For my final project, I decided to create a podcast on the origins of the humble pencil and the implications that the pencil has had on society and education. I roped in my wife on this one!

Podcast:

Podcast Name: All The Right Type

Episode #: 3

Episode Name: The Humble Pencil

Credits:

• Producer: Richard Wong
• Editor: Richard Wong
• Podcast Host 1: Richard Wong
• Podcast Host 2: Diana Shen

Script

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ojw_a6DY3q5lRsDak9LEfVyubkc13uFR3_wnYiIgplk/edit?usp=sharing

References

https://bit.ly/3Dx8LID

In Task 12, we were presented with the challenge of creating two speculative narratives about our potential relationship with media, education, text, and technology in the next 30 years.

I have decided to present my speculative narratives in the form of podcasts. I have been listening to many audiobooks lately and have found them to be a good way to digest information on the go. I have also found that audio helps me better visualize the context and situation of a narrative.

1. “Class Act” – An artificial intelligence (“AI”) solution for post-secondary students.

In my first speculative narrative, I explore “Class Act”, an artificial intelligence earbud that can tap into the brain waves as well as the auditory, visual, and tactile stimuli experienced by users to suggest and implement real-time learning interventions. Since Class Act is tapped into the brain waves of the user, the learning interventions can be presented in the form of visual or auditory resources or immersive simulations that consider the user’s contexts and backgrounds.

2. “Credit Note” – An artificial intelligence (“AI”) tool and algorithm that assesses class participation marks and tailors assessments based on student behaviour.

In my second speculative narrative, I explore “Credit Note”, an artificial intelligence tool and algorithm that collects student data from electronic devices and uses that data to adjust student participation scores and student assessments. This speculative narrative considers a situation where AI and algorithms go wrong.

In Task #9, we were asked to review and analyze a network database in Palladio, generated from the Golden Record Curation Quiz we submitted in Task #8.

Upon loading the file, a data visualization of communities, tracks, and curators appeared. The initial image was overwhelming and difficult to interpret. However, after a few instruction manuals and a YouTube tutorial or two, I gathered that the central nodes showed some of the tracks that united our entire class. Melancholy Blues, Johnny B. Goode, the Fifth Symphony (First Movement), and El Cascabel were just a few of the tracks that appeared to connect most people in the class. Some of the tracks that appeared on the outer edge were ones that people rarely selected (such as the Men’s House Song and the Pygmy Girls’ Initiation Song).

Based on this initial view, I attempted to draw some assumptions on why my classmates selected these songs, but nothing became evident came to me.

I then decided to shift my attention to the 4 communities that were populated. I was a part of Community #1 and it was interesting to once again try and speculate why we were organized in this way.

After a few more clicks, I was able to see some of the commonalities in my community (Community #1).

In the community that I was a part of, the most popular tracks were:

• Track 12: Tchakrulo
• Track 18: Fifth Symphony (First Movement)
• Track 5: Morning Star Devil Bird
• Track 6: El Cascabel
• Track 7: Johnny B. Goode

I once again found it difficult to draw a clear conclusion or assumption as to why we all chose these tracks.

I chose a lot of the tracks that I did out of diversity. To me, diversity is obtained by showing variety in gender (having male and female artists), geography (having songs from each continent and a variety of countries), genres (having folk songs, rock songs, jazz songs, etc.), and instruments (not just all guitar-based songs, but others as well). My playlist features vocal tracks, instrumentals (no vocals), male voices, and female voices. My playlist has songs from every continent (except Antarctica), thus demonstrating geographic diversity. Lastly, my songs feature a variety of genres and instruments. I have everything from Mexican mariachi to American rock to Peruvian panpipes to Azerbaijian bagpipes.

I tried to see if my group was aiming for the same approach. However, without additional criteria to sort and filter by, it was hard to draw any solid conclusions or assumptions. For example, we all chose Track 18: Fifth Symphony (First Movement). There were several classical songs, so why was this one chosen? I chose it because it was the most familiar of the classical selections. However, I am unclear whether other people chose it for the same reason.

The data visualization, on its own, does a poor job of explaining the reasoning behind the choices. Only weak inferences and speculations can be made. Additional filtering criteria such as country of origin, continent of origin, instruments used, presence of vocals, genre, or time period may have helped in drawing better inferences or conclusions.

Closing Thoughts

Overall, I found this task to be challenging as I was not completely familiar with the various terms in Palladio (such as facets and dimensions). I found that it took a lot of trial-and-error to figure out how to create the data visualization or table I desired.

For example, even after an hour of playing with it, I could not figure out how to create a table that summed up the number of students who chose a particular track. Instead, I relied on creating a table with the curators who chose each track and manually counting the number of people that appeared.

I also found it challenging to not be able to download or find the raw data. I use learning analytics in my courses and data analytics software like Tableau and Alteryx in my corporate job. With the raw data in Excel and a few additional criteria to sort on (such as instruments, country of origin, etc.), I could’ve likely come up with a more useful data visualization or made more tangible conclusions of the data.

Lastly, I found it challenging to have such little data or information to work with. If the quiz had collected reasons for selecting a particular track (even if it was broad categories like time period, vocals, etc.), I could’ve drawn further inferences from the information. In addition, I feel that I know very little about my classmates. This knowledge could’ve helped me draw conclusions and inferences about their choices. Are they from the same age group? How does their taste in music differ?

It makes me wonder whether this is how marketers determine and define target markets. Do marketers plot us all out in a data visualization and determine what features unite us?

In Task #8, we were asked to narrow down a 27-track “Golden Record” into 10 tracks based on criteria of our choosing. The two “Golden Records” were included with the Voyager 1 and 2 space probe with the hope that it would one day be encountered by extra-terrestrial life forms to introduce them to Earth and to mankind.

I found this task to be challenging for a few reasons:

• First of all, I do not have a strong musical background. Outside of 2 piano lessons I had when I was a kid, I cannot read music, identify the instruments being played, or even note some of the subtle differences between the tracks. For example, I noticed that the record had several classical pieces by Bach, Stravisnky, and Mozart. I ended up grouping all of these together under the category of “classical music” and selecting only one. I am certain a musician or music teacher would be dissatisfied with my oversimplification of genres.
• Secondly, the task instructions appeared fairly vague. I was asked to pick “10 pieces” but the instructions did not provide specific criteria or guidelines that I had to follow. Am I picking my 10 favourite? Are these 10 meant to be most reflective of human culture? Do we want to ensure each of the 10 songs is from a different country or that they rely on a different instrument?
• I found some tracks difficult to listen to. In fact, while I was going through the record, my wife found some of the tracks to be so annoying that she came by to close my office door. While I realize this may be a bias, I found it fairly easy to eliminate “difficult to listen to” tracks, even if they provided a different perspective of human culture.
• Will extra-terrestrial life forms know how to play the records? Today, we can get music with a push of a button. I personally find the extraterrestrial instructions confusing. I think they’d have better luck figuring out an iPod if they have never seen a record before.
• Is this music truly reflective of what humans listen to today? The records lacks modern pop, for example. Would a record, produced today, include bands such as BTS or Justin Bieber?

