So I think I have my project idea firmly settled in my mind, and I have found some book search widgets that might work. I’m going to create a wiki, my only question now is how it’s going to look. I have an idea of what I want to be on the page, but I have no idea of how I want it to look. I want each user to be able to not only search for a book quote, but add a book, and have a page for each book that might show common phrase searches for that book, or something like that. I might also want to connect to Amazon, so that people can directly buy a book. Who knows? I’ll be honest, I really have no idea how to do any of this.
The Photosynth
Monday, March 23, 2009
So, feeling somewhat uninspired by today’s reading, I decided to cruise through TedTalks and search “most jaw-dropping”. By accident, I stumbled upon some things that we have discussed multiple times in class, specifically hyperlinks and Flikr. Photosynth, a Microsoft creation, uses various pictures found all over the internet and merges them into one picture with depth and detail. (If anyone remembers the photo from the Inaugeration, it used Photosynth) In the example used in the video, an entire, detailed 3D model of Notre Dame was constructed from Flikr photo images. In another, the view could take in a 3D panorama of a cliffside, almost as if one was standing in the middle and turning around to see everything. The beauty of Photosynth is that it can take various images and create a network of hyperlinks from image to image to create a network of photos. One could, for example, tag the various saints carved into the Notre Dame. In turn, each person on Flikr whose photo was used to create the 3D Notre Dame will also have those tags on their photo. They can then tag things on their photos that will link back to other users and so on and so on. The video was aptly rated as one of the most jaw-dropping.
McCloud Revisted
Monday, March 23, 2009
So after our discussion on Thursday, I went home and watched the TedTalk that McCloud had done that Dr. C. had mentioned briefly. Unfortunately, about 5 minutes into the 17 minute long video, it stopped working. However, the first 5 minutes gave me some excellent insight into McCloud. He began by talking about his father, who was blind, but managed to be a very successful inventor and engineer. As the talk progressed, he began to talk about other people who had overcome obstacles in order to create something great. The first people he mentioned were Bush, Licklider and other creative thinkers whose ideas all focused on one thing: computers. It seemed interesting to me that a comic book writer would be interested in computers, of all things. After all, it seems that something drawn by hand would be the opposite of what computers would be used for. Once it is computer-drawn, it loses the charm and imperfections of the hand drawing. However, McCloud is not focusing on hands versus the mouse, he’s focused on the way computers have brought comic books into the future. I didn’t think about this on Tuesday, but looking back, I suppose I should have wondered why we were reading about comic books in a computer class anyway. However, after watching McCloud’s talk, (at least part of it) and looking at some of his webcomics, I understand, at least in part, how the computer can be used to reinvent something like comics, which to the average person, seems un-reinventable (sorry, not a real word, but you know what I mean). One would think that the comic strip can’t really be improved upon, but McCloud proposes hyperlinks, 3D imaging, and other ways to break comics out of their original rectangular shape.
The Hidden Message in Peanuts
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
So I haven’t really got much to say today about McCloud aside from the fact that I’m not sure I buy it. Frankly, I am not blown away every time I read the Sunday comics (and outside of that, I’ve never read a comic). At the moment, I can’t seem to fathom such depth to the comics as McCloud seems to think is there. For me, they aren’t deceptively simple, just simple. Granted, I am not much of a comic fan, and I spend little time reading and/or thinking about comics, which I think is mostly to blame for my current skepticism. But at the same time, I have trouble seeing Marmaduke as a shining example of creative thought. I think this is one of those articles that I need to discuss and receive some outside input before forming a final decision. Look for updates on Thursday and we’ll see how I really feel.
Turtles and Legos
Monday, March 2, 2009
So I am currently unable to find my book, though doubtless it will reappear conveniently sometime tomorrow. Consequently, for the moment, I am unable to read Papert’s essay. I have, however, done some research, so hopefully I won’t embarrass myself in class tomorrow. From what I understand, Papert, aside from creating a brilliant programming language, and a “turtle”, was an advocate of changing the educational system to include better ways of teaching and learning through developing software such as Turtle Geometry whereby children could learn by making rather than learn by doing. Papert believed that children were not inclined to be bad or good at math, but rather that the methods used to teach mathematics were not conducive to learning mathematics. In short, children were overcoming obstacles and managing to learn in spite of the system rather than actually being aided by it. In response, he created Turtle Geometry, a program that allowed children to create geometric shapes and plug in algorithms, etc, to modify the shapes.
Being naturally inclined to hate all things related to math, I was a little suspicious of this plan at first. How is creating a square that different from just looking at one? Is is different? And if so, how does that difference alter one’s perception of the square? But by applying the same logic to language, I began to understand how it might work. Reading a sentence in a language is never the same as forming your own. In the human mind, several things are going on at once that enable us to form our own unique sentences, which is why we often fumble or misspeak. However, these same processes are not occurring when one is reading. Yes, there is a degree of translation and understanding required, but to form a sentence is much more complicated and more conducive to language learning than just being able to read a sentence. Non fluent speakers can often read and understand sentences in a language, but when asked to construct a sentence, they often struggle and their sentences are full of mistakes. By applying this same logic to other learning processes, including the dreaded mathematics, it seems logical that self-creation is much more conducive to actual learning that merely reading about a subject.
