This stands for the meaning of something. It describes something that makes a computer understand certain things. It has been argued that how can a computer understand things as well as humans? A computer has the task of finding things out for people and a semantic web allows it to do just that.
It is from W3C director Tim Berners-Lee's vision of the web.
Is this a good thing in society? How will we benefit?
Monday, 14 April 2008
web 3.0
A term that contrasts to the semantic web. Both ways that will evolve over the next few years. It is a path that will dramatise in the next years, it will transform the web into the database. Making web use quicker and easier.
This will lead to possibities in artificial intelligence. Half of me thinks that as a society, we are becoming obsessed with technology and its enhancements. The other half thinks that we need to adapt to the changes and there is nothing wrong with us becoming better off through technology. I do however, think its a little sad how much we rely on it!
What do others think?
This will lead to possibities in artificial intelligence. Half of me thinks that as a society, we are becoming obsessed with technology and its enhancements. The other half thinks that we need to adapt to the changes and there is nothing wrong with us becoming better off through technology. I do however, think its a little sad how much we rely on it!
What do others think?
Sunday, 13 April 2008
Frustrations of a fictional neo-luddite
Tom wakes up to the intense shaking of his mother. Not the typical alarm clock awakening most of us are used to! Tom's mother screams at him in her strong french accent down the corridor.....'Tommy sis time to get up! Vid vid!' After a groan Tom climbs out of bed to a quiet house. His mother is standing over the stove mixing up his daily bowlful of porridge.
He looks at the only clock in the house and makes his way to school after his usual routine of getting dressed and washed in dead silence. He can hear the television of next door and can sometimes make out the words if he's lucky.
After a 20 minute walk he arrives at the University. Passing students in their own little world, with their ear pieces and on their mobile phones, he makes his way to his lecture room.
His english is still not as good as it should be and it takes a while for him to realise that the lecturer is asking him to sit down and sign into a computer. After trying a few times, he raises his hand and asks for 'elp!' 10 minutes later after pressing about 20 different buttons, he was finally logged onto a computer. Everyone around him was typing away as if they were playing a piano! He was well and truely lost and giving up was in the near distance. After staring at the screen the lecturer waved his students out of the room. Finished already? If every lecture was like this, he would most certainly fail.
At lunch, he fiddled in his pocket until he found a £1 coin, he walked to the nearest phone box (30 minute walk) and dialled the number for his mum. 'Bonjour!' she cried. She obviously hadn't grasped the idea that it was 'hello' in this country! After a quick hello, Tom couldnt help but feel upset at the sound of his mums voice. For a moment, he longed to be back in France, where talking was normal and not being unsociable with ipods!
Tom returned home that night with square eyes and a headache from so many computers. He was nervous at the thought of asking his mother for a lap-top.....he wondered if hand written essays were acceptable in this country?? Dreaming of France, he fell asleep.
He looks at the only clock in the house and makes his way to school after his usual routine of getting dressed and washed in dead silence. He can hear the television of next door and can sometimes make out the words if he's lucky.
After a 20 minute walk he arrives at the University. Passing students in their own little world, with their ear pieces and on their mobile phones, he makes his way to his lecture room.
His english is still not as good as it should be and it takes a while for him to realise that the lecturer is asking him to sit down and sign into a computer. After trying a few times, he raises his hand and asks for 'elp!' 10 minutes later after pressing about 20 different buttons, he was finally logged onto a computer. Everyone around him was typing away as if they were playing a piano! He was well and truely lost and giving up was in the near distance. After staring at the screen the lecturer waved his students out of the room. Finished already? If every lecture was like this, he would most certainly fail.
At lunch, he fiddled in his pocket until he found a £1 coin, he walked to the nearest phone box (30 minute walk) and dialled the number for his mum. 'Bonjour!' she cried. She obviously hadn't grasped the idea that it was 'hello' in this country! After a quick hello, Tom couldnt help but feel upset at the sound of his mums voice. For a moment, he longed to be back in France, where talking was normal and not being unsociable with ipods!
Tom returned home that night with square eyes and a headache from so many computers. He was nervous at the thought of asking his mother for a lap-top.....he wondered if hand written essays were acceptable in this country?? Dreaming of France, he fell asleep.
The youngest digital Immigrant I know
My mum is 42 and has no clue about technology at all!
Heres an example of how bad she is.....She lost her phone last week and went into the Orange shop for a new one. After being bombarded by the people that work there to buy the newest swakiest phone there, she chose a phone that would cost her £49.99. This is because she has no idea how to use a phone and cannot be bothered to learn! She would rather sacrifice getting a brand new phone and look up-to-date and 'cool!' and get the cheapest and easiest phone because she says she 'has no time to learn'. This proves what Prensky says, that all people over 25 are digital immigrants. Even though not all people are living up to this, my mother (bless her!) is what Prensky calls a digital Immigrant! (and an embarracment!)
Heres an example of how bad she is.....She lost her phone last week and went into the Orange shop for a new one. After being bombarded by the people that work there to buy the newest swakiest phone there, she chose a phone that would cost her £49.99. This is because she has no idea how to use a phone and cannot be bothered to learn! She would rather sacrifice getting a brand new phone and look up-to-date and 'cool!' and get the cheapest and easiest phone because she says she 'has no time to learn'. This proves what Prensky says, that all people over 25 are digital immigrants. Even though not all people are living up to this, my mother (bless her!) is what Prensky calls a digital Immigrant! (and an embarracment!)
The oldest digital native I know
My grandparents are so madly up to date when it comes to technology. It actually puts me to shame!!
They know so so much about technology and how it changes so rapidly. I can go round there and ask them anything about computers and my nan says, 'shouldnt you be the one teaching me?' They are right! However, whose to say thats how it should be? I always learn so much from my grandparents and them teaching me about things 'i should know' shouldn't stop them! They are always keeping up to date with technology and my Grandad has a cupboard full of gadgets and other silly little technological thingies!! They could actually open up a technology shop! They would earn loads! Maybe it's because they dont want to be behind the times and seen as old...or maybe its because they have nothing better to do! Either way....I think its great!
They know so so much about technology and how it changes so rapidly. I can go round there and ask them anything about computers and my nan says, 'shouldnt you be the one teaching me?' They are right! However, whose to say thats how it should be? I always learn so much from my grandparents and them teaching me about things 'i should know' shouldn't stop them! They are always keeping up to date with technology and my Grandad has a cupboard full of gadgets and other silly little technological thingies!! They could actually open up a technology shop! They would earn loads! Maybe it's because they dont want to be behind the times and seen as old...or maybe its because they have nothing better to do! Either way....I think its great!
Week 9- education being tailored to fit into their preferences
If teachers were there to fit their teaching methods to students preferences there would be problems in the long run.
The question is where do you draw the line?? If a child with cultural preferences wishes to make a change in the way a teacher is teaching, whose to say then that another child may have a problem with that?
This is a similar argument to when rules and regualtions are made and are changed because of peoples culture. At my secondary school, we were not allowed to wear jewlery, however, those religious people were able to wear a tiny cross. I agree, that there should be respect for others cultures and religion. But also, people should respect rules and reguations of a school. They are there for a reason. Its all about adapting to other cultures too.
I think that when it comes to teaching, students need to respect the authority of an educator and accept their teaching methods. What do others think?
The question is where do you draw the line?? If a child with cultural preferences wishes to make a change in the way a teacher is teaching, whose to say then that another child may have a problem with that?
This is a similar argument to when rules and regualtions are made and are changed because of peoples culture. At my secondary school, we were not allowed to wear jewlery, however, those religious people were able to wear a tiny cross. I agree, that there should be respect for others cultures and religion. But also, people should respect rules and reguations of a school. They are there for a reason. Its all about adapting to other cultures too.
I think that when it comes to teaching, students need to respect the authority of an educator and accept their teaching methods. What do others think?
Week 9- Should education stretch a person?
This is a difficult question to answer? What do we mean by 'stretching' a person?
There are many factors which are needed to take into consideration here. Age, sex, capability, background.
A younger person is there to learn how to learn. If a teacher is pushing a student from a young age, it will make the resent education and work in the long run. I think if you see potential in a child from a young age, encouragement is the way to deal with him/her.
Girls and boys both learn and grow up differently. Different teaching methods are used to each individual child to suit them. For example it is known that girls prefer to do essays and present their work sufficently. Whereas boys, would rather get it out the way with less hassle. This is why girls outperform boys when it comes to coursework, however, boys seem to do better in exams (national statistics online).
