Holoda’s Weblog

This article (“Education Changing by Incorporating Technology”), was basically about the integration of new media in the classrooms and how great it is that students can integrate the internet, software, etc within their studies to enhance their learning, etc, etc, etc. But once again I think the discussion applies to specific audiences because, in reality, there are limited schools that can actually enjoy this privilege. Of course my experience with different school districts in California is limited, but I can speak for Yucaipa-Calimesa and Redlands School districts as I have had many opportunities to witness their access to technology first hand and talk with the teachers, my mom being one of them. It’s a great thing when a student is researching something and is able to use computers to enhance their research with pictures, video clip, etc, but what about the districts that can’t particularly afford this stuff? For example, in the Yucaipa school district many of the programs and software available to schools is not really feasible and completely overlooked because the schools don’t have the funding to use it, nor do they have enough technology. Then, if you consider the districts that get by with the bare minimum (like some LA schools for example), it’s really disheartening. It’s an interesting situation as we discuss the possibility of textbooks “becoming obsolete” because of the integration of technology in schools, yet many schools can’t even afford the textbooks to teach.

Here’s the link to the article….  http://post-journal.com/page/content.detail/id/502546.html?nav=5018

I finally got around to reading the Dibbell article (“A Rape in Cyberspace”), and I have to admit it was a little alarming. Although it was obviously upsetting to the ‘victims,’ I have a hard time feeling the degree of shock and empathy for these people in relation to the terrible reality of a rape in the material world. The author stresses rape as an “emotional act” and quotes a few of the MOO members in their “attempts to fine-tune the differences between real and virtual violence. ‘Is not the mind a part of the body?’ ‘In MOO, the body IS the mind.” Yet, “rape” is a horrible act that has seriously negative effects on the mind and body and it is hard for me to compare “cyber-rape” to real life.

ON the other hand, Dibbell brings up an interesting issue in regards to identity and how far it extends beyond our physical body. If we see these virtual identities/communities as extensions of ourselves, then at what point can we (should we) censor or punish (in Bungles case, banish), a member who steps outside of the “boundaries” of proprieties, cultural values, etc. And what are these boundaries? An extension of the cultural that exists in the material world? This article raises a lot of questions that are seemingly impossible to answer.

Something that was particularly odd to me was the community discussion to toad or not to toad Bungles, and the obvious factor that he could easily make up another character and continue to do the same things.

Just wanted to comment on the article Prof. Rhodes sent out entitled “Balto. Co. to overhaul report cards” from the Baltimore Sun. Baltimore County apparently is going to try to implement a new electronic report card that provides a detailed assessment of a students growth in elementary school. It will “assess [not only] students’ acquisition of knowledge, but also their application of knowledge” using multiple modes of “measurement” in each individual subject. It is irritating to me (although this is a nice idea and all) that little consideration is given to the extra workload on the teacher. If anyone is a teacher or knows one (elementary school or high school), I am sure they are aware of how much teachers are already highly overworked and underpaid. For the amount of extra hours already required of the job (outside of “contract hours” which is only a portion of how much time teachers dedicate to grading, revising, planning etc.), this additional imposition irks me, especially considering the amount of personal time that is already consumed by report cards. The article does mention this a little at the end. Here’s the link…  http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_county/bal-md.co.schools21may21,0,5107596.story

The more abstract these articles are, the more distracted I get with this stuff. Richard Buchanan theorizes design in his article “Rhetoric, Design, and Humanism,” and I just want to briefly comment on the begging in of his piece. I liked his discussion of a subject matters “indeterminacy,” and the three points he makes to try to illustrate why ambiguity is a good thing. First, he says ambiguity in design is distinguished from the scientific tendency towards “neutrality” or the tendency to gravitate towards the “understanding of determinate subject matters” (229). Next, “indeterminacy” implies ongoing change and “diversity,” he emphasizes the “play” of meaning as it is “continually evolving.” Lastly, he says that the indeterminacy of a subject implies that it has many “alternative resolutions.” I thought this particular section really echoed Derrida in his discussion of “play” and the significance of a “non-centered” approach to any text. Viewing things through the lens of multiplicity and ambiguity are essential to enjoy the richness of meaning implied in a text. Now with Buchanan this approach is necessary in regard to any integration of “art,” and he gives a historical overview of design from antiquity to modern times….

