Friday, May 30, 2008

Hello Mother, Hello Father...

...things are great here at summer camp! We had arts and crafts today but if I can't get this audio piece down to 30 seconds, you're all getting lopsided ashtrays and hand-stitched wallets instead.

I wonder then how much of my day today was spent “working” with Audacity and how much was spent “playing” with Audacity. Today certainly didn’t feel like work; the stakes were manageable, the activity was fun and experimental, the rules and constraints imposed by the assignment and tools were reasonable and allowed room for creativity and self-expression. Personally, I find that I accumulate new literacies more easily and retain them with better facility when I first encounter them as toys rather than tools. So, other than the fact that I can harness it as a tool for teaching composition when I get back to Pitt, what about learning to compose with Audacity was work?

This made me think about the role of play in accumulating new literacies. I wonder then how introducing such technologies into the classroom impacts my students’ perception of those technologies. Once they enter the classroom are they any less fun to experiment with? And, if they are “less fun,” what happened that made them that way? Further, what is it about new technologies that allows them to be more readily accepted as objects of play rather than, say, a sheet of paper (although we all know how much fun pen and paper, themselves, can be when incorporated into play)?

I think the answer here is one of positionality. In Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter, Stephen Johnson discusses how game designers create environments and challenges that lead players to happily perform all manner of mundane, repetitive tasks by positioning those tasks as part of play (which should be fun) and not work. The games Johnson refers to and new multimodal discourse technologies both make familiar process such as composing strange in a way that is difficult to do with print-based monomodal essay writing. Despite my best efforts to position activities like journal writing, drafting, and other kinds of prewriting as low-stakes environments for experimentation and play, those forms still occupy the same spaces as the “work” of the class (assuming that the “work” of the class manifests itself in the final draft of a paper printed and handed in on sheets of paper). In my opinion, part of the exiting potential of multimodal composing is that students, in learning new to use new digital tools, will hopefully learn new critical and theoretical tools as well, accumulating a new set of literacies that can benefit them in their work outside of the classroom. I wonder, however, how effective an pedagogy that makes the work of composing strange will be as students increasingly come to our FYC classes already equipped with skills such as audio production that have had the fun drained from them by the new work of the classroom.

On another note, we have our very own DMAC Facebook group! Join us!

3 comments:

Cheryl said...

Hey JJB,
fwiw, I taught an Audio Essay class this past semester, to mostly English majors (it was the advanced composition course number). To me, it felt like "teaching writing" (and not some version of new media or composition in multiple media) for the first time since I first taught FYC in 1998! Quite invigorating! And the students did a reflection at the end of the semester (I wish I'd put them online before coming...) in a "This I Believe"-style audio short. Many of them remarked about how they thought they were taking yet another writing class -- glad for it, since they were Eng majors but also going in knowing they'd breeze through it writing *more* papers -- and were flummoxed by my spin on things. They were scared/worried at first, but by the end of the semester, they reflected on the similarities between composing an audio essay and composing a print essay, but also on their functional (and sometimes critical and rhetorical) use of Audacity as well as on (my main goal) their rhetorical and aesthetic use of multiple media to compose. The class blog (just one-way, with my posts) is here: http://www.ceball.com/classes/246. All their writing was done behind a password in Moodle, which I used for the first time, but some of them do have versions of their essays in Moodle, which I have permission to use/distribute (in some cases), should anyone want to hear examples.

I guess my point was not to show off my class but to say that students (1) didn't come in knowing how to do any of this stuff [2 out of 17 had done video, but not audio, editing], and (2) they were scared but learned a ton and had fun in the process.

Genevieve said...

Jamie, Why is it that if I'm assigned a book for class I loathe reading it but the same book on "my own terms" will be enjoyable? I suppose it's the same question about why technology gets less fun in the classroom. I'm wondering, though, how do we get it back? Is gaming the solution then?

Phill said...

I hate to invoke Focault in a perfectly civil conversation... but I think one major problem is the issue of power.

Last year, I assisted a number of professors in learning (and then teaching their students) Dreamweaver so that they could teach a basic web-publishing assignment. I invited each of them to watch me, and when I teach DW, it's sort of like a mix of instruction and open-mic night stand-up comedy (which is to say it's sort of funny, but not something you'd pay to see, but everyone has a good enough time). I make it clear to the students that I can create web pages, and that I can generally look at HTML code and see glaring errors, but that I am by no means a master and that I frequently search Google or IM one of my friends when I get in a bind.

I introduce the opportunity to work with HTML as an adventure, as something we're going to try, and I make it clear-- particularly when we first start-- that I'm not expecting anything but for them to try.

It works fairly well for me. There are always a few students who learn the software slower than their cohorts, but they generally feel comfortable asking questions.

I saw one professor-- and I shant offer a gender or name, as I would never mean to insult this person-- who wouldn't give up any classroom ethos while teaching DW, even while I was present to assist due to the professor's lack of training. The professor took on the position of "expert" and didn't project that the assignment could be fun at all. Due to the atmosphere, the students seemed to resist and become hostile (or frustrated, or both) even with the same prompts for the assignment and the same handouts that I used with my classes (and some of the same lecture).

That could be a coincidence, of course. I'm not going to try to ratify anecdotal evidence... but I think a great deal of it is about how the student is engaged.

That's why *I* resented reading certain books back in high school. "Make me read The Grapes of Wrath," will ya? Not gonna happen!" Meanwhile I'd have a copy of Moby Dick in my backpack for leisure reading. :)

I think what Cindy and Scott are modeling to us here is exactly the sort of mentality we need to take into our own classrooms (well, other than the "you already have an A" part-- that'd be catastrophic with first-semester students :)). We have to keep this fun. I would argue we should do that with our alphabetic text assignments, too (is "old media" a good term yet? "Media: Classic?"), but it is my experience that by the time students get to us they're already angry at the concept of writing in paragraphs. :(