Most recent public comments by Tiffany Sutter https://nowcomment.com/users/49557 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319365 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319365 This concept connects well with Liz Kolb's Triple E framework rubric for lesson evaluation. One third of her rubric is tied to this idea: --The technology creates opportunities for students to learn outside of their typical school day. (24/7 connection) --The technology creates a bridge between students school learning and their everyday life experiences (connects learning goals with real life experiences). --The technology allows students to build authentic life soft skills, which they can use in their everyday lives. In fact, this piece of her evaluation rubric ties to the ideas of connection out of school and the ideas of relevance and meaning mentioned above. This framework allows lessons that don't meet these three criteria to still be exceptional at connecting concepts. I would argue that without these three things (or at least one of them), the lesson falls short. Ito et al.'s concepts here are not new, but they are increasing in importance in education as charter schools and alternatively-designed schools are gaining traction. Tue, 09 Apr 2019 22:46:11 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319363 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319363 Selwyn cautions against leaning too heavily on social media for educational purposes, though, as he points out that most users are passive or inactive and consumers rather than producers (pp. 117-120). While students are using media and communications to share, I would be concerned with who is doing the sharing and who created the content being shared. Many students are happy to take the passive role but feel they are learning something new because it comes in a form they relate to rather than in a classroom. Mon, 08 Apr 2019 22:17:22 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319356 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319356 I am always weary of such statements because I wonder what the class structure looks like as well as Clarissa's engagement within it. A teacher who has strong content and pedagogical knowledge might need help to integrate technology better so that Clarissa (and her classmates) could find outlets online to publish the work they do in the classroom in order to make it meaningful. That said, does the instructor attempt to link things to the real world and it is missed because Clarissa has already disconnected, deeming the class "out of touch" from her interests? Mon, 08 Apr 2019 22:10:02 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319354 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319354 This reminds me of a quote I saw that said something to the extent that the staircase is not afraid the elevator will take its place. Tue, 09 Apr 2019 21:52:49 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319352 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319352 This statement seems reminisent of Dr. Yong Zhao who was frustrated with the Common Core curricula and the "responsibility" of the tech to teach it better. Uniform content standards is an admirable goal in order to "level the playing field," however, it's not doing what it's being pushed as (and doesn't Selwyn caution against this?) and instead is isolating students from their own passions and learning. Foundational skills are one thing, but a prescribed content for all students who are in the later years of high school and in college for a degree seem to be doing a disservice overall. Mon, 08 Apr 2019 22:04:40 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319327 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319327 I think the springboard into her conversation about connected learning introduced that "Dave" was following his interest through his path of knowledge and eventually to his job. As long as their are laundry lists of content standards required along with a mandate of high school coursework, this process will not work for the K12 system. Students don't typically get to follow their passion as they have to take 4 credits of English, 4 of math, and so on. The courses tend to be a mile wide and an inch deep as they strive to "hit" all the standards instead of really helping students to know what piece of that content relates and connects to their passions and interests. I am in agreement that content and instruction can be unbundled; I don't yet know what that looks like for credentials. It will depend on the ultimate degree/goal for an alternative credentialing system. I do like the idea she mentioned about taking assessments to earn the final credential based on competency. If I can take the test and pass without all the coursework because I've learned it elsewhere on my own, why make me pay for it here? I have this same thought every year when they make me redo my Bloodeborne Pathogens training... Mon, 08 Apr 2019 21:46:53 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319309 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319309 In some ways, I love this statement! Students can find almost anything they want online - what they cannot do is distinguish between fact and opinion or truth and propaganda. Students do not have a critical eye - they've been trained to believe what teachers tell them for years. Then, they get on the internet (to use it as a type of teacher) and they believe all that they see/read without question. I've struggled with this concept in Spanish for a few years now. There are apps that will use an AR type platform to overlay Spanish words onto real life images as they use the camera on the phone to view. There are real-time translation apps available to enhance conversation with someone who speaks another language. Without base knowledge, however, students cannot think and consider critically what they are being told by the app - can they judge its accuracy? Furthermore, they aren't actually learning the language - yes, they are communicating - but not by their own brains and mouths. Learning (and especially language