Collaboration in the Wiki

While the goal was largely consistent with previous expectations, the medium for realizing the goal resulted in new challenges for the participants. 

The openess and freedom that the Wiki offered allowed for discussions to be generated in a format that was determined largely by the initial contributors to the Wiki platform.  The initial contributors determined the way in which the rest of the group would contribute and add to the discussion:

• contributions would be added at the end of streams, except in the case of additions to specific topics
• if individuals were being addressed, their name(s) would preceed the comment
• authorship of comments was put at the end and in parenthesis

One of the first tasks I undertook upon entering the Wiki was to determine ‘how’ I was to contribute to the discussion.

The discussion was often difficult to follow:

• the absence of message alerts to inform the participants of new threads or thoughts that were added made it neccesary to reread posts multiple times to ascertain their originality.
• The lack of seperate threads increased the confusion in following topics as items were not originally separated for content.  I was impressed by the creation of subtopics on the first page of the Wiki as it became necessary to create organisation amongst the multitude of additions regarding personal experiences with technology in the classroom.  This addition (perhaps a logical step that arose almost naturally?) allowed for easier navigation of materials and ideas.
• it was diffucult to deduce when enough had been said and synthesis of ideas was necessary for a continued progression towards the goal of arriving at 5 challenges and strategies.

The instructions for creation of the Wiki eased our progression into the discussion.  Without these specific instructions we would have felt at a loss as to ‘how’ to acheive the goals outlined.  However, the outline was loose enough to allow for a large degree of flexibility and creativity in the process in realizing the product.

It was often difficult, however, to ascertain whether everyone had had the opportunity to contribute.  I had this constant feeling of the need to remain available for contributing to the Wiki on a regular and consistant basis, knowing that I had contributed and it was my responsibility to my colleagues to be available for response and clarification of my input to the collectivity.  It was difficult to step aside for a couple of days when I was unable to log in, knowing that I had left comments with no availibility for clarification.  I felt like I had performed a Wiki-and-run!

The need to log in to yet another forum, seperate from the WebCT page and our personal Weblogs is a frustration point for me in many of the courses.  While it is incredibly valuable to discuss, and explore ideas through different media, the fragmentation of having work in multiple locations on the Internet and course website is much akin, for me, to having multiple classrooms in which to work.  It is difficult to keep everything straight when you are working from so many different venues, or work places. 

Overall I appreciated the collaboration of the group in working through the issues and challenges set out for us.  The effort exhibited was consistent with the effort exibited throughout the rest of the course and the level of professionalism was extremely high.  Participants carried their ideas of Internet ettiquette easily over to the Wiki, making a smooth transmission to the new venue.  The new media challenged all participants to work together and create a product in a less constricting environment but with extremely productive and positive results!

 

Goals and personal technology assessment

It is interesting to see, based on the ISTE’s Educational Technology Standards for Teachers, how my own particular way of utilizing and implementing technology in my professional life is very strong in some areas, and in need of further attention in others.

Part 1

1. I found that my ability to “Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity” was quite strong through various means such modeling innovation through a class website, exploration of real themes such as maple syrup production via Smartboard through Youtube, and collaborating with students and colleagues through such efforts as linking student webpages to the central page, and working with others in the MET program.
2. In terms of “Design[ing] and Develop[ing] Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments” I found again that while there is so much room to grow, I feel proud of the ways in which I have introduced technology to enhance learning to encourage creativity, independence, and personalizing the learning process. I would like to explore this even further, but further collaboration and learning on my part is required to make this happen.
3. In “Model[ing] Digital-Age Work and Learning”, I feel strongly that I demonstrate fluency in many technology systems both with peers and colleagues, utilize collaborative initiatives to increase success, and utilize tech to locate, analyze and evaluate information resources. Students in my classes utilize the Internet to locate quality recipes to compile into a recipe collection that is either online or in a word processing program format.
4. My ability to “Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility” in my classes is an area I would like to focus on. Focusing on copyright and intellectual property is an important value to instill and the high school level is an important time to stress the importance of appropriate documentation.
5. In terms of “Engaging in Professional Growth and Leadership”, the MET program is incredibly valuable and key in exploring new technologies and participating in global learning communities, evaluating research and both exploring and evaluating new technologies. 

Part 2

The ETEC 565 course offers a variety of avenues for further exploration of how to utilize technology to encourage self-evaluation and reflection.  In the classroom evaluation is in depth and diverse, and with technology it needs to be as well.  Just as we can not simply transfer mechanisms for teaching and learning directly from a f2f to a digital environment, assessment and evaluation needs to change as well, both the reflect the particular needs of the digital learner and the environment in which the learning takes place. 

As we work towards creating individual blogs through WordPress I begin to think further about this topic.  The websites students in my classes use are equipped with blogging capabilities which would offer an interesting means of reflection and self evaluation. 

Key skills and approaches throughout the course I would like to focus on are:

• improving my understanding and application of assessment practices that are relevant and meaningful in a digital environment,
• exploring meaningful and transferable ways to evaluate and assess, and
• exploring how assessment can occur for digital learning both within and outside of the digital environment.