IPartner

The resource I reviewed and scored using the RemotEDx Rubric was Capstone Interactive.  The strong points of this resource were the web content accessibility, the visual design being clean and coherent, and the flexibility and adaptability of the work.  I really think the content accessibility piece with Capstone Interactive is worthy of high praise as you can change the size of text, have the passages read aloud, and highlight each word as it is read.  The accessibility feature is great and teachers and students would be able to find it very easy to use.

What I think could be better would be the research-based strategies.  Capstone Interactive uses Guided Reading Levels and this is not aligned to the Science of Reading.  If the State of Ohio is going for classrooms to use a SOR-aligned approach to reading, then Capstone Interactive should look at adding decodable levels to their books.  This would make this resource more aligned to what schools will be using in the near future.  

This is great feedback based on the Rubric criteria. I agree about the research-based strategies. Many vendors are still catching up with SOR. One great thing about your feedback is we can share it with them!

I reviewed the Highlights Scholastic books. I found that this would be rated highly on usability and accessability. With very many readings, at varying levels, this resource provides educators with an array of readings that students could use to support their reading ability. Educators have the option to choose between fiction or non fiction, which will ensure that the text students are reading are focused on the standards aligned with the current unit. The readings also have a quiz that students can take which will assess their reading comprehension levels. 

The quiz was an area that could be improved. The quiz was a one shot deal. There was no feedback given if a student got a question wrong. I think if a question gets wrong the student could have another opportunity, having students go back into the text and cite evidence. The quiz is also solely multiple choice, which takes out some of the higher order thinking skills. 

Hi Caleb - did you look at Highlights Library or Scholastic BookFlix? Two very different resources, both eBook platforms. Be sure to dig in deeper to the resources. It will be helpful when you share them with the schools and districts you work with.

The resource I reviewed and scored was the iWonder. This resource is a wonderful tool for students to access when researching a topic or question. I would rate it high for usability as its format is simple and easy to navigate, It does not appear to require to much bandwidth to access all of the materials. The links do open in new tabs and the format of information may be slightly different from page to page. There are articles, pictures, and videos for students to access and learn more. 

One thing I would improve or change is their search feature - there are opening questions that students can select to guide them on to many other and specific resources. It might be nice to have some type of filter search option for students to select the things they are interested in and limit the results that way.

I reviewed Explora for Grades PK-5.  Full-text articles from thousands of magazines, journals, and newpapers, along with images, videos, and primary sources.

Initially the page is easy to navigate with pictures representing subject categories like Animals, Arts and Music, Biographies, Geography, Language Arts, Math, Science and Health, and Social Studies.  Once selecting a category, there are again pictures to easily navigate to a desired topic.  The following reference page lists available source types.  They are available in HTML, PDF, or downloadable.  Filters include publication date and Lexile range.  

The site has many accessibility features but is difficult to navigate and figure out.  The listening feature is not easy to use; however there are a variety of listening text settings including multiple languages.

Other than finding some articles with lower Lexile levels, this does not appear to be a user-friendly site for young students.  Older students would be able to search for materials after some instruction on navigating the resources.  There are Scavenger Hunts for Primary, Middle, and Secondary which would help with this.  

There are lesson plans available for teachers along with professional articles that are on relevant topics to teachers.  Folders can be created to collect material.  There is a search options that brings up about any topic.  The Curriculum Standards dropdown did not appear to do anything.

Overall this appeared to have a wealth of authentic information that would be valuable for research.  There are flexibility and adaptability features but they are not automatically easy to use.  

Adam - I like to use this resource to find content to share with primary students. I would agree that this is not accessible for most PreK-5 students, but the content is. Think of this as a database with text that could be shared in the classroom. It contains the content from several popular magazines, such as Highlights, Cricket, and Sports Illustrated for Kids. How could you help educators use it? There is also a class you can take or use as a training resource. https://www.infohio.org/campus/learning-pathways/course/explora-for-grades-prek-5

It would be helpful to show teachers to use the Curriculum Standards tab.  They can reveal search strings apply limiters like Reading Level to find results that could be used to help support instruction for the particular standard being taught.  The tutorials and training courses are very nice for each resource.

Since it's my favorite resource, I reviewed BookFlix.

I feel BookFlix meets or exceeds expectations for usability, especially WCGA guidelines. I am not sure how well the site meets consistent high speed internet criteria, but having used the resource for over 10 years in multiple locations, I can say that I have never bandwidth, streaming, or resolution issues. The visual design of materials is clean and coherent, lending itself to ease of learning.

For flexibility and adaptability, I am not aware of any offline usage, so it may not meet expectations in that area. The material is solely reliant on a single educational technology or tool, however, the paired books, puzzles, and deep dives are extended through very detailed lesson plans that include activities for before and after viewing of the videos.

BookFlix meets or exceeds expectations for Inclusive Teaching through its diverse selection of texts and topics. The highlight would be the fiction and non-fiction pairings that use students’ real-life experiences to connect school learning to students’ lives.

BookFlix incorporates several research based strategies and meets or exceeds expectations in this area. Below are just a few examples:

• Uses formative assessments such as advanced organizers - including exit tickets, mini-quizzes, student questioning, and content surveys to gauge students’ knowledge of concept or skill
• Content leads to further learning by gradually removing supports and requiring advanced skills and concepts via additional lesson plans for all paired books.
• Includes explicit vocabulary instruction.

I love BookFlix!!!

Love this review!!

