A7.6: Response to McInnis

Traci Girondo

October 7, 2007

McInnis, R.G. (1994, September). The three “R’s” of inquiry: Teaching literacy in academic cultures. Council of Chairs Newsletter. Retrieved October 7, 2007, from http://www.marshall.edu/commdis/courses/315/mcinnis.doc

TAP: The topic of this article is how teach student inquiry using the Three R’s including reading, writing, and research. This article is focused on an audience of teachers in that it aims to inform teachers on the components of this teaching method.

Claim: McInnis claims in this article that “students skills in inquiry continue to be deficient” in that when conducting research students tend to look for an answer to a question, rather than finding evidence to examine the topic. (2004)  McInnis feels this defiency is due to a students lack of knowledge on how to conduct proper research. In the article McInnis explains approaches on how to teach students to successfully conduct research.

Evidence: The author supports this claim by exploring the idea that students must be taught the Three R’s inquiry which include, reading, writing, and research. He states that “if we don’t teach the Three R’s we are setting students up for failure” (2004). The defiency of inquiry skills in students is because students become bombarded with information and do not know how to sort through the information. They examine research to find a specific answer , not to find evidence to support their topic. For this reason students must be taught how to conduct research. McInnis explains that when students do not know how to do these three things they can become overwhelmed.

McInnis also discusses “knowing how” and “knowing what.” “Knowing how” relates to operation of the mind whereas, “knowing what” includes the facts, knowledge, and truth. This concept shows how teachers must be interested in both how students discover and process information along with how the content of the information they are obtaining. This goes along with the Three R’s in that the Three R’s can be categorized under the “know what.”  The author states that if students are equipped with these then this will help students develop intelligence.

Connections: This article connected to previous knowledge I had in that I know the feeling of being overwhelmed by extensive amounts of information. I find myself having trouble sorting through information to put it in to an organized manner that will be functional when I begin to write a research paper. I feel that this article examined a topic that many students have difficulty with.

I am not able to pinpoint any specific text that I have read that relates to the same content covered in this article.

This artice relates to the broader world of clinical practice in that as future professional I need to be equipped with the skills to conduct extensive research. It is important that I realize that when researching I do not need to find a specific answer, but finding valid and reliable information to the support the topic will make my research more productive.

A7.2: Web Evaluation II

Traci Girondo

October 7, 2007

Literacy & Poverty

http://www.on.literacy.ca/what/litpov.pdf

When reviewing this website, I did not find an author located on the site. The Ontario Literacy Coalition is listed as the group sponsoring the site. An address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address is listed to contact this group.

The publishing body listed on this site is The Ontario Literacy Coalition. A website is listed on this article that will take you to the groups main page. Informative informaion on who the Ontario Literacy Coalition and their mission is listed on the groups main page. This charitable organization promotes all aspects of literacy, specifically focusing on people living in the Ontario area.

In relation to bias information, this document does reside on a web server that has a clear stake on the issue of literacy. There does not appear to be any connections to a political organization.

I do not feel the author did a good job of listing sources on this page. Only 5 sources are listed and no specific bibliographic information is listed on these sources. The name of the organization or report is the only thing listed. No specific references were made to these sources within the body of this article. This makes me wonder about the credibility of these sources.

This article was wrote in 2003 and does not appear to have been updated recently. There are no dates listed specifing recent revisions of this article. This could be because this site is a specific PDF file. When examining the Ontario Literacy Coalition’s main website there was a copyright date of 2005, but no other recent revision updates.

I found the information in this article to be very informative. The information on this article directly correlated to the subject I am researching for my paper. I do not feel that I would be confident in using this as source though, because this article is lacking information on both authorship and currency. Also, there is no specific sources listed specifying where this organization is recieving their information.

A7.4: Reflection on Discussion of 10/1/07

Traci Girondo

October 6, 2007

In regards to the online discussion on 10/1/07, I found our online meeting to be very enjoyable and informative. Going in to this experience I expected to be overwhelmed and confused by the various dialogues going on between close to 20 people. In all actuality, this was not the case at all. The online meeting was not difficult to follow and I gained alot of new knowledge from our speaker.

I found the content of our discussion to be very interesting and pertinent to what I am interested in doing as a future Speech-Language Pathologist. Our speaker, Katie, was very informative about her experiences and expertise in the areas we discussed. I liked how she was very open and honest with us. If she was unsure of an answer she would tell us that she did not know. I also found it helpful that she spoke to us on a level that was appropriate for our knowledge on the subject. If she used a term that she felt we may be unfamiliar with she would clarify that term. For example, she was talking about a Code Blue. Before she continued her story she asked if we all knew what that meant. Since some of use were unfamiliar with that term she clarified that a Code Blue is when a patient goes in to cardiac arrest. After some initial stories about good and bad days on the job as a SLP we moved in to the main part of our discussion. Discussing literacy as it relates to Aphasia and TBI was something that I found to be very interesting. I love how Katie described Gardner’s Principles and how they relate to literacy and intelligence. I had never considered how it could be possible for there to be various forms of intelligence. A person does not have to know how to read and write to be considered an intelligent person. For that person, they be intelligent in a specific trade that does not require reading and writing skills. This shows how what may be functional for one person will not be for another. This really stresses the point that Katie made that we have to focus therapy around what is functional for that specific patient. I love the example she gave about the patient who was a math professor at Asbury. I had never considered before that I would ever have to study math equations to make therapy functional for my clients. This just shows how true it is that we never stop learning. In regards to literacy and how it relates to Aphasia and TBI I found it interesting when Katie discussed that the effects on a person’s literacy skills will depend on the sight of lesion not specifically the disorder. She said that they specifically look at a person’s strengths and weaknesses when determining what to focus therapy towards. Just because a person has damage to the left hemisphere doesn’t mean that all patients will look the same. It is important to remember that most of the time therapy with these patiens will be rehabilitative to habilitative. I feel that all the topics we discussed were very informative and helpful. This class really got me excited to be out in the field working with clients.

