WebQuest About WebQuest

Your Role


    ___Efficiency Expert   ___Affiliator    _O_Altitudinist__Technophile

Your Impressions

WebQuest	Strengths	Weaknesses
Grow School Greens	The students are learning a lot of information that they can take with them. There is a lot more to this project than just building a garden. There is different things that can be debatable in this project like where, how, and why should they put in a garden.	There are not enough roles for all the children in a class. The garden could not be planted depending on where the school is. There is no way to be creative.
Where is My Hero?	It is a good project to prove that heroes do not have to superheroes.	Too many worksheets are used. Children will not remember the information about the person they read. There is nothing to analyze. Students can not take a stand on this topic to debate.
Underground Railroad	There are different ways to let your ideas be heard. Even if a child gets a role he or she does not agree on they still have to research and find out why the person was the way they were. Also children are using the internet to research each role and other information that ties into the role. Letting the child act out their person is a great way to let them be creative. They have to make the class believe they are who they say they are. When a child gets involved in a project by acting or debating their side they are more likely to remember what they learned than they arefrom just memorizing it from a worksheet they did in class.
Ice Cream	The children can be as creative as they want when they are coming up with a new ice cream flavor.	This is very narrow minded. The children do not learn anything other than how to make ice cream and work together. There is nothing that could be debatable other than the flavor of the ice cream. No technology is used.
Ancient Egypt	The students can make the brochure look anyway they want too. While yes, they are assigned what to write about there are so many subtopics they could choose from.	The website looks sloppy and not as put together as the other ones. There are no sides to take on this project. The students are just finding the information and putting it in a brochure. They are not actually learning and remembering the information.

Best: Grow School Greens, Where is my Hero?  - The website had a nice layout, lots of links and visuals. They used groups in everything they did. There was somethings that was debatable in the project. It could be a short project or broken into different sections

Worst: Ancient Egypt, Ice Cream - The websites were either too boring or too loud. Both projects took more time than necessary to learn about the subject. There was nothing the students had to debate or take a stand on.

Can Kids Learn From Video Games?

In both of the videos below they are arguing against the common judgement of video games. The first video is from a guy who has designed video games and the second is from a scientist who does research on the topic.


In the video Are Video Games Making Your Kids Smarter? they make a couple claims:

• Kids who play video games have awesome multitasking skills which helps the brain
• Kids are constantly learning during video games
• Overall IQ has been increasing since video games has become popular (Coincidence? I think not.)

The video Your Brain on Video Games also makes claims about video games:

• Video games in reasonable dosages can have positive impacts
• People who play action packed video games has better eye sight
• They also have better attention spans and can switch between tasks swiftly and effectively

The video Big Thinkers: Katie Salen on Learning with Games is not like the other two videos. She talks about how it is important for kids to be able to take risks and fail but be ok with it. To me that is what 21st learning is all about. How are we going to get better if we don't try and fail?

INTENSE video game! by Shellnort

I grew up hearing how video games were the devil from most adults. "They make you stupid." is the most common thing I heard. I have never been much of a gamer probably because of how much I heard about games being bad for you from people. Another common thing I heard growing up is that video games were for nerds who couldn't play sports. I don't think these people have ever played a game because there is a lot of skill that you need to play one. 

From watching these videos I learned that the ideas I had about videos game aren't true or right. Parents tell their kids all the time, "Don't watch too much TV, it hurts your eyes". They don't say that it healthy dosages it can help, then again they probably don't know. Not many people research things they say to make sure they know what they are talking about. We just believe what we read and watch.

How many times have you heard that video games make you stupid? I know I have. Did you know that you are constantly learning when you play video games? It makes sense considering that you are always leveling up and the game is constantly getting harder for the player.

Lets admit it we have all heard about how bad action and violent games are for our kids. Violent games will only make you violent if you have already seen it somewhere else (like at home). People who play action games have better eye sight and can multitask better.

When I learned all this it blew my mind. Who knew how beneficial video games could be?

Below is a school that is taking something kids love (video games) and having them learn from it.

"A novel public school in New York City has taken the video game as its model for how to teach. Students use video games and design them as part of their classes. As Quest to Learn is wrapping up its first year, those behind the program say game-based learning is integral to 21st century literacy."

