The conversation around the Chatroulette web site (discussed in an early post and comments) and the Daily show’s satirical look at the media’s exaggeration of the web site as a “craze” tied into questions I have had relating to how discussions of fear around media are framed.
I have a particular interest in the debate about violence that surrounds video games. I’m not so much concerned here with the legitimacy of claims about the negative effects of video game violence, but more so interested in how much that debate has framed discussion around video games, to the exclusion of many other discussions.
I don’t dispute the fact that violence is a serious issue. I personally dislike watching violent movies (can’t handle Tarantino) and would definitely prefer not to have youth I work with be violent. However, I’m not quite sure what the long-running debate around video games and violence is supposed to accomplish. If it is conclusively proven that video games cause violence, is the aim to then restrict people from playing these games? To ban the industry from creating violent games? To restrict just young people? Or something else?
Whether or not we researchers, educators, parents come to the conclusion that video game violence is detrimental, video games are already deeply imbedded in our culture – and the video game industry is larger and more pervasive than perhaps even the movie industry in the United States. And it is the most violent video games that are also the top sellers, not necessarily just because they are violent but because they are often the most complex, largest in scope, open-ended and interactive, and generally the best-funded games. So what do we do? What discussions should we be having? And why is the violence debate so often the only discussion the mainstream media seems to be having?
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
Participatory culture and classroom transformation--easier said than done
Although the video from Dan Brown posted by Anna had its weak points—for example, most of my and my children’s university experience has involved much more than the memorization of facts, and I’m also not convinced that increased access to facts by more people is what drives society forward, his general argument that the nature of institutional education needs to be transformed is one that I have been reading about, thinking about, and agreeing with over the past several weeks.
In Digital Literacies: Social Learning and Classroom Practice, the book I critiqued for my second assignment, editors Victoria Carrington and Muriel Robinson argued passionately that it is not especially useful to view new digital technologies simply as nifty new methods for getting the attention of children so that we can teach them the same old facts; if we want to educate children for media literacy, the very nature of education will have to be transformed from a model in which teachers impart information to students who lack it, to a model in which teachers act more as guides and facilitators and classrooms become communities of co-learners and creators of knowledge. This is a familiar concept to readers of Henry Jenkins's white paper which argues that as digital technology encourages and enables an increasingly participatory culture, the challenge will be to shift the focus of literacy education from one of individual expression to one of community involvement. Ross Todd, in his article “Youth and their Virtual Networked Worlds: Research Findings and Implications for School Libraries”, speaks of the need both to re-conceptualize the school library as a knowledge commons and to shift the goal of instruction from the imparting of information to the development of knowledge.
These scholarly and research backed arguments conform to my own experience as a homeschooling mother. I rarely told my children what they had to learn and I never gave them tests or grades. I was not their chief source of information. They pursued their own interests, learning from books, from TV, from each other, from friends, from other adults, from the internet, and occasionally, even from their father and me. We truly did function as a community of co-learners. I learned along with them. My most important tasks were to facilitate their learning by making resources available to them, to encourage them to think critically about what they learned by asking questions or suggesting additional sources of information, and to help them learn how to accomplish what they wanted to do when they were stuck. All of them have remained enthusiastic and competent learners as they have grown into adulthood.
Having expressed all of this agreement, however, I have to say that I think that transforming how we approach education is a lot easier said than done. My positive experience with homeschooling was dependent upon a household in which there were two parents, there was enough financial security for one parent to be unemployed, and there was one parent who preferred home to career. For many families, public school is the only option.
It may be easy enough to argue persuasively that the nature of education needs to be transformed, but actually achieving those changes is another question altogether. The Jenkins white paper offers a few concrete suggestions for activities that could be used to promote the various competencies that, according to Jenkins, need to be taught, and these are reasonable starting points. But they are still just a beginning step on the road to transformation. Anyone I have ever talked to who has taught in the public schools has spoken of the difficulty of effecting change in the classroom. With more and more emphasis being placed upon test scores, learning standards, complying with various federal and state mandates, and increased “accountability” for teachers and schools, there is precious little room for a teacher to introduce a new way of doing things, and precious little time for a new practice to take root and produce the sort of verifiable positive results that would allow it to be continued.
Transforming how we think about education will take more than persuading teachers of the need for change. In fact, persuading teachers of the need might be the easiest part of promoting change. The greater task will be achieving the social and political change that will need to occur in order for teachers to have more freedom to experiment and try new ways of conducting their classes. I have to admit that this strikes me as a rather daunting obstacle. I would be interested in others’ ideas about what can be done to make it easier and more acceptable for teachers and librarians to transform how education is carried out.
In Digital Literacies: Social Learning and Classroom Practice, the book I critiqued for my second assignment, editors Victoria Carrington and Muriel Robinson argued passionately that it is not especially useful to view new digital technologies simply as nifty new methods for getting the attention of children so that we can teach them the same old facts; if we want to educate children for media literacy, the very nature of education will have to be transformed from a model in which teachers impart information to students who lack it, to a model in which teachers act more as guides and facilitators and classrooms become communities of co-learners and creators of knowledge. This is a familiar concept to readers of Henry Jenkins's white paper which argues that as digital technology encourages and enables an increasingly participatory culture, the challenge will be to shift the focus of literacy education from one of individual expression to one of community involvement. Ross Todd, in his article “Youth and their Virtual Networked Worlds: Research Findings and Implications for School Libraries”, speaks of the need both to re-conceptualize the school library as a knowledge commons and to shift the goal of instruction from the imparting of information to the development of knowledge.
These scholarly and research backed arguments conform to my own experience as a homeschooling mother. I rarely told my children what they had to learn and I never gave them tests or grades. I was not their chief source of information. They pursued their own interests, learning from books, from TV, from each other, from friends, from other adults, from the internet, and occasionally, even from their father and me. We truly did function as a community of co-learners. I learned along with them. My most important tasks were to facilitate their learning by making resources available to them, to encourage them to think critically about what they learned by asking questions or suggesting additional sources of information, and to help them learn how to accomplish what they wanted to do when they were stuck. All of them have remained enthusiastic and competent learners as they have grown into adulthood.
Having expressed all of this agreement, however, I have to say that I think that transforming how we approach education is a lot easier said than done. My positive experience with homeschooling was dependent upon a household in which there were two parents, there was enough financial security for one parent to be unemployed, and there was one parent who preferred home to career. For many families, public school is the only option.
It may be easy enough to argue persuasively that the nature of education needs to be transformed, but actually achieving those changes is another question altogether. The Jenkins white paper offers a few concrete suggestions for activities that could be used to promote the various competencies that, according to Jenkins, need to be taught, and these are reasonable starting points. But they are still just a beginning step on the road to transformation. Anyone I have ever talked to who has taught in the public schools has spoken of the difficulty of effecting change in the classroom. With more and more emphasis being placed upon test scores, learning standards, complying with various federal and state mandates, and increased “accountability” for teachers and schools, there is precious little room for a teacher to introduce a new way of doing things, and precious little time for a new practice to take root and produce the sort of verifiable positive results that would allow it to be continued.
Transforming how we think about education will take more than persuading teachers of the need for change. In fact, persuading teachers of the need might be the easiest part of promoting change. The greater task will be achieving the social and political change that will need to occur in order for teachers to have more freedom to experiment and try new ways of conducting their classes. I have to admit that this strikes me as a rather daunting obstacle. I would be interested in others’ ideas about what can be done to make it easier and more acceptable for teachers and librarians to transform how education is carried out.
commonsensemedia.org
Commonsensemedia.org is a fascinating web site, there’s so much to look into with reviews and articles about all the various media that young people use or could use but with a parent or educator’s point of view. One feature which I felt was really a smart thing is the things “families can talk about” section of each review featured here. My wife and I frequently will check out a Christian web site provided by Focus on the Family to get movie (and sometimes other media) reviews to see if it’s something we want to see and they provide positive and negative elements as well as other considerations but no specific area that shows how the movie, etc… can be used as a point of conversation between you and your children. (www.pluggedinonline.com) I hope that the people at Focus on the Family might add something like the above to their reviews also.
It was also nice of this site’s creator to have the green, yellow, and red indicators with age appropriateness on each review as well to indicate the level of appropriateness. It was strange then though to see that some of the green ‘go’ and yellow ‘’ labeled sites still came with some pretty strong warnings of inappropriate features especially with web sites. I want to not be an alarmist when it comes to the technologies of web 2.0 but, some of the sites I found here were a bit disconcerting from what the reviews told me and I could understand a little better why some parents are a little gun shy on this topic. I’m glad I’ve taken courses like this and other similar ones as its good to have reminders that there exists a whole plethora of constructive and creative outlets for young people and adults for that matter.
This web site is simply so useful to both public and school librarians alike can use this as a kind of advisory tool to locate web sites to suggest to teens which, they can use to meet their information and entertainment. It could also be a helpful resource to the librarians themselves when doing collection development so they select those media which best meets the patrons of their library. As a school librarian I also liked that they have resources which appear to help you develop an appropriate media policy for your school that’s sensible but, it’s hard to say much beyond that about it as you have to buy the educator’s kit to really learn more.
Lastly, I’ll just comment a little on the resources for parents. This incidentally is something that librarians at either public or school locations can recommend to parents who express concern about their kids using the Internet. There are some really good videos and articles for them to take in and think about with regards to the many media inputs in their children’s lives. It’s great that the developers of the site thought to make this information accessible by age range and topic as obviously, what’s suitable information for one age of the youth spectrum may not be for another. The advice too isn’t preachy and leaves room for the parents to decide, it just gives them points to consider. I think I can best sum up my thoughts on commonsensemedia.org by saying; this is one site I think I will add to my delicious account for future reference-good stuff!
It was also nice of this site’s creator to have the green, yellow, and red indicators with age appropriateness on each review as well to indicate the level of appropriateness. It was strange then though to see that some of the green ‘go’ and yellow ‘’ labeled sites still came with some pretty strong warnings of inappropriate features especially with web sites. I want to not be an alarmist when it comes to the technologies of web 2.0 but, some of the sites I found here were a bit disconcerting from what the reviews told me and I could understand a little better why some parents are a little gun shy on this topic. I’m glad I’ve taken courses like this and other similar ones as its good to have reminders that there exists a whole plethora of constructive and creative outlets for young people and adults for that matter.
This web site is simply so useful to both public and school librarians alike can use this as a kind of advisory tool to locate web sites to suggest to teens which, they can use to meet their information and entertainment. It could also be a helpful resource to the librarians themselves when doing collection development so they select those media which best meets the patrons of their library. As a school librarian I also liked that they have resources which appear to help you develop an appropriate media policy for your school that’s sensible but, it’s hard to say much beyond that about it as you have to buy the educator’s kit to really learn more.
