Editing the letters individually, with greater contrast between them, would have made the word ("create") more legible
Here's one I'm not so sure about: graffiticreator.net…
It's fun, though I'd have liked an un-do button, but maybe that's just me: I've never actually had a go with an aerosol can and reckon true graffiti artists don't, ever, "un-do"… ,-)! But would I actually want to use this with students?
Criteria for using technology
When I'm lesson planning and look at a website or an activity of some sort involving the use of any technology, I ask myself the same questions I suggest in the technology session on our CELTA course:
- Is it a suitable level of difficulty, language and maturity for my learners…?
- Will my learners enjoy doing it…? Will it engage them…?
- How can / must I adapt it…?
- What are the aims…?
- What are the stages…?
- What language is being used, practised and learnt…?
- What are we going to do with what we've found / created…?
- What is the return-on-investment (time spent setting up, in class…)?
With graffiticreator.net, my doubt is really over the language that is going to be produced and used: is it merely going to engage my learners at the visual level and absorb them in understanding how the site works, or am I going to be able to create a task that will really produce a lot of meaningful (linguistic) interaction?
On balance, that looks to me like one that will go into my "For the kids" file in my favourites — for my own kids, that is, they'll like it, but I don't think I'll be using it in the classroom with learners.
Now, on the other hand, if we had a class blog, and I wanted to decorate it, and we had — say — a new "graffiti word a week", and the kids wanted to do it in their own time, at home, or when I'd got someone finished all their other work, then I might consider it — but my aim would not then be a linguistic one.