Interview

I interviewed my 13 year old brother in law. He isn't as attached to his phone and electronics as much as others I've seen, but I was glad to sit down and talk to him about it 

1. Do you feel like you get less attention when your parents are using technology? Yes, dad won't play games with me.

2. Do you wish that they were on their phone less or more? Less

3. How much time do you spend on your phone or computer? Idk, little bit

4. Do you find yourself using technology while spending  time with your friends? Not really

5. Do your friends spend their time using technology too while with you? Yes

6.  Do you find it hard or intimidating to have a conversation with a peer? No

7. Do you find it hard or intimidating to have a conversation with an adult? No

8. Do you have a Facebook Account? Yes, 11

9.  How often do you check it? Once a day

10. What do you do on it mostly? Talk to my friends

11. Do you believe that you are on it too little, too often, or just right amount? Just the right amount

12. If you are alone, what do you do to keep yourself busy? Play my DS

13.  Does being alone make you anxious or nervous? I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO BE DOING SOMETHING

14. What kinds of technology do you have access to in your home? PHONE, DS, TV, wii, 

15.  What kinds of technology do you have access to in your school? Computer, iPad, 

16.  How well do you think you are able to operate different types of technology? Really well. 

17. Would you like to have a robot companion instead of human companions? No, because that would be boring. Because my friends are already my friends. 

18.  Does your home have any technology rules? i.e. no phones or TV at dinner, or in certain rooms of the house.  No

19. Would you rather text (message) or call someone? Call someone, too lazy to text

20. Do you think that it is appropriate to text while someone else is speaking to you? Or in class? Yes it's okay in class, but not ok if they're speaking straight to you. 

21. Why do you think some people spend their whole day on their phone or computer? Because they're weird. Because they don't like having fun with other people. 

22. Do you think that you have to compete with your parents phone for attention? No

23. Do you think that you have meaningful conversations with your parents?  And they give you their full attention? Yes

24.Why do you think teens would rather text than talk on the phone? To avoid getting yelled at 

25. Do you think that it is sometimes difficult to interpret text messages?  Yes, idk. Would the message be more clear if it was spoken over the phone?  Or face to face? Yes, because you can hear how the words are being said. 

Week 9- Media Education

I chose to watch the McLuhan introduction and was interested in his concept of a global village.  He predicted accurately that with the invention of television and eventually the web that this form of communication will link all people by most of their senses.  In 1964 he stated in his book Understanding Media, "Today, after more than a century of electric technology, we have extended our central nervous system itself in a global embrace, abolishing both space and time as far as our planet is concerned." (Marshall McLuhan Forsees the Global Village, 2014, Para.1)I don't know how many other people could have seen this future coming for our world, but he did.  Today we are connected in an infinite amount of ways to an infinite amount of things.  Not just our town, or state or country but the whole world! Like synapses in the brain, our messages can be instantly transported.

 Nicolas Tesla was another forward-thinker of the past, before McLuhan himself.  In an interview with Colliers magazine Tesla in 1926 stated: "When wireless is perfectly applied the whole earth will be converted into a huge brain, which in fact it is, all things being particles of a real and rhythmic whole. We shall be able to communicate with one another instantly, irrespective of distance. Not only this, but through television and telephony we shall see and hear one another as perfectly as though we were face to face, despite intervening distances of thousands of miles; and the instruments through which we shall be able to do his will be amazingly simple compared with our present telephone. A man will be able to carry one in his vest pocket." (Marshall McLuhan Forsees the Global Village, 2014, Para.3)

How amazing is it that these men were so in tune with the future of our technology?! I know that we have dreams of future technology today; teleportation, flying cars, living on the moon, traveling outside of our solar system and so much more.  We think that these are things of the far future, but we might be surprised to find out that there are coming a lot sooner than we can ever imagine!