Lastly, I’ll just comment a little on the resources for parents. This incidentally is something that librarians at either public or school locations can recommend to parents who express concern about their kids using the Internet. There are some really good videos and articles for them to take in and think about with regards to the many media inputs in their children’s lives. It’s great that the developers of the site thought to make this information accessible by age range and topic as obviously, what’s suitable information for one age of the youth spectrum may not be for another. The advice too isn’t preachy and leaves room for the parents to decide, it just gives them points to consider. I think I can best sum up my thoughts on commonsensemedia.org by saying; this is one site I think I will add to my delicious account for future reference-good stuff!
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Rheingold and Levine Inspired WebQuest
I thoroughly enjoyed last week's readings, especially the selected articles found in the Civic Life Online book from Rheingold and Levine. I had decided to put together a WebQuest on blogging for our second assignment and was substantially lost on how I was going to organize and present it because I'm not an active blogger whatsoever and making myself blog for this class has been quite the challenge--I'm cut from the same cloth as Katie L--I like to keep a very low/non-existent profile online and admit that I don't participate in anything online ever including blogs, social media, commenting, etc.--so I didn't know how I was ever going to convince young adults why they should start blogging themselves. But after I read the readings for last week, I realized that I could essentially build a WebQuest around Rheingold and Levine's notion of civic engagement through exercising one's public voice via blogging. Hopefully this WebQuest will not only introduce teachers and students to their ideas but actually motivate students to blog by utilizing the suggested activities that Rheingold outlines in his article for blogging. It will probably just die undiscovered in the vast expanses of the internet, but I just thought I would share it with you guys and I welcome any feedback that you might have if you feel so moved to comment ha-ha! (You can link to it below or click on the title to this post).
http://questgarden.com/100/35/6/100409000556/
http://questgarden.com/100/35/6/100409000556/
Chat Roulette
I don't know why, but you'll have to manually put the URL into your browser from the first paragraph of my post if you want to watch the video on Chatroulette. Sorry!
Chat Roulette...the new conversation??
I have a creepy feeling about Chatroulette.com. Of course, it takes me awhile to warm up to any new technology so I am going to try to be objective about this new phenomenon. I get a kick out of being a voyeur as much as the next guy but Chatroulette is too “in your face” for me. For background, watch http://vimeo.com/9669721 informal, funny research on this new use of the web cam.
My gut reaction is that there is something weird about wanting to chat with a stranger who probably has no expertise in anything I’m interested in and whom I will never talk to again and will never meet. I like to meet people that share one of my interests or with whom I can have a relationship. And, of course, there is the pervert factor. Every article I’ve read and news report I’ve seen warns of the sexual implications of this form of entertainment. On Chatroulette one can see masturbation, private body parts, psychos with nooses around their necks, men in bras…need I go on?
Is the right to patronize this site in the same league as the right to read books on sensitive subjects? My opinion is no, it is not. While I am all for freedom of the press and freedom to express your opinions and to talk about the taboo, I think there are some things that do not need to be witnessed. I might join in a conversation about sexual perversion, what is perverse, what the attraction is and why some people like it and others don’t. But it is a whole new ballgame to witness sexually explicit acts. For example, to change the context, it is one thing to read about a grisly murder but it is quite another to witness one.
This is definitely a concern when thought of in the same context as youth. Teens would be the most likely age group to be attracted to this technology. First, some of them have more leisure time than adults and more of their time, leisure or not, is tied to the computer. Secondly, even if a teen is leery of whom they will run into, persuasion of peers will be a big factor. And, most importantly, trying new technology is as familiar as breathing to teens and that, combined with natural curiosity and a sense of daring, might be a dangerous combination.
It’s not that I don’t trust the kids (God, how many times have you heard THAT one!) Seriously though, my concerns are with whom they will start chatting in Chatroulette and what that person will do on camera or ask the kids to do. Older teens have probably seen much more sexually than adults want to recognize but the younger teens and tweens that might get on Chatroulette.com could see things that they are just not ready for. Another concern for me is that the more we see and accept sexual behavior, as well as other outer-limit behavior, the more mainstream it may become, although I think we may have crossed that threshold already.
I would like to say that perhaps there is some educational value in meeting new people from different areas of the world but from what I have read and seen, that is not even possible. Participants move from one to the next partner so quickly, this process is called nexting, that if you are not a beautiful, young girl or naked, you will be nexted faster than you can say hello. This new use of internet technology is purely for entertainment. The point is simply to sit there and see what completely strange thing can be seen. The point is not to chat so much as to be shocked.
To quote Cliff Kuang at Fastcompany.com, “Self-published entertainment has officially moved into territory I can barely comprehend. Parents: One more reason to lock up your daughters.”
My gut reaction is that there is something weird about wanting to chat with a stranger who probably has no expertise in anything I’m interested in and whom I will never talk to again and will never meet. I like to meet people that share one of my interests or with whom I can have a relationship. And, of course, there is the pervert factor. Every article I’ve read and news report I’ve seen warns of the sexual implications of this form of entertainment. On Chatroulette one can see masturbation, private body parts, psychos with nooses around their necks, men in bras…need I go on?
Is the right to patronize this site in the same league as the right to read books on sensitive subjects? My opinion is no, it is not. While I am all for freedom of the press and freedom to express your opinions and to talk about the taboo, I think there are some things that do not need to be witnessed. I might join in a conversation about sexual perversion, what is perverse, what the attraction is and why some people like it and others don’t. But it is a whole new ballgame to witness sexually explicit acts. For example, to change the context, it is one thing to read about a grisly murder but it is quite another to witness one.
This is definitely a concern when thought of in the same context as youth. Teens would be the most likely age group to be attracted to this technology. First, some of them have more leisure time than adults and more of their time, leisure or not, is tied to the computer. Secondly, even if a teen is leery of whom they will run into, persuasion of peers will be a big factor. And, most importantly, trying new technology is as familiar as breathing to teens and that, combined with natural curiosity and a sense of daring, might be a dangerous combination.
It’s not that I don’t trust the kids (God, how many times have you heard THAT one!) Seriously though, my concerns are with whom they will start chatting in Chatroulette and what that person will do on camera or ask the kids to do. Older teens have probably seen much more sexually than adults want to recognize but the younger teens and tweens that might get on Chatroulette.com could see things that they are just not ready for. Another concern for me is that the more we see and accept sexual behavior, as well as other outer-limit behavior, the more mainstream it may become, although I think we may have crossed that threshold already.
I would like to say that perhaps there is some educational value in meeting new people from different areas of the world but from what I have read and seen, that is not even possible. Participants move from one to the next partner so quickly, this process is called nexting, that if you are not a beautiful, young girl or naked, you will be nexted faster than you can say hello. This new use of internet technology is purely for entertainment. The point is simply to sit there and see what completely strange thing can be seen. The point is not to chat so much as to be shocked.
To quote Cliff Kuang at Fastcompany.com, “Self-published entertainment has officially moved into territory I can barely comprehend. Parents: One more reason to lock up your daughters.”
Saturday, April 10, 2010
"An Open Letter to Educators"
On adapting institutional education (at all levels) to the "information revolution." Found via tametheweb.
A notable quote:
"Society no longer cares how many facts we can memorize, because in the information age, facts are free."
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Michael Stephens slides
I found the slide show by Michael Stephens probably the most interesting of all the things we viewed or read for this week’s class session. One of the first things to catch my attention was the book, Born Digital by John Palfrey and Urs Gasser. Where I work with high school students who are definitely a part of this group, I think this title would be most beneficial for me to read so I can understand where it is our students are coming from. I’ve already located it at my local public library and plan on picking it up soon.
In the presentation, it’s stated that 1% of searches online begin at a library web site and I don’t doubt this. As one of the following slides says there isn’t much awareness of the electronic resources to which many libraries subscribe. I am fortunate that more teachers seem to be getting the idea that we have more consistently reliable information in these resources and therefore more of them have had me speak to their classes about them. I was pleasantly surprised just before spring break when some students came by the library quite some time after school was out and hardly a student can be found let along in our domain sadly enough. However, this group came asking for the tri-fold handout I’d made up with our library’s login information for our databases. This seemed to have been done completely on their own initiative so, occasionally it appears that some of the things I tell classes do sink in with them.
Another good point Stephens makes is that for the Millennial generation, these emerging technologies are just another part of the scenery for them whereas for people my age and older, it’s like ‘wow, this is something new and fantastic’ or ‘run for the hills, there’s another new overwhelming technology to learn’. I had a discussion with a student today about this very thing and she agreed that many technological innovations today aren’t that intimidating to people her age, you just explore it with little fear of failure she seemed to be saying. There’s always someplace or someone you can go to if you don’t understand something.
I found myself and our school library to be guilty of possessing some of the signs shown in the slides that forbade gaming or social networking on the library’s computers. Initially, when I took this position I agreed more heartily with these positions but even now as I see more benefits for students to learn these technologies in a participatory culture, I know that the school administration wouldn’t be as understanding if we tried to open the door to some of these tools. I think the scary stories of the misuse of technology by young people have many less tech-savvy adults freaked about the use of such things. Though, I’m not honestly sure that I want to go as far as this guy seems to be advocating where it’s like let’s throw open the floodgates but I know I could be misinterpreting things possibly.
I do agree that libraries, public or school, do need to be open to young people’s input so that it’s a place that relevant to them and thus, a place they want to be. I think programs that teach them how to use various Web 2.0 technologies so that they can contribute to the real world are great. The Bloomington Public Library in collaboration with the some of the local high schools has in the past worked with teens on video production as part of an effort to be part of a local film festival. Activities like this certainly have real world applications and I think many of the teens involved enjoyed learning more about this technology. As I mentioned in class tonight, one way that I’ve tried to incorporate student input is by adding a link to a blog I created recently where students can share their book reviews hoping that they’ll share this information with their friends or others will stumble across it while on our site and see what comments their peers left. I fear that students may be reluctant to share their thoughts for the same reason they don’t in classes verbally-fear of ridicule. I know that I too have this fear with my online classes here though I know perfectly well that’s not likely to happen. With teenagers who know their peers can be less than mature and uncouth often times online sharing may be taken up as much as it could be and I guess that’s why I’m surprised people like Michael Stephens and the authors of the other articles were such strong advocates for young adult participation in online forums. It’s probably just a case of me missing some piece of the puzzle here and once I get a better view of the big picture of things I’ll understand better.
