Writing, Computers, and the Like

I have been percolating, but I will be back soon. . .

In what ways am I?

The internet is the place where we can step away from everything that constrains us. There are no boundaries, no issues, just people being non-people, right? Well not so much. There are a few problems with this notion. One, we can’t step away from our own experiences. We are our experiences. They are our identities. We can choose which experiences we show. We can alter experiences when they are shared. Still, though, we cannot move away from what we know. Still, though, to have a place to play with experience and representation is cool. Two, there is an illusion of choice. We can believe that we can create and recreate ourselves in the spaces. We can make choices about avatars regarding how the options come together, but they are still options that are dictated to us by the people that design the system. Moreover, these options are often going to be influenced by what they were taught or told were good options to include. In other words, we not only play by their rules, but by the rules of the people that taught them. The default setting is not nearly as innocent as I would like to believe. Also, where does representation start? How closely is the space and the way we represent ourselves in that space to who we are? I recently read an article that discussed the way in which texts were used to create the identity of a student in regard to special education. With each step was another form and with each form was a little less of the actual child and little more of the numbers or technical language. Now, as far as the readings go, and with the use of IM and chat spaces, we are probably not going to privilege technical language and IQ scores, but there is something to the idea that the text is representing the person and with each possible manifestation of the text, such as a forward or copy and pasted section of the IM, the text become relied upon more to show the person. If a person starts checking the wall posts of random people on Facebook, how much do they really know? Are we that text? No. But then again, in that instance, we are the text. In this situation, the supposed lack of boundaries becomes the ultimate boundary—the lack of time and space constraints imposes a far more constrained view of identity— decontextualized lines.

I have thirty-three years of experiences. I have laughed and cried. I have lived and loved. I have died metaphorically and have come way to close, several times, on a physical level. I have had thoughts that are far too complex to discuss and have had some that are so incredibly simple as to need no discussion at all. I have played. I have run to and run away. I cannot even begin to fully understand myself and I would never ask anyone else to try. But to the person that stumbles upon this far from private space, who am I? A jumble of alphabetic symbols? My greatest joys, fears, loves, and beliefs may be present as they are woven in, out, and through the lines of this blog, but they are not fully laid out for all to see. How can it be? What is pictured is not me, at least not really me, it’s a semi-true story, and then you move on.

“Well the things that I’ve lived, and I’ve dreamed, and I’ve seen, and I’ve heard. You take the good with the bad and be glad to have every word. It’s a semi-true story. Believe it or not. I made up a few things and there’s some I forgot, but the life and the teller are both real to me, and they all run together and turn out to be a semi-true story.”

“Semi-True Story” from Jimmy Buffett’s Beach House on the Moon

Hmmmmmmmm. . .

“According to my watch the time is now. The past is dead and gone. Don’t try and shake it, just nod your head. Breathe in, breathe out, move on. Don’t try to explain it just bow your head. Breathe in, breathe out, move on.”

“Breathe in, Breathe out, Move on” from Jimmy Buffett’s Take the Weather With You

I was and still am a poet. I am a trained poet, no less. I have studied with, hung out with, chatted with, and consumed with some of the greatest poets of our time. Poets, like everyone else, come from different perspectives and approaches. I was/am a formalist. I love sestinas for their obsessive beauty, villanelles for their automatic connection to mood and history, sonnets for the passion, and of course couplets and odes for their potency when used well. Here is the thing with form, it is freeing through its constraints, but only if those constraints are used as challenges to make new the presentation, mood, and style. If the form is maintained in its generic manner without challenge, if words are placed in without thought, if the form is used because it is the form and not because of the connection to the idea and poet, then formalist poetry turns into a trite, grating, exercise in conformity.

If I speak in a way that is me, if I use the flow and ebb of the words to generate, no channel, the stories of time, of place, of dreams, of waking, and of wakes, then perhaps I can through the restraints, transform the restraints, transpose the restraints, transmit the restraints, and transcend the restraints. When the restraints become owned by those they hold back, then beauty exists and moves destroying the grip of pasts unseen, untold, unknown, unbelieved, and often unacknowledged. 

Technology, as with poetic form, as with values, carries with it beliefs and restraints beyond that of margins and script. Technology can try, at times, to stop language. Tools can try, at times, to hold back beliefs. Designers can try, at times, to restrict. This is part of creation whether meant or not. People, though, can speak without language, beyond language, and in spite of language. People, though, can believe when the void is pressing from above and when the past encroaches upon the present to engulf the future. People, though, use restrictions to free themselves by reinforcing the self when the self is denied. Hold us, push us, restrict us and we will find ways to speak and that voice will emerge more loudly than had we been left to chat in softened tones, for although at times made to whisper, it is that whisper which moves with forces beyond description. Just as the wave only crests when something is placed in its path, our voice will often truly emerge only when it is suppressed. Thus, through the restraints, perhaps technology can provide the freedom that is has, in the past, promised to deliver now and tomorrow.

