Digital Media for Art Educators

Final Project: Digital Teaching Tool

2011-12-21T09:46:00.000-08:00

Integrating digital technology into a classroom of any age level or educational setting has its challenges. From personal experience, I can assert from a student’s perspective that learning a new technology can be absolutely overwhelming-to the point that all frustration prevails and one wonders, ‘Why should I even learn this?’ Now, as I progress through my teacher education program and gain more practical experience in educating, I am learning that the same feat can be equally as challenging for the instructor. Especially in an arts program and within a broader world of art making, the daunting task of entering the digital age by incorporating digital technology is crucial because it has become both a way to create art as well as a form in which a learners can experience art.

Digital technology is exponentially becoming a part of how artists create and a medium in and of itself. Aside from artists, teachers in classrooms are increasingly supporting and supplementing their practices with the technological benefits of classroom blogs, smart boards, podcasting, virtual assignments, gaming, etc.

Especially at the high school level, it is critically important that teachers not only are able to implement some form of technology into their practice, but to also successfully educate technologies to their student. Skills that can be learnt either indirectly or directly from technology are highly required to succeed in today’s 21^st century. Whether it is basic office technology skills such as creating spreadsheets or presentations, word editing formatting or advanced skill sets in photo, video, audio editing or creating, writing or designing webpages, students should not leave their high school education without an above proficient level of technologic skill sets.

This points back to the educator-How important is it that the educator teaches digital technology? How proficient should they as the educator be with the technology? Is it good enough that they can teach it, but not be as proficient in it? How much training should a teacher receive before endeavoring to teach the technology to their learners? Such inquiries led me to create a digital teaching tool for teachers. It began to make perfect sense that in order to convey or translate successful levels of knowledge and training to students, it all starts with the teacher.

Again, I can speak from experience that when informally learning new content or skills (especially in a digital sense) I search for and find online tutorials. The creators of these web tutorials were, at that time, my educators. A tutorial is one amazing way in which an educator can inform new information or solve any issues that revolve around a digital technology. It can serve the purpose of an entire walk-through of, for example, iMovie, Audacity or Adobe Flash, or it can solve a short question by way of real-time showing and demonstrating.

Also, in an ideal sense, it can be a time-saver. The option to create a single document explaining a walk through of a digital program, finding a place to host it where all students may reference at various progression points, would enable the teacher to have more time for trouble shooting and working with students on an individual level.

Although knowing how to create a tutorial is expandable for both learners and educators, my digital teaching tool is aimed for teachers. It was created so that teachers may be able to execute their knowledge of a digital technology on par with the digital technology itself. It is a technological way of presenting and educating on a digital technology. My digital teaching tool is a tutorial on how teachers can create tutorials for their students.

Again, the successful teaching of technology to high school aged students is so crucial that I believe this tutorial on tutorial-making to be a succinct way that teachers, who should already be enabled somewhat with digital skill sets, may be present, demonstrating and represented digitally.

I created the tool with the above-mentioned points in mind. I chose to keep the tone and pace upbeat and confident. These are necessary attitudinal measures when both educating high school aged students (through or not through tutorials) and educating on digital technology. As a tool, the educator would ideally access the tutorial as a professional development tool or exercise.

At the beginning of a course, semester or school year, an educator would view this tutorial, become acquainted with a working knowledge of Screenflow software. They would be able to rely on this knowledge base as they begin to craft their units on other digital software such as above mentioned, iMovie, Garageband, Word or PowerPoint, setting up blog rolls, etc., being confident and successful in creating their own tutorials or video documents that would aid and assist their students’ journey through such softwares.

I decidedly structured the tutorial on Screenflow software to cover the basics of recording desktop video and audio, making edits or cuts, affects such as zoom and cursor attention as well as polishing effects like fading in/out. It seemed, though daunting, this would be the best equation of working knowledge, action location and organization plus room for creative exploration of the software.

In the tutorial, I mentioned a creative idea of how Screenflow could actually benefit the students directly as well, aside from the indirect effects of a teacher being able to use, make and share documents created in Screenflow. When/if a student were to learn this software and make an appropriate tutorial/video document, it would be an interesting form of assessment. A student’s ability to translate their knowledge into a recorded and accountable documented explanation/translation could be helpful in determining their conceptual and practical grasps.

All in all, I went down an interesting pathway that created a digital teaching tool for educators, benefitting both the educators and the students. It was challenging at times to find the best and most appropriate structuring in the creation of a tutorial on how to create tutorials. However, I feel it is valuable because it both incorporates the practice of learning digitally as well as teaching digitally. Best of all, its use is to teach content that is also digital. It attempts to capture the core of digital learning.

Collaborative Lesson Plan Assignment

2011-12-14T15:33:00.000-08:00

[Kayla McCormick and I worked collaborative on the lesson plan below. There is a video tutorial below accompanying lesson plan. Additionally there is a video highlighting our digital, remote communication via Skype; and below that you will find a personal reflection on the experience.]

[ You Through iMovie ]

10th grade Public High School Art Classroom

Enduring Understanding:

We represent ourselves with thoughtful choices of action.

Essential Question(s):

How does control of narrative affect our decision-making?

How do you define narrative?

How does our control of the narrative effect the decision we make?

Introduction:

This project’s end result will be a video that uses iMovie and it’s ability to edit video to create a personal narrative film. Students will be shown the basic of iMovie through a teacher made tutorial. They will then be sent on a mission to shoot footage during their day-to-day life with the only parameter that they must collect footage that by free association interests them. After this freedom of shooting footage they will be asked to reflect on what they have collected to help inform how they will edit it together to create a narrative. Narrative at this point will be defined by them and their film will be based around this expressive association of footage to create meaning and purpose.

Goals/Objectives:

1. Learn basics of iMovie (see video tutorial) and make notes about the following effects: Speed transitions (slower and faster), Glow effect, Cropping and fitting, Color Change, Volume Adjustments, Vignette, Hard light, and any others editing effects that you observe.

2. Brainstorm and shoot footage that revolves around insight into you as a person day to day i.e. what you do, what interests you, what catches your eye, what repulses and attracts you, etc

3. Edit footage in iMovie thinking of these questions:

A. Is there a film or style of film that you are attracted to that you would like to base your editing around

B. What are the common threads that link your footage clip together: are they calm, fast, a certain color, certain sounds, in simliar environments, of a certain genre, social, solitary, small things, big picture, texture, focused, out of focus

C. Define narrative and base your films structure around that definition

Assessment:

A. Critique

-Describe what you see

-Analyze what you see

-Interpret the message that the artist intended

B. Self-Assessment

-Does your video accurately depict what you envisioned for it?

-What did you learn about narrative and how you define it?

-Do you see things differently around you after manipulating it? And if

so describe how.

