Thesis Idea, Scene 1, Take Two!

So, apparently my idea was too big, which isn't really a problem in the grand scheme of things, but it makes me have less of an inclination to post because I'm pretty much back at post one (what is my research question)?

I need to do more research to make sure that these are really the correct terms I want to use, but I'm interesting in seeing how a classroom functions when infused with elements of critical pedagogy, specifically through allowing many opportunities for peer teaching (students teaching me and each other).

I think that my data is fairly similar as my previous question, with more focus on the student experience through interviews and weekly blog entries. Also, I'm considering introducing a wiki as well so that students can collaborate throughout the semester on their own definition of "Media Literacy Education".

Where I'm at a loss now is how I evaluate the data--I like the idea of a priori schemes of organizing data, and since this new approach focuses less on my own lesson plan creation and more on the student experience, I'm not as worried about manipulating my research to fit my predetermined tools of analysis. I just don't know what those tools of analysis are at this point; perhaps they will emerge during the intensive crash course on critical pedagogy that I plan on designing for myself after our theory midterm is over.

Chris Andrews at Salem Hills High

I shared my thesis question and the basic details of my project with Chris Andrews.

Andrews graduated from TEE (the program I am going through to get my teaching certificate) with a minor in Media Arts Studies from the TMA department. He is a first year teacher at Salem Hills High School. Andrews teaches News Broadcasting, Digital Photography, Beginning Media, and Video Production (the class in which Andrews recommends I enact my thesis project).

Andrews is on board. He’s excited about the project being in his classroom and is willing to participate. We are in the process of coordinating our schedules for Fall 2010.

One concern is that Andrews is on a one year contract. He has been verbally pledged a position for next year, but he won’t know for sure until the middle of April. Once that is confirmed:

I (with Andrews) will teach a unit of storytelling and each student will write a story.

The students will then make a video telling their story.

The emphasis will be on returning to source material and using the equipment to tell and enhance their story.

If Andrew and I’s schedule isn’t a factor, when would you recommend enacting this project?

The later in the year it is done, the more exposure the students will have had to the equipment and technology. How much of a factor to my thesis do you see that as?

How short should the stories be?

Will having each student make a video be too big? What is a possible alternative?

My Research Has Proven...

...that complete lack of inspiration and total frustration are a direct result of lack of sleep and too many things on one's plate at a time.

I think I'm at least a bit better now. I hope.

So, obviously, Thursday wasn't quite a productive experience for me. It was just frustrating, and I know that 99.9% of that was due to my fatigue. I have NO idea what exactly my next step it, because I'm not 100% sure where I stand, but here's my chosen (this is really what I do want to do research on) research question:

How do students’ perceptions of South Africans change as new media is infused into a World Literature Curriculum unit centered on African Literature?

What I'm thinking for data now includes some of what was discussed in class on Thursday--some sort of "pre-assessment" of students' perceptions and where those perceptions come from. (Movies, TV, etc.) Most of the other data to be collected I think will be the same as I posted last week.

Now, as for data analysis...I think that there's some "cooking" of data as well as organization of "stuff" that can go on as I go along in my unit, and as I assess my students for typical "grade" types of things. However, I think that the majority of major analysis should probably come after the fact, because of the "before" and "after" comparison.

The other thing that I've been wondering is whether or not I should choose to track specific students rather than the entire class? I could choose students of varying initial perceptions, or even students of various "participation levels" (aka-those who are and aren't typically engaged) to get a varied sample? I don't know--this is mostly a new idea, and I'm thinking out loud.

So...what do you guys think? I could definitely use the feedback this week. Thanks for your help!

Keep it simple...well...you know.

In all of our discussions of action research, I think I have failed to mention that it is possible to make changes in your teaching that are, perhaps, a bit more subtle and study those. For example, Amy and I went to a conference last year where a group of professors added a podcast component to their literacy methods course and studied how students talked about literacy methods as part of the podcasts (this might be the worst study summary ever). The point is, their action research didn't involve changing everything about their course or the way that they taught it.

Just something to consider. You all are doing some good, hard thinking. Keep it up!

I'll begin by echoing everyone else in saying that talking these issues out with everyone else has been extremely helpful to me. I still don't like the phrasing of my research question and I think I can do a better job of explaining the connection between the two ideas in my question, but I feel much, much better about my actual project. I feel like I have a much better grasp of where to start with my literature review, which is a huge relief for me because that's seemed like a fairly daunting task because I could see so many different ways to go with both the project and the research and now I feel like it's a more manageable project.

Problem:
I feel that my students lack critical thinking skills, specifically that they take texts at face value when they are presented to them and that they fail to understand or differentiate value between different historical records and texts. I want to see if having student's go through the process of creating a historical record of their own will change the way they approach other texts. It's interesting, while looking up an article for my paper for Sharon's class I came across an editorial in the New York Times about the Texas State Board of Education revising their Social Studies Core Curriculum. The editorial argues that student's "... deserve to have a curriculum chosen for its educational value, not politics or ideology." I agree with the sentiment of the article but I think the fact that it exists highlights the fact that other teachers also recognize that student's do not critically engage with the texts they encounter in the classroom. The editorial makes the assumption that student's will accept what is presented in their textbooks as history rather than as a version of history.

Research statement:
The purpose of this study is to document high school student’s abilities to critically analyze historical texts while participating in the creation of an oral history project.

Data Collection:
* Student projects
* lesson plans/student handouts
* roundtable interview and observations from student's--I think I'd like to do a pre and post interview and ask student's how they view texts etc, before the project and then ask them the same questions again at the end and see if they perceive any difference in how they interact with historical texts.

Thesis Statement

I think it’s a little late for me.


The purpose of this study is to document the experience of students in a secondary education classroom fulfilling the national standards of a multimedia Career and Technology Education course infused with a focus away from the technology tools and on the meanings and themes created with technology tools. This study will take place during a six week unit on Keynote and Powerpoint in which students will be taught storytelling principles, be assigned to tell a story using a presentation program, and be assessed on their abilities to tell a story using that tool.


Note: I’m using Keynote and Powerpoint as an example. It could be any number of programs or tools (e.i. editing software, photo manipulation software, a camera)

One aspect that I’m interested in is how little time can be spent on the technical aspect of the tool. If the purpose and some possibilities of the tool is explained and demonstrated, and I get them started, will they be able to move forward easily from there? Will they be motivated to learn the specifics of the tool either on their own, through tutorials, in lab, from peers, or from family members?

If the students are being evaluated on their ability to tell the story then they must be proficient enough with the program to manipulate it into generating the themes and the intended meanings they want.

A lot of this is dependent on the students being intrinsically motivated by their story to not half-heartedly fulfill the assignment. If they love the story and want to tell it, then they will make the technology work for them instead of fitting the story into the very basics of the tool.


I spoke with Brother Shumway (a Technology and Engineering Education professor and a member of my thesis committee) and he recommended I look at the standards for courses in the theatre department because they may have standards for storytelling and it may give more validity to my project to use standards that already exist as tried and trusted.

He also recommended that I observe Chris Andrews to see how he teaches his technology classes and to see to what extent what I’m suggesting is already happening.

My triadic research question (I'd rate it as B major...)

I, like Timbre, am grateful for our discussion on Thursday. What I wanted to say then but didn't is that I'm not really worried about looking stupid in front of you all as we hash out our research questions, I'm worried that I'm just actually stupid, and that some day someone will realize this. At any rate, I have a sneaking suspicion that none of us are actually stupid, and that this can become a great forum to get some feedback, so that's cool.

