Thanks to the wonderful Mr. Florian, my website is up! One of the images didn't come through, but the rest appears to be there (best viewed through Firefox and probably IE; Safari did some funky things with the formatting).
It's on the UWM server, so the address is www.uwm.edu/~mlhyder.
Thanks, everyone, for a great semester! I look forward to looking more closely at your projects after graduation.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
More resources
FYI, if you're interested in the Freire stuff below (praxis as reflection and action), you might also want to check out "Becoming Symbol-Wise: Kenneth Burke's Pedagogy of Critical Reflection" by Jessica Enoch. Enoch uses Burke's theories to argue that "reflection is action in and of itself" (291).
Also, a plug for the MIT Press books available through the MacArthur Foundation: I've read a few more articles, esp. from Youth, Identity, and Digital Media and found them to be really useful.
Also, a plug for the MIT Press books available through the MacArthur Foundation: I've read a few more articles, esp. from Youth, Identity, and Digital Media and found them to be really useful.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Third Article
Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Chapters 1 and 2 (and a little from 3)
by Paulo Freire
(page numbers refer to this edition posted online because I don't have a copy of the book with me; to distinguish page numbers from the different chapters, I'll add the chapter number and a period before the page number)
Because my project is working with and intended to replace UWM's current 101/102 reflective essay assignments (see post below), I've been looking for readings that seem to have influenced these assignments. To that end, I decided to read/re-read part of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, focusing specifically on what Freire has to say about reflection.
For Freire, reflection is an extricable part of the struggle for liberation, and in this struggle, "pedagogy will be made and remade" (1.4). True reflection leads to action, and the consequences of action must in turn be subject to critical reflection (1.17). Freire argues that the oppressor (or the teacher) must trust the oppressed (the student) and their ability to reason, so that the oppressor doesn't "fall into using slogans, communiques, monologues, and instructions" (1.18) — that is, the banking method of education that dehumanizes both its subject and objects (ch. 2). Liberation, then, must be co-created by teachers and students; both are subjects and both must participate "not only in the task of unveiling...reality and thereby coming to know it critically, but in the task of re-creating that knowledge" through common reflection and action (1.20).
Freire's insistence that "authentic liberation – the process of humanization – is not another deposit to be made" in students, and that "liberation is a praxis: the action and reflection of men and women upon their world in order to transform it" (2.7), means that the reflective writing assignment, if we want it to empower students to participate in their own liberation and (ultimately) to change the world (remember – what kind of world do you want to live in?), must not be a ''communique." This is tricky! My hope is that through the links I provide but whose content I do not control (e.g. to Facebook, MySpace, the students' blogs), the students will be encouraged to co-create the resulting knowledge, reflection, and action. Freire also emphasizes dialogue (2.8 and 3.2ff), so I'm trying to think about how I might build dialogue into the website, or whether that would be saved for the in-person class meetings.
Freire's explanation of what reflection is and what it can do resonates with Herring (below). Through reflection, he writes,
That which had existed objectively but had not been perceived in its deeper implications (if indeed it was perceived at all) begins to "stand out," assuming the character of a project and therefore of a challenge. Thus, men and women begin to single out elements from their "background awareness" and to reflect upon them. These elements are now objects of their consideration, and, as such, objects of their action and cognition.... In problem-posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as static reality but as a reality in process, in transformation" (2.10).
Finally, though I won't go into here, I want to mention that he begins chapter 3 by explaining that reflection and action are two inextricable and co-constitutive dimensions of "the word." If I have time, I'll investigate this more to see what it might say about the act of reflective writing. Also, all of this makes me wonder if and how we can ask our students to reflect without asking them to act. If we ask them to act on their reflection, I think we need to be prepared for students who, for example, choose not to submit a portfolio at all or who choose to blog their reflection or post it on MySpace rather than turning in a 12-pt, black-ink, Times New Roman paper with 1-inch margins.
