technology « Vicarious Conversations

Posts Tagged ‘technology’

Wednesday, May 28th, 2008

MP: The animated gif

In this second post about Mapping Pedagogy, I’m realising that I’m focusing on an almost atomistic view of the technologies. Part of this project is to take all of the things[1] we use or have used (and maybe forgotten) and see what they can contribute to a flexible learning environment. I think we have much potential to do some things simply. There seems to be a tendency towards the more complex solutions as that is, apparently, what students want.

The animated gif is probably one of the first multifaceted image technologies that we have. While single images give a good display, a single snapshot of a state, the animated gif provided our first glimpse into process. The potential was there (although I cannot remember an instance) to show the steps involved in a process for achieving an outcome. These have mostly been replaced by the video, but the simplicity of the animated gif provided a glimpse into possibilities.

Animated gifs could tell a story in a few short images. Take the image in this post. It tells the story of the evolution of the computer interface. The original image showed Bill Gates leaning on a Windows machine that had the word “Windows” written on it [2]. But over his shoulder was a Mac Plus. Bill had one before the rest of us. The animated gif focuses our attention on just a portion of the original image, giving some control over perception and understanding.

I like animated gifs, although many of them are distracting rather than focusing.

The technical term [↩]
The image is allegedly for Teen Beat magazine, but listed at ‘Rights managed’ at Corbis.com [↩]

Tags: learning, pedagogy, technology

Posted in Mapping Pedagogy | 1 Comment »

Friday, February 1st, 2008

Fingers on the Keyboard

I’ve just realised how long it’s been since I wrote anything. My whole purpose for blogging is to get the creative juices flowing and to actually put fingers to keyboards and produce words. Words that put my thinking into context. Words that will contribute to my understanding of things. I seem to fail at that.

So here goes:

I have a tendency at this this time of year to put my all into preparation for classes. I’m starting to wonder why, as it seems I am burning myself out a bit trying to get it right. So I started thinking about it a bit deeper.

(Bit of background, this is a course with over 700 students across 2 semesters. There are often 5 or 6 tutors involved in the course and we’re trying to use new technologies. The course is called Business Informatics.)

Some of my thoughts include

Why do I do this?

The answer seems to be: Consistency, quality, pedagogy, control!

Okay, so I like there to be a consistent experience for students. The only way I can do that is to design a set of key activities for them. Problem is some of the tutors like to do things the old way, like sticking strictly to the text and getting students to answer the review questions in the tute. Somehow I don’t think that really adds value. Adding value is what we really need to do.

Which brings me to quality. How do we ensure the quality of what we give students? Now I have a problem with that question. What type of quality are we talking about. I think I really mean I want good quality, but definitely not poor quality. In some ways, quality relates to Value (notice it’s already achieve capital status).

The third point was pedagogy. I don’t think we can adequately define pedagogy, except that it takes some ideas, puts them into activities and adds Value. It contextualises and makes relevant all the ideas. It is a value adding activity.

My last point is control. Why do I want control over what happens in the tutorials? I don’t think I really do, I want the tutors to have something they can build on (add their own value), but I want the foundation that they use to be consistent. I have a circular reference.

Consistency and control together with a bit of pedagogy and quality should make for a value-added experience for students.

Am I taking on too much? Probably, but if the theory works, then I should be a little more relaxed during semester. Except that I push the limits of what we can do.

Tags: control, teaching, technology

Posted in innovation, Ramblings | No Comments »

Monday, October 2nd, 2006

Things? or Processes?

Is hypertext a thing or a process?

Is the web a thing or a process?

Is information a thing or a process?

Knowledge is more process than thing. Information is processed data. So it is a process. But it also has a certain thingness to it.

What happens when we start to think of the web as a process rather than a thing? We talk about linking, and going, and finding. These are all processes. But is the web a thing that we do these processes to?

I just asked someone if hypertext was a thing or a process. They said it was a piece of code. That’s so limiting because we don’t look at a link as a piece of code. We look at it as a way of getting something, of getting from one place to another. It’s a route on a map, ergo a process.

I really need to think these things through.

Tags: ideas, technology

Posted in Ramblings | No Comments »

Thursday, June 15th, 2006

Digital natives?

I have just read Marc Prensky’s Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants (again). This was the paper where he calls for a radical shift in the way we teach. He believes there has been a fundamental change in today’s students, that possibly their “brains have physically changed” that they are “different from ours”. However, I think Prensky’s dichotomy is perhaps too simplistic. Perhaps, there was/is a distinct difference between the two groups. But what about naturalised immigrants, those of use who have taken up the technological bounty we’ve created? Having become naturalised to the point where many of the so-called ‘immigrants’ are younger than me, and many of my students don’t get what I’m talking about, I’m beginning to think that perhaps there is potential for a naturalisation to occur. It relates in some ways to James Wertsch’s discussions of ‘appropriation’. It is entirely possible to become naturalised without growing up with the technologies.

People often wonder that I have my computer in the lounge room, that I have the TV/radio going, instant messaging programs open, my email always open (apparently one of the often cited interruptions to an academic’s ability to engage in research). But these skills, the way I have of working is perhaps more indicative of the transition I have made to the digital world. In effect, I have ‘gone native’*.

But the fact is, I almost need the constant simulation. It’s disruptive, but that’s technology. It frustrates me terribly that I see some people unable to engage fully in their own domains when it’s mediated by technology.

But Prensky is right about there being a different way of thinking, but immigrants can become native. We just have to get close enough to the natives.

*Who was it that coined that term? Where are all the anthropologists when you need them?

Tags: innovation, technology

Posted in Research Ideas | No Comments »

Monday, February 27th, 2006

I love Aussie TV

The greatest irony of Australian TV is that we are still so far behind. I mean, I was really amazed at one point last year when we were only 3 episodes behind the US in a TV show. I can’t remember what it was, but it was only 3 episodes ahead. But tonight, we have How Techies changed the World with William Shatner on the Discovery Channel. Because it clashes with something else, I went looking for it online. All I could find was references to it on Australian, New Zealand and Asian TV. It struck me as really weird. But, I eventually found it and realised it was called something different. It was actually called How William Shatner changed the World in other parts of the world. When I first heard about it (last night on TV), I thought it was call How Trekkies changed the world, which would have made sense, seeing it’s about Star Trek’s influence on our culture.

But why on earth refer to Techies? And why the different name in this part of the world? And why is it (at least) six months since this was actually released in US and Canada (and probably other places as well). It’s frustrating trying to be at the forefront of cultural change brought about by technology when the country one lives in is anything from 3 weeks to 6 months behind the rest of the world? And that’s on a good day!

In other news, first day of semester today. First classes tomorrow. I think I’m all prepared (I’ve spent the last few weeks trying to get everything done). Just a few more updates on the coures web sites and I’ll be cooking with gas!

Tags: DRM, technology

Posted in Ramblings | No Comments »