Seminar Questions

1.Student A, how did the group decide to include Garrette’s perspective/lens/conclusions into the overall presentation?

 Lens: historical and political and included the statutory promise from the IDEA and in terms of federal funding has not contributed enough

1.Student A, how did the group decide to include Carter’s perspective/lens/conclusions into the overall presentation?

 Lens was economic and we included it through incorporating the idea of tele-interventions into our solution. She discussed tele-interventions in her paper by noting that it is a resource that most rural schools lack.

2. Student A, give one specific way that your thinking changed as a result of learning about garrette’s findings.

 Garrette’s findings changed the way that I thought about this issue by providing more insight of the historical role the government has played in this issue. She made me think about how much the government wasn't giving enough funding to school districts.

2. Student A, give one specific way that your thinking changed as a result of learning about carter’s findings.

Carter's findings changed my way of thinking about how much of a positive impact tele-intervention would have on rural school districts with specialized education programs. Students that are able to have highly qualified teachers teaching them, even through zoom meetings, can greatly benefit them in their learning process due to the extra support the teachers provide.

3. Reflecting on your colleagues’ work, which one had the greatest impact on your overall understanding of the problem your group identified?

Garrette’s essay had the greatest impact on the overall understanding of the problem because she identified very specific and detailed research pertaining to the Individual disability education act or the IDEA like the use of the certain bills pertaining to funding access for rural schools.   

4. What is an example of a compelling argument from one of your peer’s individual reports that you decided to exclude from your team presentation and why?

Carter And Garrette- We decided to exclude the idea of smaller rural districts coming together and raising funds for a shared specialized staff. We felt as if the argument of tele-interventions was stronger than smaller rural districts fundraising together because it is an action that can happen now. 

5. What is a way in which your team’s resolution makes you think differently about your own individual research?

Gracie- Our resolution of tele-interventions makes me think differently about my own individual research by shifting my attention slightly away from the classroom socialization portion of education and focusing more on student teacher collaboration. Socialization with peers is important in a classroom setting but our resolution made me realize that there needs to be more individualized work with students in order for them to succeed.

6. Describe an argument from one of your peer’s individual reports that made you think differently about your team’s solution or conclusion?

One argument from Garrette’s individual report that made me think differently about my team's solution was the argument of tele-interventions solving rural schools being geographically isolated. With rural schools being miles away from urbanized areas, tele-interventions prove a strong point as in improving teacher shortages and improving isolation.

7. If you had another team member, what other perspectives or limitations could they have researched that would have made a useful contribution to the project?

Cultural/social- If we had another group member they could research the social and cultural part of this project. They could use this lens and research to provide insight on how different parts of America could adapt to the solution of tele-interventions and fit it into their cultural or traditional ways of learning.