In most of my posts, I tend to gain insight based on a broader scope of what was read; however, in reading this section of Buxton's Sketching User Experiences, one phrase in particular stuck out to me: "being able to articulate the reason for your decisions" (147).
Throughout my time in RCID 805, which I'm not over halfway through, we have been making project after project. My focus - though not where it should have been - has primarily been on learning the technologies so that I could complete the projects for class. Don't get me wrong; I certainly have been thinking about the rhetorical situation and the process involved, but that has not been at the forefront of my mind as much as trying to figure out which buttons to press, which boxes to click, and which options to drag to get the technology to work with and not against me.
Reading the above phrase, though, really keyed me in on where my focus needed to be instead: on the why. Why am I even making these projects? Why am I doing them in a certain way and not another? Or, as Buxton puts it, "Do I want this rather than that, and why?"
I am pleased with the timing of this reading. All along, I've known the importance of asking these rhetorical questions but have not done a good job listening to the voices in my head that were telling me to actually ask and answer them. Today, though, I finally have a skeleton of a website up so that I can place my projects on "display" - though hidden from most of the world as they are certainly not - or hopefully won't be anyway - my finest achievements. In setting up the website, we were asked to create multiple sections wherein we could discuss our rhetorical process and decisions. Now that this space is "up and running," I can kind of hear it speaking to me and beckoning me to fill in those spaces. I feel more of a need to ask and answer rhetorical questions regarding the projects we are working on.
In determining the questions and in answering them, I want to keep in mind much of what Buxton has been saying, namely the importance of creating a literacy of sketching. I want to really do well with showing and explaining the process by which these projects were made. For, the projects in and of themselves, for the most part, are not going to display well. However, the thought that went into them and the ideas that they represent certainly have meaning and value - value that I would like to return to when creating similar projects in the future.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Weighing the Worth
Kaplan and Sullivan each present multiple sides of integrating computers into the teaching of composition. Reading these articles was enlightening as I could not possibly imagine composing without a computer. I do 99% of all "writing" on a computer/electronic device - papers, communication with friends, notes, lists, etc. So, reading about the history of computers being brought into the composition was interesting, though not entirely surprising as academia is generally slower to adopt newer technologies and ideas than industry.
Something that they both bring up is the fact that composing via a computer provides writers with a greater amount of control than was previously available, paying particular attention to how computers increase what writers can do with their works in terms of publishing and revision. I think this is possibly the greatest benefit available now.
Kaplan, by way of Ohmann, though, brings up the issues of elitism and access. He quotes Ohmann as saying, "I see every reason to expect that the computer revolution, like other revolutions from the top down, will indeed expand the minds and the freedom of an elite, meanwhile facilitating the degradation of labor and the stratification of the workforce that have been the hallmarks of monopoly capitalism from its onset" (23). I agree that using computers to teach composition could certainly further separate the elite from others; however, I do not think that this is necessarily required to be the case. I think that recognizing this as a great possibility can open up ways to provide more access to people who may not otherwise have it. If we, though, assume that people have access and expect them to need electronic access in order to complete the necessary tasks of day to day life (which, currently, we often do), then we are doing as Kaplan suggests and helping the elite to become more elite while positioning "the others" in an even lower class position and making it more difficult for them to make headway in society.
Something that they both bring up is the fact that composing via a computer provides writers with a greater amount of control than was previously available, paying particular attention to how computers increase what writers can do with their works in terms of publishing and revision. I think this is possibly the greatest benefit available now.
Kaplan, by way of Ohmann, though, brings up the issues of elitism and access. He quotes Ohmann as saying, "I see every reason to expect that the computer revolution, like other revolutions from the top down, will indeed expand the minds and the freedom of an elite, meanwhile facilitating the degradation of labor and the stratification of the workforce that have been the hallmarks of monopoly capitalism from its onset" (23). I agree that using computers to teach composition could certainly further separate the elite from others; however, I do not think that this is necessarily required to be the case. I think that recognizing this as a great possibility can open up ways to provide more access to people who may not otherwise have it. If we, though, assume that people have access and expect them to need electronic access in order to complete the necessary tasks of day to day life (which, currently, we often do), then we are doing as Kaplan suggests and helping the elite to become more elite while positioning "the others" in an even lower class position and making it more difficult for them to make headway in society.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Experiences
The context for this week's reading, for me, is the websites we are creating for our online portfolios. I think that they serve as a wonderful example of Bolter and Grusin's remediation. We are filling these websites with several different types of media and are using much old media to create new media. The cyberpoem in particular comes to mind as many of us will likely be using poems that were written hundreds of years ago before "new media" was even an idea. What I'm not sure about how to help create, though, is a transparency among the website. And, though Bolter and Grusin seem to think otherwise, I don't think that total transparency will ever be psosible. Certainly, we can try - and web designers who are skillfully trained can come close to - making objects and concepts in media seem like reality; however, even if everything were holographs, there would still be a way of knowing and recognizing that some things simply must be experienced.
