Tasks – Tech, Text & Thoughts Regarding

Task 12 – Speculative Futures

OVERTURE

Being an English teacher, I jumped at the opportunity to write a narrative. Typically, I am the one teaching the narrative elements to my students, but I never truly have the opportunity to write creatively myself. I’ve also been an avid follower of Yuval Noah Harari’s writing throughout the years, and was thrilled to use his article Reboot for the AI Revolution as the basis of inspiration for my narrative.

Set in the distant future, my narrative warns of the authoritarian type experiences AI could produce on a dystopian speculative basis. It takes Harari’s idea of the “useless class” and magnifies what that might truly look like in a neo-Marxist type future. In this speculative future, the rise of AI algorithms and automation has essentially eliminated the middle class, leaving only the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’. While one struggles to accumulate the basic necessities for survival, the others grapple with determining what living truly means: A new age proletariat vs bourgeois story, so to speak. You may notice the influence of a number of course elements thoughtfully integrated in the story.

There are also thematic reflections on the role of text, technology, and education throughout the piece – I was intentional in highlighting the shift in the fundamentals of education of the time, ironically contrasting the return/ importance to naturalistic and ‘primitive’ types of knowledge despite being set in a hyper technologized world (ie- foraging, hunting, farming). I attempted to also make clear that use of ‘high technology’ was dominated by the ‘high class’, and that the divide between the two was immense and immeasurable. At the center of the narrative is the idea that the human capacity to create algorithms in AI technology needs to continue to develop on an ethical level, but more importantly, to be utilized for the right reasons and the right people. I also went to some lengths to direct some attention to the damage done to the environment due to the lack of action on climate change; an area where I truly think we need to turn our attention to especially when it come to enabling technology to solve problems. Enjoy…

_________________________________________________________________________

PART 1

Centered within a ramshackled skyline, three tall towers rose above all else.

Their peaks brushed the ceiling of the sky while the base of the buildings dispersed into multiple purple and silver tubers solidly planted deep within the cold, hard ground. Most of The People referred to them as Roots. The Roots ascended to great heights, at least ten stories Ava had heard people say. They reminded her of the large mangrove trees she’d learned about while watching a video using her friend’s stolen internet connection; trees that were long extinct now. “Imagine a coast line” the video began. It was difficult for her to conjure up accurate images. Ava had never seen a coast line. “The mangroves straddled two worlds… not only do they adapt, they create a sanctuary for an extraordinary range of creatures”. Ava couldn’t help feel like the haven these Roots purported to protect, felt more like a prison, an immensely twisted metallic jail cell.

Click The Mangrove to see the video Ava Carlton watched on her stolen internet

At a certain point, the Roots culminated in a gnarled wire tangle where a thick plateau of steel rested and served as the base for the countless stories above. Each tower seemed to disappear into the clouds and each were made of the highest quality SmartSpecs, TechnoSteel, and IntelliFibres. All three towers were fenced off with cable fencing, every corded wire measuring at least three feet in diameter and supercharged with 7000 volts of electricity. The sound of buzzing electricity was constant. A series of enormous metal spheres sat at regular intervals as Ava’s eyes climbed the towers, serving as the only common structure that kept them all connected.

A sketch taken from Ava Carlton’s journal

Nobody had ever seen the Paragons come in or out of any of the towers, but everyone knew they were in there.

Ava Carlton had been walking home from Dr. Howard’s schoolhouse, close to the towers, when she had been jolted by the sight of a small pack of coyotes digging through heaps of garbage. With the surrounding region becoming so environmentally bare, the animals that once lived wild and free were forced into the city’s encampments to find food, and in some cases, people. Avian species were one of the organisms left completely extinct, and sardonically, small drones roved through the skies in their place, watching. The forests that once stood at the edge of the city had been cut down long ago and large metallic cylinders emerged from the ground, branching off high into the sky. Some said they were the same tubules that made up The Roots, connected in an underground maze meant to harvest various energy sources for the Paragon’s usage. Some conspired to dig, but nobody had ever found anything.

The ocean ice had long melted and sea levels had increasingly rise year after year. Summer’s were extraordinarily hot, and those who didn’t die of hunger, thirst, disease, rabid animals of succumbed to the hands of nomadic bandit tribes, died of heat exhaustion or dehydration. Salination levels fell to an all time low, and if the chemical breakdown of plastic within ocean water didn’t kill the aquatic life, it was the fact that sea creatures simply couldn’t survive in water that diluted. There was talk every year that the ‘big storm’ was coming; a rain so intense and so long that it would flood the earth like in Biblical times.

The pandemics had wiped out roughly 60% of The People, and those who did survive found that the food supply would quickly run out. The Paragons, on the other hand, were largely unaffected having been injected far in advance with innovative biotechnology they nicknamed BloodBots; nano-robots designed to fight off disease, discomfort, and all sorts of pain. How can you be human, if you can’t feel any pain, Ava thought to herself.

The People did not have the means to afford this technology shortly after The Divide. They were relegated to “the old ways”, using the land in some capacity to survive. Planting crops in arid land, hunting and foraging in barren forests in hopes of some semblance of a decent harvest. An ironic full-circle approach to a world once filled with promise of technological opportunity for the underprivileged. Those who chose not to adhere to the old ways resorted to thievery, destructive violence, and generally reckless nihilism. Danger lurked in every corner. Ava picked up her pace and weaved her way through a series of narrow alleys until she bolted safely through the front door or a dilapidated apartment building, clicking closed the four padlocks her father had installed.

Devin sat nervously at the tiny wooden table in the kitchen. He had been reading the Daily Bulletin on his tablet, trying to make out the words through the fractured and splinted screen. Most books had been used in the early days to fuel fires. The textbooks went first. Devin put down his tablet and walked painfully over to embrace Ava, limping heavily with every step. He hadn’t eaten properly for months and had been nursing leg wounds sustained from hunting. He insisted that most of the food he was able to scavenge went to Ava, and there were no conversations to have about it. His hunting and foraging skills were a far-cry from his civil engineering job years ago. He had been pushed out of the industry by the rise of A.I powered algorithms that could produce higher quality projects at a faster rate. This was a common occurrence to many when The Divide happened.

Their neighbour, Don, was a military man but was discharged after the ComBats took over as the main vehicle for wartime combat. Marianne lived across the hall within the commune. Once a doctor, she lost her job after CyberMed AI Systems replaced many of the medical professionals at hospitals, walk-ins, and private clinics. It was common to find ruined apartment buildings housing groups of useless people working together just to survive. Once Ava arrived home, both Don and Marianne made their way over to Devin’s unit, where Ava taught them what she had learned throughout the day. They’d been working on this for a year now, and there wasn’t much time left to complete it.

She knew that doing so put her in grave danger.

___________________________________________________________________________

PART 2

Dr. Howard sighed heavily as his legs walked him into his domicile. He stepped out of his exo-skeleton frame and dropped heavily into his anti-gravitational chair. All Paragons wore their OssoXO suits throughout the day as a way of fully embodying their fundamental belief that ‘technology was made to serve us’, a belief that Dr. Howard despised. I’m certainly capable of using my legs myself, he thought.

