Go back to pages 34–36 of your digital notebook from EDU 226 and evaluate the two technologies we used for that course—digital notebooks in Google Slides and e-portfolios in Digication—using the knowledge you gained in this unit.
Examine the findings of the Triple E assessment rubric scores for these tools to determine what factors should be taken into account if you want to use a similar tool in your school.
Using the three elements we learned about in this unit—cultural context, impact on equality and accessibility, and evaluation of the results on student success—provide a brief summary of your analysis in the comments section below.
Evaluating the Deployment of Instructional Technology Tools
Based on my experience in EDU 226 class and the research I conducted, evaluating instructional factors and privacy in Digital Notebooks versus Learning Management Systems (LMS), using the Triple E Framework, I found that both are valuable for teaching quality and privacy. However, LMS platforms provide a more comprehensive and secure solution than digital notebooks.
I recommend Learning Management Systems (LMS), such as Google Classroom and Brightspace, because they offer advanced instructional capabilities, including course creation, assignment management, student progress tracking, assessment tools, interactive communication, and integration of additional tools. These platforms are specifically designed to enhance the teaching and learning experience, making them highly effective for structured educational settings.
In contrast, digital notebooks are excellent for personal classwork, organization, collaboration, analysis, and reflections. While they support adding images, links, and other multimedia, they may not offer the same breadth and depth of instructional tools found in LMS platforms.
I analyzed Google Classroom and Jupiter Ed based on instructional design and technology principles from EDU 226, using the Triple E Framework (engagement, enhancement, and extension), and criteria from this unit, including cultural context, equality and accessibility, and student success evaluation. I can state that according to:
Cultural Context
Equality and Accessibility
Evaluation of Results on Student Success
Overall, Google Classroom provides a highly accessible, flexible platform that supports a range of learning styles as well as a flexible environment that supports students across different cultural contexts, and educational backgrounds. It is free and device-friendly, with robust support for equity and accessibility, allowing students to engage with learning from various devices, whether they are at school or on the go. Its versatility and compatibility with assistive tools make it a strong choice, though students may need additional guidance in content structuring.
The two technologies tools I evaluated for EDU 226 were Google Slides and BrightSpace. After I examined the findings of the Triple E Framework (engagement, enhancement and extending) BrightSpace scored higher than Google Slides. Now using the three elements we learned in this unit (cultural context, impact of equity and accessibility and evaluation of the results on student success) I come to the following important information.
Cultural Context: BrightSpace supports diverse educational settings with localized support and flexible tools, enabling multilingual content and varied formats to adapt materials to different cultural backgrounds. On the other hand, Google Slides is accessible and widely used, adaptable to various contexts, though its cultural flexibility depends on instructors’ content creation as it lacks built-in inclusivity or multilingual support.
Impact on Equity and Accessibility: BrightSpace is equipped with strong accessibility features like screen reader compatibility, alternative text, and customizable interfaces, BrightSpace also uses learning analytics to monitor and support student progress, fostering an inclusive learning environment. However, Google Slides includes basic accessibility features, like keyboard shortcuts, closed captions, and collaboration tools.
Evaluation of Results on Student Success: BrightSpace’s data tracking and analytics allow targeted support to boost learning outcomes, while asynchronous, personalized learning pathways enhance student success through customized pacing and content while Google Slides though lacking built-in analytics, Google Slides fosters real-time collaboration and engagement, supporting active learning and immediate feedback that indirectly enhance student success, especially in group settings.
Summary: BrightSpace is perfect for environments that prioritize equity and quantifiable results because it provides a thorough, data-driven approach to instructional support. Although Google Slides is popular and easy to use, it lacks some of BrightSpace’s more sophisticated equity and success-tracking features. Depending on the requirements and goals of the learning environment, both methods can be used successfully.
For EDU 226, I evaluated google slides which is where my digital notebook was housed and the LMS platform Brightspace. In regard to cultural context, google slides provides the opportunity to integrate various cultures into each slide. This is evident in the tools provided on this platform (themes, insert visuals, etc…). However, Brightspace has its own set theme.
In regard to equality and accessibility, Brightspace provides several different ways for students to access content as well as submit work. Students can view videos, read text, as well as click on hyperlinks to assist in further research. When submitting a file, students have the choice to upload it from a computer or use the record view/record audio option. Google slides provides these same tools under their “Insert” tab.
In regard to the evaluation of the results on student success, Brightspace provides a more visible way to see this via the “Assignments”, “Class Progress”, and “Grades” tab that is readily available. On the other hand, google slides does not have this automatically built in.