C. Assessment from teacher

-Film is 90 seconds at least

-Film has at least 3 effects exhibited in the tutorial

-Film has a clear narrative in content, style, and flow.

__________________________________________________________________

TUTORIAL:

__________________________________________________________________

SKYPE COMMUNICATION:

__________________________________________________________________

Reflection:

Conducting a video chat with Kayla via Skype was really convenient and, with a few minor sound delays/discrepancies that were resolved quickly, it provided a neat opportunity for live, real-time brainstorming. She and I asked each other questions, essentially hashing out the main points of a lesson plan as well as what our digital technology was to be, etc. We spent nearly an hour just considering these types of points and re-wording our essential questions, enduring understandings to be as clear as possible. We also used this Skype time to consider the best ways to assess our plan.

We also used a little bit of facebook and text messaging in coordinating times to plan together. After initial brainstorming, we found a system that had Kayla typing and planning the plan itself and me creating corresponding video tutorials and other videos. During our separate task worktimes, however, we continued to be in touch with each other and make any respective edits. She would send me a draft of the lesson and visa versa, we would suggest, ask questions and make the necessary edits to make all parts fluid and cohesive.

I enjoyed the application of digital communication because being a digital person, it allowed me to multi-task while thinking, brainstorming and communicating. I admit that it is not the same as a face-to-face brainstorming/working session but it was close to it and therefore quite comparable to how she & I, speaking specifically, work together in real-time/space. Kayla & I work together very fluidly and balance each other out in a number of harmonious and advantageous ways, so conducting this process digitally was not extremely difficult but in a way, still enlightening.

Photoshop Image Creations and their Breakdowns

2011-12-12T20:52:00.000-08:00

The first thing I did to create the above image was open a new, blank Photoshop document.
The new document was roughly 8.5"(w) by 11" (l).
The next step was to open my two source documents: two separate images.
I opened these in separate, Photoshop windows, which I accomplished by first moving my mouse over the title of the document in the top window bar/menu, then by clicking, holding and dragging my mouse over and outside to the right of the current window.
One source image is a screenshot, taken from a video work I was currently working on. The second was of an X-ray styled, portrait of myself.
I dragged the dark, mostly blackish screenshot onto my blank document, thus creating a new layer.
I did the same for the portrait image. I now had three total layers in the original document; the background (1), the screenshot (2) and the portrait (3.)
Each layer was treated with Transform, which is found under the Edit menu. This altered the layers sizes and orientations.
I wished to preserve only the face from the image and delete the rest so I used a Quick Selection Wand tool, found on the left hand side toolbox, to highlight the face.
Once the face was highlighted (keep in mind, the entire time the portrait layer is selected in the Layer Menu found on the right hand side) I right clicked (ctrl+mouse click) and chose 'Select Inverse.'
I pressed 'delete' which deleted everything from that layer except for the face.
Automatically, this action left the face still highlighted, which enables the 'Refine Edge' tool, found in the top menu (just below File, Edit, Image, Window, etc.)
After clicking 'Refine Edge', I altered the sliding scales to my preference-feathering the edge, blending its hard-cut appearance more smoothly. I also chose to bring this layer's border in some. These were aesthetic choices.
Then, I selected the layer in the Layer Menu which represented the screenshot image (this is not the one I was just previously working on.) I highlighted the bottom corner 'blurb' (if you will, or screen static.)
Once highlighted, I again chose to refine its edge by applying similar changes outlined in step #13.
I copied this highlighted selection and pasted its duplicate as a new layer.
I then took the duplicated layer, chose the Transform option again and flipped its orientation by holding SHIFT, clicking, holding and 'swooping' the mouse, moving it to its designed orientation.
Also, while still using the Transform option, I made it larger, again by holding SHIFT and holding/dragging the mouse, which keeps its size constraints uniform.
In the Layers Menu, I dragged the duplicate UNDER the facial portrait. Then lowered the duplicate layer's opacity.
By highlighting all layers in the Layers Menu (right hand side) I merged all the layers by scrolling down the Layers drop down menu and selecting 'Merge Layers.'
The final adjustments were made using the clone stamp tool to hide any imperfections that were missed through the adjustments.

_______________________________________________________________

For this image (above), I again began by opening a new, blank Photoshop document, sized roughly 8.5" (W) by 11" (L.)
I then opened my source image of a painting I created a few years ago from the File menu, selecting Open and finding the image which I had placed on the desktop.
I dragged the source painting image into the new document; this created a new layer. I made this layer about 50% opacity.
Making the source image layer the size of the blank document by using the Transform tool under the Edit menu, I held SHIFT and held/dragged the mouse, which keeps its size constraints uniform.
I created a new layer by selecting New Layer, in the Layer Menu on the right hand side.
On this newest layer (making sure it is selected or highlighted), I selected the Pencil Tool which is accessed by right clicking the Brush Tool and finding it in the drop down menu.
I selected the size, hardness, opacity and color by preference.
I began to trace the previous layer. I did this in sections, altering the colors of the Pencil Tool.
I filled the shapes that I had outlined by selecting the Paintbucket (Fill) Tool from the left hand toolbox in colors I preferred.
The colors I used were chosen under the Color Window. I went back and forth from using RGB sliders and pre-set swatches.
I created another new layer and hid all but the sourced painting image layer. I did this by unclicking the 'eyeball' icon placed next to each layer in the right hand Layer Menu.
I chose a brush from the left hand tool box (I had to right click and switch from Pencil Tool back to Brush Tool.)
Again, by preference I adjusted the brush pattern, its spacing and color to add texture to the face.
I did the same thing to add texture in the hair and the left side of the work, each time creating a new layer in the Layer drop down menu and choosing new brushes with varying spacings, colors and opacities.
Lastly, I hid the original source work painting that I had traced from by clicking the 'eyeball' icon next to its respective layer in the Layer Menu.
I then re-clicked that 'eyeball' icon for all other layers (which made them visible again, because I hid them temporarily, in step #10) and merged all the layers by highlighting all layers, using the Layers drop-down menu, selecting 'Merge Layers.'