In the presentation, it’s stated that 1% of searches online begin at a library web site and I don’t doubt this. As one of the following slides says there isn’t much awareness of the electronic resources to which many libraries subscribe. I am fortunate that more teachers seem to be getting the idea that we have more consistently reliable information in these resources and therefore more of them have had me speak to their classes about them. I was pleasantly surprised just before spring break when some students came by the library quite some time after school was out and hardly a student can be found let along in our domain sadly enough. However, this group came asking for the tri-fold handout I’d made up with our library’s login information for our databases. This seemed to have been done completely on their own initiative so, occasionally it appears that some of the things I tell classes do sink in with them.
Another good point Stephens makes is that for the Millennial generation, these emerging technologies are just another part of the scenery for them whereas for people my age and older, it’s like ‘wow, this is something new and fantastic’ or ‘run for the hills, there’s another new overwhelming technology to learn’. I had a discussion with a student today about this very thing and she agreed that many technological innovations today aren’t that intimidating to people her age, you just explore it with little fear of failure she seemed to be saying. There’s always someplace or someone you can go to if you don’t understand something.
I found myself and our school library to be guilty of possessing some of the signs shown in the slides that forbade gaming or social networking on the library’s computers. Initially, when I took this position I agreed more heartily with these positions but even now as I see more benefits for students to learn these technologies in a participatory culture, I know that the school administration wouldn’t be as understanding if we tried to open the door to some of these tools. I think the scary stories of the misuse of technology by young people have many less tech-savvy adults freaked about the use of such things. Though, I’m not honestly sure that I want to go as far as this guy seems to be advocating where it’s like let’s throw open the floodgates but I know I could be misinterpreting things possibly.
I do agree that libraries, public or school, do need to be open to young people’s input so that it’s a place that relevant to them and thus, a place they want to be. I think programs that teach them how to use various Web 2.0 technologies so that they can contribute to the real world are great. The Bloomington Public Library in collaboration with the some of the local high schools has in the past worked with teens on video production as part of an effort to be part of a local film festival. Activities like this certainly have real world applications and I think many of the teens involved enjoyed learning more about this technology. As I mentioned in class tonight, one way that I’ve tried to incorporate student input is by adding a link to a blog I created recently where students can share their book reviews hoping that they’ll share this information with their friends or others will stumble across it while on our site and see what comments their peers left. I fear that students may be reluctant to share their thoughts for the same reason they don’t in classes verbally-fear of ridicule. I know that I too have this fear with my online classes here though I know perfectly well that’s not likely to happen. With teenagers who know their peers can be less than mature and uncouth often times online sharing may be taken up as much as it could be and I guess that’s why I’m surprised people like Michael Stephens and the authors of the other articles were such strong advocates for young adult participation in online forums. It’s probably just a case of me missing some piece of the puzzle here and once I get a better view of the big picture of things I’ll understand better.
As I was reading this weeks articles, I was reminded of a film I ran across a year ago that clearly combines media use and civic advocacy by teens. This film is called March Point and information about it can be found at here. This film follows three young men as they participate in a film making program rather than go to drug court. Initially, the young men, Travis, Nick, and Cody wanted to make rap videos and action movies, but were drawn instead to look at the effects of oil refineries on their reservation. This film follows their progress from knowing very little about the impact of the refineries to presenting the case to their senator in Washington, D.C. This film is a very powerful story and shows the impact of the movie making process in their personal, social, and civic lives.
Peter Levine discussed the importance of audience in a crowded media environment. For me March Point illuminated some of the issues that he addressed. Levine points out that in a celebrity culture the creativity of ordinary people is blocked out. March Point is sort of a combination of the two. It was funded and filmed by a non-profit organization with professional filmmakers as well as student film work done by the young men. It is also available on iTunes which is a very main stream venue for accessing many types of media. There is a potential for a large audience, but is this information actually getting to people who can make a difference and right the wrongs of the oil companies? In the film, the young men are very discouraged after visiting with their Senator and remarked that it was more of a photo opportunity than a real avenue for change. In this situation, a very powerful audience was reached and yet they wondered if this actually was an audience that would create the change they sought.
Throughout the film, the "plastic" aspect that Levine described was very evident. These teens experienced a very personal change in their habits and concerns. They became more involved in school, their community, and in preparing for their future after high school. This is a prime example of the positive youth development that public voices in media can have on young adults. These adolescents learn to care about not only their health, but the health and concerns of their whole community as well as their cultural heritage.
March Point is sort of an extreme example. This was a project that had a strong backing of funding, instructional filmmakers that worked with the young men, and experienced directors. A librarian who is interested in involving teens with civic engagement might not have the resources, film experience, or motivation to take on a project such as this. That is where I believe Howard Rheingold's article and the slides by Michael Stephens might be more useful specifically in a library setting.
Rheingold's focus on combining the digital production that teens already know how to do with civic engagement is a really useful way to encourage young adults to develop their public voice. I appreciated his description of the activation gap and the thought of bringing pro-social goals into enjoyable formats such as blogs, digital storytelling, and wikis. I particularly found the exercise he described at the end with high school students as very accessible. By using wikis to discuss an interesting topic, the students are able to cultivate skills that congressmen and congresswomen use such as discussing and arguing with peers, making decisions, and composing group summaries. This exercise attempts to develop very useful skills in a way that incorporates media in a very applicable way.
I also appreciated that both Rheingold and Levine discussed the differences between addressing a civic issue over the internet versus actually putting feet to the pavement. Rheingold's mention of social scaffolding was particularly poignant to me as it created the image of addressing community issues with support and a connection to what is already going on. As students attempt to make sense of their transition from a private voice to a public presence they can be encouraged to make the connections to those who are working on the issue and use their experience when finding a listening audience. I think that one way librarians can greatly impact their communities is by helping young adults to make these connections between the civic interests that they have and the organizations within the wider community that work to address these issues. However, libraries must be places where young adults are welcomed and can feel their voice is valued. As Michael Stephens showed, there are many examples of libraries that do not allow many things that are appealing to young adults. Creating environments that draw teens in will allow librarians to interact with teens in a way that encourages their interests and allows them to expand their involvement.
Peter Levine discussed the importance of audience in a crowded media environment. For me March Point illuminated some of the issues that he addressed. Levine points out that in a celebrity culture the creativity of ordinary people is blocked out. March Point is sort of a combination of the two. It was funded and filmed by a non-profit organization with professional filmmakers as well as student film work done by the young men. It is also available on iTunes which is a very main stream venue for accessing many types of media. There is a potential for a large audience, but is this information actually getting to people who can make a difference and right the wrongs of the oil companies? In the film, the young men are very discouraged after visiting with their Senator and remarked that it was more of a photo opportunity than a real avenue for change. In this situation, a very powerful audience was reached and yet they wondered if this actually was an audience that would create the change they sought.
Throughout the film, the "plastic" aspect that Levine described was very evident. These teens experienced a very personal change in their habits and concerns. They became more involved in school, their community, and in preparing for their future after high school. This is a prime example of the positive youth development that public voices in media can have on young adults. These adolescents learn to care about not only their health, but the health and concerns of their whole community as well as their cultural heritage.
March Point is sort of an extreme example. This was a project that had a strong backing of funding, instructional filmmakers that worked with the young men, and experienced directors. A librarian who is interested in involving teens with civic engagement might not have the resources, film experience, or motivation to take on a project such as this. That is where I believe Howard Rheingold's article and the slides by Michael Stephens might be more useful specifically in a library setting.
Rheingold's focus on combining the digital production that teens already know how to do with civic engagement is a really useful way to encourage young adults to develop their public voice. I appreciated his description of the activation gap and the thought of bringing pro-social goals into enjoyable formats such as blogs, digital storytelling, and wikis. I particularly found the exercise he described at the end with high school students as very accessible. By using wikis to discuss an interesting topic, the students are able to cultivate skills that congressmen and congresswomen use such as discussing and arguing with peers, making decisions, and composing group summaries. This exercise attempts to develop very useful skills in a way that incorporates media in a very applicable way.
I also appreciated that both Rheingold and Levine discussed the differences between addressing a civic issue over the internet versus actually putting feet to the pavement. Rheingold's mention of social scaffolding was particularly poignant to me as it created the image of addressing community issues with support and a connection to what is already going on. As students attempt to make sense of their transition from a private voice to a public presence they can be encouraged to make the connections to those who are working on the issue and use their experience when finding a listening audience. I think that one way librarians can greatly impact their communities is by helping young adults to make these connections between the civic interests that they have and the organizations within the wider community that work to address these issues. However, libraries must be places where young adults are welcomed and can feel their voice is valued. As Michael Stephens showed, there are many examples of libraries that do not allow many things that are appealing to young adults. Creating environments that draw teens in will allow librarians to interact with teens in a way that encourages their interests and allows them to expand their involvement.
Thoughts on the Gryphon Lecture
I’ve been meaning to post about the Center for Children’s Books’ Gryphon Lecture for some time now. I had been waiting to try to get the powerpoint files, but will post without them. Allison Druin gave a lecture on “Children's Search Experiences in the Age of Google, Today and Tomorrow.“ The audio file for the lecture can be found here: http://waterfall.lis.illinois.edu/dl/events/gryphonlecture/druinmar05_10.mp3. It was fascinating.
Her team of researchers, sponsored by Google, conducted research on children’s search strategies and behaviors. They found and classified several different types of searchers, and also made findings based on age and gender. Some of the searchers that she talked about included those thought that one site could find all their information needs (I think the example was a Spongebob site!), or those that would prefer to find the information visually or through a video and thus continued searching this way even if they were unsuccessful. For further details, please listen to the audio file. Unfortunately, I didn’t take detailed notes.
The lecture made me think a lot of about the way we go about teaching information literacy. We spend so much time teaching people how to develop appropriate search techniques and explaining these work the best. But WHY do these techniques work best? Simply put, it is because it is generally the best way to find information using the CURRENT system. But what if the current system is FLAWED? Instead of spending all this time educating users on how to search in ways that aren't intuitive, wouldn't it be easier to just improve the system?
ENTER GOOGLE.
Google has completely changed the way users go about finding information. Not only has it opened the door to multiple formats for learning information (text, image, video, map, audio, etc) and allowed users greater access to an expansive wealth of information at the click of a button, but it has also diminished the need for users to bother saving favorite sites or to develop good search habits. So many of the weaknesses (correct spelling only, no thesaurus/plural, no phrases, etc) of past databases that influenced good search strategy techniques are practically rendered obsolete through Google's improvements. Given this what do we as librarians do? What skills can we teach that will remain relevant?
