Magazine Cover

Double Entry Journal #5

Quote: “Educators face enormous challenges in preparing their students to be critical online readers.”

Response: I whole heartily agree with this statement. Most teachers do not have the knowledge to teach children the ins and outs of the internet. I have a hard time keeping up with the new gadgets of the internet, such as twitter, blogging, and I still am not sure what a gadget is. I just recently learned the difference between an iPad and a tablet. If teachers and most adults doesn't know this stuff, how are we to teach the children? I find in most cases, it is the children teaching the adults. But I do agree that this digital media needs to be introduced and used in the schools. Information comes much faster and freer using the internet. Another problem facing children learning and using the internet in the classroom, is funding for these projects. Most Board of Education Departments lack the funding to train the teachers with this new technology and also can not provide for the purchasing of the computers for the children to gain access to the internet. We need to resolve all of these issues. I feel the children would be more efficient in their learning and the work load on the teachers would improve.

I found the following article and hope this answers some of these questions that we have. This is a link as i could not get it to copy and paste.

http://www.classroom-teacher-resources.com/teaching-with-technology-t2.html

 

Bibliography:

Educational Leadership:Literacy 2.0:Teaching Media Literacy." Membership, policy, and professional development for educators - ASCD. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2012. <http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar09/vol66/num06/Teaching-Media-Literacy.aspx>.

"Teaching with Technology Keeps Kids Engaged and Eager to Learn." Classroom Teaching Resources | Create Student Success and a Job You Love. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2012. <http://www.classroom-teacher-resources.com/teaching-with-technology-t2.html>.

Wikipedia reliablity worksheet

Wikipedia Reliability Worksheet

Article title: Battle of Antietam

Answer the following questions to see how reliable a Wikipedia article is.

1. Start with the main page. Does it have any cleanup banners that have been placed there to indicate problems with the article? (A complete list is available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/
   Cleanup.)

Any one of the following cleanup banners means the article is an unreliable source:

This article or section has multiple issues.	no
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.	no
The neutrality of this article is disputed.	no
The factual accuracy of this article is disputed.	no
This needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling.	no
This may contain material not appropriate for an encyclopedia.	no
This article only describes one highly specialized aspect of its associated subject.	no
This article requires authentication or verification by an expert.	no
This article or section needs to be updated.	no
This article may not provide balanced geographical coverage on a region.	no
This is missing citations or needs footnotes.	no
This article does not cite any references or sources.	no

2. Read through the article and see if it meets the following requirements:

Is it written in a clear and organized way?	yes
Is the tone neutral (not taking sides)?	yes
Are all important facts referenced (you're told where they come from)?	yes
Does the information provided seem complete or does it look like there are gaps (or just one side of the story)?	yes

 

3. Scroll down to the article's References and open them in new windows or tabs. Do they seem like reliable sources? (For help in determining the general reliability of a source, check out the Knowing What's What and What's Note: The 5 Ws (and 1 "H") of Cyberspace handout.)
   
   Reliable references:  All references seem accurate and see to come from textbook or reference manual with IBN numbers
   Possibly unreliable references: I do not see any listed
   
   Definitely unreliable references: I do not see any listed

 

4. Click on the Discussion tab. How is the article rated on the Rating Scale (Stub, Start, C, B, GA, A, FA)? What issues around the article are being discussed? Do any of them make you doubt the article's reliability?

This article has been rated as GA-Class. I only see referenced updates for this article.

5. Based on the above questions, give the article an overall ranking of Reliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable.

• You may use a Reliable article as a source (but remember that even if a Wikipedia article is reliable, it should never be your only source on a topic!)
• You may use a Partially Reliable article as a starting point for your research, and may use some
  of its references as sources, but do not us it as a source.
• You should not use an Unreliable article as a source or a starting point. Research the same topic in a different encyclopedia.

How did you rank this article (Reliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable)? Give at least three reasons to support
your answer.

I find this article as very reliable. It has many references. The references are states clearly. The references seem to come from notable experts.

 

 

Users:

Brian Downey- Interests would indicate that he is very interested in History. However he does not have any background or history education. I would  still count him as a reliable source.

Mtsmallwood: has retired from Wikipedia

Hal Jespersen-  says is his a computer guy by trade. but has great interest in American Civil war.

