Is a reality augmented by digitality a good thing? My job with this post is not to answer that question, but to help make it possible.
I think this is important because in class, we talk so much about offering a solution to some of these issues, but I think we need to ponder this line of thinking: The solution is a simple as starting the dialogue and opening up the line of thinking and conversing.
comprised of a physical body as well as our digital Profile, acting in constant dialogue
Powerful.
The critique stems from the systematic bias to see the digital and physical as separate; often as a zero-sum tradeoff where time and energy spent on one subtracts from the other
This is exactly what I am starting to believe. We are doing ourselves, and future generations, a disservice if we continue to have this bias, that being "present" in one space takes away from the other.
augmented reality
So this is the term for when the digital and the physical world collide: augmented reality.
anti-digital-dualists ignore the reality that experiences in virtual reality can be very different than in our everyday reality.
I feel like this contradicts the earlier statement that anti-digital-dualists "acknowledge this fact [that what happens in cyberspace is different then in person] when they admit that chatting online or at a cafe are not the dame experience-and when the point to how people in social media deepen their relationship when they meet their online friends in-person."
supposed digital dualists were saying that what happens in cyberspace can be different than what happens in the face-to-face world.
Why the word "supposed"? Does it imply sarcasm?
Whether real or fake accounts, the message to teens about social media should consistently focus on always being in control of your own reputation, sharing things online that reflect the real you, and thinking of the long-term implications of posts. Real or fake accounts – the rules stay the same.
Good point! Just because it's private or just for certain viewers doesn't mean it's full-proof.I feel like that's probably something teenagers do not think about.
perspective on what their friends are doing
Not sure what the benefit of this is.
Their use of these accounts can potentially give teens more control over their digital identity, protecting themselves from users viewing and possibly misinterpreting their posts.
Positive aspect of finstas.
With this purpose, teens can feel free to enjoy their interest, or try new ones, without being worried that someone will mock them.
Isn't this a deeper problem? One article I read talked about how technology and social media is a vice and like any vice, the reason behind the vice is the problem. Isn't this mentality of having a fake persona so you won't feel judged part of a larger issue about being yourself? Isn't this slightly counter intuitive?
present a rawer, “this-is-the-real-me” personality to a smaller group of closer friends.
Oh I had it backwards. The "rinsta" aka real instagram is the fake persona and the finsta is the real them. That's an oxymoron no?
Finstas are often strategically used by teens to relieve this pressure.
Interesting. Finstas are used to relieve the pressures of having that picture perfect online presence, meaning they dedicate their finstas to manipulating and performing to project what they want the world to see. Not what is real, but what they project.
multiple devices that usually include a mobile phone and a laptop
Does the use of or access to multiple devices impact teens use of social media?
shifting in new ways in response to changes to social media platforms, the teen’s age and social context
That makes sense! I wonder what they do with the old accounts after they move on to a new platform?
I expected bullying to be much worse because of the Internet but I'm confident in the data that shows that it's not.
l would love to see that data.
But it should not be up to technology companies to determine when teens are old enough to have their voices heard publicly
How is this any different then the government deciding how old one needs to be to smoke or drink?
Instead, adolescents must be exposed to — and allowed to participate in — public life while surrounded by adults who can help them navigate complex situations with grace.
But the problem with this line of thinking is that Boyd gives adolescents more credit than they deserve. Yes you have responsible teenagers who utilize the parents or adults in their life, but lookout side that tiny circle and you'll see those kids are the exception. They are not the norm. Boyd underestimates adolescents need for freedom, which doesn't consist of asking adults in their lives for guidance.
When minors select to make their content public, they are given a notice and a reminder in order to make it very clear to them that this material will be shared publicly.
Ugh. Everywhere I read that it's important to give students the freedom to make their own choices and help them navigate this world. While I agree with that, that the world is changing, it's insane to me that we keep giving these kids more freedom, and yet there is a rise in mental health issues in teenagers, and we wonder why? Come on people. The key word in the text is "minors". I get that at 18 they don't drink a magic potion to become an adult, but they for sure have not at 13! Why should a 13 year old be given the same right as an adult? 18 is the legal age for a reason: overall more maturity and life experience. These kids don't have that and instead of fostering freedom and maturity, we're fostering entitlement and self-righteousness.
deepfakes
According to an article by John Donovan,"Deepfake Videos Are Getting Scary Good", he mentions that, "It's important to note that not all video and photo editing techniques based in artificial intelligence and machine learning are deepfakes. Those in academics who work in the field see deepfakes as amateurish, relegated to mere face-swapping." I think the issue here though is that these academics view it as amateurish. History teaches us that when we brush off someone as naive or ineffective, or young and inexperience, they end up being way more than we thought. Pay attention now people.
children.
This also made me think of other ways to target people: through subliminal messaging. We just read "The Lottery" and in it, the villagers blindly follow tradition, teaching the youngest of kids to also blindly follow tradition. Well in the case of the internet, if tradition dictates that it's okay to manipulate children's TV shows, what does that say about targeting them young? If politicians or advertisers decided to, they could begin manipulation young and foster a new generation geared to think and vote a certain way.
up
But are these view counts real or fake? And which is worse; that they're fake and people think they're real? Or that they're real and people are buying into them thinking they're real but that they are fake?