What WIkipedia Means for 21st Century Teaching and Learning

Participatory culture: in other words a culture in which private persons (the public) do not act as consumers only, but also as contributors or producers.

Wikipedia is all about everyday people getting involved. If you know a subject really well why not share it so everyone can learn the information?

"Wikipedia empowers students to take seriously what they have learned in other classes, to see their own research as having potential value in a larger enterprise, and to take greater responsibility over the accuracy of what they have produced. Much as young people become more critical consumers of media when they have engaged in production activities, young people ask better questions about the nature of scholarship and research when they contribute to Wikipedia." (Jenkins, 2007)

Global warming - the battle of the elements by Hjortur Smarason

Step One:
"Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and scientists are more than 90% certain that it is primarily caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation."
I found this statement might be bias because we do not know who the scientist are that were picked for the survey. They could have picked only scientists that shared the same views as them. Also the other 10%'s view was not mentioned at all.

"Global warming has been detected in a number of natural systems."

"A number" is not a specific amount. It doesn't say whether it's the majority or minority.

Step Two:

"Since 1979, land temperatures have increased about twice as fast as ocean temperatures (0.25 °C per decade against 0.13 °C per decade). Ocean temperatures increase more slowly than land temperatures because of the larger effective heat capacity of the oceans and because the ocean loses more heat by evaporation."

I found this statement first in Wikipedia then in the Journal of Physics.

"Satellite readings of temperatures in the lower troposphere (an area scientists predict would immediately reflect any global warming) show no warming since readings 23 years ago. These readings are accurate to within 0.01 C, and are consistent with data from weather balloons."
This statement from American Policy Roundtable disagrees with the statement from the Journal of Physics.

Considering the statement from Wikipedia can be found all over in journals I feel like it is reliable.

Step Three:

When an article and its editors are subject to General Sanctions means they are to limit or remove user privileges.

Step Four:

Q. Doesn't water vapor cause 98% of the greenhouse effect?
A.  Water vapor is indeed a major greenhouse gas, contributing about 36% to 70% (not 98%) of the total greenhouse effect. But water vapour has a very short atmospheric lifetime (about 10 days), compared with decades to centuries for greenhouse gases like CO2 or nitrous oxide. As a result it is very nearly in a dynamic equilibrium in the atmosphere, which globally maintains a nearly constant relative humidity. Rising temperatures caused by the long-lived greenhouse gases therefore will increase the absolute amount of water vapour in the atmosphere, amplifying the greenhouse effect. This is an example of a positive feedback. Thus, while water vapour does not act as driver of climate change, it does amplify existing trends.

This question and answer is found in the Wikipedia Global Warming talk page.

The statement below is from The Reality of Climate Change and agrees with the above statement from Wikipedia.

Naturally occurring water vapor (clouds) make up as much as 95% of all greenhouse gases.


Step Five:

In Long-term impact of carbon dioxide emissions section of the talk page Enescot gives his view on why it should be added to the Wikipedia article of global warming. He not only gives his personal reason why but he backs it up with scientific facts. In the classroom this could be shown to students before they write a paper. It will show them that while yes their opinion matters sometimes they need facts to back it up. Also they could be assigned to look up a topic and try to add information on to a Wikipedia page.


Step Six:

NewsAndEventsGuy seems to know what he is talking about. The way he argues his points makes me believe he has studied a lot on Global Warming.
Enescot on the other hand does not make me feel that way. The only information he has on his page is that he is currently doing edits on global warming.









"Obviously, publishers create products specifically for the adoptions in those three key states. They then sell the same product to everybody else, because basals are very expensive to produce -- a K-8 reading program can cost as much as $60 million. Publishers hope to recoup the costs of a big program from the sudden gush of money in a big adoption state, then turn a profit on the subsequent trickle from the "open territories." (Ansary, 2004)


How is it fair that publishers only write their textbooks for bigger states? Shouldn't they not pick favorites? Textbooks should show all facts not just the facts the key states want.


Wikipedia does not just tell the facts the key states want. Then again how could they? Wikipedia is a non profit organization. What does that mean? That means all the big states with all their money has no say on what Wikipedia. Also who writes the textbooks? Do we really know? Now if you would get on Wikipedia you can see who writes the page. Now they might have funny user names but you can click on them and see if they really know what they are talking about and usually they do. Another good point is how many of us have seen an error in a textbook? Either a spelling one or a grammatical error. Why spend so much money on a textbook that has errors in it?