Though I was focusing mostly on reflection, I noticed in these chapters many other resonances to our readings and discussions this semester. For example, Freire discusses the interdependent nature of subjectivity and objectivity (1.6); the relationship of "having" to "being," which reminded me of our conversations about access and the digital divide (1.12); freedom (throughout, but especially 1.13, 1.19, 2.9, and 3.2ff.); and control (throughout, but especially 1.13, 1.16, and 2.6).
by Paulo Freire
(page numbers refer to this edition posted online because I don't have a copy of the book with me; to distinguish page numbers from the different chapters, I'll add the chapter number and a period before the page number)
Because my project is working with and intended to replace UWM's current 101/102 reflective essay assignments (see post below), I've been looking for readings that seem to have influenced these assignments. To that end, I decided to read/re-read part of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, focusing specifically on what Freire has to say about reflection.
For Freire, reflection is an extricable part of the struggle for liberation, and in this struggle, "pedagogy will be made and remade" (1.4). True reflection leads to action, and the consequences of action must in turn be subject to critical reflection (1.17). Freire argues that the oppressor (or the teacher) must trust the oppressed (the student) and their ability to reason, so that the oppressor doesn't "fall into using slogans, communiques, monologues, and instructions" (1.18) — that is, the banking method of education that dehumanizes both its subject and objects (ch. 2). Liberation, then, must be co-created by teachers and students; both are subjects and both must participate "not only in the task of unveiling...reality and thereby coming to know it critically, but in the task of re-creating that knowledge" through common reflection and action (1.20).
Freire's insistence that "authentic liberation – the process of humanization – is not another deposit to be made" in students, and that "liberation is a praxis: the action and reflection of men and women upon their world in order to transform it" (2.7), means that the reflective writing assignment, if we want it to empower students to participate in their own liberation and (ultimately) to change the world (remember – what kind of world do you want to live in?), must not be a ''communique." This is tricky! My hope is that through the links I provide but whose content I do not control (e.g. to Facebook, MySpace, the students' blogs), the students will be encouraged to co-create the resulting knowledge, reflection, and action. Freire also emphasizes dialogue (2.8 and 3.2ff), so I'm trying to think about how I might build dialogue into the website, or whether that would be saved for the in-person class meetings.
Freire's explanation of what reflection is and what it can do resonates with Herring (below). Through reflection, he writes,
That which had existed objectively but had not been perceived in its deeper implications (if indeed it was perceived at all) begins to "stand out," assuming the character of a project and therefore of a challenge. Thus, men and women begin to single out elements from their "background awareness" and to reflect upon them. These elements are now objects of their consideration, and, as such, objects of their action and cognition.... In problem-posing education, people develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as static reality but as a reality in process, in transformation" (2.10).
Finally, though I won't go into here, I want to mention that he begins chapter 3 by explaining that reflection and action are two inextricable and co-constitutive dimensions of "the word." If I have time, I'll investigate this more to see what it might say about the act of reflective writing. Also, all of this makes me wonder if and how we can ask our students to reflect without asking them to act. If we ask them to act on their reflection, I think we need to be prepared for students who, for example, choose not to submit a portfolio at all or who choose to blog their reflection or post it on MySpace rather than turning in a 12-pt, black-ink, Times New Roman paper with 1-inch margins.
Though I was focusing mostly on reflection, I noticed in these chapters many other resonances to our readings and discussions this semester. For example, Freire discusses the interdependent nature of subjectivity and objectivity (1.6); the relationship of "having" to "being," which reminded me of our conversations about access and the digital divide (1.12); freedom (throughout, but especially 1.13, 1.19, 2.9, and 3.2ff.); and control (throughout, but especially 1.13, 1.16, and 2.6).
Monday, May 5, 2008
Second Article
“Questioning the Generational Divide: Technological Exoticism and Adult Constructions of Online Youth Identity”
by Susan C. Herring
From Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Ed. David Buckingham. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 71–92. doi: 10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.071
Read about Prenksy’s article (below) first.
