A7.7: Week 7 Participation Memo

Linsey Cushing
October 6, 2007

Week 7 Reflection

Aims and Objectives:
This week, my personal goal was to get the assignments done by their due date on Sunday evening. This was the first week so far that I have had to work during the weekend on my assignments, and I am planning to make my goal for next week to be done by Friday again. I did not get the assignments completed earlier this week because I have had a lot of other work to do in addition to dancing on Thursday night. Midterms = stress.

Declarative Knowledge:
This week, I learned about the Three R’s of Inquiry in the McInnis article and I learned about evaluating web sites. In the McInnis article, I learned that students must become competent in the areas of reading, writing, and research to become successful in the academic world. In order to do this, students must change their mindset when researching from trying to find “the” answer to trying to compile information so that they can come up with an answer themselves. I also learned about the two types of knowledge: “knowing that” and “knowing how.” “Knowing that” involves facts while “knowing how” involves processes and procedures. Students must know how to obtain both of these types of knowledge to participate in an academic culture. The three R’s, reading, writing, and research, are all included under “knowing how.” I also learned that the best way for instructors to teach students how to obtain these skills is through assigning research topics and requiring students to write a paper and present the information to the classroom. This way, the teacher is able to mediate and teach the student during the process while also making it something that the student must participate in. Another thing I learned about was evaluating web sites. When I see a web site, I must think about several things before accepting that the site is valid and reliable. I need to look at the accuracy of the site, the author’s credibility, objectivity of the site, any available dates on the site, and how well the information is covered.

Procedural Knowledge:
This week, I learned how to take part in a live classroom on tappedin.org . First, I had to sign up to become a member of Tapped In and verify via e-mail. Once I successfully logged onto the site, I looked at the other people listed. I clicked on KarenLM (my professor’s name) and clicked Join from the drop-down menu. I then clicked on her name again and clicked on the door icon and was admitted to her “classroom.” Once all of my classmates were in the room, we presented questions to a guest speaker (a speech-language pathologist) and discussed the information in a chatroom-style fashion.

I also learned how to evaluate a web cite. As stated in the declarative knowledge, you must consider these categories when checking for the validity and reliability of a web cite: accuracy, authority, objectivity, currency, and coverage. After answering the questions provided under each of these headings, I determined whether two web sites were good sources or not. I also learned how to become a member of a social bookmarking network called del.icio.us. I visited the site, signed up to become a member, and verified the information by clicking a link in the e-mail sent to me. Next, I logged on to http://del.icio.us and I was done!

Conditional Knowledge:
The information that I acquired this week will be very beneficial in my future. Regarding the Three R’s, I feel confident that I have received a good basis for the development of these three skills in my past and am continually learning about them in my current education. I feel that I will be able to communicate efficaciously in the future with colleagues in the academic world. In the McInnis article, the information about students mistakenly searching for the answer rather than searching for the information that can lead to an answer really opened my eyes. I know that I am somewhat guilty of this; instead of trying to come up with my own answer when researching, I try and find “the” golden answer. The article really put this into perspective for me and I plan on reminding myself of this in the future. I completely agreed with McInnis that we must have “knowledge that” and “knowledge how” in order to succeed. It is the combination of these two categories that makes a student successful. A breakdown in one of these areas results in failure for the student. Actually, this can also be applied to the field of speech-language pathology. If a client cannot remember facts due to a memory loss, perhaps from a TBI or dementia, he or she will have a breakdown in communication. On the other hand, if a client cannot remember processes, a breakdown will also occur. A breakdown in either of these areas will result in the need for therapy. As a citizen, I will use this type of information because I plan to be active in my community and I am sure that I will at some point apply my writing skills to do this. Perhaps I will write an article for the newspaper to educate my community about certain disorders or even write an article in my children’s school newspaper about upcoming events at the school. As you can see, this type of information will be a necessity for the rest of my life.

A7.6: Response to McInnis

Linsey Cushing
October 6, 2007

McInnis, R. G. (1994). The three r’s of inquiry: Teaching literacy in academic cultures. Council of Chairs Newsletter. Retrieved October 4, 2007, from http://www.marshall.edu/commdis/courses/315/mcinnis.doc

TAP:
The topic is the importance of teaching students how to read, write, and research properly. The audience is college educators and the purpose is to inform professors about the need to teach students these skills while also instructing how to do so.

