Before I was introduced to wikis in April 2008, I never would have envisioned how much my teaching could use these new technologies.  More importantly, my students could not be more ready to take their education to a new level that I sincerely hope will better connect them to the world and prepare them to participate in a digital world.  The time is now, and while students have been hungry for this opportunity, the reinforcing research is thorough enough to justify using wikis,blogs, podcasts, Flickr, Moodle, and online writing technologies that I feel can significantly improve students’ writing, and perhaps more importantly, prepare them for digital citizenship.

This article is the 2nd in a series, based on action research I collected while studying for my M.Ed, explores the impact digital technology can have on how our students learn, and how we, as educators, can leverage that impact for the good of our students.

You can also read the rest of the series here at We Teach We Learn

1. Web 2.0: Pedagogical Evidence and Brain Research

3. Web 2.0 Technologies and Online Writing Tools (coming soon)

4. Online Security and Safety (coming soon)

Online literacy and new literacy

Another important line of literature focused on the importance of students both being exposed to concepts in and employing online literacy.  In their article, “Information Literacy 2.0:  Empowering Students Through Personal Engagement,” Brown and Bussert, who used the Web 2.0 technology Flickr in a learning community in Cairo, Egypt, point out that

“[c]ommon Web 2.0 applications such as blogs, wikis, and social bookmarking tools are ‘intrinsically user-centered and can be leveraged by Information Literacy (IL) instructors for a creative, student-centered teaching and learning environment” (Brown, Bussert, 2007).

And while some resources argued that simply exposing students to these technologies does not improve their online literacy, this article opposes that position, stating that the

“. . .fundamental hypothesis underlying the use of social software to teach key information literacy concepts is that student learning will increase due to personal engagement, use of preferred learning styles, and application to daily life” (Brown, Bussert, 2007).

These resources go on to detail ways in which exposure is important, and also how they can more specifically be applied as powerful classroom tools.  But in this set, understanding how to use them is part of the education, according to authors like Luce-Kapler, who cites visual literacy using these mediums as yet another layer of important learning students get while utilizing new technologies.

Calling these new literacies “radical change,” which is also a portion of the author’s title, Luce-Kapler highlights three main forms of new literacies:

“(1) changing forms and formats such as new forms of graphics, new levels of synergy between text and pictures, nonlinear and nonsequential organizations and formats, and multiple layers of meaning and interactive formats;

(2) changing perspectives such as multiple points of view both visual and verbal and previously unheard voices, including youth; and

(3) changing boundaries such as dealing with previously forbidden or overlooked subjects and settings, new types of communities, characters portrayed in new and complex ways, and unresolved endings” (Luce-Kapler, 2007,  p. 215).

And although Jakes doesn’t come right out and say it, his assertion that using wikis and Web 2.0 writing technologies also “promote[s] a lifetime of participation and contribution,” leading to what some writers described as digital citizenship.  Students will be sharing ideas, debating, agreeing, asking questions, and leading discussions using these technologies, and through such collaborative efforts, they will also be challenging their own thinking while challenging the thinking of their peers as well.

Finally, it is one thing for students to know how to participate in social networking Web 2.0 technologies, and many are doing so rather comfortably, but do they really understand what they are doing?  Do they understand the potential that exists beyond the social web as they move toward this “digital citizenship” that undoubtedly stands before them?

J. Salpeter’s article “Make Students Info Literate” focuses on what the author calls education’s most clear goal for the next century:  “[H]ow to develop a new generation of knowledgeable digital citizens who can operate in the unregulated online world” (Salpeter, 2008, p. 25).  She also makes emphatic mention of the NTCE’s adoption of new literacy goals and correlating definitions – an obvious eye-opener to any educators (especially English instructors) who are failing to pay attention.  The authors I read seemed to predict the NCTE’s move, as Brown and Bussert already understood through their Flickr implementation back in 2004-05, defining information literacy as “the set of skills needed to find, retrieve, analyze, and use information” (Brown, Bussert, 2007).

