From the standpoint of technical writing, I feel like this class was a living example of an idea I’d cultivated in previous classes, which is that practice is like tossing someone a fish, but theory is like teaching someone how to fish. Obviously, both are important in the job market–English majors are supposed to be famous for their ability to pick up skills on the fly, and I think it’s all the theory that gets thrown at us that makes us that way; but prospective employers want to see solid skills on resumes, and this class has given us both.

Having software demos peer-taught was an excellent idea, and I think that should continue. Honestly, I think I would have zoned out on the OpenOffice part had I not been in charge of teaching it. When passively absorbing knowledge, it’s easy for me to think to myself,  “Oh, I know all this already” whereas being in charge of a demo of the program gives me the responsibility to survey my knowledge and make sure I have everything right. All the software demos were great, too, because even with the programs and sites I had used before, all of you showed me parts of it I hadn’t seen before or hadn’t tried, so they all felt like new experiences. The software demo experience has inspired me to survey my knowledge of all the programs I use regularly–I even browsed the FLOSS (Free License/Open Source Software) manual on Mozilla Firefox recently and was blown away by what I didn’t know about a program I use all the time.

I think what has me most reassured going forward is that, despite everything I’ve learned here, the princess is still in another castle. There’s still a lot more to learn about digital workspaces and writing and all that, and I look forward to it. I hope all of you have fun on your journeys through digital workspaces.

The paper was actually a lot harder than I thought it would be; moreso than usual, I ran into the problem of looking at the finished product, recognizing it as done, yet still harboring that nagging feeling that there’s something else I have to do to make it better. Maybe the curse of being an English major is that I’ll never fully feel like any one project is done, that everything is a work in progress. There’s also that nagging senioritis, which is something I’m really bad about (and I’m not even a senior, technically!) Whenever my body glimpses the possibility of rest, it pretty much deflates all the volition I have, despite all the thoughts of “agh no bad can’t do this gotta keep working ugggggh” that float through my mind. Maybe this is why coffee was invented.

So, to wrap up, I want to say it’s been a pleasure working with all of you and I hope that, wherever coming days find you, that you stay happy and remember that technology does not own you. Not without a fight, anyway.

When I first started the semester, I figured I would stop updating as soon as I reached my required number of entries. This attitude was motivated by a general burnout on my part toward blogs; I’ve maintained a Livejournal for several years and have reached the point where I barely feel like updating. This shows in my posting stats for that journal, where I have one total post in the month of April and something like three or four on the year. Every journal I’ve ever maintained, whether online, offline in a doc file, or in print, has met this fate.

I feel like I share my view on journals with Leigh Botts, the protagonist of Dear Mr. Henshaw, who starts his journal writing to the titular character, an author of children’s novels, and then realizes at one point that he no longer feels the need to write directly to Mr. Henshaw. It is at this point that he finds his own voice, and from the rest of the novel on (and through its sequel, Strider, which was also wonderful) he writes with that voice, composing it to no one but himself. There’s always a point where I outgrow my own journals and shed them like a snake sheds layers of skin. I think it happens because my interests change so much from time to time, and I don’t want to confine myself too much.

If I do keep this blog going, I figure I’ll keep posting reading responses to things that interest me. I’ll also use it as a springboard for ideas regarding my paper on open source programs and education, which I intend to submit as a degree paper. I may shift the focus more to gaming, including more articles about gaming analysis and pedagogy, to keep more in tune with my interests. Either way, I’ll know within a few weeks whether I have the impetus to continue.

Chang’s article on World of Warcraft was an enjoyable read, both presentation- and content-wise. I liked that I had several options for reading the text, and the information presented within was interesting. I don’t play any MMOs, but I used to play MUDs; it was from this experience that I discovered how these games can be huge timesinks, and learned that my academic success greatly depended on my avoiding them completely. I do play a lot of single-player console RPGs (role-playing games) though, so I have a familiarity with the “gaming as action” idea.

