Literacy and Thinking Tools for Science Teachers

Literacy and thinking tools, such as Venn diagrams, are construction tools for the mind. Just as carpenters use tools to construct a piece of furniture, literate thinkers learning science can use tools to construct new scientific understandings. Like tools used by a carpenter, some literacy and thinking tools are purpose-built for science education; Josephine used a Venn diagram tool because she wanted to compare her pet bird to a bald eagle. Just as a screwdriver is built to slot into the head of a screw and rotate it, you can use literacy and thinking tools for subject- and text-specific purposes. In this chapter, we examine some characteristics of literacy and thinking tools (Whitehead, 2001, 2004). A list of these tools, together with the chapters associ-ated with their use, is provided in Table 2:1

Lo‐tech tools as episteme: rethinking student engagement in the writing process and beyond

In this paper, five teacher‐scholars describe pedagogical inquiry into the use of ‘lo‐tech’ tools and what we discovered about the affordances of these tools. These include but are not limited to technologies like sticky notes that help students to organize written thoughts and physically move them around, crayons that allow students to highlight, trace, and categorize different types of thoughts on their paper, and index cards that they can use in a variety of interactive ways for their own writing and to write collaboratively. We found that the use of lo‐tech tools complemented our work with digital technology, engaging the kinesthetic learners in our classrooms and encouraging a spirit of play in students and teachers alike. We also discuss how teachers can encourage the use of lo‐tech tools epistemologically to help students process information, create knowledge, and to come to their own understandings or demonstrate understandings of course content ‐ with no product in mind other than knowledge‐making

Study of Tools Interoperability

Interoperability of tools usually refers to a combination of methods and techniques that address the problem of making a collection of tools to work together. In this study we survey different notions that are used in this context: interoperability, interaction and integration. We point out relation between these notions, and how it maps to the interoperability problem. We narrow the problem area to the tools development in academia. Tools developed in such environment have a small basis for development, documentation and maintenance. We scrutinise some of the problems and potential solutions related with tools interoperability in such environment. Moreover, we look at two tools developed in the Formal Methods and Tools group1, and analyse the use of different integration techniques

Gorillas’ (Gorilla g. gorilla) knowledge of conspecifics’ affordances: intraspecific social tool use for food acquisition

The use of tools, long thought to be uniquely human, has now been observed in other animal taxa including several species of birds, non-primate mammals as well as some non-human primate species. Chimpanzees, one of humankind’s closest living relatives, exceed all other non-human animal species as they have been reported to use an exceptionally large toolkit. However, relatively little is known about the tool-use skills of the other great ape species. While the majority of tools described are inanimate objects, the use of social tools has received relatively little attention. Here we provide the first evidence of naturally occurring spontaneous exploitative behaviour of a conspecific as a social tool for food acquisition in non-human animals. We observed gorillas in captivity utilising a conspecific as a ladder to gain access to unreachable food. We discuss our findings in the light of other studies on social tool use and suggest the need for more nuanced interpretations of gorillas’ cognitive skills

The technological mediation of mathematics and its learning

This paper examines the extent to which mathematical knowledge, and its related pedagogy, is inextricably linked to the tools – physical, virtual, cultural – in which it is expressed. Our goal is to focus on a few exemplars of computational tools, and to describe with some illustrative examples, how mathematical meanings are shaped by their use. We begin with an appraisal of the role of digital technologies, and our rationale for focusing on them. We present four categories of digital tool-use that distinguish their differing potential to shape mathematical cognition. The four categories are: i. dynamic and graphical tools, ii. tools that outsource processing power, iii. new representational infrastructures, and iv. the implications of highbandwidth connectivity on the nature of mathematics activity. In conclusion, we draw out the implications of this analysis for mathematical epistemology and the mathematical meanings students develop. We also underline the central importance of design, both of the tools themselves and the activities in which they are embedded

An effective and efficient testing methodology for correctness testing for file recovery tools

We hereby develop an effective and efficient testing methodology for correctness testing for file recovery tools across different file systems. We assume that the tool tester is familiar with the formats of common file types and has the ability to use the tools correctly. Our methodology first derives a testing plan to minimize the number of runs required to identify the differences in tools with respect to correctness. We also present a case study on correctness testing for file carving tools, which allows us to confirm that the number of necessary testing runs is bounded and our results are statistically sound. <br /

Group and individual time management tools: what you get is not what you need

Some studies of diaries and scheduling systems have considered how individuals use diaries with a view to proposing requirements for computerised time management tools. Others have focused on the criteria for success of group scheduling systems. Few have paid attention to how people use a battery of tools as an ensemble. This interview study reports how users exploit paper, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and a group scheduling system for their time management. As with earlier studies, we find many shortcomings of different technologies, but studying the ensemble rather than individual tools points towards a different conclusion: rather than aiming towards producing electronic time management tools that replace existing paper-based tools, we should be aiming to understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of each technology and look towards more seamless integration between tools. In particular, the requirements for scheduling and those for more responsive, fluid time management conflict in ways that demand different kinds of support

Do Android Taint Analysis Tools Keep Their Promises?

In recent years, researchers have developed a number of tools to conduct taint analysis of Android applications. While all the respective papers aim at providing a thorough empirical evaluation, comparability is hindered by varying or unclear evaluation targets. Sometimes, the apps used for evaluation are not precisely described. In other cases, authors use an established benchmark but cover it only partially. In yet other cases, the evaluations differ in terms of the data leaks searched for, or lack a ground truth to compare against. All those limitations make it impossible to truly compare the tools based on those published evaluations. We thus present ReproDroid, a framework allowing the accurate comparison of Android taint analysis tools. ReproDroid supports researchers in inferring the ground truth for data leaks in apps, in automatically applying tools to benchmarks, and in evaluating the obtained results. We use ReproDroid to comparatively evaluate on equal grounds the six prominent taint analysis tools Amandroid, DIALDroid, DidFail, DroidSafe, FlowDroid and IccTA. The results are largely positive although four tools violate some promises concerning features and accuracy. Finally, we contribute to the area of unbiased benchmarking with a new and improved version of the open test suite DroidBench