Because basic human movement had been crafted for their technological counterparts, the muscles of all Paragon’s had atrophied over the years. Despite the loss of muscular vigor, Paragons were in peak physical and intellectual health, primarily due to the infusion of nanotechnology within their bodies. BloodBots collaborated with blood cells, helping to fight off novel diseases and block pain receptors from reacting in the brain. CereSynap chips were implanted in their brains, allowing new information to be uploaded to their memory as if one were uploading a photo to a device. Some Paragon’s injected DNChain technology into their bodies, allowing them to modify their DNA in various ways, while others replaced limbs with robotic prosthetics. All Paragons believed that this was the next step in the evolutionary ladder: human and technological integration.

A faint buzzing sound had begun emanating nearby. A drone-like object, no bigger than a human hand, had appeared quickly and flooded Dr. Howard’s face, torso, and legs with yellow beams of light. EARL, an acronym for Electronic Algorithm and Response Lexicon, was a standard issue companion drone meant to monitor and serve each Paragon user.

“Good evening Doctor.” The drone spoke as if it were human. AI voice had come a long way since its inception. “Our research algorithms suggest there are multiple disease variants on the horizon. It is advised that you upgrade your bio-protection system with the following nano-bots”

The drone produced a tiny vial filled with a clear liquid and a small syringe. What fun it is to be human when you don’t feel any pain, thought Dr. Howard sarcastically as he jabbed himself with a needle and pressed hard into his tough skin.

The drone spoke again – “Secondarily, there are indications that the global deluge is on pace to arrive at our current location no later than Friday next. All systems in the Towers are operational and our data suggests we should have no problem withstanding the projected damage.” There was a slight pause “My algorithms are indicating a higher than normal sense of stress, Doctor. Your blood pressure is high, and your brain waves indicate that you are on high alert. Is there something the matter?”

An algorithmic visual rendering of the aforementioned scene

“Funny, EARL. I didn’t notice,” Dr. Howard said dismissively. But he did notice. Over the past year, Dr. Howard had set up a small inconspicuous school house in what most Paragon’s called the Filth, the surrounding area around the three spires. It was causing him deep anxiety. None of the other Paragons knew of Dr. Howard’s endeavours, for it went against their beliefs, and any Paragon who violated their hallowed customs paid a significantly lethal price.

“You cannot lie to me, Doctor. My biotech algorithms are flawless,” chided the machine.

“EARL, do you know why they called it The Divide?” Dr. Howard turned to face the floating drone.

“My global database suggests that in the year…” EARL began sputtering out information.

“I figured. You cannot know. You can only regurgitate the data that’s been provided for you. You claim that your algorithms are flawless. How do you then account for the population of people living down there!” Dr. Howard pointed out the SmartSpec glass window, which automatically untinted itself to provide a clearer picture for the viewer.

“No algorithm is flawless,” muttered Dr. Howard under his breath.

Most people weren’t aware why everyone referred to that time in history as The Divide. It was assumed that it simply stipulated an alarming divide between two major sects of society: the Paragons and the People. Although true, this was not what The Divide was meant to relay. In the late second millennium, Dr. Howard had developed a new algorithmic technology designed to assess the future potential of any individual on earth. It factored in a multitude of characteristics such as DNA genetics, Intelligence Quotient, previous and potential life experience, and geographic location among hundreds of other facets. The technology showed promise in identifying individuals who could be the next Einstein, Mozart, or Shakespeare. It could be used to ‘harvest’ these individuals and allow them to make meaningful and lasting change for the entirety of planet earth; to put the right people in the right positions. This is not how the story went.

Greed took over. The technology fell into the wrong governmental hands, and rather than use the algorithm to determine the people who could meaningfully impact the world, the Paragons were formed: an identified sect of society inherently more valuable than the other half, according to the AI. The Paragons formed their own society, with their own beliefs, customs and rules, harnessing the AI technology to perennially solidify their seat in the social hierarchy. Resources, food, energy, protection from the elements, animals, and disaster all went to the Paragons. The Divide did not only create two societal factions, it quite literally algorithmically divided the worthy and the unworthy, the living and the living dead.

In a personal act of penance for his grave misdealings, Dr. Howard had taken it upon himself to secretly rework the algorithm and use it to identify those in the lesser population who had the potential to comprehend Paragon knowledge and the skills necessary to construct and distribute technology to The People. He had been privately and secretly tutoring a small group of children, and young adults, providing them with the knowledges they would need to introduce various life-saving technologies to the people below. Ava was one of his brightest. He hoped that after a year’s work, she would be able to produce something relevant before next Friday. Before the deluge had destroyed every last one of the People.

A knock came at the door of Dr. Howard’s unit. A tall, black haired woman slowly paced into his room.

“Dr. Yael, to what do I owe this pleasure!” Dr. Howard said with delight.

Yael was the chief medical engineer within the Towers. She had the important job of programming, engineering, and managing the manufacturing of all medically related AI technology within the Towers. With AI taking over the medical industry, the only vocations left were the one’s who created the machines. There was a grim expression on her face. She held a flat metallic remote in her hand. Dr. Howard knew what was about to happen.

“Doctor, I’m sorry. There has been speculation about your whereabouts recently. It’s given rise to an internal investigation. We know you’ve been associating with… them”. Dr. Yael moved closer to Dr. Howard, as if to ensure he couldn’t flee.

“Is that so” murmured Dr. Howard.

“I’m sorry Doctor, but I know you are aware of the protocols. We must ensure what we’ve established here lives on here forever. We can’t afford to change our…”

“Algorithms” Dr. Howard finished her sentence.

Dr. Yael bowed her head and took on a somber tone, “We owe a lot to you Doctor. I’m sorry.”

With that, she thrust the remote into Dr. Howard’s exposed neck. A quick flash. An electric buzz. A jolt of a body. Dr. Howard remained conscious, but wore a puzzled face. His eyes went from their vivid emerald green, to a silken black. His facial muscles relaxed. You could watch his memories being drained from his brain, as if a computer hard drive had been wiped of it’s storage files.

—————–

Anytime new members were inherited into the Paragons, typically through procreation, a new EARL drone is manufactured for their purposes. On rare occasions, Dr. Howard’s old algorithm was used on The People to determine if there were any worthy of Paragon life. In these cases, previously used EARL are given new assignments.

“EARL Series 3 Model xx91C – You’ve been assigned to a new Paragon,” a Paragon engineer directed to the drone, “Please report to domicile 932. You’ve been allocated to Dr. Carlton”

Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). A methodological playground: Fictional worlds and thought experiments. In Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Retrieved March 18th, 2021, from Project MUSE database.

Hariri, Y. N. (2017). Reboot for the AI revolution. Nature International Weekly Journal of Science, 550(7676), 324-327 Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/news/polopoly_fs/1.22826!/menu/main/topColumns/topLeftColumn/pdf/550324a.pdf

Price, L. (2019). Books won’t die. The Paris Review. Retireved from https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2019/09/17/books-wont-die/

Task 11 – Algorithms & Predictive Text

I think it first serves us well to understand that algorithms are rooted in nature and within collective organisms, not within computers. It is unwise to understand algorithms as explicitly applied to computers, robots, or codes.

In its most basic form, an algorithm is simply a methodical set of steps that can be utilized to make calculations, realize a determination and/or choose decisions. More often than not, the perception is that algorithms are contextualized as codes embedded within the language or computers, but similar to McRaney’s assertion that prejudices are inherent within the way human beings make decisions, so too are algorithms intrinsic in the way we survive. At a neuroscientific level, what are emotions other than biochemical algorithms vital for the survival of all mammals? What is the process of photosynthesis other than mother nature’s algorithm for plant growth? Artificial Intelligence (A.I) simply mimics the most basic human configuration for decision making; all we have done is project our humanistic operations and behaviours into an artificial medium (Vallor, 2018).

