Rebecca’s Blog

I recorded my first podcast the other day, and I was surprised at how easy it is.
It is about some things to consider when making a podcast. I need to try to figure out how to post the podcast on this blog.  Here’s the script:

Hello everyone! I am a novice podcaster and this is my first attempt, so please be kind as you listen.

I just read Dr. Kjeldsen’s message on Lori’s blog.  He refers to an article that analyzes Al Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, as a presentation.  It is VERY interesting.  Here is the link:    http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/dec2006/sb20061220_144107.htm?campaign_id=rss_topStories

Myers, J. & Beach, R. (2001, March). Hypermedia authoring as critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(6). Available: http://www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/jaal/3-01_Column/index.html

As a proponent of critical literacy, I enjoyed reading this article. It is my belief that our world of media saturation requires a close look at the representations and agendas of media creators and distributors. In his introduction, Bertram Bruce invokes Kant when he says, “We are both empowered by our representations and limited by them. In today’s realm of learning technologies, we would say that representations provide both affordances and constraints for sense-making.” This is especially important when you are working with students to create hypermedia. Critical literacy involves the ability to ask questions like: What is really being said? What has been left out? What can I learn from and about this text/image/site/sound? It is tricky to teach students to question media without appearing to deride its value. One way to approach this is to provide different versions of the same content, for example, articles, stories, and web sites of a news event they are familiar with. Through discovery, they learn on their own that media often present slanted versions of events.

I really like the idea that Myers and Beach discuss regarding students’ use of hypermedia productions to foster critical analysis. The interactive nature of hypermedia projects practically ensures engagement. Teachers do need to provide guidance as students follow the many paths available in this type of inquiry. It is possible to become “lost in hyperspace,” and/or distracted by easy access to online videos and games. Scaffolding instruction in creating hypermedia productions might help students learn to focus. In addition, it might help if they keep a project book with notes of the process, so they can learn what works and what doesn’t. By giving them choices, using discovery learning, and scaffolding instruction, a hypermedia project is a great way to incorporate critical literacy into a class.

Hargis, J. & Wilson, D. (2005). Fishing for learning with a podcast net.  Retrieved February 25, 2007, from http://www.unf.edu/dept/cirt/tech/podcast/ HargisPodcastArticle.pdf

Richardson, W. (2005). Podcasting andScreencasting: Multimedia publishing for the masses. In Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful Web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

The article by Hargis and Wilson, “Fishing for Learning with a Podcast Net,” was not particularly well-written, but it did contain some helpful information. I have always considered podcasts as a form of radio broadcast, but they look at them as audio blogs. I think this is really more descriptive of the most common use of podcasts. However, they also characterize podcasts as “digital magazine subscriptions” because you have to subscribe to be able to download. I think this is a little misleading because most podcasts are not structured like magazines.

Some of the passages in the article were not clear; for example, the first paragraph under the subheading, “What Podcasting Promises Educators,” has sentences like, “Conceptual learning requires multiple inputs, time between inputs, guidance, reflection, facilitation and subsequent quality control of ideas.” There is no further discussion of this process, so a reader without the necessary prior knowledge is lost. In that same section, they say, “the metaphor for using podcast is inherent in the concept of podcasting itself.” Huh? The article needs editing and proofreading to be considered academic writing.

Regarding podcasts and their uses in education, the authors brought up some important points. First, visual learners may struggle with podcasts, but if they contain “authentic background sounds and colorful narratives,” listeners are able to “create their own vision.” This reminds me of reports on NPR. Even though I don’t consider myself an auditory learner, the reports keep my attention with these very elements. Another point they discuss is the connection between podcasting and conceptual learning, which is critical for “genuine learning – sustentative, long-term learning.” I think the connections will only be made if the students are started with specifically conceptual assignments. One of their goals in the article is to encourage educators to use podcasting for teaching and learning. I think it is fairly effective for this purpose.

In terms of our inquiry project, I think the chapter by Richardson had many useful tips. I looked at a few of the suggested sites and some of the addresses are no longer functioning, but this is always as hazard when dealing with the Internet. Some of his “how-to” information was a bit outdated, but as we saw with the Edublogs interface, the technology changes so fast that it is difficult to keep up with it in print publications. Most of the sites he recommends, such as Audacity, have links to new addresses and user-friendly instructions on how to use the software. If not, updated information is readily available on the Net.

I like Richardson’s suggestion to record phone interviews and podcast them on a blog. If we can locate a willing expert in our inquiry topic, maybe we could try a podcast. Hargis and Wilson claim that podcasts “represent practically everything that is occurring worldwide, in a raw, uncensored format, ready for consumption,” which is exactly what we need for our project.

