3.6 Selecting and Evaluating Digital Tools & Resources
Candidates collaborate with teachers and administrators to select and evaluate digital tools and resources for accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure. (PSC 3.6/ISTE 3f)
Artifact: Emerging Technologies Project
Reflection:
1. Briefly describe the artifact and the context in which it was created. What was/were your individual contribution(s)?
This artifact was created as a piece within my graduate school curriculum. The idea for the article was to evaluate an emerging technology, and I decided to evaluate the app Touchcast. I put this project together as a keynote presentation, but it is presented as a PDF because not everyone has access to keynote. Everyone does have access to a PDF.
2. Explain how this artifact demonstrates mastery of the standard/element under which it is placed. See the portfolio rubric and watch the videos for more details on what to include in your reflection for this question. You must respond to each of the items on the rubric in this question! It is VERY IMPORTANT that you address ALL of the criteria on the rubric. This one question may need to be several paragraphs long in order to address all of the items on the rubric.
This article meets the standard because the presentation touches on the accuracy stability and compatibility of using Touchcast both at the instructional level and the needs of the app as far as implementation at the district level. My overall take on the app is that it would be great for all schools to implement video production aspects.
3. What did you learn from completing this artifact? What would you do differently to improve the quality of the artifact or the process involved in creating the artifact? Not changing anything is NOT an acceptable response.
For this artifact, I learned all of the things that need to be looked at when evaluating an app or a tool. There are lots of concerns both at the instructional level and at the school/district level, so I will need to consider all of them in the future.
4. How did the work that went into creating the artifact impact school improvement, faculty development, or student learning? How can the impact be assessed?
This artifact gives a detailed evaluation of Touchcast that can be used in the future by teachers to evaluate how it can be used in instruction, and by administrative staff as an app that can be used in both faculty development and school improvement
1. Briefly describe the artifact and the context in which it was created. What was/were your individual contribution(s)?
This artifact was created as a piece within my graduate school curriculum. The idea for the article was to evaluate an emerging technology, and I decided to evaluate the app Touchcast. I put this project together as a keynote presentation, but it is presented as a PDF because not everyone has access to keynote. Everyone does have access to a PDF.
2. Explain how this artifact demonstrates mastery of the standard/element under which it is placed. See the portfolio rubric and watch the videos for more details on what to include in your reflection for this question. You must respond to each of the items on the rubric in this question! It is VERY IMPORTANT that you address ALL of the criteria on the rubric. This one question may need to be several paragraphs long in order to address all of the items on the rubric.
This article meets the standard because the presentation touches on the accuracy stability and compatibility of using Touchcast both at the instructional level and the needs of the app as far as implementation at the district level. My overall take on the app is that it would be great for all schools to implement video production aspects.
3. What did you learn from completing this artifact? What would you do differently to improve the quality of the artifact or the process involved in creating the artifact? Not changing anything is NOT an acceptable response.
For this artifact, I learned all of the things that need to be looked at when evaluating an app or a tool. There are lots of concerns both at the instructional level and at the school/district level, so I will need to consider all of them in the future.
4. How did the work that went into creating the artifact impact school improvement, faculty development, or student learning? How can the impact be assessed?
This artifact gives a detailed evaluation of Touchcast that can be used in the future by teachers to evaluate how it can be used in instruction, and by administrative staff as an app that can be used in both faculty development and school improvement