TASK 1: WHAT’S IN MY BAG? – Jennifer
https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540jenniferr/2021/01/15/task-1-whats-in-your-bag/
I appreciated Jennifer’s “What’s in My Bag” task post, particularly because she chose to share something different from what I considered to be a typical daily bag, such as the purse that I used for my post: she chose to share something that she holds “sacred” and that “transports the tools” that enable her expression. I admired her willingness to share meaningful contents and her commitment to expressing herself through music on a daily basis. I also appreciated that she used music as her communication focus for this task as it introduced a whole new type of literacy that I hadn’t considered.
The contents of Jennifer’s bag seemed especially relevant to a course that introduces students to various technologies intended to facilitate expression. It even included technology for use during times when her self-expression became too much (practice pad for snare head.) Her inclusion of a journal for moments of overstimulation spoke of a practicality and an ongoing commitment to expression, even in moments of silence.
Despite this commitment to expression, Jennifer notes “…the narrative of my bag conflicts with the one that I project to the world.” Influenced by Jennifer’s musical theme for this task, I envisioned a tuning fork as this message resonated with me. It reminded me of how difficult it can be to communicate from a place of authenticity, even when we have various tools and opportunities to practice our expression.
Jennifer’s bag included technologies of various materials, made of paper, wood and electronics. In her analysis of these technologies, she noted how some signify the relationship and ongoing conversation with her music teacher. As someone who is very biased in the direction of relationships, I found it interesting that this element was not included in the technologies described in my “What’s In My Bag?” task. I might not have noticed this omission if Jennifer hadn’t remarked on her bag’s contents enabled relationship. This is clearly important to her as she notes that “you can get to know someone more deeply by how they choose to express themselves.|
When I thought about how Jennifer’s approach to this task differed from my own I recognized that her content was free from COVID – no sanitizer, no disinfectant wipes, no coupons for curbside service. “And the band played on” came to mind. I found comfort in artifacts that, at least on the surface, had remained untainted by the virus.
Jennifer said that loves “to be inspired by others.” Based on my experience, I imagine that there are others who love to be inspired by Jennifer.
TASK 3 – VOICE TO TEXT – YING
https://blogs.ubc.ca/2021etec540/2021/01/27/task-3/
Aside from the fact that Ying’s “Voice to Text” post was about dogs, I was drawn to her post because of her opening sentence: “Voice-to-text programs are unappealing to me because they’re not ‘smart.’” As someone who is consistently amazed by the capabilities of such technologies, I don’t often examine them from this perspective. Even with all of the errors that were included in my voice-to-text transcripts, I remained enamoured with the fact that we have such technology to support our communication.
Ying’s post showed that she didn’t need voice-to-text to tell her that she needs to work on initiating speech. She noted that she already knew that she needs to settle her mind, focus on enunciation and slow down when she starts speaking to someone. I presume that this knowledge was made available through inferences made during verbal communication with humans. Technology cannot necessarily provide such nuances.
Ying and I shared similar stances regarding the weightier consequences of the written word: She wrote, “an oral story is more forgiving,” and I wrote “the material permanence of the written word adds a layer of cautious care as we anticipate our work being interpreted and critiqued by others.
The concepts of time and consciousness seem to be relevant to both of our perspectives. To communicate clearly, we need to slow down and be conscious of our intentions. Writing forces us to take time to slow down and communicate clearly, just as Ying says she needs to slow down to communicate clearly. However, with writing, the extra time required to communicate also comes with heightened expectations regarding the quality of the communication. Presumably, if we take our time with spoken communication, we might have the best of both worlds.
In terms of consciousness of intention, this is where I found Ying’s post to be very thought-provoking. To communicate consciously, we need to think about what we want to say. But, as Ying asks, “are thoughts even in words?” “Do thoughts occur divorced from words?”
I have never considered any other possibility.
How can thought exist without words? What is a thought that is not communicated?
Time continues to be a factor in Ying’s questioning, as she notes that “thoughts occur rapidly, too rapidly to occur in complete sentences.” I agree. Thoughts do occur rapidly, but I can’t conceive of them as being made of anything other than words. Ying’s post made me think this through. For now, my thoughts are (ha, ha) that thoughts are only made conscious when they are slowed down enough to be seen as what they are: words. Techniques such as mindfulness help us to slow down our thoughts enough to be aware of them, and to examine them. And we examine them, question them, with words.
Bolter (2001) notes that writing makes our “verbal thoughts visible” (p. 193). As writing is communicated in words, I have assumed that it was simply transcribing the words of our verbal thoughts. This is clearly a bias of mine that I will continue to challenge after this course. Thanks, Ying!
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Hypertext and the remediation of print. In Writing space: computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Routledge.
TASK 4: MANUAL SCRIPTS – MEL D.
https://blogs.ubc.ca/meldrake/2021/02/03/task-4/
After musing about how my manual script might have contributed to a more thoughtful communication process, it was fun to witness Mel D’s approach to the potato stamping option for this week’s task. I appreciated her ingenuity on so many levels! First, she chose a process that forces deliberate thought around communication with the cutting out of letters, the thinking through of ink, the concern about whether it would be acceptable to use said “ink,” the selection of a personally meaningful message, and the effort to use technology to convey the whole experience as effectively as possible (and in true educator style, providing details on how she accomplished that!)
While this task suggests that Mel would likely go above and beyond with any assigned task, I wonder how different the process would have been if the task didn’t allow for her personality and talents to shine. I think about factory workers stamping with stamps they didn’t create, into products they didn’t make, for an outcome that they may or may not find rewarding. Daniel Pink’s research into motivation comes to mind when I compare Mel’s work to factory work or the “excessive drudgery” of the monastery transcriptions of our earliest days. In his book, “Drive” Pink reminds us that we need to have a sense of autonomy, mastery and purpose. I’m not sure that Mel wants to master the art of beet stamping, but her ability to adjust the assignment and express her creativity (autonomy) in a way that contributes to her learning (purpose) shows us what we’re capable of in our communications.