Jakes’s most profound statement in his article, “New Literacies:  Enrichment or Essential?” supports these claims, stating, “Our kids need to use the Web for learning in many ways, but we have to structure online learning so that it is true inquiry, supported by the requisite information literacy skills, so that students, when in need, have internalized a problem-solving approach to build answers to questions of importance.”  In K. Bolan, M. Canada, and R. Cullin’s article “Web, Library, and Teen Services 2.0,” the authors go so far as to argue that

“[g]aming is one of the newer services that libraries are implementing that embraces library 2.0 beliefs.  Contrary to what some may think, gaming is recognized as a literacy activity” (Bolan, Canada, Cullin, 2007, p. 42).

At this point, I can quickly see how information and online literacy is of great importance, and the NCTE obviously will be pushing all of us forward.  For me, when I have historically looked at Wisconsin and national standards, the technology pieces are often those that are given the least attention, mostly because I know that although important, they will not be addressed on the test.  But that is my motivation – not to teach to a test, but to prepare these students for digital citizenship.

One might argue that by not preparing them as such, they will be ill-equipped to fully function and contribute within our democracy, and further, with our international neighbors.  By employing Web 2.0 technologies, I will already be assisting them in becoming more digitally literate – helping them to decipher quality resources from those that are potentially fraudulent.  This always mattered to me, but now I will implement that concern by embedding that in my teaching.

In addition, as an English teacher who teaches a research paper and incorporates literary research with analysis papers, there are a number of opportunities for me to teach to these new literacies, and not to simply meet the “F” criteria in the Wisconsin State Standards.  As for environmental aspects, I suspect that with these technologies will come new responsibilities for students as they are not working in their own corner of the room any longer; because a number of their contributions will be accessible to all students in my classes, they may feel more inclined to take care with the work they do, and more naturally become more conscious of the quality and compassion behind what they contribute.  Jakes continually asked his title question:  “Enrichment or Essential?” (Jakes, 2006).  It will become my job to make online literacy essential, not simply an exercise in enrichment for my classes.

Bolan, K., M. Canada, and R. Cullin (2007). Web, library, and teen services 2.0 Young adult library services, 5 (2), 40-43

Brown, N.E. and K Bussert. (2007). Information literacy 2.0: empowering students through personal engagement. Eric Document Reproduction Service : ED 500-136

Jakes, D. (2006). New literacies: enrichment or essential? Paper presented at TechForum in San Diego, California

Luce-Kapler, R. (2007). Radical Change and Wikis: Teaching New Literacies Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51 (3), 214-223 DOI: 10.1598/JAAL.51.3.2

Salpeter, J. (2008). Make students info literate. Technology & Learning, 25-28

Before I was introduced to wikis in April 2008, I never would have envisioned how much my teaching could use these new technologies.  More importantly, my students could not be more ready to take their education to a new level that I sincerely hope will better connect them to the world and prepare them to participate in a digital world.  The time is now, and while students have been hungry for this opportunity, the reinforcing research is thorough enough to justify using wikis,blogs, podcasts, Flickr, Moodle, and online writing technologies that I feel can significantly improve students’ writing, and perhaps more importantly, prepare them for digital citizenship.

This article is the 1st in a series, based on action research I collected while studying for my M.Ed, explores the impact digital technology can have on how our students learn, and how we, as educators, can leverage that impact for the good of our students.

The Pedagogy and Politics of Technology in the classroom

Talking with just about any administrator about the importance of technology in a school, one will find him/her pointing to the computer labs available, the existence of a school webpage, and maybe to the SmartBoards the school has installed thus far (if lucky enough to afford them).  But J.D. Bransford points out that technology’s existence is not guaranteeing anything at all to a mother who is about to enroll her child in the district’s high school.  In an ever-increasingly politicized educational system, taxpayers are crying foul over every expenditure, especially on new and constantly changing technology.

Bransford combats these issues by stating, “Because many new technologies are interactive, it is now easier to create environments in which students can learn by doing, receive feedback, and continually refine their understanding and build new knowledge” (Bransford, 2000, p. 208).  What’s particularly wonderful about these new technologies is that they are all free to access and use, especially when you are talking about educational purposes (my own wiki pages, because they are clearly of an educational nature, are free and one level above a basic page, meaning that I have more gigabyte space for backing up pages, and no advertisements whatsoever).  And while I have to address how much access students have to internet services outside of school by using an early technology survey, I always allow sufficient time in class and extended deadlines for certain types of online work that allow students enough flexibility to participate successfully, even if they don’t have access to the web after school is out.