Role-playing games have many parallels to a long book; as you play, your character develops and learns more about the game world, and through save points, you can leave “bookmarks” at any time to come back and resume the action later. The ability to suspend the narrative by saving and turning the game off is welcome with as many commitments as I have, especially considering the length of some of these games; I’ve put in as much as 180 hours just on one game! Perhaps my love  of RPGs is related to my love of books; both are a means of escapism that I can pick up and put down at any time.

The sobering part of the essay for me is that the climate is a lot worse now, and two factors behind that change are bills that became law in 1998, the same year Logie’s article was published. The end of the article referred to attempts by then-Senator Sonny Bono to extend copyright; after his death, the Sonny Bono Copyright term Extension Act (also known as the Mickey Mouse Copyright Extension Act because Disney lobbied heavily in favor of the bill) was passed and signed into law. It extended the terms set in 1976 by 20 years. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was signed into law in October 1998 and strengthens penalties for copyright infringement as well as making illegal any attempts to circumvent copyright control measures, such as Digital Rights Management (DRM).

In much of my research into copyright, it’s struck me that the conflict over copyright and intellectual property often seems like a war. There are extremes on both ends: RIAA suing individuals and families over songs they downloaded, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per song; piracy itself, which makes it possible for people to see an upcoming movie a whole month in advance; and in between are many of the situations we will continue to encounter in the classroom.

As members of the educational community, we should keep a constant vigil over issues like these. One point Logie makes early on, and one with which I wholeheartedly agree, is that conflicts over copyright in the classroom will inevitably escalate as more technology enters the classroom. Staying ahead of these issues is a way to ensure that they don’t blindside us.

Assignment Title: Illustrating a Struggle with Technology

Introduction: We all struggle with technology. Whether it’s the PC that flashes the “Blue Screen of Death” like it’s the new screen saver, or a device that seems to have a life of its own, we all have those moments that make us wonder whether we own technology or whether technology owns us. This assignment is a multimodal look at our battles for supremacy against the tools we built to improve our lives.

Assignment: Compose an essay about a particular time you’ve struggled with technology and then convert it into a video, audio recording, or photo essay (alternate modes will need to be approved by instructor) to be shown to the class. Collaboration is allowed, either with a group doing one project for one grade or with another person acting as an “extra” in a film to receive extra credit.

Ingredients

Required components for the assignment will be determined by which mode you pick, but generally, the following would be required for each mode:

Video Recording:
Digital Video Camera, Webcam, or other video capture device to record the film
Windows Movie Maker or equivalent program to compile and edit the film

Audio Recording:
Cassette Recorder or Microphone attachment to computer
Windows Sound Recorder/Audacity/equivalent program to record sound

Photo Essay:
35mm camera or digital camera (Many stores, including Wal-Mart and Walgreens, offer digital prints from 35mm film for a fee)
Microsoft Paint/Adobe Photoshop/GIMP/equivalent image editing program to edit images
Windows Movie Maker or equivalent program to compile the images into a film

Other Ingredients:

CD-R or RW on which to place the finished assignment for grading; additional CD-R/RW or USB thumb drive to transport the assignment to class
Source Essay (see below)
Script (see below)

Sequencing

Reflection/Freewriting: Reflect on struggles with technology and form an idea for what event/technology will be the subject of the essay.

Composition: Write an essay based on your reflections that offers a solution to the problem you faced. (2-3 pages, 12-point double-spaced) This is a persuasive essay in which you argue that your solution is viable.

Scripting and Storyboarding: Compose a script to convert your essay to a multimodal presentation. For audio recordings, this script will be what you read off of when you record; for video recordings and photo essays, compose both a script and a storyboard showing the visual element of your presentation. For photo essays, your storyboard may be a printout of the photos used; for video essays, your storyboard may be hand-drawn or comprised of stills from the video.

