Week Four: Life Online: Digital Identity & Being Connected

The focus for this week is the contemporary conception of digital identity. Both selected readings, When Atoms Meet Bits: Social Media, the Mobile Web and Augmented Revolution by Jurgenson (2012) and Visitors and Residents: A New Typology for Online Engagement by White and Le Cornu (2011) spoke of the fallacy of digital dualism and argued for a more integrated view of the physical world and digital world. Jurgenson (2012) argued that the digital and physical enmesh to create an "augmented reality" (p. 84). While White and Le Cornu offered a replacement for Prensky's Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants in the form of a new continuum based typology. White and Le Cornu (2011) state, "our Visitors and Residents typology should be understood as a continuum and not a binary opposition" (p. 5). This continuum avoids the generalizations of Prensky's dualistic theory or we end up viewing the world as the film The Matrix (Jurgenson, 2012, pp. 84-85).

https://laurenbedfordportfolio.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/matrix-pill.jpg Technology will always shape the people in terms of relevance and applicability. If the technology is relevant to a person it will naturally be incorporated into their daily lives. As an avid gamer, born and bred in the warm glow of Nintendo games and the chime of dial-up internet, I am no stranger to technologies influence in my daily life. Social media exploded on the scene while I was in high school and quickly became a popular means to stay in touch with others. Now I have continual access to my smart phone, social media, online gaming, and video streaming. Upon reflection on playing Second Life, a massively multiplayer online role playing game (MMORPG), I asked myself: Am I my user profile, username, or avatar rather than myself online. Sometimes I become my digital self, particularly when I am attempting to be articulate in a professional sense or when I am frustrated while gaming. Further, one should ask when engaging with social media: do you find your self-worth from social media or does it lift you up? It is a balance for me. I can not quit. For me, the digital and physical occupy the same realm and therefore my reality has always been augmented.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/76/1d/3f/761d3f8d82c7d4cc0e313a1f54bbca7a--cyberpunk-art-cyberpunk-design.jpg

Check out this incredibly succinct and thoughtful video:

Is Social Media Hurting Your Mental Health? | Bailey Parnell | TEDxRyersonU

How Social Media Shapes Identity | Ulrike Schultze | TEDxSMU

Discussion in class focused on our redefined relations and identity online. How we portray ourselves online is often a reflection of our true self; an expression of freedom or professionalism. Unfortunately there are individuals that berate or belittle the works or ideas of others online; these individuals have earned the moniker troll. As Coles and West (2016) note, "'trolling' refers to specific type of malicious online behaviour, intended to disrupt interactions, aggravate interactional partners and lure them into fruitless argumentation" (p. 233). Trolling behaviour has the potential to great harm and is pervasive throughout online media (Coles & West, 2016, p. 233).

The world's greatest internet troll explains his craft

https://imgur.com/gallery/G0Zf8yi

Net neutrality is the concept that all data should be treated equally. Linked with net neutrality and under the umbrella of an "open internet" are the concepts of decentralization of technological power, social justice, lack of internet censorship, transparency, and open standards. Berghel (2017) rhetorically asks, "How does net neutrality fit within today’s neoliberal politics?" To which Berghel responds, "In short, it doesn’t" (p. 68)! Berghel uses, " neoliberalism to denote an uncritical vision of unregulated markets, privatization of public assets and resources, and antipathy to public support of social programs that’s affiliated with crony rather than laissez-faire capitalism. Under this definition, government largely serves the interests of the power elite and military industrial complex—through corporate welfare (government subsidies/subsidy economics), procorporate tax policies (for example, foreign investment credits), loose monetary policy (for example, quantitative easing), deficit spending, and pro-monopolistic practices—and its legitimacy is measured by its potential contribution to corporate profit" (p. 68). Neoliberalism in this regard is diametrically at odds with the concept of net neutrality and an open internet. There are ways as users we can fight back. Online tools like Disconnect and Ghostery or the search engine DuckDuckGo avoid and block online tracking. The conversation in class around net neutrality really got me thinking of the television show Silicon Valley and a concept the show introduced, that of a decentralized internet.

Here is an article from wired in 2017 on the new decentralized internet and here is one from 2018 on the arrival of a glitchy decentralized internet. We are achieving a free system but there is a long way to go in a neoliberalist system. 

We're building a dystopia just to make people click on ads | Zeynep Tufekci

The reflection this week was exhaustive but offered plenty of conversation and insights.

Sources

Berghel, H. (2017). Net Neutrality Reloaded. Computer, 50(10), 68-72.