So, without further ado, the research topic:

The purpose of my study is to describe how a media literacy education classroom functions when it includes a focus on theory instruction, pedagogy instruction and practice, and creat

ive production. I am particularly interested in seeing if this can function as a viable framework for implementing situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and transformation of knowledge as mentioned in Multiliteracies (Cope and Kalantzis).

I tacked on that last bit, which is maybe fraught with all sorts of loaded language, but I want to include that somehow in the research question because I plan on using those four pedagogies as evaluative tools for my study. How can this triadic (a term I've decided to adopt in place of "triangulated", because it doesn't seem to have any specific research related definitions, but it

does have a musical definition relating to chords and such, which seems appropriate (parts adding up to a whole...)) focus function as each of these important pedagogies?

Data to collect:

• My own field notes (written out directly after teaching each time) describing my own impressions of what's happening in the classroom.
• Student interviews (due to time restrictions, these will most likely be written reflections, but I'm not opposed to making time for some group interviews).
• Student work (documentaries, blog posts, presentations, lesson plans, etc.)
• Video recordings of class time.
• My own lesson plans

And, because Timbre did, here's a comic I like:

Oh the Data, the Data

First of all, let me just say a HUGE "Thank You" to everyone for last night's discussion. I left and I felt lighter than I have in quite a while...I really was having such a hard time with my research question and was terrified of the overwhelming task of implementing research into all of my classes over the course of an entire semester. Yeah, I really thought that, and so learning that data collection will take place in one of my classes over the course of one unit? RELIEF. (Don't get me wrong, I'm still very well aware of the fact that this is not going to be easy, but I can just breathe a little easier now.)

Also, I really don't think I would have been able to solidify my research question into something so "workable" without listening to our discussion and then adding your input. I can actually begin to see how this will be able to work itself into my classroom without having to revamp my entire life--which I was planning on doing.

So--THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!

Now, as for a response to last night's discussion of data, I kind of feel like we did this at the end of class, so I'll just recap here. Let me know if I need to include anything else. :-)

RESEARCH QUESTION:
"What is the nature of student perceptions of (insert culture here based on unit chosen) as new media is infused into a World Literature Curriculum unit centered on (insert country/continent here based on unit chosen) literature?

PURPOSE STATEMENT:
"The purpose of this study is to examine the nature of student perceptions of (insert culture here based on unit chosen) as new media is infused into a World Literature Curriculum unit centered on (insert country/continent here based on unit chosen) literature."

PEOPLE INVOLVED:
* Teacher-Ms. Newby
* Students-Particular Class (A1, B1, etc.)
* The "Other" as introduced by the new media

PLACES TO COLLECT DATA:
* Classroom
* Computer Lab
* Home
* Internet/"Blogosphere"

POSSIBLE DATA TO COLLECT:
* Observations and Notes
* Lesson Plans
* Interviews
* Audio Recordings/Conversation or Instant Message transcripts
* Surveys
* Student work

Storytelling

No matter what level or even subject I teach, I always want to teach the principles of storytelling. Storytelling has been a big part of my education and I have some opportunities to conduct an action research project in this area.

Jeff Parkin is the chair of my committee. I have been his TA for Screenwriting 241 for four semesters. I have a great opportunity to work within the classroom to enact an AR project.

Brother Parkin has often mentioned the difficulties students have with structure. This is the subject I am most interested in and accomplishing an AR project in this field will increase my
ability to teach storytelling.

A possible project would be to analyze previous scripts that come out of the class to see what aspects of structure students don't seem to understand, and I can interview former students to see what was most and least helpful. I will then create new assignments and restructure the syllabus and schedule for the class to put an emphasis on the structure of the story. I will only teach a handful of the lessons, but I will grade and give notes on every assignment, as well as meet with the students to help them one on one.

I also thought it may be interesting to go through the process of creating my own class that will prepare a storytelling troop for Timpanogos Storytelling Festival.

Oh Brother, What is my Project?

So, I'm a teacher. Action research is perfect, right? However, while I'm SO glad that we're currently in the "visioning" stage of this thing, I think I may need glasses.

Here's what I know:
* I want this process to inform and improve my practice.
* I want the research to have a positive impact on my students (or at least not DETRACT from my normal standard of teaching.)
* I want my students to become more globally connected/open-minded/knowledgeable, hopefully opening the doors for an appreciation of literature created within other cultures.
* I will have 5 sections of World Literature in which to do this project--2 Honors classes and 3 Regular.

So...here are the "working" research questions I have developed. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other:

1-"How does the use of new media affect student connection to cultures outside of the U.S.?"

2-"How can our knowledge of traditional literacies help shape our comprehension and development of media literacy?"

I think that the second is interesting, though probably being researched all over the place, and the first one is obviously more tied to the list above. I also think that the first may be a bit more "action research-y" because I develop my own curriculum around the question whereas the second seems to be a bit more difficult to "implement" within the classroom.

So, with regards to the first, I think that I'll need some way to assess "global connection" before and after the project. There's a "test" out there that could possibly be helpful for this (the Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale, but we'll have to see.

I've also thought about how to involve an analysis of how various cultures are treated within academic circles as well as in popular media as opposed to within outer new media forms, but this may make things a bit more complicated. And then there's the big question, "How do I get the kids to care about the new media element in order to even 'test' for personal connection?" It all sounds a bit nebulous to me. Any thoughts?

Planning Action Research

So, I've been revamping some of my backup plans. Here they are.

Action research is about my personal practice in my own classroom. I'm interested in changing up the production side of the class to incorporate more (smaller) documentary projects that make an attempt to tie into the critical studies portion a bit better. For example, when talking about media literacy principles relating to access, analysis, evaluation, and creation, I want them to make a media-biography that explores their own personal relationship with media. I'm interested in them exploring principles of identity in a doc project, and sense of place, and all those wonderful things that we talk about on Mondays that don't always seem to manifest themselves in their actual documentary projects. I'm interested in evaluating success in the project based on the SOTC principles we've been talking about from Multiliteracies.

If possible (obviously I will do this anyway, but I don't know if it would be possible for my thesis), I would then track how (if?) implementing these changes in TMA 458 affects Hands on a Camera instruction at all, because it's in Hands on a Camera that I find an even bigger disconnect between lessons about media literacy principles and lessons about documentary (though clearly the very process of creating a documentary is a media literacy experience, I think that the two could be even more significantly connected).

I also want to experiment with incorporating more peer to peer learning experiences, and seeing if that changes the experience as well, but it might be too many changes to implement in one semester.

Here's where I'm running into some challenges: I think that all these changes are good, and will provide me a lot to think about, but what is my concrete research question? I started with, "What is the experience of a TMA 458 student when media literacy principles and documentary storytelling are more integrated in this course?", but is that too vague?

School as a Site for Identity Formation

As I was reading this week's reading (in the MUL book), I just kept thinking about something one of the presenters in the FutureLab session at the conference said:
"What sort of curriculum can we make for the kind of people we want to make for the kind of future we want to make?" In other words, we need to stop thinking about curriculum first (maybe we don't think about curriculum first), and start thinking first about the kind of society we want, the kind of people that we need to have in that society, and then work on the kinds of curriculum that make those kinds of people.

As mentioned in the article, we value people who are multi-layered, we seem to value the diverse workplace, and civic pluralism seems to be the model for the future (I won't go on a rant about how our country is failing in this regard here...), and we need to work on building a curriculum that allows for that sort of identity formation. School is a key place of identify formation, perhaps even as influential as the home because it is at school that students begin to figure out how their private identities operate in a public space; it is in school that students learn to navigate a world that they have little control over, how to act like themselves while working toward goals they may not have chosen. Particularly for young people who are not involved in many other social activities, school is the one of the first and main sites of socialization. So, if we want children to be socialized in an environment that creates multi-layered, multi-modal people, we need to create an environment (not just a curriculum) that allows for this type of identity formation.