As a child gets older, it is important to stretch them a little further, simply because you do not want them to get into the idea that they are better than anyone else. I went to school with a girl who was always praised from a young age. By the time she was doing her GCSE's, she thought she was better than everyone, so didnt do any revision. Because of this she failed her exams. The teachers were focussing all their attention on rewarding her, they forgot to stretch her mind more. It is important to praise students, but too much of this could lead on to other negative outcomes.
What do others think? Do all the factors ive stated affect if a child should be stretched? Or can you think of more?
There are many factors which are needed to take into consideration here. Age, sex, capability, background.
A younger person is there to learn how to learn. If a teacher is pushing a student from a young age, it will make the resent education and work in the long run. I think if you see potential in a child from a young age, encouragement is the way to deal with him/her.
Girls and boys both learn and grow up differently. Different teaching methods are used to each individual child to suit them. For example it is known that girls prefer to do essays and present their work sufficently. Whereas boys, would rather get it out the way with less hassle. This is why girls outperform boys when it comes to coursework, however, boys seem to do better in exams (national statistics online).
As a child gets older, it is important to stretch them a little further, simply because you do not want them to get into the idea that they are better than anyone else. I went to school with a girl who was always praised from a young age. By the time she was doing her GCSE's, she thought she was better than everyone, so didnt do any revision. Because of this she failed her exams. The teachers were focussing all their attention on rewarding her, they forgot to stretch her mind more. It is important to praise students, but too much of this could lead on to other negative outcomes.
What do others think? Do all the factors ive stated affect if a child should be stretched? Or can you think of more?
week 9- digital differences and its effects
With people all having differenct understanding and knowledge when it comes to digital issues such as computers, the internet, mobile phones and other aspects of the digital world, it is inevitable that certain negative effects will take place.
Talking from a social-economical point of view, it is inevitable that when it comes to the economic world, those without the knowledge and skill of digital native will struggle. If you were to put two people from different ages in for a job interview. The one with the most knowledge and understanding of the digital world would be the one more likely to get an offer. What Prensky believes is that one, would be the person under the age of 25 with the skills of the newer technologies out there.
I would have to agrue this point, as firstly, who is to say that the job specifically needs anyone who knows how to use the new enhanced computer program? Also, there are things in life called life chances. You are able to learn and pick up things quickly and with a little help, that person over 25, could be a lot better than the digital native. In life you need to give people chances and its discriminating to believe that all people over the age of 25 are not willing or able to learn these new skills.
ACROSS COUNTRIES AND REGIONS
When discussing this topic in realtion to global issues, it is inevitable that this may cause problems. When discussing issues such as the war and things where all countries get involved. If one or a few countries are a little behind when it comes to communicating with certain advanced technologies, it could cause fatal problems when it comes to communication. Therefore, affecting problems in the long run. If every country and region were to stick to the same technoogies, there would be no problems. Obviously this would not happen in an ideal world, but it would be nice!
Another factor, is that some countries cannot afford to keep up with the technological changes. Third world countries are not going to be educated in the land of technology, whereas compared to countries such as Japan and England, we are in a whole different league.
What do others think? Would the world benefit from having everyone at the same level of understanding in relation to technology? Or would that cause more problems than we think?
Talking from a social-economical point of view, it is inevitable that when it comes to the economic world, those without the knowledge and skill of digital native will struggle. If you were to put two people from different ages in for a job interview. The one with the most knowledge and understanding of the digital world would be the one more likely to get an offer. What Prensky believes is that one, would be the person under the age of 25 with the skills of the newer technologies out there.
I would have to agrue this point, as firstly, who is to say that the job specifically needs anyone who knows how to use the new enhanced computer program? Also, there are things in life called life chances. You are able to learn and pick up things quickly and with a little help, that person over 25, could be a lot better than the digital native. In life you need to give people chances and its discriminating to believe that all people over the age of 25 are not willing or able to learn these new skills.
ACROSS COUNTRIES AND REGIONS
When discussing this topic in realtion to global issues, it is inevitable that this may cause problems. When discussing issues such as the war and things where all countries get involved. If one or a few countries are a little behind when it comes to communicating with certain advanced technologies, it could cause fatal problems when it comes to communication. Therefore, affecting problems in the long run. If every country and region were to stick to the same technoogies, there would be no problems. Obviously this would not happen in an ideal world, but it would be nice!
Another factor, is that some countries cannot afford to keep up with the technological changes. Third world countries are not going to be educated in the land of technology, whereas compared to countries such as Japan and England, we are in a whole different league.
What do others think? Would the world benefit from having everyone at the same level of understanding in relation to technology? Or would that cause more problems than we think?
Week 9- Wenger and Prensky
Wenger is basically saying that within a practice community, there is inevitably going to be people who are better than you in certain skills. However, what is also pointed out is that that doesn't necessarily mean that people hold a particular authority or power over you. You simply are all learning or have skills at different levels. this happens throughout life and particularly in education.
In relation to education and Prensky's idea of Digital immigrants and native immigrants. It is clear to see how they are putting across the same ideas. Prensky believes that these two different types of people (digital immigrants, digital natives) are contrating in todays society. One holds more power over the other when it comes to discussing the 'digital world'. Becvause of the changes withion technology, it is difficult for some to simply keep up with others. This again, does not underline that some hold a greater power or dominance, they are simply ast different levels of understanding.
Both ideas relate to each other simply because throughtout life you will always come across people who are better or worse than you at certain things. This doesnt mean however, that they are better at everything and both Prensky and Wenger believe that you can learn from each other.
In relation to education and Prensky's idea of Digital immigrants and native immigrants. It is clear to see how they are putting across the same ideas. Prensky believes that these two different types of people (digital immigrants, digital natives) are contrating in todays society. One holds more power over the other when it comes to discussing the 'digital world'. Becvause of the changes withion technology, it is difficult for some to simply keep up with others. This again, does not underline that some hold a greater power or dominance, they are simply ast different levels of understanding.
Both ideas relate to each other simply because throughtout life you will always come across people who are better or worse than you at certain things. This doesnt mean however, that they are better at everything and both Prensky and Wenger believe that you can learn from each other.
Thursday, 3 April 2008
My disagreements with the articles
The only thing I disagree with is the idea that just because someone is older doesnt necessarily mean that they are unlikely to not only be able to learn new skills. but want to.
I think generalisations are being made whereby the idea that age is a major factor of whether or not you are able to accept that technology is changing. Ive been lucky enough to grow up in the world where 'technology is right at our fingerstips' (Prensky). However, how do we know if that is a good thing? Are we becoming lazy as a society?? Are teachers teaching in a way where we have no choice but to use a computer to type and not a pen and paper?? All of these statements are questionable.
I would just like to point out that I think the statement that suggests that anyone over the age of 30 is incompetent/behind with the times of technology. Who decided that cut off point?
Also, I have parents who both work in occupations where technology is something they rely on to a great extent. They are not incapable of picking up new technological enhancements, nor are they thinking they are too old to.
I have a nan in her 70's who writes out a text message quicker than I do, surely that proves my point? My grandad has more technological D.I.Y toys in his garage than B&Q!! In fact my grandparents are more likely to want to learn about new technolgies than I am!
What does everyone else think? Is this idea of segregating people into digital immigrants and digital natives all a bit silly? I think its simply stereotyping people into age groups, when really- there is no need to make such generalisiations!!
I think generalisations are being made whereby the idea that age is a major factor of whether or not you are able to accept that technology is changing. Ive been lucky enough to grow up in the world where 'technology is right at our fingerstips' (Prensky). However, how do we know if that is a good thing? Are we becoming lazy as a society?? Are teachers teaching in a way where we have no choice but to use a computer to type and not a pen and paper?? All of these statements are questionable.
I would just like to point out that I think the statement that suggests that anyone over the age of 30 is incompetent/behind with the times of technology. Who decided that cut off point?
Also, I have parents who both work in occupations where technology is something they rely on to a great extent. They are not incapable of picking up new technological enhancements, nor are they thinking they are too old to.
I have a nan in her 70's who writes out a text message quicker than I do, surely that proves my point? My grandad has more technological D.I.Y toys in his garage than B&Q!! In fact my grandparents are more likely to want to learn about new technolgies than I am!
What does everyone else think? Is this idea of segregating people into digital immigrants and digital natives all a bit silly? I think its simply stereotyping people into age groups, when really- there is no need to make such generalisiations!!
