The Changing Spaces of Reading and Writing

Commentary #3: Web 2.0 Collaborative Learning

In “Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning?”, Bryan Alexander (2006) examines how social software has become an important part of Web 2.0 enabling people to connect with other people all over the world. Alexander (2006) compares social software applications to “static or database-driven web pages” (p.32) whereby users can modify social software sites such as wikis, but can only read information on static web pages (p.32). Web 2.0 builds on the microcontent that users have been creating for years and enables them to develop “web content often collaboratively and often open to the world” (p.34). Alexander (2006) emphasizes the importance of Web 2.0 users being information architects who create microcontent in an open environment (p.34).

Alexander (2006) then describes and compares the various types of Web 2.0 tools that exist. Folksonomy is a type of metadata that users assign to data to tag it so that it can be easily identified, retrieved, and shared with others (p.34).

Social bookmarking is a “service for storing, describing, and sharing bookmarks” (Alexander, 2006, p.34) that plays an important role from a teaching and learning perspective because social bookmarking allows for “collaborative information discovery” (p.36). Social bookmarking is also beneficial because it provides a location to post links and facilitates networking with peers who share common interests which can lead to collaborative learning with others. It also offers new perspectives on one’s research: “as clusters and tags reveal patterns” (p.36). In addition, for groups who are collaborating on a project, each member can upload their own bookmarks to a central location without being co-located and an instructor can easily track their students’ “progress in their research” (p.36).

The wiki is the best Web 2.0 tool for facilitating social interactions and collaborations (p.36). In addition, some Web 2.0 tools exist to enable users to create websites using user-friendly graphical user interfaces (p.38). These tools are similar to wikis in that they offer social interactions like wikis, but differ in that they are more user-friendly than wikis and identify the authors (p.38). From a teaching and learning perspective, wikis and these websites that exist for creating websites easily promote collaborative work environments where many people can work together on group assignments (p.38).

Blogging is an important tool for digital writing and there are various search services that exist to “let users search for content within blogs” (p.38). From a teaching and learning perspective, creating blog entries and the ability to search for blog entries enables students and teachers to track a search throughout a semester (p.40).

Blogdex and other similar sites combine news and social software to enable people who share a common interest in news stories to connect with each other. These sites contain powerful search engines that “enhance the pedagogy of current events” (p.40) enabling classes to explore the various perspectives contained in these sites (p.40).

Although in closing Alexander (2006) is hopeful and excited about the prospect of Web 2.0 tools continuing to evolve and offer easy to use social collaborative environments in which to teach and learn, he raises concerns about IT support being an issue and copyright violations posing a problem as well in the future (p.42).

Dalsgaard (2006) concurs with Alexander (2006) that Web 2.0 tools offer innovative ways for teaching and learning: “social software tools can support a social constructivist approach to e-learning by providing students with personal tools and engaging them in social networks” (p.2). However, Dalsgaard (2006) recommends that social software tools be designed specifically to support learning considering the fact that social software such as wikis, weblogs and social bookmarking were not developed with teaching and learning in mind (p.9).

Uribe, Klein, and Sullivan (2003) examined the effects of learners first learning a four-step problem solving process on their own through an eLearning course. Then, they examined the same learners working in computer-mediated pairs or alone to apply the four-step problem solving process to a problem-based learning exercise. The learners who worked in pairs using a computer-mediated collaborative environment: a chat room in a virtual classroom hosted through a learning management system did better than the students who worked on the same problem alone. As a result, “the study indicates that computer mediated collaborative learning is a more effective strategy when teaching problem-solving skills than is individual learning” (p.17).

When it comes to computer supportive collaborative learning, Lou, Abrami, and d’Apollonia (2001) affirm that learners learn better when they collaborate in groups of 3 to 5 people either asynchronously or synchronously as opposed to learning on their own “by comparing alternative interpretations and solutions, correcting each other’s misconceptions, forming a more holistic picture of the problem if the task is complex, or simply pooling resources” (p.479).

Clark and Mayer (2008) also state that synchronous and asynchronous social software help facilitate group collaborations for learners in e-Learning courses: “chats, breakout rooms in virtual classrooms, wikis, blogs, and discussion boards offer a variety of channels for online collaboration” (p.259). Similarly, Bennet and Bennet (2006) state that a learning management system (LMS) facilitates learning by providing social software applications within the LMS for collaboration and sharing of knowledge amongst learners (p.4).