Claim:
Three major “R’s,” reading, writing, and research, are essential skills of inquiry that students need to be successful in an academic culture. Students must be instructed to switch from searching for an answer to searching for information that can be examined. In turn, the student can come up with his or her own answer. Students need to have the skills for “knowing how” and also for “knowing that” in academic cultures (McInnis 1994).

Evidence:
According to McInnis, students need the basic skills of reading, writing, and research (the Three R’s) to be successful in academic cultures, also known as higher education. McInnis has discovered through his own research and experience that students are misunderstanding the process of inquiry. Students expect to find the answer to the question at hand rather than finding the information that can lead them to a conclusion. Also, students are great at accumulating a lot of information about a topic but subsequently cannot figure out how to sort the information out and make it meaningful. If students do not learn the basic skills of reading, writing, and research, they are bound to fail at succeeding in the academic world because this is how the academic world functions. McInnis emphasizes that professors must meet the students halfway when teaching these skills and apply the instructions to information that the students can identify with. For example, McInnis uses either newspaper articles or op ed articles to teach his students how to research and convert from writing to the public to scholarly writing. Another point McInnis focuses on is that students are required to have two different types of knowledge: “knowing how” and “knowing that.” “Knowing that” involves knowledge about facts. “Knowing how” refers to knowledge of processes and procedures. The Three R’s are included under “knowing how.” All of these skills can be put to use when an instructor requires a student to conduct research, write a scholarly paper, and present the information to the classroom (McInnis, 1994).

Connections:
This article reminded me very much of my education from around fifth grade through my senior year of high school. My particular schools were based on the college prep idea, so from fifth grade on, we began learning how to read, write, and research properly. As soon as I saw “Three R’s,” I immediately thought of Mrs. Sloman’s fifth grade classroom because we had a poster up with our three R’s: read, recite, and review. Every time we read something, we were required to do activities involving these three procedures. My first research paper was in sixth grade, and they occurred almost yearly from that point on. My last research paper in high school was the “I search” paper, a fairly new concept that involves more of the writer’s input rather than a purely subjective point-of-view. As you can see, I have been around this concept for most of my life. I’m sure that my teachers were all put through training that involved articles just like this one. This information relates to the information we’ve been reading this semester because it involves literacy. Although we’ve mainly been reading about digital literacy, we have been putting the Three R’s to use for our weekly assignments. We will also put these to use when we do our research project for this class. As far as this information connecting to my future as a speech-language pathologist, I will constantly have to put my reading, writing, and research skills to work as a professional. Whenever I am not familiar with a particular disorder or disease, I will have to research it and become knowledgeable about it. I will use my reading and writing skills on a daily basis when reviewing and updating patient charts.

A7.4: Discussion on 10/1/07

Linsey Cushing
October 6, 2007

Reflection on Discussion 10/1/07

After participating in my first online meeting, I realized that I really enjoy this method of attending class! It is so much like what we were brought up doing in chat rooms, so it is a familiar setting. It is also very easy to carry on several different conversations at once, which is a lot harder to do in person. I learned a lot from Katie, the SLP who was our guest speaker. I also learned some technical aspects about how to chat in Tapped In.

This experience was brand new to me. Although I’ve taken classes online before, we have never had a live meeting. Instead, we discussed through discussion boards, which does not have the same effect as live chatting. I actually had a lot of fun “going” to class this way because I learned a lot but also got to joke around with my classmates. Also, I like how it is not a typical lecture-style classroom. With this type of virtual classroom, the students are the speakers while the professor is more of a passive observer, providing advice or answers only when needed. Overall, I thought this was a great learning experience because I learned about information pertaining to speech-language pathology while also learning some technology tricks.

To discuss in Tapped In, I had to first become a member. After completing the sign up process, I went to http://tappedin.org and went to Member Login. After logging in, a screen came up where I could see who all was on the site. I clicked on KarenLM , my instructor’s name, and selected Join from the drop-down menu. After this, I clicked on the door icon and was directed into her “classroom.” Once I was there, I chose Detach from the drop-down menu so that I could enlarge the screen. After this, I began talking! The main “trick” I learned was that Tapped In does not have emoticons. Instead, you type colon (:) and then whatever you wish to emote and it will place this on the screen. For example, I could say :smiles and the screen would say Linsey smiles. I really enjoyed doing this!