All in all, both platforms are great instructional technology tools.
Based on my analysis, both are excellent digital tools (Digital notebook and LMS). The only difference is how they are used. For instance, this will depend on what the teacher wants to teach, the needs of the students, or how advanced the class is in terms of knowledge of the technology. However, regardless of their use, both tools offer significant educational benefits (instructional strength), instilling confidence in teachers and enhancing the learning process for students. They provide easy and understandable access and a safe(privacy) educational environment.
In EDU 226, I evaluated the digital notebook and LMS using the Triple E Framework. Overall, the LMS scored higher than the Digital Notebooks related to the Triple E framework. Based on the knowledge acquired during this unit, I can say that LMS enhanced the learning of that course and can be used in other courses as well.
Equality and accessibility in the context of LMS refers to the design and implementation of digital tools and content that can be accessed and used by individuals with disabilities. Disabilities can range from visual impairments and hearing loss to cognitive challenges and motor disabilities. An accessible LMS ensures everyone can navigate, interact with, and benefit from its educational resources and activities regardless of their abilities.
Cultural context LMS can distribute web-based learning content across cultural borders, creating opportunities for cross-cultural learning.
Evaluating student success (LMS) results provides benefits like centralized access to course materials, flexible learning options, progress tracking, improved instructor communication, personalized learning experiences, peer collaboration, and easy access to assessments and feedback. These features save time and potentially improve engagement with the learning process.
A few key points stand out when comparing digital notebooks and Google Slides. Google Slides is more flexible and easier to use, which helps students work together and stay engaged. Both tools have features for students with disabilities, but Google Slides is more straightforward for everyone.
In summary, each tool has pros and cons. It is essential to choose the one that meets your teaching goals while considering data privacy and security. The right technology can improve learning and give all students a fair chance to succeed.
In EDU 226, the two tools I evaluated were Google Slides/Notebooks and Brightspace (we did not use e-portfolios in Digication). Using the Triple E Framework, Google Slides scored 14/18, and Brightspace scored 16/18. The factors that should be taken into account if I want to use similar tools in my school are:
Cultural Context: Both tools offer ways to include diverse perspectives. Google Slides provides more flexibility for students to express their cultural identities, while Brightspace offers a more structured environment that still allows students to share relevant cultural experiences, though with less creative freedom.
Equality and Accessibility: Accessibility is key in both tools. Google Slides allows for a more adaptable, personalized approach to learning, which can help meet the needs of a wider range of students. Brightspace, on the other hand, offers built-in scaffolding that supports students who need more structured guidance and clear paths to success.
Student Success: Brightspace’s integrated assessment tools and structured layout make it easier to track progress and provide feedback, supporting student growth. Students can also access all their feedback in one place, which facilitates their learning process. Google Slides promotes creativity and active engagement but requires more manual effort for tracking student progress and offering feedback.
In my opinion, while I appreciate the flexibility of Google Slides, I find that Brightspace is more structured and easier for me as a teacher to find everything in one place. This organization helps streamline my planning and assessment process, making it easier to manage my classroom effectively.
In EDU 226, we compared digital notebooks in Google Slides and e-portfolios in Digication. We found that Google Slides is more adaptable to different cultural contexts, making it easy to customize. It’s also user-friendly and accessible, which promotes equality among students. On the other hand, Digication has a more complex interface that may be challenging for some learners. While Google Slides encourages collaboration and engagement, benefiting student success, Digication focuses on long-term reflection. Overall, due to its flexibility and ease of use, Google Slides may be a more effective tool for diverse educational settings.
In EDU 226 I reflected on the digital notebook and I recently compared it to blackboard since I had never used Portfolio. I found that both platforms scored similarly on the rubric and as I wondered more about it, I realized that although both tools were easily accessible, the digital notebook was more engaging than blackboard as it provided a more simple method to easily track all the work being done. even though I have used both platforms, the digital notebook was more familiar to me. I use it frequently to create lessons for a range of topics with my students. The notebook was easier to navigate since there were no extra links tied to other work. therefore this was the tool I used to assign work and it will continue to do so.
In EDU 226 I evaluated the digital notebook and blackboard using the Triple E Framework. Overall, the digital notebook scored higher than blackboard did related to the triple E framework. I think the notebook is definitely something that enhanced the learning of that course and it is something that can be used in other courses as well.
For my capstone project and for my final project of EDU 226 I used an adaption of the digital notebook. I think it is definitely a good way to keep students engaged.
I find it interesting that CUNY has switched platforms from blackboard to brightspace since taking EDU 226. I think blackboard was a little easier to navigate but that could be because I have had prior experience.