Method

I started this task by identifying some criteria to assess the songs against, even before opening the YouTube playlist.

The creators of the “Golden Record” highlight that a goal of the records is to show diversity so I wanted to make sure that my 10-track sample was diverse. To me, diversity is obtained by showing variety in gender (having male and female artists), geography (having songs from each continent and a variety of countries), genres (having folk songs, rock songs, jazz songs, etc.), and instruments (not just all guitar-based songs, but others as well). My playlist features vocal tracks, instrumentals (no vocals), male voices, and female voices. My playlist has songs from every continent (except Antarctica), thus demonstrating geographic diversity. Lastly, my songs feature a variety of genres and instruments. I have everything from Mexican mariachi to American rock to Peruvian panpipes to Azerbaijian bagpipes.

I then listened to each of the tracks twice. On the first pass, I identified 14 tracks. On the second pass, I identified 12 tracks. I then scanned the various countries of origin to come to my final list of 10 tracks:

1. Senegal, percussion, recorded by Charles Duvelle. 2:08
2. Australia, Aborigine songs, “Morning Star” and “Devil Bird,” recorded by Sandra LeBrun Holmes. 1:26
3. Mexico, “El Cascabel,” performed by Lorenzo Barcelata and the Mariachi México. 3:14
4. USA, “Johnny B. Goode,” written and performed by Chuck Berry. 2:38
5. Mozart, The Magic Flute, Queen of the Night aria, no. 14. Edda Moser, soprano. Bavarian State Opera, Munich, Wolfgang Sawallisch, conductor. 2:55
6. Peru, panpipes and drum, collected by Casa de la Cultura, Lima. 0:52
7. “Melancholy Blues,” performed by Louis Armstrong and his Hot Seven. 3:05
8. Azerbaijan S.S.R., bagpipes, recorded by Radio Moscow. 2:30
9. Beethoven, Fifth Symphony, First Movement, the Philharmonia Orchestra, Otto Klemperer, conductor. 7:20
10. India, raga, “Jaat Kahan Ho,” sung by Surshri Kesar Bai Kerkar. 3:30

I put together this Nearpod interaction so that one can see the different continents represented and review the audio clips.

Upon completion of this task, I wanted to highlight a few closing points of reflection:

• Music preferences are subjective for each person. I would not be surprised to find other students, eliminating tracks that I have chosen due to their preferences or biases.
• It is unclear what extra-terrestrial life will think of our music. Will they connect with the male or female voices? Will they find the sounds of rock or jazz unpleasant? Can they even hear? There is mention of including a visual hand-written note, but perhaps we should also ensure that the capsule carries a few timeless written pieces, pictures, or an e-reader, in case the extra-terrestrial life can read but not see.
• Would a “Golden Record” of today be produced in a different format and have more songs? Today’s electronic devices can store thousands of songs. Perhaps space does not matter as much anymore. Per Smith (1999), next to no loss of information occurs in making a digital copy. Perhaps we can also have better ways of categorizing and sorting similar songs.

References

Smith, A. (1999). Why digitize? Council on Library and Information Resources. https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub80-smith/pub80-2/

In the linking assignment, we were asked to visit our colleagues’ web spaces to read about and discover their engagement with the course. Having the opportunity to review and reflect on my peers’ contributions was a good experience for me as many of my colleagues approached the same tasks, very differently.

All in all, I chose 6 posts (3 from the first half of the course and 3 from the back half of the course). I attempted to choose posts, stories, and submissions that connected with me, challenged my thoughts, or were strikingly different from mine.

Task 1: What’s in Your Bag?

Link: https://karenw0801.wixsite.com/mysite/post/task-1-what-s-in-your-bag

My first link was to Karen’s response to Task #1 (What’s in Your Bag?).

In this task, we were asked to introduce ourselves by reflecting on and describing the contents of our bags. In doing so, we were asked to consider the text technologies in our bag and how we engage with language and communication. Karen chose a bag that she uses for errands and to meet up with friends. Compared to the heavy-duty backpack I bring to work, Karen’s bag was light, small, and easy to carry.

I chose Karen’s post for a few reasons:

• Karen’s post began with a picture of all the objects in her bag, laid out on a desk. The minute I saw this, I was reminded of my own experience, laying out all of the objects in my bag in an organized fashion.
• Karen’s bag was the complete opposite of mine. I use my bag for work and I pack it to the brim with items. In contrast, Karen travels light. This fascinated me as I could not imagine getting through my day without half the items in my bag.
• Karen reflects on her background as a Chinese person and having a Chinese name. I could relate to this as I am also of Chinese descent.

Despite differences in the size of our bags and the number of items in our bags, Karen and I did have some similar items in our bags. We both had wired, tangled-up Apple headphones. This potentially signifies that we both like to listen to audio on the go and that neither of us has switched over to the wireless, Bluetooth headphones that appear to be popular in the market. We both had dated receipts from stores, indicating that we use our bags as storage for items we no longer need or know what to do with. We both also had hand sanitizer and vaccine cards in our bags. This helps anchor our posts to the 2020-2021 period. Hand sanitizer, vaccine cards, and protective equipment like masks would not have been common in bags before COVID-19. Karen’s physically printed vaccination card reminded me of how much we rely on our mobile devices to carry and hold information for us. My vaccine card is a screenshot on my phone. My music, my e-books, my photos, and my notes are all stored on my phone. A decade ago, storing this data would have required separate devices, such as a Walkman, a camera, or a notebook. It is fascinating how text has so quickly dominated as a digital form. I remember borrowing books and sharing printed images when I was a kid, both activities I have not done for at least the last 5 years. Lastly, I see that an iPhone was a common piece of technology for both of us. Like Karen, I rely on my iPhone to document information or search the Internet. However, where we differ is that the main purpose of my iPhone is to work and respond to emails from clients and students. Karen mentions that she uses her iPhone to engage with social media and images from Pinterest and Facebook. It also appears that Karen and I record and send messages differently with our iPhones. Karen prefers voice-to-text and speech (due to ease of use) whereas I prefer written text. I rely on written communication because it leaves a record. Records of my communications act as a to-do list for me and helps me recall promises and commitments I have made to others.

Overall, Karen approached this task very differently from me. While I prepared a 14-minute video, Karen relied on a fully text-based submission. I chose a video to establish trust with my classmates. As Anderson (2008) highlights, “in the absence of trust, learners will feel uncomfortable and constrained in posting their thoughts and comments” (p. 350). The video was a good way to have my classmates know what I look like. I also found that a video was an effective way of displaying my personality and having my classmates pick up on non-verbal cues. This is in line with Gnanadesikan’s (2011) thoughts that writing “records language, but not actual speech” (p. 9).