Coles, B. & West, M. (2016). Trolling the trolls: Online forum users constructions of the nature and properties of trolling. Computers in Human Behavior, 60(C), 233-244. Retrieved from CRKN Elsevier ScienceDirect.

Jurgenson, N. (2012). When Atoms Meet Bits: Social Media, the Mobile Web and Augmented Revolution. Future Internet, 4(1), 83–91. doi:10.3390/fi4010083

(note: this blog post might help with this - the original post where Jurgenson coins the term ‘digital dualism’: https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/02/24/digital-dualism-versus-augmented-reality/)

Sest, N. & March, E. (2017). Constructing the cyber-troll: Psychopathy, sadism, and empathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 69-72. Retrieved from CRKN Elsevier ScienceDirect.

White, D.S. & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday. 16(9). Retrieved from https://firstmonday.org/

Week 3: Integrating Technology in Education: Pedagogical Change, Integration Frameworks, and Engagement

The integration of technology into education, for me, has always been a nature process. Recognizing your student's needs and utilizing the appropriate pedagogical approach is essential. Kolb (2017) identified six important themes to consider when integrating technology into learning: Instructional strategies, engagement, access, application of use, authenticity, and co-use (p. 10). Okojie, Olinzock, Okojie-Boulder argue, "the degree of success teachers have in using technology for instruction could depend in part on their ability to explore the relationship between pedagogy and technology" (p. 66). The relationship is a give-and-take partnership.  



For me gamification and game-based learning highlights the relationship of teacher and pedagogy. 
Game-based learning (GBL) is a branch of serious games, games that encompass edutainment but also extends to all aspects of education, that utilize a variety of games, simulations, and role-playing to target predefined learning outcomes. Gamification, a set of motivational triggers such as rewards and competition, involves “using game-based mechanics, aesthetics and game thinking to engage people, motivate action, promote learning, and solve problems” (Kapp, 2012, p. 10). Games are productive; providing clear actionable steps and a progression towards a goal (McGonigal, 2011, p. 55). Game-based learning and gamification in the classroom may increase student engagement and is shown to increase student motivation, strengthen and form positive social relationships, promote student ownership of their learning, allow students the freedom to fail, offer opportunities for differentiated instruction, and promote the development of empathy. When digital game-based learning is placed within the Triple E framework one can see the potential benefits for the students.

http://www.tripleeframework.com/uploads/2/2/8/7/2287991/triple-e-framework-1_orig.png

Fullan's (2013) book, Stratosphere: Integrating technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge, spoke of the concept of flow and student engagement. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi is a psychologist who recognised and named the psychological concept of flow, a highly focused mental state. While researching the topic of the incorporation of game-based learning and gamification to promote student engagement in 07.714 Educational Research Methods, the ideas of Csikszentmihalyi featured predominantly in the related research materials. The question I ask myself is seems counter-intuitive but agrees with the research, why does engagement not automatically correlate to academic success (Kolb, 2012, p. 12)? The concept of flow as related to engagment just seems to resonate with my personal research interests. 

Flow is a state of absorption where individuals find pleasure in the work and the activity is intrinsically valuable (Admiraal, Huizenga, Akkerman, & Dam, 2011, pp. 1185-1186; McGonigal, 2011, p. 38; Fullan, 2013, p. 33). Active learning occurs when students are dynamically focused on learning goals. The goal, over time, of GBL is to establish a learning environment comprised of intrinsically motivated students whose behaviour is self-determined by whether they find the activity interesting and they want to successfully achieve the outcome. An autotelic activity is a self-motivated, self-rewarding activity that engages one entirely (McGonigal, 2011, pp. 45-46). Abuhamdeh and Csikszentmihalyi (2012) note, “the most enjoyable games were those in which player’s outplayed higher rated opponents by relatively small margins” (p. 326). Optimally challenging games in terms of outcome seem to be important for the enjoyment of goal-driven, intrinsically motivated games and simulations that increase student’s self-efficaciousness and increased student achievement (Abuhamdeh & Csikszentmihalyi, 2012). The chart below demonstrates Csikszentmihalyi's concept of flow:

https://opentextbc.ca/introductiontopsychology/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2014/05/image003.jpg

The following videos explore the concept of flow in greater detail:

FLOW BY MIHALY CSIKSZENTMIHALYI: ANIMATED BOOK SUMMARY

TED Talk – Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi – Flow – 2004

FLOW by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi | Core Message

Check out digital pedagogy and game-based learning from University of Toronto here.

Sources

Abuhamdeh, S., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2012). The Importance of Challenge for the Enjoyment

of Intrinsically Motivated, Goal-Directed Activities. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(3), 317-330. DOI: 10.1177/0146167211427147 Retrieved from SAGE Journals database.