As far as the content of the conversation, I will stick to the educational aspects, although we did have a great conversation about smoothies thanks to Jamie. Katie, our guest, is an SLP who works full-time with the Stroke Unit. She mainly has stroke patients but also has some TBI. I learned that a lot of her patients had very low educational levels prior to the stroke or TBI so she had to base therapy on their previous skills. If someone just used writing to sign his or her name, that is all she would work on with them in the graphic communication aspect. I asked Katie if she has ever dealt with someone who was illiterate prior to the stroke, and she said that yes, she has. In this case, you only help them with what they did prior to the stroke. With so much emphasis on literacy, this really surprised me. I had never really thought about how different therapy would be for someone who is illiterate or dropped out at a very young age. For these patients, you have to base therapy on their work skills or interests and go from there. Katie shared some very interesting stories with us, showing us both the positives and negatives of working with this population. She also told us that we will be spending a lot of time working together with a team of occupational therapists and physical therapists. Overall, I was reminded how this field is never going to be “cook book” in nature and I am very excited to see what my future brings!

A7.3: Library Searching II

Linsey Cushing
October 5, 2007

References II

1. Database: MEDLINE
Keywords: cochlear implants, literacy
Bibliographic Information:

Fiori, A. (2006). Model oriented assessment of literacy performance in children with cochlear implants. Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie, 85, 489-495. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from MEDLINE.

2. Database: PsycINFO
Keywords: cochlear implants, literacy
Bibliographic Information:

MacDougall, J. C. (1991). Current issues in deafness: A psychological perspective.
Canadian Psychology, 32, 612-627. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from PsycINFO.

3. Database: MEDLINE
Keywords: cochlear implants, literacy
Bibliographic Information:

Boothroyd, A. (2002). Postimplantation audition and educational attainment in children with prelingually acquired profound deafness. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. Supplement, 189, 79-84. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from MEDLINE.

4. Database: MEDLINE
Keywords: cochlear implants, literacy
Bibliographic Information:

Spencer, L.J., Barker, B.A., & Tomblin, J.B. (2003). Exploring the language and literacy outcomes of pediatric cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 24, 236-247. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from MEDLINE.

5. Database: MEDLINE
Keywords: cochlear implants, literacy
Bibliographic Information:

Geers, A.E. (2003). Predictors of reading skill development in children with early cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing, 24, 59S-68S. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from MEDLINE.

 

A7.2: Web Evaluation II

Linsey Cushing
October 5, 2007

Web Evaluation II

Lending Ears to Learners
http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/newspaper/printedition/friday/chi-deafed_21sep21,0,5514522.story?page=1

I decided to evaluate a web site that is actually a newspaper article that has been put on the Web. The article is about cochlear implants and the positive effects they are having on children, including excelling in mainstream classrooms. When evaluating this article for its validity, I considered several different aspects as recommended by the John Hopkins University’s The Sheridan Libraries web site (http://www.library.jhu.edu/researchhelp/general/evaluating/). The author, Megan Twohey , is not familiar to me. The article does not give her address or phone number, but it does provide an e-mail address to reach the author at. The only aspect that makes her reliable is that she listed as a Chicago Tribune Staff Reporter. However, this title alone is not convincing enough to make me confident about the article’s validity. When looking at the publishing body, the article has Chicago Tribune’s name and official logo. However, the Chicago Tribune is not a scholarly, academic source. There is a link to the main page of the Chicago Tribune at the bottom of the article. You can also tell from the URL that this is linked to the Chicago Tribune. The Chicago Tribune is not particularly recognized in our field, but people know about it because of its popularity as a newspaper. The article does not list any credentials that make me think that Megan Twohey is knowledgeable about cochlear implants. However, the people that she interviews in the article are parents of children with cochlear implants and the children themselves. The entire article is not an interview, though, so she had to get her information somewhere. This web site is part of the Chicago Tribune site, so it does not reside in the author’s individual web page. As far as looking for bias, the Chicago Tribune appears to be a fairly neutral site. The article is written in favor of cochlear implants, but it does state that not all recipients succeed with the implants. The article does not provide a bibliography. Because cochlear implants are still controversial, the author does give both sides to the situation. Because this was not particularly a research article, it was hard to determine the “accuracy or verifiability of details.” However, the author does state that “experts say” when writing about the information. In regards to currency, the article states that it was written on September 21, 2007, and has a copyright for 2007. Although I did find this article on Google, it was not the first article listed and I understand the methods by which Google selects articles. Overall, I think that this web site is not as reliable as a peer-reviewed article, but it is listed under the Chicago Tribune, so it has a copyrighted name attached to it. Therefore, the information could at least be used as a basis to search for a peer-reviewed article on the same information. I also would be comfortable with just citing this source because of its link to the Chicago Tribune.