Webiste names for digital immigration and native
Fryer. W (2006) 'Beyond the digital native/ Immigrant dichotomy' http://www.wisc.edu/depd/html/TSarticles/Digital%20Natives.htm [12.02.08]
Mazar, R (2006) 'Digital Natives vs. Digital immigrants', http://www.mazar.ca/2006/07/18/digital-natives-vs-digital-immigrants/ [12.03.08]
Prensky, M (2001) 'Digital natives, Digital immigrants, Part 2: Do they really think differently?' http://www.delmar.edu/sumacademy/prensky2.pdf [12.03.08]
Vanslyke. T (2003) 'Digital Natives, Digital immigrants: Some thoughts from the generation gap' http://www.wisc.edu/depd/html/TSarticles/Digital%20Natives.htm [12.03.08]
Mazar, R (2006) 'Digital Natives vs. Digital immigrants', http://www.mazar.ca/2006/07/18/digital-natives-vs-digital-immigrants/ [12.03.08]
Prensky, M (2001) 'Digital natives, Digital immigrants, Part 2: Do they really think differently?' http://www.delmar.edu/sumacademy/prensky2.pdf [12.03.08]
Prensky, M (2001) 'Digital native, Digital immigrants' http://www.learnerstogether.net/digital-natives-digital-immigrants/53 [12.03.08]
Vanslyke. T (2003) 'Digital Natives, Digital immigrants: Some thoughts from the generation gap' http://www.wisc.edu/depd/html/TSarticles/Digital%20Natives.htm [12.03.08]
website 5- week 8
This was the site I found most interesting- simply because it was the counterargument of the others. This author argued that just because people who are over 30 are born into a different generation doesnt specifically mean that you are unable to learn and adapt to certain technological changes.
He argues that just because you stop learning at the age of 20, doesnt mean that you are unable to learn new things. The article argues that it is similar to telling people to stop reading after the age of 20.
After reading this article I began to believe that just because people are getting older- doesnt mean that they are incapable of learning and adapting to the changes of society. If you think about it, after the cavemen, society changed and has been ever since. If people did not learn to adapt- there would be a struggle with everything such as the economic world.
He argues that just because you stop learning at the age of 20, doesnt mean that you are unable to learn new things. The article argues that it is similar to telling people to stop reading after the age of 20.
After reading this article I began to believe that just because people are getting older- doesnt mean that they are incapable of learning and adapting to the changes of society. If you think about it, after the cavemen, society changed and has been ever since. If people did not learn to adapt- there would be a struggle with everything such as the economic world.
website 4- week 8
This site is one that faces us with a different angle of the arguement. The creator of this article is one of a digital immigrant. He believes that although the world is full of digital immigrants and natives, it doesnt necessarily mean that this is a bad thing- being a digital immigrant just means that you have your foot in the past and there is nothing wrong with that.
I like this arguement- there is a lot of people who will think negativly about being a digital immigrant- however, I do not think this would be a negative aspect. Just because times are changing doesnt mean that as someone from an older generation shouldnt be able to learn and catch up with technology.
This site is again reletively recent- however, not as much as the other sites. This has an effect on how people read the article. With it being older, means that people are more likely to question its validity. This then effects how people decode the article.
I like this arguement- there is a lot of people who will think negativly about being a digital immigrant- however, I do not think this would be a negative aspect. Just because times are changing doesnt mean that as someone from an older generation shouldnt be able to learn and catch up with technology.
This site is again reletively recent- however, not as much as the other sites. This has an effect on how people read the article. With it being older, means that people are more likely to question its validity. This then effects how people decode the article.
Website 3- week 8
Webiste 3
This website was short and so wont need too much of an analysis.
The site is again one of a recent date and it focusses on diagrams as a way of describing and explaining certain aspects of 'our digital landscape'. I think this is a good way to show exactly what is going on- it breaks up the chunks of writing and allows us as a reader to see what he is trying to put across to us.
There are also comments at the bottom the site from other people- this allows varied arguements and opinions that other have.
I think this is a good thing- as it makes the article valid. Having a counterargument means that it is unbiased and allows you as a reader to make up your own mind on the subject.
This website was short and so wont need too much of an analysis.
The site is again one of a recent date and it focusses on diagrams as a way of describing and explaining certain aspects of 'our digital landscape'. I think this is a good way to show exactly what is going on- it breaks up the chunks of writing and allows us as a reader to see what he is trying to put across to us.
There are also comments at the bottom the site from other people- this allows varied arguements and opinions that other have.
I think this is a good thing- as it makes the article valid. Having a counterargument means that it is unbiased and allows you as a reader to make up your own mind on the subject.
Website 2- week 8
This webiste is similar to the previous and discusses the main differences between digital native and digital immigrants. It is again fairly up to date. The way is it set out differs from that of the previous. It focusses on Prensky's main arguement and argues against it saying that as a 30 year old man- he fnds adapting the the changes in technology simple and argues that just because he is older, doesnt mean he cannot understand how to use certain technology mediums.
However, he does later agree that when he got a new job in the US he saw first hand that the gap of which Prensky discusses was apparent.
I think that unless you can see it forst hand- you will believe that there is no gap. People of an older generation are often in denial about how much they know about technology. What does everyone else think?
However, he does later agree that when he got a new job in the US he saw first hand that the gap of which Prensky discusses was apparent.
I think that unless you can see it forst hand- you will believe that there is no gap. People of an older generation are often in denial about how much they know about technology. What does everyone else think?
Webistes dealing with Digital Immigration-week 8
Webiste One
The first website underlines the rapid changes in the way in which our children are being bought up. It argues that in the day of our parents, we are being taught various dofferent aspects of technology. The article is fairly up to date- and so gives us as an audience the reassurance that what is being said is valid today. This then makes it more believeable and is more persuasive.
Statistics are given which again makes what is being said more valid as it backs up comments with statistics.
The webiste is easy to ready and its useability is simple, the font used is clear which makes the article easy to read. Bullet points are used to break up certain parts of the article- this is a good aspect to obtain- simply because the article becomes easily digestible.
The first website underlines the rapid changes in the way in which our children are being bought up. It argues that in the day of our parents, we are being taught various dofferent aspects of technology. The article is fairly up to date- and so gives us as an audience the reassurance that what is being said is valid today. This then makes it more believeable and is more persuasive.
Statistics are given which again makes what is being said more valid as it backs up comments with statistics.
The webiste is easy to ready and its useability is simple, the font used is clear which makes the article easy to read. Bullet points are used to break up certain parts of the article- this is a good aspect to obtain- simply because the article becomes easily digestible.
Digital Immigration
Digital Immigration is a term that was founded by Marc Prensky. He believed that there are two contrasting views- he believes that people are either digital immigrants or digitally native. These are both different and he believes that they describe 2 varied types of people.
Digital Immigrants are people who are not used to having technology at their fingertips and are content with using older methods of teaching and other aspects of life. For example, they are not used to using the internet and technologies such as iPods and Iphones.
The contrasting group- Digital Natives are people who are fully aware in the rapid changes of technology and who have been bought up understanding how to use these technologies. These people are generally students who are expected to know how to use technologies such as the internet.
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Digital Immigrants are people who are not used to having technology at their fingertips and are content with using older methods of teaching and other aspects of life. For example, they are not used to using the internet and technologies such as iPods and Iphones.
The contrasting group- Digital Natives are people who are fully aware in the rapid changes of technology and who have been bought up understanding how to use these technologies. These people are generally students who are expected to know how to use technologies such as the internet.
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Saturday, 8 March 2008
China: Its Distance Higher-Education System
China was one of the first countries to use radio, television and online broadcasting as a method of teching. This was due to insufficient funds to hire teachers to fulfill the usual teaching method, that is face to face.
This method of learning started in 1986 and it had lead to the social-science courses greatly increasing in its size of students. As with the Deakin University courses, I believe this is again a difficult method of teaching. Especially when teaching topics such as social science, which is all about your own opinion. In these topics, such as socialolgy & psychology, I believe it is about what you think and expressing your opinion, i believe would be a difficult task online.
Having a television in front of you instead of a teacher, means that you are all going to be learning the exact same thing and not being able to express your opinion would mean that you would have to keep it to yourself, or basically not having one, as you are not pushed into thinking for yourself. I think, therefore this could be examined as a negative example of interactive learning. However, it was a great success in China which was due to the increasing number of students and lack of teachers.