Motivation

A number of the sources in my research focus on how technology can help to drive motivation and keep students focused on real-world tasks using new real-world technologies, all the while giving them the opportunity to “perform and learn in far more complex ways than ever before” (Bransford, 2000, p. 215).  And while Glasser doesn’t directly address new technologies in his somewhat archaic article from 1997 and 1998, he nicely massages any questioning administrator or parent into believing in the potential these technologies have on student motivation, mostly because they are intrinsically supportive of his belief in choice theory, where students take ownership and responsibility for their actions.

Web 2.0 collaboration and activity can easily meet the four psychological needs he cites in his article, “’Choice Theory’ and Student Success,” including “the need to belong, the need for power, the need for freedom, and the need for fun” (Glasser, 1997, p.17).  And J. Willis’s article, “Preserve the Child in Every Learner,” shows just how important it is that students feel that they are an integral part of what is occurring in the classroom.  Looking at the function of the amygdale and the brain chemical dopamine, Willis makes a clear brain-based assertion that dopamine in students’ brains is not as readily blocked when teaching strategies include “exploration and investigation activities, cooperative learning, allowing students to establish some of their own learning goals, student choice of subtopics to investigate, social collaboration, and physical activity connected to academic study” (Willis, 2007, p. 35).

Perhaps even more revealing in the literature is the fact that the barriers that have historically existed between student and teacher could be knocked down using such new technologies.  Bransford argues that the use of these technologies in the classroom can actually redefine the roles of students and teachers alike, stating that “[o]ften both teachers and students are novices, and the creation of knowledge is a genuinely cooperative endeavor.  Epistemological authority – teachers possessing knowledge and students receiving knowledge – is redefined, which in turn redefines social authority and personal responsibility” (Bransford, 2000, p. 227).

Glasser could not be more thrilled, stating that students have a “personal world” where only a select few are allowed to enter.  If teachers move from bossing to leading, and these technologies can allow for exactly that, then “[w]e follow [teachers] because we believe they have our best interests at heart.  In school, if [a student] senses that particular teachers are now caring, listening, encouraging, and laughing, he will begin to consider putting them into his quality world,” and the environment of that classroom can be truly special (Glasser, 1997, p. 18).

Willis’s brain-based research also reinforces the importance of a safe, stimulating, comfortable environment for quality learning to take place, stating that “when students are in a positive emotional state” and “when subjects express feelings of contentment and safety, a stimulating, but comfortable amount of challenge has a positive influence on the amygdala’s affective filter,” which in one study showed “students tested under these conditions show better working memory, improved verbal fluency, increased episodic memory for events, enhanced creative problem solving, focus, and higher order executive function and decision-making abilities” (Willis, 2007, p. 35).

When looking at my own instruction, there is no doubt that using Web 2.0 technologies allow for me to break down the barriers that exist between teachers and students, creating an online forum and digital environment that can quickly spread into the classroom, making a safe place to share ideas, writing, and other project-based learning I might involve in the curriculum.  Two springs ago, I first experimented with employing a wiki page in my English 11 courses, and the feedback (in the form of surveys and in verbal communication) was phenomenal.  Even in my summer school class, students with whom I had little or no connection were able to develop a relationship with me by using a website called shelfari.com, where we shared good books we have read in the past and were reading at that moment.

Exciting, to say the least.  For me as an English instructor, considering the topics we cover in our reading of J.D. Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye alone, if students do not feel that I genuinely care about the trials and tribulations of teenagers, how can teaching such an important piece of literature really be effective?  These technologies really do take the impact of my teaching Catcher to another level altogether.  And finally, when considering assessment, it’s clear that my students perform better as a result of what is a more inviting, involving, caring environment using these new technologies,

But I couldn’t do that. There is so much more to say!! I am so excited about Voice Thread and its possibilities for teaching and learning! As a result of this over exuberance, I’ve decided to forgo all the quality checks and balances we have here at We Teach We Learn, and just toss this out there. I’ve got a devil may care attitude tonight.