I tend to get annoyed when articles make this kind of a call to action without offering some sort of possible solution for how we get there, so I appreciated that Cope and Kalantzis didn't just stop here with a call to action: the last few pages (and, really, the entire book...) function as a way to say, "THIS IS HOW WE CREATE THESE SORTS OF LEARNERS!" I've appreciated not having to read all of this book, but I almost feel like after this class is over I would like to read it from start to finish because I feel like I'm having a bit of a non-linear experience with it, but nevertheless I think that the ideas we've had around available designs and SOCT (which is the acronym I think we should all adopt) all work to help us create the kinds of students we want to create. These goals seem lofty, but it's entirely possible to tweak our framework just a bit to help students become the kinds of people they need to be.

How many words is this supposed to be? 451, right?

Media Resopnse 5

At the conference in San Diego, I saw watched a presentation being done with a Prezi and was impressed, so I decided to check it out. This is the one I used for my Theory presentation.

Stephen Prince on Prezi

I'm not a powerpoint fan. I hate being stuck in a linear path. No matter how the presentation was going or where the discussion was leading, the next slide was predetermined. My first experience with Prezi was great. It has the benefit of holding gathered clips, images, and information into a single presentation, but with the flexibility of an actual classroom setting. Similar to the Mind Meister, this is all held online, works as a storage device, and can be shared with anyone.

I created a very simple presentation and it didn't take too long to get used to the Prezi canvas, so I look forward to trying it again.

Apparently posting it to a blog limits the presentation. Sorry about that, but good to know.

Reading Response 6 – Pluralism

I was totally unprepared for this chapter – I did not expect this forum of discussion based on the title, “The Changing Role of Schools.” This chapter was not only interesting to me because it was somewhat cynical in its perspectives – it appeared to me to have a kind of biting wit to it – but because Alisha, my wife, is currently in a multicultural education course at UVU and she absolutely hates it – because it is not pluralism. Of course, she did not know this term previous to my reading the chapter, but we have had discussions on the subject-matter and, as I read, I had to read to her the following passage:

The first is a veneer of tokenism in which it appears diversity is honoured – a spaghetti and polka multiculturalism – but in which nothing really changes in terms of patterns of educational outcomes.

For me, I could not help but think of her because she frequently talks about how all multiculturalism in the classroom is (according to her professor and much of her learning) exactly this idea of “spaghetti and polka multiculturalism” as it pertains to saying, “Hey look, we’ve got some Hispanics in our class…let’s talk about the ‘Day of the Dead’…” This hearkens back to the previously written idea that:

Education as a superficial kind of multiculturalism means that, at a surface level, the system recognizes, even honours, the variability of lifeworlds, but deep down, you’ve still got to make yourself over in the image of those lifeworlds closest to the culture of institutionalized learning and ‘mainstream’ power.

So, what are the implications of this thought? Pluralism, in my perspective, says that every student should be working in a kind of “self-directed study” with a learning plan specific to their lifeworld because we cannot be truly pluralist unless we actually change the form of our educational system to meet the individual, not the other way around. Again, we’re back to the “portfolio person.” Now, I could be misinterpreting this.

The final question of the text talks about “productive relationality” – essentially connecting with, entering in, and learning from (in a productive manner) other lifeworlds not our own. I got interested. They pointed to articles within the text (which is nice) that would inform us regarding the “how” of pluralism – and then I noticed that they all seem to do with learning a different language or collaboration. So, in essence, we have to do some kind of expatriate activity that gets us involved in the language of and collaboration with other lifeworlds…and all this within our schools? I love the idea of pluralism but its implementation kind of exceeds my abilities to perceive – perhaps it is too ideal even for me?

Reading Response 6

I selected Daugherty's "A Changing Role for Technology Teacher Education" to read in conjunction with Kalantzis and Cope's "Changing the Role of Schools." Daugherty's article stems from a study done is 2005. In 2003, the undergraduate program for Technology Teacher Education was changed and a survey was done of current (at the time) Technology teachers with 2 purposes:

1. To what degree do technology teacher educators support the Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology (Content Standards) and the Advancing excellence in technological literacy: Professional development standards?
2. To what degree is substantial curricular and pedagogical change required and/or supported in technology teacher education?

I almost stopped reading the article at this point. Doesn't it seem obvious that the standards would be supported? And who doesn't support pedagogical change in technology teacher education?

These articles both tapped into what I am most excited about and fearful of in the classroom.

Kalantzis and Cope's section of the article entitled "Education and changing patterns of work" is an idea that we've read before from Cope. Postfordism and productive diversity is the new work environment we want students to be prepared to enter upon graduation. The classroom is a work space as is and has the potential to adopt the theories and practices of a modern work atmosphere. I'm excited to be in the TTE field because I feel that I will have a step up on creating this environment of multiskilling and worker empowerment for students. Everything that I am learning in my undergraduate program suggest that I be the teacher described by Kalantzis and Cope. Professor Steve Shumway actually uses this text "Multiliteracies" in his undergraduate classes.

LET'S DO THIS THING!

In Daugherty's article, there is one question that halts my enthusiasm:

"Do you believe that your technology teacher education program offers the 'ideal' kind of curriculum?"

80% said no. Which is fine. No big deal, let's work with the curriculum. That should be done continually anyway, right?

The follow up question was why and the number one reason was "Bureaucracy and lack of support prevent change." That's disturbing. It's also interesting that there was no mention of lack of funding or materials. I don't want to be in a situation where I'm fighting with the Principal. It seems cruel to teach me an ideal and put me in a situation where it can't be met, but I guess that's the real world. Haha, just kidding, I'm not giving up that easily. I love a good fight.

Media Response 5

This movie's been sitting in my netflix queue for a couple of months now but I finally got around to watching it this weekend and I'm so glad I finally found the time to watch because it was great. Netflix labeled it a mockumentary and I suppose in the sense that it is not actually real it is "mock"-umentary but I tend to associate that term with Christopher Guest style over the top antics and while there were a few moments that approached that in this film, as a general rule the film felt extremely real to me. I've definitely had those freak out moments in the classroom, I've said things that 2 seconds later I wished I could take back. I've struggled to get kids to care about subjects that they seem to see as having little to no value in their lives. Most of the teachers in the film clearly cared about being good teachers and it was nice to see a movie in which most of the teachers seemed competent instead of making it all about the lone teacher who actually cares about her students amidst a see of indifference that seems to make up the plot of most Hollywood films about teaching.

Watching the film got me thinking about what draws us into a movie and causes us to identify with the characters. In this film I identified with the characters because they seemed to reflect some of my own experiences and emotions, but does that mean that the film won't appeal to anyone who hasn't taught in a high school? Clearly not, because I've also found myself moved to tears by situations and characters that bear no resemblance to my actual life. I don't really think I have any conclusions here, but I do think it's interesting how some stories capture us because they seem to embody some of our own experiences while others can be completely outside of our realm and yet also hold great appeal and empathy for us as an audience.

Reading Response 6-The Role of Schools

Kalantzis and Cope’s “Changing the Role of Schools” offered up some interesting ideas pertaining to the educational system. I feel like the contextualization was comprehensive regarding education’s past, present, and future relationship to work, civics, and personal life, and it was interesting to see how the authors demonstrated the interconnectness of education and other elements within society.

