I prefer reading the captions whenever I watch videos because I do not always understand the audio, so it would be especially disconcerting if the captions were not accurate. But that aside, I understand the scenario the book is introducing here, and the point about accessibility.

There is layer after layer of things we must consider when embedding an activity into our lesson to ensure all students benefit in a meaningful way. If something goes wrong with technology we need to think of alternate and/or supplemental solutions. But then we must also realize that this is not optimal for a fraction of our students and are therefore tasked with developing further interventions and adjustments. It can be a complicated and time-consuming processes, but it is necessary to create a wholesome learning environment.

This guiding UDL principle of multiple means of engagement is quite effective in middle school and high school. As stated here, students in that age range appreciate being given a choice or say in what task they are required to complete. Of course, the instructor can offer choices that do not compromise on the level of rigor or the learning objective being met while still appealing to the interest of students.

Another aspect to consider related to this principle is that of rotations of activities in the classroom such as what is often seen in blended learning. With an increase of meaningful interactions with the content, students develop a more profound knowledge of the content and are then better able to articulate it, both in word and in writing.

This is a great tool which is more widely available since it's free, although I have seen my students use the similar Kurzweil 3000 tool since they are granted access through our school. Either way, their read-aloud feature is highly beneficial to many of the students and is an accommodation they have on state exams as well. I've also seen the translation feature used frequently and it is quite solid.

I've had a bad experience with learning tools that are not robust myself. My two sons are tasked with iReady math work from school and we only had Android tablets at home so they had to share my desktop computer which was not ideal. I eventually had to get them an iPad so they could access the app to complete their assignments.

As far as my students, I found that while most have their student laptops, those who lose them or whatnot and resort to their cellphones to try to be productive lose access to many of the apps which require their Clever accounts or the single sign-on in via school email. Going of what I learned about in the previous chapter, that also opens up more severe privacy concerns.

This does not seem feasible, at least in my case. It is unfortunate, but there is so much to consider when choosing tools and resources. With the rise of the cheating tools in math, I am always looking for different question types that will steer students in the direction of doing their own work. It is also the case that while there are some websites that are rather comprehensive in their array of questions, I still find the need to rely on more than just one to cover the required standards as best I can.

Now as far as how protective tools/apps are of student privacy I have not yet found any that can do the same job or do it as well. What is available that meets the privacy criteria is better served for review or intervention purposes rather than for a main assignment.

For this reason, I hope that MOOC and OER continue to develop at a rapid pace in terms of math so that students have access to quality tools that are not built on the preying or collection of personally identifiable information.

Reading this was a little surprising for me. I remember being pulled by the counselor in high school for an essay I wrote on a STAAR test. It received the maximum score in terms of answering the prompt and being well-written, but the rater was concerned about my mental health. I definitely have not seen the tech tools referenced in this section of the book do that yet. It is always the teachers who read something and show concern and may refer the student to their counselor, communities in schools social worker, or wrap-around specialist.

It has been my experience that when the tools are used "in search of warning signs" they are indeed to punish and perhaps even to discriminate against certain students rather than get them the help they need. I understand when there is a threat to the school involved and I appreciate the effectiveness of said tools in those situations, but I have to wonder why the findings from the tools cannot be used to intervene in struggling students lives for the better.

With all the talk of social emotional learning going around, why do the people with access to these tools not use them in such a way so as to help students get back on track so they can focus on their studies?

This section on Children's Internet Protection Act was highly informative for teachers. There are some common websites that students try to access that are blocked. There are also some video streaming sites that are blocked and some that are not. This is more of a concern for social studies and English teachers who may want to show certain movies related to their learning units than to a math teacher like myself, but it is still important to consider. I do test resources to see if they can be used on the school network before requesting that students reference them.

I just started using PhET simulations this year with my students and thus was one of the resources I included in my Google sites back in Module 1. I was not aware that it did not collect personally identifiable information on its Android app, so I am glad to have learned of this from this chapter of the book.

It is a great tool that can serve as a digital manipulative, a discovery tool, and a resource for review as well. My only hope is that they continue to expand the math section so that it becomes as robust as the science one.

I see the need for students to be exposed to these higher order thinking skills. It's unfortunate these projects and assignments are usually reserved for the advanced and honor students who happen to be in the right school or class. Regular and at-risk students need them just as much if not more because they may not be headed to college but their careers will still require them to think critically, be creative, and think on their feet.