With that said, I do believe we are currently sitting at a significant crossroads where we may be implementing technologies, specifically with respect to A.I, without recognizing the potential unintended consequences. Cathay O’Neil speaks about this concept at length and focuses her line of thought on judiciary matters, educational administration, and fundamental hiring practices. It seems only recently have we begun to recognize the implicit biases A.I technologies seemed to have inherited from their creators. Examples are endless: Legal analysts are rapidly being replaced by A.I, meaning that successful prosecutions or defences can rely almost wholly on precedents reconfigured as algorithms, and even predict future criminals based on certain human factors (see: Machine Bias Against African Americans). The job market increasingly relies on A.I tech to filter CV’s. Most human eyes will never fall upon a prospective employee’s resume again, effectively placing people’s livelihoods at the mercy of machines (see: Amazons AI hiring tool biased against women). Ultimately, these algorithms are caricatures of our own human imprints.

So when I think about the predictive text feature on my phone, and the created sentences generated by the prompts, I can’t help but feel that there is a piece of me in there somewhere. I have a Google Pixel phone, and used the predictive text feature in the messaging app. I find that the feature is excellent when I need to correct a spelling error, or suggest the next potential word while I am in the process of texting, but I did not find it helpful at all for this exercise. When given the freedom to produce its own sentences, it failed to construct anything coherent. For the record, I do not think any of these predictive text iterations sound remotely like me.

My instincts tell me that the predictive text feature analyzes the words and phrases used the most within my texting app and generates the next most likely option. I found small successes when formulating two to three word phrases, but outside of that, there was much left to imagination. Take this example here: “Everytime I think about our future together with any of these documents, I have been in the future of fashion technology and services” . ‘Future’ appears twice in this sentence, and I can at least understand it’s relativity to ‘technology’ and ‘services’ for example. Alternatively, I haven’t the slightest clue where it got ‘fashion’ from.

This second example makes a little more grammatical sense, and is slightly more eloquent in its delivery, but the fact remains that I simply do not text like this. There is a high degree of formality in this rendering, as if I was speaking to a workplace superior. I found it interesting that both examples incorporated elements of documents and attachments. Perhaps a reflection that I’m working too much… Moreover, these predictive texts are fairly good at sensing when there truly is a link available (often when a link is sent, there will be a mini-previous provided), but of course, there was no link sent.

Perhaps the most interesting example to me was the following predictive text that was typed but not sent. I wanted to provide an alternative perspective and make available a sort of ‘behind the scenes’ image to illustrate what predictive aspects were offered to me:

The most striking feature in this image is the predictive emoji being offered: the smiley with a cowboy hat. Not only do I question the emoji’s particular relevance within this predictive body of text, but I can confidently say, without a shadow of a doubt in my mind, that I have never once used the cowboy hat emoji in any context whatsoever. I am dumbfounded by what algorithm decided to offer me the cowboy hat emoji as an option here.

I struggled to discern these types of predictive patterns in academic articles, novels, or anything of the like (perhaps I’m just being naive in that sense), however, I did seem to recognize similarly structured sentences in social media infrastructure, and online ads. For example:

Perusing Facebook permitted me to acknowledge some potential predictive text, within a specifically targeted predictive advertisement. I don’t spend that much time on Facebook, truthfully, but I know that this being a sponsored ad, I was obviously a target of a number of specific algorithms designed to place this ad in front of me. The text in the ad strikes me also as predictive: “Classic men’s clothing Built For the Long Haul and the modern man.” Something about it just doesn’t seem human – Why are there capitals in the middle of the sentence? Why does the modern man portion seem like it’s just been tacked on at the end? Perhaps this is where my predictive text got fashion from…

Conversely, I am aware of automated journalism as a concept gaining much traction. I think it’s important to echo one of O’Neil’s sentiments about the rise of A.I powered machines; that we shouldn’t attempt to employ A.I as a means to eliminate human enterprise, but rather as a tool to empower it. In reading the aforementioned A.I generated news column, I do find it to be extremely ‘bare-bones’ in the sense that it is only relaying specific facts, rather than injecting a creative or original tone into the story. Perhaps this is a mode reserved more effectively for sports or finance news stories.

One of the ethical dilemmas we tend to find in this particular arena is simply: what is truth? We are inclined to think that journalists are held to high standards and are bound to their journalistic commitment to spreading what is true. But it’s no secret that in recent years, we’ve seen a decline in ethical journalism and the overall journalistic standards in the industry. Is this a journalist’s fault? Can we blame A.I for this? It’s a difficult area, but they both seem to have a hand in the rise of fake news, and the fall of ethics within journalistic standards.

McRaney, D. (n.d.). Machine Bias (rebroadcast). In You Are Not so Smart. Retrieved from https://soundcloud.com/youarenotsosmart/140-machine-bias-rebroadcast

O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy (First edition). New York: Crown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQHs8SA1qpk&list=PLUp6-eX_3Y4iHYSm8GV0LgmN0-SldT4U8&t=1032s

O’Neil, C. (2017, July 16). How can we stop algorithms telling lies? The Observer. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/16/how-can-we-stop-algorithms-telling-lies

Santa Clara University. (2018). Lessons from the AI Mirror Shannon Vallor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40UbpSoYN4k&t=1043s

Task 10 – Attention Economy & Interface Design

It took me roughly 7 minutes to complete the User Inyerface game, and I think about 4 – 5 of those minutes were spent trying to fulfill the supposed password requirements. I had to conduct a quick search on the meaning of cyrillic characters, and questioned the degree of information privacy I was afforded. Initially, I thought this was just an exceptionally poorly designed website, which raised a red flag for me in terms of what information I should truly divulge. As I progressed through the game, I came to realize this was simply a cleverly designed interface meant to challenge and frustrate internet users by highlighting a multitude of dark patterns.

Ultimately, the User Inyerface game by Bagaar is essentially and completely counterintuitive to the ways in which we’ve been (un)consciously trained to understand and utilize the fundamental design conventions within the Internet; basic patterns of recognition like directive buttons that draw your eyes, hyperlinked words and links, checkbox and form-filling functions and webpage symbols/ images have all been reworked in a way that do not reflect the current accordances of internet functionality. It almost felt like I was sort of learning a new internet language while playing this game. Perhaps more significantly, I was forced to recognize the depth of online marketing strategies and considerations developers need to contemplate when building web spaces and internet interfaces. I certainly won’t be taking the auto-delete function for granted anymore when I need to fill out an online form. With that said, however, the User Inyerface was not attempting to sell anything or truly strive to elicit dark patterns rather than venture to illustrate the degree to which dark patterns can appear within internet interfaces, challenge users to recognize them, and enquire about the importance they have within marketing strategies that influence social and cultural behaviours (Tufekci, 2017).

The most obvious deception is the giant green button on the first page; it draws your attention away from other page elements, tempting you to click it despite clearly reading “NO” as if satirically indicating it is not the right pathway. The button expands when you hover your cursor over it, implying the button actually does something. The small fine print below the button is written in a different colour font, and reads “Please click HERE to GO to the next page”- I could spend my entire post reflecting just on these 9 words.