I wonder how our world would be different if we all took such care in the communication of our messaging!
TASK 5: TWINE – DEIRDRE
https://blogs.ubc.ca/ideamachinery/2021/02/12/task-5-twine/
I found solidarity in the suffering of Deirdre as she elaborated on her experience of the Twine task. “Pleasantly frustrating” is how she described the process. I’m confident that is the first time that I have seen those words juxtaposed. This is one of the reasons I chose to write about her experience here. Like me, she was frustrated by the process. Unlike me, she enjoyed that.
I agree with Deirdre’s observation about how Twine helps to “make explicit their thinking and understanding of topics” I find her continued observation to be “pleasantly frustrating” in its accuracy from my experience. She writes that Twine-like processes may be especially helpful for “students that are challenged by showing their thoughts linearly.” I find this observation to be “pleasantly frustrating” because it may be true. As someone who enjoys the wanderings of free association, I didn’t enjoy the experience of having to work so systematically to create Twine narratives. The overall result of seeing it come together was very rewarding, though. It provided that special sense of triumph that only comes from overcoming challenges through the use of new and uncomfortable ways of thinking.
Bush’s (1945) commentary about the mind’s preferences for connecting ideas describes my typical approach to thinking and problem solving. However, the fact remains that we wouldn’t have technologies like Twine to accommodate associative learning preferences like mine without linear and sequential thinking.
Deirdre’s approach to the Twine task was not premeditated. She allowed herself to “continue fully down one path before returning to the fork.” In choosing the scenario for my Twine task, I selected an area of professional competence – an area where I felt confident in my knowledge of all of possible endings. Assuming we already know the answers is not particularly conducive to learning. Through Deirdre’s reflection, I can see how my prior knowledge might have interfered with my experience more than the linearity of the narrative tool.
In a world that is becoming arguably more hypertextual, I wonder what is happening to our minds and learning preferences. As I curmudgeonly become irritated by the rapid barrage of my teenager’s Tik Tok feed, I’m reminded of the annoyance of channel surfing of days gone by. “Pick a channel!” people used to say as a family member scrolled through the channels with the remote control Now the channel itself is constantly changing, teleporting to something new within seconds. Perhaps my annoyance is actually the fear that I can’t keep up. If I trust in Bolter’s (2001) assertion that hypertext can help us to manage overwhelm, perhaps there’s an app for that.
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Hypertext and the remediation of print. In Writing space: computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Routledge.
Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101-108. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/
TASK 7 – MODE-BENDING – JASMINE
https://blogs.ubc.ca/jasmineparentetec540b/2021/02/28/task-7-mode-bending/
Jasmine’s re-imagining of the “What’s in My Bag?” caught my attention. She chose the path less travelled on a couple of levels. First, she chose to veer away from the contents of her bag and focused instead on its context of its contents: COVID. Next, she chose to embrace the additions that COVID had made to her bag, and her life. Her audio presentation surprises you as it opens with a friendly tone. It certainly wasn’t one of those cathartic letter writing exercises where the writer spews venom and then torches the evidence. The twist of expressing gratitude for something so disruptive is a tribute to the resilience of the human spirit. As COVID has left me hungry for resilience, Jasmine’s submission was a welcomed, emotionally evocative experience.
Jasmine capitalized on the power of orality with the use of repetition, cadence, and pace. Her repetition of the phrases “because of you” and “what I wouldn’t give” created the dramatic effect that conjured the mental lists of all that has been lost and sacrificed during this time. The repetition also created a “pile on” effect – one more suffering being added on top of another. While written poetry can create some of this rhythm, Jasmine’s choice to do this for an auditory task was especially effective.
My love of language and interest in therapeutic writing were also served by Jasmine’s approach to the mode-bending task. She demonstrated the ways that our world shapes language, identifying pandemic-inspired phrases such as “Zoom bombing” and “social distancing.” She balanced this with the ways that existing language such as “essential” “front-line” have inherited new meanings through the pandemic.
I appreciated Jasmine’s intentionality of letting her authentic language come through, rather than covering it up with more generic words that people might recognize. It was an important recognition of Jasmine’s individuality in the midst of an overwhelming global experience.
Despite our different approaches to the task, Jasmine and I shared some commonalities. Our submissions both demonstrated how people have agency over their narratives. My mode-bending exercise asked listeners to write “positive” and “negative” narratives based solely on the objects in a still photo, and Jasmine showed us how a positive narrative can emerge from negative circumstances. We also used music to convey an emotional shift from a melancholy mood to something more upbeat and hopeful.
TASK 12 – SPECULATIVE FUTURES – ANNE
https://anneemberline.com/edu/task-12-speculative-futures/
Anne’s Speculative Futures posts made me feel more hopeful for a more emotionally-intelligent future! She used her design skills to create an app and a media campaign that were plausible given our technologies today. Given our understanding of micro-expressions in communication and the current availability of emotion recognition technology, Anne’s AI that would measure “almost imperceptible flash facial expressions” could be feasible in less than 30 years!
I imagine that the RYTO app would earn a “seal of approval” from Steve Jobs who famously reduced his cognitive load by reducing his wardrobe options to a black turtleneck and jeans!
Both narratives depict our growing deference to AI for knowledge on uniquely human processes. There is irony in having a computer help you with your people skills. I was particularly struck by the promotional claim for RYTO, which stated that it can “help you figure out what your own opinion is.” We need to remember that the machines learn from us, not the other way around. The fact that we spend more time with them than with ourselves is fodder for another speculative narrative.
