Wikipedia Vs. Textbooks

Three important ideas/things from the video today are that volunteers work for Wikipedia making sure everyone follows the rules, Wikipedia is not a place that allows contributors to share opinions, and many people can help add facts to this website, but the most important thing I leaned today is that it is hard for books that have been made months or years ago to keep up; that is why Wikipedia helps.  

After reading both Wounded Knee Massacre from textbook and Wounded Knee Massacre from Wikipedia I saw many similarities and differences. For example, in the textbook it explains how the armies "feared" that the Indians were planning war. The armies could have been worried and probably were, but that is not a fact unless they have proof. In Wikipedia they do not explain how the Indians and soldiers were feeling, in fact they explain that there is more than one version of this story. Another example is that Wikipedia using a lot of numbers, of exactly how many men, women, and children were apparently killed. Which the textbook does not state exact numbers. Although Wikipedia explains more of the story, both sources have the same idea. They both explain the main facts that people were killed, and who was that was battling each other. 

Wikipedia is trying to improve accuracy of the articles, as well as improving diversity on their articles. For example, they are seeking facts and information from people who's cultures the article is about. I believe that because they are making an effort to find individuals who are from and know a lot about the certain topic majority of the information is true. The facts in the Wounded Knee Massacre article was probably received from people who are related to the one's that were there during the massacre, whose stories were passed down. The article did have a lot of facts that the textbook did not. Although Wikipedia is trying to find people with the true facts of what happened at the time, stories do change over time. They have to make sure to provide reliable sources.  

Volunteers are discussing the topic of Medals of Honor during the Wounded Knee Massacre. They show what people had posted on the article and why they thought it was necessary to take it off. For example, someone commented the fact that Gettysburg had more Medals of Honor than Wounded Knee Massacre (which is true), but the amount they said was not true and did not have a source to back it up. 

After reviewing some of the volunteers profiles for Wikipedia I am unsure whether they should be the ones applying facts. The user Sdgjake seemed to have knowledge in areas that could be useful for others. He shares the degrees he has obtained and tells the information that he likes to give viewers facts about. However, Piratedan seems to be funny and entertaining, he also shares the degrees he has. But, he does not share what he is specifically good at or what he could help users learn. User V8m8i only shares that they are in the military, nothing else. I believe that volunteers on Wikipedia should only provide help to articles they specifically are good at or major in.

Going to the talk pages on each of these profiles it shows that Wikipedia tries it's best to only allow facts on their website. They ask each individual for sources when they provide information or a picture. They do this to make sure that they are really providing true information. Also if Wikipedia finds facts that are not true the volunteers are asked to take their posts down and delete it. After seeing this it actually helps me feel better about using Wikipedia.

Reading the whole article on Wikipedia of the Wounded Knee Massacre provides individuals with a lot of information. They use numbers to provide readers with how many people were affected, exact dates, names, and quotes. They also give information of what happened before and after this event to give the reader an idea of why it happened and what happened afterwards. I believe the article appears to be neutral, because it strictly is giving facts. It does say how the people at the time were feeling, but not how the writers personally feel about the events. If the author were to use statements like "the Indians did not deserve that" then the article would have appeared biased to me. But they appear to be neutral when saying "In the years prior to the conflict, the U.S. government had continued to seize the Lakota's land." they could have stated that a lot harsher if they were in favor of the Indians. 

"Wikipedia in recent years has become a more trusted source of information"
"Bing uses Wikipedia’s article for its Ebola summary."
"Only registered Wikipedia editors with at least some experience are permitted to edit the page, and the requirement for sourcing is much more rigorous than for other Wikipedia entries. Newspaper articles, for example, do not cut it."

Wikipedia is a good way to help educate students and many other individuals. Some peopel try there best to find text books that are fun for students. For example, "I signed on as an editor at a major publisher of elementary school and high school textbooks, filled with the idealistic belief that I'd be working with equally idealistic authors to create books that would excite teachers and fill young minds with Big Ideas. Not so." Although there are fun learning story books for children, text books for class usually bore students. Geoff Ruth states "While some textbooks are excellent, most bore my students and frustrate me."  Wikipedia is loaded with useful information, you can find facts on anything! This website can even help with health care. An example is, “Wikipedia is a do-ocracy,” said Dr. James Heilman, an emergency room doctor from British Columbia, Canada, who leads the Wikiproject Medicine that keeps close watch on the most important public health articles, like Ebola Virus Disease." 

Argumentative Essay

I strongly agree that “the personal computer is used to amplify human potential.” Computers are used quite frequently, inside and outside of school. Using this technology to teach is an effective way to educate, especially to this generation. Individuals use computers for many reasons. Such as research, entertainment, social media, etc. When it comes to school, students tend to get excited to learn when the lessons involve technology. Computers are a fun way to educate, help students express their individuality, and show how much education has changed.