The Irony of the Block
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
So today, I am having massive writer’s block. I can’t think of a single thing to write about that I could stretch beyond two sentences. I thought about writing about McLuhan and the idea of the medium as the message, but, to be frank, I can’t think of what to say. McLuhan already said everything, and I don’t disagree with him on any point, so I can’t just wax on about his brilliance for a paragraph. I don’t even understand why his idea would have been controversial because it seems like such common sense to me. Granted, I never thought about it, but when it was explained to me, it was some sort of “duh” moment, where it then seemed so obvious that I wondered why I never thought about it. Just as when one reads an article or a book by an author, one reads the material with the understanding that the words and ideas presented are colored by the author’s view, which is a medium in itself. Its no great leap to presume that the way material is presented also colors one’s understanding of that material. We always talk about bias and neutral presentations, yet the medium is just another bias that one must go through to understand the material. And of course, in the final stroke of irony, by writing about how I don’t know what to write about, I managed to write quite a bit.
Polio, White Men, and Web2.0
Monday, February 23, 2009
So today, in the hopes of securing three free passes for my Theater Props class, I went to see the play Iphigenia 2.0, written by Charles Wee. The play is a fusion of the ancient Euripides play Iphigenia, and a modern reworking that puts the play in a suspension of time between the Trojan War and the War in Iraq. While its an interesting concept, what is perhaps the most radical part of the play is the fact that it is posted freely online, and is meant to be reworked, rewritten and reclaimed by other theater producers and directors. Wee calls it the (Re)making Project and as soon as a read it I instantly recognized a sort of creative commons usage agreement, though not stated as such. Secondly, I was intrigued as I continued to read about Wee. He is at least 70 years old, and yet he is not only a creative thinker to the point of being child-like, he is also very up-to-date on new technology and Web2.0. It got me thinking about children and education which we were discussing the other day. Its rather refreshing to find one still in a state of child-like curiosity about both technology and art and the combination thereof. The idea that plays are not merely for the individual author, but for all to be inspired from, should be an example for all education. Education should not be about rereading what has already been written, but about taking something that has been written and being inspired by it, reworking and reshaping it so that it speaks to you. As a lover of literature, I feel that as readers, when spend too much time making a work “speak” to us. Yes, Shakespeare was brilliant. I too enjoy works by Austen, Joyce, etc., ect., blah blah vomit. I get it. Other people write great things, but one can’t be educated by forced inspiration from great works. Great works should be a source of inspiration for new, individual works that speak to the writer and to a new audience. By allowing his plays to serve as inspiration, not merely works of art, Mee is taking a step towards changing the way we view art, and eventually, hopefully, education.
Big Ideas
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Per instructions from the great Dr. C himself, I am blogging today about my project idea(s). The concept is a comment driven “book quote” dictionary, edited by users. My hope is to create a type of wiki where users can either insert or search for a word or phrase in a book, and then be able to view all definitions and comments about that particular phrase from the various users. I am hoping to create some type of yahoo pipe or whatnot that will connect the users to google books so that the phrasing may be searched from there. That way, readers can find similar words and phrases, various meanings of the same word/phrase, etc. within the webpage. Since google books has recently been starting to upgrade and include full texts of many books, the features of this website will expand over time. However, users would also be able to search within the website for words/phrases that have already been posted by other users, so the search feature would not be limited solely to google books.
Ted Talks…about Blocks
Monday, February 16, 2009
So last time I wrote about the need for open-ended education, without a pre-designed pathway. And today, while randomly searching TedTalks, I came across a video for a new type of computer called Siftables (watch the talk here). These small blocks are interactive mini-computers that can link to each other and can be controlled through everyday motions such as turning, flipping, pouring, etc. The brilliance of the idea is that it is the beginning of Nelson’s idea of computer oriented education. These blocks allow users to do math, reading, colors, music, and even allow one to create stories. And while they are “user-friendly”, it’s not in the sense of an iPod or a personal computer, but it’s easy because you use these computers as you would use any object in everyday life. For example, to mix colors, one takes two Siftables of whatever color, and pours them onto a blank Siftable to create a new mixed color. The beauty of the interface is that it is natural, not because we’ve learned about it, but because its something we already do. The program enhances our natural learning process, rather than teaching us about a program that will then teach us how to learn. All this makes me think that we might be beginning to realize the potential for computers to aid us in work and learning.
Please Keep all Hands Inside the Vehicle
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Take a walk in the woods. You can either have a specific start and end point in mind and wander as you choose on the journey or you can follow the pre-marked trail. Part of the problem with education is the pre-marked trail. If we are all stuck on the same path, is there ever any learning? Part of the beauty of learning is going down the undiscovered paths. Is repetition learning? Granted, perhaps it is with learning cursive, but there is so much more to learn beyond repetition. Is there any way to have progress if we are all doing the same thing? Yet we can’t have an education system without any structure. There must be a starting and ending point for the learner, but we can’t set him on a straight path with no room to explore. “Motivate the user and let him lose in a wonderful place” (Nelson). Being forced onto a path in the woods robs one of the beauty of the experience, the beauty of being in the woods. The beauty of being in the woods is that one can explore.