Regardless of whether Web 2.0 asynchronous and synchronous social software applications are located within a learning management system or on the Internet, they offer wonderful tools for facilitating collaborative learning without learners needing to be co-located. In addition, learning in small groups with social software has proven to be a better method for learning than learning on one’s own due to the rich collaborative environments that these applications provide to their learners.


Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning? EDUCAUSE Review, 41, (2), 32-44.

Bennet A. & Bennet D. (2008). e-Learning as energetic learning. The journal of information and knowledge management systems, 38, (2), 1-12.

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Pfeiffer San Francisco.

Dalsgaard, C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, (2), 1-11.

Lou, Y., Abrami, P.C., & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis.  Review of Educational Research, 71 (3), 449-521.

Uribe, D., Klein, J.D., & Sullivan, H. (2003). The effect of computer-mediated collaborative learning on solving ill-defined problems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (1), 5-19

November 19, 2009   2 Comments

Rip.Mix.Feed using PhotoPeach

I chose to document my hiking trip to Torres del Paine, Chile for this assignment in PhotoPeach: My husband Mark and I travelled there in December 2004 and completed a 65 Km hike that was a really amazing journey! I chose PhotoPeach because I had used it before in my last MET course and liked how it allowed me to add captions, select music to go along with the photos, and I liked how the photos sort of dance on the screen. I also liked the fact that I could tailor the speed of the slide show to ensure that it wasn’t too slow and would be over before the music finished.

I chose the song “Gold in them Hills” to accompany the photos because the lyrics speak of the importance of appreciating all things in our lives even when life is getting us down and being hopeful too. There were days during the hike when it was a tough slog, but I kept on going and felt very inspired by the beauty of the scenery. Also, on the last day of the hike, we got very close to the “Torres”, the steep granitic towers which made the hike even more worthwhile. They really were the “gold in them hills”.

November 16, 2009   3 Comments

Commentary 2: Hypertext

In Chapter 3: Hypertext and the Remediation of Print in the book Writing Space: Computers, Hypertext, and the Remediation of Print, Jay Bolter examines hypertext. In the introduction to the chapter, he states how common hypertext has become and that it provides beneficial links to other information (Bolter, 2001, p.27). He compares hypertext to a footnote in a book and says that it is the electronic equivalent of a footnote, except that hypertext can point to a page that has additional hypertext links that point to additional pages that are not necessarily less important (Bolter, 2001, p.27). He states that the role of hypertext is to provide a transparent structure to a website, provide footnote-like information, and define relationships (Bolter, 2001, p.27). He also describes the role of writers who use hypertext: “The principle task of authors of hypertextual fiction on the Web or in stand-alone form is to use links to define relationships among textual elements, and these links constitute the rhetoric of the hypertext” (Bolter, 2001, p.28-29).

The author has subdivided the chapter into the following sections:

·        Word Processing and Topical Writing

·        Hypertext

·        Writing as Construction

·        Global Hypertext

·        Hypertext as Remediation

·        The Old and New Hypertext

In Word Processing and Topical Writing, Bolter (2001) describes word-processing with a computer as being a dynamic and flexible way to work because documents can easily be edited (p.29). He states that when word processing, writers think and write about topics “whose meaning transcends their constituent words” (Bolter, 2001, p.29). Also through word processing, you can set up complex hierarchies of many topics in a tree-like structure which is a manageable way to work because word processing enables users to move, delete and add information with ease, unlike a typewriter, where more than one hierarchy is difficult to manage (Bolter, 2001, p.32).

In Hypertext, Bolter (2001) describes the process of writing on a computer called prewriting in which students create a “network of elements” (p.33) that can be easily edited, moved around, and removed (p.33). Prior to writing with a computer, the writing process was linear (Bolter, 2001, p.33). Bolter (2001) describes the electronic connections that hypertext affords its readers compared to having to use an index or page numbers in printed books (p.35). He also describes electronic writing as being topographic whereby writers organize their text into units of information that are linked to a “textual structure spatially as well as verbally” (Bolter, 2001, p.36).

In Writing as Construction, Bolter (2001) describes writing with a computer as being both inclusive because it is “open to multiple systems of representation” (p.36) and constructive because “an electronic writer can build new elements from traditional ones” (p.37).