Therefore aside from serving as a motivation to get through the class, higher order thinking assignments may also change their outlook on how relevant the class is to their future job. So while I meet certain kinds of technology with pessimism because I feel it lowers the cognitive processing required of students, I am also forced to acknowledge that said technology also forces educators to move past the lower level skills of remembering and understanding. Hopefully my school can move beyond the stringent teaching to tests and allow us greater space to explore with these high order thinking activities.

Flipgrid is a great tool which at our school the social studies teachers were once appraised on their implementation of it or lack thereof. I was skeptical of how its use in my math classroom, but decided to try it out after I got a taste of VoiceThread at UHD. My students met it with great reluctance but those that did it were able to see each others videos and also receive feedback from me.

From an evaluation perspective, I was able to get a better picture of their understanding of the math concept I assigned them to explain. I noticed some of their misconceptions as well as the fact that many were not comfortable using the right academic vocabulary. Of course the downside was that for the number of students that we teach in high school, I don't think it would be feasible to assign Flipgrid on a regular basis.

I think there is merit to the cognitive theories of learning. Now that supplemental aids for testing have become a norm, even distributed to students who are do not require to have such an accommodation, it is good to make the mind maps and mnemonic devices a routine during the everyday lessons.

I state their use for testing because that is what matters to administration and above. But speaking on the students behalf, which I believe may also be the case with the theories themselves, their learning is more in-depth when it stack on prior knowledge. The vertical alignment present in math is well-suited to cognitivism because students need to apply previously learned concepts to new skills and situations all the time.

The behaviorist approach is a staple in math, so that even this book included the example of student's receiving immediate feedback for solving a math equation. Indeed there is a time and place for that since many times we are asking students for the right answer to a problem.

But with the new formats for key exams such as STAAR, it may be time to look at other ways of asking questions. We need to help students to form connections and thinking critically. At first I was quite discouraged when we stopped assigning Quizizz due to how easily students cheat on it. It's the same with other gamified websites such as Kahoot and Blooket. For Quizizz, I used to enjoy the premium features and question types as well as counting with all my customized assignments I had prepared over the years.

So that has forced me to restructure my assignments and face the reality that I must look beyond behaviorism. It's a shame about the cheating, but all I can do is direct my students to think, struggle, and practice math while they are in the classroom.

I think the fact that a PLN must be diverse is a given. So I would like to focus more on depth and dynamism. Depth in particular is one of the reasons I am not completely sold on social media interactions. From my personal experience, there is too much superficial sharing going on out there. It lacks the structure and relevance that is found in a class discussion such as this one.

In contrast, within my PLN we can dissect, experiment and reflect on the technology tools that could work best with our caliber of students. Both veteran and novice teacher have that safe space where their voice is heard and where their contributions are appreciated. That leads to the dynamism of my PLN. As a beginning teacher I listened and adopted many of the best practices from those more experienced than myself. In turn, I always offered assistance with technology and also the content matter. Now that I have more experience and also that I have taken several MAT courses, I am able to contribute in a different way. I am able to expand my PLN in my campus and learn from others outside my content area. Thus, I am steadily adding to my repertoire of knowledge and tools, but I am doing in a way that is tailored to my students needs and abilities.

I'm quite grateful to my PLN which consists of the people in my school's Math department. I've received plenty of advice regarding which tech tools and equipment are effective for our students. Since we share similar tools and practices, it also helps form a consistency that students can expect and appreciate as they progress through the math courses. This year my PLN has expanded to include a few other teachers from other departments given that we are all learning the new Canvas LMS together.

Honestly speaking I'm not a big fan of social media, whether for educational or even for personal use. I do look at some of the educational articles mentioned in this chapter from time to time, but I prefer to experiment and learn from the tech tools as much as I can on my own. That in turn helps me better assist my colleagues that come to me for help.

This is actually a good tip for both students and teachers. I have recently begun to do this for math topics to see alternate ways to explain a concept and when I find something relevant or particularly useful I can then follow the source of the image for further explanation. It is also a callback to the the Digital Natives article by Marc Prensky, wherein he stated that "they prefer their graphics before their text." Thus, it is something that students might already be doing, but if not it would be worthwhile to point out.

