Considering the work we've been doing this week, I've been thinking about the need for the implementation of technology in the classroom and in academic work. While it is obvious that technology can benefit students in a variety of ways, I admittedly enjoy the comfort associated with writing a paper or even taking a test. When using new technology to complete a project, I have found that these situation often create more all-nighters, cramming, stress, and frustration than do conventional assessments. I think this is primarily because the challenge of learning new technology demands time from busy students and teachers - time that very well could be taken away from producing a product requiring less introductory tutorials and appointments in a technology center. Furthermore, the idea of assigning a technology-based assignment assesses not only a student's conventional "intellect" but computer capabilities and creativity.
While I hold these somewhat negative concerns when thinking about the technology-based assignment, I see the potential benefit as well. As we are a generation that thrives from up-to-the-minute detail and expect instantaneous and always-available information, it is important that we can use new technology as assigned in order to create a product that meets both the procedural requirements and embodies the formal conventionality (our ideas, concepts, and the presentation of such ideas) necessary in a paper or on a test. Essentially, I do not mind doing this kind of project because I remind myself I should be able to complete such a task. But nevertheless, I think that these types of assignments should be used with caution in classes outside of the field of pedagogy. Can a digital story really live up to an analytical paper? Can a podcast replace a test? Though I cannot give a definitive answer, I imagine the answer is no. These tasks require something different. They respond to the needs of modernity and require different skills, which we need, but not in place of the conventional abilities we as students are expected to master by the end of a liberal arts university education.
Michael, I really enjoy a lot of the points you have made. I agree that a digital story can ever hold the same weight as an analytical paper. But, I don't think the purpose of a digital story is necessarily to replace writing but to add a different perspective. It would be nearly impossible to convey the same kind of analysis that one would see in a 10 page paper in a 2 minute story, but perhaps it's the way we go about doing it that is important. However, the fear still lingers that 100 years from now the idea of being able to write properly is no longer existent.
ReplyDeleteI completed a digital story last year, and I can assure you that even if it doesn't "live up" to an analytical paper, it definitely takes as much or even more time than a paper. After completing m DS, it felt like my little baby or something. After countless rewrites of the script, numerous recordings, and making sure that the images were perfect, I was ready to be finished with the project. I think I felt more attached to what I had produced through my DS, though, because I spent so much time with it, and it grew so much since its original "draft." It's honestly a very rewarding experience, and I think you'll end up enjoying it more than you think.
ReplyDelete