Here are our thoughts and notes on our design challenge:
Be sure to take our survey!
Here are our thoughts and notes on our design challenge:
Be sure to take our survey!
A person’s identity indicates something about them. As a set of social classifications, identity is created by viewing two or more people or groups in relation to one another (oneself is included). Identity is a paradox in two ways.
First, it is constantly in flux, but at the same time, suggests an ever-developing constant within a person. How someone chooses to identify his/herself (or someone else) can change over time; there can be momentary or long-term changes. For example:
Second, a person’s understanding of their own identity affects the lens through which they view his/herself and others.
Early on Wenger mentioned “We define who we are by the ways we experience ourselves through participation as well as by the ways we and others reify ourselves.” Far too often people say nobody affects who they are as a person. To which we would argue is not true. The way we define our identity has a lot to do with the world around us and how we react and respond to other people asserting their identity.
In the Wenger reading I got caught up in the way trajectory was defined. The world is more networked than it has ever been before, so it makes sense how we, as people identify become networked as well. Wenger suggests trajectory in not a fixed path nor is it a fixed destination but continuous motion. The former definition of trajectory falls more in line with past definitions of identity, static and rigid. Thinking about how you can have “multiple” identities thanks to the power of anonymity on the Internet a more fluid definition of identity works. A definition where you are not only identify with your physical characteristics, but also your interest, your thoughts, and the content you create.
An interesting part of Youth, Identity, and Digital Culture was the dichotomy between Giddens’s and Foucault’s views. The true nature of identity probably lies somewhere in between these two opposing philosophies. The individual is shaped by societal norms and constricted by society’s expectations, which can be both good and bad. Society deems what is acceptable behavior, which can act as a chilling effect on undesirable behavior but also any behavior at all that deviates from the norm. The Internet just accelerates this process by providing a more effective feedback loop.
The set of characteristics that physically and mentally distinguish one person from another.
We chose YouTube as our disruptive medium. Since YouTube was created 10 years ago, 300 hours of video are uploaded to the site every minute. (source).
YouTube disrupts traditional television stations and contributes to “cord-cutting” by providing an alternative source of content, one where anyone can produce as well as consume. It can even deliver a replacement for the “10 foot experience” using YouTube Leanback, which allows videos to be viewed on a TV and controlled using a smartphone.
Below, you will find our team’s preferred method of communicating ideas about projects, readings, and discussions. In this session, we laid the foundation for our video and generated smaller, independent assignments for the team to complete.
We now see Reddit as a CoP, whereas before, we only viewed subreddits as this type of community. Redditors constantly ask WWIC? People want to not only ask questions, but be heard as well. Reddit offers a medium through which crowd-sourcing information from hundreds of people is available.
The Medium is the Massage – Core idea 1: Technology acting as an extension of the body/ senses with the electrical system being an extension of the nervous system allowing what was once the public to now act as the mass.
The Medium is the Massage – Core idea 2: “Now, with TV and folk singing, thought and action are closer and social involvement is greater. We again live in a village. Get it?”
“Electrical information devices for universal, tyrannical womb-to tomb surveillance are causing a very serious dilemma between our claim to privacy and the community’s need to know”
-Quotes from reading
The Web is a Customer Service Medium – Core idea 1: WWIC- individuals have a desire and need to express opinions, thoughts and feeling on everything and the web provides a unique medium where this is possible.
The Web is a Customer Service Medium – Core idea 2: there are three levels to a website with the”like” option at the foundation. Apps attempt to bridge the gap between the businesses finding a way to profit while still appealing to the WWIC mass.
Discuss them in the context of both community and identity
The web allows for a return to the tribal notion of community where instant discussion is possible. What used to be our private Identity is now public and our identity Is less fluid because once something has been expressed on the web it is not easy to retract and it is possible for someone to go back and view every mistake you have made despite the fact that as a person you grow and change over time.
Do you feel differently about your team video now that you have read McLuhan’s ?
I think it’s interesting that we are making a video about YouTube on YouTube. We are massaging the medium.
Please complete the following readings before class on Thursday.
Related to Cluetrain Manifesto:
While reading, think about what theses from the original Cluetrain Manifesto (1999) are still relevant today. Which theses are no longer relevant in 2015?
Strength: Provide a Baseline Technology
When collaborating on projects, Google Drive and apps allow for easy communication and data sharing. Too often, we encounter students who are not comfortable using drive and other productivity/content creation-geared applications. Sometimes, collaborators seem resistant because they are not yet comfortable.
Although these applications are available for desktop platforms, the mobility of the iPad apps allows the user to bring the technology, and the ability to create content into any collaborative or meeting space. The iPads are slim, portable, and a pleasure to use. With workflow adapting to such a portable, multitask oriented utility, we will change what it means to do group work.
If every student possessed an iPad, everyone would be exposed to the applications and have a baseline vocabulary associated with the technology. Time will no longer be spent on getting everyone acquainted with the technology.
When every student can operate with utilities that improve workflow and collaboration, communities will be quicker to innovate and produce work.
Let the information flow.
Weakness: Can’t Do Everything a Laptop Can
Opportunity: Reduce in Paper (SBU’s Eco-Footprint)
iPads for everybody offers an excellent opportunity for the Stony Brook community to reduce it’s eco-print by using less paper. By using free .pdf reader apps that are available, students can upload reading assignments, class notes, and e-books to their iPads which means they don’t need to print out long readings or buy expensive books – which all use paper. Not only would SBU reduce its eco-print, they would also reduce costs; perhaps part of the cost of getting the iPad could be offset by reducing expenditures on paper. Even though there might be a learning curve for students as they get used to accessing, reading, and taking notes on .pdfs using their iPads, the benefits of using less paper is well worth the effort. In addition to the immediate ecological benefits, and possible reductions in cost, Stony Brook University has the opportunity to stand out as a leader in higher education by using new technology to improve both the quality of education and the quality of life on campus for students, teachers, staff, and the environment.
Threat: Potential for New Forms of Academic Dishonesty
When looking at potential threats concerning the introduction of iPads to a university setting, qualms that professors may have immediately comes to mind: the potential for new forms of academic dishonesty (in the classroom). With the internet at a student’s fingertips, they could possibly look up their answers on Google, or be chatting with their friends for help while in class. Yes, most students now have smartphones, but if a university provides iPads, it would be the understood authorization that the iPads are allowed in class. However, a simple re-focusing of the coursework model could fix that. Grading could come in part from class discussion through Google Docs (which generally works better than discussion portals within classroom management sites such as Blackboard or Moodle) in which each comment is digitally signed (by color-coding or other symbol). By everyone claiming their own work, and allowing others to comment and help edit, final products are usually better. Tests would still be “technology free,” meaning that students would not have easy access to communicate with others.
It comes down to what the purpose of the classroom and higher education construct is. Do we lead students to be smarter than everyone else and perpetuate a model of “I have better grades [read: am better, smarter] than you?” Or do we instill a CoP framework that encourages community learning toward an end-goal of contributing to something that is larger than all of us? Collaborative learning is a far cry from academic dishonesty—everyone still gets credit for what they do.
This post itself represents four unique styles of writing that came together in a collaboration on Google Docs. In that file, you can see exactly what each person wrote, and the comments that were left to help come up with a final project.