So I've expanded and tried to be multimodal in my blog posts. The final frontier within this environment is audio. Here's a link to a msnbc podcast asking whether children need cell phones. I tried embedding it into blogger but my mind is a bit fried right now which illustrates an interesting point. People may default to the mode with which they have the most familiarity with for a given medium. As someone who came to pc first via word processors my default mode is text.
My quest for multimodally has definitely expanded my "vocabulary," there I go with text based references. Well at least I'm trying.
Monday, May 11, 2009
The world keeps on turning...
These high school student videos take a satirical look against and for cell phones in school. As the debate continues throughout school districts in the United States, students are voicing their concerns on youtube videos. A quick search of cell phones in schools and no cell phones in schools resulted in the videos linked above.
Monday, April 13, 2009
It's been a while
I have been busy working on my summer research proposal so it's been a while since I've checked in or rather written in or videoed in or sounded in. See all of this multimoodal communication "talk" has caused me to rethink my language choice when communicating, notice that I did not say writing as this medium offers me the opportunity to communicate using many modes of communication.
In thinking multimodally it challenges and expands my thinking when it comes to evaluating the ways in which students communicate and the ways in which we communicate to our students. My past adherence or rather privileging of certain communication modes over others is constantly called into question based upon my own biases and social construction. As a child of print I have privileged print over other communication modes probably to the dismay of my students. Multimodal teaching leads the educator to consider his/her biases or predispositions to various modes of communication and how those biases may impact students.
This becomes even more complicated when situating communication modes within power structures and environments which privilege certain modes over others, sometimes rightfully so and other times simply as a hegemonic tool meant to perpetuate and replicate the current power structure.
My reticence to use video and other communication modes speaks to my bias yet limits the reach of the communication based on its sole reliance on one mode of communication.
As I am behind in my blog postings I am going to try to use other modes of communication in my forthcoming posts to expand my communication modes.
In thinking multimodally it challenges and expands my thinking when it comes to evaluating the ways in which students communicate and the ways in which we communicate to our students. My past adherence or rather privileging of certain communication modes over others is constantly called into question based upon my own biases and social construction. As a child of print I have privileged print over other communication modes probably to the dismay of my students. Multimodal teaching leads the educator to consider his/her biases or predispositions to various modes of communication and how those biases may impact students.
This becomes even more complicated when situating communication modes within power structures and environments which privilege certain modes over others, sometimes rightfully so and other times simply as a hegemonic tool meant to perpetuate and replicate the current power structure.
My reticence to use video and other communication modes speaks to my bias yet limits the reach of the communication based on its sole reliance on one mode of communication.
As I am behind in my blog postings I am going to try to use other modes of communication in my forthcoming posts to expand my communication modes.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Texting for Toddlers-when is too young?
So I'm working on my paper on texting for toddlers. I mentioned several articles on gadgets for toddlers and young children and the launch of the new leapfrog texting device in past posts. The NY Times wrote an article in June of 2008 which listed Piaget's stages in the context of technological devices.
What's interesting is when you think of literacy Barton mentioned the social, psychological and historical. Barton argued that they needed to be interwoven to get an overview of what is involved with literacy and I agree if you consider culture as part of the social and historical aspects of literacy, which I think Barton would agree with. **Here it would be interesting to get your comments on my reading of Barton** Barton outlined his approach under eight headings (2007, p. 34-5) grouped within social, psychological and historical categories. I mention Barton and literacy because all of the discussions around toddlers and texting seem to focus heavily on the psychological with some mention of the social and historical aspects.
I really resonated with the comments in the NY Times June 2008 article regarding children mimicing their parents when they use technology. I watched a toddler "play" with her parents cell phone today and it was interesting in that she played with the cell phone in much the same way I see children play with parents other devices. The toddler could have been playing with her Mom's makeup case or her book.
Well enough for this post. Thanks for reading.
