Hi! I am Iván. As you know, I will be one of the participants of my all-star group. In that way, I will present you the tool “Google Classroom”, and I will evaluate it thanks to the help provided by two different tools, such as the “Rubric for eLearning Tool Evaluation”, and the “Privacy Evaluations of Common Sense”.
On the one hand, regarding the first evaluation rubric, it can be stated that according to functionality, “Google Classroom” can be very profitable, as it can be scaled to any size class, it has a friendly interface, the abilities can be acquired in a personalized and intuitive way, and the tool allows users to communicate through different channels (audio, visual, textual). Otherwise, talking about support and help, they are available, but not much user-friendly.
In the same way, it is considered an accessible tool, due to its meeting of accessibility guidelines, it accesses the needs of different users, it does not require special equipment beyond a computer and internet connection, it can be used without any additional cost.
It also addresses the technical issue, but with some limitations, as it can be integrated into an LMS, but it ignores some functions of the school. However, students can use the tool with even any standard, up-to-date operating system and browser, and they do not need to download browser extensions.
Focusing on mobility, it can be said that “Classroom” is not an entirely mobile tool. Mainly because it can be utilized on the computer, but accessing the internet cannot be possible from everywhere, and it cannot be used when offline. Nevertheless, the desktop and mobile versions are functionally equal.
Moreover, privacy is respected, as the tool does not require the creation of an additional account or login, ownership and copyright of intellectual data are maintained, and students can deal with varied formats.
It is socially present as well, since the synchronous and asynchronous fields are covered, teachers can control children's anonymity, and it is well-known, especially in this time of pandemic.
Likewise, it is efficient at teaching presence, yet it favors teacher management, monitoring, engagement, and feedback; it can be personalized in order to suit the classroom and their intended learning outcomes; it permits providing an analysis in response to students' work.
To conclude with this rubric, it is interesting to mention that “Classroom” facilitates cognitive presence, as it helps by degreasing complex tasks. It favors the development of higher order thinking skills, and students can be assisted thanks to feedback.
On the other hand, seeing the “Privacy Evaluations” (of “Google Classroom”), we can analyze and evaluate it as a tool created by Google, whose main function is to stream the lessons in order to maintain the contact between teachers and students, as well as other functions such as viewing assignments, submitting homework, and receiving grades from teachers. It belongs to the G Suite for Education (with “Gmail”, “Drive”, “Calendar”, etc.).
On their behalf, Google assures that they utilize information to improve the safety and reliability of the services they provide. That englobes preventing, detecting, and facing risks for Google or its public. In that sense, the users only have to log in with one scholar account which permits them using all the G Suite for Education services. In fact, they have to introduce an user’s name, an email address, and password, but if the school chooses it, a secondary phone, email, and address can be included. Google can also collect personal information from G Suite for Education accounts (telephone number, profile photo, etc.).
In terms of security, they strongly refuse to act against the law when sharing users data. Thus, custom hardware running a custom hardened operating system and file system is utilized by Google’s data centres.
This gadget can be used from its website, or can be downloaded from the iOS App Store and the Google Play Store. The Privacy Policy and the Terms of Service can be found on the three of them. It is important to add that the policies do not change after someone accepts them.
According to compliance, the terms of Google say they make some commitments in their G Suite for Education agreement. As we have mentioned before, they ensure that students will be treated with maximum transparency.
Consequently, we can establish different overall scores, as every privacy rating includes one. The higher the score (up to 100%), the more transparent privacy policies that products provide. The score indicates the quantity of additional work which people have to do in order to make a decision about a certain product.
The policies of an application or service are summarized into concern categories based on evaluation questions that serve to identify or recognize particular practices of the policies of a vendor. Concerns are composed of questions which help to calculate the scores of concern.
Referring to statutes, we can state that they are relationed with one or more evaluation questions. As a result, different scores can be calculated for each statute, thanks to relationed questions.
FInally, here we can find several criteria, and their correspondent marks, following this tool:
-When talking about data collection the score is 65%.
-If we analyze data sharing, it obtains 90%.
-Data security obtains a 95%.
-Data rights gets a 95%.
-Data sold’s score is 70%.
-Data safety obtains 70%.
-Ads & Tracking get the 65% of the whole mark.
-Parental consent is 80% appropriate.
-School purpose’s mark is 70%.
The average qualification given to “Google Classroom” is 88% (pass).
Comments
Post a Comment