The issue that I found most interesting within the readings is related to the sense of our political duties as they relate to society and the implications that technology has on democracy. The article by Mark Kann was interesting because it really solidified the a few ideas that I already had. "In recent years, we have seen a broad disenchantment among people with civic engagement and representative democracy," states Kann, and within the mid 1990's it appeared as if things were bound for a change with the internet. He gives three methods in which the internet promoted democracy:
extended communities for broad forums of discussion,
many to many citizen interactions that invite political action,
and polling being made easier through people's expression.
But within a few years, "theorists and advocates of digital democracy" started to see the "populist majority as uniformed, impulsive, and materialistic." These opinions were created whenever people look at the populist majority's preference of "Internet pornography and commerce" over civic and political engagement. With the rise of this growing sense of political apathy, digital democrats feel the need to educate and improve public opinion of the system. But the author later posits that because internet discussion is generally "undisciplined, intolerant, and superficial" that it is not suited for online talk intended to "produce sober, wise recommendations for policy-maker and law-maker consideration. So the point is that perhaps the internet is not suited for such a high level of "disciplined, facilitated discussion...more suited to the halls of Ivy League universities." Most importantly the author has determined that some individuals should be unwelcome in a public forum debate. Those who are "impulsive, impassioned, self interested...people of faith, [who] are commited to a singular version of truth, morality and virtue...social and political..activists" are all individuals with ideas that are corrupted by a greater idea that makes them incapable of compromise and thoughtful and forward thinking discussion.
But to this end I wonder, is this all new? Is this dissention in democratic thought borne from our networked society? I believe the key speakers from the videos, Digital Youth, Social Movements, and Democracy in Brazil and Networks, Power and Democracy both had very similar ideas. The civil society, one that has discourse and discussion, as summarized by Saskia Sassen has been used by the technology where conversely in the world of finance, technology has been altered to fit its ideals. From this, Raquel Recuero states that technology has exemplified the issues that harm democracy and the global presence allows more consumers to see that is the case.
There are substantial uses of technology for democratic good but as Sassen has stated, there may have to be some creative destruction to maximize the benefit. She also suggests that we need to invent new political formats for technology to be effective in that means. Recuero, and her evaluation of Brazil's digital youth, is on the way to maximizing the technologies abilities for discourse with their direct link to the President and their ability to solve pollution problems, but there are still issues that need to be solved so that everyone can participate and be involved in a reworked civil society where morality and good intentions reign supreme.
I'm just wondering, what would Sassen and Recuero would think of Barack Obama's campaign that relied heavily on networked culture. I'm sure Sassen would have thought that it was not a completely sincere attempt but Recuero may have thought that it was a good attempt to reach the masses.
References:
Kann, Mark E.. "More or Less Democracy in the Internet Age?." Networked Publics. N.p., 6 Oct. 2005. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
"Raquel Recuero - Digital Youth, Social Movements, and Democracy in Brazil Connected Learning." Connected Learning. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
"Saskia Sassen: Networks, Power, and Democracy - YouTube." YouTube. Kazys Varnelis, 23 Mar. 2006. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Saturday, October 5, 2013
Week 4-Participatory Culture
First off, wow, what an awesome reading from H.J. Jenkins! This material has spurred some very interesting conversations with my colleagues and myself and I think I came a realization about networked culture that has changed my perspective completely. I've always assumed that education should always create an environment that is similar to the one students will encounter when they leave the safe confines of school and enter the harsh reality of the real world. I have known that the internet and the various spaces created in it are very prevalent in everyday life but I now know that when the education system does not effectively teach in the network culture it is detrimental to the development of students. Not only does it not prepare them for the world by using internet based resources but the culture itself teaches so many valuable lessons, many of which are highlighted in this reading.
I'd like to center this post around a statement that was introduced in the assignment for this week. Most people assume that people, especially young people, are reading less and have too much screen time. On a superficial level, I would agree. Young people are socializing more through networked culture and are relying on the internet for entertainment. Some young people play video games and often enough they are educated more in video game culture than they are in academia. But honestly, who can blame them? From what I can tell, to most pre college students school is boring. I love learning and talking to people in person because I feel like that is a complete experience you can not get online but I see the alluring nature of technology. Technology is forgiving, does not judge, and is there all the time. I think that the skill of play, discussed in the reading, is the main reason why tech culture is more popular than academic culture. The user gets the chance to learn at their speed, in their preferred medium, experiment, and go back and learn afterwards. All of this is done with little to no pressure. How is the "user" treated in school? The school user does work, inside of class and out, and then is tested. After tests, that is it! And the tests for some, are in high stakes situations, full of pressure that is corrosive to true learning. Sure there is some scaffolding that occurs that would make students recall information they have previously learned but the "Renaissance Man(woman)" culture that schools have cultivated puts less importance on specializing on something and makes students learn just a little bit of everything. What is the reason that students would want to remember something if they just move to something else later? More importantly, what is high school doing to prepare young people to enter the world if they do not go to college.