Admiraal, W., Huizenga, J., Akkerman, S., & Dam, G. T. (2011). The concept of flow in

collaborative game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1185-1194. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.013 Retrieved from CRKN Elsevier Science Direct database. 

Fullan, M. (2013). Stratosphere: Integrating technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge. Toronto, ON: Pearson Canada. (pp. 33-54)

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Kolb, L. (2017). Learning first, technology second: The educator’s guide to designing authentic lessons. Portland, OR: ISTE. (pp. 9-37)

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change

the world. New York, NY: The Penguin Press.  

Okojie, Mabel CPO, Olinzock, Anthony A., & Okojie-Boulder, Tinukwa C. (2006). The Pedagogy of Technology Integration. Journal of Technology Studies, 32(2), 66-71.

Week Two: Does Technology Make a Difference? What Difference?

Does technology make a difference in the classroom? Oblinger and Hawkins (2006) poignantly tell the reader, “to get an answer as to whether technology makes a difference, we need to ask: ‘Difference in what’” (p. 14). This rather obvious question struck me as I had never considered asking myself this question. Prior to considering this question, I had simply employed digital technologies with the mindset of using them as an outcome, never considering the broader understandings or implications that they carry. In formulating a response, while perusing a few technology blogs, I happened upon this graphic below which eloquently laid out a more logical and thoughtful mindset to the usage of any technological methods.

http://blog.williamferriter.com/2013/07/11/technology-is-a-tool-not-a-learning-outcome/

Technology has always found a place in education. Zhao, Gaoming, Lei, and Wei (2016) note, “the Deus Ex Machina in education has never appeared” (p. 1). This central premise became the basis of a lively discussion in class. To which our class was asked the question: Which one of the five mistaken approaches to transformative technology in education identified in Never Send a Human to do a Machine’s Job resonates with you the most? I found that erroneous expectations and definitions of educational outcomes used as an effective means by which to raise academic results to be the most resonating mistaken approach. Transformative educational technologies are about providing more meaningful education for all. There is no fast track or cursory options, an educator needs to be open to integrating new technologies in a manner conducive for creating the optimal learning experience for all students at anyone time. This requires work and dedication, not cheap gimmicks and a sycophantic personality. 

http://www.workonthework.org/wtowblog/2014/12/9/deus-ex-machinawhat

Technology can be blended with new and old, providing a wide range of active learning opportunities in a social context, that provide uniquely redesigned activities that go beyond doing the same old song and dance. Unfortunately, educational technologies are often discussed via idealistic rhetoric and hyperbole. As Selwyn (2015) notes, educational technologies are, “infamously infused with language that is opaque, obtuse, and often self-serving” (pp. 1-2). Language is power and politics.

http://www.quotemaster.org/language+power

While reading Selwyn’s (2015) Minding our language: Why education and technology is full of bullshit … and what might be done about it the text introduced the ideas of critical pedagogy theorist Henry Giroux (p. 4). Giroux discusses how language is used as a tool of manipulation in contemporary neoliberal frameworks. (As an aside: In my previous post I had discussed issues of neoliberalism as related to critical digital pedagogy and now here is a theorist who succinctly elaborates on these concepts.) “Giroux talks of how citizens are continually compelled to overlook and ignore the complex historical, political and moral contexts of the current events in their lives. Instead, dominant interests propagate a lazy preference for jocular, superficial and generally vacuous talk throughout popular, professional and even academic discourse” (Selwyn, 2015, p. 4). Giroux identifies this as public stupidity, which is sustain by language devoid of ethics and social responsibility that deems critical speech as dangerous and untrustworthy. In this regard, digital technology can be a powerfully corrupt and dangerous medium but through proper education and application of critical pedagogy, digital technology can be a transformative experience. The explanations and social theories offered by Giroux offer a fascinating basis for conducting further research and one avenue that I will surely explore. Do you find language able to carry this much influence? Giroux greatly expands on the concepts of neoliberalism and critical pedagogy and offers insightful commentary and discussion in the videos below:

A rather poignant Taft Talk led by Henry Giroux:

Henry Giroux: Where is the Outrage? Critical Pedagogy in Dark Times

Finding Joy Amidst Fascism & Violence | Russell Brand, Henry Giroux & Brad Evans

Check out Henry Giroux’s website here.

Sources

Giroux, H. 2014. The Violence of Organized Forgetting: Thinking Beyond America’s Disimagination Machine. San Francisco, CA: City Lights. 
Oblinger, D.G., & Hawkins, D.L. (2006). The myth about no significant difference. Educause Review, 41(6), 14-15.