An internet user reads these words, recognizes the misdirection, and immediately becomes confused as to where exactly to be clicking. For me, my first instinct was to click on the underlined “click” particularly because I have come to understand typical hyperlinked words as underlined or shaded in different colours as a means of making a distinction from other text in that line. Of course, that goes nowhere. The next determination I made was to click on the “next page” text because it was written in a light blue hue. Nothing. Consequently, we are left with the capitalized words “HERE” and “GO”. Both words indicate a direction, but none make it clear where the next pathway leads; turns out we need to literally click HERE. None of these design features adhere to the traditional understanding of effectively navigating the internet.

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect for me was the password creation page. Similar to the examples Brignull provides, the Inyerface UI utilizes a number of double negatives meant to confuse users (Brignull, 2011). Things like “I do not accept the Terms and Conditions” and “Your password is not unsafe” plastered in red text gives rise to concern for some users. For me, I noticed this and began continually reworking my password until I somehow met the requirements (It took me a few minutes to decipher that my password being ’not unsafe’ was actually a good thing). I absolutely despised the fact that when you click into the form-filling boxes, the text didn’t automatically disappear, and again, the button below labelled ‘cancel’ plays on the users traditional assumptions that this button is the correct button to use in proceeding to the next page.

The user’s interest form is another example of an interface designed to play on the inherent design customs embedded within the traditional understanding of internet navigation. Firstly, the blue button labelled “download image” draws the users eyes and implores them to click, but any critical thinker will recognize that we do not need to download, but rather upload an image to proceed. Of course, this is uncharacteristically buried in a hyperlinked text above. Secondarily, the instructions prompt users to select three interests from a list of questionable selections. The twist, of course, is that all the selections are checked off, inclusive of both options providing users the possibility of selecting or deselecting all choices. I couldn’t help but remember a quotation from Brignull here:

Those who ignore both the checkboxes will unknowingly give some marketing permissions, while those who zealously tick both checkboxes will also end up giving some marketing permissions (Brignull, 2011).

The last step of the game is the CAPTCHA stage where the interface asks users to select all images pertaining to an incredibly ambiguous word in order to discern whether we are human. I was almost offended at this point – You want to confirm I’M human when you can’t even design a simple form properly? You can’t adhere to the basic conventions of internet navigation and you are challenging my humanity?

Regardless, “choose all the images of a bow” could be interpreted as selecting a bow tie, a bow and arrow, or perhaps the action of bowing. “Choose all the images of checks” could manifest itself in check marks, a monetary cheque, or the act of putting your opponent in check while playing chess. All of which turn out to be correct, and in fact, all of which are needed to be selected to succeed in this final task.

Consequently, this game is designed to infuriate the user on purpose. It’s meant to highlight the fundamental design aspects needed to be considered when navigating the internet on the most basic level. It challenges users to creatively problem solve when these patterns are not adhered to, and provokes participants to begin recognizing dark patterns in online marketing strategies. For me, it made me begin questioning: How did I learn to use the internet effectively? Who taught me how to navigate? To what degree are internet design aspects responsible for facilitating my unconscious understanding of online navigation?

Brignull, H. (2011). Dark Patterns: Deception vs. Honesty in UI Design. Interaction Design, Usability, 338.

Harris, T. (2017). How a handful of tech companies control billions of minds every day. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/tristan_harris_the_manipulative_tricks_tech_companies_use_to_capture_your_attention?language=en

Tufekci, Z. (2017). We’re building a dystopia just to make people click on ads. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/zeynep_tufekci_we_re_building_a_dystopia_just_to_make_people_click_on_ads?language=en

Task 9 – Network Analysis: The Curated Golden Record

It took a while to understand how to effectively utilize the Palladio network, and harness the filtering tools to reveal exactly what I was looking for, but once that was complete, it was clear how much information was available for network analysis. Evoking some of the language from graph theory, it seems as if this exercise was a simple multigraph utilizing a variety of nodes and links (as opposed to its multiplex counterpart). It’s also clear that this was an undirected and unweighted graph, and thus we can only rely on the sum total of links a node has in order to determine the degree of connectivity.

Some statistics and analysis:

There were 27 tracks on the Golden Record, and 21 participants in this curation exercise.

I shared an average of 4.65 common songs with my peers.
Marwa and I chose 70% (highest rate of commonality) of the same songs, while Sarah and I shared only 20% (lowest rate of commonality). Between a community of the three of us, for instance it seems we could only agree on a singular song: “Percussion (Senegal)”.

The song with the highest degree of connectivity was “Percussion (Senegal)” at 76% of participants.
- There are fourteen songs categorized as “Folk” or “Cultural” which makes up roughly 52% of the total music on the Golden Record. Every participant picked at least one Folk style song.
  - Of them, Percussion Senegal was chosen an average of 10.64 times (76%), Flowing Stream 9.24 times (66%), Crane’s Nest 7.98 times (57%), Tchakrulo, Types of Flowers, and Panpipes & Drums all 5.88 times (42%), Wedding Song 5.32 times (38%), Azerbaijan Bagpipes, Night Chant, Morning Star, and Izlel de Delyo all 4.62 times (33%), Solomon Panpipes and Pygmy Girl’s Initiation both 3.22 times (23%), and finally Men’s House Song 2.66 times (19%).
The song with the ‘lowest degree of connectivity’ was “String Quartet No. 3 in B Flat” at 9% of participants.
- There are seven Baroque/ Classical style tracks on the Golden Record’ which makes up 26% of the total music on the Golden Record. Nineteen participants (91%) picked at least one Classical style song.
  - Of them, Symphony No. 5 was selected at an average of 3.29 times (47%), Fairie Round 2.94 times (42%), Well Tempered Clavier 2.52 times (36%), Magic Flute 1.82 times (26%), both the Brandenberg and Gavotte at 1.47 times (21% respectively), and String Quartet at 0.7 times (10%).
Of the Top 10 songs with the highest degrees of connectivity, 50% represent music from the continent of Asia, 30% from North America, 10% from Europe, and 10% from Africa.
- Of these 10 most commonly selected songs, I chose 80% of them in my curated Golden Record. Does this simply reflect my superb music taste? (Definitely not) Is it more of a reflection about my ability to predict what others will choose? Perhaps it indicates something about the criteria I chose to select these songs?

That final statistic prompted me to think further: What criteria did my peers use when selecting their chosen songs into their own Curated Golden Record? I felt it pertinent to review my own criteria. To me, this is the most glaring piece of information the data does not divulge. Despite the commonalities and differences between my peers, there is no indication of why our choices are similar or dissimilar. This is a significant factor to consider: Although we may have selected, or not selected the same song, we may have made this decision based on completely different reasons and criteria. Thus, in spite of the fact that we may have been grouped into certain communities based on our song selection, we may have been grouped there for completely the wrong reasons.

For example, let’s take the rock n’ roll classic Johnny B. Goode by Chuck Berry. I chose to prescribe to a criteria that eliminated the societal significance certain songs had, presumably because these factors would be arbitrary to any extraterrestrial intelligent life that happened upon my Curated Golden Record. Instead, I focused on a thoughtful variety of songs that demonstrated unique and distinct genres, and plethora of instruments, and a certain diversity in location on planet earth. Alternatively, someone may have included Johnny B. Goode because of the immense cultural and societal value it holds; Chuck Berry was one of the first African-American rock n’ rollers, a revolutionary in his own right, and often considered the father of this particular musical genre. Although we may have came to the same selection, our pathways to reach that destination were exponentially different.