Karen’s text-based submission, on the other hand, had benefits of its own. Writing allows for readers to examine, analyze, point to, and dissect the text (Gnanadesikan, 2011). Readers can search for words and phrases (Bolter, 2001). Karen also likely had an easier time editing her piece for errors. As Bolter (2001) notes, “With a word processor, writers can delete or replace an entire word; they can highlight phrases, sentences, or paragraphs. They can erase a sentence with a single keystroke” (p. 29). When I made an error in my video recording, I had to rerecord, edit, and buffer my video clip, which took a significant amount of time.

In completing my task, I also put the objects in my bag into categories such as items for teaching, items for sustenance, items for health, items for transportation, and items for relaxation. As Karen had few items in her bag, she did not go as far as to categorize them.

I noticed that Karen’s blog was hosted on Wix, whereas mine was hosted on WordPress. Both appear to be mobile-friendly and did not require the reader to install any additional software. Ciampa (2013) and Bates (2015) note that with emerging educational technologies and mobile learning increasing in popularity, accessibility through an application or browser and compatibility with a wide selection of devices and operating systems are important.

Given that I was not familiar with Wix, I was curious how the two differed from a content authoring perspective. I chose WordPress because it was the default suggestion and because of its ability to quickly edit, create, and post. I imagine that Karen chose Wix for the same reason I chose WordPress: it is easy to manage, it is what I’m familiar with, and it is free to use.

Both WordPress and Wix have the ability for readers to comment, multiple themes, and HTML editors. However, Wix has a ‘like’ function, a view counter, and a one-click share to Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Perhaps if sharing information through social media is key, Wix is a better choice for conveying information. I also appreciate that Karen indicated how long (in minutes) it would take to go through her post. This is something that I look to implement in my posts moving forward as it gives the reader a sense of how much time they have to commit before starting.

All in all, it was fascinating to see a bag, approach, and authoring tool that was so different from mine. If nothing else, I am jealous of Karen as her bag seems so light and easy to carry!

References

Anderson, T. (2008a). Teaching in an online learning context. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 343-365). Athabasca University. http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Bates, T. A. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Open Textbook Library. https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/9-pedagogical-differences-between-media/

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600110

Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: An investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(1), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12036

Gnanadesikan, A. E. (2011). “The First IT Revolution.” In The writing revolution: Cuneiform to the internet. Vol. 25). John Wiley & Sons (pp. 1-10).

Task 3: Voice-to-Text

Link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540bhela/2021/09/21/task-3-voice-to-text-task/

My second link was to Kirn’s response to Task #3 (Voice-to-Text).

In this task, we were asked to record an unscripted, 5-minute story using voice-to-text software. Kirn used the voice-to-text feature on her iPhone to share her experiences on virtual interviews.

I chose Kirn’s post for a few reasons:

• Kirn refers to a lot of corporate entities like Lululemon, Microsoft, Amazon, and Hootsuite. These are all companies I discuss in my accounting classes and I was curious what Kirn had to say about them.
• In reviewing Kirn’s script, what jumped out at me was the number of periods and commas I saw. Without reading into the content, Kirn’s text almost looked like it was typed. My text, on the other hand, lacked punctuation. Kirn barely mentioned punctuation in her reflection and I was curious as to why this was the case.
• I wanted to see the experience of someone who used a different technology. I used Speechnotes to record my story whereas Kirn used an iPhone to accomplish this task. I have never used the voice-to-text feature on my iPhone so I was curious to see how it functioned and compared.

As I mentioned, Kirn’s script looks very different from mine. While Kirn’s script appears to have periods and commas, mine looks like an unstructured run-on story with no commas and only 4 periods. At first, I thought that Apple’s voice-to-text software was just far more advanced than Speechnotes. But, in her reflection, Kirn highlights that she had to suggest commas and periods for them to appear and that the software did not know to do this on its own. Punctuation was not something I had considered having to manually add so I was impressed that Kirn identified this need for this. Perhaps it is a result of the experience she may have in this area.

I also noticed that Speechnotes improperly capitalized certain words in my speech (e.g. “Comfort”, “Integrity”, “Educator”). Kirn did not appear to have this problem. All proper nouns were properly capitalized (e.g. Microsoft, Lululemon, and Amazon). Kirn’s text also appears to lack repeated words (such as “I”, “and”, and “is”). Perhaps the iPhone is better at filtering filler words out or Kirn feels more comfortable telling stories orally. Despite lecturing for a living, I found oral storytelling to be a weird and awkward experience.

However, there were some striking similarities in both our texts. Both of us chose to tell general stories about our lives. Kirn talked about several interview experiences and I talked about a few academic dishonesty cases. Both stories did not go into the facts in great depth. I feel that the assignment would have been extremely difficult to complete if I had to make a fictitious story from scratch or if I had to include specific details without a script. We both chose to use informal or conversational language. I do not consider this an error but a result of speaking to a microphone without a formal script to guide thinking. Lastly, both of our texts lacked paragraph breaks and indents. This made it unclear for readers to know where thoughts started and ended.

What fascinated me most about Kirn’s post is that she made a video to document her experiences. Devers et al. (2018) highlight that relevant images placed near text, “allow students to make clearer connections between the text and graphics” (p. 11). This was fascinating as you could observe an important time-out safety feature that the iPhone had, which stopped the recordings after a period of time. Speechnotes did not do this, which could result in the recording to continue without your knowledge. The lack of such a safety feature could result in written speech, unintentionally being turned into a manual script that could be easily shared, searched, or documented.

Overall, we both concluded that a scripted story would result in fewer errors. This aligns with Gnandesikan’s (2011) views that, “Writing is done more deliberately … so finished written pieces are much more carefully crafted than a typical spoken sentence. Written texts can thus convey their message more precisely” (p. 5). The software, while it captured the majority of words in our speech, did not pick up punctuation or capture our non-verbal tones or speech patterns.

References

Devers, C.J., Devers, E. E., & Oke, L. D. (2018). Encouraging metacognition in digital learning environments. In D. Ifenthaler (Ed.), Digital workplace learning: Bridging formal and informal learning with digital technologies (pp. 9-22). Springer International Publishing AG. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-46215-8

Gnanadesikan, A. E. (2011). “The First IT Revolution.” In The writing revolution: Cuneiform to the internet. Vol. 25). John Wiley & Sons (pp. 1-10).

Task 4: Manual Scripts

Link: https://annekenussbaum.wordpress.com/2021/10/01/task-4-manual-scripts/

My third link was to Anneke’s response to Task #4 (Manual Scripts).