TV episode
I think the problem is that so many people have the attitude of "so what". Modifying an animated kids TV show doesn't seem to alarm many people. The problem with this mentality is that it's not exactly about the tv show itself, but the fact that Youtube or whoever, can actually do this.
The content is fake.
This is the section I will add to.
grapes into wine
Thank goodness for low-level alchemy!
Further, it is possible that faculty have unrealistically high expectations for student writing.
One of my concerns with how this survey is done, is the question of expectations. This survey is up to teacher and student discretion, so how do they know what the expectation for "good writing" is? I can only imagine that the expectations are widely diverse, especially considering economic backgrounds and the personal lives of the students.
“Developing logical arguments and supporting them with valid evidence,” “writing an argumentative or persuasive essay,” “writ-ing expository prose,” and “analyzing an issue or problem” (
Yea but is this because that's what the Common Core requires or because teachers truly feel this?
ow much students wrote assignments involv-ing summarization, analysis, and argument.
I think this is great! However, I worry that school districts care more about "buying" curriculum more than creating one. For example, I am responsible for implementing Lucky Calkin's Writing Units of Study, which is the writer's workshop model. I am forced to follow a rigorous calendar that places most of the writing importance on analyzing non fiction, creating and defending arguments, both in non fiction and literature. Traditionally called "Academic Writing". The problem with this is that yes, my students writing skills are improving, but so is their hatred for writing. They are burnt out by the time they graduate 8th grade, and I fear that that is not being taken into account.
Another influential study including middle and high school students
It's interesting hearing about these surveys in middle schools, as I've never heard of them or seen them.
151A d d i s o n And M c G e e / w r i t i nGi n h iGh s c h o o l / c o l l eGequality of writing must be improved if students are to succeed in college and in life. (Writing: A Powerful Message
I think it's so interesting then that more emphasis isn't placed on the written portion of the SAT. If that is where are students are lacking, it should be valued. Unfortunately, we live in an assessment based society and if the skill isn't assessed it's often overlooked and not considered "important enough" to spend time on. That whole "teaching to the test" idea. But then, if writing isn't stressed as important on a test so important as the SAT, why should students view it as such?
http://comppile.org/wpa+nsse/docs/27_Question_Supplement.pdf
I agree! The questions given were generic, and from a student standpoint, I don't see the value in them. If I was to take that survey, I would probably do it half-heartedly.
I was also thinking about the individuals who wrote the survey and was wondering if they were trained in it. When I write surveys for my class, a lot of thought goes into how to write it and what time of reflection I want my students do. I'm not always successful and I can tell that at times, they half-ass it too. That was the feeling I got from these questions: that they were just written to say they "had" a survey.
Presenting academic knowledge making in these narrow ways may also make students less likely to be creative or innovative in their academic projects.
I know I said this a few times last semester but I feel it's so true-that students today are less and less creative and I have to wonder: Is that the institutions doing? Are they just lazy? Or are we not giving them enough outlets to exercise being creative?
e or she will not learn to ask questions about such things as how to find other sites where information might be found, how to apply this knowledge to thinking about other library databases, or how to adapt the use of keywords or search strings across different kinds of databases or search engines
I absolutely agree. I feel like this is where I struggle with academic research. Knowing where to begin looking and knowing how to use those resources to help me use others.
opic decisions can change based upon information encountered duringthe research process.
I'll always have my students research for about a week on a broad topic, and have them look at all possible ideas or angles their research could take. THEN we go to researching more specifically.
Purdy and WalkerLiminal Spaces and Research Identity19We want to be clear that the academic library is a valuable resource students should use when conducting academic research.
we get it.
akes them see themselves not as academic researchers but as students forced to conduct academic research. I
very very very true!
Tensen’s text ignores potential ways to connect with the online spaces in which students are often more comfortable (and how such spaces can and do connect with libraries).
Instead of criticizing students for using these online spaces, how about teaching us to use them in different ways?
unregulated information
or alternative facts?
This is an important point! To think of undergraduates as capable primary researchers instead of just writers of research papers.
how compo-sition handbook authors created these textbooks to dictate what instructors would teach. Instructors did not need—and, in fact, were not trusted—to develop their own lesson plans or grading criteria; these were outlined in the books.
Huh...so this is saying that people who aren't in the classroom, aren't working with the students, aren't actively involved, are the ones making the lesson plans and dictating the curriculum? HA sounds familiar.
We therefore contend that academic research practices need to be connected to students’ existing practices rather than set up as wholly separate from (and better than) them
We're told this in teaching as well. In order for kids to learn it has to be taught in a meaningful way! If it's not meaningful to their life or experiences then they won't learn as effectively.
This uneasiness reveals itself in expressions of alarm that students do not, or cannot, consult the “right” online research sources and thereby will use inappropriate materials,
Isn't there a way to marry the two even in an intro class? Teaching a more traditional view of research molded with our ever evolving world?