I really enjoyed the way this reading broke down the learning theories. I remember learning about these theories in my child development class but I never thought about how certain apps/tools are more fit for each type of learning. The examples provided made it easy for me to connect how specific types of learning can be used in a 21st century classroom.

I think the PICRAT model is useful for all teachers to use because it allows you to understand how your classroom interacted with a certain digital tool. It also pinpoints what the tool was lacking and what the tool is good at from a students point of view. I also like that teachers can track how lessons were able to play out after using a digital tool with the PICRAT table.

I think Grammarly is a good example of assistive technology. This website gives feedback on how to make your writing better. However because Grammarly grades objectively vs. subjectively it often grades your writing lower than what a teacher would. This is proof that not all the features of assistive technology should be used in a classroom.

I often just click “sign in with google” because it requires less questions when making an account. However I never realized how much of my information I was giving away, like access to my personal emails. Another thing I noticed is when I talk about something aloud and then later see a ad about it on a website I’m using. I know Siri is always listening/recording but I didn’t realize she may be to the cause of these coincidences.

While I was reading this article, I realized it has many connections to special education class. In that class we talk about accessibility for our students as well. Earlier this week we watched a video about a woman who was blind and couldn’t choose what she wanted to eat because she couldn’t read the menu's. This connection just gave me the idea to evaluate the UMass Dining app with the POUR Model. I could not find any option for changing the language (P), I can only be used on cell-phones or tablets (R), and it doesn’t come with a built-in screen reader (P). This app also isn’t the most understandable because the ingredients can be very long and using words that most students haven’t seen.

I enjoyed that this article included examples and videos that showed feature on the websites that are helpful. For example showing the retractable taskbar on Canva, it provided proof that a website that is minimalistic is actually better for students because the ads can be distracting. I also found it useful that this article mentioned collaboration among students on the same platform. I think that introducing a new website during a group project is extremely helpful because the students are able to learn together and teach one another as they continue exploring.

I think that making sure the apps and website we use are accessible to everyone is really important. I liked how this reading broke down the different levels in terms language accessibility and internet access. Sometimes I think teachers can overlook that aspect and accidentally have students trailing behind.

Reading this article made me realized how inaccessible remote learning was at my high school. For example, I don’t remember any of my teachers incorporating captions on zoom lessons. I also don’t think my teachers really took into account students who had trouble paying attention because most of them didn’t include hyperlinks in the work that we got. I can only assume the students who lost focus also struggled with getting their work done because most links had no reference.