In my opinion, most people start learning in kindergarten and stop learning when they reach 7th or 8th grade, and that is it! I would bet the farm that most people don't remember what they learned in high school and can recall more accurately the information from their younger years. What is that telling you about the validity of high school education. If I was given the key to the city and the ability to restructure the school system, the college format would start earlier. Students would pick what they want to pursue earlier in school instead of the "Renaissance Man" curriculum. And to simulate the real world, instead of tests that are fairly arbitrary and do not give a complete view of knowledge gained, students would be evaluated through tasks that they must accomplish.
I know that I am opinionated and I think that is because I work in a school. I have had discussions with teachers and students and they have similar views. Teachers feel that they are inhibited to teach and go off on valuable tangents because they are teaching to a test, the end point of a curriculum. They must tailor a whole school year, 180 days of learning, to a test that lasts two to three hours. (When did school become so Machiavellian?) Students on the other hand, are not sure why they are learning the things that they are learning. I know that not all students are advanced but I know a student that is doing highly sophisticated work with people in college and beyond and is applying for patents for technology that he and his team created. How is school servicing him? He goes to school, sits in the library and watches Netflix on his computer because he has to be in a building for a certain amount of time in order to graduate. In my mind, he has already graduated.
So to conclude, I think that the system is broken. I know that the system was created to benefit the greatest number of people but I think it can be differentiated to accommodate more students. We can use the ideas presented by Jenkins and others that harness the positive aspects of a networked, participatory culture. We, as educators and a public that is concerned for the youth of society, must make learning more intrinsically motivating. Sure, people are getting a bit more screen time but where else would they go, or better yet, where would they want to go? Let us make the screen time work more effectively for us. Let us direct the screen time in a way that can allow people to develop more intellectually. Why not make a learning environment that has meaning for students and enable teachers of all types to be facilitators of knowledge? Why not use technology to educate students in the proper uses of technology and enrich their education through it? There are definitely technological skills that need to be harnessed if we want to be more successful and the only way that we are going to do that is joining the internet revolution, not resisting it.
I'd like to center this post around a statement that was introduced in the assignment for this week. Most people assume that people, especially young people, are reading less and have too much screen time. On a superficial level, I would agree. Young people are socializing more through networked culture and are relying on the internet for entertainment. Some young people play video games and often enough they are educated more in video game culture than they are in academia. But honestly, who can blame them? From what I can tell, to most pre college students school is boring. I love learning and talking to people in person because I feel like that is a complete experience you can not get online but I see the alluring nature of technology. Technology is forgiving, does not judge, and is there all the time. I think that the skill of play, discussed in the reading, is the main reason why tech culture is more popular than academic culture. The user gets the chance to learn at their speed, in their preferred medium, experiment, and go back and learn afterwards. All of this is done with little to no pressure. How is the "user" treated in school? The school user does work, inside of class and out, and then is tested. After tests, that is it! And the tests for some, are in high stakes situations, full of pressure that is corrosive to true learning. Sure there is some scaffolding that occurs that would make students recall information they have previously learned but the "Renaissance Man(woman)" culture that schools have cultivated puts less importance on specializing on something and makes students learn just a little bit of everything. What is the reason that students would want to remember something if they just move to something else later? More importantly, what is high school doing to prepare young people to enter the world if they do not go to college.
In my opinion, most people start learning in kindergarten and stop learning when they reach 7th or 8th grade, and that is it! I would bet the farm that most people don't remember what they learned in high school and can recall more accurately the information from their younger years. What is that telling you about the validity of high school education. If I was given the key to the city and the ability to restructure the school system, the college format would start earlier. Students would pick what they want to pursue earlier in school instead of the "Renaissance Man" curriculum. And to simulate the real world, instead of tests that are fairly arbitrary and do not give a complete view of knowledge gained, students would be evaluated through tasks that they must accomplish.