References:

Marshall McLuhan Foresees The Global Village. (2014). Retrieved July 10, 2015, from http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_mcluhan.htm

Marshall McLuhan Speaks Special Collection: Introduction by Tom Wolfe

Week 8-Ad Deconstruction

I chose to deconstruct this advertisement.  When I originally saw it I was shocked.  I thought that it was very inappropriate for a billboard to display something this provocative. Going through the assignment only confirmed my suspicions.  While I was driving down the high way I didn't notice the small writing underneath the Snickers logo "satisfies."  I never knew that was their phrase, "Snickers Satisfies."  Satisfaction can relate to one's hunger for food, but also hunger sexually.  I personally thought that adding that word put it over the top.  

 I think that this advertisement could lead people to associate eating a Snickers and then having sex; it puts you in the mood. I think that the woman is being portrayed sexually in this ad. She is being seduced by the man; she isn’t the one seducing him. I think that posting this on a billboard would be socially irresponsible. I think that it is company’s responsibility to post advertisements that are appropriate for all ages to view, since they will be seen by all aged citizens. Citizen responsibility means looking at the bigger picture of society and honoring all people in it. Consumer responsibility means that you also have to watch out for yourself. If you see an inappropriate advertisement or any form of media it is your responsibility to guard yourself and your children from the crude or inappropriate messages.

I think this ad is that it is funny, but it is also inappropriate for all ages for view. It depends on where it is being posted; in a men’s restroom or in a bar might be appropriate; because there should only be older individuals there. Young boys or girls don’t need to see a women in her lingerie with a man trying to take it off. But, I am really struggling to think of a perfect place for it to be posted. I can envision the confusion in my young daughter’s eyes if she would have seen this, “Momma, why is that man going to punch that woman in the back?” That would open up a whole other can of worms; why did they use boxing gloves? They have a violent connotation. Why not a pair of big bulky mittens? It would have still been funny, but maybe a little less violent. In the end it is our responsibility to appropriately filter what our children are exposed too as best we can.

Week 6- Weblogs and Society

I was really interested in the essay written by Andrew O’Baoill.  I think that he brought to light some very obviously-unobvious facts and opinions about the effect of bloggers on the public.  Now, there are many positives about being involved in a public, online debate.  In the eyes of the internet community, all bloggers are equal and no controversial topics are too taboo for discussion.  If you present yourself as an eloquent and rational debater, your blog may be tagged for regular viewing.  O’Baoill indicates that anyone with minimal technological skills, some free time and some financial funding has the potential of being a big-time blogger (O’Baoill, para. 3).  The most challenging part is researching and reading all sides to an argument to put together a formidable plan or discussion with valuable evidence.  The unfortunately side effect of this all is that the divide between people active and inactive in politics will grow substantially.    O’Baoill identified that “24% of American’s have direct or indirect experience with the internet…Internet population is younger, wealthier and more educated than the offline population” (O’Baoill, Para. 7).  Some people eve chose to become professional bloggers, which sounds ludicrous to me, but if you can make a living off of starting insightful discussions, then more power to you.  I think that oftentimes bloggers hope to raise money to do it full-time but can’t make enough to make ends meet.  

I was speaking to one my students a few weeks ago and he said that he had a random piece of information for me; that Helen Keller did LSD.  My co-worker and I were confused on what he was talking about, but he was adamant that he had read it on the internet so it had to be true.  Well, it took him a half hour to find what he was talking about… (this picture was his proof)

We had to have a nice long conversation with him about how to tell if things are fake or not on the internet.  Good or bad, LSD was around/invented while Helen Keller was alive, but we couldn’t find anything saying that she actually did it.  Just that she made a joke about it, maybe…if she even did.  O’Baoill touched on this when he said, “The importance placed by many weblogs on breaking news not only leads to greater risks of false information being published but, given the layout of weblogs, can foreshorten debates” (O’Baoill, Para. 14).  We see it all too often, people getting into heated debates online, and since many people are argumentative by nature things get out of hand.  Arguments explode and things get messy.  In paragraph 21 O’Baoill mentioned that a plus side of blogging is that it is a way for oppressed cultures and individuals to expose the conditions that they are living in.  People in Iraq and Syria have been posting things about their totalitarian regimes for years, until censorships have been placed on their internet access.  It still happens, but it is more difficult and dangerous for them to post.  

Sometimes we don't think about all of the wonderful opportunities we have, and how lucky we are to just have access to the vast amount of knowledge that is available on the internet.  I think that we take it for granted at times, and thinking about the people who are using it to express their personal concerns and tragedies (domestic or foreign)  is inspirational. 