In regards to the process of the discussion, I have found both pros and cons. I was very surprised by the layed back atmosphere of the discussion. I expected us to enter the discussion , ask questions, have them answered and be done. For me, this atmosphere was both good and bad. I like that we all felt comfortable discussing information with two people who are more knowledgeable than us on the subject matter, but in a way I feel like this layed back atmosphere also allowed us to get off topic a lot of the time. I found it interesting that a person’s connection speed affected their participation in the discussion. Even though their responses were posted later than the initial conversation we were still able to respond and apply those comments to the conversation. Overall this was an easy process to participate in. I foun it very similar to a chat room in which people can type at the same time. The most beneficial aspect of the whole process for me was having the hard copy of the discussion e-mailed to me. This helped to go back and clarify topics that were confusing or examine topics that had been overlooked.

Before this process I had never participated in a virtual classroom. I learned how to participate in this type of discussion all in one day. For a task that I though would overwhelm me this did the exact opposite. I found myself very relaxed and comfortabe through the whole process. I even had numerous people staring at me in the library as I laughed out loud at the screen. The information that I obtained from this experience is going to be very helpful to me in the future. Katie gave us many ideas on how we have to be creative to find ways to make therapy functional for patients. For example, she discussed working with man who had dementia and had reverted back to speaking his native language Spanish. Katie worked with him by doing a rosary with him in English. I also learned the difference between deficits in patients with TBI and Aphasia. A person with TBI may be able to read words, but they have difficulty interpreting them. This is different than Aphasia in that a person with Aphasia may not understand what the letters mean that make up the words. One topic that I learned that I was very surprised by was that Katie does not classify patients in term of types of Aphasia. She stated it is very important to know the difference, but she looks at specific characteristics the patients is exhibiting. The are numerous other topics that were discussed in the night, but these were the topics that I learned the most from. I also learned a little more about my classmates which is always interesting!

A7.1: Web Evaluation I

Traci Girondo

October 6, 2007

http://www.betterdogfood.com/

Accuracy:

1. The author of this website does not cite sources used to develop this cite.

2. Since no sources are listed, there is no way verify their legitimacy.

3. The author of this cite is not listed, but two individuals are listed on the Better Dog Food site as part of the managment team. Rebecca Hargrave is the President and Chief Creative Officer of BetterDogFood it is stated on the cite that Hargrave “brings to her role as President and Chief Creative Officer of BetterDogFood an innate understanding of user interface issues that allows pets to better use the Internet.” Also listed is Carl Malamud, who is the chairman/CEO/founder of betterdogfood.com. It is stated on the website that Malamud first worked at a telephone company and owns a dog named Bob. The background information given on these individuals does not lead me to believe that they have any specific expertise on the material covered on this cite. The only background information about them that pertains to dogs is that Hargrave has a love for the animal kingdom and Malamud has a dog. I do not feel this this supports credible background knowledge on the subject.

4. This cite is not research based. There is no information on data collection or methods of research.

Authority:

1. I do not recognize the names of the authors or the management team.

2. There is no specific author listed on this website. Information on the management team included that Rebecca Hargrave was currently the President and Chief Creative Officer for BetterDogFood. In the past, Hargrave was influential in the development of Today’s Breeder Magazine. An e-mail address in listed for Hargrave. Another individual Carl Malamud is noted to have a dog named Bob and has once worked at The Telephone Company. No contact information was listed for Malamud.

3. This site was referenced to me from my weekly assignments for my CD 315 class. I have found in the past that the cites listed on my weekly assignments are credible sources and I do trust the individual who posts these sites for me to examine. This site can also be found by searcing various search engines. I have learned that not all websites on the web contain valid and reliable information in that anyone can post a website to the web. This leads me to wonder about the trustworthiness of this cite.

Objectivity:

1. The think the aim of this cite is to sell dog food and to find more people to invest in their company. My reasoning behind this is that their are links on the cite that take you to information on investment oppurtunities and a link to an online store.

2. The purpose of this website is to advertise a product. For this cite the product is dog food.

3. There is no specific reason why I should distrust this company or their managment team. The information on the cite or lack there of does make me skeptical about the product they are attempting to sell though. I feel this way because there is no evidence to back up or support how they have determined what type of dog food is better for one dog as compared to another.

Currency”

1. The date, 2000, is listed at the bottom of the website.

2. The date is referring to the copyright date. This was easily determined in that Copyright is listed directly before the date.

3. The resources on the website are not current. Many of the links listed on the website lead you to pages that have expired or been removed from the web.

4. This page should be continually updated since they are selling a product. I feel that new advertisements and improvements on the product should be updated on the page. There is no indication that routine updates are done on this page.

5. Yes/No. Some of the links lead you to the appropriate websites, but some lead you to pages that have expired or been removed from the web.

Coverage:

1. No, the topics on this site are vaguely covered. None of the topics are discussed in-depth.

2. The links on the site are not comprehensive. They only make you more puzzled about what the overall goal of this website is.

3. Some of the links are relevant and appropriate, but many are not. For example, their is a link to The Telephone Company in which a member of the management team once worked. I do not see how this is of any relevance to this site.

4. I did not find the information on BetterDogFood.Com to be valuable. The webpage was not clearly organized and did not show sufficient evidence to support the claim they were making to the online viewers of this sight. I was disappointed in this website because when I saw the title of the link I thought I was going to find an informational site on which dog foods are better than others. I feel that this site has helped me to realize that it is very important to examine all information on a webpage before making a decision to buy a product or invest in something you do not know a vast amount of information on.