So, if you haven’t already done so, check out the video above for a brief 3 minute example/introduction.

Okay. Back with me? Great. If that’s your first exposure to Voice Thread, let me show you something else. See, I don’t want to spend a lot of time telling you about this. As a teacher, you really need to see it and experience it and then let your imagination run with the possibilities.

What you’re looking at just below, is an actual Voice Thread I’ve embedded here explaining what a Voice Thread is. So go ahead. Click play. You know you want to:

Alright, so maybe you watched the whole thing, or maybe you didn’t. Regardless, can you start to see the potential here? I’ve been playing around with this application for about a week now and have made a few Voice Threads of my own. One of my first was actually for this blog as I shared some information about gender differentiation. You can see that post here.

So there I am stumbling around. You liked it, you didn’t like it–whatever. That’s not the point here. Stay with me.

At the time of this writing, I hadn’t yet found anyone else to play with me. I mean, nobody has participated on the voice thread. I hope that will change soon. But it may not. Still, the point is it opens up all kinds of possibilities for presentations. The slides I used were taken directly from a handout I gave to people that attended my session at a conference. I also prepared a powerpoint that I used during my talk to inform and help stimulate discussion among the participants.

I was a bit rushed for time. Still, I thought it went reasonably well. But here’s the thing: When we all left the room that day–it was over. I haven’t heard from a single one since to further the discussion.

Not that this would be ideal, but with a Voice Thread, I could have prepared and presented everything on-line. People could have been able to access it as many times as they liked, whenever they liked. And not only that, but we could have also continued the discussion–OUTSIDE OF THE ROOM!

Okay. So to me, that’s pretty cool. But the other thing is, this application is so ridiculously easy to use! I’ve explored podcasting, and uploading slide shows using slideshare and trying to add voice and video into powerpoints–but it’s all so cumbersome for me. Sure, I suppose I could figure it out. But like I said when I started this post–I’m busy!

I promise you, Voice Thread took less than 5 minutes to figure out. It really is as easy to use as it looks.

So, naturally, I wanted to start using it in my classroom.

Now let me say right off the bat that, while my ideal is to get the kids involved in discussion by using the Voice Thread as a launch point, I have to temper my enthusiasm because I don’t have a solid, secure way to manage their accounts. You need an email to get your own free account. Not all my kids have that. I wish we could get them all secure accounts here at school, but we’re just not quite there yet as a district. So, I’m willing to start small.

Here’s what I did. This is a link to a wiki I’m developing to manage my–you know–class, curriculum, units. It’s a place kids can go to get what they need for 8th grade language arts. Please don’t be critical–I’m just getting it started. I don’t have any interaction built in yet–or even many units.

Anyway, we just started a Treasure Island novel unit. The way I run it is, typically, students are responsible for two chapters a day, one of which I read to them in class. The other, they’re on their own–which is fine for most. But, you know, there are always those that are going to struggle mightily with the text. I mean, after all, Treasure Island was originally published in 1883. The language has changed a bit. Plus there’s dialect and weird vocabulary and spellings and all kinds of other complexities.

So, if you check out this wiki page, you’ll see that I’m slowly but surely recording the even numbered chapters (those I typically don’t read in class), along with slides that support the text. Now these struggling readers can read along as they listen. We don’t have to have a library of audio tapes or CD’s to keep track of. They can just hop on a computer with internet access– either here at school, or home, or the library, or where ever–and away they go!

But this is just one (very limited I might add) application of how Voice Thread can be used. Soon, I’d like to secure a few email addresses for some of my struggling writers so that they can leave voice comments in response to slides I develop prompting them to–you know, all that language arts stuff–summarize, predict, analyze, interpret and extend the text of the story by responding ORALLY!!!

Who knows where we can go from there. Maybe even responding to each other, offering opinions (on our opinions), capturing discussions and learning on line. Maybe kids who are low energy during class will be able to engage at a later time of day. I don’t mean to imply that voice Thread can totally replace a good quality classroom discussion. But I think it can certainly be a tool we can use to enhance teaching and learning.