Related to this course, I believe these tools have accessibility and are easy for students to navigate.
In EDU 226, I evaluated notebooks and Google Slides using the Triple E Framework evaluation tool for engagement, enhancement, and extension of learning goals. My evaluation total for Notebooks was 16/18, which translates to, exceptional connections between the learning goals, and the tool. Everything except for two things my evaluation of Notebooks was outstanding. The tool allows students to get less distracted. Notebooks, also promote a shift in behavior from passive to active. Notebooks is very engaging, except for motivating students in the learning process. This is where I took points off. I also took points off on the enhancement of the learning goal band. I don’t think the tool allows students to develop or demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the learning goal.
Regarding the culture of an organization, Notebooks could be a great adaptation to my school. I teach at an International School that promotes one learning model for all. In addition, my school promotes digital literacy. I; ‘ve been in this school for seven years, and co-teach with many teachers, and everybody uses digital tools. My school makes everything possible so that students get access to laptops, tablets, computer labs, and at one point free smartphones. I do think it will be challenging, but fruitful.
Moreover, on the impact on equity and accessibility, Notebooks can be easily translated. Since my school uses Gmail, students will be able to easily access the tool. One negative note would be, that not every student in my school has internet access. Some students have smartphones, which they can use while on a bus ride. Many others, (a high percentage of our students live in shelters), don’t have these types of devices. This can be a big factor in student achievement of outcomes.
In EDU 226, the two tools that I evaluated were the Google Slides/Notebooks and Blackboard (we did not use e-portfolios in Digication). My evaluations for these tools using the Triple E assessment model are as follows:
Overall, I thought that Google Slides was more user-friendly than Blackboard. It is interactive and encourages collaboration, although it is not as robust as Blackboard. As an instructional website, Blackboard is more suitable but for older students. It has everything you need in one place, although the user has to be more independent in order to use it.
Considering the elements covered in this Module 2 — cultural context, impact on equality and accessibility, and evaluation of the results on student success — I can say that Google Slides/Notebook and Blackboard are comparable, however Google Slides scores higher in terms of ease-of-use.
Cultural Context
Impact on Equality and Accessibility
Evaluation of the results on student success
The tools we are currently using in EDU 227 are Brightspace and the CUNY Blog. While the Brightspace interface is more-or-less user friendly (and reminds me a lot of Canva), the CUNY Blog has been very difficult to navigate. It took a while to obtain access to the Blog due to having to get permission to use a different email, and then the website was down for some days a few weeks ago.
Overall, when thinking about tools to use in schools, for me it comes down to utility and accessibility. How helpful are the tools in terms of making learning accessible for students? Is the technology easy for students to utilize? Will it take a long time to train educators to use and integrate those tools in the classroom? Also, does the tool make learning more engaging?
Integrating digital tools like Blackboard and digital notebooks into education offers great potential to enhance learning experiences. Schools must prioritize cultural inclusivity, equal access, and effective implementation strategies.
Adapting these tools to the cultural context is crucial in today’s diverse classrooms. This means acknowledging and valuing cultural differences in content, language, and instructional methods. By being culturally sensitive, schools foster an inclusive environment where every student feels represented and respected.
Additionally, it’s important to ensure equal access to these tools for all students, regardless of their background or abilities. This means addressing issues like language barriers, providing support for students with disabilities, and bridging the digital divide. Equal access ensures that everyone can benefit from the educational advantages these tools offer.
Successful implementation requires careful consideration of several factors. Schools need to assess the technical requirements and ensure compatibility with their existing infrastructure. Providing comprehensive training and support for both teachers and students is essential to maximize the effectiveness of these tools in the classroom. Robust data privacy measures and compliance with regulations are non-negotiable to protect student information and build trust.
Regular feedback from students and teachers is invaluable for continuous improvement. By listening to their experiences and suggestions, schools can adapt these tools to better meet the evolving needs of education.
By embracing technology responsibly and inclusively, schools empower students to actively participate in their learning and prepare them for success in an increasingly digital world. Digital tools like Blackboard and digital notebooks, when implemented thoughtfully, can transform classrooms into vibrant, equitable, and effective learning environments.
The integration of tools like Blackboard and digital notebooks into educational practices holds immense promise for improving learning experiences. By embracing cultural diversity, promoting equality and accessibility, and addressing key implementation factors, educators can use the full potential of these tools to create a more inclusive and effective learning environment for all students.