In Global Hypertext, Bolter (2001) defines hypertext as “the dynamic interconnection of a set of symbolic elements” (p.38). He states that it’s the melding of both computer programming and writing that creates hypertext whereby writers write within data structures (Bolter, 2001, p.38).

In Hypertext as Remediation, Bolter (2001) states that hypertext would not exist without digital technology and that it is the “remediation of print” (p.42) because it is an improvement to printed text, which is linear and static (p.42). He states that hypertext is more representative of how people think because people think by making associations, not in a linear manner (p.42). As a result, the use of hypertext allows us to “write as we think” (Bolter, p.42).

In the Old and the New Hypertext, Bolter (2001) describes hypertext as a type of writing that has made a break from the past with printed writing (p.44).  It is characterized by “interactivity and the unification of text and graphics for achieving an authentic experience for its reader” (Bolter, 2001, p.45). Bolter (2001) describes the dependency that hypertext has on print: “print forms the tradition on which electronic writing depends, and electronic writing is that which goes beyond print” (p.46). This dependency is reminiscent of “the age of Secondary Orality” (Ong, 1982, p.3) meaning that electronic technology such as hypertext “depends on writing and print for its existence” (Ong, 1982, p.3).

Throughout the chapter, Bolter (2001) describes hypertext as being a positive invention due to the fact that word processing and the creation of hypertext links have made the processes of writing and reading easier. However, DeStefano and LeFevre (2005) state that hypertext links impair reading performance due to the fact that it makes it more demanding for people to make decisions and process graphics while reading (p.1636).

Bolter (2001) also provides a positive account on the linking capability of hypertext links: being able to link to additional information. Horton (2006) concurs that people are accustomed today to being able to quickly read through online text by using hypertext links to navigate through an online document and link to relevant information inside or outside an online document (p. 534-535). Horton (2006) recommends the use of hypertext links when designing eLearning courses because hypertext links make it easier for learners to access and read about topics related to the course content (p.305). Horton (2006) suggests that hypertext links be used to cross-reference reference information, background theoretical information, exceptions to rules, procedures, definitions, and prerequisite information (p. 305-306).

However, Clark and Mayer (2008) recommend that hypertext links be used sparingly when designing an eLearning course because if they are used too much, they can have a negative impact on the learner’s ability to learn (p.308). They recommend that hypertext links not be used for core course information and that they be used for information that is peripheral to the course as many learners will skip the linked information (Clark and Mayer, 2008, p.308). In addition, Driscoll (2000) also cautions against the use of hypertext links in instruction because they can distract the learner by removing them from where they are currently learning and sending them off in different directions (p.161-162).


The invention of hypertext has revolutionised the way in which people write and read electronic documents and learn.  Bolter (2001) describes the many qualities that hypertext has brought to us including: ease of writing, ease of linking to additional information, ease of navigating, and ease of reading. In addition, hypertext links can be a wonderful resource when designing an eLearning course. However, they need to be used with caution: only when necessary and not for essential core course content as they can distract the learner.



Bolter, J. (2001).  Writing spaces: computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print.  Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum.

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Pfeiffer San Francisco.

DeStefano, D. & LeFevre, J. (2007). Cognitive Load in hypertext Reading: A review. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23, 1616-1641.

Driscoll, M.P. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Horton, W  (2006) E-Learning by Design, John Willey & Sons, Inc.

Ong, Walter (1982). Orality and literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen.

November 11, 2009   1 Comment

Invention of the Telephone

My second commentary is located in this wiki too: Course:ETEC540/2009WT1/Assignments/ResearchProject/InventionTelephone


The telephone is an instrument used to transmit and receive sounds, most commonly the human voice. The word telephone comes from the Greek words tele meaning far and phone meaning voice. The telephone works by converting sound waves into electrical signals and by converting electrical signals into sound waves. The history of the telephone is controversial because although many inventors were involved in performing pioneering experiments in voice transmission over a wire, only Alexander Graham Bell obtained a patent for the telephone in March 1876. (