 Refrences:

  O'Baoill, A. Weblogs and the Public Sphere . Retrieved from http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/weblogs_and_the_public_sphere.html

Week 3: Politics

I chose to reflect on Chapter 3 Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation.  I specifically chose this chapter because I was interested in seeing how they percieved the future of politics.  I know what you're thinking, "Yuck, Politics?!" Trust me, I thought the same thing.  But the sad truth is, being familiar with politics helps us to better understand why things are the way they are, how they got that way, and what we can do about it!  The good side to any democracy is that the people (however small) have a voice.  If you want change, take strides to become a politician and an agent of change!  It is possible.  What irks me is when people get their political knowledge from a single source (i.e. the news) and think that they are political savants.  At the moment out political system is quite corrupt ( I am sure most people agree!) and mostly ruled by while, older men.  It is my wish that technology influence politics in a way that can level the playing field and make it more accessible and understandable for the everyday citizen.

The first topics brought up is the "electronic town hall" where people can speak directly with a representative(p.77). I think this sounds like a great idea; if the elected officials respond.  But, I have the feeling that they would very rarely or not at all.  The example of the public sphere that was posted was in order to determine what to do about the 9/11 site was interesting.  Eight Hundred Americans were asked and through "structured, guided discussion and deliberation, participants contributed their positions to decision makers" (p.79).  I think that this was a very honorable and compassionate way to include many people in the decision making process.

The only thing that truly concerned me was the alarming amount of times that the chapter described the internet as 'convivial.'  I am not going to lie, I didn't even know what that word meant.  But I don't think that I should take up nearly 19 pages on explaining how 'friendly' ( I looked it up! )the internet is. I think that anonymity of some sites can create a 'friendly' and guilt free atmosphere but I don't think that I would use the adjective 'friendly' to describe the whole internet.  Sure it is low-cost (in general p.81) and  collaborative but it is difficult to control or censor.  Now, I don't say this to sound like the Chinese Government. I think that some parts of the internet should be managed.  I am a firm believer that there should be some responsibility on managing those horrible comments or bullying remarks that are posted on various sites by teens.    Maybe if someone types derogatory or inappropriate language it should be censored, and deleted.  I understand that this may violate freedom of speech; but I think that people have the freedom to be jerks in their homes, but more than they should in public places like the grocery store.... or the internet!

Forgive me, I know that there are flaws in my argument, but consider the other side of the story too. Children (under 18) don't have the same freedoms as adults. While under the responsibility of their parents, they must abide by their rules and the rules schools.  Their freedoms are limited already... but in the end it may save a life.





Varnelis, K.(Ed.).(2008). Networked Publics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Week 2- What is literacy and how does it change in response to new media?

“what counts as literacy, how literacy changes in response to the new media landscape,” and what value we should ascribe to the new forms of communication that continue to emerge and evolve online (Jenkins, 2009)

I think that it is difficult to define and quantify "What is literacy?."  I am a math person; my brain analyzes based on evidence and logic.  I really appreciated the approach that the book (Lankshear and Knobel) took on defining it in multiple contexts; as functional and active citizenship.  It pulls together the ability and the skills that are considered literate and the value or benefits of a literate life. (p. 6 and 76)  The article brings in this new concept of digital literacy, and the ability to use the internet.  It is great, because within the definitions of literacy in the book; you can accurately define it as an actual literacy that is important to everyday life.  It is so important for all students to learn these skills that digital literacy will begin to be assessed globally (Rich, 2008, paragraph 11). This article was written in 2008, so I assume it has already taken place.  I would be interested to see the scores of the countries that participated since the article stated that the United States was not going to be one of them.  

To compare, the article to the readings in the book, I think that as new "literacies" develop naturally in our ever changing world we can assess them and determine whether or not that can be constituted as literacies.  They can be assessed based on their functionality and requirement to be active citizens of society.  In twenty years it might be that we all have those google glasses.Google Glasses literacy might be a real thing.  It could be something that is necessary to function within our society.  Maybe all the road signs and maps will be displayed on the glasses so that the DOT doesn't have to keep changing the big interstate signs every time they build a new road. And citizens won't have to purchase atlases every year, or update their GPS. They will always be up to date.   if you don't have the glasses you will be lost!  Or at least at a disadvantage compared to everyone else.  

