Remediating (our motivations in) the classroom

To think about remediation in the classroom, or rather, to think about remediating the classroom, requires an instructor to rediscover his or her fundamental motivations and pedagogical beliefs. In my ponderings, I noted that Bolter and Grusin’s theory of remediation maintains that media constantly changes, shifts, and blends. That writing, academic or otherwise, stays static makes little sense. Because we ought not to treat the classroom like a vacuum, we must be aware of the changing rhetorical situations in the world beyond the classroom door and incorporate the skills necessary to be successful in these rhetorical moments into our teachings. It would be a great disservice to our students to ignore the movements in the world “out there” and pretend that they (and we) belong to a stagnant world “in here.” When I mentioned this in class, someone posed this question: “Yes, we can say we want to bring technologies into our classrooms to empower students, but what’s in it for us?”

The question blindsided me. Of course, I take graduate courses because I enjoy them and because I love learning, but I plan to teach first and foremost because I love the possibility of empowering others. What is in it for me is what is good for my students. Granted, like all desires, my plan to teach also benefits me directly; it is not wholly selfless. I might get summers off to travel. Empowering others will, hopefully, contribute to positive, larger scale social change that will benefit everyone, including myself. Teaching will allow me to continue learning, will afford me the chance to meet many different people from whom I can acquire new skills and new knowledge, and will give me the opportunity to take part in engaging, critical discussions of theory, its manifestations, and its applications. To ignore technology, new media, and the changing nature of mediation (past, present and future), then, would be to deprive students of the opportunity to communicate more effectively with the people around them and would deprive all of us (students and teachers) the opportunity to gain new insight about today’s “what is,” and to think critically and rhetorically, as Selber might suggest, about why it is, how we fit into it all, and how we can shape it and ourselves when change becomes necessary.

To think about remediating the classroom, we must not just question our feelings towards technology; we must also question what motivates us to teach and what we consider our goal in the classroom.

A whole lot of -mediacies and -mediations!

Remediation is the appropriation of one medium, or of content or characteristics of one medium, by another medium. Remediation echoes the myth of the inherent link between technology and progress, and furthers this notion by suggesting a connotation of healing or curing. Bolter and Grusin trace the word “remediation” back to its Latin root, remederi in order to solidify this link (59). We live in a forever imperfect world, according to our consumerist behaviors, but these consumer imperfections are different than those that we might point to consciously. Through our purchasing patterns, we insist that the technologies we currently use do not have the capabilities we need or want, do not best reflect ourselves, or do not allow us to create/work/organize/etc. to our fullest capabilities. As Bolter and Grusin suggest, however, we don’t “realize that the older medium [has] failed in its promise until the new one appears” (60).

As I understand it, hypermediation refers to the bombardment of media that makes media seem more real, which is the goal of all media according to the authors. This pursuit of realistic representation, of real technological experience and of experiencing reality through technological means, translates into, when done successfully, transparency of the employed medium. Transparent immediacy likewise strives for realism, working to pin down a mediated experience as the experience or a mediated object as the object, to define it, its existence, through a singular, transparent technological gaze. Hypermediacy, on the other hand, represents the technological glance, or multiple gazes from various points of view. Hypermediacy provides are more multifaceted interpretation of an experience or an object than does immediacy, and in that way is more real and at the same time, more obviously mediated.

School district lends laptops, violates rights.

Not nervous enough about technology? Read this.

Functional literacy.

Thomas can work his Blackberry. I can take sneaky pictures. Bwahaha!

Really, world?

http://www.cbs2.com/video/?id=127675@kcbs.dayport.com

My visual essay: "Multiliterate Me!"

Someone give me a paper bag. I'm hypermediating.

I am sitting at my dining room table, my hands in position over my laptop’s keyboard. It is 5:00pm on Friday afternoon, and the following things surround me: make up; a mirror; some trail mix; keys; my checkbook; a calculator; my cell phone; pens; Remediation; my planner; my coffee; and a lighter. These things comprise my immediate environment, but, interestingly, none of them holds my attention. Instead, my eyes are fixed on my computer screen, now staring at these words as I type them, but shifting back and forth to the flashing boxes on the taskbar letting me know that I’ve received a new Google Talk or Skype message. The Google Talk messages appear as blurbs above my taskbar clock, saving me the effort of clicking over to that window to read them until I need to respond. I’ve got another window open, minimized comfortably for now in my taskbar: Mozilla Firefox, my Russian Doll window. Thanks to tab browsing capabilities, I’m currently monitoring Gmail, Facebook, and Blogspot via Firefox. When these bore me, I’ll CTRL + T and open up Twitter, “window” shop at my favorite online retailers, check my bank statement, read the news, find recipes.