While I see and understand the first two sections, work and civics, for me, personally, I think that the most interesting section was the one on personal life. I think that this is because it is within this realm that I am able to actually make direct connections to my individual practice. It is here that I see the most potential for realistic change as an individual teacher because it doesn’t take the alteration of an entire society to begin teaching in a way that respects “multilayered identities.”

In the article, the authors point out that, since the end of the Cold War, “Instead of mass consumption, we are experiencing increasing subcultural fragmentation around niche markets…When not through a language of its own, each subculture speaks in its own specialized discourse.” And while these subcultures are becoming more and more defined and exclusive, they are also interacting more and more closely with others, creating a very interesting conglomeration of subcultures in small spaces. Trying not to sound too cliché, I think that we can see this “separated togetherness” very clearly within our public schools. Whether looking at the division of race, socio-economic class, or even just “cliques” within a school, these personal identities greatly affect the learning environment within my classroom.

As a teacher, I can see the value of using education in this “multilayered identity” fashion. Any practitioner will tell you that an open acknowledgement, respect, and access of student individuality can have a significant positive impact on learning. I think, though, that the problem lies in the fact that until there’s a nuclear holocaust and we start it all from scratch, the evolution of the educational system to include these principles is going to very slow-going. Does that make it any less worthwhile? Of course not, and I think that if more teachers would engage with these ideas then the change would be more effective more quickly. As for me…I’m gonna at least try.

Media Post 5--A Week After Valentine's Day...

I went and saw Valentine’s Day. It reminded me a lot of Love Actually in that there are a million different people in it, many of them well-known, and they create a myriad of story lines that intersect and interweave over the course of the film. I thought it worked…many of the critics didn’t. Many of you may not. But I don’t care; I liked the movie.

When I got home from the theater that night, my roommate said that she’d been listening to a film critic on the radio who had dubbed Valentine’s Day “homophobic” because the story’s “gay” storyline culminates in one man caressing the other’s face with a flower, rather than a kiss. As I thought about this, I was struck by the ridiculousness of this statement. Has it really come down to the fact that the only way to demonstrate love within a film is by having the characters make out? Gay, straight, whatever, is there really nothing left to be said for tenderness, or does it have to be full-force sexuality all of the time? If that’s the case, it’s sad.

Now, would I ever use this in my classroom? Probably not, especially not this specific example, what with the general attitude regarding sexuality in the public schools in Utah. However, I can see using bits and pieces of the film to help in the instruction of narrative structure, as each individual storyline is relatively short. Further examination of various story lines could also be use to show interconnectedness of story and how each character within one narrative has his or her own specific life and set of circumstances that come into play, even if you’re not telling this particular character’s story.

So after reading through his comments in the roundtable discussion, does anyone else feel like Marc Prensky and Eisenstein would get along? At least in the sense that they both seem to be pretty firmly convinced of the superiority of their own approach to anything.

I actually found Mr. Prensky's critique of the format of the program really interesting, particularly in light of some of the criticisms raised about the possible detrimental effects of the digital lifestyle. I was really interested in the idea that multitasking has changed the way students write, that they struggle with writing papers that contain a connecting thread, instead they bounce from idea to idea in each paragraph. Mr. Prensky criticized the program for not laying out their arguments in a sort of issue, pro/con and then new issue format. To me, that seems like a much more old school way of organizing an argument, conversely the more loose organizational style the documentary actually used seems to be more in line with the way multitaskers think, jumping from idea to idea and then back and assuming that everyone is following the logical leaps. Of course, I suppose you could also argue that by breaking the issues up into smaller chunks of pro positions, con positions and then you move on you are also creating something that is more in line with the attention span of the multitasking generation. I also found it interesting because it breaks what is clearly a complex issue into a binary of positive and negative. I think that goes against everything we've discussed about multiliteracy and media literacy and the value that it has for students.

Over the course of the last year, I've become increasingly convinced that media and technology and the behaviors that accompany the use of them are neither bad nor good, it merely is. It is our responsibility as educators to find ways to use it in positive ways and to help students to become aware of the ways they interact with media. We should educate them so that they can make informed decisions about their media choices. This fits rather conveniently into our discussion of the necessary elements of multiliteracy education. We must provide students with opportunities to practice and transform knowledge but we need to make sure we are giving them the critical framing and overt instruction, without all four elements the strategy is much weaker.

Reading Response 5--At War with Multitasking

I really enjoyed watching Digital Nation, and I am happy to say that because I had to watch it online but wanted to watch it on my TV, I wasn't doing anything else while I watched it. As I write this response, I am not listening to music (although that's mostly because it's 6:30 in the morning...), and I do not have my email up in another browser. I am single-tasking, which I think is a vocabulary word that needs to be introduced into our society; I think it can be good to multi-task (clearly lots of scholars agree), but if this is the skill that comes innately, then we need to concentrate on learning how to single-task as well. Obviously there are many issues to engage with in this film (many of the things they talk about hit very close to home for me: my first two years of high school I practically lived online; my dad used to fly those predator drones, and was actually one of the engineers who helped figure out how to equip them with missiles (a fact that simultaneously makes me proud and sad)), but in the spirit of single-tasking (and in not writing an 800 word response...), I'm just sticking to this one.

I graduated in 2007, and applied to this program in 2009. At that time, I was anxious about the application because I really felt like I had become stupid in those intervening two years; even though I was teaching a class at BYU in that time, I didn't challenge myself with rigorous reading, I didn't have intellectual conversations at the level that I did as an undergrad. I stopped requiring myself to sit down and read a text, and I definitely never wrote an essay for fun. I started engaging with media WAY more than I did as an undergrad (when I did the media log assignment in a class as an undergraduate, I often talked about films, short stories, or plays that I encountered in other classes because I didn't have TIME to seek out other media forms), but I wasn't engaging with it on the same level. I went for quantity interactions, not quality (although Michel Gondry argues that quantity is better than quality because quality doesn't last...). I became more of a multitasker, and even though it meant that I was doing more, I actually do think it made me less capable of focusing on tasks for an extended period of time.

I think we need to stop asking the question of whether or not we need to be able to multitask; clearly there are times in our lives when this is required of us. I think we do need to honestly look at data that tells us that when we multitask we are less effective at each of the activities we are doing, and decide in which situations we can live with this reality. When I'm checking my email and watching American Idol while making dinner, I don't think that my being slightly distracted has too great of an impact (as long as I don't burn what I'm cooking). The degraded quality of my work in this scenario doesn't have super high stakes. However, when I'm checking my email while trying to understand Stan Brakhage, I have a bit of a problem. We need to help students understand that there are times to multitask and times to single-task, and I think that if we approach them in a way that 1)brings the fact of their multitasking out in the open (instead of ignoring it like I am occasionally inclined to do) and 2)values multitasking as a process, that we could maybe make some sort of headway.

Reading Response 5

Some aspects of Digital Nation hit a little close to home. Listening to the professors talk about the lack of through-lines in student's papers, reminded me of my own writing. I consistently write paragraphs of what I see as pretty great ideas and then (for seemingly inexplicable reasons) move on to the next paragraph with a completely different idea, expecting the professor to either follow my train of thought or accept each paragraph or thought on its own.

I was surprised with the gaming section of the program. I never considered those who play massive online roll playing games as being so connected. We have read many articles documenting the positives of online interactions and socializing, but I never considered the whole reason for getting online and playing the game was the urge to connect with others.