The positives of this is that you are able to follow in your own time, as the teaching was available to download and so you would be able to catch up with missed lectures. I also think it is important to keep up with the technological advancements within society. If you are not following, it may lead to confusion later in life when it comes to jobs. You are expected to be able to use a computer and other sufficient methods of communication.
In China- students were also able to have one on one tuition, which I believe is a majorly important part of education. It allows students to ask individual questions with the tutors full attention.
What do others think? Is online learning important in future careers, or do you think old fashioned methods are more substantial?
This method of learning started in 1986 and it had lead to the social-science courses greatly increasing in its size of students. As with the Deakin University courses, I believe this is again a difficult method of teaching. Especially when teaching topics such as social science, which is all about your own opinion. In these topics, such as socialolgy & psychology, I believe it is about what you think and expressing your opinion, i believe would be a difficult task online.
Having a television in front of you instead of a teacher, means that you are all going to be learning the exact same thing and not being able to express your opinion would mean that you would have to keep it to yourself, or basically not having one, as you are not pushed into thinking for yourself. I think, therefore this could be examined as a negative example of interactive learning. However, it was a great success in China which was due to the increasing number of students and lack of teachers.
The positives of this is that you are able to follow in your own time, as the teaching was available to download and so you would be able to catch up with missed lectures. I also think it is important to keep up with the technological advancements within society. If you are not following, it may lead to confusion later in life when it comes to jobs. You are expected to be able to use a computer and other sufficient methods of communication.
In China- students were also able to have one on one tuition, which I believe is a majorly important part of education. It allows students to ask individual questions with the tutors full attention.
What do others think? Is online learning important in future careers, or do you think old fashioned methods are more substantial?
Friday, 7 March 2008
week 7- Distance Learning
The Deakin University
This Universities main focus is online learning. However, it does allow students to choose whether they prefer online lectures or face to face lectures. I think this is a good way to allow students to choose what they would rather do. At the age of University you are able to make up your own decisions about how is the best way to learn. You are doing this choice for the benefit of yourself and i believe this is a good thing. There are a variety of courses at the Unviersity from a Bachelor in film and video, to a Bachelor in Property and Real estate. This allows a variety of choices which again, I feel is a good thing. Although I do believe that it may be difficult to understand topics that are difficult, simply by watching a screen and learning interactively. I think it is important to be able to communicate with a teacher face to face.
It allows one on one time and it is important to see facial expressions and emotion in the way people answer a specific question. This makes the way you decode a question completley different.
The university says that it 'prepares graduates to be confident and competent using online technologies and in online environments'. I agree that in this day and age, it is important to be up to date with the rapid changes of technology.
What does everyone else think?
This Universities main focus is online learning. However, it does allow students to choose whether they prefer online lectures or face to face lectures. I think this is a good way to allow students to choose what they would rather do. At the age of University you are able to make up your own decisions about how is the best way to learn. You are doing this choice for the benefit of yourself and i believe this is a good thing. There are a variety of courses at the Unviersity from a Bachelor in film and video, to a Bachelor in Property and Real estate. This allows a variety of choices which again, I feel is a good thing. Although I do believe that it may be difficult to understand topics that are difficult, simply by watching a screen and learning interactively. I think it is important to be able to communicate with a teacher face to face.
It allows one on one time and it is important to see facial expressions and emotion in the way people answer a specific question. This makes the way you decode a question completley different.
The university says that it 'prepares graduates to be confident and competent using online technologies and in online environments'. I agree that in this day and age, it is important to be up to date with the rapid changes of technology.
What does everyone else think?
Friday, 29 February 2008
Week 6-Wenger and Jean Lave (task3)
Task 3
An online group that i looked into was the Hollyoaks forum page:
http://www.hollyoaksforum.com
This site gives the idea of an online community of whom all share the same common interest that it of course the soap Hollyoaks. There are a lot of different groups to this forum and many different discussion baords.
It appears as though the people in these groups know each other through this group as they comment to each other quite informally and in a friendly manner.
In my opinion, this is community in practice, it is simply online rather than being face to face, Wenger's theory concentrated heavily on the face to face concept of communities in practice. I think there is a big difference between having an online community to being part of one that occurs in a face to face enviroment. You have to use your imagination a lot more considering you do not get to see who you are talking to. Also, you cannot see facial expressions or any other forms of emotion, people are simply just using words to put across their views.
However, I do believe that these online forums are still representing an online community and it would be invalid to assume that because they are online and people do not fully know each other, that it is not classed as a community in practice.
Everyone on the Hollyoaks site hold a common interest, and one that they all have knowledge and views about. There are different forums on the site, that lead off to talk about things other than Hollyoaks.
For example, in one discussion board where the subject is, 'general chat'- there are a few topics in that forum, one that I picked up on had nothing to do with Hollyoaks, but was in fact about the recent Earthquake. This justs shows how these people are although literally anonymous, still feel comfortable discussing everyday topics with each other. Therefore I believe it is arguably an online community of Practice.
What do others think? Is a site such as this classed as an online community?
An online group that i looked into was the Hollyoaks forum page:
http://www.hollyoaksforum.com
This site gives the idea of an online community of whom all share the same common interest that it of course the soap Hollyoaks. There are a lot of different groups to this forum and many different discussion baords.
It appears as though the people in these groups know each other through this group as they comment to each other quite informally and in a friendly manner.
In my opinion, this is community in practice, it is simply online rather than being face to face, Wenger's theory concentrated heavily on the face to face concept of communities in practice. I think there is a big difference between having an online community to being part of one that occurs in a face to face enviroment. You have to use your imagination a lot more considering you do not get to see who you are talking to. Also, you cannot see facial expressions or any other forms of emotion, people are simply just using words to put across their views.
However, I do believe that these online forums are still representing an online community and it would be invalid to assume that because they are online and people do not fully know each other, that it is not classed as a community in practice.
Everyone on the Hollyoaks site hold a common interest, and one that they all have knowledge and views about. There are different forums on the site, that lead off to talk about things other than Hollyoaks.
For example, in one discussion board where the subject is, 'general chat'- there are a few topics in that forum, one that I picked up on had nothing to do with Hollyoaks, but was in fact about the recent Earthquake. This justs shows how these people are although literally anonymous, still feel comfortable discussing everyday topics with each other. Therefore I believe it is arguably an online community of Practice.
What do others think? Is a site such as this classed as an online community?
Week 6-Wenger and Jean Lave (task 2)
Task 2
What Wenger means by 'organizational units' is that being part of an organization whereby there is a person who holds a higher status with everyone else. This is identified within the workplace, at school and in the home.
When it comes to comparing this to a community of practice I belive there are various differences. The main one being that there is not really someone who holds dominance. In realtion to something such as going to a dance school, it is evident that there is in fact someone who holds more power than others. That is the teacher, however, depeding on your age, that view changes.
I went to my dance school from the age of 6 through to 16, and I can say from experience that my views and relationship with my teacher changed. From a younger age, it was obvious that because she was older, she held the high status. However, when i got to the age of around 15, my teacher became more of a friend to me and someone i respected more than just as my teacher.
I think that these factors can affect how you see as people who hold power and status. Within an organizational unit, there is evidently someone who holds the power and is there to specifically keep people in their place and doing their job. In a community in practice however, it is difficult to put someone above someone else.
As Wenger said in the reading, there is evidence that there are people who will be better than you at something, however, he does not mention that these people hold more domianace and power. In a community of practice, you are able to have the freedom to do what you wish to a certain extent. In an organizational unit, i believe there are more serious rules and regulations you have no choice but to follow.
What does everyone else think??
What Wenger means by 'organizational units' is that being part of an organization whereby there is a person who holds a higher status with everyone else. This is identified within the workplace, at school and in the home.
When it comes to comparing this to a community of practice I belive there are various differences. The main one being that there is not really someone who holds dominance. In realtion to something such as going to a dance school, it is evident that there is in fact someone who holds more power than others. That is the teacher, however, depeding on your age, that view changes.
I went to my dance school from the age of 6 through to 16, and I can say from experience that my views and relationship with my teacher changed. From a younger age, it was obvious that because she was older, she held the high status. However, when i got to the age of around 15, my teacher became more of a friend to me and someone i respected more than just as my teacher.
I think that these factors can affect how you see as people who hold power and status. Within an organizational unit, there is evidently someone who holds the power and is there to specifically keep people in their place and doing their job. In a community in practice however, it is difficult to put someone above someone else.