Alexander Graham Bell who was born in Scotland worked as a professor of vocal physiology at Boston University in Boston, Massachusetts. As a professor, he trained teachers in how to teach the deaf mutes how to speak and he performed research with speech and electricity. The first bi-directional transmission of speech was made by Bell to his assistant on March 10, 1876, which was followed by the first long distance phone call which was made by Bell to his assistant on August 10, 1876. Then, Bell created a primitive telephone and a patent was obtained for it on January 30, 1877. This telephone transmitted weak sounds and one needed to place one’s ear close to the earphone to be able to hear. Bell went on to produce commercial telephones, made many improvements to them, and laid the ground work for the development of the telephone industry(

The telephone was a very important invention of the nineteenth century which helped improve communications between people at a distance. The first telephone exchange that linked many people who had telephones together so that they could communicate by telephone was implemented in Hartford, Connecticut in 1877 and the first telephone exchange that linked two cities was implemented in 1883. This exchange connected the cities of New York and Boston. (


The telephone provided a big change to existing methods of conversation at the time of its invention because both parties involved in a conversation no longer needed to be in each other’s presence to communicate. Reciprocity, which is the back and forth communication between individuals having a conversation would be eliminated in general when machines were involved according to Franklin (1999, p.42) due to the distance between the individuals involved in the conversation. However, through the use of the telephone, reciprocity is preserved because the telephone allows for “genuine reciprocity” (Franklin, 1999, p.140) whereby the basic makeup of a conversation: people talking to each other and listening to each other and responding to each other is possible.

 Broadcasting Medium

Early in the twentieth century, the telephone was used in an innovative way as a real-time two-way broadcasting medium for broadcasting sporting events: “A reporter on a sports field could describe an important match and the phone brought back to him the cheering and booing of those who listened to the phone on this giant party line, connected just for the occasion” (Franklin, 1999, p.106). At this time, many thousands of people could partake in this type of sports broadcast. During this same period in France, the same telephone technology was used to broadcast operas (Franklin, 1999, p.107). Broadcasting over the phone today is a form of one-way communication whereby users listen to recorded messages, (for example: voice mail messages) but are unable to interact with these messages (Franklin, 1999, p.107).

Telephone Operators

Telephone Operators played an important role in the history of the telephone by providing the human connection between telephone electronics and the community: “the operator’s role was that of an operating and trouble-shooting engineer as well as that of a facilitator” (Franklin, 1990, p.107). As technological advances were made in the telephone industry, the need for the human point of contact of the telephone operator was significantly reduced as the industry became increasingly automated, making the role of the telephone operator increasingly redundant. Modern telephone technologies such as the ability to host a conference call and retrieve voice mail have enabled telephone users to be independent and not need to depend on a telephone operator for help executing these functions. Franklin (1990, p.110) states that technical designers were inconsiderate concerning operators’ needs because as their jobs became increasing automated, they were left with “fragmented and increasingly meaningless work.”


Ong (1982, p.3) describes the invention of electronic equipment including the telephone as the beginning of an age called Secondary Orality, “which depends on writing and print for its existence”. Secondary Orality combines the characteristics of both literate and oral societies whereby telephone technologies encourage relaxed, informal, immediate conversations and foster a sense of a close-knit community (Ong, 1982, p.133-134). Ong (1982, p.134) also states that telephone technologies are promoting literacy through the production of printed books because they “are essential for the manufacture and operation of equipment and for its use as well”.


From a teaching perspective, Bates and Poole (2003) describe the telephone as a two-way synchronous communication technology that provided equal opportunities for all students to participate in learning. The telephone is “good for clarification, diagnosis of learning difficulties, student feedback, discussion, and argument” (Bates and Poole, 2003, p.54). The telephone necessitates that students attend class at the same time, which fosters a “sense of community” (Bates and Poole, 2003, p.54). The use of the telephone was applied to education in the 1980s at many universities in the United States. These universities offered remote classroom teaching whereby a teacher at one campus taught in real-time to other campuses in other parts of the state. The motivation behind this initiative was to offer the same educational opportunities to all students in the state regardless of where they were located (Bates and Poole, 2003, p. 123). Although the use of the telephone in teaching allows for two-way synchronous communication among the professor and the students, “the remote classroom model generally is based heavily on the transmission of information, with limited opportunities for interaction and discussion unless the total number of students at all sites combined is relatively small” (Bates and Poole, 2003, p.125-126).


