July, 2008

30 Tigers today: Dr Seuss and New Media

I can lick 30 Tigers today is the story of a young person who determines to take on the world in the form of 30 tigers.  However, upon seeing how many 30 tigers are, one tiger is eliminated because of curly hair.  With each successive iteration of belief of the person’s ability to take on multiple tigers, the number is reduced until finally the person decides to go and have lunch not having taken on the tigers.[1]

At its simplest 30 Tigers is about overconfidence, about taking on too much.  Whittling away the opposition is perhaps the best approach for some tasks.  Each time you find a tiger with some ‘quirk’, you can eliminate it.  It’s an interesting approach to life, and one that I think the traditional media have taken to heart.

You see, there’s all these Pirates[2] out there (not tigers) and they all download music and books and movies and games because they can’t afford to buy them[3] and of course that is money lost by the various industries[4].

Now there’s a number of takes you can make on this.  The Industry[5] has been whittling away opposition (tigers) to changing their business model.  We have the DMCA, DRM and probably heaps of other acronyms that all point to propping up these Industries.  Each on of these acronyms is a response to a tiger that has been dismissed.  It’s Under Control (the tiger, not the acronym).

On the other hand, each user who is being sued could also be positioned as a tiger.  No single tiger can stand up to this Industry. And the Industry keeps dismissing (or suing) single tigers.  And the tigers roll over[6].

What would happen if all the tigers roared together?  Probably not much, because there seems to be a divide and conquer strategy going on.  There’s this blanket strategy of suing whomever is around[7].  It doesn’t matter who (or what) they sue.

But what if we turned it around?  What if we decided that all those new rules and

  1. Seuss, D. I can Lick 30 Tigers Today! And Other Stories. Collins, 1969 []
  2. And why pirates?  What kid doesn’t like being a Pirate? []
  3. There are many reasons why people don’t buy these things and that reason is value, not cost []
  4. I along with others think that that money is not made rather than lost, but in a mad digital world, who’s counting?  Oh, yeah, they are. []
  5. you know which one I’m talking about []
  6. but then, who has the money (or the claws) to fight this Industry? []
  7. Even a printer and I wish I had bookmarked that link. []

Tags: ,

Wiki Pedagogy in colour

So hot on the heals of the whole EduPunk rethunking, and to elaborate for our wiki paper, Luke suggested a diagram of what wiki pedagogy was in our course. So I’ve put together a first draft trying to demonstrate how things interconnect in our wiki teaching. There are a number of things that we do slightly differently from other work that I’ve seen.

I think the significant thing that we do differently is start with an empty wiki.  Okay, it’s not completely empty, but we only have the core course information in the wiki at day one.  We are developing a set of tutorials very similar to those found in WikiEducator, but modified for TikiWiki.

This means that students have to start the work. The idea is to get them thinking about how community development is facilitated by technology.  They must not only create the course ‘text book’, but they create the community of students who develop this.  I figure that this is an experience that is important — getting things off the ground without any assumption that things are already going, which I sense is a key thing for established LMS.  Everything is already there for the beginning of semester and all the students have to do is absorb.

But not in this course.  There is very little information about the content of the course.  There is some structure, and we’re getting better at putting this in place to guide students, but there really isn’t much.

Wiki Pedagogy

Wiki Pedagogy in Colour (Click for larger version)

The diagram shows some of the things that I think are important in the wiki course.  The Pedagogy is based on ideas about community of practice ideas[1], bringing novices from the peripheries to the centre, providing some pathways for developing knowledge and for developing collaborative workstyles. There’s also a theme of ‘students as designers’[2].  This is in contrast with developing group work practices, because while they are all working together, they are all working separately, so they are really only responsible for their own output, but can build upon the work of others, comment, critique and interact, but not depend on others.

In the diagram, all the tools in the Wiki Learning environment (well, most of them) are listed.  There are really two kinds of tools, which I’ve labeled knowledge production and collaborative.  The knowledge production are generally where thoughts and learnings come together.  These features generally allow the display of developing knowledge and includes images, pages and blogs.  There is generally space to develop an idea in words and pictures.  This is where we assess the more traditional demonstrations of knowledge.

Collaborative features are those that let students engage with one another.  There are comments (and this should probably include the forums, but these tend not to get used too much), private messages (where students send a message to one or more — kind of like email in the wiki) and the shoutbox which is like a open messaging system where a single message can be sent to all participants.  The students kind of like that because the shoutbox appears on every page, and quite often someone responds to them in the shoutbox.  It’s like a multi-threaded public conversation in short bursts.  Very twitterish, now that I think about it.

