MUDs and MOOs?

There’s a saying that “change is the only constant”.  I couldn’t help but think that the readings in this module were too outdated and therefore, the arguments not so profound.  Bolter’s Chapter 4 of Writing Space was the first I’ve heard of MUDs and MOOs however.

Yet I still found myself asking, what’s the big deal?

Perhaps in the future, changes in communication technologies will just happen faster.  “Older technologies remediate newer ones out of both enthusiasm and apprehension” (Bolter 29).

I am not a teacher, nor a parent so I cannot claim to be right in my views or impressions.  I have a friend whose husband is a farmer from Ecuador who doesn’t speak English and they refuse to expose their kids to the Internet.

I certainly think there are tremendous benefits to “breaking into the visual” and for our kids to learn how to navigate the digital space.  But by thinking so, this made me think about how our understanding of hypertext, multi-modality, and digital literacy can sound ethnocentric, elitist or classist.  Will access to wifi and tablets in elementary classrooms become a basic requirement (if it isn’t already)?  Will learning to write code replace learning to write prose?

I admire the education professionals taking this class who are tasked with keeping ahead of this fast-paced world exacerbated by technology. Things like the changing nature of work (The New London Group 66), user friendliness or UX design of web pages or apps are already second nature to the millennial generation that make up the largest component of the workforce.  Furthermore, unlike my generation where analog coincided with digital, hypermedia is all that the current generation, Gen Z has ever grown up with thus far.  I remember gawking at my niece when she requested a digital camera for her 5th birthday, then a Tablet for her 7th.

Bolter’s foresight is almost scary. He states that “all remediations will be for the same goal: greater authenticity and immediacy…streaming technologies will threaten and displace text on web pages (36-38).  A 2014 study conducted by Hunter Qualitative Research (note, this study was sponsored by Defy Media, a YouTube content producer, so there may be commercial bias here), examined what makes millennials click through online video content.  It found viewers were driven by however many “likes” the video had.  And 58% of these were videos posted by “someone they respect.”

In this way, I agree with Bolter and Kress that we are witnessing a decline in textual modes of representation due to a rise of visual modes.  But there is one oversight made by Bolter here: “The computer can hold so much information that there’s little need to be selective: the reader need only look at one tiny portion at one time (48).”

As a student in our Canadian high school system, I recall long nights of studying while feeling overwhelmed at the amount of information I had to take in.  I get the impression that students now can be overwhelmed with their inability to filter information out.  How is this criterion developed?  I would argue that there is a greater need to be selective now, with implications to larger issues like intellectual property, data privacy & security, and dependence on search analytics technologies.

 

References:

Bolter, Jay D. Writing Space: Computers, Hypertext and the Remediation of Print.  Routledge, 2001.

The New London Group.  (1996) “A Pedagogy of Multi-literacies: Designing Social Futures.”  Harvard Educational Review 66(1), pp. 60-92.

Spangler, Todd.  “Millennials Find Youtube Content More Entertaining, Relatable Than TV: Study.”  Variety, 2015, https://variety.com/2015/digital/news/millennials-find-youtube-content-more-entertaining-relatable-than-tv-study-1201445092/.  Accessed 16 July 2018.

« »

Spam prevention powered by Akismet