One woman at the Blizzard Entertainment party said something like, "People who never play online games will never understand how close you can get with someone you have never seen." My sarcastic question is "why would you want to?"

It seems a little ridiculous on one hand to be chatting online with someone on the other side of the world, when there are people all around. Like that young Korean boy who wouldn't carry a conversation with his mother, but would rather be on the internet playing a game. So, for this example, if we apply the ideas of the creator of Second Life and solve alienation with more technology, then we need to get his mom on the computer to have dinner with him virtually.

They suggest that the game doesn't isolate you, but it gives you a new way to be intimate. They claim to be rewriting the rules of human interaction. I agree that they are giving you new ways to be interact with other and I am a big fan of that, but unfortunately, these forms of interaction are replacing other forms of connectivity. I love to text, but I'm not going to stop talking to my wife because I think it might be easier to just text her.

The internet becomes frightening when it destroys and replaces life. It is beautiful when it adds to our current, healthy life a new layer of connectivity and social interaction.


we are together on the internet, you're not alone anymore

Media Resopnse 4

ustream.tv

I have been spending a lot of time on ustream.tv recently because I've had multiple people tell me about live streaming videos they watch (Brother Parkin watches the panda habitat at the San Diego Zoo).

The idea of the website didn't appeal to me until I saw this ad:



I watched the Virginia Beach board walk for thirty minutes on ustream.net at 9pm while it was raining. No one walked by.

Reality television gets stronger each season. This is partially because it's a lot cheaper to produce, but also because people are watching. My wife watches The Bachelor, and even though she says this season isn't as good, she still watches it because she enjoys talking with the other teachers at lunch about it. The appeal seems to be the realness of it. We aren't talking about fictional characters or manufactured experiences, but real people with real consequences (feel free to go back and add quotation marks around real if it makes you feel better).

If I Can Dream gives you more control. You can change the camera angles. There is more to talk about with much more access.

I'm interested to talk about this in classes because it almost seems like we are regressing to a greater time. I loved making movies and putting on plays when I was a kid. It was all about storytelling and make-believe. Being given more control and less structure allows my mind to create. While watching the Virginia Beach boardwalk, it was nice to not be told what to think other than look this way.

This American Media Response 4

(in the spirit of full disclosure, some of the things in this post are things I have articulated previously on my personal blog, because that's how much I love the show).

About 2 1/2 years ago, Amy handed me a bunch of iPods with microphones and said something to the effect of, "Let's use these in our media class." I figured we would do some sort of documentary project, but I had no idea what I was doing--I'd never really listened to audio documentaries, and I was just barely starting to fully understand what a podcast was.

So, I figured I'd better do some listening. A lot of listening. And that is where I found what is probably my absolute favorite media text (which makes me hesitant to write about it...): This American Life.

In an episode of The O.C. (which I don't watch), a character references TAL and another character dismissively asks, "Is that that show by those hipster know-it-alls who talk about how fascinating ordinary people are?" Her question gets pretty much to the point of what the show is about--showing how fascinating ordinary people are. This is one of the things that we talk about in our Hands on a Camera project, and I find it to be a deeply charitable notion: ordinary people have stories and are worth listening to.

I clean my house while listening to TAL, because it's a way to fill my house with meaningful voices. It helps me feel less lonely, but also helps me think more about the world. I certainly don't always agree with the people that are sharing their stories and perspectives, but I learn more about people and I find myself articulating viewpoints about important issues that I wouldn't have really taken the time to think about before. This is the thing that I find to be somewhat unique to radio: it helps us cultivate the art of really listening to someone talk (because we have no opportunity to interrupt them, no opportunity to interject our own opinion). Many of my students have a difficult time with radio, and I think it is because they haven't trained their minds to be fully engaged in something without a visual component.

If I'm ever feeling like nothing is happening in my life, sometimes I like to think, "If I were in a TAL episode, what would it be about? What would I say about these experiences? What would someone learn about me just by watching or listening to my routine?" Thinking like this has made me more willing to shovel snow in the winter, more willing to do the laundry, more willing to talk about my religion openly, because I feel like I'm revealing a character. Sometimes it motivates me to do things I really don't want to do because the character that I want to be is not the one who plays video games all the time, but the one whose life is engaged in meaningful service. So, while it's true that this motivation has a bit of a Narcissistic edge to it--I'm pretending my life is actually cool enough to be documented by TAL--it also gets me to do good things. Which is good.

This has gotten unnecessarily long, so I'll end it with this: I think that podcasting has revived radio in a major way (radio on demand), and while I think it is a venue that my students don't always get behind 100%, it's a unique medium in its ability to demand that we learn to listen. I agree with Jenkins et al. that learning to multi-task is good, but I also believe that we still need to have the ability to single-task, and listening to This American Life has helped me to do that.

"Reading" Response 5-Digital Nation

First of all, can I just say that “Digital Nation” surprised me. While I was expecting a technology-heavy exploration of how digital media has incorporated itself into our lives, I really wasn’t expecting the relatively cautious and very two-sided approach to the pros and cons of life in a digital world. I think that oftentimes people choose a “camp” when it comes to innovation and progress, and it’s sometimes hard to remember that most of us are trying to reside in a world that is somewhere in the middle. For me, this recognition first came when Rachel Dretzin expressed her own uncertainty regarding digital media, especially with regards to her own kids. Again, as I was expecting a very blatant “GO TECHNOLOGY” type of presentation, the fact that the producer/director was unsure herself was refreshing.

As I watched “Digital Nation,” there was one specific conversation that stood out to me, probably because it is the same question that I have asked myself as I have interacted with my own students. After showing some of the results of research regarding multi-tasking and how those who think they’re wonderful at it actually aren’t, Douglas Rushkoff talks to Rachel as they are walking down the street. He says, “We need to know if we’re tinkering with something more essential than we realize…Are we changing what it means to be a human being by using all this stuff?”

We talked a little about this in class last week in regards to games and learning—whether gaming culture is, in fact, altering the learning styles of our students, if the beings that are now sitting in our classrooms are fundamentally different due to the games and other technology that they interact with. I, personally, would say that, as people are a sum total of their biology plus their experiences, yes, technology has altered people, which is why Media Literacy Education is, I feel, so important.

As I was looking through the Core Principles in relationship to “Digital Nation,” I think that many of the “areas of uncertainty” within the program could be addressed, or at least smoothed over a bit, by incorporating and institutionalizing the Core Principles. In particular, Core Principle 1—that Media Literacy Education requires active inquiry and critical thinking about media—is HUGE. I know it sounds a bit simplistic, but I think that if we all were a bit more critical (in an analytical, not a negative, way) as teachers, students, parents and children, many of the “issues” that arise with digital media could be resolved or even avoided. For example—the kids who’ve died in Korea during gaming tournaments? I’m of the opinion that THAT could have been avoided with a bit of logical reasoning.

Media Response 4

So, this week we began our marathon training program. Last year, I read 4 Months to a 4 Hour Marathon and we used it as our training guide to prepare for the Ogden Marathon. This year, inspired by listening to the audiobook version of Born to Run, we decided to choose an off road marathon for our big goal. We plan on running in the Timp Trail Marathon. Anticipating that this might be a little more difficult than our previous marathon, I started looking for a training program that was also a little more intense. After reading several reviews of training books on Amazon, we decided to use the FIRST training program. In addition to doing three weekly running workouts, one speed, one tempo, and one long run, I decided to add some core strength training on my own.

