<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Comments by Mrs. Dalonda Reeves</title>
    <description>Most recent public comments by Mrs. Dalonda Reeves</description>
    <link>https://nowcomment.com/users/80425</link>
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://nowcomment.com/users/80425/comments"/>
    <item>
      <title>Agree</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883505</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883505</guid>
      <description>I agree that the use of digital tech should be a collective responsibility. There should be substantial input from staff, students and teachers when determining what is needed. Ed tech is a socio-technological issue and there needed to be more research conducted on how data can be collected and analyzed to be effective when discussing the change and implementation of ed tech.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2020 00:46:32 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Power</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883504</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883504</guid>
      <description>It seems that teachers and/or students may not be made aware of the data collection being collected by interested companies. It seems as if the schools may be provided with a light-overview of general data that may be collected with the use of ed tech but the specifics of what the companies seek , I believe is not being disclosed. Perhaps the sharing of what these IT firms are seeking would impact the marketing ideals of the schools. The solicitation of schools seems to be focused on appealing to the latest and greatest and not necessarily on the specific needs of hardware or technology. </description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2020 00:43:18 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Inequality</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883502</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883502</guid>
      <description>It is meaningful to mention the Matthews-effect when discussing that technology benefits one set of students over others. These are the unintended consequences of digital technology that Selwyn suggests can be a result of the dependency of substantial amounts of digital technology use. If ed tech is used then it important to have an understanding if what will the technology undo for the students who do not receive the same benefits of ed tech implementation.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2020 00:36:33 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assumptions</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883500</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1883500</guid>
      <description>Selwyn is very passionate about his beliefs on the discourse of education. He assumes that much of digital tech is used to gather data and monitor teachers. Selwyn also assumes that schools do not focus on the impacts of the tech they acquire but the financial implications that are implied by purchasing the 'latest and greatest' mainly because of the vast amount of solicitation schools receive from IT firms. There was also the notion that technology is a headache for teachers. This assumption is based on the challenges of implementing technology in the schools and not supported with the body of his article and talk.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2020 15:46:04 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>test</title>
      <link>https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1878057</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://nowcomment.com/documents/200879?scroll_to=1878057</guid>
      <description></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2020 01:24:45 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