As I was reading this I thought about finding the topic or tool by using similar terms, in particular their example of different terminology for elementary school. I related it to the different research articles I have read while doing this masters program, and how they may reflect authors from UK, Australia, or other English speaking countries.

But then, many of us educators are fluent in at least one other language. I realized that I haven't recently tried to search for tools or topics in my own native language. It would be worth a try to improve my search. It would also help me better advise my beginner ELL who recently arrived to the U.S. from Latin American countries.

Canva is what I ultimately decided to use for this module's project. It was not an easy decision since I wanted to try out VYOND as was suggested in the project description. Ultimately, it came down to cost and features. I also cross-shopped Moovly and Powtoon, but at the free education tier which is all that my budget allows, I found that Canva provided the most features and was the easiest to use for what I had in mind.

Having used it, I can attest that the instruction and interface are easy to follow and that overall, Canva does provide an excellent user experience.

This was one point which stood out from this required reading. It ties to what Marc Prensky noted about the Digital Natives in the reading for the project from this module. That is, today's students learn when they are networked, and this is the case when they can collaborate in real time and receive affirmation from their peers. It is imperative therefore that teachers include tools which give students that capability of collaboration, because then students simultaneously gain deeper content mastery and build up essential soft skills in a formal setting.

Tinkercad's breakdown of the instructions into the three indicated categories does seem easy. I would like to try it out with my children at home to see if they are able to follow along. If they as elementary students can get a good grasp of it, then it stands to reason that my high school students would as well.

Until now, I never had the opportunity to try out Tinkercad, although I did see it once demonstrated by a previous Computer Science teacher. At the time we had been charged to do a project across the content areas with Minecraft Education with the Pre AP students. It did not work out, but I still believe Tinkercad could be highly suited for use in a Geometry class.

I have experienced this situation at some of the worst times such as final exams and also during STAAR tests. At times as these there may not actually be an alternative or back up plan. But it is equally disappointing when my students are actually engaged or trying to participate and then the tech tool decides not to function as it is supposed to. Although it may be possible to transition into another activity, in some cases the tech tool may be a required one, or it may be one that "amplifies" or "transforms" the learning and if that is the case the poor user experience is most unfortunate.

This is a clear interpretation of the term backward design, and it would be beneficial to novice teachers. They are swamped with requirements, including which technology tools are required along which those that are heavily recommended. The learning curve is steep for some of them, and they may grow disheartened or feel overwhelmed.

Planning time is always cut short, which is why it took me a few years until I was finally able to begin "planning with the end in mind" as the saying goes. Once I did, I found that I had more savvy as to which tech tools to use to meet the learning goals for each unit. Before that, I was always scurrying from one tech tool to another to meet the demands of the campus or the district which are not always the same. As expected, that mentality and practice did not translate into good test results.

As a callback to my time in ETC 5301, wherein I wrote a fictional piece of a teacher's implementation of PICRAT model in BookCreator, I wanted to post a response in this section. The author here contrasts it to SAMR model, but adds that more than linear progression of technology, the grid or matrix that PICRAT uses more fairly represents how technology should be adapted since it also takes the student into account.

How the student interacts with the technology and the final product they produce is what appraisers are looking to see. In my opinion, the PICRAT does have a progression, but it's not 100% linear. It is also lenient in not demanding that activities be at the highest level all the time. This is in consideration to teacher's time limitations in planning and also the times a teacher may have to reteach and/or provide enrichment.

This is sound advice for any teacher. As a math teacher, I have found myself in attendance of several trainings where I thought the technology tool in question was amazing but I didn't immediately see its relation to my content. Sometimes I was right in dismissing them, though other times I was convinced to at least attempt to use the technology tool in my classroom. A couple of things to keep in mind are how easy the students will acclimate to and adopt the new tool and if it is flexible enough to be reused.

This is a bold statement on which all educators should reflect upon. Teachers are a diverse group, but just to pick on the typical veteran teacher, they may be inclined to argue that they are not comfortable with implementing technology. In short, they do so because its mandated by their administration, and thus they are reluctant to explore beyond mainstays such as MS Powerpoint, MS Word, YouTube vidoes, and online textbooks. There is nothing wrong with these, but a more purposeful use of technology could really transform their classrooms.