This chapter does an excellent job of troubling and balancing out voices like Marc Prensky’s, which remind us that we need to be paying attention to the ways digitality has changed youth and should change the way we teach them but which run the risk of over-reacting. Susan Herring argues here that adults—Prensky’s “digital immigrants”—exoticize and rampantly speculate about the effects of digitality on youth, and “mainstream media commentators interpret new technologies and youth practices in normative, moral terms, a process that reinscribes youth as ‘other’” (71). In turn, these youth have been socialized into adult and media constructions of them. She suggests that we focus less on the technologies, which in today’s rhetoric are seen as deterministic of youth, and more on the young people themselves, and she includes some of their voices in her chapter. While I don’t think Herring cancels out Prensky’s observations about today’s students, I appreciate her cautions about adult discourses that over-react to and over-determine the relationship between technology and youth. In this area and others, I often worry about the ways “we” talk and write about “them.” Another article called “The Myth of the Digital Native,” written by M. Owen in 2004, further questions unproductive “sloganizing” with statistics showing how many youth spend very little time on the internet, playing video games, etc., and showing that the largest demographic for games and online activity are 20-35 and 35-44 year-olds, respectively.
A few points of interest from Herring in relation to my project:
- In addition to fulfilling the 101/102 goals, I hope my web-based reflective writing assignment will help address the “transparency problem” of technology, that is, the “challenges young people face in learning to see clearly the ways that media shape perceptions of the world” (88).
- Herring suggests that today’s students are not the true “Internet Generation” but rather a transitional generation. Perhaps this project can “take advantage of the present transitional moment to reflect across generations about technology and social change” (72).
- Perhaps it might also involve young people in reflecting on the generational digital divide, in order to move beyond adults’ “exoticization” of youth media practices: “Any serious attempt to avoid cooptation of young people’s experiences must therefore consider the more radical possibility of collaborating with youth in an attempt to break down those hierarchies...” (87). How might I involve my students not only in the use of and interaction with this website but also in its creation/production/design? (Not possible this semester, but in the future?)
by Susan C. Herring
From Youth, Identity, and Digital Media. Ed. David Buckingham. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008. 71–92. doi: 10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.071
Read about Prenksy’s article (below) first.
This chapter does an excellent job of troubling and balancing out voices like Marc Prensky’s, which remind us that we need to be paying attention to the ways digitality has changed youth and should change the way we teach them but which run the risk of over-reacting. Susan Herring argues here that adults—Prensky’s “digital immigrants”—exoticize and rampantly speculate about the effects of digitality on youth, and “mainstream media commentators interpret new technologies and youth practices in normative, moral terms, a process that reinscribes youth as ‘other’” (71). In turn, these youth have been socialized into adult and media constructions of them. She suggests that we focus less on the technologies, which in today’s rhetoric are seen as deterministic of youth, and more on the young people themselves, and she includes some of their voices in her chapter. While I don’t think Herring cancels out Prensky’s observations about today’s students, I appreciate her cautions about adult discourses that over-react to and over-determine the relationship between technology and youth. In this area and others, I often worry about the ways “we” talk and write about “them.” Another article called “The Myth of the Digital Native,” written by M. Owen in 2004, further questions unproductive “sloganizing” with statistics showing how many youth spend very little time on the internet, playing video games, etc., and showing that the largest demographic for games and online activity are 20-35 and 35-44 year-olds, respectively.
A few points of interest from Herring in relation to my project:
- In addition to fulfilling the 101/102 goals, I hope my web-based reflective writing assignment will help address the “transparency problem” of technology, that is, the “challenges young people face in learning to see clearly the ways that media shape perceptions of the world” (88).
- Herring suggests that today’s students are not the true “Internet Generation” but rather a transitional generation. Perhaps this project can “take advantage of the present transitional moment to reflect across generations about technology and social change” (72).
- Perhaps it might also involve young people in reflecting on the generational digital divide, in order to move beyond adults’ “exoticization” of youth media practices: “Any serious attempt to avoid cooptation of young people’s experiences must therefore consider the more radical possibility of collaborating with youth in an attempt to break down those hierarchies...” (87). How might I involve my students not only in the use of and interaction with this website but also in its creation/production/design? (Not possible this semester, but in the future?)