In today’s diverse educational outlook , the implementation of digital tools such as Blackboard and digital notebooks plays an important role in improving learning experiences. When combining these tools into a school environment, it is essential to consider their cultural context, impact on equality and accessibility, and the factors necessary for their successful implementation.Cultural context is pivotal in ensuring that educational tools resonate with students from various cultural backgrounds. This involves recognizing and respecting cultural diversity in content, language preferences, and instructional materials. By accommodating cultural nuances, schools can create an inclusive learning environment where every student feels valued and represented.
Moreover, the impact on equality and accessibility must be carefully assessed. These tools should aid equal access to educational resources and opportunities for all students, despite of their socioeconomic status, abilities, or geographical location. This includes providing appropriate support for students with disabilities, establishing language accessibility, and addressing digital divides to promote equitable learning outcomes.When implementing similar tools as a teacher, several factors value consideration. Firstly, understanding the technical requirements and compatibility with existing school infrastructure is crucial to seamless integration. Enough training and support for both students and educators are essential to maximize the tools potential and success in the classroom. Furthermore, guaranteeing strong data privacy measures and compliance with regulations safeguard student information and encourage trust among stakeholders.
Continuous feedback mechanisms from students and colleagues are vital for improving the use of these tools and adapting them to meet evolving educational needs effectively. By using technology responsibly and inclusively, schools can empower students to engage actively in their learning journey and prepare them for success in an growing digital world.
The integration of tools like Blackboard and digital notebooks into educational practices holds immense promise for improving learning experiences. By embracing cultural diversity, promoting equality and accessibility, and addressing key implementation factors, educators can harness the full potential of these tools to create a more inclusive and effective learning environment for all students.
In EDU 226 I have evaluated Digital Notebook and Blackboard LMS. The score I gave Digital Notebook a 7 out of 16 and LMS a 16 out of 18. I would recommend Blackboard more because I feel like students can learn more and it is easier for them to learn how to use it. Both tools can be very engaging and learning tools for students to benefit from. If I would use something for my classroom it would blackboard.
In EDU 226 I have evaluated Digital Notebook and ePortfolios (I had used them in the past). To be completely honest, I should have probably evaluated Blackboard instead. The reason for that is that back then, I thought that Blackboard wasn’t user-friendly. Now that we switched to BrightSpace, I am at a loss. I can feel the frustration my students experience when I try implementing a new tool in my classroom.
However, when evaluating Digital Notebook, I gave it 15/18, and e-Portfolios got 17/18. e-Portfolios took the lead in the “Enhancement of the learning goals” criteria. From my experience with e-Portfolios, they require you to research how to navigate and help you enhance your understanding of the learning process in a more sophisticated manner. Also, e-Portfolios are a great way to scaffold for different types of learners and learning styles.
Both tools got 6 out of 6 in “Extending the learning goals” criteria since they both can be accessed 24/7, they help connect them with learning outside of the classroom, and most importantly, they build authentic life soft skills that they can use in everyday life and if we add CT into their learning we will see a new rise of thinkers.
In terms of cultural context, impact on equality, and accessibility, these tools serve as a tool to bridge the gap and allow the opportunity to all students to learn in a way that makes it accessible to all of their needs with, of course, necessary adaptation or modification depending on the needs.
In my EDU 226 we compared the Digital Notebook and Blackboard (LMS).
The factors to consider when using any one of these tools is which is most beneficial to the student. The tool used should be user friendly. A tutorial would be great. The digital notebook was captivating to the eye and seemed user friendly for the most part. Collaboration was easy as well once you got the hang of it.
Both tools include features that help students with different learning styles, whether it be language, sight, or audio.
I am a creature of habit and would advocate for Blackboard. It’s what I know. It’s my learning style preference. I adapted to the digital notebook because I have no other option.
I had evaluated the tools Google Slides and LMS Blackboard. The overall scores were Blackboard a 16 out of 18 and Google Slides a 17 out of 18. I would recommend Google slides because it has more ideal factors that students and educators can benefit from.
For Engagement in Learning, Enhancement of learning goals, and Extending the learning goal, Google slides took the lead. It’s user-friendliness and has collaborative features that make it an ideal choice for educational settings. Google slides enable students from diverse cultural backgrounds to participate and contribute equally.
In terms of impact on equality and accessibility, both tools include features to help students with disabilities, like compatibility with screen readers and text alternatives for images however, Google Slides is easier for everyone to use. It accommodates all skill levels.
