How Does Thinglink Stack Up Against a Rubric?
Every educator loves a good rubric. We use them for anything we grade. So why not use a rubric to grade what tools we use in our classroom? To do this, I consulted Web 2.0 Selection Criteria which can be found here. This rubric looks at a web tool's accessibility, usability, privacy and intellectual property, workload and time management, and fun factor.
Let's first look at accessibility. There is an app for both the android and apple products. The site is accessible for both Windows and Mac users. It can be opened through numerous web-browsers. I cannot speak for dial-up accessibility. The tool is free and I would imagine Thinglink would be around for awhile. So, things are starting well for Thinglink.
Next is usability. You do need to create and account to use the tool, however, the steps are very quick. I have found the tool very easy to use. There are some great tutorials out there on how to make a Thinglink even better but the basics are easy to pick up. The help section looks very, well, helpful. There is a portion just for educators which I thought was really helpful.
Third, we have privacy and intellectual property. Because this is a more "legal" type of situation, I have decided to copy from Thinglink's Terms page and paste their information here for your easy referencing.
Workload and time management is the 4th criteria for the rubric. This tool is not a grading tool. Thinglink does allow for commenting. You can share a created Thinglink on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Google+, Edmodo and E-mail. For my proposes, I use Edmodo so that would be how I would have my students share their Thinglinks. If you are familiar with Padlet, you can post Thinglinks onto Padlet which makes for an interesting use of two technologies. That is actually a part of my lesson redesign that you can view in that section of my website.
The last criteria for the rubric is fun factor. I really think Thinglink is fun. The ability to make different resources available with the click of a hotspot is really cool for learning. I could get away from long powerpoint presentations or lists of websites for my students to visit and my students could create a ThingLink and share their information that way. Students really can get creative and take ownership of their learning. This tool very much increases the perception of connectedness. They could click on a hotspot and see pictures from people and places around the world; students could instantly view videos of people sharing their personal stories or experiences on a relevant topic. I think this tool can be used for collaboration. They are working on allowing multiple users to edit a Thinglink at one time.
Overall, I think Thinglink stacks up well with the Web 2.0 Selection Criteria Rubric.
Let's first look at accessibility. There is an app for both the android and apple products. The site is accessible for both Windows and Mac users. It can be opened through numerous web-browsers. I cannot speak for dial-up accessibility. The tool is free and I would imagine Thinglink would be around for awhile. So, things are starting well for Thinglink.
Next is usability. You do need to create and account to use the tool, however, the steps are very quick. I have found the tool very easy to use. There are some great tutorials out there on how to make a Thinglink even better but the basics are easy to pick up. The help section looks very, well, helpful. There is a portion just for educators which I thought was really helpful.
Third, we have privacy and intellectual property. Because this is a more "legal" type of situation, I have decided to copy from Thinglink's Terms page and paste their information here for your easy referencing.
- III. Intellectual Property Rights The ThingLink service is protected by copyright, trademark, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights of ThingLink. These Terms of Use do not grant you any rights in the ThingLink service as such, except for your right to use the service in accordance with these Terms of Use.
- We claim no intellectual property rights over the material you provide to the ThingLink service. Your materials remain yours. However, unless and until otherwise expressly informed by you, you grant ThingLink a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide and perpetual right to use, modify, distribute, and prepare derivative works of, such material solely on the ThingLink service.
Workload and time management is the 4th criteria for the rubric. This tool is not a grading tool. Thinglink does allow for commenting. You can share a created Thinglink on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Google+, Edmodo and E-mail. For my proposes, I use Edmodo so that would be how I would have my students share their Thinglinks. If you are familiar with Padlet, you can post Thinglinks onto Padlet which makes for an interesting use of two technologies. That is actually a part of my lesson redesign that you can view in that section of my website.
The last criteria for the rubric is fun factor. I really think Thinglink is fun. The ability to make different resources available with the click of a hotspot is really cool for learning. I could get away from long powerpoint presentations or lists of websites for my students to visit and my students could create a ThingLink and share their information that way. Students really can get creative and take ownership of their learning. This tool very much increases the perception of connectedness. They could click on a hotspot and see pictures from people and places around the world; students could instantly view videos of people sharing their personal stories or experiences on a relevant topic. I think this tool can be used for collaboration. They are working on allowing multiple users to edit a Thinglink at one time.
Overall, I think Thinglink stacks up well with the Web 2.0 Selection Criteria Rubric.