Throughout this course we have interacted with several spaces for reading and writing: our course wiki, the community weblog and the discussion boards. We have also engaged with several spaces outside of the course through peer projects that make use of websites, videos and Web 2.0 technologies. For me, this course has really been about how reading and writing changes within each of these digital spaces. <\/p>\n
Bolter (2001) states that \u201cthe reflexive character of each technology permits writers to find themselves in the texts they create and therefore to know themselves in new ways\u201d (p. 189). The discussion forums were an essential reflection tool for our course. In the Digital Literacy and Multi-literacies forum, Kathleen Cavanagh reflected on writing in online forums and provided a list of best practices on creating postings that grab the attention of the digital reader (Do Web Browser Affect Literacy, Nov. 21, 2009). In the same thread Erin Gillespie pointed out the importance of generating community for knowledge creation. She also mentioned how \u2018the personal touch\u2019, \u2018shared insights\u2019 and \u2018co-construction of knowledge\u2019 are what makes discussion forums motivating and engaging (Nov. 24, 2009). Drew Murphy followed up by stating that \u201cposting[s] could become a very intense learning experience when people\u2019s ideas are squeezed into a small, community space\u201d (Nov. 24, 2009, para. 2). <\/p>\n
Within the short 13-week span of our course, I believe we have built a learning community through simultaneously making use of multiple digital reading and writing spaces. Though work-related challenges limited my participation at times, this environment for me, extended my understanding of the course concepts as my peers provided unique points-of-view. Through individual postings, we collectively pulled together ideas and in turn each person could come away with a new understanding of themselves.<\/p>\n
Online, our thoughts can be hyperlinked and thus be flexible, interactive and quickly disseminated. This made me think about how the spaces within our course shift our writings from being informal (discussion threads or weblog comments) to being formal (assignments posted to the weblog, wiki, etc.). However regardless of what is posted, in these content spaces we continually move between being consumers and being producers. Just look at the Community weblog to see exactly how much content, we as a group have generated in such a short amount of time. Then look at all the links we have generated!<\/p>\n
In terms of readings, I particularly enjoyed Bolter\u2019s chapter \u201cThe Breakout of the Visual\u201d as well as Dobson and Willinsky\u2019s article \u201cDigital Literacy\u201d. With the proliferation of images in multimodal realms there is a need for students today to be multi-literate. In the Multimodality and the Breakout of the Visual forum, Dilip Verma stated that he sees graphic design skills as eventually becoming \u201cas valued as spelling and grammar in the 21st century\u201d (Nov. 5, 2009). In another thread entitled \u201cVisual\/Textual?\u201d Kelly Kerrigan reflected on how visual representation has become prominent in society today and that MET courses reflect this transformation by encouraging students to explore different modes of representation. ETEC540 supports this claim as we have had the opportunity to present our work in shared digital spaces, leaving room for us to make use of hypermedia and hyperlinks. It was interesting to peruse the projects where people took a more visual approach:<\/p>\n
Final Project \u2013 Graphic Novels, Improving Literacy <\/a> – A Case For Teaching Visual Literacy<\/a> – Bev Knutson-Shaw<\/p>\n Pen and Paper Project<\/a> – Ed Stuerle & Bruce Spencer<\/p>\n Navigating the Hypermedia Sea<\/a> – Marjorie del Mundo<\/p>\n
\nCatherine Gagnon<\/p>\n