Thursday, March 29, 2012

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Double entry Journal #10

This week we read Sowing the Seeds for a More Productive Society

This is a really long quote, but it really impressed me.

             "At one Hong Kong workshop, an 11-year-old girl named Julia was inspired by a pair of shoes that she had seen that contained embedded lights that flashed as the shoes moved. But Julia wasn’t interested in buying shoes with pre-programmed lighting patterns; she wanted to create her own patterns. So she connected a Cricket and a series of lights to her boots, then installed a sensor near the bottom of the boot, where it could detect the up-and-down motion of her foot. She programmed the Cricket to change the colors of the lights, based on how fast she was walking.
       At the same workshop, an entrepreneurial 12-year-old named Anthony came up with a business idea: a wearable jukebox. He cut a coin slot in the top of a cardboard box, then installed sensors on the underside of the slot to measure the size of the coin inserted. He then programmed the Cricket to play different songs based on what coin the customer put into the box. For Julia and Anthony, the Cricket provided a way to create and personalize their own interactive inventions. As Julia explained, “With Crickets, you don’t have to use what someone else made. You can make it yourself.”"

I liked this quote, because it shows a young person's capacity for achievement and creativity when given an opportunity to create and flourish.  I think that much too often we stifle young people's creativity, when we should be encouraging it.  Especially looking at something like this, I know maybe two adults who could create something like this.  I wonder how many others could if given the opportunity and free-range like this as youngsters.

This article gives help and advice for teachers and how they can use technology to help them teach.  It even gives links under each point, that may be beneficial to that point.

Resnick, M. (2007). Sowing the seeds for a more creative society. Learning and leading with technology, 18-23. Retrieved from

Tenkely, K. (n.d.). Top 10 technology tips for new teachers. Retrieved from

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Double Entry Journal 9

10 Things Schools Can Learn From Video Games
There really wasn't a quote that jumped out at me.  For some reason I got the idea that this person doesn't actually play video games.  The way games are described in this article, it just doesn't seem how someone who plays games would describe them.

School Uses Video Games To Teach Thinking Skills

10 things schools can learn from video games. (2012, January 20). Retrieved from

Chaplin, H. (2010). School uses video gamesto teach thinking skills. NPR, Retrieved from

Wikipedia Blog Posting

How a Ragtag band created Wikipedia3 things you learned
They are funded by donations.
They have two million articles, with most languages by Eastern European.
They Say that they are more popular than the New York Times.
They only have one real employee, with the rest being volunteers.
2 things agreed with
I love their dedication, and mission to keep wikipedia free.
I really like that he was willing to admit that it wasn't perfect, around 5 minutes in, it makes me feel more feeling to trust him and his site.
1 thing you disagreed with
Were you surprised? Why?
 I don't know if surprised is what I would call it.  Aggravated maybe?  It seems to me that this is a case of someone not being able to find a fault in wikipedia's accuracy, so they are nit-picking anything they can find.
Almost never, I've only done it twice in the past five years.
1) No.
   A) Yes, there are links to each article, with further links to more information clearly stated, or highlighted.
   B) Yes, the article provides what appears to be only factual information based on the events, while using an objective stance.
   C) There are references linked to the reference section at the bottom, throughout the article, most of which then have a link to the actual resource.
   D) It appears to be complete.
3) There are 64 references to the article, some of which would be reliable, such as the Washington post, some of which may be biased, such as WWE's own website, and some of which may not be reliable due to being prone to sensationalism, such as Sports Illustrated.
4) WWE was one of the good article nominees, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
WikiProject Connecticut Rated B-class, Mid Importance
WikiProject Professional wrestling Rate B-Class, Top-Importance
WikiProject Companies Rated B-Class, High-Importance
  • 1 Wrestler link redirects
  • 2 Sydney headquarters
  • 5 Logo
  • 6 WWWF section
  • 8 HHH
  • 9 The WWE's status as a company...
  • 11 New WWE Tag Team Champions
  • 12 CEO/Chairmen
  • 13 Still World Wrestling Entertainment/opening line
  • 16 Scripted wins
  • 17 Proposal to merge History of WWE into WWE
  • 18 Change the name
  • 19 Founding
  • 20 WWE is a real sport

  • 5) I think it's partially reliable.  There is no apparent bias involved.  However, as I stated above, some of the sources may not be the most reliable.  Also, according to some of the comments on the discussion, some of the information is outdated.


    Wednesday, March 7, 2012

    Double Entry Journal 8

    This week we read Wikipedia.

    a. What is Wikipedia?
    According to the article wikipedia describes itself as "Wikipedia is a multilingual, Web-based encyclopedia project, operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, a nonprofit organization."

    b. How would you answer the question posed in this piece “How reliable can a source be when anyone can edit it?”?
    Not incredibly, you never know who has changed what, or what their motives or knowledge is.

    c. Who do the creators of Wikipedia place their trust in when it comes to weeding out misinformation?
    Their readers.

    d. Why did founder Larry Sanger leave Wikipedia?
    To create a site that depends more on experts.

    e. What would abuse or vandalism look like on a Wikipedia page?
    Heavy handed bias for or against the subject of an article.

    f. What do the statistics quoted in the third paragraph of this piece reveal?
    That Wikipedia is highly successful and still growing.

    g. Why do you think Wikipedia is so successful?
    It's easy to use and access.

    h. Why might Wikipedia’s creators not want to accept advertising?
    To keep free of clutter, and to remain impartial.

    i. How does Wikiscanner help increase the reliability of Wikipedia entries?
    It helps make sure that those leaving information on the site is are trustworthy and unbiased.

    Thursday, March 1, 2012

    Website Evaluation

    Has someone taken responsibility for the content of this Web site?
           Not a single group, or person, no.  However the author of the article is listed.

    Are there any links to in-depth information about the author or organization?
           There is a link to their mission statement, but not who they are.  Again though there is a link in the article to a short biography on the author.

    Can you contact the company or author through a real world postal address or phone number?
            No they only have an email address.

    Is the information biased in any way?
            No, they are offering both sides of the argument in a objective way.

    Does the site's information seem thorough and well organized?
            It is very well organized.  It sets up the information in a concise way, then expands on it

    Does the Web site offer a list of further in-depth resources or links to such resources?
            It has a related information section, with links to this information.  However all of their arguments, both for and against have no supporting facts, or evidence to back them up, except for one link to a incredibly biased website.


    Is it important that the information you're looking for be absolutely current?
            Yes, as there is new, and changing information on the fight for gay rights, and gay marriage, coming out all the time.

    Is a reference date provided to show when the material was put online, or when it was last updated?
            There is information on when the site was last updated.

    Do the links work?
            Yes, but some of them lead to more opinion sites, and some lead to advertisements to things that have nothing to do with the issue.


    Can I get the information faster offline?
            No, I don't believe I can.

    Does the online material I'm finding suit my needs?
            Not at this particular site.

    Am I able to verify this information?
            No, there are not many links to their sources, but there are links to what they consider relevant information.