________________________________________________________________

The above work was, like the others, sourced from an outside image, but really explored the options of the brush tools.
Like the others, I began by opening a new, blank Photoshop document, sized roughly 8.5" (W) by 11" (L) by selecting File>Open Blank.
Then under File, I selected Open and opened an image I had taken over the summer. I dragged this into my blank, Photoshop document, creating a new layer within the original document.
I made the source-image layer again about 50% opacity. I used this as a background to which I could create my new image closely.
I made this image layer the size of the blank document by using the Transform tool under the Edit menu, I held SHIFT and held/dragged the mouse, which keeps its size constraints uniform.
I created a new layer by selecting New Layer, in the Layer Menu on the left hand side.
On this layer, I selected a star-shaped brush from the brush tool because I wanted to created a firework. I was able to access more options under Window and scrolled down to select Brushes.
In this menu, I adjusted the spacing of the star-shaped brush to be so spaced that one or two clicks made a single star shaped imprint.
I repeated this, making a new layer for another star shaped imprint with a star shaped brush, but in different colors and at different sizes about 3 times (meaning 3 total layers.)
When I got my star, with its different colors and sizes on different layers, to my liking, I highlighted all the layers with star brush works on them and merged them by selecting 'Merge Layers' under the drop down menu in the Layers Menu (right hand side.)
With the star as one, single layer, I decided to brighten it by highlighting its respective layer, then under Image I went into Adjustments and chose Brightness/Contrast. This allowed me to adjust the star's brightness solely.
Again, I created a new layer (also from the drop down menu in the Layers menu on the right hand side), and began creating a leaf-like/tree-like effect by selecting an interesting brush imprint (left hand side toolbox, Brush Tool), adjusting its spacing and colors.
I copied and pasted this layer several times.
Each layer of 'leaves' were altered by selecting Transform under Edit and using my mouse to turn it different ways as well as re-sizing these duplicates. I decided to let the constraints of the duplicates to be non-uniform, as I enjoyed the effects.
I put several of these layers on top of one another, by dragging their respective layer in the Layer Menu (right hand side.)
Once I had all the leaves the way I enjoyed them most, I highlighted all layers with leaf-like brushwork and merged the layers into a single layer by selecting 'Merge Layers' under the drop down menu in the Layers Menu (right hand side.)
Once all leaf brush work were condensed into a single layer, I adjusted its hue and color just a tad by again accessing the Imagemenu, going into Adjustments and choosing Brightness/Contrast. This allowed me to adjust the leave's darkness.
Also under Image>Adjustments, I selected Hue and changed the color to be just a bit more on the brown/green side than simply green.
I hid all layers by de-selecting the visible 'eyeball' icon next to each layer in the right hand side Layers Menu.
I created a new layer from the drop down menu in the Layers Menu on the right hand side and filled this layer with a single color of my choosing, accessed with the paint bucket, fill tool (found on the left hand side.)
To give the firework some smokey clouds around it, I made the star layer visible again, by re-clicking the 'eyeball' icon next to its respective layer in the Layers Menu.
Then I created a new layer in the Layers drop down menu specifically for the smokey clouds, onto which I added very low opacity brush work.
This layer needed to be BELOW the firework layer in the Layers Menu, so I dragged the smokey-cloud layer underneath the firework layer.
Once all adjustments were made to my liking, I made sure that the order of layers were correct.
The leaf layer was at the highest listing in the Layers Menu, making it visible atop all else. Next in order was the firework layer, then the smokey clouds layer, then the backdrop, ashey-color filled layer.
All this was organized by clicking and dragging the layers, as they appeared, in the Layers Menu, either on top of or below other layers.
Lastly, I hid the source image (the one I had taken this summer) and merged all layers by selecting 'Merge Layers' under the drop down menu in the Layers Menu (right hand side.)

Virtual Museums: Topic Presentation

2011-12-09T10:48:00.000-08:00

VIRTUAL MUSEUMS

What are Virtual Museums?

· The concept of a virtual museum is that access to museum environments and exhibitions are accessible online.

· Museum objects and collections are translated into the virtual realm.

· Virtual museums exist virtually in CyberSpace.

^·“A virtual museum is a collection of electronic artifacts and information resources - virtually anything which can be digitized,”(Mckenzie, 1995).

· Paintings, drawings, photographs, diagrams, graphs, recordings, video segments, newspaper articles, transcripts of interviews, numerical databases are all examples of content that may be displayed and saved on the virtual museum's file server (Mckenzie, 1995).

· A collection of digitally recorded images, sound files, text documents, and other data of historical, scientific, or cultural interest that are accessed through electronic media,” (Virtual Museum, in Encyclopedia Britannica, 2011).

· A virtual museum is not always a virtual exhibition;
most virtual museums rely upon permanent
collections versus traveling or special exhibitions.

· This presentation does not include collections of
representations of dispersed digital objects,
such as Artstor or ArtServe in its definition of
Virtual Museum.

Virtual Museums: A History

· In its most basic sense, the virtual museum was born from museums that began listing information digitally or virtually.

· What we would consider a ‘basic’ webpage now, with images attached to links and detailed information listings, is the origin of the virtual museum.

· Beginning around 1993-1994, early collections from museums began listing within Mosaic, the first graphical browser (Virtual Museum, in Encyclopedia Britannica, 2011).

· Many of these early collection listing sites were simple pages, connected through hyperlinks to images, citations and other scholarly information.

· One of the first was EXPO (1993), an online guide to artifacts from the Vatican Library that were on display at the U.S. Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. (Mckenzie, 1995).

· In 1994, WebMuseum was created by a computer scientist from École Polytechnique in Paris was an exhibition of artworks by Western painters which grew to incorporate reproductions of paintings, background text, and musical selections submitted by a large number of contributors (Virtual Museum, in Encyclopedia Britannica, 2011).

· By 1995, Unisys & National Science Learning Network funded projects launching four science museums entirely virtually. Also, by this time one could visit the Smithsonian, Dallas Museum of art & the Louvre, digitally (Mckenzie, 1995).

· Google Art Project (2011) an online compilation of high-resolution images of artworks from galleries worldwide, as well as a virtual tour of the galleries such as Tate Gallery, London; the MoMa of NY, NY; and the Uffizi, Florence.

· The modern day Virtual Museum as exemplified through Google Art project and more, has developed spatial translations and object representations virtually.

Why Virtual Museums?

· “…I grew up in India. I had a great education -- I'm not complaining -- but I didn't have access to a lot of these museums and these artworks. And so when I started traveling and going to these museums, I started learning a lot.
And while working at Google, I try
to put this desire to make it more
accessible with technology
together. So we formed a team, a
great team of people, and we
started doing this…” (Sood, 2011).

· A virtual museum holds the capacity to connect a viewer remotely to global visual and sensory information held within a physical museum (Basu, 2010).

· The virtuality of a museum opens up access to viewers of all age, learning and interest levels.

· The browse-as-you (similar to a physical museum) at the ease of a computer can create greater comfort and an unintimidating viewing/learning context.

· This mode of learning and exploring is both learner-center and constructivist (Mckenzie, 1995).

· The advancement of technology in recent years has allowed for increasing amounts of artifacts, artworks and other collection-housed items to be readily available via the world wide web (Ivarsson, 2009).

· "Virtual visitors to museum websites already out-number physical (on-site) visitors, and many of these are engaged in dedicated learning," (Hawkey, 2004).

