In my opinion, the group process required by this interactivity was authentic collaborative. It brought together a group of people who will all one day be teaching the same content and forced us all to go above and beyond the “ technological norms”, thinking of many creative ways to present information to students. This is important because even though it was difficult to really think hard about what technologies can be used aside from the usual ones ( powerpoint, ipod, ipad, etc.) , this information will always be able to be utilized in the future. When we actually have to teach, we can now focus in on the “not so frequently used” technologies instead of the ones that are always used in order to create the best learning environment possible.
From the final inventory, I am able to notice that each member took on a very different approach which in turn guided them to choose certain technologies as opposed to others. For example, a lot of my technologies have to do with everyday life and aspects that if my students were to go to Italy, they would need to know such as slang used in texting which is also used on public posters, etc. and ,everyday cultural aspects such as fashion etc. while other groups members took different approaches however, basing their technologies more on visualization , or auditory skills just to name a few.
This technology inventory in my opinion won’t serve a purpose in READ 411 but will in CURR314. Because this course is based on assessment of students, these various technologies can be utilized in many ways to make sure students are learning correctly through the various uses of auditory, visual and kinesthetic aids.