Once again I returned to amazon, this time in search of a fitness dvd that I could do to work on improving my core strength. After reading a bunch of different user reviews I opted to buy Jillian Michael's 30 Day Shred. I've never actually seen the Biggest Loser but through pop culture osmosis I've managed to pick up the premise of the show and a little bit about the trainers and I felt like the dvd would be a good fit for me. The dvd arrived yesterday and this morning I got up and completed the first training circuit. My arms are really tired, but I feel good about the workout and I think it's going to help me to be a stronger runner.

What does this all have to do with media literacy and our ongoing discussions? As I was getting ready for work this morning I was pondering all of the various media elements that have gone into my marathon training decisions. I've read a variety of written texts both online and off, I've listened to books about training, I've relied on the expert opinions of strangers via blogs and product reviews, all to prepare myself to do one of the most basic of human activities--running. I don't know that I have anything super profound or original to say about the topic but I do think it's really interesting to look at just how much the way I interact with media has impacted just one small area of my life.

Reading Response 5 - Marc Prensky

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/learning/literacy/do-books-have-a-future.html?play

While I was reviewing the interviews online, this gentleman totally threw me for a loop when he, essentially, said that the written word was all but dead. “You don’t have to read them to take in what’s in a book…The stuff that’s worth reading, that really matters, is very small…There are very few books that you have to have read…Video is the new text.” Initially, I had an emotional response of, “What the heck?!” This is why I’m going to write based around him. I feel compelled to. “Books are not as good as the internet for contemporary learning.” Whoa! “We accelerate; we do that shorter and more intensely…”

Okay, so he’s ALL about intense experience in short spans. “Almost every book I read I wish were shorter…There’s so much that you don’t want in the stuff you read…” He’s okay, however, if you WANT to learn in a larger format, but “you have to discover that for yourself.” He doesn’t believe that we should be forced to learn any more than we need to learn from any book. If we want more, we can get more, otherwise why? Also, there is the idea that guided learning is the first thing, desire is the second. We have things that teachers need us/want us to learn – that can be pinpointed – (not unlike Darl leading us through “Birth of a Nation”) and if we want to visit the full text, we can. Is this necessarily intelligent thinking? I know that Mark Bauerlein doesn’t necessarily believe so, but then, he’s not necessarily part of the pro-digital media realm either. The two camps are very interesting. For the most part, watching these leading experts in the digital media, media literacy fields almost seems to dictate the need to be in one of the two factions: enthusiast or cynic. Henry Jenkins is fascinating because, if you go to his site, he seeks to be hip: “The first thing you are going to discover about me, oh reader of this blog, is that I am prolific as hell. The second is that I am also long-winded as all get out. As someone famous once said, ‘I would have written it shorter, but I didn't have enough time’” (http://henryjenkins.org/aboutme.html). This is his attempt to be part of the crowd that he is advocating by speaking a similar language. James Paul Gee doesn’t put up this kind of pretense, but is nonetheless not unlike Jenkins.

After Mr. Prensky caught my attention, I had to go and look him up online.

http://www.marcprensky.com/experience/default.asp

Okay, Mr. Prensky is a triple Master’s degree: MA in Theatre, MAT in Teaching (from Yale) and a MBA from Harvard. This is not a man who is necessarily illiterate or unintelligent. He also has taught in public education, performed in music and theatre, helped plan television programming and consulted in film investments, been involved in technology research, e-learning programs, and most recently is developing training games for corporations. He has a wide breadth of experience, knowledge, and interests – which would make him necessarily multimodal because of his multiple disciplines – so why would he be advocating that we read less, and engage with smaller bits that are “more important”? Granted, my upbringing is in reading books and I believe in reading thoroughly – cover-to-cover. For some of what he says, this makes sense, but what is Mr. Prensky leaving behind? What is happening if we are being possibly overabundant advocates of the new media that we neglect some of our past heritage of learning? He feels that getting a book is getting information that is 3 years old when we can have an author’s thoughts from 3 days ago quicker through the internet – is that necessarily better?

Media Response 4 - Opening Pandora

I personally discovered (I say personally because I have known about this website for a long time because many at work use it) Pandora this last Friday. For those of you who do not know what Pandora is, this is what they say about themselves: Click Here. In my words, Pandora is a website that allows you to “create” your own radio stations based on your tastes in music (having a great deal of input into the radio station even after it is “created”) and then saving them to an account so you can always reference those stations again. I was hooked; since Friday I already have 13 personal radio stations with varying styles depending upon what I know my usual moods are.

As fun as it is to be able to set up your own radio stations (that have minimal audio commercial interruptions, though there are always ads posted and the ability to buy the songs you have listened to), what is fascinating is the theoretical background behind the website’s creation: “The Music Genome Project.” 8 years of music analysis “uncovered” over 400 distinct “musical characteristics” (a very obvious structuralism perspective). Pandora relies upon trained music analysts (rather than software) to create these differentiations in taxonomy and connecting that musicological information to songs and artists.

Pedagogically, this raises for me some interesting ideas regarding literacies. One thing is this is audio literacy, and audio literacy that is looking at the codes involved in different genres of music from (as far as I can tell) a purely auditory experience. Another thing is we can use this as a microcosmic way of studying multimodal literacy: audio, visual, informational, and digital. Therefore, a discussion of how “The Music Genome Project” was possibly orchestrated and what standards were developed to “measure” music would be enlightening for a young group thinking about their own personal tastes of music and how they would describe their auditory experiences. Also, the microcosm of this one website and its marriage of modes could be broken down on so many levels: What does the site’s very existence say about us as individuals? What are the assumptions that are made regarding us as consumers? What part does the information about artists and songs play in our understanding of the media presented?

Media Response 4

So, this week, in response to our reading, I decided to take a trip down memory lane and go back to an age when I did play video games. Last Sunday, I found an online version of Oregon Trail and started playing it. I was immediately transported back to third grade as I chose the names for my characters, my occupation, and the date I planned on leaving Independence, Missouri. My initial trip across the plains that day went well, until I was about three landmarks away from the finish, when my computer froze and my game ended. Playing it later in the week, Boyfriend and I managed to kill off our entire “family”—he was the only one who made it to the end because we all starved to death or drowned.


The thing that I thought was interesting about this process was to look at it now from a teacher’s perspective. As I mentioned playing this game to someone (I can’t remember who—it could have been one of you, but I’m thinking that maybe it was my student teacher), she said that she remembers competing with her friends, trying to see who could kill off his/her entire party the fastest. Now, I’m not sure, but I’d assume that WASN’T the educational objective of her teacher at the time, and I wonder what students actually learned from these days in the computer lab. I know that I, personally, remember thinking that it was “cool” and “fun,” especially because back then, computer games were very new.


I also had the chance to play the original Mario Brothers game this past week. I used to LOVE Mario Brothers 3, and as I played it was amazing to me how much my hours in front of the game as a kid are stored in my subconscious. I sat there and it was as if my hands and my head were coordinating to do things and go places in the game that I didn’t consciously know existed. It was really weird, having my subconscious control my actions. As I thought about this, I started pondering the implications if we could find a way to harness this aspect of gaming, the “training” of the subconscious, and apply it to learning. What would happen if we could use gaming to subversively “program” knowledge into students? Not a very ethical thought, I know, but still an interesting one.

reading response 4

Ito says that educators, no matter their stance, have "the tendency to fetishize technology as a force with its own internal logic standing outside of history, society, and culture. The problem with both of these stances is that they fail to recognize that technologies are in fact embodiments, stabilizations, and concretizations of existing social structure and cultural meanings."

