In nearly every developed facet of my life, computer technology is nearly essential. I'd like to think that I could get by without it, but who am I kidding - I'm in love. I imagine in that regard that I'm not much different from many of my fellow children of the digital age. I use my laptop to check the weather, read the news, keep in contact with old friends and keep tabs on "friends" I haven't spoken to in years. I use it to store all of my music, photos, and writings. My laptop lets me do everything from look at terrible photos of celebrities to sending my grandma pictures of my new apartment.
As a student, my relationship with computer technology is even closer. I don't just want access to e-mail, a word processor, and the library's online catalog - I need it to get my work done. Look at this blog post; I needed my laptop in order to complete a simple class assignment. I don't yet know how technology will affect my teaching, but if the classes I'm taking now are any indication, I'll at least need e-mail and some sort of site in which I can organize my class.
Computer technology is necessary for me, and at times it can be a hindrance. I have some friends and relatives who are upset when I don't respond immediately to a message from them - but these are mostly the people I know who have smart phones or other mobile Internet gadgets. They're expecting me to always be available like they are. And the thing is, I could go on and on about how personally inconvenient it would be for my mom to have a really good reason to think I'm ignoring her, but I know I'll eventually jump on the bandwagon. Otherwise, I'll get left behind.
However, I'm not entirely onboard with Wysocki's definition of new media, so I'm having a hard time linking it to how I might run my own classroom. Although she tries (a couple times) to state what it clearly is, she manages to illustrate more clearly what it isn't ("...we probably ought not give up our own agency by acting as though technologies come out of nowhere and are autonomous in causing effects" 19). One section I found confusing or troublesome was, "Under the definition I offer not just any computer-screen text counts as 'new media': just because a newly published textbook (for example) has an online component does not mean that what is online is 'new media'" (18-19). She goes on to state that these new media (cell phones, scanners, etc.) don't cause us to interact with them differently. Wysocki is very concerned with people staying in charge of technology - not the other way around. I don't understand why this issue gets so much play (nearly a full page of the book). It seems like an implicit argument.
Ok, so in my head this wanting-stay-in-control-of-technology thing looks a lot more like Terminator, but another point I wonder about is why Wysocki feels that if new media is going to be used effectively it has to be so loud about it? She stresses new media "as texts where we keep their materiality visibly, both as we work to make them and as we hold them before us" (19). When writing a good reflective essay, one of the things a writer tries to do is not call attention to the fact that someone will be reading this essay. Isn't that why we tell writers to stay away from cliches and overused phrases like "My next point is. In conclusion"?
This section also had me constantly thinking about advertising. Maybe it's because I'm really missing watching "Mad Men" right now, but it seems like advertising companies have been all over new media since someone realized you could sell it. And then sell space on/in it. Anyway, good commercials don't call attention to the fact that they're commercials - instead they use anything they can find to hook you into wanting to know more. When I think about all the other people and businesses who have been using new media in really effective and interesting ways, it seems as though composition teachers aren't so much standing in front of a golden opportunity as chasing a missed bus.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Unrelated Mostly
I just remembered this awesome YouTube video a professor showed me a while ago - and since it's kind of related to this class, I'll just go with it. I think it's pretty funny, so take a study break. I suppose you can comment on this if you want...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQHX-SjgQvQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQHX-SjgQvQ
Friday, August 27, 2010
Yancey Response
The very first thing I have to do is describe what I think my job as a writing instructor is? Tough question. I mean, the only things I've read about writing pedagogy has been a couple articles this week, and we all know I've never set foot in front of a classroom before. However, I've been a student in plenty of different writing classes, so I can certainly give this a go.
My first instinct is to make sure that all my students are at comparable levels in basic skills, or GUMS (grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling) as my high school English teacher called it. After spending three years copyediting my college's newspaper, I have a hard time letting this very basic principle take a backseat. However, it seems silly to drill students in how to use a semicolon when they could be focusing on how to make the actual content of their assignment stronger. I suppose another reason why basic skills jumps to mind is because of that one piece of writing that essentially everyone has to do - writing a resume or filling out a job application. While organization will certainly help, if a student makes frequent spelling and punctuation errors, they're almost certain to end up in the trashcan rather than the acceptance pile.
Perhaps a better skill I would like my students to learn is how to write for their audience. A simple journaling assignment can change drastically depending on whether it's written for oneself, the teacher, or other students to read. For example, if it's written just for oneself, emphasis on the writing's organization will probably drop - hopefully allowing the student to explore a concept freely. Even the content of this blog entry has been altered because I know my professor and possibly other students will read this. If a student manages to learn how to write for an audience, then I know they are able to assess what they mean to write and give thought to the best way to convey their message. This can easily be associated to incorporating technology into the classroom, given how changing the medium from a tweet to a YouTube vide to an e-mail can easily change the content.
Just instinctually, I feel myself drawn to teaching the way I was taught. Emphasis on the nuts and bolts and leave the invention of actual content to the back burner, which also tends to deemphasize anything that's not print writing. I'm one of those stodgy people sneering at social networking - and I haven't even stepped in front of a classroom yet! I find myself hesitant about Yancey's inspirational speech because my mental picture of a writing classroom doesn't include a lot of tweeting or video editing. However, if this is how we are composing now... It would be ridiculous to ask student to write a paper with chalk, on a typewriter, or even pen and paper. Perhaps we're now moving on to yet a different way of composing which may make the word processor obsolete. I suppose my intent meshes with Yancey in that I want to make these new mediums essential parts of the classroom, however, I am hesitant about its actual execution.
My first instinct is to make sure that all my students are at comparable levels in basic skills, or GUMS (grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling) as my high school English teacher called it. After spending three years copyediting my college's newspaper, I have a hard time letting this very basic principle take a backseat. However, it seems silly to drill students in how to use a semicolon when they could be focusing on how to make the actual content of their assignment stronger. I suppose another reason why basic skills jumps to mind is because of that one piece of writing that essentially everyone has to do - writing a resume or filling out a job application. While organization will certainly help, if a student makes frequent spelling and punctuation errors, they're almost certain to end up in the trashcan rather than the acceptance pile.
Perhaps a better skill I would like my students to learn is how to write for their audience. A simple journaling assignment can change drastically depending on whether it's written for oneself, the teacher, or other students to read. For example, if it's written just for oneself, emphasis on the writing's organization will probably drop - hopefully allowing the student to explore a concept freely. Even the content of this blog entry has been altered because I know my professor and possibly other students will read this. If a student manages to learn how to write for an audience, then I know they are able to assess what they mean to write and give thought to the best way to convey their message. This can easily be associated to incorporating technology into the classroom, given how changing the medium from a tweet to a YouTube vide to an e-mail can easily change the content.
Just instinctually, I feel myself drawn to teaching the way I was taught. Emphasis on the nuts and bolts and leave the invention of actual content to the back burner, which also tends to deemphasize anything that's not print writing. I'm one of those stodgy people sneering at social networking - and I haven't even stepped in front of a classroom yet! I find myself hesitant about Yancey's inspirational speech because my mental picture of a writing classroom doesn't include a lot of tweeting or video editing. However, if this is how we are composing now... It would be ridiculous to ask student to write a paper with chalk, on a typewriter, or even pen and paper. Perhaps we're now moving on to yet a different way of composing which may make the word processor obsolete. I suppose my intent meshes with Yancey in that I want to make these new mediums essential parts of the classroom, however, I am hesitant about its actual execution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)