Lots of possibilities.

And the cool thing is–there seems to be no limit. It’s totally up to you. Now imagine how it might fit into your curriculum. Let your creative juices flow.

Next, invite your students.

For a list of examples of how other teachers have used Voice Thread, check out this page of educational Voice Thread examples to get ideas for your own classes. This page contains examples created by real teachers, for real K-12 students in all curricular areas.

Check out this link to explore Voice Thread logistics related to education. Complete with a discussion about privacy.

So there you have it. The bottom line: Voice Thread takes presentations and collaborations and discussions and media to the next level. Add it to your arsinal.

This article is the 3rd in a series, based on action research I collected while studying for my M.Ed, explores the impact digital technology can have on how our students learn, and how we, as educators, can leverage that impact for the good of our students.

Before I was introduced to wikis in April 2008, I never would have envisioned how much my teaching could use these new technologies. More importantly, my students could not be more ready to take their education to a new level that I sincerely hope will better connect them to the world and prepare them to participate in a digital world.

You can also read the rest of the series here at We Teach We Learn.

1. Web 2.0: Pedagogical Evidence and Brain Research

2. Online Literacy and New Literacy

The vast majority of the resources I picked up had to do directly with various Web 2.0 technologies, although most of the sources touched on them to some degree.  The key to keep in mind here is that there is a lot of reinforcing evidence for using Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom, but there are so many with so many different uses in and outside of the classroom, that many of these sources focused on how the technologies work and how they could be used in schools.  Many of the authors attest to how the technologies, while new, aren’t terribly difficult for students to access and use (and they are all free for both the teacher and students).  With that said, here is an additional breakdown:

Blogs – According to Flierl and Fowler, “a form of online communication most often described as an online journal.”  Unlike a wiki, this is a more individuated technology.  Will Richardson, who wrote the tech-famous Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms, enthusiastically cheers for blogs, stating:  “Writing stops; blogging continues.  Writing is inside; blogging is outside.  Writing is monologue; blogging is conversation.  Writing is thesis; blogging is synthesis” (Richardson, 2006, p. 31).  Process is everything in writing, and Richardson argues that blogging does reinforce this well.

Flickr – Essentially a photography sharing type of social network where images are uploaded, and techniques in getting shots are shared by artists.  V. Heffernan states in a New York Times article, “Let’s face facts:  the Web, after nearly 20 years, has failed to uncover new masters of noble art forms like poetry, sculpture and the airport thriller.  But it has engendered – for good or ill – new forms of creative expression…People don’t upload to the Web words and images they had fashioned apart from the Web; they fashion their stuff specifically for online platforms and audiences” (Heffernan, 2008).

Moodle – Poses as the best of both worlds, according to W. Fryer in “Wiki, Blog, or Moodle?”, because it “offers the ability to host threaded discussions” like a wiki or blog but yet “ can be comparatively more organized than a series of blog posts (especially on different blog sites) and reflect the contributions of different people more directly than a wiki can” (Fryer, 2006).

Podcasts – Dionne (2006) calls them the online tool for the “non-geeks.”  Essentially an auditory broadcast to which virtually anyone can listen, podcasts are easy to create and access.  Like so many of the other Web 2.0 tools, they are great to keep students and parents alike connected to what is occurring in the classroom (or in the building, should the school and/or district choose to employ them for announcements and the like).

RSS (Real Simple Syndication) – Allows a person to create a link to a page that adds updates to this tool from any webpage without having to continually go back to check physically.  This is potentially a great tool for any student doing online research on virtually any topic.

Twitter – “[T]he micro-blogging platform used on mobile phones,” according to A. Fernando in “Baby Steps in Web 2.0 Education” (Fernando, 2008, p. 9).   In other words, it’s a blogging format that can be accessed using a cellular phone.  Twitter is now often used educationally in PLNs as a way to collect links to other resources as well as a way to connect with people of similar interests from around the world.