It is amazing to me just how much the tool affects what is done. This is a basic concept in some theoretical perspectives, such as activity theory, but it still amazes me. What we do is created by the tool just as much as how much we adapt the tool to our needs. The book has adapted and changed what we do and how we present information. Just as, as Bolter pointed out, with the differences between the book and the scroll, the manner in which a story is told and what is privileged is affected. The linear and the hierarchy has become a staple of the thought and the tool.

The concepts and the hierarchy/linear quality was at one point new and innovative, though it is now so commonplace that we can no longer even see this perspective. There is a great youtube video that shows a helpdesk call with the book and makes the connections with what is going on in many offices today <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFAWR6hzZek > (search introducing the book). As Bolter starts to discuss the ebook and the encyclopedia, it really does make me wonder where we are headed. The other point made by Bolter, regarding the need for visuals and aesthetics, feeds into this as well.

I recently read a student paper that discussed the trend of the ipod claiming that the popularity of the ipod comes from the video capabilities. There are obvious issues with the logic, but it did cause me to move even further in my thoughts. Apple knew that this was a good innovation or they would not have included it. This is not the only instance of video becoming even more important. Minivans have built in dvd players. Phones can now show television programs. Many websites now open with video production, so where are we going to go next.

There is a debate surrounding whether or not the book with disappear. Perhaps this is a valid question. With the ebook, and its capabilities to hold many books, which is something I find appealing when I have a very heavy bag on the weekends, and its capabilities to incorporate things like video, maybe the days of the book are numbered.  Youtube, websites, and other video presentations are becoming increasingly important in the classroom, so, if the text has videos built in, maybe the ebook has a place.
 

Visuals are more powerful than words. Visuals are concrete. Visuals are easy to understand. Visuals span cultures and times. My students can interpret a visual argument much easier than a written argument. If we have the capabilities, and know that it will help students learn, shouldn’t we move forward. Using a tool just to use a tool doesn’t necessarily make sense, but if we practice what we preach, audience consideration, perhaps it is time to let the book drift a bit. Don’t get me wrong, I love books. I love the feel of a book, but more and more, I find myself turning to the electronic forms. If all the books on my shelves ceased to work, I would be sad and search for electronic copies. If the internet went away, though, well, I am not sure I would know what to do since I couldn’t search for the answers.

Let’s hope the internet doesn’t really crash J

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqqcnVxl8wE&NR=1>

Hypertext

Let’s put this on the back burner for a second. As I stand if front of my class to bring together a quick discussion about a class activity, I go through the normal process. I am writing the main points that the students provide in different colors on the whiteboard, I am talking, I am asking questions, I am listening, I am formulating the next step, and I am scanning the students looking for who is involved and who might be brought in the discussion. Reflect for a moment about how often you speak to someone while thinking about something else. Thoughts don’t come one at a time, they are layered. Thoughts don’t move logically from one point to the next, they start, they stop, they jump to last night’s dinner, and maybe they move to what the cat did in that movie, and then they flow back to the point they were developing. Think about the times when someone was speaking to you and the connection you made with her story only made sense to you.

allows

Let’s put this on the back burner for a second. Heat Moon, in PrairyErth, talks about issues of time in this book. He beautifully brings a discussion together of clocks. He points to the fact that time in the Western world is linear, but that doesn’t have to be the case. Some Native Americana perspectives show that the past, the future, and the present are not separate but exist together. We may try and flatten it. We may pull out the heavy iron, heat it up, and even provide a little steam to take out the bumps, to push time forward into one smooth continuum, but with life and wear, the wrinkles return.

thoughts

Let’s put this on the back burner for a second. Bolter makes clear that the tool has been formed and has formed us. This is nothing new. We are often, whether we like it or not, created and recreated but what we though we created. To what extent, though, should we fear the new possibilities because they fit not with old tools?

to grow

Let’s put this on the back burner for a second. Heat~Moon, in PrairyErth, states “certain kinds of writing and dreaming are intertwining things, like wild grapevine up the trunk of the plum tree: from the same dark soil, different fruits” (238). We are all but dark soil producing different fruits. Seeds from different fruits, flowers, weeds, and grasses fall and grow in new and unimagined ways. We may try and control the variety and types of wildflowers that come forth, but this creates nothing but monotony and bland palates. Let the colors bloom with the intensity that only natural progression can provide. Let the differences blossom.