· Studies show that young children as well other groups of learners are intimidated and in some cases afraid of the museum environment (Falk & Dierking, 1992).

· Whether in families, school trips or adult outings, learning and social experiences in (physical) museums have sharply different outcomes when unguided versus guided (Falk & Dierking, 1992).

· Informal, nontraditional and self-regulated modes of learning are becoming increasingly supported by empirical and qualitative research supporting their validity in the spectrum of cognition and understanding.

· The paradigms surrounding learning and museum contexts have experienced significant changes over centuries and especially so in the past decades.

· In addition, the virtual museum, may provide opportunities to display more of a single collection, more often, than physically possible (Russo, 1998).

· Physical museums house artifacts and masterworks which require custodianship and are victim to the damages of dust, light and other environmental exposures (Chmielewski, Mourkoussis, Patel, White, Walczak & Wojciechowski, 2005).

How To Use Virtual Museums

The technology is still developing, the research is in infancy and educational methodologies require creativity and imagination…

· If/as a classroom teacher: V.M.’s should not replace actual field trips. However, V.M.’s may assist complementarily for issues such as

o Budget

o Long distance Travel

o Learners’ digital interests

o Attention duration

o Classroom management(s)

o Digital media & WWW browsing skill sets

· If/as a classroom teacher: Technological accessibility and competency necessary, but not overwhelmingly so.

o With a computer and project, virtual tours of virtual museums may be presented to an entire class.

o Instructor will need to become acquainted with online materials and reputable VM databases, understand bandwidth limitations within presentations and occasionally abide by the outlines on permission usages of protected content.

o Without replacing a physical museum trip, a virtual museum tour could break the ice with both older and younger learners to prepare expectations of classroom trip.

· If/as a museum educator: some could consider V.M.’s and V.E.’s to threaten the educational role at a physical museum.

o The interactivity of a virtual exhibition or museum has a large benefit of being an accessible take-away component of the museum education.

o Surveys, art activities, creative writing or critical thinking exercises developed within an institutions educational department (either physical or digital) would be dependent on or benefitted by the access of the collection from a home computer.

o A take-away activity or any take-home material connects content mastery and thoughtfulness across physical and digital contexts.

o The continuation of instruction/information sharing that is exchanged at a physical museum with at-home stimulation could develop long-term understandings.

How The Museums 'Become Virtual'

· Curators, education officers, technicians and museum management guide the process of digitizing and presenting web materials (Russo, 1998).

· Computer programmers work collaboratively with museums,
photographers, videographers and site developers.

· Through high resolution filming and shooting, HTML writing,
coding and programming, exceptionally high resolution
images are combined with 3D software that allows for a
‘walk-through’ type of interface.

· Google Art Project shares their virtual museum content at
10 Billion pixels - Gigapixel Technology.

· “Dynamic Database-Driven VRML” is a specific VRML technique originally developed in tangent with the Australian Museums on Line, seeks to organize various collections for subsequent online display (Russo, 1998).

· Dynamic Database-Driven VRML also acts as a server extension which can analyze a visitor’s identity and associations.

· Online 3D environments are also created by using 3D modeling technology, Virtual Reality Modeling Language and X3D which is an updated component to VRML (McKenzie, 1997), (Higuera & Pernas, 2005).

· A Robocam is commonly employed to both shoot and film as to analyze and record the physical environment, assisting in translating it into a 2D virtual space (Russo, 1998).

· Imaging techniques include X-Ray imaging, 2D and 3D laser scanning, Image Based Rendering and Modeling (McKenzie, 1997), (Higuera & Pernas, 2005).

· Not dissimilar in the initiation of a project by an architect or engineer, the virtual museum begins with a ‘sketch’ or a landscape.

· With the case of Dynamic Database-Driven VRML technology, a Virtual Community Engine creates this sketch (Russo, 1998).

· Meta-tags are then created in associate with the pages stored in a VCE and empower designer to add structural templates and usabilities (Russo, 1998).

· All of this creates a Virtual Community Modeling Language (VCML.)

A Sampling of Virtual Museum Databases

· Google Art Project (MoMA, Palace at Versailles, Frick Collection & more)
http://www.googleartproject.com

· Smithsonian Institute’s National Museums of Natural History
http://www.mnh.si.edu/panoramas/htmlVersion/01L.html

· The Louvre
http://www.louvre.fr/en/visites-en-ligne

· The Vatican Museum
http://www.vatican.va/various/cappelle/sistina_vr/index.html

In Summary

Critical Discussion

· In the context of education, how does virtuality effect reality?

· What is to be gained or lost with the uses of virtual museum environments?

· How is a virtual museum environment similar to or different than an online classroom?

· How accessible is this technology to teachers? In what ways could accessibility inconveniences be resolved?

· In what ways could virtual environments affect pedagogy?

· Physical museums formally necessitate order and representation for social, historical and political contexts. In what ways is this formatted responsibility translated from physicality to virtuality?

Bibliography

· Alexander, Emily. (2011, Nov 16). Instructors using virtual campus to complement distance learning. The ASU Herald. Retrieved from http://www.asuherald.com/news/instructors-using-virtual-campus-to-complement-distance-learning-1.2673181

· Basu, Saikat. (2010, Dec 20). Visit These 5 (virtual) Museums Without Leaving Home. Retrieved from http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/visit-5-virtual-museums-leaving-home/

· Cellary, W. & Walczak, K. (2006). Virtual Museum Exhibitions [Abstract]. Computer, 39(3), 93-95. doi: 10.1109/MC.2006.108

· Cellary, W. & Walczak, K. (2003). X-VRML for Advanced Virtual Reality Applications [Abstract]. Computer, 36(3), 89-92. doi: 10.1109/MC.2003.1185226

· Chmielewski J., Mourkoussis, N., Patel, M., White, M., Walczak, K. & Wojciechowski, R. (2005). Metadata Requirements for Digital Museum Environments. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 5(3), 179-192.

· Dierking, L., & Falk, J. (1992). The Museum Experience. Washington, D.C.: Howells House/ Whalesback Books.

· Google Art Project. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.googleartproject.com/

· Hawkey, Roy. (2004). Learning with Digital Technologies in Museums, Science Centres and Galleries. FutureLab, 4-11.

· Higuera, J., & Pernas, F. (2005). VRML Based System for a 3D Virtual Museum. In Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology. USA. doi10.4018/978-1-59140-553-5.ch539

· Ivarsson, Elin. (2009). Definitions and Prospects of the Virtual Museum. (Master’s Thesis). Retrieved from EBSCO. ISSN: 1651-6079.