Double Entry Journal #4

Quote:   ”Many educators express concern about young people’s increased reliance on Wikipedia as a resource for their homework assignments and research projects. These teachers worry that youth aren’t developing an appropriate level of skepticism about the kinds of information found on this particular site.”

Response: I can understand where educators are being concerned on the reliance of Wikipedia as a resource. I have always been told that any type of encyclopedia cannot be used as a reference. Any encyclopedia should only be used as a starting point for your research paper or homework assignment. It should only be used to get a general feel or knowledge of the topic. However, I do feel that Wikipedia is a good starting point for anyone seeking to learn something about any topic. I agree that it should never be cited or used at the only reference to the assignment. But Wikipedia is a very knowledgeable place to start. Experts help to create the article. They quote and use outside resources. And if they are wrong, other persons/peers can make changes, updates, or even have a discussion about the topic or dispute at hand. And the problematic topic is generally corrected in a short amount of time.

Bibliography:

• "Encyclopedia Britannica." Britannica | Encyclopedia Center | Your Encyclopedia Resource. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2012. <http://www.encyclopediacenter.com/Encyclopedia-Britannica-s/83.htm>.
• "WHAT WIKIPEDIA CAN TEACH US ABOUT THE NEW MEDIA LITERACIES (PART ONE)." Confessions of an Aca-Fan — — The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2012. <http://henryjenkins.org/2007/06/what_wikipedia

Activity #2 Wednesday 9/19/12

Wikipedia is a non-profit, multilingual, web-based encyclopedia project. It is operated by the Wikimedia Foundation founded in 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger. One Wikipedia defender answers the question of "How reliable can a source be when anyone can edit it?" by saying that"the problem with Wikipeida is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can never work." The Wikiscanner checks the IP addresses of anonymous editors who may try to vandalize the site through seft-interest. One founder Layy Saner left Wikipedia because he believed that it (Wikipedia) should give more authority to experts. He Created another site Citizendium (which does allow experts to make and update changes to his site). Vandalism/abuse on Wikipedia would be shown by the changes that were made in the article and the changes would not follow with the article itself. The statistics in the article show that there are more than 280 languages with a total of more than eight million articles. Wikipedia is amoung the top 10 most-visited sites on the Internet. This to me shows that is it a very popular site in which to get quick info on just about any topic that anyone needing information or just a starting point on reachering information about a topic. I think Wikipedia is successful because it is a fast and reliable source in which togather information. I think that they will not accept advertising due to not wanting to jumble the information that is given. They want to keep it as clean as possible. Wikiscanner helps to increase the accuracy. It will catch any vandalism and abuse by any user who tries to make harmful changes to the website or article posted.
4 ways to use Wikipedia (never cite it)
I most usually use Wikipedia as a starting point in any paper that I have to write. It gives me a background/starting point about the subject I am writing about. It also gives links and references to look up to get more information on the subject.

Auditory and Picasso

I am an Auditory learner. There are several things that help. When I am studying, I need to be in a really quiet place. As for Technology, we have books on cd's, most things on the internet have sound, and I can understand it better if something is explained to me rather then reading the instructions.

Double Entry #2

Quote:

The standardization of English spelling began in the 16th century, and although it is unclear at exactly what point our spelling became set, what is certain is that ever since it happened, people have complained that the rules of spelling, such as they are, just don’t make sense.

Response:

I agree whole heartily with this statement. We have too many words that are pronounced the same but yet have different meanings. We have, for example, their and there. Their is for showing a belonging to someone or something. There is for showing a place. Even in my work place with other adults, they cannot get one right from the other. This is not a once in a while occurrence this is every day.  If this is confusing for adults, I can imagine what it is like for children trying to learn the difference in the meanings of the words and the trying to spell them.  Let’s not forget the people from other countries trying to learn our language; it is probably exceedingly hard for them to learn. As a matter of fact, I have spoken to many foreigners who have a hard time learning our language for this reason. Maybe the younger generation has it right. Abbreviations in texting reads the same just doesn’t look the same.

+
Biblography:

Ransom-Wiley, James. "Potentially offensive DS dictionary set for release | Joystiq." Joystiq. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2012. <http://www.joystiq.com/2005/08/18/potentially-offensive-ds-dictionary-set-for-release/>.

Ransom-Wiley, James. "Potentially offensive DS dictionary set for release | Joystiq." Joystiq. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2012. <http://www.joystiq.com/2005/08/18/potentially-offensive-ds-dictionary-set-for-release/>.

Wordle