Star Week 5: Google Classroom

Hello everyone!!!

How are you doing? I hope that you have missed us so much during the Easter Break. Now we are here again. This week is a little bit different than the other ones because all of us are Stars.

During the Easter Break I have been doing this atypical task. It was based on the analysis of an elearning tool through a rubric. Between all the elearning tools that we have nowadays I choose one that I know perfectly which is Google Classroom. Google Classroom, commonly known as Classroom, is a Google tool in which teachers can upload content like photos, docs, videos to complete the learning of their students. Also, teachers can upload tasks with a deadline and can be graded. Each teacher can make different classrooms for their groups, and a student can be in a different classroom at the same time. This tool gives the opportunity to communicate between student-teachers, and both can receive feedback from the other part.

We had a really good rubric to analyse the elearning tool that we choose and also, we had a browser to see if the elearning tool is safe to our students.

I have made a report about my elearning tool with the information of the rubric and the solutions.










































Like I said before, the elearning tool that I had chosen is “Google Classroom”. Now I’m going to start rating this tool.

About the functionality:

• In the scale of creating groups of any size and sub-groups, the tool works well.
• In the ease of use this tool has an easy interface and its use is easy for instructors and students and can be rated as works well.
• The tech support works well and gives good technical support.
• In the hypermediality the tool works well because students and teachers can share videos, audios, docs, and other channels.

About the accessibility:

• The accessibility standards work well because it meets accessibility guidelines.
• In the user-focused participation the elearning tool works well because the teacher can give each student personalized attention based on what they need.
• In the area of using required equipment, the tool works well because the users doesn’t need something special to work with the tool.
• This tool is totally free, so we can say that it works well at the cost of use.

About the technical:

• The tool is embedded in a HTML code so it is classified as works well.
• The users of this tool can effectively use the tool with any standard, up-to-date operating system. So we can say that in desktop/laptop operating systems this tool works well.
• About the browser, the users can use the tool with any browser, so the tool works well here.
• Users if this tool doesn’t need to download any special browser to use it, so about additional downloads this tool works well.

About mobile design:

• About the access of the tool in a mobile phone, it works well, is perfectly adapted to the smaller size of the phone and can be used in it by the web or by the app.
• About the functionality on the mobile phone, the tool works well because users can do the same in a phone and in a laptop or desktop.
• In the mobile phone, the tool minor concerns working offline. Users can only use the app with the download data that they have.

About privacy, data protection and rights:

• To sign up, the instructors and students must have to have a google account. This account is recommended to professional use, so personal data are not needed. We can say that in this section, the tool works well.
• About the section of data privacy and ownership, we can say that the tool works well in this section, because the information that instructors upload always is private between their students and they.
• To archiving, saving and exporting data, the tool works well because users can download the content in different formats.

About Social Presence:

• In the section of collaboration the tool works well because users can learn through asynchronous and synchronous opportunities.
• About the user accountability the tool works well because instructors can control their students' anonymity.
• About diffusion, the tool is very famous and most families know it perfectly, so it is classified at works well.

About teaching presence:

• At facilitation, the tool is easy to use and gives to the instructors the opportunity of having feedback, engagement, active management and monitoring, so it is classified at works well.
• At customization, the tool is adaptable and can be customized to facilitate the instructor's work, so it's classified as works well.
• About learning analytics, the tool works well because the instructors can monitor their students’ performance and can measure it.

About Cognitive Presence:

• At the enhancement of cognitive tasks, the tool is classified as minor concerns, because it improves the participation in the tasks but it doesn’t enhance engagement.
• About higher order thinking, the tool is classified as works well, because with the participation of the students, they can exercise higher order thinking skills with the tasks that the instructors upload to the tool.
• At the metacognitive engagement, the tool works well, because students regularly receive feedback from their instructors about their works and their learning.

Before, I also talked to a browser to see if the elearning tool is safe for our students, this browser is this: https://privacy.commonsense.org/. This browser rate the elearning tool that I used in different sections:

• Data Collection: 65%
• Data Sharing: 90%
• Data Security: 95%
• Data Rights: 95%
• Data Sold: 70%
• Data Safety: 70%
• Ads and Tracking: 65%
• Parental Consent: 80%
• School Purpose: 70%

That is all the information that I have copilated about my elearning tool. In general, this elearning tool has a high score on security and If I were a teacher now I will introduce it in my classroom.

Thank you for paying attention to me one more week.

See you next week in a different role :)