Kjeldsen, J. E. (2006). The rhetoric of PowerPoint. Seminar.net: Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning, 2(1).

Dr. Kjeldsen makes some interesting points in his article about PowerPoint. He seems to go back and forth between negative and positive criticisms. I agree with some of his negative criticisms. People use the phrase “Death by PowerPoint,” in reference to those interminable, mind-numbing presentations we have all experienced. In addition, many of the presentations used in educational settings are a waste of the audience’s time. Case in point: an administrator I have worked with insists on using PowerPoint for every meeting. Little time and effort goes into the construction of the presentation; therefore, it detracts from the productivity of the meeting. The examples given by Kjeldsen are a little alarming. Is he serious when he reports that the Columbia Space Shuttle may have broken up because of a flawed PPt presentation? It’s also scary when he claims that “Microsoft’s presentation software is a technology which fundamentally changes our way of communicating and thereby of thinking – even without our being aware of the change” (p. 4). Any comments about this, fellow bloggers? Do we think differently because of PPt?

I agree that the templates, clip art, and formatting can be limiting, but there are other options. The software offers flexibility for the writer to be as creative as he/she wants to be. Kjeldsen never really addresses this option; instead, focusing on the problem of fixed formats that create students who are mindless notetakers, passively copying the text from the slides without processing the information. It is important for the speaker to think about the audience and make the presentation effective and engaging. Kjeldsen’s argument that “we need Media Rhetoracy to be conscious communicators” (p. 2) is true of any speaking context, not just PowerPoint presentations. However, he is correct that people misuse the software and do not choose the creative path. His example is Peter Norvig’s parody of “The Gettysburg Address.”         http://norvig.com/Gettysburg/sld001.htm

Regarding our project for class about culture and language, I’m not sure where this article fits except to say that it’s important to be aware of how information is presented effectively.

I e-mailed Dr. Guzzetti with some questions about her research on zines:

I read your study in RRQ regarding the three zinesters, and I was wondering if you are still reseaching the writing of adolescent girls?  I am interested in studying adolescent writing and I like the way you combined social justice issues with literacy research.  It seems to me that blogs and MySpace have taken the place of print-based media, but I would like to know what you think.  I am also curious about your suggestion that writing groups be single-gender.  Have you done any research about this specific topic?

Here is her response:

 Thank you for your interest in my work. Yes, I am still studying adolescent girls. That was just one of about 8 publications that I have had that looked at young women’s interactions with new literacies. I published a conversational interview with those 3 girls in Reading Online, IRA’s electronic journal; an article in the NRC Yearbook about their punk rock fandom; an article in RTE about their online journaling; an article in E-Learning about their use of web sites and cyberspace; a book chapter in a forthcoming book by Sanford and Hammel about adolescent girls” critiques of school and bridging the gap between school and home literacy practices; an article in the NRC yearbook about their zining and the zining of one of the girl’s brother, etc.

I think that blogs and MySpace are creeping into schools in the girls’ writing assignments (teachers complain to me about it). My RTE article explores this a bit.

I have not researched single gender wriiting groups per se, but I did research single gender lab groups in high school science classes and published that in the Journal of Research in Sciene Teaching. I believe that Luce Kapler did research single gender writing groups; if you get my IRA book, Reading Writing and Talking Gender in Literacy Learning, you will find a review of studies about gender and writing and see that others have done that resulting in girls being able to have their wriing read without fear of critcisim or ridicule.

Thanks for your questions! You are on the path to becoming a scholar with your thoughtful questions.

Best Regards,

Barbara Guzzetti .

The first three chapters of Anderson’s and Kanuka’s (2003) e-Research present information that is very familiar to me. They define quality research as being “focused on solutions to an important problem” (p. 3), systematic, and transparent. This seems like common sense to me. Two interesting topics that are raised involve the necessary skills for e-research, and the ethical, moral, and legal checks that are critical when doing e-research. Research is research, but one must learn certain skills when searching the Net. Without these skills, such as knowing Boolean logic, it is easy to waste time looking for information. I have taken many staff development classes in technology, but none of them taught search skills. I have picked those up on my own. Educators should know these skills and should teach them to their students. The issue of ethics is also important for e-research. With increased access to the Net, students have found it easy to plagiarize and cheat. Many schools are trying to find ways to prevent unethical, immoral, and illegal activities on the Net. Some have even suggested censorship or limiting access. I don’t think that this is the answer. It is difficult to force someone to be ethical or moral. Parents and teachers need to teach young people to have the values that promote these attributes. Anderson and Kanuka state, “…it is up to us, as competent e-researchers and principled human beings, to define and practice ethical behavior…personal integrity…self-regulation…openness…honesty…” (p. 56).

Welcome to Rebecca’s Blog.