"You don't learn stuff from textbooks," one student wrote. "You just memorize for a test, then forget it." (Ruff, 2005) I for one can agree with this wholeheartedly. After you read the text book so much you can even remember what page the information is on for your test. Once the test is over however you have to move on and read more. Not many students can remember everything they read. Although if it is hands-on and fun they are more likely to remember something about what they learned even years later.

Reference List:


Ansary, T. (2004, 11 10). A textbook example of what's wrong with education. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/textbook-publishing-controversy


Jenkins, H. (2007, June 26). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://henryjenkins.org/2007/06/what_wikipedia_can_teach_us_ab.html


Ruff, G. (2005, 2 8). No books, no problem: Teaching without a text. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/textbook-publishing-controversy

Teacher of the Year & Media Literacy

 I should be Teacher of the Year because of the way I view teaching. Learning should be fun! Students should be up out of their boring old seats if you want them to learn. The different teasers I have on my magazine "Educational fun with insects, nature art, and active outdoor games", "A trip around the room using math?!", Technology is a sure bet to get any child's attention!!", Science experiments are highly recommended!" and lastly "Is spelling really that awful? Spelling games that will make every child want to spell!!" proves my thoughts about learning being active. 

When you think of math being taught you get a picture in your mind of a classroom with a teacher in the front of the room by the chalkboard with equations and students in their desk coping down the notes. What if you could take them around the world? With today's technology you can do just that without ever leaving the classroom. The students would have to buy tickets and hotel rooms, find out where they are going with longitude and latitude, and you could tie in other subjects as well. What's the weather normally like in that country? What's the culture? Do they do any unusual sports? What do they eat? Learning could be so much more fun with just a little imagination!

In my magazine I feel like I am using plain folk and association as my tools of persuasion. Plain folk is pretty obvious because I am not a celebrity or a world known teacher. With association I tried to get the children's attention by talking about things they would be interested in. Everyone is interested in ways to make learning more fun.

"From video games to social networks, incorporating what students are doing online into the school curriculum holds great, and perhaps the only, promise for keeping students engaged in learning." (David, 2009) This statement says it all! Technology these days is so important. Not just in schools but life in general. We have to teach children these skills early in life so they can use it once they get in the "real world".

Reference List:

David, J. L. (2009). What research says about … / teaching media literacy. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 84-86. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar09/vol66/num06/Teaching-Media-Literacy.aspx

Magazine Cover Deconstructing

Strong,
muscular,
manly,
tall,
serious,
intimidating

When looking at this magazine cover I feel like this would be someone I would go out of my way to avoid.











Fitness nuts paid for this magazine considering the title is Muscle and Fitness. They want the viewer to see how they could look if they would work out.  This magazine is more for the older generation of guys because for one it shows that even if you are older you can still workout and look good. The text on this magazine is all about how you can work out either by getting "20 inch arms in 3 big moves" or  how to "Get lean in less time".

The subtext is all about what we get from this cover by just looking at it.

• Arnold likes to work out
• Arnold is healthy
• It is easy to be fit and healthy
• Fire goes hand and hand with manliness
• Guys with muscles wear sunglasses
• You can be famous by being fit

This magazine uses two tools of persuasion: celebrities and testimonials. Everyone knows who Arnold is. They have seen him at one time or another. People like to do the same thing celebrities do. Also by showing Arnold on the cover and putting an article "The Man, the Movie & the Workout it shows us that he actually does these workouts and that they work. If they didn't work then he wouldn't be so muscular.

What's not being told on this cover is the background behind the workouts. Do they take hours to do? How often do they have to be done? Also do you need equipment to do the workouts? Can common everyday people do them? Did he use steroids? Is he on a certain type of diet? The big question is are there side effects? Can you get seriously injured doing these workouts? Lastly this magazine is excluding all people who are not physically able to do these workouts.

Funny,
trust worthy,
down to earth,
rich,
friendly,
relaxed

Looking at this magazine cover I feel like this is a type of a guy I could walk up and talk too.