Moreover, because there was a 10 song limit to our Golden Record selections, there are underlying implications regarding excluded songs. I suppose the ‘null’ choice can be reflected in the data (neither effectively or positively), but only in comparison to other participants who selected. By not including a song, essentially the data has disallowed you from associating with a given ‘community’. With only 10 songs to pick, I simply had to be ruthless in which tracks I chose to include. I suppose there was also criteria for my non-inclusive music list as well: tracks that sounded somewhat similar or utilized the same instruments, songs of the same genre, songs from the same global area etc. I didn’t pick Panpipes and Drums or Night Chant, for example, but I would have if I had 11 songs to choose!

The community membership of the top ten most commonly selected songs.

The act of including or omitting in itself is inherently a political act. When I peruse Twitter in between bouts of work, I often notice staunch supporters of the idea that “teachers should never reveal their political positions or ‘indoctrinate’ youth with various political ideologies”. Truthfully, I believe the act of teaching itself is often political – For example, we teach from a mandated curriculum created by a governing body; it’s different from other curricula around the globe. Should we not then develop a universal curricula? It’s often best to tackle these types of issues head one, discuss them, formulate opinions on them, rather than hide from adversity and sweep unwanted conversations under the rug!

Code.org. (2017, June 13). The Internet: How Search Works . Retrieved from https://youtu.be/LVV_93mBfSU

Systems Innovation. (2015, April 18). Graph Theory Overview . Retrieved from https://youtu.be/82zlRaRUsaY

Systems Innovation. (2015, April 19). Network Connections . Retrieved from https://youtu.be/2iViaEAytxw

Task 8 – What Can We Afford to Lose: The Golden Record

What Can We Afford to Lose?

When considering what musical selections to include on my 10-track abridged version of the Golden Record, I was encouraged to use Abby Smith Rumsey’s characterization of digitizing material as a sort of determining compass: Of these 27 tracks, which one’s can we afford to lose? Which ones have long-term value? How can we distinguish these tracks from ‘noise’ and ‘signal’?

Consequently, this begs the question of what considerations need to be made with respect to developing a criteria that can assist in determining what exactly it is we can afford to lose in this endeavour. Smith Rumsey’s article Why Digitize delves briefly into some of the iterations of criteria that already exist in regard to digitizing certain materials. There is one element that stands out to me as most relevant for my purposes:

Creation of a “virtual collection” through the flexible integration and synthesis of a variety of formats, or of related materials scattered among many locations (Smith, 1999).

With this in mind, I set out to apply this criteria and curate 10 tracks that incorporated a variety of forms (manifested through instruments, vocals, genres, or a combination of multiple elements) and representative of a variety of locations. It was difficult, but I also thought it pertinent to eliminate any specific cultural, ethnic, or social significance to any music track partly due to the fact that if any intelligent life were to stumble upon these sounds, they would presumably be unaware of those underlying factors.

CLASSICAL MUSIC

LOCATION

TITLE

ARTIST

PERFORMED BY

Germany / United Kingdom

Symphony No. 5 in C Minor, Opus 67: I. Allegro Con Brio

1808

Ludwig van Beethoven

Philharmonia Orchestra, conducted by Otto Klemperer

India

Bhairavi: Jaat Kahan Ho

12th Century

Hindustani Classical Music (shastriya sangeet)

Kesarbai Kerkar (vocals) with harmonium, Tanpura and tabla accompaniment

There are a total of seven Classical/ Baroque style tracks on the Golden Record. I felt it was important to have some representation in my ten. Symphony No. 5 by Beethoven is perhaps one of the most familiar pieces of music of all time. My partner said it was “planet earth’s theme song” and that was a convincing enough argument for me. But truly, Symphony No. 5 appeals to the “synthesis of a variety of forms” criteria as it incorporates a diversity of instruments like woodwinds, brass, percussion, and strings. Similarly, Jaat Kahan Ho utilizes a harmonium and tabla, but more importantly, it contrasts ‘European’ classical music with “Asiatic” Hindustani Classical Music. Ultimately, our extraterrestrial brothers and sisters will presumably be able to enrich their understanding to study these images in new contexts (Smith, 1999).

“MODERN” BAND MUSIC

*LOCATION*	*TITLE & DATE*	*ARTIST*	*PERFORMED BY*
United States	Johnny B. Goode 1958	Chuck Berry	Chuck Berry (vocals, guitar) with Lafayette Leak (piano), Willie Dixon (bass), and Fred Below (drums)
United States	Melancholy Blues 1927	Marty Bloom and Walter Melrose	Louis Armstrong and His Hot Seven
Mexico	El Cascabel (The Little Bell) 1957	Lorenzo Barcelata	Antonio Maciel and Los Aguilillas with Mariachi México de Pepe Villa/Rafael Carrión (conductor)

North America is well represented in the “Modern” (I use this term incredibly loosely) Band Style Music category. I grouped these tracks together primarily because they embodied the most recent forms of music on the Golden Record, and thus I considered them modern (?). Consequently, these songs all require fewer individuals with fewer instruments when compared to the likes of a symphony for instance, which is why I distinguished this category with ‘band’. I felt that these tracks best represented three distinct genres of music: jazz, rock, and mariachi, all of which employ a variety of novel instruments.

FOLK MUSIC

*LOCATION*	*TITLE & DATE*	*ARTIST*	*PERFORMED BY*
Georgia	Chakrulo 8th Century	Georgian Polyphonic Choral	Georgian State Merited Ensemble of Folk Song and Dance/Anzor Kavsadze (director) featuring Ilia Zakaidze (first tenor) and Rostom Saginashvili (second tenor)
Bulgaria	Izlel ye Delyo Haydutin 17th Century	Bulgarian Folk Song	Valya Balkanska (vocal), Lazar Kanevski, and Stephan Zahmanov (kaba gaidi – Bagpipes)
Australia	Barnumbirr (Morning Star) and Moikoi Song 1962 (recorded)	Australian Indigenous Song	Tom Djawa (clapsticks), Mudpo (digeridoo), and Waliparu (vocals)
Benin	Cengunmé 1963 (recorded)	Traditional African Music	Mahi musicians of Benin

Perhaps the most difficult category to curate was the Folk Music category – There are 14 tracks on the Golden Record considered as folk music, so it was only natural that this category be the largest. I felt it necessary for Australian Indigenous music to be included on here, principally due to the unique sounds it creates and it’s nativity to Australia. These same reasons can be applied to Cengunmé as it is an almost completely percussive song and Izlel ye Delyo Haydutin because of its distinctive mix of vocals and bagpipes. Finally, there is just something beautiful about the polyphonic choral arrangement of Chakrulo that just hits different.

INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC

LOCATION

TITLE & DATE

ARTIST

PERFORMED BY

Japan

Sokaku-Reibo (Depicting The Cranes In Their Nest)

18th Century

Arranged by Kinko Kurosawa

Goro Yamaguchi (shakuhachi – bamboo flute)

The final category is one I characterized as “Instrumental”, particularly because there is a singular instrument and artist. I thought this song was reflective of a different Asiatic influence, and while most, if not all, of the above songs incorporated a number of different musical elements, this song was singular in its approach (bamboo flute).

Smith Rumsey, A. (1999, February). Why Digitize? Retrieved June 15, 2019, from Council on Library and Information Resources: https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub80-smith/pub80-2/

Smith, Rumsey, A. (2017) Digital Memory: What Can We Afford to Lose

Task 7 – Can You Hear What’s In My Bag?

