Final "Portfolio" Reflection #1

Well, it looks like I've written 35 or 36 posts since I began this blog back in September! Wow! Time sure has flown. And, I can't believe I've written that much. I had figured 1-2 a week for the 15-week semester, which would be about 15-30. Well, I guess it's close. (Too many "wells"? I'm still not sure if I've found my "tone" or "voice" yet!)

The first major thing that comes to mind when reviewing my posts is something Alyssa R. said to me in class a few weeks ago: "These blogs sure are public." When I asked her what she meant, she replied that someone from SlideRocket had found her blog, and her post about SlideRocket, and they had left a comment for her. Like me, I think she thought no one would find these blogs except our classmates. But someone had found hers! Then, just a day or so later, I saw a comment to my podcasting post, and Chuck Tomasi (one of the co-authors of Podcasting for Dummies) had left a comment thanking me for using and mentioning Podcasting for Dummies in my blog! Then, a few days after that, the SlideRocket people had also found my SlideRocket presentation and blog post, and had left a message as well. Of course, it's all about recognizing "product placement" and advertising, but it's also "cool" to think that these blogs are "out there, and lovin' every minute of it," as Kramer once said on Seinfeld.

My best blog post? Maybe the two posts about American Literature, and comparing my course to a course Donald Ross is currently teaching. But why are these the best? Maybe because they were not assigned for my Digital Writing class. (Which is where we want our students to also end up, eventually.) But also maybe because I'm really enjoying my sabbatical and having the time to do things like this, to take this Digital Writing course, and to sit in on another course that I enjoy teaching. So, I don't know if the two posts are necessarily "good" because of the writing itself but because I enjoyed the creation of them, the experiences which led up to them.

Likewise, my "worst" blog post ... perhaps the one(s) having to do with podcasting ... because I struggled, at first, and partly throughout, with the podcasting activity itself, with figuring out Audacity, with take after take, with finding music, with editing. But by the time I was looking for music, and editing, and using the envelope tool, I was actually starting to have a bit of fun.

So that may be the "key" for me, the criterion that I would use for evaluating my blog posts: Which activities gave me the most frustration and struggle, and which activities were fun (or even became fun as time moved along)?

Frustrations:

• Podcasting (recording and editing audio) ... the first three-quarters of it
• Vlogging (recording and editing video) ... I don't actually consider what I did to be a vlog ... OK, it's definitely NOT a vlog, I do know that ... and it took a long time ... but again, the fun came later, when I got the "hang" of iMovie ... and it was fun to use video of my cat and creatively connect it to writing ... and it was fun to actually post something to YouTube!
  

Enjoyments:

• Creating the WritingMinnesota wiki
• Bubbl.us
• Flickr SlideShow
• VoiceThread (x2)
• SlideRocket Presentation
  

These were all "new" tools for me, they were fun, I had to be somewhat creative (although I'm not creative at all), and I tried to always connect it to my teaching, although often in somewhat goofy ways. But, hey, it's a start ... and I might even have the courage to show these to my students as "rough models."

And that's what I have to keep doing: reflecting on HOW AND WHY I might have my students use these tools. Yes, I want them to have fun, to be motivated and engaged, but I also want them to be writing and to be improving their writing. And I want to be confident that these tools are indeed helping them to do that.

Evaluating a Podcast

I finally got back to this post, which I promised weeks ago!

I started out following the directions given in Podcasting for Dummies, second edition, by Tee Morris, Chuck Tomasi, and Evo Terra. It's a great book if you're starting out with podcasting, and the sections about finding and listening to podcasts have great examples and recommendations. I agree that one should "browse" through many podcasts before starting out ... but I plunged right in, after reading most of the book first, and only later did I start to listen to some.

I'm using both Juice and iTunes as "podcatchers," but I'm not sure which one I prefer. There are some things about the different "screens" in Juice that I don't understand, but Juice is clearer than iTunes, it seems to me, in the step about "going-out-and-seeing-if-anything-is-new," whereas this step seems more hidden in iTunes. With Juice, you get a clear list of all available "episodes" and can see at a glance which ones you have or don't have. I haven't found this yet in iTunes.

The podcast I listened to was Episode One, "Wikipedia: Friend or Foe?" produced by Digital Campus and the Center for History and New Media. It originally "aired" on March 7, 2007. I think I'm going to like the Digital Campus podcasts, if I can work more of them into my schedule. The focus is definitely more on higher education than "Teachers Teaching Teachers," but I think there'd be some good stuff there as well.

This episode had the host, Dan Cohen (?), and two guests. It was pretty informal, the three speakers seemed to know each other, they worked off of each other pretty well, and they seemed comfortable with a few seconds of "dead air" here and there.

The episode started out with a "News Roundup," which covered many different topics and was very interesting. Oddly, though, it took up about half the time of the podcast. Here's a "run-down" of the topics discussed:

• MS Vista
• Google Docs
• A reminder that "students are not automatically technology literate" -- even though we might think that since they're mostly in the 18-22 age group
• A reminder that some students do not have MS Office -- due to cost or other issues
• A discussion about open-source class management systems vs. commercial ones such as BlackBoard and WebCT -- and how "tagging" works in various systems
• Flickr -- and the Ken Albers study
  
• Delicious

At this point, the discussion about Wikipedia began, and they made many good points. Instead of saying to students that they can't use it and/or they can't cite it -- which they're going to probably look at anyway -- we should "train" our students in a better use of Wikipedia. We should even ask and discuss the question, Is an encyclopedia an appropriate college-level source?

