this is important when it comes to the conversation of "deskiling" the teaching profession. Folks may think that as more digital tools become available teachers don't need as much expertise or training to effectively do their jobs. However, selecting and implementing the right tools certainly requires a great deal of professional know-how.

This is important when it comes to the discussion of "deskilling" the teaching profession. Folks may think that with an every-increasing inventory of digital tools for learning, teachers do not need to be knowledgeable or skilled. However, this isn't the case because it takes expertise and thought to select and implement proper tools.

This idea is so foundational to anyone in a helping/service profession. I like thinking about individuals as each having their own strengths and tools to work with. Teachers need to allow students to adapt and change situations using their strengths.

It's fascinating that redefining learning may involve changing the dynamic of a student-teacher relationship. i think it's neat that technology can empower students to work alongside teachers rather than as subordinates (for lack of a better word).

This is particularly startling. It's interesting the way the teacher identifies all students "the kids we teach" as having the same prospects. This reminds me of research finding that teachers tend to view students belonging to minoritized racial/ethnic group as one student instead of individuals.

I think there is something to be said for the way that the words "inclusive" and "justice" operate here. These have kind of become trigger words for folks unwilling/unwanting to have tough conversations or conversations about social progress. I believe that inclusive design and design justice are one of those things that in principle most people would understand and subscribe to.

This is especially an issue when it comes to issues of racial/ethnic inequity in schools. Students of color, and ELL students have long been mistreated and fairly assessed in schools due to ways of speaking and writing that are deemed unprofessional or improper, when for example students write/speak in AAVE.

The last part of this activity was especially thought-provoking. I've often joked that I am well-aware of companies taking and using my data but 'I have nothing to hide, so it is what it is.' I have not long considered the way that identity shapes this point of view. This is really important.

I really appreciate that, while the other aspects of evaluating tools are much more 'practical' and straightforward, this is much more complicated but vitally important. I do think it is often difficult, depending on a teacher's own identities and experiences, for an individual to thoroughly evaluate this aspect but it is vitally important which is why connecting with one's PLN and asking students about their experiences with the tool during use is a method that can be used to examine whether a tool supports diverse learners.

I'm wondering about how apparent this kind information is. Teachers have a lot on their plate and although it is vitally important for teachers to brief the tools they are using and make sure they are appropriate for classroom use, realistically how much time ought educators put into vetting tools before implementing them? It would be neat if digital tool creators displayed this rubric on their platform, showing how they stack up and meet criterion. This would lessen the stress and responsibility that comes with using digital tools in the classroom.