What's interesting is when you think of literacy Barton mentioned the social, psychological and historical. Barton argued that they needed to be interwoven to get an overview of what is involved with literacy and I agree if you consider culture as part of the social and historical aspects of literacy, which I think Barton would agree with. **Here it would be interesting to get your comments on my reading of Barton** Barton outlined his approach under eight headings (2007, p. 34-5) grouped within social, psychological and historical categories. I mention Barton and literacy because all of the discussions around toddlers and texting seem to focus heavily on the psychological with some mention of the social and historical aspects.
I really resonated with the comments in the NY Times June 2008 article regarding children mimicing their parents when they use technology. I watched a toddler "play" with her parents cell phone today and it was interesting in that she played with the cell phone in much the same way I see children play with parents other devices. The toddler could have been playing with her Mom's makeup case or her book.
Well enough for this post. Thanks for reading.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Text, Visuals, Context and Cultural Understanding
Comic Book Superheroes Unleashed on History Channel
In one of my courses yesterday we reviewed Multimodal Literacy through the lens of manga and comic books. We were to bring artifacts to class and the above link was my artifact. A discussion ensued whether text or visuals required more background information to process, i.e. did you need an awareness of the "society" or "culture" to understand what was happening with both text and visuals and which was easier to understand outside of "context." Well as a group we didn't come to any conclusions but this does have some real implications when you think of mobile devices and communities of practice. Is a knowledge of the community an integral part of the practice of "learning" how to use a mobile device and once learned using that mobile device to learn other things like math or language.
In one of my courses yesterday we reviewed Multimodal Literacy through the lens of manga and comic books. We were to bring artifacts to class and the above link was my artifact. A discussion ensued whether text or visuals required more background information to process, i.e. did you need an awareness of the "society" or "culture" to understand what was happening with both text and visuals and which was easier to understand outside of "context." Well as a group we didn't come to any conclusions but this does have some real implications when you think of mobile devices and communities of practice. Is a knowledge of the community an integral part of the practice of "learning" how to use a mobile device and once learned using that mobile device to learn other things like math or language.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Freedom presumes a need to be free
So I received an email regarding and updated syllabus being posted for a class and after ten minutes grew frustrated as the "Syllabus" link still on the left hand navigation bar under forum continued to take you to the version posted on January 13th whereas the "Syllabus" link on the top navigation bar had the updated version of the syllabus listed under discussion.
I mention this not merely to vent my frustration but also to highlight or rather ponder freedom presumes a need to be free, or in its most extreme case bondage or imprisonment. Tools meant to make us free automatically presume that such a need exists, and with the whole "blogging for class" phenomenon sweeping academia the presumption of bondage is not universal.
The challenges with "tools" especially for literacy lies not just in the "tools" but in assessing "literacy." You need first to know in what ways or even if someone needs to be free before you start providing them "freedomtools." Literacy can be defined in so many ways so it then gets down to intent. Ebonics is fine on the block but if your "intent" is to get a job or have a career in a certain industry you need to ascertain the correct "literacy" for that industry. Freedom is directly tied with bondage and I guess the issue is to whom or what are you bounded to?
Okay so this has turned into a vent, but it has also served as tool for freedom as I was all bound up by frustration and now I feel a little bit better.
I mention this not merely to vent my frustration but also to highlight or rather ponder freedom presumes a need to be free, or in its most extreme case bondage or imprisonment. Tools meant to make us free automatically presume that such a need exists, and with the whole "blogging for class" phenomenon sweeping academia the presumption of bondage is not universal.
The challenges with "tools" especially for literacy lies not just in the "tools" but in assessing "literacy." You need first to know in what ways or even if someone needs to be free before you start providing them "freedomtools." Literacy can be defined in so many ways so it then gets down to intent. Ebonics is fine on the block but if your "intent" is to get a job or have a career in a certain industry you need to ascertain the correct "literacy" for that industry. Freedom is directly tied with bondage and I guess the issue is to whom or what are you bounded to?