What new technologies could be created to help? Here are some ideas:
- * A Reader/IGoogle/delicious type of a thing where pages/sites can be represented topically by image icon (perhaps the site's favicon?). Not only could there be a science type icon for a great science site, but that bookmark could fall under a "school" icon. Ways to organize in an intuitive, fun way, would be excellent. And it would be so nice if you could just drag and create easily/quickly (i.e bookmark, check mark the pictoral icons it should fall under). I realize that delicious already does this with tags and browsers do this with bookmarks, but I feel the tags don't map the sites (maybe verbally but not visually) in enough interesting ways, and it certainly doesn't seem as fun as images would be. I see this new delicious/bookmark as being more like a internet-based (universally accessible) desktop for your computer or a home page of all your sites (where you can easily see all your categories visually). It would look and act like a library webpage of your personal bookmarks.
o Ex/Zoo bookmark filed under two tags: animal, Chicago
§ To access your bookmark. Click on animal icon, click on the zoo icon (link to site). You could also click on the Chicago icon, and then click on the zoo icon (link to site). This way children might actually use the sites that we tell them about. I admit, I hardly use the sites that I find in class. They are great, but I forget about them or don't have easy access to them when I need them (lose the paper, can't find the site/forgot the name of site, don't have bookmarks with me, etc).
- * Searches:
When typing in a search box, Google could automatically aggregate the search term with the most likely related Google image next to the predicted word list. This might help in situations where you have "D-O-L" but don't know how to spell "dolphin" and there are several possibilities given that you can’t read (Ex/ for pizza: pizza hut (brand logo), pizza planet (brand logo), etc.)
International Digital Children's Library in the classroom
I’m currently doing my practicum at a high school, and I recently talked-up the International Children’s Digital Library to a few teachers, giving ideas for using the database in the classroom. One of the teachers for non-western history, who is currently teaching his student’s Sanskrit, is interested in letting me do a lesson using this database. I proposed using ICDL to allow students to attempt to read books in Farsi and to expose them to examples of other non-western writing systems/alphabets. We will also be looking at examples of children’s books from western countries and non-western countries to compare/contrast the pictures and stories, and determine whether they can tell us anything about the culture (what are the books meant to show/teach children?). While I was working on selling the resource to teachers, I came up with some ideas and thought I would share them. If you have additional ideas, please add to the list J
10 Awesome things about this FREE site:
- Search by color
- Search by emotion (how does the book make you feel?)
- Search by character type (imaginary, animal, people)
- Search options are picture icons (and words)
- Search by length
- Search intuitively helps you limit your search
- Read in any order you like (if you choose spiral view)
- Thousands of books available from around the world
- Books are translated into several languages
- Apps available for Iphone, Ipad, Netbooks, etc
Ways to use this site in a classroom setting:
Art class
- Compare artwork of books from different countries
- Compare illustrations in different mediums
Social Studies/Geography
- What do a country's children's books say about its beliefs and society?
- Compare books from around the world. How are they similar/different?
- Show samples of language (and writing systems/letters/symbols/etc) from around the world by looking at a book that has been translated into several languages OR by using books from different countries as examples of their writing systems.
World Cultures/English
- Discuss/read/compare folktales from around the world (search subject "culture and society--how people live", then "places, then isolate to "mythology/folk tales)
English
- Discuss the role of illustrations in literature (what are different types, how can they serve to supplement/tell a story?, what happens when you look at books written in a foreign language?)
History
- Discuss books about a certain time period (isolate by time, topic and/or country) to supplement discussion
- Compare different country's viewpoints of a time period/event as seen through children's lit (ex/ enemy countries)
- Identify what was happening around the world during that time
- Look at what was being written (published) during a time period -- notice any trends? what does that say about the country/world during that time?
Language
- Practice beginning languages by reading a children''s book
- Choose a book to have the class translate as a group project. (Contact site for permission)
Library
- Compare ICDL's Simple Search interface to that of Google (or several database interfaces for that matter) and compare/contrast them. What does the database infer about user tendencies? Who are the target audiences of the database? How do they cater to that audience? What is the best way to use the database?
- When would you use this database? Look at IDCL as example of an intuitive search. How does it differ from most other searches? How can you accomplish some of these same tasks using another database (i.e how would adults search achieve this information using search terms)? Teach keyword search strategies and other info literacy skills.
- Discuss the idea of a book. What makes a book? Compare different types of book formats (wordless picture book, pop-up book, traditional book, graphic novel, audio book/playaway, digital book from idcl, etc)
As a tool for librarians:
- Vague Reference Questions (Red cover....there was a dog in it. I liked it -- search by color/animal) *only works for books in collection
- Readers Advisory (I want a book about a __ that is funny) (No animals or imaginary creatures!!!) *use for tech savvy kids, or kids with internet but no books at home
I would like to see IDCL this: (feel free to respond with additional suggestions!)
- Find a way to add the bookmark to the site on the computer's desktop (rather than on the browser) as an icon (similar to the way apps works on an Iphone/Ipad)
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
The Question of Audience
Peter Levine's article for this week (A Public Voice for Youth: The Audience Problem in Digital Media and Civic Education) brought up an issue I had not thought much about--who is the audience for all of this digital media that we are having kids create; and even more importantly, what impact can sharing the work have in their lives and the lives of users?
I'm already convinced that facilitating the creation of digital media by youth is beneficial. I hadn't thought too far beyond that to the *purpose* of youth creations (other than the inherent benefits within creation) and the *who* of the intended audience. I need to do a bit more thinking before I can come to a conclusion on ways to implement these ideas within the kinds of programming I have done and am doing with young people, but I am both slightly astonished and extremely pleased to see that meaningful civic engagement has been linked to such positive outcomes among at-risk youth. I am particularly intrigued in the idea of envisioning local youth affinity groups as communities, whether schools, clubs, etc.
Eli Neiburger has spoken on the topics of gaming tournaments and civic engagement--particularly how video game tournaments can teach youth how to be good competitors, find a place within an affinity group, and effect change. I found this article [Libraries, Videogames and Civic Engagement] that expresses some of his ideas, as well as thoughts from Jenny Levine and others.
And I will continue mulling over the question of whether production in and of itself is enough, or whether it needs to be meaningful and situated within an audience, and how that can be done.
I'm already convinced that facilitating the creation of digital media by youth is beneficial. I hadn't thought too far beyond that to the *purpose* of youth creations (other than the inherent benefits within creation) and the *who* of the intended audience. I need to do a bit more thinking before I can come to a conclusion on ways to implement these ideas within the kinds of programming I have done and am doing with young people, but I am both slightly astonished and extremely pleased to see that meaningful civic engagement has been linked to such positive outcomes among at-risk youth. I am particularly intrigued in the idea of envisioning local youth affinity groups as communities, whether schools, clubs, etc.
Eli Neiburger has spoken on the topics of gaming tournaments and civic engagement--particularly how video game tournaments can teach youth how to be good competitors, find a place within an affinity group, and effect change. I found this article [Libraries, Videogames and Civic Engagement] that expresses some of his ideas, as well as thoughts from Jenny Levine and others.
And I will continue mulling over the question of whether production in and of itself is enough, or whether it needs to be meaningful and situated within an audience, and how that can be done.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Reluctant Media Participant
I am a twenty-eight year old person who had the internet in high school, video games as a child, and e-mail as a college student and yet I find that rather than being pulled into the vast worlds that are available in the internet age I have resisted a large online presence. This is my first participation in a blog. I am not on Facebook, MySpace, or Twitter. I have never played a Sims game or loaded a video onto YouTube, however I have been challenged to think about the ways that media literacy can effectively be taught in the classroom and how libraries can support this instruction. I looked at some of the elements that I felt could fit a variety of media platforms as a way of bridging the gap between my lack of media experience with the task of working with students in this very realm.
Some of the characteristics that Jenkins attributes to the informal learning that accompanies participation in popular culture is the experimental and innovative aspects. There is a lot of space for exploration and participation that is not always encouraged in traditional classrooms. This asset to media literacy allows for a lot of trial and error and risks without the drama of a failed test. The participants are challenged to question the very core of the game and to take chances with their understandings and expectations. As a best practice for cultivating media literacy, this freedom in the exploration should be encouraged and celebrated.
Another aspect of media literacy education is knowing the student population. Will the students have the equipment and access to effectively carry out a media-based assignment? Does the school have the resources to support an aggressively media centered educational initiative? I worked in a school where students struggled to supply their own pencils, paper and an adequate lunch, so media education will need to be creatively implemented during class time or with the school's computer lab. Jenkins examines the challenges of students who have their primary media experience in the classroom. These students rely on the teacher or other students to learn skills that others students have already learned at home. The educator must be carefully navigate the wide range of skill levels and acknowledge the different levels have more to do with experience than effort.
An important aspect of media literacy and the educational practices that support it is the critical examination of sources. Marlee Asselin in her article entitled "Towards a Transformative Pedagogy for School Libraries 2.0" encourages educators to cultivate student's ability to deeply and critically evaluate information by asking the questions of "what is credible?" and "who decides?" She remarks that many times students' information is found by a quick Google search and then scanning the first search option listed. Students need to be aware that these items found in search results have various levels of commercialism, credibility, and relevance to their intended topic. A huge part of best practices for media literacy is teaching students how to identify and evaluate the information that is presented. As internet resources continue to expand both in quantity and quality, Jenkins argues that new sources will make huge strides in credibility. For example, Wikipedia has been found to be roughly as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica, but lacks the same credibility as the established resource. Renee Hobbs in her article in the American Behavioral Scientist also identified critical maturity and self-confidence when judging texts as a tool that can be applied to media education on a world wide scale. As students continue to be bombarded with texts, images, videos, and audio files they must learn to identify the sources and biases within the information in order to effectively navigate a media saturated world.
Once students have the skills to critically evaluate information, the possibilities and benefits of networking and negotiation in an online environment will be even more apparent. Jenkins defines networking as the ability to "sample and distill multiple, independent perspectives" (Jenkins 2006, 51) as well as the ability to navigate social networking sites in an effective manner. These spaces offer a place for students to share their work with a community and allows the community to respond to the student's ideas. Both aspects of networking are used in this process as the student must wade through multiple perspectives and share their ideals in a social environment.
All in all, the writings of Jenkins, Hobbs, and Asselin have identified skills that students need in order to effectively navigate the media world. Best practices for media literacy should include activities that allow students the freedom to experiment, innovate, and critically examine texts so that they will be able to fully participate in the changing landscape of the public life.
Some of the characteristics that Jenkins attributes to the informal learning that accompanies participation in popular culture is the experimental and innovative aspects. There is a lot of space for exploration and participation that is not always encouraged in traditional classrooms. This asset to media literacy allows for a lot of trial and error and risks without the drama of a failed test. The participants are challenged to question the very core of the game and to take chances with their understandings and expectations. As a best practice for cultivating media literacy, this freedom in the exploration should be encouraged and celebrated.