Lastly, for the evaluation of the results on student success, Google Slides encourages student success by enabling collaborative and creative learning. Its easy-to-use design and dynamic capabilities make learning more engaging. The ability to share and work together on presentations ensures that all students can participate and benefit from shared knowledge, boosting overall academic performance. Blackboard has more complexity making it harder to be creative. It’s a detailed and structured learning environment that is good for student success but can be challenging to use at first. Google Slides, with its simplicity and collaborative features, promotes fairness and inclusivity, making learning more engaging and successful for all students.
It’s so interesting that we had the same score for google slides but such different scores for Blackboard! It really highlights how subjective these rubrics are!
I was in a different professor’s course for EDU 226. On these pages she had us compare google slides digital notebook and our LMS at the time (blackboard).
The findings of the Triple E assessment rubric scores for these tools to determine what factors should be taken into account if you want to use a similar tool in your school: Google Slides’ digital notebook scored 17 out of 18 because it had high engagement in learning (time on task, motivation to start, and shift behavior). It also enhances and extends the learning goals. The LMS blackboard only scored 11 of 18.
Using the three elements we learned about in this unit—cultural context, impact on equality and accessibility, and evaluation of the results on student success—provide a brief summary of your analysis in the comments section below:
Using these elements, Google Slides would still win. It is accessible at any time of the day with no additional charge when students use their school accounts. There is digital equity because using Google Slides provides constant reliable access.
I evaluated Google Slides and Canva presentation tools. Both tools provide opportunities for student engagement on many levels. While both tools allow for student creativity, each provide levels of accessibility for all learners (free to monthly subscription). Using tools that are equitable and accessible can empower learners to increase their level of engagement in their learning. However, if organizational culture is absent and/or limited, then these tools become less applicable thereby decreasing learning opportunities for all learners. Without organizational culture, learning is impacted deeply and will impact all learners and all stakeholders. When organizational culture is present, there are limitless opportunities to decrease the digital divide in learning environment because there will be opportunities for staff to engage in learning new tools that can enhance their instruction which can increase student engagement in their learning environments. Both of these tools received quality ratings and high usage among academic institutions, large companies and others.
Compare Canva vs Google Slides 2023 | Capterra
In EDU 226, I evaluated the Google Slides presentation Digital Notebook and the LMS/Blackboard system.
Google Slides compared to the Blackboard system both have tools to make materials accessible to all, including those with diverse learning styles, language barriers and students with disabilities. The tools allow for engagement, collaboration and academic achievement providing flexible assessments and feedback.
While Google Slides is widely used in the Dept. of Education and is convenient for creating presentations, there are some privacy and security considerations that should be acknowledged. Google Slides content is stored by Google and can be accessed with users with the link or by the same organization. Therefore, there are concerns with privacy of sensitive information, such as student data and owner rights of the data stored or shared.
Google Slides does allow for collaboration as multiple users can work together simultaneously, which promotes teamwork; however, for any new information inputted to be saved in real time, it requires internet connection.
The benefits of using a system like Blackboard allows for collaboration in the discussion forums and email features to maintain privacy between students and with instructors. Course content can be organized in an easier and accessible format (i.e., presentations, videos, links) to allow access to all relevant information in one place.
When using a learning management system like Blackboard there may be some potential privacy concerns, when it comes to the students’ stored personal information. Blackboard does ensure that there are authentication methods in place to prevent unauthorized access. However, there can be a breach in the data system. Blackboard may share users’ personal information with re-sellers and other partners, who may use users’ personal information for third-party marketing and targeted ads.
If I were to advocate for a specific tool, I would make sure it aligns to the specific goals and needs of my students. I need to make sure that it is user-friendly, compatible on all devices, have accessibility features and maintain privacy.
The two digital tools that we used in edu 226 were digital notebooks and LMS(blackboard). I’m my triple E framework score, I’ve scored all of the two because I feel like both tools protects our data and it’s engaging and accessible to students. If I wanted to persuade my school to use one of the tools it will be very difficult because both tools are good. But I should’ve considered the cultural context of the tools.
In 226 we evaluated the Digital Notebook and LNS (Blackboard). I stated that BB was a better system for security reasons amd can create some engaging opportunities such as videos and ability to submit content. However if I were to recommend a tool to my employer it would be difficult to sway them away from Google Slides since all our NYCDOE accounts are connected to Google and we share and collaborate on documents, and drives daily with our colleagues. This would greatly impact the culture of our school and learners. Furthermore it would have a direct impact to the culture of our students since utilize Google Classroom to upload assignments and they are more likely familiar with Google. They would be at a disadvantage being introduced to a new platform especially those families that already have challenges understanding technology. They will not be able to assist their children at all with a new platform. This correlates directly with student success. I would .uch rather advocate for a tool that is familiar for the whole community rather than have to reintroduce a new tool and create confusion.