In this task, we were asked to write a 500-word script by hand. Anneke is a hobby calligrapher that enjoys creating texts by hand and watching calligraphy videos. She wrote a short story entitled, “Sara’s Grump”.

I chose Anneke’s post for a few reasons:

• The topics of our written scripts were vastly different. I chose to write a story based on something I did (baking a turkey). Anneke wrote a fictional short story.
• I found this task to be challenging as I do not enjoy writing. Anneke enjoys writing and does calligraphy in her spare time.
• At the end of the task, my script was messy, incoherent, and illegible. Anneke’s calligraphy was flowy and artistic.

What united Anneke and I was an agreement that there is a nostalgia to hand-written messages that demonstrates care, thought, and time taken by the writer. But perhaps this is one of the only things we agree on.

I found this task to be very challenging for several reasons: I had to constantly count my words to see how close I was getting to the 500-word target, my pen ran out of ink halfway through, my hand started to cramp, and my writing was illegible. I could not wait to be done with my 500-word text so I could move back to typing my reflection using a word processor. It is no surprise that I bring my laptop and smartphone everywhere I go to make notes. Anneke, on the other hand, enjoyed the process. She loves seeing smudged fingers, the feeling of the ink and pen, and the way that writing makes her think differently. It engages her creative mindset. Writing for her, supports Ose Askvik et al.’s (2020) findings that handwriting engages more of the brain areas associated with memory and encoding than typing.

Anneke’s process was also very fascinating. Where I did the entire 500-word script and then the reflection on a computer, she did her reflection half by hand, using an app (Nebo) that converts handwriting into typed text. A program like Nebo allows a writer to experience the affordances of digital text. After converting it into a digital text, “With a word processor, writers can delete or replace an entire word; they can highlight phrases, sentences, or paragraphs. They can erase a sentence with a single keystroke” (p. 29). This is arguably the best of both worlds for a writer.

Even though such technology exists, it is unlikely that I would rely on a similar process. When I write on paper, I tend to misplace it. Typing my notes from the get-go allows me to upload them to the cloud, where I can access them from other devices. In addition, digital text is searchable and easy to share, collaborate, and reproduce. Anneke echoes these conveniences and it is why she ends up digitizing the text despite starting with handwriting.

Our approach to editing and writing is also different. I wrote my script, single-spaced. As I relied on a pen, I crossed out errors made and continued writing. I would’ve normally used white-out but did not have any available. When I finished, I reread the script, made small edits, and inserted any missing punctuation. Anneke wrote double-spaced and crossed-out errors because she doesn’t like white-out. Handwriting made me realize the affordances that electronic devices provide and that I often take for granted. When using a laptop or smartphone, I will simply erase or revise my words. With text messages on my smartphone, I will let minor spelling and grammatical errors slide (if I believe the reader can still interpret my script) or I will rely on abbreviations (such as lol for “laugh out loud”).

Something unique that I noticed Anneke did was record her writing process using a video. As Bates (2015) suggests, it is important to offer several options of learning to ensure different learning preferences are met. The text, supplemented by a video, employs multimodalities which can increase the accessibility of content to more readers.

Anneke closes by discussing examples of how she technologizes paper. It never occurred to me to use an iPad or iPhone as a piece of paper as I only use these devices to type. She technologizes paper with applications like Notability and Nebo which allow her to blend the best of handwriting and word processors. She can quickly make changes to font styles, titles, and correct errors.

This task made me sit back and reflect on whether or not I see value in writing by hand. I believe I still do. I agree with Gnanadesikan’s (2011) thoughts that, “Writing is one of the most important human inventions of all time” (p. 2). Handwriting is still useful for images and mind maps. However, I can’t discount the affordances that come with a word processor and an electronic device. As Bolter (2001) highlights, “With a word processor, writers can delete or replace an entire word; they can highlight phrases, sentences, or paragraphs. They can erase a sentence with a single keystroke; they can select a paragraph, cut from its current location and insert it elsewhere, even into another document” (p. 29). It is clear that Anneke sees the value of this as well, given that her work is converted to a digital form, even if started by handwriting.

References

Bates, T. A. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Open Textbook Library. https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/part/9-pedagogical-differences-between-media/

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600110

Gnanadesikan, A. E. (2011). “The First IT Revolution.” In The writing revolution: Cuneiform to the internet. Vol. 25). John Wiley & Sons (pp. 1-10).

Ose Askvik, E., van der Weel, F. R. (Ruud), & van der Meer, Audrey L. H. (2020). The importance of cursive handwriting over typewriting for learning in the classroom: A high-density EEG study of 12-year-old children and young adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1810-1810. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01810

Task 7: Mode-Bending

Link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540ajazieni/2021/10/24/task-7-mode-bending/

My fourth link was to Amy’s response to Task #7 (Mode-Bending).

In this task, we were challenged to change the semiotic mode of Task #1 (What’s in Your Bag). The change was to be delivered in audio form or, at least, one that is not exclusively visual. Amy built a podcast that described the items in her bag and asked listeners to guess what the object was.

I chose Amy’s post for a few reasons:

• I am a big fan of podcasts. I was impressed by the way Amy pieced together her podcast and it sounded a lot like the professionally-made podcasts that I listen to. The podcast had introductory and concluding music, sound effects, and a high-quality voice recording.
• The number of modalities employed were very different. I aimed to capture several modalities including visual, spatial, and auditory. Amy chose to focus on only one modality, auditory, and I wanted to understand why this was the case.

In Task 7, I shifted from the video I created in Task 1 to using Microsoft PowerPoint, the camera on my iPhone, a voice recorder, and a voice-changing application to create a virtual museum that showcased items in my bag. Each display in my virtual museum had an item from my bag on display as an exhibit. Viewers had the opportunity to travel between exhibits in my museum and hear about the origin story of each object. Compared to Amy’s submission, my final submission relied on several semiotic systems (as outlined by the New London Group (1996) including written text, auditory discussions, visual images, and spatial modes, producing a multimodal experience. Amy acknowledges the lack of semiotic modes and attempts to make up for this by engaging the listener through gamification, having them listen and guess various objects she was describing. I found this to be effective as I found myself sitting there trying to figure out what objects she was describing.

I believe that Amy’s post could’ve been heightened with a visual quiz or click-through activity. Prensky (2001) notes that digital natives need to be immersed in technological environments. As MET students, many learners are in the age range of the digital native and the ability to interact with the artifact increases the likelihood that they will engage and be motivated to explore it. Tobin (2014) also recommends the creation of alternative formats as a strategy for incorporating universal design of learning (UDL). By creating a submission that relies exclusively on audio, Amy’s podcast potentially decreases accessibility to users. Lastly, I noted that my virtual museum provides the user with the opportunity to navigate back and forth. Users can choose which exhibits they wish to go to. In Amy’s podcast, items are presented sequentially. The listener must follow the order of topics decided on by Amy (unless they deliberately fast forward or rewind). This reminded me of Bolter’s (2001) comments concerning the affordances that electronic writing and websites have over print in terms of the ability to fashion a website (using links) to become a forest of hierarchical trees.