Compilation: Compile your presentation using your chosen source material, hardware, and software. The final product, after edits, should be between 90 seconds and three minutes (try not to exceed either boundary) Copy the final presentation onto a CD-R or CD-RW to be turned in for credit.

Presentation: During the class period in which the assignment is due, each of you will show  your presentation. and then speak briefly about it. Possible talking points include: why you chose the mode you chose and what you felt it brought to your subject, elaboration on your subject, or a question-and-answer session with the class.

Rationale

This is an assignment that could be used with a reading of Selber’s Multiliteracies for a Digital Age. Many of the issues people have with technology fall under the umbrella of functional or critical literacies, and the writing prompt is a way for people to examine their relationship with technology and how they can empower themselves; or, as we might put it, to point at their technology and say, “You’re not the boss of me!”

I offered the collaboration credit option because I felt that was a really effective part of a previous (somewhat multimodal) assignment I had in fifth grade, where each student had to give a speech about a President (I was FDR). Instead of standing in the front of the room and reading off of a paper (which led to unintentionally humorous lines such as “I died on July 4, 1826″) I recruited a classmate to interview me for a radio segment and then “break in” after the interview to say that President Roosevelt had died. Not everyone likes to work in groups, but the option is nice for people who do, and two people can often bring a lot more to an assignment than one.

Sample

My sample started out as a video skit illustrating my problems with getting used to the new Facebook design, and became a conglomeration of the photo essay and video options. Most of the film is image cards I created to the audio of me reading an essay I wrote based on a blog post I’d planned about my gripes with the new design. I’d originally thought 60 to 90 seconds would be sufficient for students, but when I did mine, I cut it as short as I felt it could go and it was still over 2 minutes. Given that, I changed the boundaries from 60-90 seconds to 90-180 seconds. I morphed the rant into more of a discussion of critical literacy issues illuminated by the fact that social networking sites can and will change themselves around with very little warning. My argument is that the proprietary nature of and rapid rate of change in digital workspaces threatens users’ ability to work in these spaces, and that users need to stay educated about these changes and be flexible in their use of digital workspaces to mitigate these issues.

I enjoyed creating my sample because it gave me the opportunity to do a lot of things I’ve either seldom done or never have done before, including using Flickr Creative Commons, using a webcam, and making a lolcat (yes, there’s a homemade lolcat in my presentation) Part of the reason my video feels like a conglomeration is because it really is; I took it partly as an excuse to try out a bunch of stuff, and I’m quite pleased with the result. I hope all of you in class enjoy it as well.

Parameters:

-Using a chosen multimodality (approve with instructor first) illustrate a conflict between you and technology. Some examples of multimodality might include: video or sound recording, recital of a poem, a drawing or picture, or a skit.

-During the class period when the assignment is due, each student will perform their piece and then explain, briefly, why they chose that mode to illustrate their conflict and what they feel that mode showed about their struggle with technology that would not come across in a typed essay.

-With prior instructor approval, students may collaborate. Alternately, if a student needs an “extra” for his or her assignment, extra credit opportunities are available.

Rationale:

I don’t have much teaching experience in the classroom, so my goal was to make as basic an assignment as possible. From past experience, I know flexibility can be overwhelming to students, but it also allows them to make the best use of their talents.

I offered the collaboration credit option because I felt that was a really effective part of a previous (somewhat multimodal) assignment I had in fifth grade, where each student had to give a speech about a President (I was FDR). Instead of standing in the front of the room and reading off of a paper (which led to unintentionally humorous lines such as “I died on July 4, 1826″) I recruited a classmate to interview me for a radio segment and then “break in” after the interview to say that President Roosevelt had died. Not everyone likes to work in groups, but the option is nice for people who do, and two people can often bring a lot more to an assignment than one.

This is also, in part, inspired by the lectures and writings of late Carnegie Mellon professor Randy Pausch, who always told students to look for the “head fakes” in a lecture. The “head fake” I want to go for in this assignment is that by illustrating a struggle with technology, students can put a humorous take on that struggle, and therefore take ownership of it to a degree.