Here’s what I came up with for this weeks Task Redesign: ETEC540 – Can You Hear What’s In My Bag?

For me, this task was most definitely the most difficult encountered in ETEC540 thus far. It wasn’t because of the challenge of bending the mode of expression and meaning (although that did pose an interesting provocation), rather it was wrapping my head around the theories informing this practice. It seems to me that the underlying conditions of multiliteracies are heavily (but not entirely) dependent upon postmodern style thinking; I am still not entirely convinced of its principles.

My qualms do not reside in the expression of multimodalities (ie – visual, auditory, linguistic, tactile, gestural etc). I think these are fairly straightforward and reasonable. I believe we are able to form a more holistic interpretation as we incorporate more and more modes of meaning. It’s more about the interpretation that the meanings created by these modalities are unbound to any type of hierarchy of reasonable comprehension. Cope and Kalantzis assert:

“What the meaning maker creates is a new design, an expression of their voice which draws upon the unique mix of meaning-making resources, the codes and conventions they happen to have found in their contexts and cultures. The moment of design is a moment of transformation, of remaking the world by representing the world afresh” (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009).

This is all well and good, and I do believe that, in my case for example, I have drawn upon a multitude of meaning-making resources, the conventions available to me, and have transformed an old representation into new. But to draw upon the postmodern position, and say that my interpretation is one of infinite and therefore is relevant only on a subjective level is somewhat foolish. Despite the fact there may be infinite means of interpretation, there remains only a finite number of reasonable interpretations. I cannot conjure up any idea of what societies would look like if there were no objective truths embedded within human meaning making.

Cope and Kalantzis use an example of a student who is unable to ‘get’ the culture of writing due to that student’s cultural, ethnic, or social makeup and that multiliteracies can be used as a type of entry point to literacy. This is absolutely the case, however, educators often understand this as a strategy of elimination: that the student’s subjectivity trumps the requirement to improve his/her writing or meet some type of success criteria, catering to that student’s other multi-modal strengths, without addressing or building upon the weakness. This is absolutely not to say that the students’ subjective output isn’t significant or important, however, culture dictates the social hierarchies of competency, and educators are doing their students a disservice by skirting the requirements and not equipping them with the basic tools necessary to climb and participate in it.

Consequently, how does multimodalities and it’s postmodern foundation stand up to pedagogical assessment/ self-assessment practices? I struggle with comprehending how it’s possible to assess a subjectively constructed artifact with an objective criteria. How is it possible to agree upon a common success criteria if every participant’s success criteria is interpreted differently? There must be a reasonable and commonly agreed upon interpretation. For example, the following image is an success criteria from my partner who teachers elementary French:

Let’s take Comprehension (Does the story make sense) – If we are going to embrace a pedagogy that dictates subjective meaning is ‘representing the world afresh’ and that everyone’s unique perspective and interpretation is ‘acceptable’ then on what grounds does an educator have to assess the comprehension level of a student? This submitted representation needs only to be fully comprehended by them and them only. Overall, I take no issue with the surface level notion of multi-modalities and the importance of incorporating it into pedagogy, however, I am wary to fully embrace its underlying theories particularly due to its proximity to postmodernism.

With respect to my own project:

Evoking the New London Group, I have appealed to hybridity and intertextuality in my mode-bending project – I’ve drawn attention to the complex ways in which meaning can be constituted through the relationship between various modes and have articulated novel practices and conventions between modes of meaning (New London Group, 1996). In this case, I’ve chained together a number of modalities to permit the viewer/reader to construct an interpretative meaning. For example, the linguistic representations of a water bottle differs exponentially once we depart from the Latin based languages, yet the sound reflective of the water bottle stays stagnant and unchanged across cultures. The visual interplay between the photo of the physical water bottle and an emoji-style reconstruction also challenges the reader/viewer to negotiate some semblance of a reasonable interpretation between the two.

As an English teacher, these ideas prompt me to think about the futures of narrative reading and writing: Will the classic characterization of the ‘book’ one day transform into a multi-modal form whereby the relating of a story will utilize auditory, linguistic, spatial, or gestural features? To what extent does this already exist in, let’s say, virtual reality?

Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2009). Multiliteracies: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4:3, 164-195, DOI:10.1080/15544800903076044

The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review 66(1), 60-92.

Task 6 – An Emoji Story

In keeping with some semblance of linearity and order, I did start with the book’s title. Perhaps this was me instinctively appealing to the traditional written word, influencing the reader to follow a strict order of comprehension while needing to interpret word-signifiers (Kress, 2005). This notion may not specifically apply when ‘reading’ emojis. Even still, it became increasingly difficult to keep the sequencing of ideas consistent and transcribe every word itself, or the meaning of a word collection for that matter, into strict hieroglyphic-type structures. Before attempting the emoji-transcription, I wrote out what I would have said had I been asked to write a description of the book and its plot. From there, I worked on assigning suitable emojis to express what would have been said through text.

Kress asserts that “words are (relatively) empty entities – in a semiotic account they are signifiers to be filled with meaning rather than signs full of meaning, and the task of the reader is to fill these relatively vacant entities with her or his meaning” (Kress, 2005). Although I do not wholly agree with this characterization of words, I do think it is exceptionally true for this exercise and our interpretation and communication through the use of emoji images. This task was certainly harder than I expected it to be, and I did choose this work based on how much I presumed I would be able to express through image rather than text.

As I reflected on this process, it became clear to me that I was attempting to translate each word into an image; this strategy quickly proved near impossible. I then began to assign an emoji symbol to a number of conceptual ideas, hoping to illustrate a collection of words and meanings with a singular image. This proved to be slightly easier but still exceptionally challenging considering there are a finite amount of emoji symbols; I quickly learned that not every word/ concept has an emoji. I began asking: “Why isn’t there an emoji for this??” (A cannon or for example, or an equal sign!). Moreover, it was difficult to organize ideas and sentences without punctuation; I opted to indicate a new sentence by writing on a new line, evoking the image of the scroll once again. There are a number of emojis that include words in them, such as “soon”, “back”, and “top” and I may have got away with a technicality on using those – Although they are considered emoji symbols, they do have specific text incorporated in them. I also appealed to a number of mathematical symbols and used them as one would use an article in the English language. Funny how there is no equal sign emoji…

It’s clear that at first glance, the meaning of my ‘emoji book review’ is ambiguous and leaves much up to the reader to interpret. I couldn’t help but relate this to the Egyptian hieroglyphs example that Hayles describes as negotiating meaning among several images. No one emoji indicated one word, rather it was a collection of them that produced some approximation of meaning:

Meaning was thus negotiated among several images, and it was their interrelation that determined significance rather than a one-to-one correlation between mark and sound (Hayles, 2003).

Similarly, my emoji synopsis reflects the same type of idea. It is a grouping of images that creates one meaning, word, or sound and those meanings are negotiated by the reader. Different readers may come up with different interpretations, but with that said, I believe the central essence and meaning of the ‘text’ will be maintained. Kress describes a similar idea when dealing with the computer screen as the contemporary canvas: “it is dominated by the logic of image—means that the practices of reading becoming dominant are the practices derived from the engagement with image and/or depiction in which the reader designs the meaning from materials made available on the screen” (Kress, 2005).