in controlled

Let’s put this on the back burner for a second. Prior, in a case study of writing separate classrooms, states, “writing and disciplinarity are laminated, not autonomous, that every moment implicates multiple activities, weaves together multiple histories, and exists within the chronotopic networks of lifeworlds where boundaries of time and space are highly permeable” (277). All writing brings together layers of though, history, experiences, goals, dreams, fears, wishes, intensions, misperceptions, and detailed discussions – ours and others. It all coexists. It is not linear.

and beautiful

Let’s put this on the back burner for a second. My thoughts are not linear. My interests are not consistent. My dreams are not formulaic. My life doesn’t fit in the margins. My writing reflects this if the tools are made to.

ways

No two students are alike and this is not a bad thing by any means. The differences between students are what makes the classroom work.

Some students like to talk—a lot (even when they don’t really have anything to say). Some students like to be a little more on the quite side. Some students find that their role in the community is to be in the front. Other students may find themselves willing to listen and contribute later. Sidenote: Those who have been in a class with me know which side I tend to lean towards.  In a f2f class, I am not relying on my presence to satisfy any requirements. I believe though that if one has nothing to say, it serves no purpose to tell others.

Some students have a lot of knowledge surrounding the specific language of the system in which they are in, such as specific classrooms be they f2f or online. Other students have trouble staying in touch with the lingo.

Some students have problems with the tools of the system in which they are involved. This could be a problem with a physical tool – such as a book, a whiteboard, or a computer program— it can be a rhetorical tool – such as an argumentative form or research method— or it could be with a genre set – such as a blog, webpage, or research paper. Other students pick the tools up and use them with an ease and grace that cannot be explained. These students may quickly learn to adapt, shape, and reshape the role of the tool in that system rather than finding themselves bound with its intended purpose.

Some students naturally understand the regulations that come with a specific system. These students may try to be sure to act in a way that is representative of the stated or unstated beliefs of the system regarding what is and is not appropriate in that system.  Other students may choose to act in a manner that is geared toward their beliefs regarding the situation whether or not those beliefs are in line with those of the system. This choice may be out of a desire to change the system, rebel against the system, or merely out of a lack of understanding of the system.

Students will come to the system with different objectives and they may or may not choose to align with those of the system. They may place their personal objective in the forefront, they may pull forward the objectives of the system, or they may keep their objectives in the forefront while acting as though it is the objective of the system that they care about.

There are a lot of moving parts here. Each system will be different and no system is static. Teachers in the online environment will not know where they fall in these situations unless they are placed in the situation. Training online instructors online is crucial to helping them experience the different roles that may be a part of their future systems. They need that training mouse in the beginning to get a feel for the environment.

What does it all come down to though? Whether it is in a f2f class or a brick and mortar class, students are different, tools will be used differently, objective will be understood and reacted to differently. Our job as instructors, actually teachers, is to help people adapt and react in away that will allow them to adapt and react to other systems. This means we cannot make assumptions about what students do and do not know. This means that we cannot crush rebellions or try to ensure absolute power. A good teacher will be a good teacher by remembering that every student in the classroom, whether they see their faces or not, is a person—a real person, with goals, dreams, fears, beliefs, desires, loves, and hates. Respect those we interact with and we just might get somewhere.

The perspective that Inman takes in “Recasting Canonized Computers and Writing Scholarship, 1979-2000: Cyborg Narratives” is extremely relevant and important. The accomplishments and stories that make up the history of our field need to be viewed in a singular and significant way. Each of the people he discusses, as well as those discussed in Hawisher et al and even those that aren’t discussed, contributed something very important to the over position which has come to be. While it is good to step back and look at the wall itself, each stone in this stonewall is significant in its construction.

What once was a singular stone was added to another. What once was a singular wall is now the network of walls as with those in the English countryside. There are still those that roll their eyes or just tune out with discussions of technology, but the field as a whole has come to accept the idea that technology and writing are linked. The material aspect of writing is no longer held out of the classroom. With those that I interact with the most, the question is no longer “how can I keep computers out,” but “how can I get a computer lab to teach in?” No longer are the computers seen as a means to the end product but as a part of the product itself. Each small act is like the smaller stones that help stabilize the larger stones.