Okay so this has turned into a vent, but it has also served as tool for freedom as I was all bound up by frustration and now I feel a little bit better.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Is there such a thing as Online Literacy?
This week at a party someone commented that all of the photos from the party would be posted online that night. One guest countered that I definitely don't want my photos on facebook stating "at 44 I don't think you should have a myspace or facebook page."
A debate then ensued regarding the age limits or rather the participation age limits of each social networking site. One guest a facebook Diva then instrcuted the guests on the ways to use Facebook to accomplish "adult networking" based on "knowledge of how the site works." She told the "anti-social networking Guest" all of the ins and outs of using facebook, cautioning against the use of other social networking sites, mainly myspace, which she countered was indeed for little kids an adult predators.
The discussion led me to think of the various online literacies and the communites of practice (Lave and Wenger) where participants gain the skills and receive the tools to become more integrated into the community. This integration within the community is based upon an interest in achieving full or some sort of participation within the community.
Online Literacy based on this obsveration seems grounded in the need or want to participate. If you don't see a need for participation then there is no need to acquire, practice, or do whatever needs to be done to become a participant within the "comunity of practice."
This makes me wander is there such a thing as online literacy or is it simply literacy within certain domains, e.g a facebook literacy or social networking literacy, mobile literacy, email literacy? Adopting Barton's approach to "literacy" would encompass literacy within the online domain without possibly limiting the view of literacy to the technology "online" which can change like "print."
Barton bounds his definition of literacy within "print" which presents some challenges when reviewing various text based literacies which can not be physically printed yet they can be preserved and later printed. Is the ability to Print enough for Barton's definition of literacy to extend to the domain of online?
The use of online literacy is something that I'm going to have to spend some time with and hopefully have more answers or questions following the reading for tonight and the subsequent lecture.
A debate then ensued regarding the age limits or rather the participation age limits of each social networking site. One guest a facebook Diva then instrcuted the guests on the ways to use Facebook to accomplish "adult networking" based on "knowledge of how the site works." She told the "anti-social networking Guest" all of the ins and outs of using facebook, cautioning against the use of other social networking sites, mainly myspace, which she countered was indeed for little kids an adult predators.
The discussion led me to think of the various online literacies and the communites of practice (Lave and Wenger) where participants gain the skills and receive the tools to become more integrated into the community. This integration within the community is based upon an interest in achieving full or some sort of participation within the community.
Online Literacy based on this obsveration seems grounded in the need or want to participate. If you don't see a need for participation then there is no need to acquire, practice, or do whatever needs to be done to become a participant within the "comunity of practice."
This makes me wander is there such a thing as online literacy or is it simply literacy within certain domains, e.g a facebook literacy or social networking literacy, mobile literacy, email literacy? Adopting Barton's approach to "literacy" would encompass literacy within the online domain without possibly limiting the view of literacy to the technology "online" which can change like "print."
Barton bounds his definition of literacy within "print" which presents some challenges when reviewing various text based literacies which can not be physically printed yet they can be preserved and later printed. Is the ability to Print enough for Barton's definition of literacy to extend to the domain of online?
The use of online literacy is something that I'm going to have to spend some time with and hopefully have more answers or questions following the reading for tonight and the subsequent lecture.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Who says you're too young to do that?
So in the fall of 2007 the NY Times wrote a story "For Toddlers, Toy of Choice Is Tech Device."
The article included the following:
"Wiring toys for a young audience is worrying some children’s advocates and pediatricians. The American Academy of Pediatrics advises against screen time for children ages 2 and younger, and it recommends no more than one to two hours a day of quality programming on televisions or computers for older children.
Donald L. Shifrin, a pediatrician based in Seattle and the spokesman for the academy, said tech toys cannot replace imaginative play, where children create rich narratives and interact with peers or parents.
“Are we creating media use as a default for play?” Dr. Shifrin asked. “When kids want to play, will they ask, ‘Where’s the screen?’ ”
Not so ironically last week Leap Frog Unveiled Baby Blackberry for Tots
"The Text & Learn was unveiled at the U.K. Toy Fair this week and isn't supposed to be announced in the U.S. until next week, but we do know it will be available this summer and will cost $25."
