It was nice having clarification on the final project and analysis. It is nice preparation for the 894 project. I will definitely use this as a template. Walter shared his expert Web 2.0 tool with us about educational Comic tools. He gave us a brief history of comics that was very informative. I use Comic Life with my students and they just love it. It is a great way for them to introduce themselves at the beginning of the year and it works so well in science, especially when students are experimenting. They take pictures to document their research and add captions to describe what is happening in each step of the processes. He gave us a resource called pixtin which is a nice resource. Using comics for social networking is an interesting way of approaching the idea. I would not have thought of using it in that format. Comic Creator is a nice resource too.
Concrete learning is effective and memorable situations. We revisited the Web 2.0 activity we participated in on the first day of class, focusing on education. Web 2.0 has countless tools which will come and go. However, the education empowers the learners and opens up possibilities for global learning. There is so much possibility to understand content and access information.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Interface Design Critique
Cmap and FreeMind
On Information Design
* Who are the users? The users are often educators that want to assist in integrating technology and graphic organizers. Also, users are often individuals that want to illustrate important information or data.
* Information chunk: FreeMind and Cmap are both easy to use and offer help features and preference settings. I feel that FreeMind is simpler to use and to create new graphics of information. However, Cmap is easier to link concepts and I like how the menu is similar to Word.
* Relevance: The tools are used to construct, analyize and share information represented as concept maps. They help individuals illustrate and organize their thoughts and important information.
* Labeling: The labels on FreeMind are graphics that may be more "child friendly" than Cmap. However, it was difficult for me to make the connection without testing out the function. Cmap was easier to navigate because the menu was familiar, since I have used Word for so many years.
* Consistency: They both feature consistent patterns and preference settings. The graphics default to their previous colors and settings. They are fairly consistent.
* Detail: I feel that FreeMind does have an overwhelming menu which is why I prefer Cmap. There are so many controls and buttons that it can make me overwhelmed. I know some people prefer that but I prefer less controls. Cmap has a lot of detail as well but it is in the toolbars. Both have a lot of functions that should be simplified. Neither are the most user friendly.
On Interactivity
* Orientation: You have to practice and play with both FreeMind and Cmap. Neither tool is the easiest to navigate.
* Navigation: The navigation is very linear, but it can make me feel all over the place. The tools are not always easy to find and the features are not obvious.
* Functionality: The tools work well and can be imported and exported. I wish they had more import and export capabilities. I also wish they had more graphic functions and libraries.
* Information access: There are some supportive sites, but they are not great. There are mostly reviews on the products. Information can be published and the software is open source.
On Screen Design
Attractive: The design is blank and basic with question marks on both FreeMind and Cmap.
Resolution: The resolution is fine and easy to use.
Color: Basic color choices and features are simplistic.
Lay out: The layout is basic and could be better in both tools.
Readability: The readability is also acceptable for both pieces. However, FreeMind and Cmap could improve.
On Information Design
* Who are the users? The users are often educators that want to assist in integrating technology and graphic organizers. Also, users are often individuals that want to illustrate important information or data.
* Information chunk: FreeMind and Cmap are both easy to use and offer help features and preference settings. I feel that FreeMind is simpler to use and to create new graphics of information. However, Cmap is easier to link concepts and I like how the menu is similar to Word.
* Relevance: The tools are used to construct, analyize and share information represented as concept maps. They help individuals illustrate and organize their thoughts and important information.
* Labeling: The labels on FreeMind are graphics that may be more "child friendly" than Cmap. However, it was difficult for me to make the connection without testing out the function. Cmap was easier to navigate because the menu was familiar, since I have used Word for so many years.
* Consistency: They both feature consistent patterns and preference settings. The graphics default to their previous colors and settings. They are fairly consistent.
* Detail: I feel that FreeMind does have an overwhelming menu which is why I prefer Cmap. There are so many controls and buttons that it can make me overwhelmed. I know some people prefer that but I prefer less controls. Cmap has a lot of detail as well but it is in the toolbars. Both have a lot of functions that should be simplified. Neither are the most user friendly.
On Interactivity
* Orientation: You have to practice and play with both FreeMind and Cmap. Neither tool is the easiest to navigate.
* Navigation: The navigation is very linear, but it can make me feel all over the place. The tools are not always easy to find and the features are not obvious.
* Functionality: The tools work well and can be imported and exported. I wish they had more import and export capabilities. I also wish they had more graphic functions and libraries.
* Information access: There are some supportive sites, but they are not great. There are mostly reviews on the products. Information can be published and the software is open source.
On Screen Design
Attractive: The design is blank and basic with question marks on both FreeMind and Cmap.
Resolution: The resolution is fine and easy to use.
Color: Basic color choices and features are simplistic.
Lay out: The layout is basic and could be better in both tools.
Readability: The readability is also acceptable for both pieces. However, FreeMind and Cmap could improve.
The Psychopathology of Everyday Things
This is not a picture of the actual train set because I do not remember the exact model number, but it did look similar.
source: http://www.yogee.com.au/lego-train-station-7997-p-390.html
Why do they make toys so difficult to put together? It often makes me feel dumb when a simple children's toy is impossible to assemble. I often see "some assembly required." However it can take more than just me, but an entire team to put together a toy for a five-year-old. I remember last Christmas, I gave a train station to my nephew because he had a love for trains. I am not a manual person and felt that I could put together a train and some tracks without reading directions. After all, I have put together a few trains in the past. As I gathered all the pieces from the box, I started putting tracks together. I purchased this particular piece because the tracks could be manipulated in many different ways. My thinking was that my nephew could try several different designs for his amusement.
Upon gathering the pieces from the box I noticed that not only did I have to put the train itself together, but I also needed to read the manual. It took an entire team to help put that train together and we could not finish it on Christmas day. I was so annoyed at the amount of assembly we needed to complete and how there were so many small, complicated pieces. The set should have been put together more than it was. Furthermore, "some assembly required" should mean some assembly.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Group Project
I had a blast working with Walter, Dan, and Henrique. Although I participated primarily online, it was great working with them. All of the online participation got me thinking about the difficulties of online participation. There are so many advantages to collaborating with others online, but there is a greater risk of miscommunication and misunderstanding. For example, I misunderstood our story rules at the beginning and did not know when to participate. My group cleared things up, but it took a while for the information to come my way. I suppose this problem will become less intense as technologies develop. If I had an Apple iPhone my experience may have been different. I also might have had an easier time if I was not in the woods cut off from civilization for a week with my fifth graders. Oh, well... I did have a good time and I just love my students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