I know that I am opinionated and I think that is because I work in a school. I have had discussions with teachers and students and they have similar views. Teachers feel that they are inhibited to teach and go off on valuable tangents because they are teaching to a test, the end point of a curriculum. They must tailor a whole school year, 180 days of learning, to a test that lasts two to three hours. (When did school become so Machiavellian?) Students on the other hand, are not sure why they are learning the things that they are learning. I know that not all students are advanced but I know a student that is doing highly sophisticated work with people in college and beyond and is applying for patents for technology that he and his team created. How is school servicing him? He goes to school, sits in the library and watches Netflix on his computer because he has to be in a building for a certain amount of time in order to graduate. In my mind, he has already graduated.
So to conclude, I think that the system is broken. I know that the system was created to benefit the greatest number of people but I think it can be differentiated to accommodate more students. We can use the ideas presented by Jenkins and others that harness the positive aspects of a networked, participatory culture. We, as educators and a public that is concerned for the youth of society, must make learning more intrinsically motivating. Sure, people are getting a bit more screen time but where else would they go, or better yet, where would they want to go? Let us make the screen time work more effectively for us. Let us direct the screen time in a way that can allow people to develop more intellectually. Why not make a learning environment that has meaning for students and enable teachers of all types to be facilitators of knowledge? Why not use technology to educate students in the proper uses of technology and enrich their education through it? There are definitely technological skills that need to be harnessed if we want to be more successful and the only way that we are going to do that is joining the internet revolution, not resisting it.
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Week 3: Reflection on Jenkins Reading Highlighting the Participation Gap
The concept that interested me was the participation
gap. I felt that prior to reading this section, I could have surmised what a participation gap is, but I think that the importance of it really hit me as I read along. Within Green’s Model, this fits in
the Operational dimension because it deals with the tools and techniques
associated (and the limitations that are imposed) with literacy and the ability to be literate. With computers and internet access
everywhere, it seems like there wouldn’t be much of a gap, but alas there are
differences in the capabilities of people accessing the internet. In the Jenkins reading, she states that
governments have found importance in the use of the internet and they are
providing access in different ways. On a
PBS Nightly News Hour in November 2005, Philadelphia mayor John Street spoke of
how the city government would work on providing low income families with
internet connection (Jenkins 12). The
reading also went further to say that the city’s Emergency People’s Shelter, a non-profit
organization, is providing access to people in the shelter as well as other
community members. With all of this
focus, and the insight into its increasing importance in completing everyday
tasks, it is a wonder that more people aren’t fluent in this literacy.
With that being said, there are hurdles in the way of access
to the general public. A good summary of
these occurrences are stated plainly in the reading on page 13, where it states
that “’Speed, location, quality and support, and inequalities in access do
persist’ states a 2005 report on children’s online experience in the United
Kingdom.” (Livingstone & Bober 13)
These are all big hurdles when it comes to both self-discovery and
guided usage. From my own experience,
especially as it relates to the courses I am taking, I have noticed at the
school I work at that there are hurdles in completing my studies. Second Life, the program that is utilized in
the Learning and Emerging Technologies course, is blocked because, as the IT
director said, “it opens up ports that may present a security issue.” Also, certain blogs are also blocked and for
the students, the blocks are more numerous.
Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are all blocked, just to name a few. In addition, the filtering system also makes judgments
on the content of the site and when doing some research for various projects,
an alert comes on the screen that may say that the website you are trying to
access is “obscene/crude” and is ruled inappropriate for school usage. I can only edit Prezi presentations on a hard
line connected computer because the Wi-Fi is too slow for the speed demands of
the website. So the fear of security deficiencies
and speed issues weigh on my participation (or ease of) in classes and can
somewhat affect my ability to learn.
With all of the hurdles that some people face, disadvantages
occur for those with fettered connections.
While I might seem like a cry baby because I have obstacles, but I am
very fortunate and I can still do what I want to. I have internet access at home, have
technology mobility at work, and am always connected by a mobile phone. For those that are relegated to using “outdated
machine[s] in a public library with mandatory filtering software and no
opportunity for storage or transmission pales in comparison to what a person can accomplish with a home computer…”.
(Jenkins 13). This inequality of ability
follows disadvantaged students through school and disallows them the comforts
that might otherwise enjoy if they had a clearer route to access.