Wikis – Combining “features of websites and word processors to create a new kind of application that allows multiple authors to write and edit content,” according to Flierl and Fowler (2007) in “Educational Uses of Blogs and Wikis.”  This is certainly a wonderful tool for collaborative learning and project-based sharing.  T. Stahmer (2006) in his article, “Think Outside the Blog,” argues that “blogs are not as effective when a large number of people want to collaborate, contribute, and easily find information on a given topic,” something that a wiki can accomplish effectively and efficiently.

YouTube – A video-sharing network that historically has gotten a bad rap in schools (often not allowed through filters).  Still cited by numerous sources as a very appropriate Web 2.0 tool in the classroom, provided that it is used responsibly (especially by teachers sharing a clip with students in the classroom).

There are a number of other areas in which these particular resources delve.  One key item is on writing proficiency.  J. Orech argues that when using a wiki, “collaborative writing produces higher quality writing than face-to-face collaboration,” or, as many would call it, peer revising (Orech, 2007).  And a number of other authors see the power of using Web 2.0 collaboration for the purpose of improving/revising compositions.  In “Four Web 2.0 Collaborative Writing Tools,” J. VanderMolen highlights four tools, including Google Docs, Zoho Writer, WriteBoard, and ThinkFree, which can all be used to collaboratively write.  It’s also a place where an instructor can frequently check in on how the process is going for students as they draft an essay or other composition.  VanderMolen exclaims, “Collaborating students need not be in the same room, or even the same school/city/state/country.  And their work, usually password-protected, can be accessed from any internet-enabled computer,” making the tool very flexible, accessible, and efficient” (VanderMolen, 2008).  L. Nelson and S.G. Feinstein continue in a similar, albeit more critical vein, in their paper “Research on Writing Conventions: U R What U Write.”  In the article, they point out that while students are often instant messaging and texting rather than talking on their cellular phones, it doesn’t mean that they are doing so to better their writing skills.  However, they argue that it is the role of English teachers to help students to “understand the importance of how they say what they say” when communicating in the digital world (Nelson, Feinstein, p. 20).  In a definitively critical article, Lankshear and Knobel argue that while these new technologies do not often afford what they call “powerful writing,” they state using blogs and other new technologies, “our use of ‘written language’ …can reach larger audiences than could have ever been imagined a decade ago” (Lankshear, Knobel, 2003, p. 6).  Indeed, purpose in writing adds to motivation, which can then add to better writing.  “Potential” is a key word oft repeated, whereby the teacher’s role becomes that much more clear when employing these tools in the classroom.

There is a potpourri of other strengths these authors find in Web 2.0 tools, including the potential that these technologies will replace the dusty (and expensive) textbook eventually, and the likelihood that teachers will be able to use these technologies to help students more cognitively reflect on their learning, since most Web 2.0 technologies include some kind of thread or historical archive.  These resources prove that the possibilities are endless – until the next generation of technologies appears (and that could be soon).  And collaboration, collaboration, collaboration – in her article, “The Next Wave Now:  Web 2.0,” L.B. Mills states,  “The top-down approach of the Web we grew up with now has been replaced with users who build information form the bottom up.  With Web 2.0, the focus is not on software, but on practices such as sharing thoughts and information through self-publishing and harnessing the collective intelligence of all users to generate information and solve problems” (Mills, 2007, p. 4).

I have no doubt that my own instruction will include some of these Web 2.0 technologies – my greatest problem is choosing which will be potentially most powerful in my teaching.  I know this so far:  I will employ a wiki page and have students create their own for some project-based cooperative learning opportunity, I will have students use one of the aforementioned collaborative writing tools, and I will have students “test” Moodle (as I am mixed in my review of that Web 2.0 tool versus a wiki page).  As for my discipline, the writing tools again fit in nicely with my English classes, but the collaborative community of the wiki page will continue to grow in both my English classes and my journalism class, as the pages were already introduced to my classes this past spring (and with moderate success).  As for the learning environment, I have little doubt, based on my research, that the collaborative online environment will feed in nicely to my classroom – hopefully leading to more free discussion (especially since the more hesitant students may feel more empowered to participate).  And finally, considering assessment, I would say at this point that while many of my sources don’t get into it, J. Orech makes clear the importance of assigning roles and guidelines in cooperative uses of online tools, and this helps to keep me aware of the fact that while these new technologies are exciting, some students may be aware of the opportunities to “cheat the system” (Orech, 2007).