Essentially, students commence the course at the periphery and sometimes on the edges of the community.  Most of them are not well established in the field as we are almost presenting a new area (mobile workforce technologies).  We have IT students, marketing students, MBA students,    We see many of them move into the community of practice through active engagement with knowledge formation processes.  The CoP surrounds the wiki tools in the wiki learning environment. There is an embeddednes about the whole structure.  Everything happens in the wiki (with the exception of providing students with their passwords which we do through the gradebook of Blackboard.)

All of these features allow students to actively reflect on the processes of knowledge development and construction and maintain their activities in a single space.  It’s a whole environment wrapped up in free software.  You can’t get much better than that.

  1. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. []
  2. Kimber, K and Wyatt-Smith, C, (2006). Using and creating knowledge with new technologies: a case for students-as-designers, Learning, Media and Technology, 31 (1): 19–34 []

Tags: , , ,

The backroads of the blogosphere

I’ve been thinking about this blog and about my history with blogs and other newer forms of media.  I named this ‘Vicarious Conversations’ because I know myself.  I don’t really like being in the centre, I like the peripheries.  I like to interact vicariously, sometimes reflectively and I don’t always have time to reflect fully before I’m on the next thought.  So I feel like I’ve missed the boat.  But the analogy of backroads seemed to take root while I was thinking about EduPunk.  I think I’ve always been in that category, whether it had a label or not, but I was on the periphery while an undergrad, stayed in the peripheries for most of my (post)graduate education[1], and am still on the periphery as an academic.

In some ways, that’s a conscious decision and it seems to be one that is not an ‘appropriate’ position for an academic in these days of the RQF[2].  But the peripheries seem to be a useful position.  It’s from the peripheries that things like EduPunk come.  The shifts and changes are more do-able at the peripheries.  They are less noticed and potentially more likely to get going while under the radar.

But the backroads.  I have spent most of my time traveling those backroads.  In reality, I only take backroads when the main roads are congested.  I’ll take the main road at certain times, but other times — keep me away from that traffic.  I suppose it could be seen as taking the path of least resistance.  This is not always such a good thing.  That’s where we do things because we can’t be bothered to change.  But consciously keeping to the peripheries, deciding when one wants to traverse the well-beaten track or when to go the back way is potentially more empowering.

So why have I stayed on the backroads of the blogosphere?  Sometimes, I wonder.  I keep thinking of the ‘Scully Incident’ where Gillian Anderson visited Brisbane and I took my daughter to see her only to be physically removed from the crush of people in such a small space[3].  I think being lost in a crowd is frightening.  Being spotted in a crowd could be potentially panic inducing.  The backroads are safe(r), they get you where you’re going, without the frustration of being caught in heavy traffic where you have no control.  That’s where mainstream education seems to be heading — heavily congested with minimal control for the drivers.

EduPunk, while it stays on the periphery, is probably a good place for me.  But it now has a name and a following.  It’s moving to a more central position.  So I ask: “What’s coming next?”

  1. Heck, I even went to regional universities to do my research — there’s nothing more peripheral than a regional uni in Australia []
  2. While the Howard Gubmint implemented that as the Research Quality Framework, it really meant that those of us at the peripheries were Really Quickly F@#ked []
  3. I never did thank the nameless security guard who recognised my panic and pulled me from the crowd — it was probably to protect everyone else, but I thank him, nonetheless []

The Wiki Way … is the EduPunk Way?

I’ve been seeing a bit of talk around about EduPunk, and I’m always loath to jump onto the latest meme[1], but I think this time, the name is actually what’s been missing from what I (and Luke) have been doing with the Wiki course.  I’m not completely sure about the name, it resonates with some people, but l feel hesitant at taking that particular label.

Part of what I wanted to achieve using the wiki when I got the GEL Fellowship was to get away from the coprotisation[2] of education.  I’d only been using BlackPlank[3] for two years, but it really got me that its design was not really user centred.  Nothing I wanted to do could be done.  There are still things that I want from an LMS that aren’t there, particularly given that I had just come from an institution that had an in-house designed LMS that did do what I thought was great for communicating with students.  And it was so simple I called it a minimalist design in my PhD.  But BlackPlank seems to be maximalist — it wants to be everything to everyone.

I will admit to squeeing over the demonstration of BlackPlank 8 the other day — the gradebook finally looks usable from my perspective and it doesn’t change much from the student’s perspective[4].  But before this turns into a rant against the established LMS in our institution, I’ll get it back to a rant against the establishment in general.

EduPunk.  Whatever the label may be, that’s what I am.  I can’t be otherwise while using a wiki and getting students to create their text book for a course.  I’m wondering if I should include the theme of EduPunk somewhere in the paper that Luke and I are (re)writing, given that it’s already been rejected from one journal for not being ‘scientific’ enough.  Part of me wants to say ‘to heck with the established journal publication route’ but that won’t give me tenure[5].

sun behind opera house

Why do we talk so much about student empowerment, student engagement, student centred learning only to be enmeshed in a standardised system with monolithic be-everything-to-everyone-tools?  I get the feeling that the term EduPunk is a response to that dichotomy and an attempt to bring coherence back to our lived experiences as learners and teachers, because that’s what we do!