· Johnson, L. & Lamb, A. (2007). Teacher Tap: Digital & Virtual Museums. Retrieved from http://eduscapes.com/tap/topic35a.htm

· McKenzie, Jamie. (1997). Proceedings from Museums & The Web Conference ’97: Building a Virtual Museum Community. Los Angeles, CA: Betty Information Institute.

· McKenzie, Jamie. (1997). Virtual Reality Transforms Virtual Museums, Online Exhibits & Exploratoriums. From Now On, 7(2).

· McKenzie, Jamie. (1995). Virtual Museums. Retrieved from http://fno.org/museum/muse.html

· Museum virtual exhibition 'first of its kind'. (2011, Nov 3). Retrieved from http://www.voxy.co.nz/lifestyle/museum-virtual-exhibition-first-its-kind/5/106283

· Rayward, W. B. & Twidale, M. B. W. (1999). From Docent to Cyberdocent: Education and Guidance in the Virtual Museum. Archives and Museum Informatics, 13. Retrieved from http://people.lis.illinois.edu/~wrayward/CyberdocentPaper.htm

· Russo, Angelina. (1998). Object Immersion: Database-Driven VRML and Robocam Technology in the Virtual Museum [Conference Paper]. Archives & Museum Informatics

· Sood, Amit. (2011, May). Amit Sood: Building a museum of museums on the web [Video File]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/amit_sood_building_a_museum_of_museums_on_the_web.html

· Swade, Doron. (2003). Virtual Objects: The End of the Real? Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 28(4), 273-279.

· The Virtual Smithsonian. (2011). Retrieved from http://2k.si.edu/2k/node_rotunda/indexe.htm

"Critique Time! Everyone SIGN ON!"

2011-12-07T11:10:00.000-08:00

“Can you hear me now?”

“Somewhat, not really, but can you see this painting?”

“…It’s really pixilated…?”

Shifts eyes. “…that is how it is supposed to-um-look…”

This is how I imagine a distance-learning situation with art. With the presentation advantages of a camera and microphone, the student and instructor critique and discuss a work that the student has just finished. Except instead of solid eye contact, the video breaks up from time to time. And instead of an intensive discussion of theory and related concepts, the audio delays to the point that each new spoken contribution is interrupted by a previous contribution.

Above is an illustrative description of how poorly such a situation could go. It does not necessarily seek to summarize the entirety of my beliefs, reflections or research regarding online education with the arts. However, it is a contribution that I can, in honesty, share from experience.

Theoretically, online learning has many advantages as it engages learners in a constructivist, mature and, often times, intensive mode of learning while also embracing pedagogy’s advancement into the modern and digital realm. For example, one of the highest rated, by both students and educators, advantages to online learning is convenience; travel to a college campus is null. The benefit in this for students is inherent for their travel costs and commute times are reduced if not erased entirely. Options for coursework or programs are more available online versus physically.

For an educator or professional’s enrollment, this makes invaluable ease for they will have greater amounts of time availability to, say, maintain a position that finances the distance-learning program.

Time restrictions are less evident in an online learning environment and this could potentially play a large role in the development of an arts-based project. For traditional online learning, the coursework or course meeting time are not typically condensed to a specific block of time. If an arts course was offered online, this could open up an opportunity to multi-task projects and concepts, with the convenience of working on a single work, while meeting online to discuss concepts both related to current work and potential future works, enhancing a cycle and production output for the art-making processes.

Theoretically, again, online learning lends itself well to being an enhanced or extended opportunity of communication because its lack of specifications or requirements to time block classtime (although some course will abide by pre-set time management regulations.) I believe, in a sense, the creative mind and artistic creator could benefit from the freedom that exists in exchanging dialogue with their instructor without serious time constraints.

Socially and attitudinally, the artistically engaged individual may (empirically supported and observed) be more introverted therefore a non-direct, distanced environment in which they may communicate and exchange could blossom the student’s social skills, even if only digitally.

Practically, an online course could improve digital literacy. Between browsing skills, network cognitions and/or basic technical skills and the limitations of computer capacities, somewhere along that pathway the student enrolled in an online course would need, thereby develop, digital skill sets necessary to any individual participating in our current world’s culture.

‘Wow,’ I am starting to think to myself, ‘Maybe this really is the future of education…’ But is it? To be frank, I somewhat am enlightened by the empirical research and general perceptions raving the benefits of online learning but only under a certain level of skepticism and critical counter-pointing.

Simply put, some subjects do not inherently lend themselves well to online learning. English, sure (reading, writing, editing, typing, publishing, etc., all at the fingertips and quite conveniently digital.) Math and science, perhaps-yet, how could equations exemplified in real time environments be conveyed digitally? And how are scientific experiments, as they exist in a physical form, to be shared in a way that isn’t reliant solely on images or video?

Which brings me to the subject of art and its spot in the spectrum of online learning. I assert that the general experience of making (traditional) art cannot be replicated virtually. By this, I mean that with the exception of digital video or time-based media, art making and critique do not benefit from virtual replication or an online environment because it removes the physicality on which art truly influences. It also does not serve justice to the type of learning experience that a group critique can provide a developing artist.

With post-contemporary art mediums developing and gaining merit exponentially, work in mediums such as installation or multi-media performance would lose itself existentially if shared in a learning context online. Sharing work online is one thing, it allows for networking and one aspect of representation, but what I am touching on is the teaching of such media online.

I also believe that creating and learning about art in a physical context positions the individual artist within a community or culture of other art-makers and thinkers. This is a crucial element; some may call it the ‘art world.’ I would say it is simply about knowing and interacting with your peers in your developmental art studies. I fear this element not to be the same if replaced by a digital, online learning environment.

Now, I must also admit that online-learning, even for the arts could have some advantages. But it is still an emerging component of the field. One would need to be very self-motivated for online-learning and able to construct their knowledge in a way that is both linear and organic, part academic and part studio. One needs to be highly developed in self-management and governance.

So, it is not to say that online-learning is totally out of the question for teaching the arts. Firstly, it matters which art medium is being learnt. Second, it truly matters the learning style and skill sets of the individual learning. Third, an insight to what is gained and lost into the specific environment of digital learning and what the sum of those mean for that learner is necessary. Lastly, moderation and access to critical forms of feedback in lieu of critiques are not to be misguided or overlooked.

With these guiding thoughts in mind, potentially online learning for the arts is of value. And if we are to support arts education while simultaneously sustaining a belief in the merit of online environments (or ‘the digital age’), we are to maintain both a critical eye as well as an optimism supporting more research and inquiry into the topic.