by Jeffrey Ayer, WTWL Writer

Wordle might be the next best thing to sliced bread, and the possibilities for implementation in the classroom are literally endless.  Heck, we could look at the word frequency in the posting I’m writing now.  In fact, we will, and I will create a link at the end.  Sure hope I avoid using “I” too often – uh, oh.  And that’s just one of the many potential uses.  The New York Times has been using word clouds to identify word frequency in significant speeches (most prominent, the speeches of Barack Obama toward the end of his campaign, and again for the inaugural address in January; click here to see his and every president’s inaugural address analyzed since George Washington).

How does it work?  Go to the Wordle site and simply click on “Create.”  Before you do so, take a look at some of the examples hanging out on the homepage.  You will notice that the style, color, and overall design is far more artistic than that of what The New York Times did with the inaugural addresses (and yes, you get to make this magic happen in seconds).

Click on “Create” at the top of the homepage.  The next window prompts you to paste a selection of text (this could be a compilation of student work, an article you assign in class for students to read, and so on), or, if you were more advanced, you could enter the URL for a web page where you might be storing student writing, and so on.  For simplicity’s sake, try copying and pasting something into the field. 

When you’ve pasted the text, click on the “Go” button, located just beneath where you pasted the text.  The next screen that pops up will be a “first” Wordle.  From there, you will see there is a small tool bar where you can select different functions to change the look of your Wordle creation.  You can change the language, font, layout, and color scheme.  You can also remove words by right clicking on one, or even add a maximum number of words (Wordle selects the most frequent).  In my case, with wanting to identify the frequency of my use of that dreaded pronoun I mentioned earlier, you would also want to click on “Language” and drag to “Do Not Remove Common Words.”  This will keep common pronouns and articles included in the Wordle.

It’s also worth noting that you can “Show Word Counts” under language as well.  Obviously, most word processing software does this already, but the word processing gurus aren’t doing anything as visually stimulating and telling as Wordle right now.  And of course, there’s no end to the possible looks you can give this.

Now, what would a teacher do with the product?  Wordle effectively identifies the most commonly used words, so if it’s student writing, a student could use Wordle to identify word frequency (like, dare I use “I”?), or overuse of prepositional phrases, to name just a few possibilities.  On the other end, when reading something new, the teacher (or student) could identify key concepts, new vocabulary, and so on.

If nothing else, creating a piece of artwork with words is just pretty cool, don’t you think?  Give it a try!  Visit http://www.wordle.net/ right now.  Oh, and here is a link to the Wordle for this blog entry (let’s see how “you” did – there I avoided using “I” – ugh!).  Click here to see the results (this sentence is not included, so I I I I I I am abusing the pronoun for fun).

by Jeffrey Ayer, WTWL Writer

Ever wanted an easier way to share your PowerPoint presentations, either with colleagues on a professional level, or with students as a teacher in the classroom?  Now there’s an easy way to share without the need to have the software on the viewer’s computer.  If you haven’t tried slideshare.com, try it now.  Not only can you post, add music, and then invite visitors for a look (and listen), but you can also get an original imbed code for your wiki page, blog page, or website, which could potentially make your amazing work as a teacher more visible to more people, and more efficient to access as well.  And if you have a Google account, you’re almost there already.  Just go to Slideshare to get started!

by Jeffrey Ayer, WTWL Writer

Haven’t tried Google Scholar yet?  Former students of mine recently informed me that Google Scholar is being widely used as a research tool at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and since finding this out, I’ve made ample use of it myself. 

Simply go to google.com, then pass your arrow over “More” and scroll down to “Scholar.” 

According to Google, this search engine “provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. “  Content includes books, abstracts, and articles “from academic publishers, professional societies, preprint repositories, universities and other scholarly organizations.”

In particular, I just used it this past weekend to connect my students to online copies of Arthur Miller’s play, Death of a Saleman.  Here’s an example of the most current Penguin edition:  Death of a Salesman

Happy Google Scholaring!