So as educators prepare students for life outside of the
brick walls of an institutionalized education, computer access must be
equalized. I feel the same as Jenkins probably
feels when she mirrors the achievement of skilled computer users and their
network access to the historical parallel of “[the] youth who had access to
books or classical recordings in their home…concerts or museums…engage[ment] in
dinner conversation…skills that helped them perform well in school.” (Jenkins
14) Jenkins further along in the reading
that computer usage is less of a lifestyle as it is a part of everyday life and
that computer access is becoming more of a necessity. Work, play, and learning are increasing in
presence on the internet and those that do not have access will unfortunately
be left behind. So I too echo the
yearning for “free Wi-Fi coupled with new educational initiatives to help youth
and adults learn how to use those tools effectively.” (Jenkins 13)
Sunday, September 22, 2013
NYT "Online, R U Really Reading"
I found this article very interesting. The argument between traditionalists and modernists is not new. Modernists seek to embrace change and traditionalists, well, not so much. They find immense value in the way things are done and sometimes are distracted from the content. When I talk to my father, an avid film buff, he often talks down the new technology used in producing modern movies. I try to remind him, are you watching the movie for the movie or are you watching it for the content. In my response, I examine the functionality of both and offer a suggestion to value both mediums as they have different positives.
I also understand that traditionalists would argue that this can not be done because the digital medium takes away the skill of prolonged concentration necessary for reading. But why not try to find ways to amend the problem so that the medium doesn't take anything away from users but adds to their complete experience. Of course typing it is very easy but I think it is trivial to fight change the way some people are doing. The change is all around us and fighting it is a battle that will not be won.
So with the reading of this article, I found that literacy has come to include reading, writing, and the skills to operate efficiently online. Online work is cognitively challenging in capacities that are not present in reading a book and we need to fix issues to move forward to a more enriching future.
I also understand that traditionalists would argue that this can not be done because the digital medium takes away the skill of prolonged concentration necessary for reading. But why not try to find ways to amend the problem so that the medium doesn't take anything away from users but adds to their complete experience. Of course typing it is very easy but I think it is trivial to fight change the way some people are doing. The change is all around us and fighting it is a battle that will not be won.
So with the reading of this article, I found that literacy has come to include reading, writing, and the skills to operate efficiently online. Online work is cognitively challenging in capacities that are not present in reading a book and we need to fix issues to move forward to a more enriching future.
Saturday, September 14, 2013
Week One Reading Response-New Literacies as a Social Practice
The quote, "The distinctive contribution of the approach to literacy as social practice lies in the ways..." is substantial. I think that as a society as we become more literate in new media it changes just as quickly. In terms of what I do with text and making sense of it and how I use it to further my own education, I look towards Wikipedia. To me, it embodies everything that is new media.
Wikipedia, for those who are unfamiliar (probably no one), started as a free online encyclopedia that is edited by its users. Genius right? People that have extensive knowledge on any topic can relay it to the public in a format that is one, accessible and two immediate. In my first experiences with the website I remember rejoicing because it gave me an avenue to quench my own inquisitive thirst. So I read it for recreational purposes. Who is so and so and what happened at this event are things that I researched. I took what I read as truth because, when is the internet ever wrong?
I was soon informed that everything on it was a lie, or at least should be scrutinized beyond all realistic questioning. Reports came out stating that false information was posted and people used Wikipedia as the brunt of a joke. When talking about school reports and papers I constantly heard "You must use internet resources, and no, Wikipedia is not a valid source" from all my teachers. How could something so noble be demonized so much?
But then, something great happened. Wikipedia started to some of its information validated. Someone (or many people) started verifying information on this once erroneous website. And it is then that it was given some credence. At the bottom of the page one can even see where the author has cited their sources. When I started working in the high school library that I work in now, I realized that Wikipedia is an amazing resource.
Evaluation
New media, as conveyed by Wilber article "Special themed issue: Beyond 'new' literacies" and the "Literacy and the New Technologies in School Education: Meeting the L(IT)eracy Challenge", is collaborative and participatory. It is through this that we have the breath of knowledge that we do at our fingertips because other people, sometimes with legitimate expertise, put information out there for use to use. When I first started school, research was very difficult. If you had no background knowledge of a particular, abstract topic, you faced an uphill battle. Now the collaborations, which both serve to enrich our knowledge as well as "self verify" itself (conflicting information being scrutinized for apparent truth) give us something. Wikipedia, which should never be the only resource, gives us a chance at some understanding. Heck, I even looked up "New Media" and found some very interesting reading! So, the world is changing and Rizvi and Lingard (1997) have found that "Students are not going to wait for their teachers to catch up with the new textual practices that they already prefer." So we, as educators (prospective and current) can seek to utilize our new tools and reach our target audience better, on their (preferred) terms. We should seek to make learning authentic and real and allow as many avenues of learning conveyance to be available to our students. We need to make learning something that students take some responsibility for so that they have more connection with the content. And as teachers, Wilber (2010) states, "[have a necessity to learn], as part of a new literacies framework, visual literacy and critical pedagogy, in order to engage students to better understand their world and construct learning."