This brings more things to mind than I have time to mention here. In 2007 Pediatricians cautioned against "screen time" for children 2 and younger and two years later a device is launched for those 2 and under. Now I am not on either side of the debate as my interest lie in letting the data speak for itself, in terms of actually observing young people with the device(s).
It just seems ironic that there was all of this talk about the potential of harm to children 2 and over in using these devices and then they go and create one for children even younger. I have not found, hence my summer research, any data that actually observes "toddler" device use in a non-controlled setting. Pediatricians have definite opinions on both sides of the argument but many of those same pediatricians also sit on both sides of the vaccination divide/debate, so their opinions have some credibility issues.
This validates my research (well at least I hope it does) providing me even more motivation to craft and conduct a study which looks into many of the questions which arise out of the creation, marketing and ultimate use of these devices by anyone, let alone toddlers.
The article included the following:
"Wiring toys for a young audience is worrying some children’s advocates and pediatricians. The American Academy of Pediatrics advises against screen time for children ages 2 and younger, and it recommends no more than one to two hours a day of quality programming on televisions or computers for older children.
Donald L. Shifrin, a pediatrician based in Seattle and the spokesman for the academy, said tech toys cannot replace imaginative play, where children create rich narratives and interact with peers or parents.
“Are we creating media use as a default for play?” Dr. Shifrin asked. “When kids want to play, will they ask, ‘Where’s the screen?’ ”
Not so ironically last week Leap Frog Unveiled Baby Blackberry for Tots
"The Text & Learn was unveiled at the U.K. Toy Fair this week and isn't supposed to be announced in the U.S. until next week, but we do know it will be available this summer and will cost $25."
This brings more things to mind than I have time to mention here. In 2007 Pediatricians cautioned against "screen time" for children 2 and younger and two years later a device is launched for those 2 and under. Now I am not on either side of the debate as my interest lie in letting the data speak for itself, in terms of actually observing young people with the device(s).
It just seems ironic that there was all of this talk about the potential of harm to children 2 and over in using these devices and then they go and create one for children even younger. I have not found, hence my summer research, any data that actually observes "toddler" device use in a non-controlled setting. Pediatricians have definite opinions on both sides of the argument but many of those same pediatricians also sit on both sides of the vaccination divide/debate, so their opinions have some credibility issues.
This validates my research (well at least I hope it does) providing me even more motivation to craft and conduct a study which looks into many of the questions which arise out of the creation, marketing and ultimate use of these devices by anyone, let alone toddlers.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Cyberethnography Syllabi
http://laurarobinson.org/syllabi/cyberethno.pdf
Professor Laura Robinson's Cyberethnography Syllabus. There is no date on the actual syllabus but it appears somewhat dated
http://www.openanthropology.org/ANTH498/blogs.htm
Professor Max Forte's Syllabus for a course he is teaching now! The reading list is great and includes many hyperlinks to the actual articles. If you are not a student you may have difficulty retrieving some of the articles mentioned.
Professor Laura Robinson's Cyberethnography Syllabus. There is no date on the actual syllabus but it appears somewhat dated
http://www.openanthropology.org/ANTH498/blogs.htm
Professor Max Forte's Syllabus for a course he is teaching now! The reading list is great and includes many hyperlinks to the actual articles. If you are not a student you may have difficulty retrieving some of the articles mentioned.
Instant Messaging, Literacies and Social identities
Instant Messaging, Literacies and Social identities
CYNTHIA LEWIS University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
BETTINA FABOS Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, USA
http://www.jstor.org.eduproxy.tc-library.org:8080/stable/pdfplus/4151663.pdf
CYNTHIA LEWIS University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
BETTINA FABOS Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, USA
http://www.jstor.org.eduproxy.tc-library.org:8080/stable/pdfplus/4151663.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)