learning) does great things for the brain which don't happen if we use the tech to replace it. So how do we balance it? Teach them enough basics to be smart about translators but let them run free with technology so they aren't hindered by their lack of rote memory for vocabulary? Mon, 08 Apr 2019 21:28:35 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319283 https://nowcomment.com/documents/136450?scroll_to=1319283 In the technologies I've explored this semester, I have found that they all require the role of teacher and student. Yes, students can learn with and from each other, but all the tools require a teacher to "set them up" so to speak. That's not to say that a students cannot create an account and do what the teacher does - they can - but that it functions better if the teachers it the "gatekeeper" of the website. This is still in contrast to the way students today learn with the internet as they just begin exploring and reading, following links and asking questions. The tech tools I've looked at definitely follow Ito's frame of mind where there is a structure and a process to doing things. These tools assume there is a teacher to monitor and design work and that students need to be guided (or spoon-fed, depending). In my opinion, YouTube is the best tech tool which has changed the notion of learning for students - video is powerful. Watching taped segments from shows they missed is engaging. Learning from others who know more than they do happens outside of a classroom, and from others who may look like them. Mon, 08 Apr 2019 21:07:57 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317686 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317686 Since our district is heavily invested in the Marzano method for teacher evaluation, my first thought related to evaluating learning is using a goal-and-scale type response as a pre/post assessment for the training. Gathering a numerical response about where participants are before it starts and then seeing if they improve in their understanding of the content once they've heard it all would be an easy way to see growth in their learning. A level 3 evaluation would be similar to something I suggested earlier about sending a survey to participants some time later - maybe 3-4 weeks to ask about how they are using the information they gathered. I feel as if the level 3 data can be gathered through quantitative surveys and maybe even qualitative observations but that level 4 has to come from another source. In order to see the impact, student assessment scores could be tracked over time to see their learning. Or even the evaluation model of the teacher could be tracked for their growth from an administrator. This pairs well with the concepts noted previously because about half of the responses to the levels would come in-the-moment of training at that site, while the later half comes from an in-situation experience of the educator using the new concept. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:45:08 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317685 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317685 In reading through their document, I feel like they provided enough credit to Kirkpatrick for the structure of their ABLE plan. Relabeling and remixing to create something useful to them seems to be a fair way to use his research and they mentioned in several places that their model was heavily based on his and cited him several other times for his contributions and original ideas. I think that this is done in research a lot... while, yes, we still go back to good ol' Maslow, there are more updated versions of his work that can be more accessible in the language and structure that people prefer to use. Heck, even TPACK has already received a facelift and Mishra and Koehler generally have a 2006 date on it which isn't that old. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:36:24 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317680 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317680 Interestingly, I read some studies which used qualitative observation just to verify what had been gathered in a quantitative survey - and they found several discrepancies. Surveys are good for data and numbers but those who are reporting those numbers don't always see their own bias or know if/when they do not represent their true self. Qualitative observation simply can serve as a double check for that information - so it wouldn't be the only way data is collected, but it would help to reaffirm the validity of the responses received rather than simply trusting it. Not only would observing a teacher in the classroom be helpful but it would also be good to see how the teachers are working together to share findings and grow. That cannot be seen easily on a survey. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:14:35 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317679 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317679 For me, it's not a lack of support or encouragement that prevents me from doing some of my own research and data collection - it's time. There are so many other things that are required of me that I have to prioritize my time and gathering data I don't officially need to report anyone doesn't rank very high. I've read a few articles about providing teachers with training about something and using them as action research participants to see how it continues and it can work but teachers must devote a lot of time to that. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:08:13 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317677 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317677 Ha ha! Wouldn't this stand to reason that if you provide teachers with PD that is specifically related to what they do every day that it would be most effective? The challenge then becomes offering so many opportunities. In our building, we have 1 science teacher, 1 math teacher, 1 social studies teacher, etc. So either our admins have to collaborate with others around the region to pool teachers together in PD which ties to their content knowledge or pedagogical strategies for teaching their content OR... they just bring in something generic and present it to all building teachers with the hope that we can extrapolate what's important and apply it ourselves to the subject we teach. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 12:02:48 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317675 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317675 "could be spurred by a district-level attempt to mandate levels of engagement which are not being witnessed." This is the hardest thing to do, isn't it? Sit through PD that the district says you need, but that no one can make "fit" to what you do? The district says we educators need PD on X topic so they bring in someone. That someone knows how to make X topic fit in a math or ELA classroom because that's what they used to teach. When Spanish asks how to make it fit, or art does, they have no idea and now those teachers are already put-off from the development opportunity in front of them. I would argue that the best PD always stems from the desires of the teachers rather than top-down. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 11:59:20 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317674 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317674 The biggest trouble I have with building-level or district-level (sometimes even regional-level) PD is that they provide exactly the same thing to everyone. It doesn't matter which building you're in and the makeup of your student population. It doesn't matter what you teach and whether the PD they are providing works for your subject matter. It doesn't matter if you already do this thing they are preaching about or if you've never heard of it before. It's like the admins pat themselves on the back for offering the PD and never gauge whether it was useful to the majority of the teachers who attended. We cannot randomly assign teachers to PD - they need to meaningfully and purposefully choose what they learn about because then they are most likely to actually try it in the classroom. Isn't that why when you go to to MACUL or another conference, they show you the sessions available and you choose what works? If they randomly assigned you to sessions, they'd see a decline in the attendance. Random PD removes just a bit of teacher autonomy in the classroom and says that you should learn about X topic even if it doesn't apply to what you do. We have this fight in our building every time the ISD comes in to teach us about something - our band and art teachers have a fit because they start talking math and ELA testing and those two feel their time is wasted. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 11:56:20 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317673 https://nowcomment.com/documents/135865?scroll_to=1317673 I have not been to a PD session where the end survey was intended to measure anything deeper than the presenter's approach and/or the thoughts I have about the topic/content right at that moment. I'm sure if this is a series of development opportunities that will be offered, it is beneficial to know if the presenter is engaging in order to continue with the next presentation. However, when it comes to long-term measurement of my use of the tool once I leave the instruction room and return to my classroom is lacking. A follow-up survey or email a week or two, or even a few months later to ask me a couple quick questions of how I'm still using the tool might be much more meaningful in regards to actual data related to the PD program. Reaching out to offer support and help along the way would aid my use of a tool over time as well. Sat, 06 Apr 2019 11:46:20 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257726 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257726 Looking at the element of school culture is important to make these bigger changes. Students know they go from one class to another every day, every year, for four years and are told what to learn. But if the culture itself shifted to an autonomous learning environment (maybe even with growth mindset) we could better meet the first element of the new paradigm. If all classes cultivated students' interests and abilities (or even overlapped and stopped having 55 minute periods in sequence) we could better encourage creativity because this expectation would not be different from the "norm" of the school. Sun, 17 Feb 2019 16:35:14 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257711 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257711 Someone who has been teaching for 10 years has likely never received the types of training that current undergrad students receive. They are only 1/3 of the way into a career but don't have the skills to move forward for 20 years. Why don't we give current teachers more time and abilities to better themselves? By helping the future teacher, we rely on them finishing their degree and finding a job before those skills make it into the classroom. Why don't we do a better job of helping those who are already there? Sun, 17 Feb 2019 15:58:40 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257709 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257709 Sun, 17 Feb 2019 15:55:50 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257708 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257708 Fri, 22 Feb 2019 17:25:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257707 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257707 The best way we can then make this change is school-wide. It will not be enough for one or two teachers in a building to be the pocket of change. There will be pushback, distrust/dislike, and eventually dismantling of the program in order to go back to the status quo. I've seen innovation (through and with technology) work really well in schools, but it's been the whole school and the design of it from furniture, class schedules/setup, tech availability, and types of work and grading. Sun, 17 Feb 2019 15:53:45 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257683 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257683 Melissa, you're totally right that creativity is shoved out of education in favor of the standards. The standards rarely ask students to collaborate (only recently has this concept been added slightly) and innovate, but rather regurgitate facts and details deemed important by the standard creators. Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:36:06 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257682 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257682 Sun, 17 Feb 2019 15:38:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257666 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257666 This is powerful for us to consider because it begins to shift the conversation. For instance, while it's amazing to have a student who can compute mathematical equations in their heads, if you can plug that into an app or a tech tool and get an answer, what is the value of that talent? Now what for that student? Sun, 17 Feb 2019 15:38:44 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257650 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257650 However, it is (sort of) refreshing to hear that it is not just an American problem! Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:45:07 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257632 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257632 If you look at the ISTE standards, they are encouraging innovation that allows students to research on their own, make their own choices of tools and products, and share what they find. All-too-often, thanks to the driving curricular standards, we don't let students do this, and instead we force everyone into the same processes and tools to stay on the same timeline. Fri, 22 Feb 2019 17:19:42 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257621 https://nowcomment.com/documents/129754?scroll_to=1257621 That said, I think he will look at the factors which lead to successful integration. First, it seems important to have strong teachers in regards to their abilities so PD and training becomes imperative. Sun, 17 Feb 2019 15:10:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1219074 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1219074 Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:46:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217877 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217877 NRI allowed me to create a diagnostic with the standards I wanted and then all my students took it. Based on where they score, the program then provides them appropriate level practice to help them grow. Even better, the site has them choose some of their favorite TV shows and movies and uses those characters and such in the questions to help keep them engaged. I have had many students tell me they really like NRI time in the lab, but I haven't run an assessment or a new diagnostic in a bit to see if they are actually growing from it or if they just like clicking through the activities. Sun, 27 Jan 2019 20:27:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217875 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217875 This would allow schools to modify what their daily schedule looks like and their course offerings to best suit the needs of their population. Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:47:50 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217872 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217872 When I'm absent, that is more time that I do not get to instruct my students or help them while they work. Especially in Spanish, subs are glorified babysitters and cannot usually help. So while I am all for signing up for PD and useful trainings, the time it takes away from my room is a downside. Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:44:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217870 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217870 Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:41:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217867 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1217867 When we are trying to give students individual grades to show their growth and progress, it is hard to know where each individual lies in regard to the material if all assignments are collaborative. Balance is key! Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:40:01 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212100 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212100 Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:46:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212099 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1212099 Tue, 22 Jan 2019 18:51:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211024 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211024 As someone who has worked in a charter school operated by an ophthalmologist who designed his school around how the brain/eyes function, I can tell you that it takes a certain something to keep a school functioning and money isn't it. Last year, I had the opportunity to visit Kent Innovation High (http://studentvoice.kentisd.org/theschool/aboutinnovationhigh/) near Grand Rapids and was blown away by it. This program is operated by the public district as a subsidiary of the Career Tech Center. They didn't follow a 55-minute, 6-class day but instead had problem-based learning and combined classes so students could see the overlap. Everything they did was project based. Yes, they had technology at their fingertips as they needed it, but they had the choice to use it or not or in what capacity it was helpful. I don't think the solution is charter schools; I think it would be better for schools that know how to function/run look for alternative scheduling options and ideas that can begin to incorporate changes like these into the curriculum. I just don't see how it's done well when we file kids through a 6-hour day from one class to the other and never allow them to see the connections. Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:46:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211021 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211021 Didn't Liz Kolb show the same type of image in her Webinar snippets? She showed that little guy with headphones on in front of the iPad, but he was just swiping to get to the game. What if schools didn't have 1:1 devices but more like 1:2 or 1:3? Then, we could still integrate tech into our classrooms but students would have to pair up to work on something. Tue, 22 Jan 2019 17:13:55 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211016 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211016 This standard says: 5. Designer Educators design authentic, learner-driven activities and environments that recognize and accommodate learner variability. Educators: a. Use technology to create, adapt and personalize learning experiences that foster independent learning and accommodate learner differences and needs. b. Design authentic learning activities that align with content area standards and use digital tools and resources to maximize active, deep learning. c. Explore and apply instructional design principles to create innovative digital learning environments that engage and support learning. By using something prescribed like a Kahn Academy or NoRedInk, an educator meets this standard. Yet students can still work in isolation and without any input from peers or resources. If teachers see these ISTE standards as a target, by using these types of sites they hit this but at what service to students? This is where Selwyn's skepticism and a rubric or deep thought process against a framework such as Triple E or SAMR can make a difference as to whether or not the tech is needed and helpful. Sun, 27 Jan 2019 20:27:22 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211012 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211012 I can barely do my subject area justice over the course of a year and now I should take a lesson and allow students freedom to explore and learn on their own? I have no time for that despite a strong desire to see what they'd come up with. At the end of the day, I have to show my administrator and our BOE that I have hit all my standards. Mon, 21 Jan 2019 21:33:10 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211011 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211011 Teachers don't want administrators or legislators telling us how to run our classrooms and in some ways, students are starting to push back that teachers might not know all the ways they learn well. For example, ISTE #2 about digital citizenship is asking students to take ownership for their online footprint rather than having adults moderate it for them. ISTE #3 wants students to research on their own and critique that information for what's real and important rather than having educators prescribe it for them (hence the dead art of the Webquest). Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:47:50 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211009 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211009 Tue, 22 Jan 2019 17:21:33 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211005 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211005 The individualized work of programs like Kahn that boast student-centered learning are teaching students that they still don't have the answers - that they have to get the process 100% correct to move forward. I don't see this concept on the ISTE standards. The ideas there are that students can gather multiple sources, synthesize and revise as needed, try the process, and construct (ISTE #3), design (#4), and think (#5). Knowledge is not a one-way street any longer (just as the teacher is trying to shift to a facilitator rather than the "sage on the stage") and tech tools can allow students to interact with information and each other more than sitting in front of a bought program that pushes them through a linear set of problems. Mon, 21 Jan 2019 21:27:14 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211000 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1211000 As I scrolled down and caught this comment, I couldn't help but think that this user is totally correct. We've used the buzzword of student centered to the point that they are the sun and the learning revolves around them in isolation instead of the system moving together. Maybe a more appropriate term would be "collaboration-centered"? This might get closer to what teachers want to see in their classes. Tech might help that collaboration and it might not. Mon, 21 Jan 2019 21:22:17 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210994 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210994 Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:44:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210990 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210990 This concept is HUGE! With the push for data, numbers, and growth, schools don't want classes that divert from the "norm." This is why so many teachers are at the S-A level of SAMR, because it takes less time to simply substitute or augment while still collecting all the data administrators want and preparing for ultimate success on a test bought and paid for by the highest bidder. I also found this article interesting as you start to look at data and how technology fits into that role: https://hbr.org/2019/01/data-was-supposed-to-fix-the-u-s-education-system-heres-why-it-hasnt?fbclid=IwAR2HM399a087LZcfqfz8qikFkEaLl7C2k7r7h8bzEU9menKL9fiuUh9bPWo Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:57:16 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210973 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210973 Overall, the concept of Kahn Academy is very isolating for students as they receive their "personalized learning." What's more, these types of learning platforms are digitized textbooks which prescribe to students what they will learn rather than embracing ISTE standards which ask the student to chart the course. Mon, 21 Jan 2019 21:14:08 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210969 https://nowcomment.com/documents/125308?scroll_to=1210969 Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:40:01 -0500