References

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600110

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816

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

Tobin, T. J. (2014). Increase online student retention with universal design for learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 15(3), 13.

Task 8: Golden Record Curation

Link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/pingcao/2021/10/27/task-8/

My fifth link was to Ping’s response to Task #8 (Golden Record Curation Assignment).

In this task, we were asked to narrow down a 27-track “Golden Record” into 10 tracks, based on criteria of our choosing. Ping chose 10 tracks based on her feelings towards them.

I chose Ping’s post for a few reasons:

• Ping discusses her reliance on well-organized parameters and criteria in making decisions. As a classically-trained accountant, I could relate to this. All the decisions I ended up making on the golden record started with well-defined parameters and criteria. Feelings were only considered afterwards. Ping, however (despite her reliance on parameters and criteria), decided to follow her gut and her emotional reaction to the tracks. This shift from her normal way of thinking fascinated me.
• Ping has a very different taste in music as I do. I can see that she appreciates Bach and Jazz. I enjoy Top 40 hits, not Bach and Jazz, which is why I likely selected very different tracks from her.

All in all, Ping and I only agreed on two songs: The Magic Flute and Melancholy Blues. Ping chose Bach because she admires Bach, Melancholy Blues because she likes Jazz, Flowing Streams because she likes traditional Chinese songs, and the wedding song because it gives her feelings of hope and happiness. My aim in selecting tracks was to choose songs that showed the most diversity. To me, diversity is obtained by showing variety in gender (having male and female artists), geography (having songs from each continent and a variety of countries), genres (having folk songs, rock songs, jazz songs, etc.), and instruments (not just all guitar-based songs, but others as well). My playlist featured vocal tracks, instrumentals (no vocals), male voices, and female voices. My playlist has songs from every continent (except Antarctica), thus demonstrating geographic diversity. Lastly, my songs featured a variety of genres and instruments. Only after I narrowed it down to 15 tracks (based on this diversity criteria) did I then consider my feelings about the track. For example, while the wedding song provided diversity, I found it easy to eliminate as it was “difficult to listen to”. I wondered if Ping had set well-organized parameters and criteria, whether she would come to the same decisions. Ping’s post helped me realize that music preferences are subjective and that we all have biases for why we pick certain tracks or not.

Ping’s webspace, like mine, was presented on WordPress. What I appreciated about her web space is that she does a good job of classifying her posts into categories. She has a ‘Weekly Tasks’, ‘Linking Assignment’, and ‘Final Project’ category which helps her reader sort through information a bit better. My webspace is more of an endless scroll. In completing this task, I also noticed that Ping did not provide any links to the original tracks. When I built my post, I created a Nearpod activity that allowed users to visually see the country of origin and hear the tracks through YouTube. It would have been nice to have links to the tracks to be able to remind myself of the various tracks. This speaks to the value of links in digital text. As Bolter (2001) highlights, text in a web page can direct you to new pages or be linked to others, acting as an electronic footnote for viewers. They can also provide additional information to the user (Bolter, 2001).

References

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600110

Task 9: Network Assignment Using Golden Record Curation Quiz Data

Link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/540ddoherty21/2021/11/07/task-9-network-assignment-using-golden-record-curation-quiz-data/

My final link was to Derek’s response to Task #9 (Network Assignment Using Golden Record Curation Quiz Data).

In this task, we were asked to review and analyze a network database in Palladio, generated from the Golden Record Curation Quiz we completed in Task #8.

With little knowledge in data analytics and visualization, I struggled with this task. It took quite a lot of experimenting with the data and several instructional videos and manuals, to come up with anything useful. I concluded that Melancholy Blues, Johnny B. Goode, Fifth Symphony (First Movement), and El Cascabel were some of the tracks that appeared to unite most people in the class. However, I was unable to draw any further assumptions or conclusions as to why my classmates selected the songs they did.

I chose Derek’s post for a few reasons:

• Derek approached this task differently. I tried to draw conclusions on the class’s reason for choosing certain songs but quickly gave up. Derek focused primarily on his community.
• I thought it would be difficult to draw conclusions about the users with no background. Derek took an attempt at this.

While I was unable to draw any clear data as to why a song was chosen, Derek argued that we did actually know quite a bit about the people who chose the songs. He acknowledged that we are MET students and suggested that we likely have an interest and education at an undergraduate level. He suggested that we were technologically proficient and would likely lean a bit to the left on the political spectrum. Because of these factors, Derek concluded that we would try to exhibit fairness, choosing songs that represented a diverse range of peoples and cultures. Derek did a good job of nailing down my profile. I am educated at an undergraduate level, lean left on the political spectrum, and was aiming to choose a song list that covered a diverse range of peoples and cultures. To me, diversity is obtained by showing variety in gender (having male and female artists), geography (having songs from each continent and a variety of countries), genres (having folk songs, rock songs, jazz songs, etc.), and instruments (not just all guitar-based songs, but others as well). However, I can safely say that this line of thinking does not apply to everyone in the class. In my last link, I discussed Ping’s golden record choices. Ping made her choices based on her emotions and feelings about various songs.

This made me consider what other conclusions we actually may be able to draw. Perhaps people excluded songs they found unpleasant? Perhaps people feel more comfortable with western songs given they are attending a Canadian university?

Derek posted his thoughts on WordPress, much like I did. However, Derek chose a different theme and a black background. I noticed that in completing this task, the images that Derek posted were very small and hard to read and that clicking on them did not make them bigger. This likely makes the post inaccessible to some users. Perhaps where images are small and hard to read, a video or audio description can be provided. This can potentially increase accessibility to a greater range of users.

In Task #7, I used Microsoft PowerPoint, the camera on my iPhone, a voice recorder, and a voice-changing application (“Voice Changer”) to create a virtual museum that showcased the items in my bag.

Each item in my bag was put on display as an interactive “exhibit” and visitors had the ability to travel to different rooms in the virtual museum and interact with each of the items. As visitors move to different rooms, they are presented with the opportunity to hear each of the items’ origin story, told from the item’s point of view.

How to Access My Virtual Museum

To access my virtual museum, click on the ‘Dropbox’ link below, wait a minute, and download the PowerPoint to your computer. You will require Microsoft PowerPoint to access it.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/keepjzc7lvkxufy/Week%207%20-%20What%27s%20In%20My%20Bag%20-%20Richard%20Wong.pptx?dl=0

If you receive the “Protected View” warning message, please make sure to hit “Enable Editing”. You will need to put the slide show into ‘Present’ mode (F5) to be able to properly experience it.

