This is the link to my Google map.
Bill's map
Working with Google maps is easy. Just hit the blue dropper above the map, then place it. I added the points furthest east, west, north, and south, plus the places I've lived. Going to Google Earth is easy, the link is also above the map. Sharing Google Earth proved problematic this evening, as the site says that part is temporarily disabled. I emailed the Google Earth view to my professor, and posted this link on the blog as required. As far as I can tell, that's as far as I can get this evening. I will post again tomorrow if I am successful in uploading to Google Earth.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Graphic
This is the link to my graphic:
Graphic
Hey, the orders said graphic, and I got excited. Then I said, what do you mean, make a picture??? Oh well.
I cannot post to the FSU site tonight. We're having really strong winds and lots of little electrical outages, and FSU is having technical troubles.
Anyway, I'm pretty low tech on graphics, and I don't have an artist's eye (or any other part of him-who do I look like, Jeff Dahmer??? I downloaded some free clip art from the Web, then used the program Paint Shop Pro 7 to clean them up so that I could use them. I find Paint Shop Pro 7 the best thing I have to resize and retool clip art and pictures.
Once I finished that, I took everything into Microsoft Publisher. The Publisher I use came with the student Office 2007 version, an upgrade of what I was using. You lay out the graphic like it was a page, and then you can save the thing in a variety of formats. I like saving things off in JPEG format so I can use it in a lot of places. It's probably not the best way to make a graphic, but I think the WordArt tools on Publisher are by far the easiest to work with. I don't have any training in how to make things look cool, so I just slap things on until it looks ful enough for me, and then I post it.
After reading the questions, I have to admit: I have no idea what the six or seven things are in a graphics program. In truth, I have never touched a graphics program. I fiddle with Paint Shop Pro 7 a lot because I would like to make animations, but I cannot get anything even remotely satisfactory. In the work I want to do, this will probably be pretty low on the list, though I would still like to make an animation.
Graphic
Hey, the orders said graphic, and I got excited. Then I said, what do you mean, make a picture??? Oh well.
I cannot post to the FSU site tonight. We're having really strong winds and lots of little electrical outages, and FSU is having technical troubles.
Anyway, I'm pretty low tech on graphics, and I don't have an artist's eye (or any other part of him-who do I look like, Jeff Dahmer??? I downloaded some free clip art from the Web, then used the program Paint Shop Pro 7 to clean them up so that I could use them. I find Paint Shop Pro 7 the best thing I have to resize and retool clip art and pictures.
Once I finished that, I took everything into Microsoft Publisher. The Publisher I use came with the student Office 2007 version, an upgrade of what I was using. You lay out the graphic like it was a page, and then you can save the thing in a variety of formats. I like saving things off in JPEG format so I can use it in a lot of places. It's probably not the best way to make a graphic, but I think the WordArt tools on Publisher are by far the easiest to work with. I don't have any training in how to make things look cool, so I just slap things on until it looks ful enough for me, and then I post it.
After reading the questions, I have to admit: I have no idea what the six or seven things are in a graphics program. In truth, I have never touched a graphics program. I fiddle with Paint Shop Pro 7 a lot because I would like to make animations, but I cannot get anything even remotely satisfactory. In the work I want to do, this will probably be pretty low on the list, though I would still like to make an animation.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Edgar Dale's Cone of Experience
Based on the provided Cisco article, Edgar Dale's Cone of Experience was created in 1954 to explain the relationships of audio-visual materials in the learning process. While the Cisco article could be as bogus as the mythical research erroneously attributed to Dale, the original cone is a logical presentation of various methods of student learning in Dale's day, though it is considerably dated for today. I cannot comment intelligently on whether it is factual, as I have no access to any research that Dale used to put the cone together. I suspect that it was factual according to Dale's experiences, which is not to say that it was factual to everyone at the time. I also suspect that Dale's cone was used to advocate the company or process that Dale worked for.
I further suspect that Dale's presentation was seen often and was somewhat exciting. For Dale's cone to be so misused and misquoted in so many subsequent articles is a sign that many thought the information was interesting and useful, and they took creative license to improve upon Dale's information by imbellishing it with facts and figures that did not exist. Once the ball was rolling, the percentages became an urban myth that perpetuated itself. No one took the time or effort to trace it back to the source, and considering the lack of the Internet where someone can now simply Google the issue, it would have been very difficult to stop in its tracks in its day.
To be used in any meaningful way today, it would need considerable revision, minimizing as a learning experience radio (mostly music and talk shows today); motion pictures (mostly very unrealistic violence and sex); educational television (??? today, the most wasted media in existence); study trips (only the very best private schools can afford these now on a regular basis); and demonstrations (sadly lacking in today's education system-I can remember some really exciting demonstrations in my education!). Replacing them would be regular television (not for the best!), (movies loaded with special effects, death, disrobing, and destruction-not an improvement either!), computers, and the Internet (which is also loaded with a lot of crap-be careful what you read or believe!).
Any other citation of the cone as research is, unfortunately, completely compromised and worthless. Besides, everyone learns differently, no matter how much we would like to homogenize education. To be a good teacher, you have to use every method available to you to get to all the students in your care. Anything less makes you a lecturer, and unless you are lecturing on a very good subject, you risk losing most of your students.
I further suspect that Dale's presentation was seen often and was somewhat exciting. For Dale's cone to be so misused and misquoted in so many subsequent articles is a sign that many thought the information was interesting and useful, and they took creative license to improve upon Dale's information by imbellishing it with facts and figures that did not exist. Once the ball was rolling, the percentages became an urban myth that perpetuated itself. No one took the time or effort to trace it back to the source, and considering the lack of the Internet where someone can now simply Google the issue, it would have been very difficult to stop in its tracks in its day.
To be used in any meaningful way today, it would need considerable revision, minimizing as a learning experience radio (mostly music and talk shows today); motion pictures (mostly very unrealistic violence and sex); educational television (??? today, the most wasted media in existence); study trips (only the very best private schools can afford these now on a regular basis); and demonstrations (sadly lacking in today's education system-I can remember some really exciting demonstrations in my education!). Replacing them would be regular television (not for the best!), (movies loaded with special effects, death, disrobing, and destruction-not an improvement either!), computers, and the Internet (which is also loaded with a lot of crap-be careful what you read or believe!).
Any other citation of the cone as research is, unfortunately, completely compromised and worthless. Besides, everyone learns differently, no matter how much we would like to homogenize education. To be a good teacher, you have to use every method available to you to get to all the students in your care. Anything less makes you a lecturer, and unless you are lecturing on a very good subject, you risk losing most of your students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)