To view this notion practically, I look at the Google Doc in which I currently am writing these words and perceive an overwhelming number of symbolic representations, each of which have meaning and purpose in the creation of these words. The “X” means to close a specific window, the “B” is to bold letters, the “paperclip” means to link, etc. I’m sure there are some symbols that many users are simply unsure about and are uncertain about their purpose. Can they assume their meaning based on the icon? Can the same be said about emojis? I think the difference here, however, is that each one of these symbols indicates a specific action in relation to word processing, whereas emojis were not designed to be used to transcribe the written word but rather to primarily express a human emotion.

Hayles, K. (2003). Deeper into the Machine: The Future of Electronic Literature. Culture Machine Vol. 5, online.

Kress (2005). Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning. Computers and Composition, Vol. 2(1), 5-22

Task 5 – The Championship Twine

You can download and play my Championship Twine here:

Championship Twine.html (This one does not have the music/ sound effects due to the file size restrictions on the blog)

In Bolter’s third chapter of Writing Space, he mentions a familiar practice: “Teachers of writing often encourage their students to sketch out topics and connect them through lines of association, an activity they have sometimes called “prewriting” (Bolter, 2001).

Funny enough, in my own creation of the Twine game’s story, I did not formulate elements that were mapped out previously; instead, I sort of generated the narrative as I went. With that said, effectively the entirety of the game itself is reflective of what can be characterized as ‘pre-writing’. In the same manner a pre-writing activity asks the author to create a type of organized progression of ideas to follow when producing the final product, so too does the twine game follow a noded design pattern that weaves together a narrative. Alternatively, the hypertext structure undoubtedly challenges the reader’s sense of traditional narrative and diminishes the conventional linearity of storytelling (Miall & Dobson, 2001). Personally, for the first time in a long time, I can clearly recognize how this type of educational tech tool could be explicitly implemented into my practice, especially when teaching language arts.

Consequently, I decided to write a ‘story’ on a topic that I am extremely passionate about. As a coach of young men, I understand that in sports and game situations there are hundreds of decisions that need to be made. I thought that would be a fun narrative adventure, however, incidentally, I recognized towards the end of the narratives creation that much of the embedded terminology would be difficult to follow for someone who doesn’t commonly follow this particular sport. I considered changing the narrative completely, however, Miall & Dobson’s words echoed:

“…attention was directed towards the machinery of the hypertext and its functions rather than to the experience offered by the story. We can see that as a result these readers largely failed to engage with the literary qualities of the text.” (Miall & Dobson, 2001).

Ultimately, it seems that players of the game are more concerned with the aspects of ‘winning’ or getting to the end than they are about the literary elements in the narrative structure.

Definitively, I felt that I wanted to go above and beyond the standard derivatives of a Twine game offered to users who consider themselves beginners. I wanted colours, sound effects, music, and potentially images. To do this, I had to learn a bit of basic coding, which at first glance, was incredibly daunting. I used the following video to understand the meaning of CSS and HTML ‘language’ and took in upon myself to learn a few fundamentals that I ended up using in my Twine game. Prior to this game’s creation, I knew the basic conceptual framework of coding but never put anything into practice. After learning and applying those skills to this game, I can’t help but this of Kamin’s words: “Even someone using text processing through the mediation of clerical help senses that something is happening to us, something more than a mere increase in the ability to edit writing conveniently and efficiently” (Kamin, 1984). Now, I understand that Twine isn’t necessarily a text processing tool, but I certainly feel like my ability to edit ‘writing’ (in the computational coding sense) has increased, and I’ve adopted a new outlook on the effectiveness, utility, and significance of that type of ‘writing’.

Bolter, J.D. (2001). Writing Space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chapter 3

Kamin, J. (1984). The think tank book. Berkeley: SYBEX.

Miall, D & Dobson, T. (2001) “Reading hypertext and the experience of literature.” Texas Digital Library.

Task 4 – Manual Script Analysis

Analysis

Much of the writing I do, both personally and professionally, is done by typing on my laptop. With that said, I do make an effort to write manually every so often (I write in my day timer, will write out the grocery list…etc). I tend to find manual writing more time consuming, susceptible to errors, and more difficult to process coherent and organized thoughts despite the perceived beauty in handwriting. My hand also became cramped after a while… Alternatively, there are certain advantages to hand-written text: I will find myself effective with shorthand point form notes, but when that style of writing is pushed to encapsulate narrative elements, the cohesiveness and clarity breaks down. Research suggests that there are mnemonic elements related to the tactility of the written word:

“Writing is a process requiring the integration of visual, proprioceptive (i.e., haptic/kinesthetic), and tactile information… There is evidence that writing movements are involved in letter memorization… that is, we write in order to remember something” (Mangen, 2015).

I think this is certainly true when it comes to the grocery list, but I also think this extends to greater notions within writing. We write narratives to remember stories. We write essays to remember ideas. We write down our thoughts to share and analyze information. Is our memory more likely to fail us when we type instead of write?

I think one of the more fascinating aspects about writing developments is the divisions between types of writing mechanisms today. For example, we can utilize mechanized forms of writing, we can type on a computer keyboard, or we can type on our touchscreen smartphones or tablets. When using those ‘primitive’ forms of writing, changing text and eliminating errors comes at an aesthetic and temporal cost. We are forced to scratch out mistakes, scribble out errors, and use symbols and arrows to indicate forgotten words. There is a physical limitation as well as alluded to earlier with the cramped hand. These aspects, coupled with the slow and measured approach to writing out articulated ideas makes this mode of writing time consuming and difficult to keep up with the flow of information in one’s mind. Moreover, one must continually practice writing to ensure it’s completely legible!

I certainly think the choice of media makes a difference here – Using a pencil, for example, affords the user less of an aesthetic cost (depending on how you view aesthetics of writing I suppose). I also chose to use a sheet of paper instead of a notebook to eliminate that fine motor challenge of attempting to fit words into the margins so close to the spine. There are certain liberties that come with typing such as the ability to delete any sentences, words, or ideas very cleanly, or insert missing words or letters with no visual evidence. Ultimately, I would lean towards typing as my preferred form of writing – It’s affordances and flexibility with respect to the aesthetic and temporal costs far outweigh the mechanized writing form.

Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2^nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Clement, Richard W. (1997). “Medieval and Renaissance book production “. Library Faculty & Staff Publications. Paper 10. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/lib_pubs/10

Mangen, A., & Anda, L., & Oxborough, G., & Brønnick, K. (2015). Handwriting versus keyboard writing: Effect on word recall. Journal of Writing Research. 7. 227-247. doi: 10.17239/jowr-2015.07.02.1.

Task 3 – The Boy and The Spoon: A Speech-To-Text Analysis

The Boy and the Spoon

Truthfully, I went to great lengths to experiment with this task. I used speech-to-text technology to record various conversations I had with colleagues at work and analyze if and how that conversation evolved. Those results were quite funny. I recorded a phone conversation with my partner to demonstrate how accurately speech-to-text would pick up speech output from other technologies. It was surprisingly more accurate than I anticipated. Ultimately, I decided to use a recording of myself narrating a story told within The Alchemist to my English class (they were thrilled I was able to involve them in this task).