Reflection

Overall, I found this task to be challenging as I created a video walkthrough of my bag in week 1. The video already relied on written-linguistic, audio, and visual semiotic systems. This left me wondering what else I could do to “bend” the semiotic mode of my submission.

After some inspiration from Ernesto during our live session and the ‘Everything is Alive’ podcast he recommended (https://www.everythingisalive.com/), I decided to create a virtual museum showcasing my bag. The virtual museum gives visitors the choice to explore different items (“exhibits”) in my bag and to listen to each item tell its origin story, how I interact with the item daily, and the item’s significance is in my life. To me, the true purpose of this assignment is to help others learn more about me, what tools I need to make it through my day, and the significance of these tools, so what better to do this than to have the objects in my bag tell that story.

The final submission relies on several semiotic systems (as outlined by the New London Group (1996)) including written text, auditory discussions, visual images, and spatial modes, to create a multi-modal experience. I chose to present it in this way to give visitors the ability to “choose their own experience” and focus on objects that most interested them.

Method

To build the virtual museum, I followed the iterative design process outlined in Brennan & Resnick’s (2013) article:

• Imagining – I thought about different ways of presenting the information and how to vary the semiotic modes employed. I started by trying to come up with ideas to target all semiotic modes, before eliminating the ones that were too challenging to achieve, given the deadline.
• Creating – I created the virtual museum.
• Playing – I tested the virtual museum and made sure it worked.
• Sharing – I shared it with my wife and family members to ensure that it was easy to use and navigate.
• Reflecting – I am now reflecting on the experience.

Benefits of Mode-Changing

Upon completion of my submission, I noted a few benefits of mode-changing:

• Prensky (2001) notes that ‘digital natives’ need to be immersed in technological environments. The ability to click through and interact with the virtual museum increases the likelihood that it will be able to engage and motivate these digital learners to explore it.
• Tobin (2014) recommends creating alternative formats as a strategy for incorporating universal design for learning (UDL). By creating a submission that relies on audio, text, and visual images, this will hopefully increase accessibility to a greater number of users.
• My students have come to expect more than one semiotic mode or output from me. Recently, in an undergraduate tax class, students described the text-only textbook as “boring” and unengaging. Multimodalities are required to captive and motivate learners. This multimodal approach achieves this expectation.

Challenges of Engaging in Mode-Changing

• I found it challenging to think of a new creative idea that would employ various semiotic modes. In addition, I found it challenging to figure out a way to employ some of the semiotic modes. For example, I was uncertain how to employ gestural semiotic systems in my virtual museum.
• I found that programming the virtual museum was extremely time-consuming compared to generating a pure text-based submission.
• I found it challenging to not know what tangible, incremental effect adding a new semiotic mode/system had on my final product. What is the incremental benefit of introducing a new audio clip or a new image for the visitor?
• I found it challenging to figure out which semiotic modes were most effective in my situation. I considered whether this depended person-to-person as well. For example, I find it difficult to get through long, written texts but some may find this to be the semiotic mode of choice.

References

Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). Imagining, creating, playing, sharing, reflecting: How online community supports young people as designers of interactive media. (pp. 253-268). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4696-5_17

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816

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

Tobin, T. J. (2014). Increase online student retention with universal design for learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 15(3), 13.

:

.

.

, , , , ,.

. . .

. , . .

. .

. . . .

, . . . . . .

. . .

. . .

..

.. . .

..

. . . .. .

==========================================================

In Task #6, I used emojis to describe the plot of a full-length, feature film that I remembered watching when I was a kid.

Reflection:

Did you rely more on syllables, words, or ideas or a combination of all of them?

I relied heavily on ideas to complete this task, rather than specific syllables or words. I found it time-consuming and inefficient to spell out specific words (even if my emoji keyboard did have letters available (e.g., )) and I was unsure as to how I could efficiently display the number of syllables in the movie title or plot to help a viewer guess my movie. 

Did you start with the title? Why? Why not?

Yes, I figured that if the movie title could not be easily translated, it would be next to impossible to translate the entire plot of the movie. I was originally going to select the movie, Shang-Chi, but as I had trouble translating the title, I did not think I would have much luck with the rest of the movie.

Did you choose the work based on how easy it would be to visualize?

Yes, I wanted to select a full-length, feature film with a simple plot. I thought that it would be difficult to explain a movie with a complicated back story or an underlying meaning (such as Christopher Nolan’s Inception).

Other Notable Items

As I worked on this task, several other thoughts came to mind:

• I found it challenging to accurately portray the emotions of characters, using emojis. I was able to use a smiley () to describe happy moments and an angry face () to describe moments where a character was angry, but some emotions did not have a corresponding emoji. For example, I was trying to indicate, at times, that certain characters were up to no good using a smirking emoji (), however, I realized that this could be misinterpreted as confusion or displeasure.
• A challenge I faced with using the Emoji Keyboard (https://emojikeyboard.io/) was that it would not allow me to insert new emojis between existing emojis. When I tried to insert a new emoji, it would simply add it to the back of my script. After this happened a few times, I ended up switching over to Facebook Messenger and my phone to complete this task.
• I found it challenging to not have a search function for the emojis. I had categories such as, “Symbols” and “Objects” but it was still difficult to find the right emoji at the right time. Much of my time on this task was spent searching for the right emoji. Some items had multiple options (such as envelopes – ), but some situations required a bit more creativity to recreate. For example, I had to go through quite a few emojis to describe a move from a home in Africa to a home in America ().
• I found it difficult to recall the full plot of a 90-minute movie and had to rewatch aspects on Netflix to ensure that I was covering the plot correctly.
• The ability to add a legend to my emoji story would have been helpful. I realized towards the end of the task that the number of characters in the movie made it difficult to keep track of everything that was going on. If I was able to define certain emojis or to have a description of the emoji appear when the reader hovered over it, this would’ve probably been more effective to a reader.
• I noticed that moving emoticons between systems presented a challenge. For example, when I copied the movie emoji () over from the Canvas assignments page, it converted into a bunch of question marks (???) in WordPress. When I copied and pasted emojis from Facebook Messenger, they appeared as images in WordPress. This made me think that the display of emojis is not consistent across all keyboards and platforms.
• I found it unusual to use emojis in this context. In my day-to-day text messaging, I use emojis to display an emotion or change the tone of my texts. Emojis were instead, used here, to communicate a plot. Perhaps as highlighted by Bolter (2001), the pictures here were not just decorative in nature and graphics were being used to replace text.
• Bolter (2001) discussed the idea of ekphrasis, using words to describe vivid scenes. I wonder if using words to describe the movie plot would have been more effective in this task. While it certainly would not be able to capture all of the contexts, emotions, and backgrounds of the movie, perhaps it would be easier for the reader to guess the movie.