When implementing a digital notebook to capture learning, the cultural context plays a significant role in determining its effectiveness.For instance, students from different cultures may have varying levels of familiarity and comfort with technology. Ensuring that the digital notebook aligns with their cultural norms and values is crucial for fostering inclusivity and engagement.Throughout EDU 226 it took me about 2 weeks become aquainted with how to move between the materials and the notebook. However beecuase of my level of comfort with technology I was able to push through the content and course pretty well.
A digital notebook may have both positive and negative impacts on equality and accessibility. On the one hand, digital notebooks can enhance equality by providing all students with access to the same learning resources and materials. However, it is essential to address potential disparities in technology access among students. Evaluating the impact on student success must consider the digital notebookds effectiveness in promoting critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. It is essential to assess whether the digital notebook facilitates meaningful learning experiences and whether it aligns with the curriculum’s learning objectives.
At the middle school I work in the digital notebook would be more of a support for a student that works best independently. We try to fostor a collaborative community, so while this was a great way to track progress and mastery, the Jamboard aspect of the course was more condusive. This would allow flexibility in the access that students have.
In EDU 226, we only evaluate a digital notebooks in Google slides as e-portfolios was not available. The Triple E assessment rubric, allowed us to look and examine at these tools to see how they ranked in providing engagement in the learning, enhancement of the learning goals, and extending the learning goals which are all factors that we should consider when evaluating a new digital tool. In my reading of the digital notebook, using Google slides, I rated it a 16/18 which indicated that it was a good digital tool to use according to me.
When looking at digital notebooks in Google slides under the lens of cultural context, digital notebooks, provide a great opportunity for collaboration, and translation. Students will be able to work with one another and they can complete work in the language of their comfort. The digital notebook in Google slides also provides opportunity and accessibility to those that require more support. The one thing that I would be critical on with regards to Digital notebook in Google slides is that students would need guidance and teaching on how to use it if they do not have prior experience to it.
In EDU 226, we were only able to evaluate the digital notebook, we did not have access to the e-portfolio. We can evaluate digital tools like Google slides in terms of cultural context, impact on equality and accessibility and overall effectiveness while applying the Triple E framework. We must consider the cultural diversity and backgrounds of our learners. Evaluate if the examples, images and references used in our slides are inclusive and representative of diverse cultures. Reflecting on the accessibility features and language support provided by Google slides. We must examine if the digital notebook or google slides promotes equitable access to learning. I would also collect feedback from the students regarding their perception of using google slides as a digital notebook.
In EDU 226, I was only able to evaluate the digital notebook. The Triple E assessment looks at the engagement in, as well as the enhancement and extending of learning goals–all of which should be taken into account when evaluating new tools for your school. While I did have some suggestions for improvement, overall, I found an exceptional connection between the learning goals and the digital notebook.
As it pertains to cultural context, my school values more collaboration than is afforded by the notebook on its own. One way to work around this is to have students complete their work in small groups and then transfer their findings and reflections into the notebook for grading. Another potential issue is that it’s not easy to make changes to the notebook once it has been shared with students.
Regarding its impact on equality and accessibility, all students in my school have access to technology and the internet. Students would be able to use accessibility tools, as needed. My only concern is that some students would need a version of the notebook that is more pared down. It can be a little over-stimulating.
Finally, the digital notebook is not the most effective tool for the evaluation of the results on student success. Teachers would have to comb through each notebook to collect, aggregate and evaluate student data. This is unrealistic and would receive a lot of push back.
In class EDU 226, I analyzed the digital notebook and e-portfolios was unavailable for my class. The digital notebook is a more accessible tool to use. It can be accessed from any digital device a student might have. The digital notebook allows students to learn from outside of their typical school day. This technology allows students to build life skills, which they can use in their everyday lives. It allows students to receive feedback from their teachers and communicate in real time with their teachers.
EDU 226 was constructed through blackboard. It is how we stood connected in the course. we also used a digital notebook that was used for assessments and acted as classwork for the course. I really enjoyed the digital notebook as it frames technology in the classroom. Do we even take notes anymore in the classrooms? I feel this acted as notetaking when we did the jamboards, and assessments throughout the course content. It was also used a study guide for labs and now EDU 227 as we continue to reference back ti it because we have access. This acts as accessibility. It can also be translated as it is part of google which can add ALt text, audio, lexend font, etc.