As Wenger said in the reading, there is evidence that there are people who will be better than you at something, however, he does not mention that these people hold more domianace and power. In a community of practice, you are able to have the freedom to do what you wish to a certain extent. In an organizational unit, i believe there are more serious rules and regulations you have no choice but to follow.
What does everyone else think??
Week 6-Wenger and Jean Lave (task 1)
TASK 1
A community of practice that i was once a part of was a dancing/drama school. It was something that I went to every week, twice a week and something that I didnt really take too seriously.
I think this is a good example of a community of practice, as it is something that was a part of my everyday life and something that was of interest to me. I was surrounded by people with similar interests, which is what Wenger is saying when it says that you are around people who are fimiliar with this experience.
It was also said in Wenger's reading that there will be people who know more or less than you. People who all have different knowledge about certain things. Which is completley true when discussing a dancing school. There will always be people better or worse than you and its something you socially expect when attending a practice.
You are all expecting to be socially bounded, another of Wenger's views. Without knowing it, you all have a relationship with each other, even beyond having the same passion for dance.
You are all in that room for the same reason and there to do something together.
Wenger also discusses team work, when he discusses the idea of communities being found within businesses. Obviously, being a part of a dance school is a little different from being involved in a community of business. However when it comes to putting on shows or taking part in dance exams, you are expected to work as a team to fulfill the best potential possible.
Wenger also examines the idea of membership being based on participation, rather than official status. Being a part of a dance school was being a part of a community and participating was the main expectancy.
A community of practice that i was once a part of was a dancing/drama school. It was something that I went to every week, twice a week and something that I didnt really take too seriously.
I think this is a good example of a community of practice, as it is something that was a part of my everyday life and something that was of interest to me. I was surrounded by people with similar interests, which is what Wenger is saying when it says that you are around people who are fimiliar with this experience.
It was also said in Wenger's reading that there will be people who know more or less than you. People who all have different knowledge about certain things. Which is completley true when discussing a dancing school. There will always be people better or worse than you and its something you socially expect when attending a practice.
You are all expecting to be socially bounded, another of Wenger's views. Without knowing it, you all have a relationship with each other, even beyond having the same passion for dance.
You are all in that room for the same reason and there to do something together.
Wenger also discusses team work, when he discusses the idea of communities being found within businesses. Obviously, being a part of a dance school is a little different from being involved in a community of business. However when it comes to putting on shows or taking part in dance exams, you are expected to work as a team to fulfill the best potential possible.
Wenger also examines the idea of membership being based on participation, rather than official status. Being a part of a dance school was being a part of a community and participating was the main expectancy.
Wednesday, 27 February 2008
Website analysis- part 3
Appeal
Its difficult to say who the disney channels site appeals to the most, there is such a variety of things to do on it, that it appeals to quite a braod range of children. There are games such as the 'finding Nemo game' and 'the disney princess game'. These obviously appeal to children who are already holding a strong interest in disney characters, movies and programmes. Prior knowledge is essential here, many children would choose to play on games that appeal to them the most. There is a good range of games that suit both males and females. This shows that the creators have really thought about their audience.
For me as kid, I would stay up late (8pm!) playing on the Disney site and i can safely say from experience that I would rather play on the disney princess game than the boys car games.
That is what is so good about this website, it has an appeal that ranges a great variety of people of different ages.
Culture
I think that within todays society, it is important to make kids find being interactive online fun. Within the postmodern world, young children are growing up a lot faster than what they used to, with them experimenting with make up and worrying about their appearance a lot more. The site and others similar to the Disney one are all trying to keep kids young and remember that they are all young once in their lives, so make the most of it! I think the site reminds kids that they are allowed to be young and do things that young children do.
The channel itself have started bringing programmes such as 'That's So Raven' and 'Hannah Montana' onto it. These are different from the cartoons that you expect to see on the channel, such as 'The Mickey Mouse club' and 'Recess'. The idea of innocence has almost been lost after the new programmes have come in. With the idea that girls want to look and be like characters, means that they are idolising characters older, and therefore, wanting to grow up faster.
Does anyone else agree? That the characters are making children want to grow up faster. 'Thats so Raven' is portrayed as a young teenager and is always seen doing her make up and kissing boys. Am i just being an older person and critically analysing the postmodern world? or should young girls especially, be acting their age a little more and enojoy being young?
What you all think??
Its difficult to say who the disney channels site appeals to the most, there is such a variety of things to do on it, that it appeals to quite a braod range of children. There are games such as the 'finding Nemo game' and 'the disney princess game'. These obviously appeal to children who are already holding a strong interest in disney characters, movies and programmes. Prior knowledge is essential here, many children would choose to play on games that appeal to them the most. There is a good range of games that suit both males and females. This shows that the creators have really thought about their audience.
For me as kid, I would stay up late (8pm!) playing on the Disney site and i can safely say from experience that I would rather play on the disney princess game than the boys car games.
That is what is so good about this website, it has an appeal that ranges a great variety of people of different ages.
Culture
I think that within todays society, it is important to make kids find being interactive online fun. Within the postmodern world, young children are growing up a lot faster than what they used to, with them experimenting with make up and worrying about their appearance a lot more. The site and others similar to the Disney one are all trying to keep kids young and remember that they are all young once in their lives, so make the most of it! I think the site reminds kids that they are allowed to be young and do things that young children do.
The channel itself have started bringing programmes such as 'That's So Raven' and 'Hannah Montana' onto it. These are different from the cartoons that you expect to see on the channel, such as 'The Mickey Mouse club' and 'Recess'. The idea of innocence has almost been lost after the new programmes have come in. With the idea that girls want to look and be like characters, means that they are idolising characters older, and therefore, wanting to grow up faster.
Does anyone else agree? That the characters are making children want to grow up faster. 'Thats so Raven' is portrayed as a young teenager and is always seen doing her make up and kissing boys. Am i just being an older person and critically analysing the postmodern world? or should young girls especially, be acting their age a little more and enojoy being young?
What you all think??
website analysis- part 2
Critique
I think on the whole that this website is really good. But the only 2 things i do not like, is that there may be too much for younger children to take in. There is a lot of stuff on the site and a younger child may find it all a little confusing. However, the whole of the Disney Channel has thisd type of caotic-ness about it. It is very upbeat and exciting and I think that the website reflects that.
The only other criticism that I think are worth mentionning is that the font in some places is quite small. This may effect the way a child is able to navigate around the site. If the font was a little bigger, I think children would be able to read it a little clearer.
What does everyone else think? is the lettering a little too small? Or do you think that it doesnt matter so much about the lettering, because the pictures explain it all?
comments please guys!!
I think on the whole that this website is really good. But the only 2 things i do not like, is that there may be too much for younger children to take in. There is a lot of stuff on the site and a younger child may find it all a little confusing. However, the whole of the Disney Channel has thisd type of caotic-ness about it. It is very upbeat and exciting and I think that the website reflects that.
The only other criticism that I think are worth mentionning is that the font in some places is quite small. This may effect the way a child is able to navigate around the site. If the font was a little bigger, I think children would be able to read it a little clearer.
What does everyone else think? is the lettering a little too small? Or do you think that it doesnt matter so much about the lettering, because the pictures explain it all?
comments please guys!!
website analysis- week6
www.disneychannel.co.uk
The webiste that I believe is one that deserves to be analysed isThe Disney channels homepage. It's something that has changed over the years, but one i remember playing on when I was younger.
The webiste and its audience
The webiste is most definatley aimed at an audience between the ages of 7-14. There are programmes on the channel that are not just cartoons, but ones that contain real children, which the younger teens would be interested in. The site has many positive things about it, which make it a fun and exaciting thing for kinds to look at, The bright colours are automatically jumping out at you and the first thing you see is the amount of blue. This is because the colour of the disney channel is blue. It could be argued, however that this could be something that is associated with boys. However, as a younger child, it would be argueable if this would really make a difference. The disney channels main colour has always been blue, so children can see straight away that they are on the Disney site.
The site itself
There is a lot going on in the site, from moving images, to pictures and different boxes containing different things for kids to do and watch. This has both positive and negative outcomes. The positives being that there is a lot for kids to do and kids enjoy a fun-filled site, there is a lot more choice. However, because of the caotic filled page, a child might find the site a little too 'in your face' and demanding and that may then lead to boredom. I believe however, that the more there is on the page, the more interested they would be.