Bibliography

Bauerlein, Mark. (2008). Online Literacy is a Lesser Kind. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(4), 10-11.
Cotton, S., & Flowers, J. (2003). Masters of Arts in Career & Technical Education: Now 100% Online. TechDirections, 63(2), 22-23.
Jefsioutine, M., & Jerrard, R. (2006). Reflections on Using Online Contracts for Work-Based Learning & Teaching in Art & Design. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 5(1). doi:10.1386/adch.5.1.55/1
Yildirium, Zahide. (2006). Preservice Computer Teachers as Hypermedia Designers: The Impact of Hypermedia Authoring on Knowledge Acquisition and Retention. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5(3).

"Show me the way to go CLONE (brush) I'm tired and..."

2011-10-16T16:04:00.000-07:00

Educating digital technology to others enters an intimidating realm for some. For many educators, this means not only teaching the technology and skills needed to operate the technology but a set of values or system of judgments of which to value the end products. Such as with teaching Photoshop, students need the foundation of knowledge for creating work, but also a way to situate their products upon what they already consider, know or challenge about 'art' and/or 'product.'

Digital creation and editing software such as Photoshop and iMovie are boasted as user-friendly with an interface typically organized in ways that welcomes users. I can recall from experience that in the earlier days of both softwares, my own self-learning occured by accidents, exploring and in many cases, losing original versions of creations. This trial-and-error method certainly has some merit but is a highly personal system of acquiring knowledge and typically should only be employed in personal work in personal time.

Educating such software in a classroom or other type of educational setting or workshop requires a more technical approach, organized by and scaffolded on steps of execution, organized by groups of learner experience and a combination of different teacher influence/demonstration techniques.

If I were to teach users how to create original work in Photoshop, I would first and foremost ensure that the entire class has at least basic access within the classroom to Photoshop (the course would need as many computers with Photoshop as students.) I prefer to keep education multimedia and varied, so I would open by sharing a video that is quick and to the point about the purpose and history of Photoshop; for example, this video could work.

In addition, I actually enjoyed the method of demonstrating Photoshop basics, where we could not be at our own computer stations, like we experienced in class. After the opening video, a short introductory demo of how to begin an image and where to find basic tools such as brushes and color swatches I feel is the best way for all learners to become immersed in Photoshop's interface and window layouts. However, to this introductory demo I would add designation of tools for cropping, history and where to find the menu for image adjustments.

Here is where I believe it could get tricky. I found that in our own class setting, the prior knowledge base of Photoshop varied therefore some users were either disinterested, disengaged or eager to begin. Because of the potential for varied prior experiences, as an educator I would arrange the class into groups which mix more experienced users with novice users after the demonstration.

In the first activity, each student would be allowed to free-play in creating an original work. And with a second/another activity, students who are grouped together will create original works according to a theme that the group decides. Experienced learners will work with more novice users using peer assistance to creatively problem solve.

In addition to peer assistance and grouped student studio time, I believe that a system in which I, the instructor, may access the student's computer station from my station, in a sort of ghost-helper way, would allow for direct one-to-one technical assistance, direction and designation in interface and technical dilemmas. This would not replace an actual one-on-one assistance where the educator is physically with the student at the student's computer station.

Having researched this 'ghost-helper' software/format under many search phrases, I cannot seem to find an exact term/definition or a good example to point my readers to. So, for anyone who knows what it is here I am referring to, please feel free to share so I may clarify.

Many users are hands-on; they must be doing while they are learning. This is case for myself as well, depending upon the content. For this, I can foresee that demo's may not always work for teaching a digital technology to a group of students. So, how else could Photoshop be taught?

One creative way could be a learn-as-you-go-with-others approach.

Have all students open Photoshop software
Ask all students to open new file
When students ask how to open new file, educator asks class.
Those (if any) experienced learners should suggest ways to do so
Teacher makes list on black/white board for all to see.

This is just a blip of an idea of one way to teach the basics of Photoshop to a varied group of learners. This approach includes and benefits peer assistance, scaffolding of pre-existent knowledge and collaborative as well as a kinetic learning.

I believe that both of my approaches outlined above, the first which takes from our own class's demo approach with the addition of collaborative grouping, and the second which entirely builds upon kinetic exercise and collaboration would be appropriate for most school settings and age groups from middle school to older.

Lastly, to conclude and lighten things up, here is a video of what you might want to avoid when teaching a digital technology.

"TEREASTARR WILL NOT PAY"

2011-10-08T10:35:00.000-07:00

Jamie Thomas-Rasset is a Minnesota woman and mother who has been fighting the recording label industry over damages from digital file copyright infringement, files she downloaded and is accused of sharing over 5 years ago. This case is the first file sharing copyright infringement case by a major record label to be brought to jury and the only to go to trial. I first came across her story while watching RIP: A Remix Manifesto.***

Her story is drawn out, up and down and full of back-and-forth; the Capitol v. Thomas trial and retrials all began with the downloads of 24 songs. When the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) sent Thomas a cease-and-desist letter along with a settlement offer in 2005, Thomas refused and was later sued in 2006.

Her first trial took place in a district court in Duluth, Minnesota where her case was built upon the assertion that it was not her, Thomas, who controlled the Kazaa account 'TEREASTARR' which was accused of downloading and sharing over 1,700 music files but later reduced to 24 songs. Her defense' claim was that her family's WiFi access had been hacked or spammed by a form of external 'zombie or ghost hack.' Jammie was found in a later trial to not have owned a WiFi router.

The jury was instructed to interpret the act of 'making available' these files to determine the willfulness of the sharing of the 24 files. The jury was asked to consider whether copyright infringement meant the illegal downloading of files for which one does not own the copyright rights to, the making available to others of illegally acquired property or the actual distribution of illegally acquired property-or all of these. The jury verdict found Thomas liable for willful copyright infringement and awarded the RIAA plaintiffs a total of $222,000 or $9,250/song in statutory damages.

However, the Judge Michael Davis declared a mistrial stating that 'making available' of copyrighted materials did not suffice in defining 'distribution' in terms of copyright infringement.

A retrial was held in 2009 where the jury was instructed to find whether there was infringement on reproduction right or distribution right and whether these infringements were willful or non-willful. Thomas' defense this time claimed that perhaps her children had downloaded the disputed files. The jury found Thomas, again liable for willful copyright infringement and this time awarded the RIAA plaintiff's $1.92 in statutory damages or $80,000/song.

Thomas' defense not only appealed the amount of damages stating that it was 'so disappropriate to actual damages that it was unconstitutional' but also requested another retrial that omitted certain types of evidence included in original retrial which were claimed to have been acquired by violating state private investigator and wiretap statues. The defense asked for either a retrial with specific evidence omission or a reduction or removal altogether of statutory damages. The jury then reduced the plaintiff's awards to $54,000 but was declined by defense. RIAA then followed with a reduced settlement offer of $25,000, more than half the jury awarded, which was, again declined by Thomas and her defense.