The invention of the telephone provided an important device for facilitating human communication. No longer did people need to be co-located beside each other to be able to converse. Through the use of the telephone, people could have equally meaningful conversations at a distance, all the while preserving reciprocity. The telephone early on was also be used as a broadcasting medium like the radio, but also allowed for the audience to respond to the commentator, which made it a two-way broadcasting medium. Today, the telephone is used as a one-way broadcasting medium for transmitting recorded messages. Telephone operators played an important role in directing telephone calls and performing troubleshooting activities as well. However, their work became increasingly redundant as the telephone became increasingly automated. Literacy was promoted through the use of the telephone due to the fact that people need to read and write in order to manufacture and operate telephone technologies. Although the telephone has been used to facilitate teaching, it is not the best medium for teaching due to the fact that discussions and interactions can be difficult to manage when classes contain a large number of students.


Bates, A.W. & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education, Foundations for Success. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Driscoll, M.P. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Franklin, Ursula. (1990). The Real World of Technology. Toronto: Ananci Press Inc.

Ong, Walter (1982). Orality and literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York: Vintage Books.

November 1, 2009   No Comments

Some Psychodynamics of Orality

In Chapter 3: Some Psychodynamics of Orality in the book Orality and Literacy, Walter Ong examines primary oral cultures: People who have no system of writing. For oral cultures, words are only represented as sounds. Ong says that the problem with sound is that it is evanescent: It can’t be stopped and preserved. When it is stopped, there is nothing only silence. (Ong, p.32) He explores how oral cultures can recall words if they are unable to record them through writing considering the fact that literate cultures procure their information from written information: “The organized knowledge that literates today study so that they know it, that is, can recall it, has, with very few if any exceptions, been assembled and made available to them in writing.” (Ong, p.33) He suggests that it is through the use of mnemonics and formulas that oral cultures can recall information. Mnemonics and formulas provide a basis for thinking for oral cultures due to their rhythmic sounds that are easy to retain and recall. (Ong, p.34-35) Ong also credits additional characteristics with helping oral cultures think, express themselves, and memorize information. These characteristic of thought and expression are as follows:

· Additive rather than subordinative: Oral cultures use less structure than written cultures and are not as concerned with the rules of grammar as much as literate cultures. They express themselves by appending their thoughts together in a pragmatic manner. (Ong, p.37)

· Aggregative rather than analytic: Oral cultures use formulaic oral expressions to make expressions more meaningful and memorable. (Ong, p.38)

· Redundant or copious: Oral cultures repeat information so that it becomes ingrained in memory. (Ong, p.39)

· Conservative or traditionalist: Oral cultures repeat information over and over again to ingrain the information and avoid adding any extra information as it would be too much of a burden to remember. (Ong, p.41)

· Close to the human lifeworld: Oral cultures remember information that is familiar to their surroundings and their own life experiences. (Ong, p.42)

· Agonistically toned: Oral cultures remember dramatic events that have a tone that expresses drama and agony. (Ong, p.43)

· Empathetic and participatory rather than objectively distanced: Oral cultures prefer being close to their audience where the audience and the speaker each have influence over each other. (Ong, p.45)

· Homeostatic: Oral cultures retain information that pertains to their current situation, not dwelling on the past. (Ong, p.46)

· Situational rather than abstract: Oral cultures learn about ideas and concepts that actually exist. (Ong, p.49)

Ong believes that oral cultures are not able to process complex topics such as geometry, categorization, logical reasoning and definitions for example because he believes that cultures need to be literate in order to engage in these types of thought processes that are generated through reading and writing text. (Ong, p.55) In addition, Ong suggests that oral and literate cultures process information differently which is referred to as the Great Divide Theory. However, Chandler (1994) states that “those in non-literate societies do not necessarily think in fundamentally different ways from those in literate societies, as is commonly assumed. Differences of behaviour and modes of expression clearly exist, but psychological differences are often exaggerated.” (Chandler, 1994)

Regardless of whether a culture is oral or literate, both cultures are able to learn and the ways in which they learn are similar based on identical learning theories. Ong’s characteristics of thought and expression pertain to the cognitivism and constructivism learning theories. 