I’ve taught this book a number of times and so the story about the boy and the spoon is one that I am quite familiar with and can recite from memory. It’s a story about balance and how that balance contributes to happiness in our lives. I typically close with asking my students what the oil is representative of and we have a discussion about what this story means, and how it can be applied practically. The text of my narrative is as follows:

So I want to tell you a story that appears in The Alchemist the story about happiness it's a story that's good that gets related by Santiago throw to Journey so there is a young boy who lives in a village and he wakes up and he philosophizes about life and decides that he wants to find the answer to what is happiness and how do I achieve it so we asked his that he asked his father where he can find the answer to this question his father tells him that he can ask the wise man there's a wise man that lives not too far from their Village and he would need to track in Journey to see the wise man and ask him the secret to happiness so the boy undertakes this journey outside of his town walks a long way down ashley finds this Grand Palace if he thinks that you walk up to the Palace knock on ask the wise man a question and you'll find the secret to happiness but that's not what happened in fact he walks into the palace and he sees this man surrounded by Merchants Travelers journeyman they're all talking and having a diet after a long wait the boy lee has his opportunity to ask the man of the secret to happiness and the man responds to him son before I answer your question I want you to take this spoon to give the boys spoon fills it with oil and he says I want you to walk around my palace with this spoon and not drop not one drop of oil so the boy grease and he walks around the palace he spends 4 hours walking around this beautiful palace tapestries paintings and fountains Gardens and all the things he walks through and finally he comes back to the wise man with his spoon full of oil and the wise man says well what did you see and the boy cannot respond he didn't see anything he was focussed his entire time on not spilling the oil so the man says well I can't answer your question just yet in fact I need you to continue to walk around my Palace and I want you to come back in 4 hours time and tell me all the beautiful things that you've seen in my Palace so the boy continues with the spoon walks around the palace sees the beautiful tapestries the forest the gardens The Fountains the paintings and sculptures finally comes back relates to the old wise man what he had seen and the old old wise man asked him what happened to the oil because in the process of him taking in all the beauty and experience around him he spilled all the oil and he says son that is the secret to happiness the secret to happiness is balance balancing the oil and with all of the things and experiences that surround you in life what is the oil

Analysis

When we tend to the deviations within this body of text, the most glaring issue is the absence of basic English grammatical conventions. Rarely, if at all, do we see the use of periods, commas, quotation marks, question or exclamation marks. Paragraphs are not used at all to space out and organize ideas. Capitalization is used haphazardly and there are a number of ‘misheard’ or missing words that fundamentally change the context of the story or create confusion in its plausibility. Perhaps this is the English teacher in me but the entire story is one long run-on sentence. The aforementioned absences of grammatical conventions is what I would consider ‘wrong’ with this text when we look at it from a purely textual perspective. These deviations from the customary processes of written English diminish the significance, impact, and overall meaning of the narrative when it is read. Comparatively, when we speak to one another, we do not mention or indicate the use of a comma, period, or any other grammatical symbol through word, rather it’s expressive, implied, and embedded within our spoken language conventions. This is not something that is available with speech-to-text technology, at least not accurately. To indicate a period or comma, one must say it as they speak in order for the technology to pick up on it. Imagine speaking like that to another human being…

Perhaps that is my mistake in not effectively speaking the language needed to successfully operate speech-to-text technology.

When I related this story to my class, I was animated in it’s retelling, utilized various modes of intonation, gesture and volume, and injected fierce emotion to keep my audience engaged. It does not seem that this recording captured these elements at all. I’m not entirely sure I consider this a mistake, but I certainly feel like this recording did not do my performance justice. This experiment revealed to me the relationship between grammatical conventions and spoken emotion, body language, and intonation. Speech-to-text technology, and writing itself is unable to effectively capture the elements used in spoken storytelling. Despite the symbols used to appeal to these sentiments, it doesn’t seem like our writing can ever truly re-animate the aspects of spoken word; it may be able to inform the way we read the written word. Walter Ong mentions this idea in his book Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word:

“It would seem inescapably obvious that language is an oral phenomenon. Human beings communicate in countless ways, making use of all their senses, touch, taste, smell, and especially sight, as well as hearing … Some non-oral communication is exceedingly rich —gesture, for example. Yet in a deep sense language, articulated sound, is paramount (Ong, 2002)”.

Body language accounts for an overwhelming percentage of effective human communication- these are factors that embody hand and facial gestures, voice volume and intonation, unconscious reading of facial muscles, and eye contact among various other things. Consequently, these are also aspects of communication that cannot be effectively paralleled in text-based communication. Even despite the rise of emoji usage, icons meant to convey the unspoken and emotional fundamentals of communication can’t convey these aspects to the same degree. As Ong suggests, there is something unique about human articulated sound that results in deeper meaning.

An interesting aspect of the story I’ve chosen was that it is a narrative that is written down. It is a story that can be found within The Alchemist. I decided to relate this story from memory and it’s revealing to see the differences. Had I chosen to tell the story using the written version, I feel as if my re-telling would be more measured and rhythmic; I would essentially be following a script of symbols annotating for me the ways in which the story should be related. With the recollection from memory, I felt that I was afforded a lot more freedom to narrate the story as I saw fit. I was able to repeat certain aspects, emphasize important plot points with visual or verbal gestures; ultimately the story became my own to tell.

Similarly, it was interesting to see that when the narrative body of text was compared to the recording of myself and my colleagues having a conversation about the different assessment strategies we use as humanities and science teachers, the narrative recording was exceptionally more accurate. I think it warrants a mention that my colleague has an incredibly strong English accent and I’m convinced this played a major role in the inconsistencies of the following text-recording. This was another aspect of speech-to-text technology that can could be perceived as ‘flawed’: it’s inability to pick up on accented language, or dialectic speech.

As an individual who is capable of speaking dialectic Italian, it comes as no surprise that accents and dialectics can lead to miscommunication. Many times, when I speak to other Italians, my utterances are often met with looks of confusion or laughter; it’s not seen as speaking the true or purest form of the language. Thus, I wonder if the same can be said for the following recording; my colleague is heavily accented, and this gave way for severe confusion when reading our recorded conversation.

Okay so basically give you copper sources i'm going to go out to eat on some questions on the sources cited fast one strand Moltres chase I was wondering the true then anisocytosis be by Sousa Center might as well stop by if you detox metals to write summary about you understand about similar Behavior drivers I meant turn you up spelling punctuation that's all that they remarked on I was an English teacher. So it's has nothing to do with the content where am I 3 secret right now we didn't surprise you points so i'm not response you should read through the achievements on side honestly each section using the comments the qualities that make demonstrate as instructed during standardizing you can. Why are these statements heavy guy assessment objectives identify and cut right explicit and implicit information ideas Lexington 5 evidence from the text explain, what is use language instructor to achieve effects in infants read this using relevance of a terminology cuz of views this is more about the structure can the rating men it is both content pupusas all this is what you have in a response receptive. Play relevant summary some attempts of summary limited summary hot mop English papers and the arts for that reason like is so much judgment made on your point or there is but I mean you do follow some type of criteria right it goes back to what we were talking about there with with the strands in the the compass talking about right so if if a student is able to relate to me that he understands Canta knowledge if you can apply it and like make inferences like that saying there then that would be the inquiry if you can apply it to something outside extra-textual or even something else in the text there's application and communication just overall is he able to to to express himself in writing when you have those pillars I feel like it's a lot easier to understand what you're looking for mean enjoyed English stop the stop of The Green Mile what was The Green Mile yet was when Tom Hanks it all the old Tom Hanks is in the whose wagon wheels are killer man they're so killer