Another aspect of media literacy education is knowing the student population. Will the students have the equipment and access to effectively carry out a media-based assignment? Does the school have the resources to support an aggressively media centered educational initiative? I worked in a school where students struggled to supply their own pencils, paper and an adequate lunch, so media education will need to be creatively implemented during class time or with the school's computer lab. Jenkins examines the challenges of students who have their primary media experience in the classroom. These students rely on the teacher or other students to learn skills that others students have already learned at home. The educator must be carefully navigate the wide range of skill levels and acknowledge the different levels have more to do with experience than effort.
An important aspect of media literacy and the educational practices that support it is the critical examination of sources. Marlee Asselin in her article entitled "Towards a Transformative Pedagogy for School Libraries 2.0" encourages educators to cultivate student's ability to deeply and critically evaluate information by asking the questions of "what is credible?" and "who decides?" She remarks that many times students' information is found by a quick Google search and then scanning the first search option listed. Students need to be aware that these items found in search results have various levels of commercialism, credibility, and relevance to their intended topic. A huge part of best practices for media literacy is teaching students how to identify and evaluate the information that is presented. As internet resources continue to expand both in quantity and quality, Jenkins argues that new sources will make huge strides in credibility. For example, Wikipedia has been found to be roughly as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica, but lacks the same credibility as the established resource. Renee Hobbs in her article in the American Behavioral Scientist also identified critical maturity and self-confidence when judging texts as a tool that can be applied to media education on a world wide scale. As students continue to be bombarded with texts, images, videos, and audio files they must learn to identify the sources and biases within the information in order to effectively navigate a media saturated world.
Once students have the skills to critically evaluate information, the possibilities and benefits of networking and negotiation in an online environment will be even more apparent. Jenkins defines networking as the ability to "sample and distill multiple, independent perspectives" (Jenkins 2006, 51) as well as the ability to navigate social networking sites in an effective manner. These spaces offer a place for students to share their work with a community and allows the community to respond to the student's ideas. Both aspects of networking are used in this process as the student must wade through multiple perspectives and share their ideals in a social environment.
All in all, the writings of Jenkins, Hobbs, and Asselin have identified skills that students need in order to effectively navigate the media world. Best practices for media literacy should include activities that allow students the freedom to experiment, innovate, and critically examine texts so that they will be able to fully participate in the changing landscape of the public life.
Aussie Internet Filter
Although I realize our discussion on internet fair use and censorship is a couple weeks away, an article caught my eye this week in the Associated Press: US concerned by Australian Internet filter plan. It talks about Australia’s plan to impose a countrywide filter on the internet that would exclude websites containing child pornography, sexual violence and criminal drug use. The filter would be constantly updated based on recommendations and public complaints. Numerous companies (such as Google and Yahoo) as well as the U.S. government have voiced their concern over this action that could become law later this year if the Australian Parliament approves it.
The idea of a national filter imposed by a democratic government shocked me when I initially heard the story. But as I began to think about it, I realized that we are not far from this standard, especially when it comes down to America’s public institutions. Although we have weeks dedicated to the reading of banned books, many schools and libraries think nothing of filtering the internet. Schools and libraries often have internet filters in order to prevent students and patrons from accessing “unsavory” webpages and information. However, even with the most positive of intentions, these filters often block users from accessing information that may not be so heinous. The issue I find with internet filters is that often the first intention often snowballs, so that once one keyword or site is blocked, it is much easier to continue the process. In the elementary district where I work, the filters originally started by blocking sites with profanity, nudity and sex. I’m sure that it stemmed from a desire to shield our youth from images and words that were deemed beyond their maturity level. However, in recent years, the district began filtering many web 2.0 sites including Facebook, MySpace and YouTube. While its true that some of these sites may contain questionable content, the main reason that these sites were blocked was because they were seen as “timewasters.” It seems to me that once censorship starts, it is difficult to contain it.
While I don’t deny that child pornography, sexual violence and criminal drug use should be condemned, is it right to censor and filter our link to the web? It would seem to me that if websites are breaking the law by posting such things that the authors of these pages would be prosecuted and the sites shut down anyway. I realize that with the complexity and vastness of the internet, that policing the World Wide Web cannot be an efficient task. Perhaps it is much easier to simply block keywords across the board. However, the easiest path is not always the most logical one. What are we truly teaching kids when we block their searches at school? Is it simply to just wait until they get home and retry on an unblocked and unsupervised computer? If we as educators and librarians do not get the chance to teach our patrons and students proper use, who will?
I will most certainly be following this story, because it will truly have huge ramifications for the democratic world if legislation passes. I also hope that as the U.S. government stands ready to condemn this action that they in turn take a look at what our public institutions already have in practice. Perhaps it is time that we take a look inward.
The idea of a national filter imposed by a democratic government shocked me when I initially heard the story. But as I began to think about it, I realized that we are not far from this standard, especially when it comes down to America’s public institutions. Although we have weeks dedicated to the reading of banned books, many schools and libraries think nothing of filtering the internet. Schools and libraries often have internet filters in order to prevent students and patrons from accessing “unsavory” webpages and information. However, even with the most positive of intentions, these filters often block users from accessing information that may not be so heinous. The issue I find with internet filters is that often the first intention often snowballs, so that once one keyword or site is blocked, it is much easier to continue the process. In the elementary district where I work, the filters originally started by blocking sites with profanity, nudity and sex. I’m sure that it stemmed from a desire to shield our youth from images and words that were deemed beyond their maturity level. However, in recent years, the district began filtering many web 2.0 sites including Facebook, MySpace and YouTube. While its true that some of these sites may contain questionable content, the main reason that these sites were blocked was because they were seen as “timewasters.” It seems to me that once censorship starts, it is difficult to contain it.
While I don’t deny that child pornography, sexual violence and criminal drug use should be condemned, is it right to censor and filter our link to the web? It would seem to me that if websites are breaking the law by posting such things that the authors of these pages would be prosecuted and the sites shut down anyway. I realize that with the complexity and vastness of the internet, that policing the World Wide Web cannot be an efficient task. Perhaps it is much easier to simply block keywords across the board. However, the easiest path is not always the most logical one. What are we truly teaching kids when we block their searches at school? Is it simply to just wait until they get home and retry on an unblocked and unsupervised computer? If we as educators and librarians do not get the chance to teach our patrons and students proper use, who will?
I will most certainly be following this story, because it will truly have huge ramifications for the democratic world if legislation passes. I also hope that as the U.S. government stands ready to condemn this action that they in turn take a look at what our public institutions already have in practice. Perhaps it is time that we take a look inward.
Comics and Game-Related Collection Development and Programming Resources for Librarians
A few resources to get you started....Remember to look back on our class notes slides on Moodle for links to other relevant sites.
Comics-Related
Mike Lavin at the University of Buffalo has a great starting point for information about comics. Here you can find resources to broaden your understanding of the history of comics as well as links to best-selling comics and reviews for librarians.
The Cooperative Children's Book Center at the University of Wisconsin also maintains a comics-related resource page that lists articles, links to review sites, and names titles useful for collection development.
If you're interested in more historically-focused information on comics, you can't beat the New York Public Library's Comic Books Research Guide.
Games-Related
Although it was included in the readings for gaming, Scott Nicholson's Games in Libraries links to useful information on all aspects of gaming.
It's brief, but this Library Journal blog post offers a good rationale for collecting and programming with games in libraries.
Check out this New York school library system's game library website for a rationale, ties to learning standards, and more.
--Carol
Comics-Related
Mike Lavin at the University of Buffalo has a great starting point for information about comics. Here you can find resources to broaden your understanding of the history of comics as well as links to best-selling comics and reviews for librarians.
The Cooperative Children's Book Center at the University of Wisconsin also maintains a comics-related resource page that lists articles, links to review sites, and names titles useful for collection development.
If you're interested in more historically-focused information on comics, you can't beat the New York Public Library's Comic Books Research Guide.
Games-Related
Although it was included in the readings for gaming, Scott Nicholson's Games in Libraries links to useful information on all aspects of gaming.
It's brief, but this Library Journal blog post offers a good rationale for collecting and programming with games in libraries.
Check out this New York school library system's game library website for a rationale, ties to learning standards, and more.
--Carol
Monday, March 29, 2010
The Creepiest (Humorous) Children's Books Ever
I thought that some of you might find this slideshow called The Creepiest Children's Books Ever humorous. I think the title is a bit misleading as not all of the books are creepy but rather quite funny instead.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Teaching in a Brave New World
Earlier this year, a student sent me this thought-provoking cartoon comparison of the the dystopian visions of George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, based on the writings of culture-critic Neil Postman. We discussed it in my senior English class after reading M.T. Anderson’s Feed. In our discussion, students themselves questioned the impact on society of our increased engagement with electronic media and some wondered if they themselves weren’t as “smart” as a result (several gave the example of having trouble with simple math as a result of their reliance on calculators). While they (and I) weren’t saying that we should toss out all our computers and iPods and cell phones and GPS systems, it does make me wonder how to use all of this to our benefit and not to our eventual destruction (not to be too dramatic about it).
So how do we avoid Huxley’s Brave New World? One way, I think, is to realize what the new media can and can’t do. As the Jenkins article suggests, the new media has created a more participatory culture. This has the potential to combat the lack of engagement and “voice” young people often feel in society and as citizens; if they feel like they are empowered, this could encourage them to keep up with current events, for example, more so than the young people of previous generations. As Jenkins also points out, however, the obstacles to this include not only the digital divide, which enables some young people greater access to this participatory culture than others, but also the “transparency problem”: students can access information more readily, but need help analyzing it independently. Young people, according to Jenkins, judge credibility of information, for example, predominately on format and design as opposed to analysis of the content itself. In general, Jenkins points out that these new literacies add to, don’t replace, traditional literacies. He writes, “Before students can engage with the new participatory culture, they must learn to read and write.” He notes that students need reading and writing skills as well as research skills and technical skills in order to fully utilize the potential benefits of the new literacies.
Other writers seem to gloss over these pre-conditions to successful engagement with new media. In Dr. Ross J. Todd’s article, “Youth and Their Virtual Networked Worlds: Research Findings and Implications for School Libraries” in the July 2008 issue of School Libraries Worldwide, Todd initially acknowledges that young people have been given too much credit for mastery of the new media. Todd writes, “According to Jenkins, as reported by Baer, on the Digital natives blog at Harvard University (2007), labels such as ‘digital immigrants’ and ‘digital natives’ increasingly oversimplify and overexaggerate generational differences, and indeed, convey the assumption that young people have innate digital skills.” Todd also cites research that concluded, “that despite increased access to information technology and information sources electronically, behaviours that predate the Web continue to persist.” In other words, students continue to underutilize advanced search options and fail to consider “relevance, accuracy and authority of information," both of which are to their detriment in accessing information. In general, Todd points out that the “Google generation” is no better at research than those who came before them. In doing so, Todd seems to be acknowledging the same needs that Jenkins does for traditional literacies.