            Though we don’t want to lose the accomplishments by comparing them to the whole, we also need to be sure to give proper respect to those that have truly contributed great sums. The larger contributions make up the strength of the wall. These stones are the ones that make the wall itself work. These are the stones that have kept the wolves on the outside of the fence. Without the big stones anything could crawl through, but without the little ones, the big stones would not be able to make it through the blast of a strong wind.

            It is only because we now have this complete wall that we can paint or decorate the front. With strength the aesthetics can be added. As all of the readings clearly show, we have come a very log way. This picturesque wall is beautiful, but it took the labor and sweat of many to bring together each big and little piece.

“I crumple the note and put it in my shoebox, my shoebox of life.” Shoebox Bare Naked Ladies 

What is in my box? Well, there’s a picture of my wife and I, a hockey puck, a ribbon, an old medal that didn’t belong to me, a beat up teddy bear, two degrees, a Buffett CD, and several indistinguishable artifacts. When do the contents of my box cease to be mine? My box, be it real or imagined—I’ll never tell—is much of me. My ideas, my emotions, my representation, my identity, are all gathered in this box. They come together in a way that is like no other. They are a strange mix of reality and what I wish was reality. The problem is the items in my box are not my creations. I did not take the picture, but is me and the love of my life, who is everything to me to the extent that I am not sure where I stop and she starts. I didn’t design the emblem on the hockey puck. I didn’t even play on the team that was in that game, but I have spent countless hours in anticipation of “the next game”. I will admit that I cried a little when Bourque lifted the cup. The two degrees have my name on them and symbolize years of commitment, but I didn’t choose the fonts. I have been a parrothead for nearly twenty of my thirty-three years. I have come to find myself in the lyrics, but I didn’t write them. I do have things I have written that I am very proud of—poems, stories, papers. I have theories that I would like to believe I thought up, that is until I read about when they were created years ago. Who owns a theory anyway? These things in my box represent me, and though I can bring them together in a way that no one else can, they are still not mine. So am I just one big copyright infringement?
 

There are students out there with a genuine complaint. They write a paper. They put in the work. They pull together the ideas. Then, a well meaning instructor uses plagiarism checker to check it along with all the others in his or her class. It is not done out of mistrust but out of policy or a desire to find “teachable moments” with slightly off use of the works of others, and now that paper belongs to another. A corporation now makes money off their hard work and they can do nothing about it. Who is infringing here?
 

I have tattoos. I love my tattoos. I have one that I designed, but I didn’t put it on my body. I have three that I found in places that are important to me. I have one that was designed in front of me, just for me, by the acknowledged best tattooist in the world at that time. Does that spot on my arm belong to me or St. Mark? Are we co-creators or am I merely a canvas that moves on its own? I am guessing he doesn’t even remember it, but I relish it. It is me. That island is where I will someday disappear, but is it mine? Incidentally, the idea of disappearing to this island and those words come almost verbatim from “One Particular Island” by Jimmy Buffett. He said it, but I believe it. I have infringed again.
 

If I make that compilation CD that has Buffett, Blue Rodeo, Offspring, Lyle Lovett, Cheryl Crow, and many others that say more about me through their words than, sadly, mine often can, is it me or am I stealing from them? I associate memories with music. An old she, is a song now by Blessed Union of Souls. That first dance with the only true she is now a song by Janice Ian. The memories are mine, but the music is not, but I am not sure I can separate them.
 

I would like to believe that I can be part of everything that is in my box. I would like to think that it is all me and in some ways I have contributed to the meanings even though countless others bring to the table a different meaning. “Pirate Looks at Forty” means different things to me that it does to the guy that was one row in front of me at my first Buffett concert begging for the song to be played. He owns it. I own it. We both contribute something new to the meaning. We are part of it. Life, representation, dreams, goals, identity, they are all one big multimedia presentation. Why must we debate the origin?

I say all this, but I want to publish. I want to be important. I want ideas to be attributed to me. I guess it’s just not that easy.

With each week I am finding that there is more than meets the eye when it comes to computers and writing. I have spent lots of time considering physical class spaces with a writing class, but I have never before considered the physical space of a computer class as a rhetorical statement, but it is. How a computer lab is designed says a lot about the power structures of the class.

There really are important decisions that need to be made regarding how writing functions in the class. There are a lot of issues that don’t have easy answers. If you have the computers facing the wall, the students can’t interact with each other when typing. The common space in the middle is nice, though, which is allowed by having the computers facing the wall. The pods seem like a nice idea, but then when there are instances when the instructor needs to be the focal point, not everyone can see her or him. Not only that, but if the students do need to work with a hard copy, there is no common area.