The sample:

For my multimodal assignment, I want to illustrate my struggles with getting used to the new Facebook design. I intend to film a scene with my digital camera; the film quality will suffer a bit from this, but I don’t think I can find a digital video camera in time. As “extra credit,” so to speak, I want to include as many Internet memes in the scene as I can think of, and explain all of them to the best of my ability.

The major problem with adapting memes to pedagogy, though, is that memes cannot effectively be prescribed, only described. I think this is due mainly to the spontaneity of memes. Some are easy to predict—for example, Heath Ledger’s Joker’s “Why so serious?” line from The Dark Knight was bound to get some repetition—but who could have predicted that a line from Finding Forrester would inspire an entire meme-generating web site? Or that pictures of cats with captions would be so popular? Or that a Rick Astley music video from the 1980s would find renewed life?

Tying this discussion back to the main article, I would argue that while developing new processes and new pedagogies is worthwhile, taking it too far into the realm of prescription is ultimately going to be counterproductive. Memes suffer when people try too hard. They are born out of spontaneity, and have to be allowed to continue under these conditions. Likewise, I think developers of pedagogy need to be careful when developing prescriptions for future pedagogy not to take it too far. As I see it, there’s always been some mix of prescription and description—that is, a mix of setting rules from afar and then describing what teachers “in the trenches” do to actually help their students. I think, regardless of what other paradigm shifts occur in the 21st century, 21st century pedagogy is going to work much the same way.

I think part of the beauty of Twitter is the low amount of commitment required to use it. Chat programs, like AIM, often bog me down and sap productivity because they’re high-commitment. They’ve always seemed to me like a party where everyone thinks they have your undivided attention. Twitter is more like a party where people shout things at each other from across the room. One wouldn’t hold a deep conversation in this manner, but it’s great for having someone snag you a soda or checking to see if the bathroom is unoccupied yet.

I thought New York Times Tech blogger David Pogue’s article “Twitter? It’s What You Make It” was very informative and had some good ideas about how to use Twitter. What interested me more than the actual article was the comments section. If you click on the word “Recommended” in any of the comments, it re-sorts the entire comments section by how many readers recommended each comment, from top to bottom. Reading the comments this way, the bias against Twitter is pretty clear; I found a lot of neat uses for Twitter reading the comments from bottom to top, though. (Unfortunately, re-sorting the comments also filters out any comment that didn’t receive any recommendations, so it’s also worth reading the whole section in order to see everything)

I can’t see myself becoming a Twitter celebrity, but I do intend to explore its use much more thoroughly going forward. I’m intrigued by how many possibilities emerge in 140 characters or less.

This passage struck me as relevant because I have had this kind of experience through my personal journal. In fact, after one night spent looking through my catalogue of entries from years and years ago, I actually spent time deleting some of those entries. This action might be construed as a cardinal sin by some, but I felt it was necessary because I was no longer that person, and I didn’t want the reminder that I had been that person available for anyone on my friends list to see. A lot of them were strong (often curse-word-filled) entries pertaining to matters of politics, which I scrapped because I no longer wanted to represent myself that way and also because I had decided it was easier on my blood pressure to lay off certain topics. Livejournal also strikes me as particularly useful in determining subjectivity because it has a feature allowing users to list off interests that then show up as tags, linking to journals of others who share those interests. Several times a year, I’ll go in there and update it, adding new interests and deleting old ones, because I typically notice through my blogging that I no longer care as much about this or that old interest.

I think blogs are an effective means of developing subjectivity, as well as crafting attitudes, because everything that is posted is public. Even friends-locked entries are still viewed by more people than just the author, and so the blog becomes a proving ground for ideas and attitudes. Blogging also provides a means to find other thinkers who share similar or opposing interests, allowing for additional reading to augment developing ideas.

Works Cited

Barton, Matthew D. “The future of rational-critical debate in online public spheres.” Computers and Composition 22 (2005) 177-190.