However, Todd goes on in his articles to champion the learning potential of social networking, encouraging librarians to rethink the library as a “knowledge commons” as opposed to an “information place.” He argues that young people’s new facility with social networking should shift our focus from students as information consumers to students as knowledge creators. While on the surface, I agree with his enthusiasm for the creative potential of social networking, Todd seems to suggest that students are either information consumers OR knowledge creators, something with which I strongly disagree. I would argue instead, as I think Jenkins does, that in order to create knowledge, in order to have something to share in this participatory culture, students still need to be informed. And, in order to be informed, students need traditional literacies.
The Rice University online media guides we looked at this week for class are great tools, but without traditional literacies, I don’t know how I could get my students to locate them and read them. If we REPLACE our focus on traditional literacies with these new media literacies, our students will not be better prepared for their 21st century lives, as Todd argues, but unable to fully utilize all that their 21st century lives have to offer. The goal, as Jenkins argues, needs to be adding the new to the old and finding how the two can enhance each other. Recently, I was in the library with my honors level American Studies class. One asked if she could ask the librarian if the school library had any books on her research topic. While I was happy to let her do so, I asked first if she had checked the online catalog yet. She had not and, as it turned out, did not know how to do so. She had been at the high school since freshman year. The librarians do a wonderful job, put together excellent electronic resource lists for topics, subscribe to excellent databases, and yet students often miss the best resources because of their poor research skills. In addition to research skills, students’ ability to create with technology is also impaired by poor reading and critical thinking skills. Using iMovie, for example, requires patience, logic, and reading directions to become familiar with it, something which students in our information-rich era don’t seem to be lacking. No one entity at school is in charge of teaching these skills; students receive them piecemeal in their classes, in library visits, but without a clearly articulated vision of where/when/what learning targets/goals are to be achieved and why. With so many choices and so much information, we don’t seem any smarter.
While Todd invokes Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World as a counterpoint to what he envisions as the wonderful opportunity for school librarians to connect to students, he glosses over how we will avoid this fate. Huxley’s fears that giving us so much information will, in Neil Postman’s words, “drown the truth in a sea of irrelevance,” don’t have to become reality. We must not rush to the new media, however, as the answer to all our educational woes, but rather as another tool, one which can only be utilized successfully in conjunction with traditional literacies like reading, writing, and critical thinking.
So how do we avoid Huxley’s Brave New World? One way, I think, is to realize what the new media can and can’t do. As the Jenkins article suggests, the new media has created a more participatory culture. This has the potential to combat the lack of engagement and “voice” young people often feel in society and as citizens; if they feel like they are empowered, this could encourage them to keep up with current events, for example, more so than the young people of previous generations. As Jenkins also points out, however, the obstacles to this include not only the digital divide, which enables some young people greater access to this participatory culture than others, but also the “transparency problem”: students can access information more readily, but need help analyzing it independently. Young people, according to Jenkins, judge credibility of information, for example, predominately on format and design as opposed to analysis of the content itself. In general, Jenkins points out that these new literacies add to, don’t replace, traditional literacies. He writes, “Before students can engage with the new participatory culture, they must learn to read and write.” He notes that students need reading and writing skills as well as research skills and technical skills in order to fully utilize the potential benefits of the new literacies.
Other writers seem to gloss over these pre-conditions to successful engagement with new media. In Dr. Ross J. Todd’s article, “Youth and Their Virtual Networked Worlds: Research Findings and Implications for School Libraries” in the July 2008 issue of School Libraries Worldwide, Todd initially acknowledges that young people have been given too much credit for mastery of the new media. Todd writes, “According to Jenkins, as reported by Baer, on the Digital natives blog at Harvard University (2007), labels such as ‘digital immigrants’ and ‘digital natives’ increasingly oversimplify and overexaggerate generational differences, and indeed, convey the assumption that young people have innate digital skills.” Todd also cites research that concluded, “that despite increased access to information technology and information sources electronically, behaviours that predate the Web continue to persist.” In other words, students continue to underutilize advanced search options and fail to consider “relevance, accuracy and authority of information," both of which are to their detriment in accessing information. In general, Todd points out that the “Google generation” is no better at research than those who came before them. In doing so, Todd seems to be acknowledging the same needs that Jenkins does for traditional literacies.
However, Todd goes on in his articles to champion the learning potential of social networking, encouraging librarians to rethink the library as a “knowledge commons” as opposed to an “information place.” He argues that young people’s new facility with social networking should shift our focus from students as information consumers to students as knowledge creators. While on the surface, I agree with his enthusiasm for the creative potential of social networking, Todd seems to suggest that students are either information consumers OR knowledge creators, something with which I strongly disagree. I would argue instead, as I think Jenkins does, that in order to create knowledge, in order to have something to share in this participatory culture, students still need to be informed. And, in order to be informed, students need traditional literacies.
The Rice University online media guides we looked at this week for class are great tools, but without traditional literacies, I don’t know how I could get my students to locate them and read them. If we REPLACE our focus on traditional literacies with these new media literacies, our students will not be better prepared for their 21st century lives, as Todd argues, but unable to fully utilize all that their 21st century lives have to offer. The goal, as Jenkins argues, needs to be adding the new to the old and finding how the two can enhance each other. Recently, I was in the library with my honors level American Studies class. One asked if she could ask the librarian if the school library had any books on her research topic. While I was happy to let her do so, I asked first if she had checked the online catalog yet. She had not and, as it turned out, did not know how to do so. She had been at the high school since freshman year. The librarians do a wonderful job, put together excellent electronic resource lists for topics, subscribe to excellent databases, and yet students often miss the best resources because of their poor research skills. In addition to research skills, students’ ability to create with technology is also impaired by poor reading and critical thinking skills. Using iMovie, for example, requires patience, logic, and reading directions to become familiar with it, something which students in our information-rich era don’t seem to be lacking. No one entity at school is in charge of teaching these skills; students receive them piecemeal in their classes, in library visits, but without a clearly articulated vision of where/when/what learning targets/goals are to be achieved and why. With so many choices and so much information, we don’t seem any smarter.
While Todd invokes Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World as a counterpoint to what he envisions as the wonderful opportunity for school librarians to connect to students, he glosses over how we will avoid this fate. Huxley’s fears that giving us so much information will, in Neil Postman’s words, “drown the truth in a sea of irrelevance,” don’t have to become reality. We must not rush to the new media, however, as the answer to all our educational woes, but rather as another tool, one which can only be utilized successfully in conjunction with traditional literacies like reading, writing, and critical thinking.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Is the Media the Message?
After watching Scott McCloud’s talk at the TED conference in 2004, I can’t stop thinking about the ideas he talked about, and how they may apply to libraries. McCloud and other comic book artists are heavily invested in print media—and as he discusses in his talk, everything about a comic, from using panels to present time frame, to using left-right tracking to create storyline, exist because of adaptations creators made to allow comics to fit into the specific media of paper, newspaper, and eventually books.
Libraries, too, are heavily invested in print media. Librarians value print media, specifically books, but also newspapers and magazines, as privileged information sources with good reason. They are durable and portable, go through a vetting and editorial process to ensure their content quality, and have served as the cornerstone of thought and learning for generations. But as McCloud points out, with new media come new opportunities and challenges. For comic artists, this meant discovering that you couldn’t plop print-based comics directly into electronic screens, add sound & interactivity, and expect it to act in the intended ways. He discusses how the linear, time frame based panels start to lose cohesiveness if you take readers out of the in-text timeline by introducing outside media.
To me, this is a fabulous metaphor for what many people (and libraries) are struggling with in using and applying new media—oftentimes we want to plop existing content in its existing form into these new channels. But to really be meaningful, the content needs to be re-conceived in new ways that are specifically designed to exploit the benefits of that new media.
To clarify this a bit, I’d like to take a look at what McCloud says, then discuss some examples. And along the way, I will trace some questions that I had as I listened to his talk. McCloud talks about “a McLuhenesque mistake” that many people make when looking at new technology. This mistake is to appropriate the shape of a previous technology as the content of new technology. Not being super familiar with Marshall McLuhen , I decided to try to look up some of his thoughts to see if I could clarify this for myself a bit more. From Wikipedia, McLuhen, perhaps most famous for the ideas of “global village” and “the medium is the message,” was a professor of English literature, a literary critic, and a communications theorist (interestingly, he was also a tutor and friend to Walter Ong, who wrote about the imperiousness of literacy in our of our class readings). In The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man, he wrote about how communication technology (from alphabetic writing to printing press to electronic media) affects cognitive organization (a la Proust and the Squid maybe?) and hence social organization.
He wrote in the 1960s about how individualistic print culture would eventually be brought to an end by “electronic interdependence” where electronic media replaces visual culture with aural/oral culture, coming full circle from the much earlier movement form oral to print. I’m guessing that where McCloud differs from McLuhan is in McLuhan’s assertions in Understanding Media (1964), that media itself, and not the messages it carries, should be the focus of study (hence “the medium is the message”).
For McCloud, the medium seems to be only useful as a way by which to more clearly, fluidly, and naturally to pass the message in a way that it can be received by others. I tend to agree with McCloud on this, that it is the content that should be valued. However, I find that quite a few librarians and teachers disagree with me on this, as we heavily value the medium of books. Can the content gotten from a web site really be as valuable or confirmable as the information gotten from a book? What do we lose in a generation of kids that gets their primary information from the Web instead of from books?
These questions are of real concern to librarians and teachers, as I think they should be. Books are valuable, precisely because of the process by which they are created, vetted, edited, and scrutinized. These same processes have not necessarily built up around digital media and web sites. And in the places that they do exist, such as online journals, the information has become so guarded, locked down, difficult to access, and poorly manipulated , that it becomes extremely difficult to use. But I think this proves McCloud’s point. It really isn’t the specific media that necessarily defines the quality of the information, but rather it is the surrounding processes that ensure the quality. And since much of the web doesn’t have these processes built in, it is much more suspect and susceptible to inaccuracies. On the other hand, though, online databases suffer from the opposite problem, the one that McCloud points out. They have appropriated the shape of the previous media (bound print journals) that have to be subscribed to, are limited to libraries and academics, etc. and carried these ideas over as content. I’m not saying they haven’t had good reasons to do this, but it does lead to many problems, including: young people find these databases difficult, inscrutable, not helpful, and hence will go to media such as Google or Wikipedia instead, which have succeeded in making content accessible and usable.
McCloud talks about finding a “durable mutation” in comics to allow for staying power that will marry both form and content in usable, helpful ways. I wonder how this will play out in online representations of information.