With my personal experience, the wireless lab on campus was great, but that room just had a series of long tables, which also kept students from collaborating. Hayes lab is nice because if students are working in the two rows, they can meet n the center, but the classroom is always divided into two.

Perhaps a wireless lab with a series of half moon pods twisted  little toward the walls with instructor areas in four corners. Thus, there is no “front” but the students can see the instructor when needed. The groups could, then, also come together around a little are off the back to work on hard copies. Above each pod could be a screen to show each group things from a common computer. (Computers are Xs and / are table area.)

                                     IS

                 /                                      \

               /                                         \

           X                                            X

       X                                                    X

       X                                                    X

         X                                               X

IS                                                               IS

         X                                               X

      X                                                     X

      X                                                     X

         X                                               X

            \                                             /

              \                                          /

                                   IS

 That doesn’t look like a very good design any more. I still need to play around a bit more with these ideas.

To be continued. . .

My initial journey into the land of the wiki has come and gone. While immersed for the first time in that land, I couldn’t help but feel that I wasn’t in the proverbial Kansas anymore. I ask for your patience as I look back through a sort of Wizard of Oz perspective as there really are some connections.

The New Territory

I must admit that I enjoy technology. I am a fan of a few specific websites, I am beginning to really enjoy blogging, and I can use Blackboard with the best of them. When I entered the land of the wiki, everything was strangely familiar, but extremely different all at once. The interface was very similar. You type and it goes up on a screen, but there were major differences, such as when multiple people are working with the same page at different locations. Also, things like inserting pictures, creating bold text, or using italics is very, very different.

Who’s That Man Behind the Computer Screen

With the wiki, and the password, it is definitely an invitation only affair. With the support of the community, though, things get done quickly and well. There were a number of surprising and uncontrolled aspects of the wiki experience that when brought under control caused me to wonder about the hidden forms of control. The main thing that brought on this pattern of thought was the appearance and then disappearance of some lines on the George Bush Wikipedia site. They were literally there and gone. This, when placed in the context of the conservipedia discussion that followed illustrating wiki lock-down, really drove home that there are a lot of control mechanisms in place, be they implicit or explicit. In the classroom it seems like this would take on even more significance. There is the idea of pseudotransactionality (thanks Spinuzzi) and forms of control that would come from the teacher. What would the final product look like?

Finding our Collective Brain

The Barton reading really does bring up some of the very powerful and very real possibilities for collective, democratic knowledge. And, as with the Scarecrow, perhaps it already exists but merely needs to be acknowledged. What Barton describes is a very inspiring and exciting thing. The idea of millions of people coming together, as in the case of wikipedia, to add to a collective forum is really exciting. There are so many different perspectives of the different ideas that is seems only natural for a major collaborative effort to have a lot to offer. The question is then, does only the resulting compromise survive in an open forum such as this one. The appearance of the remarks about George Bush that were on the wiki and then gone within seconds was a dramatic representation about the way things can appear and disappear from this collective consciousness. Yes there is accountability in this space, but what about the voice of the minority? Sometimes the compromise might be just as dangerous as propaganda.

Glenda the Good Wiki vs The Flying Monkeys with Random Phrases

The early part of the class seemed to epitomize the idea of the good wiki, the “first year” students actively working and collaborating on a single product. There were a lot of people that seemed to be enjoying the collaborative experience. Likewise, when the entries were read aloud, it was really fun to see how varied they were in approach and tone, even though the all surrounded the same set of prompts that were known to all involved. This did not surprise me much. What did surprise me was the degree to which the groups latched onto the vandalization side of it. When Toby and I added some random phrases to each wiki hoping to spur discussion concerning how to facility the use of wikis in class and to raise questions about how democratic the process can and should be in often less than democratic classrooms, I was surprised at how the groups started vandalizing each others wikis. There were even false accusations about wiki vandals. If this is what happens in a grad class, what would happen with a group of first year students? This is not enough to make me not want to use wikis in my classes in the future, but it does show me the need to think a lot about the ground rules for the process.

Need Courage?—It Can be Found in the Wiki

The wiki, though, seems to me to be a powerful tool. Some of the more quiet people in class suddenly became very active with the wikis, whether it was in the original creation or in the vandalization of the pages of others. There really is a lot to be said for that courage that is within finding its way to the front very quickly and easily.

Our Ruby Slippers?

There is no going “home” after visiting the land of the wiki. This experience changes the landscape. I truly believe that with wikis, however, we all have the power to find ourselves somewhere else that is similar but different. We have had the power all along, but with a little prompting from Glenda the good wiki, it is easier to slip away.