Just like the sun, peeking out from behind the Opera House, EduPunk seems to lighten things in a tantalising way — not quite fully shining on the establishment, but hinting at possibilities.

  1. That’s what LiveJournal is for []
  2. I really must stop mispelling that word []
  3. Maybe I should say Blackboard, but board … plank … there’s an analogy in there somewhere []
  4. I don’t actually remember asking to see what students see, I was so excited seeing something that was usable  particularly for my large classes of 300+ []
  5. I must remember to make or find a list of open journals — and publish only there from here on it — to heck with the established route []

Tags: , ,

What Dr Seuss can tell us about New Media

My favourite story as a child was one of Dr Seuss’s stories was The Glunk That Got Thunk. I have been trying and trying to find this and when I noticed a whole swag of Seuss books in the local bookshop, I went on a search to find that story. Thanks to the glory that is the Intarweb, I managed to find out that it’s one of the stories in I Can Lick 30 Tigers Today And Other Stories. It’s one of the ‘Other Stories’.

But what was it about that story that so entranced me as a child. One thing is that the lead character is a female, a very imaginative individual (although the story is narrated by her brother). It’s a story about the power of our imaginations, that we can imagine anything, from friendly little things to a Glunk.

Now the Glunk wasn’t quite that friendly and got up to all sorts of mischief, including long distance calls to his mother to share his recipe for Glunker Stew[1]. Try though she might, the young girl cannot Unthunk the Glunk. Of course, as a story of the 1960′s, the hero of the story is actually the narrator, the brother. He manages to help her finally Unthunk the Glunk.

In my search for this book, I came across a number of different interpretations, one of which was that too much imagination can be a bad thing, but I always believed that it was a story about the Power of Imagination and my reading of it is that there is even more Power in Collective Imagination.

So what does this have to do with New Media?

Well, I’m glad you asked. You see, I do spend quite a bit of time reading lots of stuff on the web[2]. And in many of the stories, there’s this belief that there is power in collaborative endeavours.  One of the most pervasive occurrences of the Internet era is the shifts in process that allow collaboration and sharing. Indeed the foundation upon which the World Wide Web was based is the idea of allowing multiple people access to a shared repository of information (Berners-Lee, 1990).

From this foundation, which is based upon sharing, we can envisage greater collectives.  Not the Borgian style collective of the Star Trek universe, but sharing ideals and ideas (via websites and blogs, no less).  So here we are, with a collective imagination of unforeseen power and it’s being broken.  I think there are people out there actively trying to unthunk the internet.  People like the MPAA and the RIAA (and here in Australia, we have ARIA and MIPI et al).  They want to unthink the sharing capabilities that we possess.  All in the name of protecting copyright.

But there’s a problem with their imaginative abilities.  And I don’t think their unthunking abilities can equal the power of the collective imagination of connected people.  Forget the fact that they don’t want us to place shift nor time shift[3]); what they don’t realise (or maybe they do and dismantling the internet is what they are actually aiming for) is that as soon as we have access to something, there is a copy of it.  We cannot view, listen, read, hear, see, think, click, load, indeed any activity done on a computer as each activity is an act of copying.

Getting back to the Glunk.  The internet (and maybe even the personal computer) is a Glunk in the eyes of the traditional distributors of media (and just try to distribute without copying, oh, but they own the copyright, not the artists, funnily enough).  They are desperately trying to unthink it.  They have achieved an incredible amount towards this goal, (eg the DMCA, Canadian Copyright reforms deforms, the rewriting of Australian copyright, ad nauseum).  They are really trying to break the internet and getting ISPs on board to do their dirty work (see multiple posts at Techdirt tagged under recording industry).

But for the rest of us, I think the traditional distributors are a Glunk that got thunk by artists[4], some of whom still seem to believe it’s a fuzzy friendly thing, not the ravenous beast that it is.  Ironically, it seems to be feeding off the morals of various governments as well as a collective dis-imagining made possible only by a lack of critical foresight.

References

Berners-Lee, T., 1990, Information Management: A Proposal, http://www.w3.org/History/1989/proposal-msw.html [Accessed: September 3, 2006]

Seuss, D. I can Lick 30 Tigers Today! And Other Stories. Collins, 1969

  1. Glunker Stew seems to be a bizarre concoction that only a Glunk could like []
  2. otherwise known as faffing around []
  3. Place shifting includes putting things on your iPod; Time shifting includes recording things on video (either disk or tape []
  4. This may be a huge assumption on my part, but I wasn’t around when it started, so I could be making everything up. []

Tags: , ,

Theme by RoseCityGardens.com
Modified by Me!