These ideas crosses over to ways in which teens interact with media for pleasure as well. I am interested in researching video games, and for me they have really come to represent a new means by which rich storytelling goes on. Without comparing the quality or value of the stories in games versus books, I’d like to just look at some differences in the media. I think games are attractive to so many because they are immersive stories. A game player is not only receiving a story, but is acting within the story, making choices, manipulating the world, solving puzzles, and determining the course of the plotline. To me this is an example of a place where the content was valued, and the media was exploited to full extent in order to support and extend the content.
Now, I’m not saying that the quality of video game storytelling is necessarily as accomplished as that within books. I don’t think it is (yet), as it is a new and developing form that is currently more focused on profitability than artistic accomplishment. However, I do think it has the potential to be extremely high quality and an extremely valuable experience for people who interact with games. However, historically we as librarians have placed extreme value on books, and excluded other media, from TV to movies to games. I understand the range of reasons for this, and I have heard the arguments, and I even myself believe that the media of print and writing is extremely important for success in today’s society. However, I also wonder if we as librarians and educators shouldn’t be thinking about what our youth will need for the world of the future as well. Have we so privileged the “shape” or the “media” that we have started to forget about or neglect content, especially if it doesn’t come in the preferred form?
Libraries, too, are heavily invested in print media. Librarians value print media, specifically books, but also newspapers and magazines, as privileged information sources with good reason. They are durable and portable, go through a vetting and editorial process to ensure their content quality, and have served as the cornerstone of thought and learning for generations. But as McCloud points out, with new media come new opportunities and challenges. For comic artists, this meant discovering that you couldn’t plop print-based comics directly into electronic screens, add sound & interactivity, and expect it to act in the intended ways. He discusses how the linear, time frame based panels start to lose cohesiveness if you take readers out of the in-text timeline by introducing outside media.
To me, this is a fabulous metaphor for what many people (and libraries) are struggling with in using and applying new media—oftentimes we want to plop existing content in its existing form into these new channels. But to really be meaningful, the content needs to be re-conceived in new ways that are specifically designed to exploit the benefits of that new media.
To clarify this a bit, I’d like to take a look at what McCloud says, then discuss some examples. And along the way, I will trace some questions that I had as I listened to his talk. McCloud talks about “a McLuhenesque mistake” that many people make when looking at new technology. This mistake is to appropriate the shape of a previous technology as the content of new technology. Not being super familiar with Marshall McLuhen
He wrote in the 1960s about how individualistic print culture would eventually be brought to an end by “electronic interdependence” where electronic media replaces visual culture with aural/oral culture, coming full circle from the much earlier movement form oral to print. I’m guessing that where McCloud differs from McLuhan is in McLuhan’s assertions in Understanding Media (1964), that media itself, and not the messages it carries, should be the focus of study (hence “the medium is the message”).
For McCloud, the medium seems to be only useful as a way by which to more clearly, fluidly, and naturally to pass the message in a way that it can be received by others. I tend to agree with McCloud on this, that it is the content that should be valued. However, I find that quite a few librarians and teachers disagree with me on this, as we heavily value the medium of books. Can the content gotten from a web site really be as valuable or confirmable as the information gotten from a book? What do we lose in a generation of kids that gets their primary information from the Web instead of from books?
These questions are of real concern to librarians and teachers, as I think they should be. Books are valuable, precisely because of the process by which they are created, vetted, edited, and scrutinized. These same processes have not necessarily built up around digital media and web sites. And in the places that they do exist, such as online journals, the information has become so guarded, locked down, difficult to access, and poorly manipulated , that it becomes extremely difficult to use. But I think this proves McCloud’s point. It really isn’t the specific media that necessarily defines the quality of the information, but rather it is the surrounding processes that ensure the quality. And since much of the web doesn’t have these processes built in, it is much more suspect and susceptible to inaccuracies. On the other hand, though, online databases suffer from the opposite problem, the one that McCloud points out. They have appropriated the shape of the previous media (bound print journals) that have to be subscribed to, are limited to libraries and academics, etc. and carried these ideas over as content. I’m not saying they haven’t had good reasons to do this, but it does lead to many problems, including: young people find these databases difficult, inscrutable, not helpful, and hence will go to media such as Google or Wikipedia instead, which have succeeded in making content accessible and usable.
McCloud talks about finding a “durable mutation” in comics to allow for staying power that will marry both form and content in usable, helpful ways. I wonder how this will play out in online representations of information.
These ideas crosses over to ways in which teens interact with media for pleasure as well. I am interested in researching video games, and for me they have really come to represent a new means by which rich storytelling goes on. Without comparing the quality or value of the stories in games versus books, I’d like to just look at some differences in the media. I think games are attractive to so many because they are immersive stories. A game player is not only receiving a story, but is acting within the story, making choices, manipulating the world, solving puzzles, and determining the course of the plotline. To me this is an example of a place where the content was valued, and the media was exploited to full extent in order to support and extend the content.
Now, I’m not saying that the quality of video game storytelling is necessarily as accomplished as that within books. I don’t think it is (yet), as it is a new and developing form that is currently more focused on profitability than artistic accomplishment. However, I do think it has the potential to be extremely high quality and an extremely valuable experience for people who interact with games. However, historically we as librarians have placed extreme value on books, and excluded other media, from TV to movies to games. I understand the range of reasons for this, and I have heard the arguments, and I even myself believe that the media of print and writing is extremely important for success in today’s society. However, I also wonder if we as librarians and educators shouldn’t be thinking about what our youth will need for the world of the future as well. Have we so privileged the “shape” or the “media” that we have started to forget about or neglect content, especially if it doesn’t come in the preferred form?
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Another Reluctant Gamer Comes Around
Much of what Sarah posted (Reluctant Gamer, March 14) resonated with me. Video games have long seemed pointless to me. Shooting and avoiding being shot, or moving to the next level, just don’t hold much interest for me. The whole language of using up one or more of your given “lives” has no appeal. But, like Sarah, I am slowly but surely coming to see that there is more to gaming than shooting and fighting and that there might be some fun, and yes, even some value, in playing video games—at least some of them.
Part of my resistance to video games comes from my essential non-competitiveness. I really don’t much enjoy beating people, and because my exposure to video games has consisted almost entirely of listening to people (most often my sons) playing shoot-em-up and fighting games, my impression of video games has been one of violence and fierce competition.
Another source of resistance is that I’m just not physically quick enough to play many of these games. I can’t react fast enough with the little buttons or joystick, I’m vaguely embarrassed at how bad I am at it, and I don’t have the time to play them over and over until I can get good at them.
I am aware, of course, that there are games that aren’t violent and don’t require shooting, such as Oregon Trail, Sim City, The Sims, Roller Coaster Tycoon, Portal, and now Spore. And I can see where they might be more fun for me, but by the time I was aware of such games, I no longer had the time or inclination to learn and play them.
I also was fascinated by Will Wright’s demonstration of his game, and I can imagine I might enjoy playing it (again, if I could only find the time) and I can see where kids might learn from playing it, which has gotten me thinking about why and how video games could be viewed as educational tools, or at least as not being brain-draining, creativity-sapping, time-wasting traps, which is pretty much how I have viewed most video games in the past.
Why might learning about evolution and long-term thinking be more likely to happen from playing Spore than from studying those topics in school? Why would kids prefer to learn about the difficulties of opening the frontier by playing Oregon Trail than by hearing a lecture or reading a book? Because playing Spore or Oregon Trail is fun, of course. And what makes it fun? It’s fun because it’s play. The essence of play according to the Wikipedia article that we read, is that it is both voluntary and intrinsically motivated. I’m willing to accept that this is an excellent definition of play. Something that a young person does willingly will naturally be more successful than something he or she is required to do. I think this principle also explains, at least in part, why attempts to introduce games, whether video games, role-playing games or board games, into classrooms are sometimes not very successful. When a teacher requires students to play a game, it immediately stops being play; it is no longer voluntary or intrinsically motivated.
This concept of intrinsic motivation also underlies Maria Montessori’s method of teaching. She understood that children love to play and that they can and will learn from playing, especially if they are offered high-quality materials in a carefully prepared environment. The Montessori “method”, in my view, is not so much a method, which implies rules and certain steps to be taken, as an approach or way of thinking. She believed that children inherently want to learn and make sense of their world and are remarkably capable of doing that on their own if provided with the tools to do it and the freedom to do it at their own pace.
This belief about how children learn was echoed by John Holt, a teacher and school reform advocate who eventually became a radical advocate of unschooling. He wrote passionately about the ability of children to learn on their own. He believed that: “Learning is not the product of teaching. Learning is the product of the activity of learners.” In his view, education is more about allowing children to discover than about teaching them what we have decided they ought to know.
I believe that both Maria Montessori and John Holt would have liked Will Wright’s Spore. This game provides children with a chance to learn by engaging in an activity they choose simply because it is interesting to them.
I want to note, also, that I think it is significant that the definition of “play” that I am using here does not include the word “easy”. I can imagine someone reading what I have written so far and thinking that learning can’t always be easy, can’t be all fun and games, and that sometimes it takes good old-fashioned effort to learn something. I agree. My point has more to do with the voluntariness of learning and the motivation for learning. Although I don’t think I could advocate an immediate and complete abandonment of the public school system, I do think that the more that children are trusted to guide their own learning, and move at their own pace, and learn by the methods that they know work best for them, the more they will learn, and the more quickly they will learn. And for that reason, I would hope that parents and teachers alike might maintain an open mind about the possibility that children are not just wasting time when they play video games and about the possibility that they might be learning the skills they need to learn when they choose to play games.
Part of my resistance to video games comes from my essential non-competitiveness. I really don’t much enjoy beating people, and because my exposure to video games has consisted almost entirely of listening to people (most often my sons) playing shoot-em-up and fighting games, my impression of video games has been one of violence and fierce competition.
Another source of resistance is that I’m just not physically quick enough to play many of these games. I can’t react fast enough with the little buttons or joystick, I’m vaguely embarrassed at how bad I am at it, and I don’t have the time to play them over and over until I can get good at them.
I am aware, of course, that there are games that aren’t violent and don’t require shooting, such as Oregon Trail, Sim City, The Sims, Roller Coaster Tycoon, Portal, and now Spore. And I can see where they might be more fun for me, but by the time I was aware of such games, I no longer had the time or inclination to learn and play them.
I also was fascinated by Will Wright’s demonstration of his game, and I can imagine I might enjoy playing it (again, if I could only find the time) and I can see where kids might learn from playing it, which has gotten me thinking about why and how video games could be viewed as educational tools, or at least as not being brain-draining, creativity-sapping, time-wasting traps, which is pretty much how I have viewed most video games in the past.