I was just thinking about the discussion Thursday and the time we spent on the idea of the “five paragraph essay,” if it was effective or useful, is there really an “end” to a piece, etc. I was trying to reflect upon my own experience with this thing, and I realized that it wasn’t until the end of my undergrad/beginning of the graduate program that I began to really understand the purpose of the five paragraph essay, and how to step outside of it’s boundaries (or even understand that I could and it was ok to do so). Although the format is limiting and tends to negate meaning/s, it is necessary to be successful in the institution of education. I think I am still getting used to asserting my own voice in a work, or criticizing, analyzing, examining a topic that is currently “unconventional” or not generally discussed. Sirc asks at one point in his “Box Logic” piece if one should teach the students according to life experience or the academy (he chooses life experience). I think my point is that there are these hoops one has to jump through in an institution that is defined from a point of exteriority, that unfortunately disrupts (but of course does not negate), the attempts to move beyond merely “satisfying the standards” of what has been presented as English Studies. I think that’s why I appreciate Cixous so much: the very format and flow of her writing defies convention yet she has very poignant things to say about the way we speak, write, and ultimately think.

I thought the Reich article was interesting (“Turn Teen Texting Toward Better Writing”), as he had an interesting approach to the sometimes annoying technologies that I have to deal with as an occasional substitute teacher. He suggests the incorporation of teen technologies into the classroom,(or “mirror[ing] the online social networks of youth culture”), such as Myspace, Facebook, texting, chatting, etc. I think his approach sounds great but when I reflect upon all of the classrooms that I have had to sub for (namely high school/junior high grades), it’s hard for me to visualizes some of these things actually happening. Of course it is always good to use these medias as a way to involve the kids in current events and spur “intellectual productiv[ity],” but the truth is that many kids in the school system just don’t care. Of course I acknowledge the fact that my experience has been cultivated through the lens of a substitute, which for many kids signals a “free day” in which they can fool around during the usual haphazard “watch-a-video” assignment. But doing anything outside of the requirements of any assignment and incorporating schoolwork into one’s blog or Facebook communication seems pretty unlikely. But then again, Reich is suggesting a cultural adjustment of the five-paragraph-essay, pen-and-paper standard assignment, and I can be a little bitter at times when I think about my experiences substituting…

     Not trying to be a particular theory nerd here, but in studying all the texts for the comp exam, everything seems to connect to Foucault, Derrida, Burke, etc., etc…. In the case of the Birdsell/Groarke article, Bakhtin keeps popping into my mind. The Birdsell/Groarke text argues for the notion that visual images can be more understandable than word print. I think this section of the piece connects well with Baktin’s “Marxism and the Philosophy of Language,” particularly in the claim that word print can be more limited, “vague and ambiguous,” than visual argumentation in the image. Bakhtin stresses that social context not only structures reality, but the individual’s consciousness. All signs (i.e. words) have a material embodiment (defined only through social interaction) that shapes the consciousness (there is no such thing as the “individual”; rather, one is shaped through language in a social context). Birdsell/Groarke show the hooked fish image to indicate an example of the visual argument as conveying a clear message to an audience: “the argument that you should be wary of cigarettes because they can hood you and endanger your health” (311). Bakhtin’s notion of “audience” also assumes that there is “no abstract addressee” because the “audience wouldn’t know him.” The speaker, (or in the Birdsell/Groarke article, the image) assumes the recipient is “up to date” with cultural conversation, morality, ethics, etc.

Reading Rogoff’s discussion of visual culture as an entirely new way of examining visual “things” is actually alot like Roland Barthes “From Work to Text,” an article that privileges the written text as always changing, “dilatory,” and having the capability to “explode.” Just as the text is an “irreducible plural” for Barthes, Rogoff presents visual rhetoric as an opportunity to “unframe” boundaries of discourse in which we have viewed “situated knowledge’s” (384).  His quote from Spivak reinforces the idea that unlimited possibilities for questioning and examination that the potentials of visual culture provide, allow for the constant re-settling of “situated knowledge’s” and “continuous (re)production of meanings” (385).  Visual art, media, etc., are areas, (much like Barthes notion of “text”), that cross-cut disciplines and contain multiple, potential interpretations simultaneously.  Just thought this was interesting because Barthes is generally privileging the written text while Rogoff, visual medias. 

I just finished the Selfe article in WNM, “Students Who Teach Us.” I thought it was interesting how she points out that,  here is this young man who is successful in web design and new media, yet cannot survive at his university because he somewhat lacks the ”ability to write and organize formal essays [and has]problems with development and logical argumentation” (49).  I had mixed feelings about this. I understand her points that that mixed media plays an increasingly significant role in communication, and that education and playing a productive role in the community , university, etc. does not rely merely on the written language, but on visual representation.  But as I was reading I kept thinking about what we do in “English Studies” and how alot of our discourse relies on “development” of ideas and the ability to argue, present, contrast certain issues “logically.”  I wonder if David’s placement in the English program was the best for him, or if there were any programs that would have been more conducive to his skills, like web/graphic design, etc.  It seems like sometimes it is a matter of direction, and in large institutions, it’s not like they cater to the individuals need. On the other hand, I’m trying to see how English studies can encourage one to develop the skills of “logical argumentation” through visual design, without the use of the essay or any “formal” text.”