What does everyone else think? Are children scared by a page full of stuff? or do they prefer it? Maybe it depends on what the page is full of??
Associations with children
There is a navigation toolbar at the top of the website, with words that light up when you click on them! (wow!) all this is something you would associate with disney and children. I think it is important to include little quirks such as glitter and flashing lights, it makes it more magical for the children. The associations with Disney, means that children would have certain expectancies, they would expect the site to be filled with images and flashy things!
Of course, there is the Disney logo in the top right hand corner, its almost like a symbol for chilren to identify with. They see that mouse symbol and automatically know they are in the right place. This little symbol means that children can understand that this is the Disney channel, without it even saying 'The disney channel'. Children, I would imagine are better at identifying logos, than they are reading words! Im sure we all were when we were younger? If you all saw the disney logo im assuming you would all know what it stood for and meant? please say yes- otherwise, you need to watch a disney film!!!
The webiste that I believe is one that deserves to be analysed isThe Disney channels homepage. It's something that has changed over the years, but one i remember playing on when I was younger.
The webiste and its audience
The webiste is most definatley aimed at an audience between the ages of 7-14. There are programmes on the channel that are not just cartoons, but ones that contain real children, which the younger teens would be interested in. The site has many positive things about it, which make it a fun and exaciting thing for kinds to look at, The bright colours are automatically jumping out at you and the first thing you see is the amount of blue. This is because the colour of the disney channel is blue. It could be argued, however that this could be something that is associated with boys. However, as a younger child, it would be argueable if this would really make a difference. The disney channels main colour has always been blue, so children can see straight away that they are on the Disney site.
The site itself
There is a lot going on in the site, from moving images, to pictures and different boxes containing different things for kids to do and watch. This has both positive and negative outcomes. The positives being that there is a lot for kids to do and kids enjoy a fun-filled site, there is a lot more choice. However, because of the caotic filled page, a child might find the site a little too 'in your face' and demanding and that may then lead to boredom. I believe however, that the more there is on the page, the more interested they would be.
What does everyone else think? Are children scared by a page full of stuff? or do they prefer it? Maybe it depends on what the page is full of??
Associations with children
There is a navigation toolbar at the top of the website, with words that light up when you click on them! (wow!) all this is something you would associate with disney and children. I think it is important to include little quirks such as glitter and flashing lights, it makes it more magical for the children. The associations with Disney, means that children would have certain expectancies, they would expect the site to be filled with images and flashy things!
Of course, there is the Disney logo in the top right hand corner, its almost like a symbol for chilren to identify with. They see that mouse symbol and automatically know they are in the right place. This little symbol means that children can understand that this is the Disney channel, without it even saying 'The disney channel'. Children, I would imagine are better at identifying logos, than they are reading words! Im sure we all were when we were younger? If you all saw the disney logo im assuming you would all know what it stood for and meant? please say yes- otherwise, you need to watch a disney film!!!
Monday, 18 February 2008
week4- task 2
Music Sharing Online
Within the last few years, music sharing online has become so massive that it has changed the way music is consumed and distributed.
You can now download a music file in seconds, without even going down to HMV and buying it over the counter.
Does anyone else think that we are all so bone idle now that we cant even do that? or is it just society progressing with new media enhancements? Its difficult, becuase on one hand, we wont have CD's anymore, so therefore that would affect the sales of CD players etc. On the other hand, as technology is progressing, we should be up to date and follow it as it changes.
Artists such as Kate Nash and bands such as The artic monkeys, have made it big through social networking sites such as MySpace. This just shows the rapid change of society and technology. You are able to share music sites with friends so easily now days that artists can become famous almost overnight.
This contrasts so easily with artists back in the day, where they would have to promote and advertise themselves.
Within the last few years, music sharing online has become so massive that it has changed the way music is consumed and distributed.
You can now download a music file in seconds, without even going down to HMV and buying it over the counter.
Does anyone else think that we are all so bone idle now that we cant even do that? or is it just society progressing with new media enhancements? Its difficult, becuase on one hand, we wont have CD's anymore, so therefore that would affect the sales of CD players etc. On the other hand, as technology is progressing, we should be up to date and follow it as it changes.
Artists such as Kate Nash and bands such as The artic monkeys, have made it big through social networking sites such as MySpace. This just shows the rapid change of society and technology. You are able to share music sites with friends so easily now days that artists can become famous almost overnight.
This contrasts so easily with artists back in the day, where they would have to promote and advertise themselves.
week 4- task one
User generated content means the expansion of social networking sites and its technological enhancements.
In my opinion, facebook is the only way that people are able to communicate free of charge, with people they do not see everyday. I know that since ive left school, i have only stayed in contact with my friends because of facebook. Without social networking sites, i think it would be very difficult for me to stay in contact with friends and i would get in trouble for that!!
Its also a good way to look at other peoples pictures etc. Its a routine now too, i look at my facebook a lot! and without it, i would be a little lost if im honest.
What does everyone else think? Is anyone else obsessed? Do you think that as a society, we are all obsessed with new media technologies. There are always new additions online now, especially on facebook. I always get requests to upload the newest file to add to my profile!! its really annoying actually!!
In my opinion, facebook is the only way that people are able to communicate free of charge, with people they do not see everyday. I know that since ive left school, i have only stayed in contact with my friends because of facebook. Without social networking sites, i think it would be very difficult for me to stay in contact with friends and i would get in trouble for that!!
Its also a good way to look at other peoples pictures etc. Its a routine now too, i look at my facebook a lot! and without it, i would be a little lost if im honest.
What does everyone else think? Is anyone else obsessed? Do you think that as a society, we are all obsessed with new media technologies. There are always new additions online now, especially on facebook. I always get requests to upload the newest file to add to my profile!! its really annoying actually!!
Monday, 11 February 2008
Task2- week3. 'Public Message Boards'
'The Sun' newspaper discussion board.
Topic- Entertainment- 'Amy Winehouse'.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/discussions/posts/list/AMY_WHINEHOUSE-23786.page
In this forum, people were all discussing Amy Winehouse and her problems at the moment.
The first thing i noticed was that everyone was using smiley faces. Is this because they were actually smiling while writing it- or because they wanted to put across the idea that they felt this was a funny topic? Im not so sure. I no that people write LOL (laugh out loud) a lot in online conversations. But i very rarely am laughing out loud!
The names people were using were ones like 'Lucy78', 'Casmatch' and 'Corless'. The only one we know anything about is Luct78. Its unlikely that she is 78 years old & know anything about Amy Winehouse, but maybe its her birth year? You can guess some things about her. But then again, how do you know that she is actually called Lucy? Maybe its a man called Bob from Newcastle pretending. You just don't know!!!
From that, i believe that in discussion/message boards, you do not have an identity and you are able to write exactly what you want without feeling any real problem with doing so.
The language used in these were similar to that of a conversation really, with the occasional 'u' instead of 'you'. But then thats what you expect when having a conversation about Amy Winehouse, its something quite modern and informal, so using informal language is expected.
I think online discussion boards are similar to using IM's like MSN, what does everyone else think?
Topic- Entertainment- 'Amy Winehouse'.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/discussions/posts/list/AMY_WHINEHOUSE-23786.page
In this forum, people were all discussing Amy Winehouse and her problems at the moment.
The first thing i noticed was that everyone was using smiley faces. Is this because they were actually smiling while writing it- or because they wanted to put across the idea that they felt this was a funny topic? Im not so sure. I no that people write LOL (laugh out loud) a lot in online conversations. But i very rarely am laughing out loud!
The names people were using were ones like 'Lucy78', 'Casmatch' and 'Corless'. The only one we know anything about is Luct78. Its unlikely that she is 78 years old & know anything about Amy Winehouse, but maybe its her birth year? You can guess some things about her. But then again, how do you know that she is actually called Lucy? Maybe its a man called Bob from Newcastle pretending. You just don't know!!!
From that, i believe that in discussion/message boards, you do not have an identity and you are able to write exactly what you want without feeling any real problem with doing so.
The language used in these were similar to that of a conversation really, with the occasional 'u' instead of 'you'. But then thats what you expect when having a conversation about Amy Winehouse, its something quite modern and informal, so using informal language is expected.
I think online discussion boards are similar to using IM's like MSN, what does everyone else think?
Task1- week3. 'Identity within social networking sites'
Having an identity online is something which is so different to having one in person. People are able to use their imaginations to guess what sort of person you are. Im not sure whether this is right.