When assessing using the triple E framework the notebook scored high at. 14 meaning it was an exceptional tool for meeting learning goals. I feel we should take into consideration ” Extending learning goals” . As educators we have students who finish fast, students who need extra time and so forth. When we utilize tools for classroom learning, this is part of the elevation that can run short in some tools. it is essential that we use tools that can rank high in all aspects of triple e because it is how we best meet the needs of all learners and make learning accessible at all times.
In class EDU 226 we used the digital notebook tool to capture out learning as we moved through the course. I believe the tool was user friendly and easy to navigate. We had to use Blackboard as well to guide us in navigating the notebook. This was difficult at times because we were essential using two tools at once.
From an instructional design stand point the digital notebook does not have any content or tools that can be used to help facilitate interactions or activities. It is up to the creator to upload all the content, scaffolds, etc.
The tools was accessible and allowed for the instructor to give feedback directly in the notebook. G-Suite is great because it is secure and you login and usually are required to go through a two step authentication.
Kattie, I loved the digital notebook! I loved how it was very broken down into each module with clear instructions on assignments. ( even links) I loved how we had access to each others notebook to feel like a real classroom where we collaborate and share ideas. I feel blackboard was harder to manage when submitting work rather than the digital notebook.
I think both the Digital Notebook and BlackBoard’s Portfolio are great tools to foster learning and protect everyone’s information. As far as providing opportunities for learning and scaffolding, teachers need to include those resources for the students. The curriculum is not just built in.
However, both allow students to have choice in their learning and end products. They can create infographic on Canva and import them into the notebook or portfolio. Both enhance student’s technology skills and tie into everyday activities. Programs like these made learning possible during the COVID.
Both programs require login information and are considered safe in the grand scheme of things. If they were not, educational institutions would not use them as widely as they do. The DOE has become very cognisant of this over the past two years.
If I needed to pick just one to use with my class, I would pick Google Slides/Notebook because it is easier to use and allows for real time collaboration among students whether in the same room or in different places. It was a life saver during remote learning.
Any tool that is Google based is great to use since it is accessible on almost any device at any time. There was one drawback to using Google Slides though. The print was very small and hard to see even when blowing up the page.
Jennifer,
I feel as educators it is important to use tools that protect our students information and validate their identity correctly. The tools that we used for EDU 226 were very safe and secure.
I agree that the notebook was the best tool in the classroom because it acted as notes, classwork and assessments all in one. It was a great tool to apply what we learned in the course . I feel if we were to use in our classrooms font would definity have to be top priority !
I also would pick Google Slides because it does allow for real time collaboration among students and even colleagues.
In EDU 226 the e-portfolios were no longer available and our class just evaluated the Digital Notebook.
In Class EDU226 we looked at the Digital Notebook as a tool. The notebook is almost universally accessible. Whether a student is using an ipad, Chromebook, laptop, or other tool there are apps. Of course if students don’t have access to a strong connection or a computer/tablet it is a mute discussion.
The google platform has easy access to translation which provides accessibility for multiple languages. Additionally students can use other forms of media to not just write but illustrate their thinking, giving students agency in how they will demonstrate mastery. Students can also adjust the font to one that suites their needs. Our work with the Triple E framework shows it is a strong choice, the caveat is the privacy settings. Depending on the settings, there is more or less privacy. Being in elementary it would most likely be part of the school network, I would be less concerned.
The ability to access student work from anywhere and the structures such as comments to leave feedback, I am a strong advocate for using this tool. However, I find there are some visual limitations in that I find the print very small and when you enlarge the tool bars are too small to be useful.
After evaluating the two technologies we used for EDU 226, digital notebooks in Google Slides and e-portfolios in Digication I personally found the digital notebooks to be more accessible and culturally relevant for our student success. I found the digital books to be more accessible and with more ease of use than Digication.
Digital Notebooks are more universally available as part of Google Docs wich has a direct impact on students equity. If I were to implement digital notebooks in my school, students will be receptive to use them because Google Slides are already part of our school culture.
Digital Notebooks can be customized to meet the unique needs of Multi Language Learners and Students With Learning Disabilities in my school, that are predominantly Spanish language dominant. They allow students to work at their own pace, to have directions and steps easily translated and posted in English/Spanish to facilitate Translanguaging as well.
I evaluated digital notebooks and eportfolios in EDU 225. The difference in the evaluation score between the two was only two points. Using the Triple E rubric to evaluate digital notebooks an Teachers should consider if digital notebooks enhance student motivation, participation, and interest in the content, if digital notebooks improve student performance on assessments or promote deeper understanding in the content and if they provide opportunities for students to apply their learning in real-world situations.