One speaker then described an extra-credit project in his Western Civ. class, a project which soon became a required project. He asked his students to either write or substantially edit a Wikipedia entry and then to track the commentary and changes made to the page. He argued that an important part of an entry that is often overlooked is the History of a page. His students soon discovered how quickly and how drastically a page can change, and not always for the better. However, the other argument is that the more people who are involved in a page, the better the article might be. His hope was that, through this project, his students might better understand both Wikipedia and the "scholarly process," the creation (and maintenance?) of knowledge.

The discussion also included, several times, the phrase: "Community of Enthusiasts." We need to recognize that these communities drive Wikipedia and that our students probably already belong to one or more "communities of enthusiasts," based on their personal and/or professional interests. We should capitalize on this and work the concept into our classes.

(As a side note, I already often teach my First-Year Writing course, especially when I focus explicitly on "academic writing," using the ideas of "community" and "conversation." Students need to recognize that, in coming to college, they are joining a new community, and they are going to be "listening to many different conversations." And every conversation is going to have different "conventions" to follow when/if one joins the conversation. We then start in with summarizing, then analysis, then evaluation, then synthesis, then argument, where they actually join or contribute to a conversation after doing all the "listening.")

Finally, the podcast ended with some recommendations for the listeners. If you want to use a wiki for personal or professional reasons, these two were highly recommended:

• wetpaint.com
• pbwiki.com

If you teach history or geography, you might be interested in:

• worldmapper.org

If you teach your students research skills, you might be interested in:

• the Open Content Alliance, a rival to Google Books (the Google Library Project), which has upward of 187,000 books online with searching and downloading capabilities -- archive.org/details/texts

I'm glad Digital Campus was recommended to me by my Digital Writing professor. I've already downloaded several more podcasts and hope to listen to them soon. I tried to listen while doing other things on the computer, but I'm not one to be able to do that, whereas I know others who can multi-task. It makes me question using podcasts for my classes: Will my students be paying attention, or will they be distracted with other things and come away with only a fraction of what was on the podcast? Maybe in asking them to find and evaluate some before actually doing their own, they might actually realize that their audience won't be paying as much attention as they hope? Is this too much to hope for?

Walt Whitman's Astronomer Poem

Here is my first attempt at "digital literature" or "digital storytelling." I'm sure it does not exactly meet what was asked of me, since here I use Walt Whitman's words mixed with some "Creative Commons" images from Flickr. I'm sure I was supposed to use my own photos or images, and my own writing, to create "this"--a digital poem or story. But I had fun doing it. And I'm sure my students might have fun doing something like this as well.

But what's the point? Why did I do this? (Other than to complete the terms of an assignment?) And why would I have my students do this? (Other than to complete the terms of an assignment?) What would be the purpose? Who would be the audience?

Would including a project like this in my course challenge my students academically in some way? (The technology challenged me a little bit, but the concept of the VoiceThread came to me almost immediately, and I had fun doing it.) Or would it be only for fun, a new way to look at and think about literature? A pop-culture approach to American Literature?

Would doing a project like this give my students more insight into a literary text? (For me, the insight might come in the way of requiring them to choose the "best" images for the project. It was impossible for me to find "applause in the lecture-room." I guess I could have "staged" it--and students might have fun doing these stagings. But, I think I did pretty well with "the mystical moist night-air," when I thought that was going to be the hardest phrase to capture.)

I definitely see much potential here, but like all the other tools I've been introduced to so far in this class, I'm still falling short of brilliant ideas and insights for incorporating them into my courses. Maybe it'll come to me later ...?

A Brief VideoThread Survey of American Literature

Here is my first experiment with composing "digital literature" using VoiceThread. The images are all from Flickr and are licensed under "Creative Commons."

This VoiceThread is an audio and video tour of some of the writers I cover in the two-semester course sequence of American Literature: ENGL 2230 and ENGL 2235 at Anoka Ramsey Community College.

Flickr Slideshow of Mankato, MN, and American Literature

The slide show you've just seen is, apparently, an odd miscellany of images from Flickr. There's no explicit, coherent theme, I don't think, so don't think you've missed anything! (Sounds a little like Mark Twain at the beginning of Huck Finn, don't you think? "Persons attempting ....") However, being the English professor that I am, I suppose there's something lurking under the surface. Maybe we can find something there?

Also, Flickr does not let me organise my faves, so there's no way I can impose upon my choices a coherent, linear narrative. Maybe that's where VoiceThread will come in handy? Moreover, my faves seem not to be organised in the order I chose them on Flickr, so that's not even helpful, where one might try to choose images in a certain order so that the faves are organised. (Did you like the British spelling of organize? I hope so. I also think we should go metric! Powers of 10 are so much easier.)

The coherent narrative is this: I went to college in Mankato, and in college I studied American Literature, first with Dr. Robert Houston, and then with Dr. Ronald Gower, both excellent professors--perhaps more on them later, in another blog post. Literature has an imaginative, playful component, much like I'm trying to adopt in this blog post, which some of these images demonstrate, and Mankato has a picturesque past and present, which also lends itself to the imagination. For example, while I could not find any images of the Dakota Sioux hanging in Mankato (it happened around 1862, I think), I did find the image of a Mankato-area man tarred-and-feathered for not supporting the war. This stuff should only happen in the imagination, right?

So there's the coherent theme or narrative. Of course, you might also see things I didn't, and that's OK too. It's what we English professors call "reader response," where the act of reading, or viewing, or interpreting, is as much a creative act as the act of composing. There are no wrong answers, right? Not as long as one can support their "reading" with evidence from the "text." (Sorry! Don't know where that lecture came from.)

NOTE: All images in the slide show have a "Creative Commons" license, which is great, and I thank the artists for allowing their use. (However, limiting a Flickr search to only those images with the "CC" license does, sometimes dramatically, limit your choices. Using your own images and/or checking other image repositories on the web, such as Google Images, might be even better.)