There has been a lot in the media recently about Facebook and privacy etc. I found an interesting site online that underlined the privacy issues within Facebook and its really good, so check it out. http://www.danah.org/papers/FacebookAndPrivacy.html (hope it works)
In relation to not putting your full name on your account, not only on facebook, but other sites too. Im not too sure about it, I think there is not really any real need to put both names, because me saying ellie, rather than ellie keene, doesnt really make much difference. The only thing it would do, would be to confuse your friends online as to which ellie you were. Does anyone think there are major problems with doing this?
I think there are a few risks with not saying who you really are online. You have this instant trust with people online and without knowing it, you are actually trusting this person is who they say they are......then again, why shouldnt we trust them?
Personally nothing has ever happened to me on social networking sites such as Facebook, that puts me in any danger. The only thing i have done recentlyis taken off my birthday and mobile number because apparently people can hack into your bank accounts or something like that.
Going back to the idea of trust. It is funny that we trust people so easily online, if someone were to be lying about their age or name face to face, it would be easier to see if they were lying. Online, we just have option to believe them!
With regards to discussing online groups. I think that it is really easy to put up this barrier and pretend you are something you are not. Like in a discussion board, it is easy online to pretend you know what others are talking about and you can easily change your identity to fit into specific groups.
What does everyone else think? Are we silly to believe everything online? Or as a society, do we simply just believe it because we have no choice but to?
There has been a lot in the media recently about Facebook and privacy etc. I found an interesting site online that underlined the privacy issues within Facebook and its really good, so check it out. http://www.danah.org/papers/FacebookAndPrivacy.html (hope it works)
In relation to not putting your full name on your account, not only on facebook, but other sites too. Im not too sure about it, I think there is not really any real need to put both names, because me saying ellie, rather than ellie keene, doesnt really make much difference. The only thing it would do, would be to confuse your friends online as to which ellie you were. Does anyone think there are major problems with doing this?
I think there are a few risks with not saying who you really are online. You have this instant trust with people online and without knowing it, you are actually trusting this person is who they say they are......then again, why shouldnt we trust them?
Personally nothing has ever happened to me on social networking sites such as Facebook, that puts me in any danger. The only thing i have done recentlyis taken off my birthday and mobile number because apparently people can hack into your bank accounts or something like that.
Going back to the idea of trust. It is funny that we trust people so easily online, if someone were to be lying about their age or name face to face, it would be easier to see if they were lying. Online, we just have option to believe them!
With regards to discussing online groups. I think that it is really easy to put up this barrier and pretend you are something you are not. Like in a discussion board, it is easy online to pretend you know what others are talking about and you can easily change your identity to fit into specific groups.
What does everyone else think? Are we silly to believe everything online? Or as a society, do we simply just believe it because we have no choice but to?
Monday, 4 February 2008
Task 2- week2. 'Blogging'
Blogging is a good form of communication, it allows us as users to be able to clearly see others work and allows us time to look through it in our own time and to comment on our views in relation to various topics. I think it allows us a lot more thinking time, which make our comments better.
Similar to any other genres?
I would argue that using blogs to communicate is very similar to other forms of communication such as using msn or other instant messaging sites. This is because people are able to communicate with others by using language that we are all comfortable with using. We are able to feel as though we are having an informal conversation with others about issues that we are interested in.
The only downside and difference to blogging, is that it doesnt always have an instant reply like msn does. Meaning you would have to check your blog regularly to be able to see what else is going on. It means that you need to get into a routine of checking your blog just like how often you check your facebook!
What do others think about blogging? do you think that it is easier once you get in the routine of checking it?
Language
If you think about it, in a seminar, you do not speak in a formal manner. So it would be silly to suddenly start typing formal words when doing your blog. I think using an informal everyday language makes blooging feel less educational and more like having a normal conversation with other people.
If we were forced into using academic language, I think it would make us all find blogging difficult. We would be trying too hard to please others, rather than actually thinking about what we were writing. What does everyone else think? Do you think using a more relaxed, informal language makes it easier for us to communicate on here, or do you think we may become bone idle if we feel as though its an informal thing?
Similar to any other genres?
I would argue that using blogs to communicate is very similar to other forms of communication such as using msn or other instant messaging sites. This is because people are able to communicate with others by using language that we are all comfortable with using. We are able to feel as though we are having an informal conversation with others about issues that we are interested in.
The only downside and difference to blogging, is that it doesnt always have an instant reply like msn does. Meaning you would have to check your blog regularly to be able to see what else is going on. It means that you need to get into a routine of checking your blog just like how often you check your facebook!
What do others think about blogging? do you think that it is easier once you get in the routine of checking it?
Language
If you think about it, in a seminar, you do not speak in a formal manner. So it would be silly to suddenly start typing formal words when doing your blog. I think using an informal everyday language makes blooging feel less educational and more like having a normal conversation with other people.
If we were forced into using academic language, I think it would make us all find blogging difficult. We would be trying too hard to please others, rather than actually thinking about what we were writing. What does everyone else think? Do you think using a more relaxed, informal language makes it easier for us to communicate on here, or do you think we may become bone idle if we feel as though its an informal thing?
Friday, 1 February 2008
task1-week2, 'Time, Authority and Identity'
Obviously typing out certain things takes up a lot more time than saying them. Hpwever, when you type things you are concentrating on this and this only. When you are in a seminar, you can be easily distracted by others around you and that could affect the point you wish to put across.
Although it is time consuming, when you get into the routine of doing your blog, it becomes easier. Having an online blogging system instead of a seminar, allows you to think a lot more about what you are writing and allows you to put everything you need down without anyone saying anything or interupting you.
Authority & Identity
Because it is your blog you are the person in charge of what you say. Others are invited to contribute, however, you are the one who is free to say exactly what you wish.
However, becuase you are aware that a tutor is looking over what you are writing, its inevitable that what you are trying to say needs to be easily decoded by him/her. You are trying to write down what you know they would like to hear. This is similar to a seminar where you are trying to answer in the best way possible.
What do others think? Is it something you are in full control of, or do you think you are influenced by what you think is expected of you?
Although it is time consuming, when you get into the routine of doing your blog, it becomes easier. Having an online blogging system instead of a seminar, allows you to think a lot more about what you are writing and allows you to put everything you need down without anyone saying anything or interupting you.
Authority & Identity
Because it is your blog you are the person in charge of what you say. Others are invited to contribute, however, you are the one who is free to say exactly what you wish.
However, becuase you are aware that a tutor is looking over what you are writing, its inevitable that what you are trying to say needs to be easily decoded by him/her. You are trying to write down what you know they would like to hear. This is similar to a seminar where you are trying to answer in the best way possible.
What do others think? Is it something you are in full control of, or do you think you are influenced by what you think is expected of you?
Task one- week2, 'Expression & 'interaction'
It is not as easy to express yourself when writing down issues i do not belive. I think that being able to communicate in person face-to-face is a better way to communicate ideas as you are able to see facial expressions of others. For example, when in a seminar, you are able to see when people are agreeing or disagreeing or do not understand, therefore things such as facial expressions and being able to see each other is an important factor which is missing when doing an online seminar.
Taking turns is also a way in which we are bought up to be able to understand each other. The whole point of a conversation is to take it in turns within a conversation. Allowing other people to have their say is an important factor in a conversation. Without this you would just have one person talking and the other one listening.
Asking questions is a good way to make it obvious that taking turns is the normal thing to do within a conversation. This then allows others to answer and to bring up their issues.
If you have not been socialised into doing this basic language expectancy then you would find doing this forum difficult as you would not ask questions to each other, allowing them their time for their say.
Does anyone else agree? i think that it is a good practice for us to do things such as tasks online, but sometimes find it difficult to put across my points.
Taking turns is also a way in which we are bought up to be able to understand each other. The whole point of a conversation is to take it in turns within a conversation. Allowing other people to have their say is an important factor in a conversation. Without this you would just have one person talking and the other one listening.
Asking questions is a good way to make it obvious that taking turns is the normal thing to do within a conversation. This then allows others to answer and to bring up their issues.
If you have not been socialised into doing this basic language expectancy then you would find doing this forum difficult as you would not ask questions to each other, allowing them their time for their say.
Does anyone else agree? i think that it is a good practice for us to do things such as tasks online, but sometimes find it difficult to put across my points.
Task one- week2, 'Navigation'
I found navigating around this forum difficult at first. I suppose it is because it was something I wasn't used to. Also, because i associate going online and having conversations with friends as something that I relate back to my leisurely activity.