In 2010, a third civic trial instructed the jury that defendant Jammie Thomas was already liable of willful copyright infringement and that what needed to be determined was statutory damages and appropriateness. Jury was asked to consider "the willfulness of defendants conduct or innocence, continuation of infringement after knowledge of copyright infringement, disregard for the copyright and/or profitable gains." Statutory damage amounts were to be assessed (as before, also) by the congressional statute of damages which range from $750-$150,00/song. The jury, again awarded the RIAA plaintiffs statutory damges of $62,500/song for a total $1.5 m.

Thomas' defense claimed that she, the defendant, had not caused the recording company's any actual harm, only that file sharing may have and again filed for appeal.

In 2011, a court ruled previously determined statutory damages for the RIAA plaintiffs in the amount of $1.5 m. to be "so oppressive and disproportioned to actual offense...was unreasonable." The damages were again reduced to $54,000 total or $2,250/song. To this decision, RIAA has filed for an appeal.

Ms. Thomas has not only made very clear to the court systems, recording industries and those who intimately follow the overarching debates of file-sharing and downloading, that she will not pay; she will accept a statutory damage amount of only $0. While she, the recording industry and courts have all grappled in a five-year, roller coaster journey of offer/counter-offer/refusal, etc., I wonder what unforeseen damages are existing in her home and professional life? How has this altered her view of the legal system and of the system for creating and sharing in our digital age and culture?

Also, while the recording companies are investing so much energy into their newer processes of requesting illegal downloader identity information from ISP's either to sue (mostly ending in "forced" settlements) or disconnections, where does this pursuit of court case come into play for the recording companies?

This specific case is challenging how we feel about sharing by challenging how we define distribution. It calls into question positions of willfulness for sharing. If an artist creates a painting and shares it with another for the other create a response piece, is s/he willfully distributing? What if he shares a painting he did not create, but found in a magazine, under the same situation? How do we define this?

How much longer will Capitol v. Thomas-Rasset continue? Who will appeal next? And will the case travel to the U.S. Supreme Court?

***RIP: A Remix Manifesto linked only to Part 6 of whole film as hosted on youtube. Consider viewing this entire film.

REMIXX

2011-10-07T09:35:00.000-07:00

The lawful use of existent sound, images and written text is an area of focus I personally love considering. There is something so tantalizing, controversial yet hiply relevant about this topic. In the Internet Age, intellectual property is becoming more and more difficult to be navigated and determined as original, untouchable or not. Most copyright laws are/were put in place to protect intellectuals as well as artists but are beginning to hinder creative productions by slapping harsh punishments and statutes on the popular actions towards arts creation. In my previous work related to this topic, I have considered what good or bad laws put in place for these purposes are actually doing by literally putting myself in the place of both sides of the argument. I have been hassled for the use pre-existent property in creative action; I also try to imagine being an individual claiming that their property has been used unlawfully and essentially 'stolen.' I try to imagine artwork posted to Facebook that is later found created line for line in another individual's work. How would this make you feel? (Just for the sake of discussion.)

Some of my classmates may remember a presentation I shared on the intellectual and creative use of pre-existent music property in relation to a musical artist named Girl Talk. I highly suggest you give this artist and his work a quick listen if you are already not familiar with him as he a 'sampler.' Girl Talk, or Greg Gillis, has been accused of 'ripping' other musicians music to create his own tracks. Interestingly, this is exactly what he does. I have often wondered how to does slip past most of the judicial systems set in place to get individuals just like him. He has 3-4 albums out now; and if you listen to closely to his earliest sampling work, most of the original tracks have been 'pitched' or noticeably altered in some way be it tone, pitch or tempo.

"I basically take preexisting pop songs and I cut them up and rearrange them and collage them together and try to manipulate them in a way that it becomes something new, try to make new pop out of old pop. "
-Greg Gillis, interview with Jamie York of On the Media

This gets at what I believe is the most influential factor in determining something called 'fair use' in the creation of product from pre-existent property. Fair use as I use it here is a limitation (but not exception to) of the Copyright laws set in place that protect creative work sampling copyrighted work without authorized rights to under a claim that is is transformed, in some way, and there are strict legal factors that help the courts determine this such as purpose, sustainability, effect and extent of transformation. A popular form this may take is when an artist parodies another work. See Jeff Koons controversial cases.

Educationally, and this connects back to the article on new, digital literacies, the implications for teaching interpretation and critical thinking skills are enormously necessary to the students' successes in our digital age. There truly is much at stake for any individual not aware of legal limitations and allowances when they create something that they feel is original. Sure, we are all taught not to plagiarize and-sure, we (should) know not to copy and paste a text definition from the internet straight into an essay. But by now, the internet has reached far and wide into may facets of our culture beyond simple research and connection. And the education keeping up with this growth needs to be as highly valued as LAW 101.

For example, one arguable condition about the fair use limitation is something called 'transformation' and to what extent the original form was transformed into this new form. There are magical numbers that exist in our legal sphere such as "20%" but this is not published or documented anywhere; I believe it is a rumor, so to speak.

Okay, now on to the applicable stuff. I used to wonder why a teacher of mine would not 'like to know' if we made multiple xerox's of one copy of an article. The teacher was funny about this, never explained why. Now, I understand that teachers do not exist in an untouchable zone for reproducing or implementing educational material that isn't their own. I used to believe teachers had access to nearly everything out there... Yet, on the contrary, while teachers do enjoy some exceptions to copyright laws, they are not sheltered from all.

Teachers are have the following, as a few examples, on media usage for education:

For Text: one master copy for teacher and only one per student, copied spontaneously,directly related to a 'curriculum test', scaled x number of words/pages for x amount of copiess,
For Motion Media/Film: Single copy of up to 3 minutes or 10% of the whole, whichever is less. (good chart here)

And also for reference we must must mention here something called the TEACH Act of 2002; this bill outlines the teacher's usage of multimedia material. Under this as well is a protection or limitation towards 'multimedia education' which is defined by educational projects of teachers and students which include original material as well as copyrighted material. This practice is claimed to be protected however it is tricky to distinguish and the guidelines, although legal are somewhat vague.

The tricky thing about a teacher's guidance through copyrighted and fair usage educational materials is that they are both helped yet hindered by the world wide web. Nowadays there is a wealth of information for educators on the subject in the internet, but at the same time it takes a keen awareness to understand which are legally valid and which are just theories or opinions. This relates to a large digital literacy but also involves a skepticism, caution and willingness to always double-check validity and ask around. Teachers must decipher all information for absolutely clear answers to fair use in their classroom and this is time-consuming but necessary.

For the following uses, teachers must be clear and ask for permission: reproducing, recording, preparing derivative work, distribution, performance, and display. Aside from the overall classroom, this is big for subject teachers such as art and music. Companies and networks are beginning to pop-up assisting educators through the murky waters of determining fair use.

