Nothing will replace a group of students being educated in group strategies, group responsibilities & knowing how to demonstrate their learning. Whether they are working with a rock & chisel or the latest network of super cool laptops, the tools do neither the learning nor the teaching. Conduit yes…transfer skills yes…pedagogue no.
Ø All the basic ground work still has to be done as for any other student group activity.
Blocks 1 & 3.
Most negatives that came from students related to the usual practicalities of group work (e.g. who did the most; such & such will not cooperate).
'Bold' comments are the students’ emphasis.
- The wiki exercise is a focus on collaborative working. What do they now think of the idea of collaborative learning using the Internet?
- What were the good things about such a tool (the wiki)? In what ways was it useful?
- How was it a good way to work with team members?
- What were the problems with the wiki & the Internet?
- What were the problems with doing this exercise in the team set-up?
- In what ways might they use such a tool in the future?
- How do they think such a tool could be made better?
- Very good for motivating the group while allowing for individual activity.
Limited appeal for casual use.
Promotes group cooperation & sharing.
But there are differences in computer skills.
Potential for groups working together despite physical distances.
- Takes good advantage of accessibility to technology when available.
Increases understanding of remote work stations.
Ease of adding & editing information.
The project can proceed with agreement even if not having met physically.
Usefulness of the wiki’s mechanics to utilize a variety of web resources.
A good presentation tool.
Caters to different group members’ timetables outside of school.
A good organization tool.
- Work can be done outside school without having to meet physically.
Work at own pace.
Members are kept accountable.
Each group member has a sense of freedom to work with this tool.
Can check in on each others’ changes & suggestions.
- Any tech glitches will disrupt work.
Different levels of being responsible for one’s work.
Accessibility is not equal for everyone.
Audio-visual tools are clumsy to set up.
Access at school to web sites is limited.
Learning curve for the audio-visuals.
- Allocation of tasks can be unbalanced as in what has to be done by each member.
Problem of settling agreements if not meeting face-to-face.
You have to rely on individuals doing the homework they agreed on.
Class time & resources at school to get organized.
Excuses made using tech problems or access to technology.
- Very promising for future presentations at school.
Effective form of communication.
Very good for organization.
Little appeal for making a web page.
Interaction with group members is rewarding.
A good way to share findings & reports.
- Some concern about the instructions.
Clearer directions needed.
Format is limited for what the group can do with it.
More options needed for manipulating the site for creativity.
The students have been spoilt a bit by the ‘bells & whistles’ that they enjoy with other sites they can personalize & interact with.
Group exercise creating wiki site for Nth Amn Geog 1st qtr 08-09 – student products (I was not present to supervise concluding steps or for tying up loose ends). Still works in progress?
https://masm.pbwiki.com/session/login?return_to_page=FrontPage...requests permission to log in
https://alphawolf.pbwiki.com/session/login?return_to_page=FrontPage... requests permission to log in
https://secure.pbwiki.com/signup.wiki?wiki=mahtoogroup001 – there has to be one group in every class!
http://mahtomedi.pbwiki.com/ - we need a suspicious group.
https://secure.pbwiki.com/signup.wiki?wiki=zephyr2 –does this say something about this class?
http://artinsisucks.pbwiki.com/ - need for censorship