I LOVE this resources as well. I agree, it meets or exceeds all expectations for usability. The visual design is so bright and engaging. The paired text on fiction and nonfiction high-quality books is a real feature. It even give websites to continue learning on the topic that's being explored. It uses the skill of vocabulary, sequencing, and fact vs. fiction to gauge student understanding. 

I guess I am a bit confused. I attempted to review Storia, but I don't have an account so I couldn't access the materials to review it. I know that it was reviewed and obviously meets the criteria, but I disappointed that the first resource I attempted to use was not accessible.

I then used BookNook. Students submit video trailers of books that are reviewed and then published. Other students can search to find a book that will engage and interest them. 

The usability is not ideal. Because students are uploading information, format can be different across options and even the same book. Links to view other trailers are included, but depending on how many trailers a title has, can be overwhelming.

The flexibility and adaptability is also not idea. There are no teacher guides. This is simply a warehouse of book trailers. There is an instruction guide for teachers on how to have their students submit trailers, but no additional materials to use with the titles. 

The rest of the rubric is not really met either. Authenticity would receive the highest rating.

This is a great site. I love it. When I was an ELA teacher, I would have used it both to help my students identify books to read as well as to upload their own trailers. However, it doesn't necessarily meet the criteria of the rubric as written.

Hi Gretchen - Two of our premium licensed resources - Storia and Transparent Language Online - require users to create an account. The resources are still available at no cost to Ohio students, parents, and educators. Remember to click on the "i" button for resources to get additional information for all resources.

BookNook is a web tool developed by INFOhio, and not one of our resources. However, I like the feedback you give here and it is definitely something I will share with our BookNook team!

The resource I reviewed was iSearch. 

Usability is met. Materials follow Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). Material(s) are not overly resource intense that would require consistent high-speed internet access, such as large video files and multiple high-resolution photos.The visual design of materials is clean and coherent, lending itself to ease of learning. (Although, it does look slightly antiquated.)

Flexibility and Adaptability is also met for the most part. Materials are flexible to allow students to access and complete work online or offline as needed. Materials can support and/or facilitate learning in hybrid and/or online delivery methods. However, teacher supports, documentation, and/or guides for effective use are not present.

Inclusive Teaching is hard to review because it all depends upon what is being searched.

Researched Based Strategies is also hard to review because this also depends on what is being searched. 

Overall, this is still a wonderful resource free of ads that could be valuable to any classroom. 

Elizabeth, 

I use ISearch often when I am searching for research in education. Using the Advanced Sources tab yields many results to find the best research and data on educational studies. 

I used the RemotEDx Rubric to review INFOhio's Digital Video Collection.  Honestly, I felt that it was difficult to utilize the rubric at a macro level to review the DVC resource.  Considering the archive of videos from a 30,000' view, this is my assessment . . .

Usability - I felt like the DVC setup was easy to read, access, and view.  There are a lot of videos covering a number of topics for students and for adults (PD).  However, I felt like the archive could be more organizationally friendly.  For example, when I attempted to browse by topic, the system did not sort the items into categories that were user friendly.  This seems to be an area for growth.

Inclusive Teaching - This category was very hard to "measure".  There are so many videos covering a myriad of content areas that I cannot conclusively evaluate the DVC portal as a whole.

Flexibility and Adaptability - The content was very flexible and adaptable.  I feel like the videos could be used in-person, remote, and/or hybrid.  Additionally, the videos could be used as a means of both enrichment and intervention dependent on the learner's characteristics.

Research-Based Strategies - Again, this was hard to "measure" given the volume of resources.  However, I feel like the element could also be vetted in the design and delivery of the person utilizing the video.  With careful and thoughtful design and delivery, the video(s) could easily meet most of the criteria along with an explicit alignment to the content standards (K-12).

You might try again choosing a single video or series and evaluating it with the rubric!

I chose to review the biography reference bank. I realize this is a different type of resource than some of the instructional resources. I used James Madison as my search string within the tool.  Using the guide, I'd rate the following: 1) 4 or the highest score.  2) Sales and Marketing all achieved a high score.  3) Content = on average a score of 3.5 4) Standards alignment was 0 as this was a resource and 5) Interactivity = 4 as the tool had many ways to utilize the tool as you searched for biography resources.  

I started this prompt by pulling up the rubric and opening the flyer. Before I could get started, I noticed a few issues with the flyer itself in regards to the accessibility goals of the rubric...

None of the logos used for each resource have alt text available. The flyer also relies on color-coding to designate web tools rather than making them hyperlinks.

As for the resource itself, I selected iSearch because I feel like InfOhio's biggest obstacle in the past was discoverability and its largest competitor for teacher and student mindshare is a Google search.

Because iSearch is more of a utility rather than a resource, I chose to focus on the usability and accessibility of the tool.

On the usability side, I found it confusing that the InfOhio webpage has a search box prominently at the top right of the page that reads "Search Site." This search box only shows content from the InfOhio webserver and not the premium resources.  The iSearch tool is a less prominent button at the bottom right that launches a floating search box.  On my phone the site search is hidden and the iSearch tool is much more promement.

Using the Wave browser plugin, I found that t the InfOhio logo, iSearch Logo, and floating quick link icons all lacked alternative text. I also noticed that "Research Starter" result included an image that did not have alt text either.  There were 4 flags for low contrast issues and none of the checkboxes designed to filter resources were tagged for screen readers. Overall there are many places where the font size is less than 14 but you can use browser controls to increase the size. Doing this makes for more horizontal scrolling as the page does not adapt it's layout to the larger font sizes.