Mnemonics, which Ong described as helping oral cultures recall information have also been described by Driscoll (2002) as helping the encoding of information by making new material more memorable to learn. (Driscoll, p. 92) When oral cultures repeat information in order to learn it, this is referred to as rehearsal which is an effective means for learning information that is non-complex in nature. (Driscoll, p.91) Both mnemonics and rehearsal are categorised as being part of the cognitivism learning theory. (Driscoll, 2000)

Ong describes thought and expression as additive for oral cultures whereby thoughts are informally appended together as opposed to subordinative whereby phrases are more formally joined together for literate cultures. Clark and Mayer (2008) state that a less formal conversational style from either spoken or written text is an effective way to engage people in deeper cognitive processing because people will try harder to understand what the person is saying.  (Clark & Mayer p.163)

When oral cultures remember thoughts and expression that are close to the human lifeworld, homeostatic, and situational, these all touch on the constructivism learning theory whereby people learn by constructing new knowledge based on the knowledge that they have already acquired. (Driscoll, p. 375)

When Ong states that thoughts and expression are empathetic and participatory for oral cultures, research has proven that people learn more from a collaborative learning environment than from learning alone. (Clark & Mayer p.278) In addition, Postman (2002) states that orality places emphasis on collaborative learning. (Postman, p.17)

Although people have depended more on print for their learning during the past four centuries, people can still learn by using the means that oral cultures did in the past. Ong’s characteristics of thought and expression conform to the cognitivism and constructivism learning theories that describe some of the ways that both oral and literate cultures learn.


Chandler, D. (1994). Biases of the ear and eye: “Great Divide” Theories, Phonocentrism, Graphocentrism & Logocentrism [Online]. Retrieved 28 September, 2009 from:

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Pfeiffer San Francisco.

Driscoll, M.P. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Ong, Walter (1982). Orality and literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York: Vintage Books.

September 30, 2009   1 Comment

Module 1 Reflections

I have enjoyed creating blog entries for the first module and reading my classmates’ entries. It’s surprising how many unique images people chose to represent the curriculum of Module 1. In the past, I have enjoyed creating bog entries for ETEC courses and think that they offer a great opportunity for me organize my thoughts, watch my progression through the course material, and learn from others. I also imagine how I could use the same means when I design elearning courses.

September 18, 2009   No Comments

What is text?

Since being made aware of the fact that the word text is contained in the words texture and textile and is defined as “woven words” in Module 1, I’m reminded of the song Tapestry by Carol King, that relates to the words textile and texture. In The first stanza, she compares her life experiences to a tapestry, which is a form of textile that has a rich texture. She says that she can see and feel the experiences in her life, but she can’t hold on to the experiences. Here are the lyrics of the first stanza of this song:

“My life has been a tapestry of rich and royal hue
An everlasting vision of the ever changing view
A wondrous woven magic in bits of blue and gold
A tapestry to feel and see, impossible to hold”

Carol king wove the words of the first stanza together to form text that began a very lyrically rich song.

September 15, 2009   1 Comment

What is technology?

When I think of technology, I’m reminded of the many years I worked as a technical writer learning about and documenting many telecommunications’ technologies: Creating conceptual and procedural information to accompany complex telecommunications equipment. I’m also reminded of the fact that technology speaks to me as being something that’s supposed to make our lives easier, better, and is very important. Its importance is described by Postman: ” Technology imperiously commandeers our most important terminology. It redefines freedom, truth, intelligence, fact, wisdom, memory, history, all the words we live by. (Postman, 1992 pp.8-9)

Postman, N (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York:Vintage Books.

September 15, 2009   No Comments

Common Textures

Reference Mosaic: Creative Commons Textures, originally uploaded by Jasen Robillard.

Hi, I’m Maureen Coyne.

I chose this photo because it reminded me of what I had just learned in the introductory module about the fact that the word text shares the same prefix as texture and textile. I had never made those connections before. This photo displays many different textures, which reminds me of the word text, which is a group of words that are woven together.

I work as a learning consultant with the Canadian federal government in Ottawa, Canada. I’ve been working as a public service employee for the past three years. My principle work duties involve designing and developing e-learning courses and programs for public service employees and project managing these projects. I’ve also been involved in editing course content, creating e-learning standards, and developing facilitator-led courses.

I have a Degree in Geology, a Diploma in Technical Writing and a MET Graduate Certificate in Technology-Based Distributed Learning. This is the 10th course that I’ve taken in the MET program.

I look forward to working with you!



September 9, 2009   No Comments