A7.1: Web Evaluation I

Linsey Cushing
October 3, 2007

Web Evaluation I

Site Name and URL:
BetterDogFood.com; http://www.betterdogfood.com/

Accuracy:
1. Does the author cite sources used to develop the site?
No – I could not find any cited sources.
2. Is it possible to verify the legitimacy of these sources?
No – I could not find any sources, so it was impossible to verify them.
3. Does the background of the author point to knowledge of the subject covered?
The site does not list specific authors; however, it does list a Management team consisting of Rebecca Hargrave, Carl Malamud, and Spot (a dog). Rebecca Hargrave is noted for her design and interface skills. She is also credited with designing and digitalizing Today’s Breeder Magazine. When I clicked on the link for this magazine, it took me to a Purina site that said the file was not found. Carl Malamud is noted for his job at The Telephone Company, a supposed fax company. Spot is the mascot. Clearly, these people do not have a good background for this type of subject besides an interest in animals.
4. If the site is research-based, does the author clearly identify the method of research and the data gathered?
The site is not research-based and does not display any type of research used or data gathered.

Authority:
1. Do you recognize the author’s name?
I do not recognize the names of the Management team. However, I looked up Rebecca Hargrave and Carl Malamud through Google and found that Rebecca is a famous digital photographer and Carl is well-known for putting government information online and promoting the Internet. I also discovered that the two are married.
2. If you don’t recognize the name, what type of information is given about the author? Position? Organizational affiliation? E-mail address? Biographical information?
The only information provided about Rebecca states that she is the President and Chief Creative Officer of the site. Her e-mail address is petchick@betterdogfood.com. Carl is the Chairman/CEO/Founder of the site and he does not have an e-mail address listed. As far as biographical information, Rebecca is a designer who loves animals and designed and digitized Today’s Breeder Magazine. Carl previously worked for The Telephone Company, frequently speaks internationally in places like Kazakhstan (supposedly), and has a dog named Bob.
3. Was the site referenced in a document that you trust?
This site was linked through my class weblog, so at first, I thought it would be valid. However, after reading through the site, I know that it is not valid.

Objectivity:
1. Determine what is the aim of the author or organization publishing the site.
The aim is to give the customer the dog while selling dog food along with it. They also strive to have customers invest in stock with their company. (Two totally opposite ideas)
2. What is the purpose of the web site: Is it advertisement for a product or service? Is it for political purposes? Is it trying to sway public opinion on a social issue?
This web site is an advertisement for a service (selling dogs and dog food).
3. Do you trust the author or organization providing the information?
I absolutely do not trust the authors for providing the information because it is clearly not valid information.

Currency:
1. Is a date clearly displayed?
The only date displayed is the copyright date, 2000.
2. Can you determine what the date refers to? When the page was first written? When the page was first posted on the Internet? When the page was last revised or updated? The copyright date?
The date refers to the copyright date. The only date given for the entire web site is 2000 so I cannot answer the other questions. It does not look like it has been revised or updated.
3. Are the resources used by the author current?
The only “resources” used were links, and these would show web sites with error messages or say that the “file cannot be found.” Therefore, the author has not updated these links or they never existed in the first place.
4. Does the page content demand routine or continual updating or revision?
This page should be updated and revised, but I do not think this has ever occurred.
5. Do the links on the page point to the correct Internet site addresses?
Not all of them. The link for the supposed Today’s Breeder Magazine turned out to be “file not found” and other links produce an ERROR message. The link for Carl’s work, The Phone Company, did work.

Coverage:
1. Are the topics covered on the site explored in depth?
No. The topics are briefly covered and mainly include a lot of complex language when really saying something simple.
2. Are the links on the site comprehensive or used as examples?
The links are not comprehensive.
3. On the site, are the links relevant and appropriate?
Some of the links, such as The Phone Company, are not relevant to dogs or dog food. Many of them, such as the Today’s Breeder link, actually connected to sites other than what I expected, making them inappropriate. Also, when the site comes up and says, ERROR, “file not found,” or “no longer active,” I do not think the links are appropriate.
4. How valuable is the information provided?
The information provided is not valuable at all. I did not learn anything about dogs or dog food by searching through this web site. According to their slogan, “We give you the dog and then sell you the dog food!” If this were really so, I would think they would have a lot more information about either of these topics on the pages. It was humorous to look around the site though and see all of the random things that were included that had nothing to do with their focus.