First Article
“Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” On the Horizon 9.5 (Oct. 2001)“Do They Really Think Differently?” On the Horizon 9.6 (Dec. 2001)
by Marc Prensky
A number of other authors credit Marc Prensky with coining the widely used term “digital native” and, slightly less well-known, “digital immigrant.” Prensky is a speaker, writer, consultant, teacher, and designer of “software games for learning, including the world’s first fast-action videogame-based training tools and world-wide, multi-player, multi-team on-line competitions” (www.marcprensky.com). In this two-part article, he argues that “our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach” (1). Not only does he claim that today’s students “think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors” but that their digital upbringing may have physically changed their brains. As “native” speakers of the digital language of computers, video games, and the Internet, they require entirely new teaching methods from their “immigrant” teachers; in fact, he suggests, the two can barely communicate with each other until the immigrants learn the language. Natives are “used to receiving information really fast. They like to parallel process and multi-task. They prefer their graphics before their text rather than the opposite. They prefer random access (like hypertext). They function best when networked. They thrive on instant gratification and frequent rewards. They prefer games to ‘serious’ work” (2).
Some of these characteristics certainly resonate with our readings: Weinberger described how random access has revolutionized not only the ways we order knowledge but the ways we create knowledge and the knowledge that gets created. Benkler and Chun emphasized the fundamental shifts—in the market, our understanding and enacting of freedom, etc.—caused by networking. Gee, Bogost, McGonigal, and others wrote about learning through games (Prensky calls this “edutainment”).
The ideas in these articles are pretty old hat by now (7 years later), due in part to this and other work by Prensky, but his conviction that “natives” are essentially and radically different and his zeal for educational reform are still notable: “It’s just dumb (and lazy) of educators – not to mention ineffective – to presume that (despite their traditions) the Digital Immigrant way is the only way to teach, and that the Digital Natives’ ‘language’ is not as capable as their own of encompassing any and every idea” (6). See next article for a response and troubling of some of Prensky’s convictions.
There was a particular paragraph in the second article that caught my attention and inspired my project. In the section entitled “What Have We Lost?" Prensky writes:
One key area that appears to have been affected is reflection. Reflection is what enables us, according to many theorists, to generalize, as we create “mental models” from our experience. It is, in many ways, the process of “learning from experience.” In our twitch-speed world, there is less and less time and opportunity for reflection, and this development concerns many people. One of the most interesting challenges and opportunities in teaching Digital Natives is to figure out and invent ways to include reflection and critical thinking in the learning (either built into the instruction or through a process of instructor-led debriefing) but still do it in the Digital Native language. We can and must do more in this area. (11)
While I don’t completely agree with Prensky, I have seen (in classes and the Writing Center) what a hard time many 101 and 102 students have with the reflective writing we ask them to do. So for my project, I’m building a website that is itself a reflective writing assignment (designed to replace either the 101 reflective essay assignment or the 102 inquiry analysis essay assignment, or both).
Photo credit: Marc Prensky, from www.marcprensky.com, by Jim Allen
Saturday, May 3, 2008
But it's so "natural"...
Has anyone seen the new AT&T commercial where the phones and other technological devices are integrated seamlessly into and among beautiful blossoming flowers (doesn't appear to be on youtube yet)? Really interesting tactic for making technology appear "natural" and healthy and beautiful and living. Just as movies like "Minority Report" (Nakamura) and books like Rainbows End (Vinge) and theories of cyborgs (Haraway) work to break down the separation between human and machine, so does this commercial attempt to meld technology and nature together. This also reminds me of the Verizon "chocolate phone" commercials.
Friday, May 2, 2008
More Words
If you identified with the sentiment underlying my video, you should check out this song by a friend of Justin Moody's. Click here, scroll to the bottom of the songs list, and click on the last song. It's very funny.
(By the way, I feel like I need to clarify that I feel very honored to work with all of my 102 students and I respect their writing very much. I genuinely enjoy reading the portfolios and having conversations with the authors. I also genuinely enjoy reading and discussing [almost] all of the books shown in the video. Obviously, I thrive on words and have/am trying to make a living out of them. But you know how it is at the end of the semester....)
(By the way, I feel like I need to clarify that I feel very honored to work with all of my 102 students and I respect their writing very much. I genuinely enjoy reading the portfolios and having conversations with the authors. I also genuinely enjoy reading and discussing [almost] all of the books shown in the video. Obviously, I thrive on words and have/am trying to make a living out of them. But you know how it is at the end of the semester....)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)