Last year I subbed for a teacher for a week and I would go with the student to the computer lab for type of keyboarding class. After the students would finish the assignment for the day, there was a list of websites they could go to and play games. I remember asking the teacher of the lab about the websites and what sorts of games were there. She didn't know, but ensured me that there were appropriate.

I have thought of that experience since and wonder, "appropriate for what?" That would be like watching any film that's PG for no reason other than the fact that you are allowed to. Why aren't we talking about the media or using it in any productive way.

One of the more surprising sections for me was in the Squire article when he had the exchange between the two young people having a very legitimate conversation about Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.

"Gamer 1: Your main character just got out of jail, a black dude in LA joining back up with a
gang. All the gang members the skinny guy and the fat guy smoking bowls and passing shit.
It’s so stereotypical.

Gamer 2: Dude all the other GTAs are stereotypical. They’re about Italian Americans and
stuff. I heard that Vice City had one line that was really controversial. Kill all the Haitians. He
was being like “genocide.” It wasn’t bullshit that they threw in there. There was controversy
between those two groups in New York. When I played Vice City, it was like being in the
movie Scarface. Same movie, same city. They are all the same ones in Scarface. You pretty
much live in the same house it’s all down to the detail. When I played SA, the first movie I
thought of was Menace to Society. All their names are all brought from those characters. "

This is an honest conversation about racial representations. The "gamers" are also able to relate the game to other forms on media and history. They are not falling into the same pitfalls of not contextualizing that Ito warns of.

I am very interested in finding a game and attempting to use it in a positive way with the students. I love being able to take media they know (films, TV shows, etc. and now games) and put it into the framing of the classroom.

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/cliff-kuang/design-innovation/scientific-study-shows-skilled-gamers-have-bigger-brains-smaller-?partner=homepage_newsletter

Reading Response 4

I admit this is more a post in preparation for my lesson than anything else.

I have talked at work about creating a “video game culture” as a strategy for developing skills and advocating a specific kind of work atmosphere built on competition and teamwork. We sat down one day, as a management team, and played several popular video games that specific groups were familiar with (addicted to) and then broke them down to find their core (very semiotic, I might add – and it has to be said that I am a bit of an eccentric but utilitarian manager). Below (perhaps for your personal interest, if you have any) is what they came up with that would be necessary to produce a “video game culture”:

• Total Everything
• Running Total of All Stats
• Ranks
• Overall
• Per Game
• Gamer Name/Avatar
• Choose Level/Style
• Experience Points
• Individual/Team Stats – always available
• Character Choice
• Perks to Earn
• Multiple Objectives in 1 Game
• In-Depth Stats – End of Game Report
• Set Weapons/Techniques
• Tracking of Use
• Time Count
• Different Game Types
• Training
• Boosts
• Replay (all or last event)
• Team/Individual Challenge
• Audio Recognition

Now, these are “aspects” of ‘competitive play’ games (first person shooters or racing games) but what they address are the necessary components of what make a game both addictive and engaging for my management team. This, to me, is not unlike Squire’s article where he tries to decipher the nature of open-ended video games and then tries to link it to educational purposes. For this blog, I’m interested in putting out there some things that he says which are of interest or concern to me:

“We need rigorous research into what players do with games (particularly those that don’t claim explicit status as educational), and a better understanding of the thinking that is involved in playing them” (167). This is not unlike what my management team and I are trying to do: figure out what makes the best games work and then tie it into a framework that meets the needs of our particular learning context.

He later asks the question that I believe is the crux of the article: “How to create spaces that ultimately exist for people to do interesting things?” After which, he says, “Good games are vehicles for player expression” and then wraps up the thought with a very poignant thought: “A potential paradox arises as educators seek to reconcile game players’ multiple ways of and reasons for being engaged in games, with the divergent learning outcomes that are likely to occur as a result” (178). In other words, how do we get learners to like doing it, be innovative in the process, and learn exactly what they need from the experience in order to fulfill core curriculum (or get results)?

Gaming, to me, is a strategy that can do a lot but it will take even more than that to design it appropriate for successful learning and skills acquisition that makes student and the state happy.

Media Response 3

Friday was our last day at Sundance and it featured the only narrative film we watched all week. Bilal's Stand, was a great coming of age story about an African-American teenager growing up in Detroit and his struggle to decide between going to college or staying in Detroit to help his family. I really liked the film for several reasons.

One, I liked that it was an honest story that felt realistic and authentic to the community while still being a film I could comfortably watch with my students. I'm not opposed to realism in language or sexuality but it's nice to see a film that doesn't rely on cheap exploitation for emotional resonance. Two, I think the story itself was very relevant to the particular student population that I work with. I've had many students who struggle between balancing school and taking care of their own interests while still helping out their families through working, tending younger children, etc. Three, I loved the fact that at the end of the film we learned that the story was very autobiographical and that in fact many of the actors in the film were playing themselves and that the director had studied film in college and then went on to start a non-profit organization that works to teach inner city kids about film making and that Bilal's Stand was their first completed film. I've seen how proud my students are after completing a 3-5 minute documentary film. They're so excited for the opportunity to show the movie to their peers and family on a big screen, I can't imagine how much that excitement would be amplified if the project they had worked together to create had been accepted into the Sundance Film Festival.

Just to throw some theory in here, I will also say that I really admired the project because I think it was a perfect mixture of situated practice, overt instruction, critical framing, and transforming knowledge.

On a more frivolous note, I find Lady Gaga's fans fascinating. Do you think this qualifies as a low-tech way to transform information?

Portrayal vs. Advocacy in Arrested Development et al.

I'm having a hard time with these viewing/using responses, because I feel like I need to contribute something meaningful to the conversation, and I often feel like my regular media consumption isn't quite up to par (don't worry media--it's not you, it's me) so I usually try to find something that offers me the opportunity to sound like a smart consumer rather than what I am, which is usually lazy.

But this week, I didn't have an opportunity to seek out anything new or different or thought-provoking. It was actually a pretty dry week for media because we spent a lot of time hanging out with my missionary brother (which is the first time in a LONG time when I've been to my parents' house and the television wasn't on the ENTIRE time. I guess that could be a blog in and of itself), so I've decided to talk about the shows that I love and my mother hates, and how I can justify liking them (wow, that was a lot of setup, probably not for an adequate payoff).

My mom and sister refuse to watch anything with the rating of PG-13 or TV14. One time when I visited her, my mom asked how I could stand to watch all those "yucky" shows. My first response is, "I don't watch ALL those yucky shows, just the comedies." That's not really the response she wanted; essentially, what she wants me to ask myself is this: how can I support and consume media that often portrays characters with values that are not my own? How can I root for Jim and Pam's love story (which is actually fairly boring now...), how can I laugh at Barney Stinson's well-dressed womanizing ways, and reconcile them with my own personal belief of chastity?

When we talk about Naturalism in TMA 114, we talk about the difference between portrayal vs. advocacy, meaning that just because someone portrays a certain kind of behavior doesn't mean that they adopt it. I think that this is the main reason that I could ever justify watching and loving a show like Arrested Development. Yes, the show is populated with terrible people, but we always know that they are terrible! I don't think that any (intelligent) viewer thinks for a minute, "Gee, I think it would be a good idea to do business with Saddam Hussein," or even, "Man, it seems completely justified to have an affair as long as it's with my husband's identical twin brother who has more hair..." While these characters are desperately trying to make their way through their various legal, mental, and physical issues, we are seldom led to believe that their actions are moral or even admirable. We come to love the characters despite these flaws (which does seem like something we should take into the real world), and we come to realize that it is fully possible to love someone and still not agree with their life choices.