I know this is kind of a silly example, but I truly think that as technologies develop new literacy requirements will as well.  I mean, what if we develop teleportation eventually?  It might become a requirement for a person to learn more than one language.  Whenever the person whats to go, at any given time, around the planet they will need to be literate in those places to function in society there.   More people may live abroad, in different parts of the world for different times of the year.  I can't even imagine all of the possibilities but I can definitely see a challenge for those who are only literate in one language. 

What do you think?? I would be pretty excited for some instant transmission :)

---Nicole






Knobel, M. & Lankshear, C. (2011). Literacies: Social, cultural, and historical 
perspectives. New York: Peter Lang Publishing 

 Rich, M. (2008, July 27). Literacy Debate: Online, R U Really Reading? New York Times. Retrieved May 28, 2015, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/books/27reading.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&  

Week 1- Literacy As Social Practice

"The distinctive contribution of the approach to literacy as social practice lies in the ways in which it involves careful and sensitive attention to what people do with texts, how they make sense of them and use them to further their own purposes in their own learning lives" (Gillen and Barton, 2010, p. 9).

The first thing that comes to mind when I read this quote is, "This is so relevant to my own life!"  It is funny that it specifically addresses texts, because my feelings about text messages has greatly changed over the last ten years.  When I was 15 and starting dating my husband (then boyfriend)  it would drive me insane whenever he would text me. I hated it.  I would have so much rather have gotten a phone call.  I thought it was so rude and inconsiderate to send me short messages instead of the decency to share time with me over the phone.  These days, ten years and a child later, I love the short messages that I receive throughout the day.  It shows me that he is thinking about me.  But, since we are both working we don't exactly have time to just drop what we are doing and have a nice long chat in the middle of the day.

I think it is very easy to misinterpret a text because you are missing out on their tone of voice and body language. More times than not I find myself asking if my husband is upset about something by the "sound" of his texts; which 99% of the time he isn't.  

I think that texting has become a more preferred and common form of communication over speaking in person or on the phone.  I think that with  the evolution of cell phones and the availability of texting that  dozens of new terminology and acronyms have surfaced.  So, yes we have all "learned" that LOL means 'laughing out loud' but is this useful for "them to further their own purposes in their own learning lives," I am not so sure.  My experience in the classroom has shown that since cellphones have been allowed into schools and texting more popular than ever; that students are carrying over their texting language onto their English assignments.  It makes me worried about their ability to write in a professional manner.  But, looking at it in the light of this class as a "New Literacy" I guess it isn't 'bad' unless we label it so.  Who says that "l8r" cannot be an acceptable form of the word "later"? Why is LOL unacceptable for a school paper, but ASAP is?

In Chapter 10: The "New Literacy Studies" from Literacies: Social, Cultural and Historical Perspectives by Lankshear and Knobel it mentions, "(new literacies) it does not follow from the fact that so-called new technologies are being used in literacy education that new literacies are being engaged with. Still less does it imply that learners are developing, critiquing, analyzing, or even becoming technically proficient with new literacies" (p.189). So, sure we are using these new technologies in the classroom to help familiarize ourselves and our students with the "new literacies" but it isn't necessarily making students more apt to make advances in such a field.  It is part of their everyday lives so much that they aren't thinking any deeper about it, they are just using it for what its worth.I think that it is definitely a social practice AND a type of new literacy. I think that our society has made them one in the same. Everyone is expected to have a cell phone, internet, facebook, twitter, an e-mail, skype etc. etc. etc. For what purpose? To be connected to people that we hardly know? And to become less connected to the people we do know.  Because, we would rather send them a happy birthday text message or facebook post than call them on the phone and have a legitimate conversation.  Maybe not everyone; but I know that most of the people who wish me happy birthday on facebook are more aquantencies than friends. So whats the point?

I hope this isn't too rambling, but the topic is interconnected to many others in a direct way.  

--Nicole