Digital notebooks can be designed and implemented to support cultural context when learning. Things to consider include: customized to incorporate images, symbols, and other elements that are relevant to students’ cultural backgrounds, collaboration among students, and designed to incorporate content that is relevant and meaningful to students’ cultural backgrounds.
Digital notebooks can support equality and accessibility as they can provide students with access to resources and learning opportunities that may not be available through paper-based resources. They can be designed with the interests of individual students in mind and include materials and resources, such as audio, video, and interactive content.
Digital notebooks can support evaluation of student success by providing teachers with opportunities for ongoing feedback and collaboration.
I am partial to digital notebooks as I have been using them in my classroom for years. Although eportfolios allow for students to showcase their work and receive feedback I found the EDU 226 eportfolio difficult to use hence inaccessible. I am not sure how customizable they are as they are a place to showcase work and not where resources from the teacher are stored and shared.
In Edu 226 we used a digital notebook and digital portfolio to record and share our reflections/learning. These two digital tools are great ways to keep students engaged and to make their learning visual. When evaluating these tools with the Triple E assessment rubric in the fall, the scores for these tools were very close to the same. There was a little difference though. When I did my scores, the notebook got an 11/18 but the portfolio got a 17/18. The scoring showed that even though the notebook made some connections between the learning goal and the tool, the portfolio made exceptional connections between the learning goals and the tool.
The factors that should be considered if you would like to use this in your school are level of engagement, accessibility/equity and student success. These factors are important when designing lessons and delivering instruction.
Both the digital notebook and the portfolio are engaging tools to teach students. They both make an impact on the culture of any school environment. I believe that in most schools, the digital notebook might be better received because it is similar to the methods schools have used forever (the notebook). However, in schools where they gather artifacts and do portfolios, the digital portfolio would be well received in that environment. I don’t believe that there would be an overlap in those environments.
When we look at equity and accessibility, both digital tools would be a challenge in an environment where students are not accustomed to using digital devices and/or have bandwidth problems. If the environment doesn’t have enough or adequate resources to utilize these tools. In an environment that is technologically rich, with 1 to 1 devices, these tools would be well received.
Lastly, when we look at evaluation of the results of student success. With both tools, it will be based on how well the students are able to navigate the tools and how well the instruction is designed. Using the tools that meet the environment’s challenges, either tool can be a source of success.
In short, each factor must be evaluated to see which digital tool would be the best for the environment that you are teaching in. After that, the instruction can begin.
The digital notebook on google slides still allows for engagement, enhancement, and extending the learning goals. The one area where the digital notebook could use an upgrade would be allowing for scaffolds to be made allowing for the information to be understood better by students that require the additional support. So in the area of accessibility, the digital notebook could use improvements. If the tool allowed for the text to be read aloud or even allowed for the students to zoom in more of the text or images where needed.
In regards to the e-portfolios even though it definitely is able to engage the students it lacks enhancement and extending the learning goals. The portfolio is also limited in how it can be designed thus limiting the student’s expression of self.
The Digital Notebook can be a powerful instructional educational tool. Since most schools use Google Drive, most teachers have access to slides. Since COVID many teachers began to use Google Slides to deliver their lessons digitally. Therefore many teachers are still using slides to deliver their lessons. So the culture of the school would be accepting of the notebook because they are familiar with the tool. The slides can provide accessibility because you can change the font to Lexend Deca, for those students who suffer from dyslexia. You can also align the text to the left and change the color of the background to help the text stand out better. You can further add alt text so that student understand the images. Furthermore, you can add videos with captions so students can watch a video to help them understand the topic. You can also change the language so that you reach students from different countries. With the use of the slides, teachers could see how the slides help to deliver the lessons by noting the results of assessments. They can use the slides to show videos that could reteach the learning objective in small groups to help differentiate instruction. As they evaluate assessments they can determine the effectiveness of Google Slides.
The Portfolios may be a harder tool to implement. Many teachers do not have access to this website. Furthermore, this tool was mostly used for adults and not children. Therefore, there would need to be more training provided to the staff, which may make it harder to integrate. I am not too familiar with how to use the portfolios so I am not sure if the Lexend Deca or another accessible font is available. I do remember being able to upload a video so that could help make it more accessible. Overall, since this is an unfamiliar tool that is mostly used for adults, I don’t think it would be very easy to integrate it into the culture of my school.
Vanessa,
I like how you added that the Digital notebook allows for videos to be added as well as the ability for each student to have the flexibility to make their digital notebook their own. And how teachers can use this to their advantage by changing the font to Lexend.