References

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi:10.4324/9781410600110

In Task 5, I used Twine to create a course simulation for an introductory accounting course geared towards business managers. These business managers, who can range in specializations from marketing to human resources, can benefit from having basic accounting knowledge to help analyze the financial performance of their divisions and make decisions surrounding staffing and resourcing.

Twine: Accounting Fundamentals for Business Managers (Zip file – Right-click to download)

Reflection:

This was my first time using Twine.

Inspired by the Temple of No, I wanted to create a multimodal simulation that would put learners in the role of a Chief Financial Officer at a fictional Vancouver start-up. The simulation would give learners a chance to make business decisions, integrating the knowledge they’ve obtained throughout an introductory accounting course and providing them with instant feedback on the effectiveness of their decisions.

I was inspired to create something that I could use outside of the context of this course and I wanted the simulation to be an effective way for learners to review key concepts from my course. A “Choose Your Own Adventure” simulation (created using Twine) was chosen as it provides instant feedback to students. Anderson (2008) highlights that “timely and detailed feedback provided … as near in time to the performance of an assessed behaviour, is the most effective in providing motivation, shaping behaviour, and developing mental constructs” (p. 352).

Strategy and Process

I began work on my Twine by brainstorming on a Microsoft Word document. In a bulleted list, I wrote out key business decisions that I wanted learners to make in my Twine and key concepts I wanted to review with learners. Every 4 to 5 points, I paused and attempted to separate my bulleted list into Twine “passages”.

I found this process to be much easier than building an outline by hand. I recalled in a previous task, that writing a 500-word story by hand brought about challenges when revising and replicating content.  Using a word processor allowed me to easily copy and paste my comments to Twine and prevented numerous hand cramps. In addition, the word processor allowed me to remove, replace, and rearrange words, sentences, and paragraphs, even placing them into other documents (Bolter, 2001).

Once the planning stage was complete, I copied and pasted sections of my plan directly into Twine passages. I rearranged and moved passages and sentences where necessary. I reviewed the Twine cookbook, a help manual, to understand the various features available in Twine and learned how to integrate them into my passages. I challenged myself to integrate some of these features to provide a multimodal simulation, maximize the effectiveness of the simulation, and prevent boredom on the part of the learner. After some trial and error, I was able to integrate images, audio, and checkboxes in my Twine. Achieving multimodality, particularly through the integration of images near text, was important to me as it allows “students to make clearer connections between the text and graphics” (Devers et al., 2018, p. 11).

After every 4-5 passages, I paused and ran the Twine in its entirety to ensure that it was working the way I had intended. In the end, I had 17 passages and 20 links.

Other Observations

In building my Twine, a few other observations came to mind:

• I found that, in general, my tone of writing was more conversational and casual, rather than formal or academic. This was likely due to the fact that I was trying to simulate conversations between a worker, their co-worker, and their boss.
• While my Twine gave learners a “choice” at certain points, this was arguably an “illusion” as poor choices, made by learners, redirected them to repeat a task or pushed them towards choices I wanted them to take. An example of this is when I ask learners if they are willing to take on the role of Chief Financial Officer. One option allows them to continue with signing a contract while the other option directs them to a situation where they are forced to take on the role regardless. Choice was very much an illusion in this case.
• If this simulation was done in print, the learner would likely have to view the text in a specific order. However, in this electronic medium, learners had the ability to veer off course and alter the order with which they progressed through the content without revising any of the text on any of the pages (Bolter, 2001).
• It was important to consider how to connect different pages or greet users as they navigate between pages. As Bolter (2001) highlights, “If the reader chooses to follow the link, she expects that the second page will comment on, elaborate, or explain the first” (p. 37). It was, therefore, important to consider what users would see as they travelled from one page to the next.
• I found it challenging to figure out how to upload and integrate images and audio files in Twine. A basic understanding of HTML was required, for which I relied on tutorials I found on Google. In addition, the HTML required me to link images and audio files to an Internet source. As such, I decided to upload and store my images and audio files on the Media page of UBC Blogs, so that the images and audio would be centrally accessible to learners.

References

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online learning context. In T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and practice of online learning (pp. 343-365). Athabasca University. http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Devers, C. J., Devers, E. E., & Oke, L. D. (2018). Encouraging metacognition in digital learning environments. (pp. 9-22). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46215-8_2

In Task 4, I wrote a 500-word story on roasting a turkey.

Do you normally write by hand or type?

In my undergraduate studies, I handwrote most of my notes to avoid the distractions of electronic devices. These days, I mostly type as it can be challenging to make out my illegible handwriting after the fact.

I find that I bring my laptop and smartphone everywhere I go. These devices are arguably more readily available than pen and paper.

Did you find this task difficult or easy?

I found this task to be challenging. It was not difficult to come up with the idea and words for a story. However, writing by hand presented a few challenges:

• I had to constantly count my words to see how close I was getting to the 500-word target. A word processor would have kept track of this for me automatically.
• Halfway through, my pen ran out of ink and I had for another one.
• Initially, I had trouble finding paper to write on.
• My hand started to cramp after a few lines of handwriting.
• The script was full of imperfections such as strikethroughs and inserted words, which took away from its visual appeal.

What did you do when you made a mistake or wanted to change your writing? How did you edit your work? Did your choice of media play a part in how you edited your work?

As I relied on a pen, I crossed out errors made and continued writing. When I finished, I reread the script, made small edits, and inserted punctuation where missing.

My choice of tools and media played a role in editing. I occasionally handwrite using a graphics tablet. With this device, I simply erase and replace mistakes. A choice between pencils and pens also changes my editing approach. I will cross out mistakes when I use a pen but erase my mistakes when I use a pencil. When using a laptop or smartphone, I will simply erase or revise my words. On these devices, I also take advantage of grammar and spell-check tools which give me additional peace of mind. When I write by hand, I rely purely on self-review and my knowledge of the English language as a final check. Finally, with smartphones, in particular, I will often let minor spelling and grammatical errors slide (if I believe the user can still interpret my script) or I will use abbreviations (e.g. lol for “laugh out loud”).

What do you feel is the most significant difference between writing by hand and using mechanized forms of writing? 

• It is easier to create mind maps and draw by hand. Inserting or drawing images in a mechanized text can be challenging, particularly on a computer or smartphone.
• When I write on paper, I tend to misplace it. Typing my notes allows me to upload them to the cloud, where I can access them on other devices.
• Mechanized forms of writing are often searchable. Handwriting does not provide for this.
• Mechanized forms of writing are easier to share, collaborate, and reproduce. I can easily share a document with others, have them edit it in real-time, and copy and paste it to different mediums.
• I believe that writing shows more of the writer’s personality. The writer’s pen, font, and colour choice can be telling signs of their personality.
• Studies have shown that writers retain and comprehend information better than typers. Smoker et al. (2009) found that hand-written vocabulary words were recalled better by participants than typed vocabulary words. Mueller & Oppenheimer (2014) found stronger test performance in students who took notes by writing.
• Ose Askvik et al. (2020) suggested that handwriting engages more of the brain areas associated with memory and encoding than typing does.