I believe that it is something that takes a lot of getting used to, and online seminars is a way in which we can communicate to each other without feeling uncomfortable or having enough time to do so. Livingstone's point in lecture 2 is valid and I believe we would talk about more online than what we would do in a seminar.
However, I would also argue that it is in fact not easier. We do not have the time to actually communicate with tutors, which could effect our way of thinking. Also, it may be easy to become lazy when doing an online seminar, atleast in seminars you are forced into speaking by tutors!
I think to do an online seminar, you need to have the type of media experience to do it properly. Issues such as typing and being able to navigate around the forum becomes a major issue and without having prior knowledge, you may become confused.
I believe that it is something that takes a lot of getting used to, and online seminars is a way in which we can communicate to each other without feeling uncomfortable or having enough time to do so. Livingstone's point in lecture 2 is valid and I believe we would talk about more online than what we would do in a seminar.
However, I would also argue that it is in fact not easier. We do not have the time to actually communicate with tutors, which could effect our way of thinking. Also, it may be easy to become lazy when doing an online seminar, atleast in seminars you are forced into speaking by tutors!
I think to do an online seminar, you need to have the type of media experience to do it properly. Issues such as typing and being able to navigate around the forum becomes a major issue and without having prior knowledge, you may become confused.
Monday, 28 January 2008
Usenet and Bulletin boards
Bulleting boards- these are similar to msn messenger, other than the fact that these sites are focused on one particular topic. Anyone can join these bulletin boards and discussion is there for people to find out information as well as just to have a simple conversation about something people find interesting. Anyone can join these groups- this count mean that they are unsafe? what does everyone else think here? The fact that anyone can join from anywhere in the world means that people could easily give out false information. Am i just over-exaggerating? (I usually do!)
Usenet is a way that only certain people with the right software can use. This already says that the people who use it are limited. This could mean possibly that it is a safer site to use, as there are not as many people on it.
I have never heard of usenet- however, i have heard of bulletin boards and have probably been on one without even noticing!
Usenet is a way that only certain people with the right software can use. This already says that the people who use it are limited. This could mean possibly that it is a safer site to use, as there are not as many people on it.
I have never heard of usenet- however, i have heard of bulletin boards and have probably been on one without even noticing!
MUD's and MOO's
MUDs- 'multi-user dungeon, dormain or dimention'. Consisting of computer gamimg where players are forced to intereact with each other. It is a game which is played over the internet and where chat rooms are found as well as the game itself.
I think this a good way to allow children to interect with each other while doing something they enjoy. However, it could lead to idle-ness as people would become obsessed.
MOO's- These are similar to MUD's- the players are again forced into playing games via text (keyboard-not phone!) It is then up to the players in how they play their game.
I think this a good way to allow children to interect with each other while doing something they enjoy. However, it could lead to idle-ness as people would become obsessed.
MOO's- These are similar to MUD's- the players are again forced into playing games via text (keyboard-not phone!) It is then up to the players in how they play their game.
our views on new media
In my opinion- it is the way in which you are socialised that shows how you erxperience media. The word 'new media', expresses that what is media is brand new and an improvement from something in the past.
Films are an example of this, with technological enhancements that occur within films, it is easy to say that this has effected films as a whole. with action shots being of a higher standard, i believe that as a society, we are instantly gratified. We are always demanding more and more. I believe we have become greedy and rely on technology an new mediums far too much. Does anyome else agree??
I have to say though, because we have been bought up in a world where we are surrounded by media, we do take it for granted a little bit. I cant imagine a life without media and its new medias that make our world go round. we simply cannot live without it!
What do others think??
Films are an example of this, with technological enhancements that occur within films, it is easy to say that this has effected films as a whole. with action shots being of a higher standard, i believe that as a society, we are instantly gratified. We are always demanding more and more. I believe we have become greedy and rely on technology an new mediums far too much. Does anyome else agree??
I have to say though, because we have been bought up in a world where we are surrounded by media, we do take it for granted a little bit. I cant imagine a life without media and its new medias that make our world go round. we simply cannot live without it!
What do others think??
TASK 2- Goebbels view of radio
Geobbel believed that the radio formed a sense of escapism when it came to people within society, within the era that the radio was first produced people within society, were going through traumatic times, such as the war and therefore the radio was a way in which people could escape the burden of everyday life.
The radio is a good way to reach the masses. Not only does it entertain people it also informs them about current events that are happenning around the world.
In my opinion, the radio is not used as much as it used to be, with television becoming the more popular form of entertainment. The radios only benefit is that there are no televisions in cars and so I believe that that is the only time people really listen to the radio is in their cars. What does everyone else think? Do you all listen to the radio, or are you more into television? I wish i was still into the radio, i feel as though i am missing out a little!
The radio is a good way to reach the masses. Not only does it entertain people it also informs them about current events that are happenning around the world.
In my opinion, the radio is not used as much as it used to be, with television becoming the more popular form of entertainment. The radios only benefit is that there are no televisions in cars and so I believe that that is the only time people really listen to the radio is in their cars. What does everyone else think? Do you all listen to the radio, or are you more into television? I wish i was still into the radio, i feel as though i am missing out a little!
Friday, 25 January 2008
question....
On page 43, under the section 'Media Stuidies'
Is it trying to put across the idea that it depends on the ways an audience decode a certain media? Im really confused, I think this is what he is trying to say, but in a very academic way (that's probably why i dont understand it!) It says we can share a common 'text', so does that mean we all have similar ideas about certain medias, but within those ideas, we have varied beliefs when it comes to looking at it in real depth. I guess its like saying, you have identified that what someone like Frank Gallager is doing in shameless is wrong. However, those from a lower social class will find it humerous as maybe they have been bought up to see this as normal. However, someone of a higher class, will identify that he is doing something wrong. And also, have the knowledge that it is serious and not something of a humerous nature. Am i reading into this too much? All im trying to say, is that people like Morley believe that it depends on the individual and the way you are bought up.
Is it trying to put across the idea that it depends on the ways an audience decode a certain media? Im really confused, I think this is what he is trying to say, but in a very academic way (that's probably why i dont understand it!) It says we can share a common 'text', so does that mean we all have similar ideas about certain medias, but within those ideas, we have varied beliefs when it comes to looking at it in real depth. I guess its like saying, you have identified that what someone like Frank Gallager is doing in shameless is wrong. However, those from a lower social class will find it humerous as maybe they have been bought up to see this as normal. However, someone of a higher class, will identify that he is doing something wrong. And also, have the knowledge that it is serious and not something of a humerous nature. Am i reading into this too much? All im trying to say, is that people like Morley believe that it depends on the individual and the way you are bought up.
first reading!!!
Ok, so after reading Lister-et-al, i have decided that we are so idle!
As a country, we are instantly gratified-always wanting more and more and I think we rely way too much on technology. I think we use the internet as a way of communicating too much. Whatever happened to the days where we hand wrote letters to everyone. i know that i dont ever hand write things anymore. The interenet is an excuse for us to be bone idle and its ridiculas. I agree with the reading in that using digital media, allows us to experiment with new technologies and as a society the technologicalk enhancements mean that we are able to achieve things, that we would never be able to do in past centuries. I found it interesting that it has only been the last few centuries that digital media has taken forms in the entertainment media, such as cinema and of course not forgetting the mobile phone phenomenon! I didnt realise that it was used in the military units before it reached other types of mediums.
I also found it interesting that it was from the 196's onwards, where there was a rapid change in media. Is it me, or does that seem really early?? I guess that's just because we have been bought up in a world of technology, so we are just used to it!!
As a country, we are instantly gratified-always wanting more and more and I think we rely way too much on technology. I think we use the internet as a way of communicating too much. Whatever happened to the days where we hand wrote letters to everyone. i know that i dont ever hand write things anymore. The interenet is an excuse for us to be bone idle and its ridiculas. I agree with the reading in that using digital media, allows us to experiment with new technologies and as a society the technologicalk enhancements mean that we are able to achieve things, that we would never be able to do in past centuries. I found it interesting that it has only been the last few centuries that digital media has taken forms in the entertainment media, such as cinema and of course not forgetting the mobile phone phenomenon! I didnt realise that it was used in the military units before it reached other types of mediums.
I also found it interesting that it was from the 196's onwards, where there was a rapid change in media. Is it me, or does that seem really early?? I guess that's just because we have been bought up in a world of technology, so we are just used to it!!
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)