Why might learning about evolution and long-term thinking be more likely to happen from playing Spore than from studying those topics in school? Why would kids prefer to learn about the difficulties of opening the frontier by playing Oregon Trail than by hearing a lecture or reading a book? Because playing Spore or Oregon Trail is fun, of course. And what makes it fun? It’s fun because it’s play. The essence of play according to the Wikipedia article that we read, is that it is both voluntary and intrinsically motivated. I’m willing to accept that this is an excellent definition of play. Something that a young person does willingly will naturally be more successful than something he or she is required to do. I think this principle also explains, at least in part, why attempts to introduce games, whether video games, role-playing games or board games, into classrooms are sometimes not very successful. When a teacher requires students to play a game, it immediately stops being play; it is no longer voluntary or intrinsically motivated.
This concept of intrinsic motivation also underlies Maria Montessori’s method of teaching. She understood that children love to play and that they can and will learn from playing, especially if they are offered high-quality materials in a carefully prepared environment. The Montessori “method”, in my view, is not so much a method, which implies rules and certain steps to be taken, as an approach or way of thinking. She believed that children inherently want to learn and make sense of their world and are remarkably capable of doing that on their own if provided with the tools to do it and the freedom to do it at their own pace.
This belief about how children learn was echoed by John Holt, a teacher and school reform advocate who eventually became a radical advocate of unschooling. He wrote passionately about the ability of children to learn on their own. He believed that: “Learning is not the product of teaching. Learning is the product of the activity of learners.” In his view, education is more about allowing children to discover than about teaching them what we have decided they ought to know.
I believe that both Maria Montessori and John Holt would have liked Will Wright’s Spore. This game provides children with a chance to learn by engaging in an activity they choose simply because it is interesting to them.
I want to note, also, that I think it is significant that the definition of “play” that I am using here does not include the word “easy”. I can imagine someone reading what I have written so far and thinking that learning can’t always be easy, can’t be all fun and games, and that sometimes it takes good old-fashioned effort to learn something. I agree. My point has more to do with the voluntariness of learning and the motivation for learning. Although I don’t think I could advocate an immediate and complete abandonment of the public school system, I do think that the more that children are trusted to guide their own learning, and move at their own pace, and learn by the methods that they know work best for them, the more they will learn, and the more quickly they will learn. And for that reason, I would hope that parents and teachers alike might maintain an open mind about the possibility that children are not just wasting time when they play video games and about the possibility that they might be learning the skills they need to learn when they choose to play games.
What's all the Twitter about?
Just before classes began this year, I decided to try out Twitter. I’d heard about it for some time, yet kept putting it off. I don’t use my phone for internet/email access, and still don’t (gasp! I know! So outdated!) So I Twitter from the web (using TweetDeck right now – free software, though you can just use Twitter.com). My attitude was quite dismissive about the whole thing. Twitter? Microblogging? Really? So much of what I heard was negative. Yet there seemed to be more and more positive uses of it. At the fall conference of the Ohio Association for Gifted Children, attendees were encouraged to try out Twitter as several organizations in the gifted and education communities were using it. I had the same dismissive attitude toward Facebook before I began using it, and now I love it. I think this is a common initial response in most humans when faced with a new technology: rejection. Do we really need something else? Why? But could I be wrong about Twitter? Was I missing something?
So I jumped in. And it took a while, as most things do, but the more I use Twitter, the more worthwhile it becomes. I have several communities on Twitter : the gifted education community, social media related sites, especially those dealing with education, the library and book lovers community, the Jane Austen fans . My “celebrities” are Mo Willem’s Pigeon (yes, the Pigeon tweets) and halfpintingalls (whose tweets are in the persona of Laura Ingalls Wilder.) There are also a few personal friends, but for the most part my friends are on Facebook, and my colleagues are on Twitter – so Twitter has ended up being the more professional site for me. Quite recently the local school district started tweeting, so I decided to follow them. I was a bit surprised when they decided to follow me! It is always a little surprising, sometimes flattering, sometimes not, when someone decides to follow you. It is a good reminder that your tweets are public. Just like anything else, you need to think before you tweet. You can protect your tweets so that you decide who can follow you, but this doesn’t seem very friendly to me. This did lead me to reflect more and to start a different Twitter account for the educational support group that I’m involved with, which has been good for helping me to organize my interests .
One of the best things about Twitter is that tweets are limited to only 140 characters. Why is this good? You can quite quickly peruse a long list of items and choose those that sound most interesting to explore further. Often there are links to more information/articles, etc. So what good stuff has been tweeted lately? Here is a sampling from the past week of some tweets that seem particularly relevant to libraries and media literacy.
Social Media Best Practices for Libraries: http://ow.ly/1nWmf from Tame the Web: Libraries, Technology and People. This looks like a great blog, bookmarked using Diigo (if you haven’t tried it, I love this bookmarking tool – allows you to highlight and put post-it style notes on webpages: www.diigo.com). This site has many other posts of interests that I want to come back to explore (quickly scanning I see “use social media to connect with teens”, “digital natives”,” the library tweets “ and more.)
How about 9 Great Reasons Teachers Should Use Twitter?
From James Mitchie (. . . a 21st century educator)’s blog, a post on Reading and Twitter: A Crowd-sourced Twitter Discussion about Getting Kids to Read. He writes openly and passionately about his core beliefs in getting high school kids to value reading and proposes the use of the #edread hashtag on Twitter and asks for collaboration on this project. If you want to check in on how it’s going, look here: http://jamesmichie.blogspot.com/p/edread.html
In the New York Times, an article on Reading and the Web, “Texts without Contexts”
I have recently thought of the idea of “cyberbalkanization” but didn’t know what to call it. This article describes it happening when “Individuals can design feeds and alerts from their favorite Web sites so that they get only the news they want, and with more and more opinion sites and specialized sites, it becomes easier and easier, as Mr. Sunstein observes in his 2009 book “Going to Extremes,” for people “to avoid general-interest newspapers and magazines and to make choices that reflect their own predispositions.” I’ve observed it on Facebook – I choose to receive news from NPR, the Christian Science Monitor, and updates from UNICEF, the Children’s Defense Fund, ALA & ALSC. What does my news look like? How about some of my “friends” whose feeds are from Fox News and such? How do the sites we choose to follow, those we select to appear on our news feeds, shape our thinking? How does this shape our view of the world and who we are? Are our choices more limited? What happens to serendipity?
I mentioned Diigo before, and here is what an article I bookmarked this morning, after learning of it on Twitter, looks like:
Young Learners Need Librarians, Not Just Google - Forbes.com
• In addition to learning how to phrase a search query, students need to learn how to protect themselves online, and how to share their work through wikis, videos, and other interactive media. Without a dedicated guide, they end up, in the words of professor Henry Jenkins, as "feral children of the Internet raised by the Web 2.0 wolves."
Feral children of the Internet – wow! Okay librarians, we’re still needed!
Want to give Twitter a try? I'm bkmuse7. Follow me and I'll follow you!
So I jumped in. And it took a while, as most things do, but the more I use Twitter, the more worthwhile it becomes. I have several communities on Twitter : the gifted education community, social media related sites, especially those dealing with education, the library and book lovers community, the Jane Austen fans . My “celebrities” are Mo Willem’s Pigeon (yes, the Pigeon tweets) and halfpintingalls (whose tweets are in the persona of Laura Ingalls Wilder.) There are also a few personal friends, but for the most part my friends are on Facebook, and my colleagues are on Twitter – so Twitter has ended up being the more professional site for me. Quite recently the local school district started tweeting, so I decided to follow them. I was a bit surprised when they decided to follow me! It is always a little surprising, sometimes flattering, sometimes not, when someone decides to follow you. It is a good reminder that your tweets are public. Just like anything else, you need to think before you tweet. You can protect your tweets so that you decide who can follow you, but this doesn’t seem very friendly to me. This did lead me to reflect more and to start a different Twitter account for the educational support group that I’m involved with, which has been good for helping me to organize my interests .
One of the best things about Twitter is that tweets are limited to only 140 characters. Why is this good? You can quite quickly peruse a long list of items and choose those that sound most interesting to explore further. Often there are links to more information/articles, etc. So what good stuff has been tweeted lately? Here is a sampling from the past week of some tweets that seem particularly relevant to libraries and media literacy.
Social Media Best Practices for Libraries: http://ow.ly/1nWmf from Tame the Web: Libraries, Technology and People. This looks like a great blog, bookmarked using Diigo (if you haven’t tried it, I love this bookmarking tool – allows you to highlight and put post-it style notes on webpages: www.diigo.com). This site has many other posts of interests that I want to come back to explore (quickly scanning I see “use social media to connect with teens”, “digital natives”,” the library tweets “ and more.)
How about 9 Great Reasons Teachers Should Use Twitter?
From James Mitchie (. . . a 21st century educator)’s blog, a post on Reading and Twitter: A Crowd-sourced Twitter Discussion about Getting Kids to Read. He writes openly and passionately about his core beliefs in getting high school kids to value reading and proposes the use of the #edread hashtag on Twitter and asks for collaboration on this project. If you want to check in on how it’s going, look here: http://jamesmichie.blogspot.com/p/edread.html
In the New York Times, an article on Reading and the Web, “Texts without Contexts”
I have recently thought of the idea of “cyberbalkanization” but didn’t know what to call it. This article describes it happening when “Individuals can design feeds and alerts from their favorite Web sites so that they get only the news they want, and with more and more opinion sites and specialized sites, it becomes easier and easier, as Mr. Sunstein observes in his 2009 book “Going to Extremes,” for people “to avoid general-interest newspapers and magazines and to make choices that reflect their own predispositions.” I’ve observed it on Facebook – I choose to receive news from NPR, the Christian Science Monitor, and updates from UNICEF, the Children’s Defense Fund, ALA & ALSC. What does my news look like? How about some of my “friends” whose feeds are from Fox News and such? How do the sites we choose to follow, those we select to appear on our news feeds, shape our thinking? How does this shape our view of the world and who we are? Are our choices more limited? What happens to serendipity?
I mentioned Diigo before, and here is what an article I bookmarked this morning, after learning of it on Twitter, looks like:
Young Learners Need Librarians, Not Just Google - Forbes.com
• In addition to learning how to phrase a search query, students need to learn how to protect themselves online, and how to share their work through wikis, videos, and other interactive media. Without a dedicated guide, they end up, in the words of professor Henry Jenkins, as "feral children of the Internet raised by the Web 2.0 wolves."
Feral children of the Internet – wow! Okay librarians, we’re still needed!
Want to give Twitter a try? I'm bkmuse7. Follow me and I'll follow you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