I think this (along with responsible resistance) is a skill/idea that all of our students need to be aware of. Just because someone puts something in a story doesn't mean they think it's a good idea (I don't really think that J.D. Salinger thought it was a good idea for a teenager to hire a prostitute...), and just because we encounter something in a piece of media doesn't mean that we need to adopt it in our own life. We can take what we like, reject what we don't, and recognize that things that are "virtuous, lovely, of good report, or praiseworthy" are found all around us.

Media Response 3 - Super Why!

Super Why! Why? Well, because the subject is alphabet and reading. Granted, this site is not one that our secondary education students or college age students would ever find themselves going to, but this site also has a great deal to offer in its structure, as does the television show which it is drawing from.

http://pbskids.org/superwhy/

I spent the morning last weekend watching this show and then following the show onto the website. The show is an interesting forum for learning. Amongst all the “educational” television that the FCC has mandated television stations show for their children’s television, this one is particularly of interest to me. I watched other things like Curious George, Clifford the Big Red Dog, and Sid the Science Kid (wow he’s spastic), but I was impressed by one thing in particular in Super Why!

Here is the premise: Wyatt (aka Super Why) is a “regular” kid who can go into Storybook Village and meets with his friends (the Super Readers), characters generally drawn from fairytales: Princess Pea (aka Princess Presto), Little Red Riding Hood (aka Wonder Red), and Pig (aka Alpha Pig; I assume he’s one of the Three Little Pigs). They all have different “literacy” powers: to read, to spell, words and the alphabet. Pretty cheesy to us adults, but I have now watched toddlers eat it up.

What happens in every episode is a minor altercation in Storybook Village: someone won’t share, someone hurt someone else’s feelings, or a character won’t listen to another character when they rudely knock down their building blocks. The Super Readers “transform” after they “state their problem” – they have a question to answer. To answer the question, they go into a book to find the answer to that question. After a series of events that specifically engages skills such as knowing your alphabet or rhyming words, the most impressive part of the show occurs: they change the story they are in to develop a new story in an effort to change the outcome of the previous problem outside of the story.

Of note, this television show follows those four aspects of pedagogy we have earlier described in class. My favorite part is that transforming knowledge at the end. Doing the same thing in our classroom, as discussed in class, is a very difficult and time consuming thing, but I would recommend watching this show to see how it plays out in its simplicity – and maybe use in our classroom won’t seem as daunting.

Reading Response 4-Games and Learning

A couple of years ago, I had to share my classroom with one of our “roving” teachers, a World History teacher. It was the first time I had had the experience to truly sit back and observe someone else’s pedagogical practice, and it was rather enlightening to me. As I observed this particular teacher (who was a good one, by the way—not the type to sit students in front of a worksheet and then plan football pays all hour) it was interesting to see how he incorporated media into his classroom, particularly the use of video games. Much like the Civilization games described by Squire, this teacher used things such as Axis and Allies and another Roman Empire game, which I can’t think of the name for, in his instruction. At the time, I honestly thought that this was simply a way for Mr. Teacher to get up and play video games in front of his class. (He was the kind who wouldn’t hesitate to tell his students that he’s been up until 4 that morning playing Halo—NOT a good thing in my book, and I tend to be judgmental, so you can see how I could possibly make this kind of assumption.) After reading the articles for this week, I still have my doubts as to the effectiveness of this kind of teaching strategy; however, my hesitations may be for different reasons now.

Okay, as you have probably already deduced, I am not a particular fan of the video game. I think that certain games can be fun (original Nintendo Mario Brothers, Dance Dance Revolution, Rock Band, the Wii Sports games, and a few others) but I tend to lean toward the “worthless waste of time” camp, which again, I know is horribly judgmental and rude. Perhaps it’s because I have seen the negative effects—lack of ambition in anything else, complete lack of social skills, neglected spouses, ruined marriages etc.—that come from addiction to the fake worlds inside of the screen. YET, as I read for this week, I feel that some of what is being discussed as possibility for learning with video games is innovative and hopeful. I think that there truly are possibilities out there, but I think that, as educators, we need to make sure of one thing—that these types of teaching strategies are facilitating learning and aren’t becoming a “filler activity.”

As I read Ito, I was thrown back to elementary school and the days of Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? and Oregon Trail. I remember going to the computer lab, sitting in front of big, clunky monitors, and playing them for hours at a time. I loved it! And yet, now, as an educator, I have to ask, “What was the point?” At least with the spelling games and the word processing car races, I can see the connection to the curriculum. Okay, so Carmen Sandiego does geography, but Oregon Trail? Really? I think I found this same weakness in the discussion of Grand Theft Auto and Squire’s argument for the potential of open-ended sandbox games. Yes, it’s good to have fun, and yes, it’s good to have students engaged because they’re having fun. However, without an objective you may as well turn on Halo, or better yet, Dance Dance Revolution, at least then they’d be getting some exercise.

Media Response 3-I Heart Regina

As you are all (except maybe Amy) aware, I LOVE Regina Spektor's “Fidelity” music video. Then, the other week, as I was reading a little about her (in class as we watched her video-I picked up the habit from Amberly, blame her), I was made aware of how often she uses literary allusion in her lyrics. Now, I’m a self-professed “lyrics girl”—if I think the words are cool, it doesn’t matter how terrible the music is, or how awful the person who sings them appears to be; I will like the song, the album, the artist. (This is probably the reason for my unexplainable love of John Mayer—his lyrics spoke to me at a time when I needed them—as corny as it sounds, it’s true.) Regina is another one who has caught me here. I enjoy her use of and play with words, themes, and allusion. Add to that the fact that her music video is rockin’, and she’s got me. I own her music, and one of the first reasons (among many) that I fell in love with (500) Days of Summer is her appearance on the soundtrack.

That being said, I realized the other day that I know absolutely nothing about any of her other music videos. Do any of the others come close to touching “Fidelity”? In my quest to answer this question, or at least become more familiar with her video work, I decided to Spektor-fy myself this week and use my media analysis time to check out some of her other work. What I found was interesting…

First of all, the red earrings that appear once her locket drops and color is introduced in “Fidelity” appear again and again in her videos. Perhaps it’s just because she likes them, but I would venture to say that it’s probably more than that. Often they are highlighted in hints of color, even when the rest of the scene is black and white; perhaps it’s a connection to who she is, herself, as a person?

The second thing is that all of the videos I looked at were truly perfect for analysis. It is evident that Spektor herself, or maybe it’s just her directors, though I think that it’s probably more her, as an artist, trying to present various messages through the videos as well as the words. If nothing else, however, they’re visually stimulating and thought provoking without being “too much” or “stupid.” I think all of these I’ve placed below are excellent choices when looking at the codes of music videos, and I truly would use any of them in a lesson on making meaning from textual analysis. Using “Sampson” in teaching allusion would also be effective, though in this case the lyrics may be a more obvious choice of focus.

“Samson”

Especially when looked at in relationship to the story of Samson and Delilah, looking at this video, one may get the message that sometimes things aren’t what they initially seem to be, or perhaps that things evolve and change over time and with perceptions?

“Us”

This one I think is interesting because of the stop-action animation effect created throughout and the used of the paper medium as well. I think that it’d be really interesting to see what my students would make of this music video in relationship to the lyrics of the song.

“Better”

I LOVE how it initially looks like there are many copies of the same person, yet upon closer observation it’s obvious that there are different faces. Through the various influences presented, are these women convinced that they need to be the same in order to be happy or accepted? In the end there’s an allusion to the idea of “marching to a different drummer,” which I think is probably Spektor’s point—be yourself.