I think back to my summer trip to Poland and how we visited Auschwitz. I'd read about Auschwitz in books and online, seen websites discussing it, watched videos about it, and even seen actual footage of many of the goings on of the Holocaust in Night in Fog. But none of that compared to being there in person. I was able to take in the place with all of my senses and was able to see it surrounding me, not simply on a screen in front of me. I could have a conversation - a genuine conversation - with people in my party about it and with the experts who were the tour guides. It was a real experience that could not be duplicated by media.
Though Buxton may argue that perhaps had the design of the media I'd been interacting with prior to my trip to Auschwitz been better, perhaps I would've had more of a transparent meeting with the sites, I believe that some things are just meant to be experienced in person. That said, though, I agree with Buxton that design plays a large role in helping to create a better user experience. Certainly objects that are innovative in their functions and also in their design are more appealing to consumers - they certainly are to me. Why else would I have spent the last several hours trying to perfectly match the color of the banner on my portfolio site to the container color? (I was unsuccessful thus far). I think that providing a well-designed product not only increases aesthetic pleasure but also increases usability due to a better organization and interface.
I think back to my summer trip to Poland and how we visited Auschwitz. I'd read about Auschwitz in books and online, seen websites discussing it, watched videos about it, and even seen actual footage of many of the goings on of the Holocaust in Night in Fog. But none of that compared to being there in person. I was able to take in the place with all of my senses and was able to see it surrounding me, not simply on a screen in front of me. I could have a conversation - a genuine conversation - with people in my party about it and with the experts who were the tour guides. It was a real experience that could not be duplicated by media.
Though Buxton may argue that perhaps had the design of the media I'd been interacting with prior to my trip to Auschwitz been better, perhaps I would've had more of a transparent meeting with the sites, I believe that some things are just meant to be experienced in person. That said, though, I agree with Buxton that design plays a large role in helping to create a better user experience. Certainly objects that are innovative in their functions and also in their design are more appealing to consumers - they certainly are to me. Why else would I have spent the last several hours trying to perfectly match the color of the banner on my portfolio site to the container color? (I was unsuccessful thus far). I think that providing a well-designed product not only increases aesthetic pleasure but also increases usability due to a better organization and interface.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Courting the Casuals
In Henry Jenkins's Convergence Culture he discusses the difference between different types of television viewers, putting them into three categories: zappers, casuals, and loyals. He then explains how reality television (American Idol specifically) has been specifically designed to "support and sustain multiple levels of engagement" (77). He discusses the way that Idol reaches out to these viewers. One way that it reaches out to the in-betweeners or casuals is to provide recaps of the show's previous airings. He notes that "as they move into their final weeks and more casuals are drawn [in], [...] shows may devote an entire episode to the season's highlights, designed to provide an easy entry point" (77).
This entry point idea is something that I would like to carry over into the library's use of social media. From what Micki said when she visited the class, there is already a good amount of social networking and blogging available for the library. What she wants, though, is both an increased numbers of interactive users and a higher level of interaction. She wants people to go to the library's social media to find out information and to ask questions/provide feedback concerning current library practices and research. She mentioned that the library already has a fair number of followers on Twitter and several friends on Facebook. What I don't know whether has happened yet or not is whether she/someone has determined the type of users present among the site. My guess would be that most of them would be casual users rather than loyals.
If the students who are already following/friends of the library via social media, then what Micki is likely looking to do is increase both the volume and quality of the social media interactions. If, though, these users are casual users, they are going to need entry points in order to have these interactions. Jenkins points out that one thing Idol did was to have a full show devoted completely to highlights and recaps. I think something like this might work well for the library - depending on what exactly they wish to get across to viewers. For example, they could highlight past effective Twitter "conversations" wherein users received positive retribution from interacting with the library. Having this sort of "highlighting" occur regularly - perhaps every other Friday - would provide entry points for casual users to understand how to become more involved.
This entry point idea is something that I would like to carry over into the library's use of social media. From what Micki said when she visited the class, there is already a good amount of social networking and blogging available for the library. What she wants, though, is both an increased numbers of interactive users and a higher level of interaction. She wants people to go to the library's social media to find out information and to ask questions/provide feedback concerning current library practices and research. She mentioned that the library already has a fair number of followers on Twitter and several friends on Facebook. What I don't know whether has happened yet or not is whether she/someone has determined the type of users present among the site. My guess would be that most of them would be casual users rather than loyals.
If the students who are already following/friends of the library via social media, then what Micki is likely looking to do is increase both the volume and quality of the social media interactions. If, though, these users are casual users, they are going to need entry points in order to have these interactions. Jenkins points out that one thing Idol did was to have a full show devoted completely to highlights and recaps. I think something like this might work well for the library - depending on what exactly they wish to get across to viewers. For example, they could highlight past effective Twitter "conversations" wherein users received positive retribution from interacting with the library. Having this sort of "highlighting" occur regularly - perhaps every other Friday - would provide entry points for casual users to understand how to become more involved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)