Making learning fun for students is a goal many teachers try to accomplish and there are lots of ways to do so. Computers are an easy way to get students engaged in classroom activities. They can be used to go to educational websites that help improve certain skills like math or reading. According to Educational Technology and Mobile Learning 75% of students from ages 5-7 regularly use technology to play educational games. Funbrain is a website where students can play games to help improve in any subject. Users can create a profile on this site to keep up with their work and to see if they are improving in a certain criteria. Personally, I can remember being a child and playing a game for my history class. This game was based on a pilgrim family trying to survive. It was a very entertaining way to teach me that it was difficult to live in that century, and I always enjoyed getting to try and successfully survive in that virtual life.

Today there are even more opportunities for educators to teach children to teach while using a computer. Students tend to expand their creativity when technology is involved. When using a personal computer individuals are able to be themselves. For instance, in my instructional technology class I get to express my thoughts and feelings by creating a blog of my own. By doing this I get to be creative by explaining how I feel on certain topics I am learning in class. In elementary school students are also allowed to express themselves. There are blog sites made for younger students also. These blogs are similar to diaries, children get to say what’s on their minds. When students use computers to make blogs it helps them with reading, writing, and being creative. Another example of how students can get creative is being assigned to write a creative poem and turn it into a video. Students get to think outside of the box when it comes to working on computers or laptops.

It is amazing the technology that can be used today to educate students that was not even thought about before! Educators used to only be able to read from textbooks or write on chalkboards. Now there are smart boards, Ipads, clickers, laptops, and many more inventions. These can be used to incorporate a whole class to learn. For example, teachers can have students come up one by one to the smart board to solve a problem. Students enjoy working with technology and finding ways to complete their assignments successfully. This generation is always using technology. Bringing it into classrooms helps students to get creative while learning. Computers are an interesting way to educate and allow students to be themselves. Personal computers show how technology in education is constantly upgrading to help teach. Technology is constantly growing, and one can only imagine what the future has in store for the improvement of technology in classrooms.

Learning Styles Don't Exist

Many people have different opinions on the theory that learning styles exist. Personally, I believe that they do, but do not need to always be used. Most teachers want students to learn meaning base rather than learning styles. Educators often think that some people have better learning styles than others. For example, some individuals will have better visual memory than another, which is not true because some material all people have to learn visually (the map).
Unless students take active rolls (asks questions, research), the ideas just disappear rather than are remembered for a long time. Facts and definitions are often not remembered. For example, after taking a test I have studied for I often forget the material. Human beings have different intellectual strengths, nobody is the same. Education made to teach everyone the same is unfair. I agree that schools need to teach material longer than just a week, rather than multiple subjects at a very fast pace.




This represents my MI strength which is visual learning.

"Meaningful learning: when you actually remember what you have been taught"

Teachers should remember that every student is different and not all learn the same, but that there are materials in the classroom that have to be taught to everyone in a certain way. I think that putting students into groups with different types of learning styles is a good way to get them used to each one. I also think that teaching the whole class the same material the same way is also affective, as long as you make sure everyone is following along. Using technology in the classroom to support the students learning is very important. You can use smart boards to teach visual learning, hands-on, and listening. There are many ways to combine technology! An example for those with intrapersonal learning is that they can have an online journal. There are many websites designed for all subjects in education that can be extremely helpful! Even music can be taught through technology by making mix tapes online! Or for those students who are hands on, they can grab video cameras and record other students roleplaying. The list goes on and on with ideas that can help all kinds of students in a classroom!!

Our Brains on Video Games

I used to think what majority of people do, which is that video games are not the best for children to play, but now I think that they can actually be helpful. People don't like video games mainly because some can be violent, however that does not mean it will cause children to become violent. If the kid is exposed to real life violence then violent games may make them more violent, but it is still not likely. In fact, playing games can increase IQ's and help teach children to multitask, I know this by the facts Gabe Zichermann gave in his lecture. Even certain kinds of games could help children with ADD concentrate! Video Games are helping  kids become smarter because they're constantly striving to move forward, always reaching a new level in their game. It helps them because they have to think critically and really focus on what they want to achieve. Games actually provide positive reinforcement towards children. A reasonable amount of gaming can have a strong and positive impact on our behavior. Average people can concentrate on 3 things, while gamers can concentrate on 6-7. There are particular games to help with particular thinking. I know this by watching Daphne Bavelier's lecture.
PLAY GAMES WITH YOUR KIDS/STUDENTS!!!!
"Gamification is when you use game thinking to engage people"