activity that involves writing about art, whether it is about
using appropriate terminology to critique their own work or
the works of others or documenting their creative process, can
be done on the internet as opposed to a paper that is handed
in. As well, their studio work, including material documenting
both process and self-assessment can be posted on-line.
One of the
major differences in using Web 2.0 tools as opposed to written
(or word processed) material, is that their work becomes public,
which can be a strong motivator for better quality work. As
well, students can be asked to comment on what others have written
or given a chance to contribute their own ideas to the topic
or assessment of other students in the class. This could easily
be achieved through the use of a blog, which offers a section
for comments after each posting.
advantage to using Web 2.0 tools to post work is the fact that
their work goes beyond the walls of the classroom. They can
work collaboratively and anonymously with students in other
classes for a more objective critique than if they only get
feedback from their classmates and friends. Family can view
their work and provide feedback as well, or engage them in a
dialogue about their work. Students can also find out the point
of view of others around the world for a cultural exchange of
ideas surrounding art making and analysis, for example, comparing
the meanings of different symbols in different countries. In
addition, many blogs allow tagging, or classifying of information,
which reinforces the use of appropriate terminology.
of the curriculum that can be enriched through Web 2.0 tools.
For example, one of the topics on the curriculum is th discussion
of post-secondary choices, including schools that offer arts-related
choices and potential careers in the arts. Projects on these
topics can be collaborative in nature, with students each researching
a school or a career and adding the information to a Wiki. Guest
artists and artisans can be invited to have input to the Wiki.
In addition, students can ask questions of these artists and
“interview” them via a blog or wiki. There are many
ways in which the tools can be integrated. I have included samples
in the following section.
in which I find students lacking motivation is being able to
pick their own art work for display. I find this particularly
true for those with low self-confidence due to learning problems.
Many parents have indicated to me that their children have not
shown them work, even though the students had been pleased with
their achievement in class. By creating class galleries where
students can post reflections and artists statements, and having
“guest books” for others to sign, students have
the opportunity to pick their best work, explain their intent
and at the same time, not feel the embarrassment of having to
hold up art and wait for feedback from others.
tools can successfully be used with accommodations for different
learning needs. The very variety of tools enables students to
explore topics through multiple intelligences. For example,
podcasts are auditory while mind maps are visual. Many of the
tools, such as blogs and wikis, can include multimedia content
including images, podcasts and videos. Students can be given
a choice based on their strengths. The essential questions and
information can stay the same but the method of exploring them
can be differentiated. As well, Web 2.0 tools can be paired
up with assistive technology for students who need their use.
For example, students can use a speech recognition software
to create blogs or wiki information. In addition, assignments
can be structured in order to provide other accommodations,
such as giving extra time for completion or reducing the number
of required blogs.
tools are not just another way to get students to write in a
journal. They are also about collaboration and linking to bigger
ideas and gaining confidence in one’s own voice. Assessment
can reflect much more than a written product, as well. Since
the student can be offered a variety of ways to achieve an outcome,
assessment can focus on the quality of the outcome, creativity,
making connections and collaborative effort. The tools can make
the teacher’s job easier because most of the programs
require student’s to log in so that they can post entries
and add comments. This enables teacher’s to track effort,
both in terms of quality and quantity, as they can see a history
of what has been posted.
certain a benefit to using Web 2.0 tools both in programming
and assessment, for students with learning differences and students
with different learning styles.