Sources:
Boomer, G., Green, e. B., & Teaching, A. A. (n.d.). Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the l(IT)eracy challenge? - Free Online Library. Free News, Magazines, Newspapers, Journals, Reference Articles and Classic Books - Free Online Library. Retrieved September 15, 2013
Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. 1997, `Foreword' in Page to Screen: Taking Literacy into the Electronic Era, ed. I. Snyder, Allen& Unwin, Sydney.
Education, 2:1, 1-6.
Wikipedia, for those who are unfamiliar (probably no one), started as a free online encyclopedia that is edited by its users. Genius right? People that have extensive knowledge on any topic can relay it to the public in a format that is one, accessible and two immediate. In my first experiences with the website I remember rejoicing because it gave me an avenue to quench my own inquisitive thirst. So I read it for recreational purposes. Who is so and so and what happened at this event are things that I researched. I took what I read as truth because, when is the internet ever wrong?
I was soon informed that everything on it was a lie, or at least should be scrutinized beyond all realistic questioning. Reports came out stating that false information was posted and people used Wikipedia as the brunt of a joke. When talking about school reports and papers I constantly heard "You must use internet resources, and no, Wikipedia is not a valid source" from all my teachers. How could something so noble be demonized so much?
But then, something great happened. Wikipedia started to some of its information validated. Someone (or many people) started verifying information on this once erroneous website. And it is then that it was given some credence. At the bottom of the page one can even see where the author has cited their sources. When I started working in the high school library that I work in now, I realized that Wikipedia is an amazing resource.
Evaluation
New media, as conveyed by Wilber article "Special themed issue: Beyond 'new' literacies" and the "Literacy and the New Technologies in School Education: Meeting the L(IT)eracy Challenge", is collaborative and participatory. It is through this that we have the breath of knowledge that we do at our fingertips because other people, sometimes with legitimate expertise, put information out there for use to use. When I first started school, research was very difficult. If you had no background knowledge of a particular, abstract topic, you faced an uphill battle. Now the collaborations, which both serve to enrich our knowledge as well as "self verify" itself (conflicting information being scrutinized for apparent truth) give us something. Wikipedia, which should never be the only resource, gives us a chance at some understanding. Heck, I even looked up "New Media" and found some very interesting reading! So, the world is changing and Rizvi and Lingard (1997) have found that "Students are not going to wait for their teachers to catch up with the new textual practices that they already prefer." So we, as educators (prospective and current) can seek to utilize our new tools and reach our target audience better, on their (preferred) terms. We should seek to make learning authentic and real and allow as many avenues of learning conveyance to be available to our students. We need to make learning something that students take some responsibility for so that they have more connection with the content. And as teachers, Wilber (2010) states, "[have a necessity to learn], as part of a new literacies framework, visual literacy and critical pedagogy, in order to engage students to better understand their world and construct learning."
Sources:
Boomer, G., Green, e. B., & Teaching, A. A. (n.d.). Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the l(IT)eracy challenge? - Free Online Library. Free News, Magazines, Newspapers, Journals, Reference Articles and Classic Books - Free Online Library. Retrieved September 15, 2013
Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. 1997, `Foreword' in Page to Screen: Taking Literacy into the Electronic Era, ed. I. Snyder, Allen& Unwin, Sydney.
Wilber, D.J. (2010). Special themed issue: Beyond ʻnewʼ literacies. Digital Culture &
Education, 2:1, 1-6.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Starting Out
Hello to everyone! I am excited to get started and figured I would create a post to see how this all works. Honestly, I am excited to learn about all of the new technology and interested to see where it all coincides together. With the advent of new technology, the world is literally at our fingertips and facilitating change in the world is clearly going to be more apparent as technology becomes more and more engrained in our daily lives, hopefully we do not see a dystopian future envisioned by James Cameron where technology takes over because of our human inadequacies, but only time can tell...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)