Which one do you prefer?

Overall, I prefer mechanized writing due to its efficiency and ability to share quickly. I find that I can write about 45-47 words per minute by hand compared to 119 words per minute when I type. I also enjoy the ability of word processors to check for grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

I must admit that I do find handwritten messages (likely because of their rarity) to be nostalgic and personal, so I will write congratulations and holiday cards by hand.

References

Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581

Ose Askvik, E., van der Weel, F. R. (Ruud), & van der Meer, Audrey L. H. (2020). The importance of cursive handwriting over typewriting for learning in the classroom: A high-density EEG study of 12-year-old children and young adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1810-1810. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01810

Smoker, T. J., Murphy, C. E., & Rockwell, A. K. (2009). Comparing Memory for Handwriting versus Typing. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 53(22), 1744–1747. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120905302218

For this task, I decided to record an unscripted story on my struggles, as a post-secondary educator, with academic dishonesty. The story was recorded using Speechnotes (https://speechnotes.com) and converted into the following written text:

Analysis

How does the text deviate from conventions of written English? What is “wrong” in the text? What are the most common “mistakes” in the text and why do you consider them “mistakes”?

The most glaring deviations from the conventions of written English (in the text) were the lack of punctuation, paragraph breaks, and proper grammar. Firstly, the text had no commas and a total of 4 periods. The periods that did appear did not always assist in breaking up the text or making it easier for the reader to comprehend (e.g. “External help from a friend. Forms of academic dishonesty). The result was a collection of run-on sentences. Secondly, the text lacked paragraph breaks and indentations. This made it unclear for the reader where thoughts started and ended. Lastly, certain words were capitalized where they should not have been (e.g. “Comfort”, “Integrity”, “Educator”). Punctuation, grammar, and paragraph breaks help to increase clarity for a reader.

Another mistake was the repetition of certain words (such as “I”, “and”, and “is”). I did not consider this an error on the part of the software as I felt nervous in parts of my story and repeated these filler words multiple times.

The text-to-speech converter had challenges understanding proper nouns and misinterpreted certain phrases in my speech. It particularly struggled with names. For example, rather than referring to the homework help site, Chegg, the text-to-speech software wrote “Shagger” in my text. I also found that the text-to-speech converter incorrectly interpreted parts of my story, leading to phrasing that did not fit in the context or would be confusing to a reader (e.g. “search eating”, “numbers 2 for the exam”, “you said play the this”, “possible have the setup number”, “i put out the real shame about this dude”). These inaccuracies detracted from my ability to create an accurate written representation of my story.

The last deviation from the normal conventions of written English was the use of more informal or conversational language (e.g. “Hey you know what if you were”). I did not consider this to be a mistake. When a story is told orally between friends, the story is often told in a casual, conversational tone. The text-to-speech software simply picked up on this.

What is “right”?

For the most part, the text-to-speech software captured the gist of my story on academic dishonesty. It was clear that the story was about academic dishonesty in a post-secondary context and the result that cheating had on one particular student.

Something I noticed that the text-to-speech software did well was avoiding transcription of certain vocal fillers (such as “ums” and “uhhs”), as both do not appear in the written text, despite using them throughout my unscripted story.

What if you had “scripted” the story? What difference might that have made?

Despite lecturing to large audiences for a living, I felt nervous talking in an unscripted manner for 5 minutes. Unscripted storytelling is not something I usually do and I had trouble figuring out where I was going next with my story without a clear plan.

With a script, I believe that my story would be more organized and have a clear beginning, middle, and end. I would have remembered to emphasize or repeat key thoughts or parts of my story and experimented more with my diction. I also would’ve expected a greater degree of comfort with the content, leading to fewer vocal fillers (such as “ums” and “uhhs”) and decreased repetition of non-value-added words (such as “I”, “and”, and “is”).

I noticed that there is an ability to add punctuation to Speechnotes. If I had scripted my story and tried again, I would probably ensure that my story had the appropriate punctuation and line breaks, thus reducing the number of run-on sentences and making the text easier to comprehend.

In what ways does oral storytelling differ from written storytelling?

Oral storytelling differs from written storytelling in several ways. Most notably:

• Oral storytelling relies on an individual’s memory rather than a written record. As Gnanadesikan (2011) highlights, writing is meant to solve the problem that information only exists if it can be recalled.
• If done face-to-face, oral storytelling can rely on non-verbal cues (such as hand gestures, facial expressions, and body language) to communicate key messages. This is not available in written storytelling. As Gnanadesikan (2011) discusses, information such as the emotional content of a speech can be lost when writing is used.
• If done face-to-face, oral storytellers can adjust their stories accordingly to meet audience needs. For example, a storyteller who sees that a listener is losing attention, can vary tone, increase their volume, and ask questions to hook the user back in. Stories told orally can also differ a little bit each time and change depending on the audience, time available, location, and the mood of the storyteller or audience members. Written storytelling does not provide for this real-time feedback and response.
• Oral storytelling can capture tones and volumes (which can be important in preventing misunderstandings). Storytellers can rely on repetition to emphasize key concepts.
• Oral storytelling generally has to confine itself to what is digestible for a person in one sitting. Written stories can be picked up and put down multiple times.
• If done face-to-face, users can interact with an oral storyteller and ask questions. Written storytelling does not allow for impromptu questions and answers.
• Written stories can be edited and developed more deeply. A written storyteller can return and add subplots and complexities upon viewing their drafts. Written storytellers can closely analyze the order of their words. As Gnanadesikan (2011) highlights, written words can be examined, analyzed, dissected, and discussed. Oral storytelling is likely to be more concise as too many details can bog down the overall message of the story or lose the attention of listeners.
• Oral storytelling gives way to more slang and casual/conversational tones. Written storytelling tends to be more formal. I look at Canvas discussion posts and live classroom discussions as an example. In a live, synchronous course, group discussions can be casual and informal. Grammatical errors and punctuation are often overlooked and more casual terms can be used (e.g. “wanna”, “gonna”, etc.). In a Canvas discussion post, grammar, punctuation, and referencing are essential.
• Oral storytelling does not require the listener to be literate. As Gnanadesikan (2011) notes, “Reading and writing do not come naturally and must be taught” (p. 4).
• If done face-to-face, storytelling requires the storyteller and the listener to be in proximity to one another (unless it is a recording). Written stories can be easily shared and transmitted.

References

Gnanadesikan, A. E. (2011).“The First IT Revolution.” In The writing revolution: Cuneiform to the internet. (Vol. 25). John Wiley & Sons (pp. 1-10).