At any rate, this entire discussion raises some inquiries:
-Should teacher education programs begin requiring education on copyright laws for education?
-Should teachers establish networks of information for copyright usages?
-What is a good, simple mantra educators can put into practice for this topic? (Bad fridge foods : when in doubt, throw it out...)

Please respond with your thoughts!

Learning 2.0: On 'Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century'

2011-09-26T13:17:00.001-07:00

Literacy education is important to both literary, textual information as well as digital discovery. Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century had me considering what literacy or literacies rely upon when it comes to digital learning. Also, what do these new literacies promise in terms of success against (or in tandem with) traditional teachings? Is it possible to understand and enact teaching new-age literacies without creating a rift between them and traditional, classroom learning? There was an interesting point in the reading about teaching new literacies but risking a decline in the interest levels for the more 'traditional' subjects. Would embracing the newer digital age and its pedagogical implications encourage students to single it out unhealthily?

Before going deeply into what I believe to be the implications around digital education pedagogy, I really enjoy thinking theoretically about participatory culture. Participatory culture, for me, is much about a cultural context and understanding that our contexts have and will always be in flux. It is also about an increase and a ratio between the consumption and production of media. Confronting's statistic on how the percentages of teens that both create or share digital media makes me think about all of my own personal youtube learning (even with the self-developed skeptical eye I always practice.)

Confronting emerged issues around digital pedagogy of my own as well as created a deeper consideration of the issues that the author raised. My first initial concerns were, access (who has computers? who has internet and where?), health (sedentary habits, eye harm), moral/ethical judgment (how much on the internet is harmful? etc.) Then I wondered, whose responsibility in our educational system is it to teach the moral, technical and creative tactics necessary to succeed in a digital realm. Who is to fund the provisions for access? Especially concerning the moral question I mentioned above in this, I connect back to the Character Education (a.k.a. The Values Class) course I am concurrently taking.

The participation gap created by the issues of access actually seems to be less about the access part now. The emerging practices involving new media are evolving so exponentially that the practice itself is past the point of keeping every student 'connected'; now, it seems, the practice is more concerned with how the student will and act and respond once connected. To me, this is quantitative access vs. qualitative access- what is actually happening during logon vs. who, when and at what frequency users/students log on.

I would believe that the majority of those included in education agree on some of the vast benefits to digital education. However, socialization being seen as able to occur online is still struggle for its place at the table. I want to know why schools are still banning access to social networking sites from their computers. This practice was just beginning to take active effect as I began to leave high school and at first it seemed obvious why-administrators worry of its (SNS's) distraction, its danger of connecting with suspicious online entities, etc. Yet, as SNS's developed and its users developed themselves technically and creatively within the online realm, policies never entertained the possibilities that SNS's might actually provide some good, a lot of good, actually.

One of the most critical concepts to educate on surrounding digital pedagogy would be the skills of judgment and discernment. With the increasing amounts of information circulating in our ever-evolving digital world, it becomes harder and harder for young minds (even the older ones!) to establish the norms and standards by which to judge credible information they receive. To harness this capacity in young learners would be to educate skills necessary to be a consumer and a developer of our participatory culture, digital or non-digital.

Another key skill to teach regarding digital pedagogy would be interpretation in tandem with critical analysis because this is crucial to the transformative use of existent cultural materials. Who will teach this? I remember creating a response video once, out of complete silliness yet it became an entity in which a constant conversation occurred about the original video vs. my response-the differences and the similarities. Many of the core skills listed in Confronting I agree with: multi-tasking, appropriation, and networking. However some I find myself feeling uneasy or unclear on because they seem vague, repetitive and unspecifically connected to digital participatory culture: negotiation, collective knowledge, distributed cognition and transmedia navigation (sort of, I am on the fence with this one...)

Educators as Bloggers

2011-09-18T15:09:00.000-07:00

Since soon after my father caved and allowed a personal computer in my bedroom in my early teenage years, I have maintained web blog posting. During 'early' years (yes, to me early and I mean 2003-2006-ish) it was, as to be expected, a smorgasbord of teenage angst, lyrical quotations and rhetorical thinking. I was encouraged in college to blog and even required which became a new issue: now that I have to blog, do I still want to? Is it going to 'be the same'?

Fast forward many years and an undetermined amount of 'writers block' and expected gaps of online interests, the opportunity to blog for class turned into more or less a hassle and even more so, a bore. Yet, as the fatigue of working towards an undergraduate thesis began seeping into my mind and body slowly, I began to return to blog reading. I must have surfed for hours or more a week online, satisfying or increasing a variety of interests in regards to digital learning and uncovering. And so, because of some of the truly connecting threads I have since uncovered, I believe I have renewed an interest in blogging again.

During that time I came across this blog. As an early childhood educator who teaches with a multi-discipline inclusive arts education program, s/he weaves in, of course, the 'blogging 101' image posts of their highs and lows within a day, short anecdotes and also, as is my personal favorite characteristic of the blog, questions. The blog as well as the writer are not uncomfortable with sharing publicly what is or isn't a strong point in their teaching abilities- and invites readers to share tips or other inquiries that may foster a potentially collaborative learning process.

and, here is my favorite post! Which really illustrates the my previous two sentences.

In addition to a healthy dose of inquiry and honesty, I also appreciate personality and slight dash of controversy (or 'up-and-coming', to be a bit more safe) when connecting with blogs, even those written on various topics relating to education. Here is a blog maintained by a retired high school yet active college instructor. Jim's (writer) views are interesting and even somewhat quiet; yet, while covering a wide range of topics he allows for the topics to open up and present arguments or thought-provokes for the reader to uncover on their own. Reading through the blog, I do not read or receive his teachings, so to speak, but find myself pondering issues around feminism or online learning. Perhaps I may not have thought about either of this topics on my own today without prompt. Interesting, indeed...

Last yet certainly not the least-a blog teetering on the edge of this week's assignment written about (gasp!) not classroom teaching but museum education! Art educators in the area of Hamilton, Ontario generate this blog as a listing of fantastic resources-here you will find a John Falk reading suggestion, symposia notes and itinerary listings. Although through my searches the blog was a bit between the cracks, there must be many other museum educator blogs such as this out there, right? Please feel free to share any links with me!

On an ending note, I would like to share this youtube video on being a "learner." I look forward to comments and findings.

Welcome!! (pageant wave)

2011-09-16T10:17:00.001-07:00

I would like to begin the blog posting by welcoming my classmates and instructor (HI!) to my blog. Thank you for visiting, reading and sharing- I am looking forward to all the exciting, new knowledge and experience that the semester will bring us!

Happy posting,
Case