Bolter and Grusin, the authors of Remediation, insist that “hypermediation makes us aware of the medium or the media and (in sometimes subtle and sometimes obvious ways) reminds us of our desire for immediacy” (34). While I am very aware of the digital-ness of my online and computer activity, the “real-life” overlap in theme and content (and often, company) makes the transition between real life and digital life nearly seamless. I answer my cell phone, sip my coffee, eat my trail mix, type responses to friends, read about what’s going on in the world, check the weather before deciding what to wear to the movie I’m headed to (the time of which I can easily find out online), copy quotes from print text to Word document, and buy new clothes via the web, which will be shipped to me and which you will likely see me wear at some point in class this quarter. In the age of hypermedia, anything and everything is immediate, available at command. Hypermediacy, I think, sounds like a medical affliction for a reason; it’s only a matter of time before I explode from all this input.

We are, we are VR.

While reading the beginning of Remediation, I started thinking about the concept of virtual reality (VR), trying to trace down why it resonated with me so much. I remember very clearly hearing my dad talk about VR and its possible applications for emergency response training simulations in the future; this was in the early to mid-nineties, and I'm not sure what progress has been made (if any) in this industry. I also remember a very cheesy show that came on after Power Rangers on Fox Kids, right about the time that the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers were getting uncool/going to space/losing main actors due to contract disagreements. Just in case any of you missed it (or in case you have, like me, chosen to forget about it until now...), here's the opening:

Selber: Three Pictures

For your enjoyment, friends: my super-simple, three-picture visual essay about Selber.

It's late, which might explain the paranoia...

While I truly believe that I know and understand that technology is a non-neutral, like Selber emphasizes in Chapters 3 and 5 of Multiliteracies for a Digital Age, my initial reaction to the technologies I use in my daily life does not respond appropriately to these “biases.” What intrigues me the most about the idea of non-neutral technology is not what Selfe focuses on in her book, the “hidden” socio-economic and political impetuses that brought technology to us and that continue to reinforce social inequalities, but rather the miniature, silent, personal manipulations our technologies condition us with, without our knowing. We've talked in class a few times about how software and interfaces have agendas (Blackboard, PowerPoint). Selber mentions grammar checkers, and how they make us doubt ourselves in Chapter 2.

Our faith in technology troubles me, especially in light of this whole non-neutrality thing. Selber has led me to believe that technology (and “the man” behind technology) manipulates my entire life, my sense of self, and my means of thought. Technology functions for many of us as more than a tool; we’d hardly expect a hammer to know what to do with itself, and yet, we rarely question computers. I had a high school science teacher who would remind us whenever something went awry with a computer that we should first “check the carbon-based thing in front of the screen.” For Christmas a few years back, I got a book called How to Survive a Robot Uprising, a Zombie Survival Guide spin-off that offers tips and tricks about what to do when our technology malfunctions and tries to take over and kill us. I think I need to write a letter to the author of that book and give him the heads up: It’s not the malfunctioning we should fear; the danger of technology lies in its flawless, everyday operation.

Ideas for my essay writing workshop

First of all, thanks for reading and thanks in advance for your help!

Now, I am torn about how to go about this workshop for a number of reasons, but tentatively, this is what I have in mind. The workshop is open to all students in the program I work for, a retention and support program for low-income, disabled, or first generation students. The workshop will accommodate up to 35 students (I expect maybe 10, ha.) and will run an hour and forty-five minutes.

I thought about starting with a paragraph-level discussion, emphasizing the power of topic sentences to keep a paragraph (and an essay!) structured and focused. I want to touch on detail sentences, and how to use the last sentence in your paragraph to conclude or transition. Then I thought I'd take up characteristics of a good thesis statement (an assertion; specific; supportable; etc.) and how an intro paragraph is similar to an expanded topic sentence with regards to its overall function in a paper. I thought then I'd look at how a "traditional, academic, 5-paragraph essay" is structured, and explain that this is a framework, a convention, but a starting point for students at a complete loss with essay writing. I also want to tie in how seeing the structure/organization of the essay in this light might help you get started with organizing your next essay because being aware of how an argument might play out and progress in a paper may offer you a starting point.

So, like I said earlier, I'm not convinced of this plan for a few reasons. One: this is a whole lot of material and I would rather do one, focused thing that keeps students interested and will be able to sink in than throw a bunch of stuff at them in tidal-wave form. However, all students have different needs and I think offering a whole slew of tips might be useful because a student can then choose to remember what made most sense or seemed most helpful to him/herself. Also, if I choose just one topic, which would be most beneficial and most universal? Two: I know the five-paragraph essay has a bad, bad rap in the comp circle, and while I understand that it might be limiting and reductive and the facilitator of bad writing and lazy thinking, I know that a lot of the students I work with are so terrified of writing that they have no idea where to start. If I can demystify bits and pieces of academic writing conventions, they may feel more agent-y in their essays.
I know a lot of my students also struggle with grammar, but I am incredibly hesitant to do an hour and forty-five minute grammar workshop. While I think knowing how to use commas and correct fragments and run-ons and be aware of tense shifts would benefit many of these students, I don't think these are the "higher order concerns" I'd like to try to touch on in the workshop space.

That is all. Help! :o)

(You guys are the best!)

test hyperlink

http://lmgtfy.com/