Selwyn, N. (2015). Minding our language: Why education and technology is full of bullshit … and what might be done about it. Learning, Media and Technology, 1-7. doi:10.1080/17439884.2015.1012523

Zhao, Y., Gaoming, Z., Lei, J., & Wei, Q., (2016). Never send a human to do a machine’s job: Correcting the top 5 edtech mistakes. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. ( Introduction & Chapter 1, pp 1-31)

Week One: Critical Digital Pedagogy, Digital Game-Based Learning, and Neoliberalism

While reading chapter one of Morris and Stommel's (2018), An urgency of teachers: the work of critical digital pedagogy, I was struck by the unusual applicability of this piece of reading to my pedagogical undertakings. I have just completed a course titled, 07.714 (NET) Educational Research Methods, under the direction of Heather Duncan. In the course, I focused my research upon increasing student academic engagement through the implementation of game-based learning and gamification in a grade nine Social Studies course measured through academic engagement and social inclusion. The student population, which is my daily reality, is a composition of approximately half indigenous students and the other half is composed of European descended students. The student body represents a range of diversity. Unfortunately, the reality is that the majority of the indigenous students are on the side of the education system which is failing them. As an educator in a school with almost half the student population composed of on-reserve First Nation students who have witnessed and experienced the results of intergenerational trauma.
The central focus of the research study was upon critical pedagogy, to foster agency and empower the learners. As a result of the technological limitations of the school and some of the students, I was limited in the usage of digital game-based programming. A group of students, who compromise the core of the school's gaming group, first provided me with what they wanted me to see in the classroom. There was an overwhelming desire to see experiential activities and games such as role playing, simulations, board games and card games to form the basis of a course, in conjunction with the use of game elements within the classroom, to create a gamified class. In previous courses, I had employed a semblance of game-based learning as they proved to be effective learning tools and agents of engagement and positive social interaction. Unfortunately, the largest difficulty for me was using digital components as our institution is financial and infrastructurally limited.

While we can mitigate and cure the symptoms of inequality, how can we prevent the recurrence and the growth of the disease in a systematically flawed neo-liberalist society? (Monbiot, 2016, April 15). How can we empower students and develop student agency? Critical digital pedagogy and neoliberalism are dichotomously opposed. In the midst of our competitive, greed driven neo-liberalist system, it may be necessary to maintain a misanthropic disposition where one is wary and mistrustful of the decisions of society. Our basic human relations become a competitive struggle. Neoliberalism recasts economic life in a Darwinian lens:

Inequality is recast as virtuous: a reward for utility and a generator of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve (Monbiot, 2016, April 15).

Neoliberalism perpetuates the inherent inequality in society by vouchsafing the status quo. This guarantees the entropy of our way of life. Evidence of this is ever-present in the lives of our students who are locked into a cycle of poverty. To develop an authentic academic engagement with all students in the classroom society needs to fundamentally alter. 

https://www.slideshare.net/jessestommel/critical-digital-pedagogy

https://teachthought.com/the-future-of-learning/zombie-pedagogies-embodied-learning-digital-age/

Jesse Stommel Digital Pedagogy Slideshow

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/09/f9/61/09f961add7cb71635e6ef2753000ffd2.jpg

To implement digital game-based learning, I familiarized myself with Jane McGonigal’s seminal text Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. Near the beginning of the text, McGonigal (2011) writes poignantly that,

When we’re playing a good game—when we’re tackling unnecessary obstacles—we are actively moving ourselves toward the positive end of the emotional spectrum. We are intensely engaged, and this puts us in precisely the right frame of mind and physical condition to generate all kinds of positive emotions and experiences. All of the neurological and physiological systems that underlie happiness—our attention systems, our reward center, our motivation systems, our emotion and memory centers—are fully activated by gameplay . . . When we’re in a concentrated state of optimistic engagement, it suddenly becomes biologically more possible for us to think positive thoughts, to make social connections, and to build personal strengths. (p. 28).

This quotation has remained with me as the essential aspect of empowering learners. Playing games can be academically engaging and a cathartic experience. For me playing digital games represents the essence of critical digital pedagogy. Is this the methodology to utilize in order to successfully embody critical digital pedagogy in the face of a neoliberal system? Perhaps, through the labours of a caring educator. Check out Jan McGonigal's eloquent TedTalk below:

Sources:

Morris, S. M., & Stommel, J. (2018). An urgency of teachers: the work of critical digital pedagogy. Hybrid Pedagogy Inc. Available at https://urgencyofteachers.com/

Postman, N. (1998). Five things we need to know about technological change [Speech transcript]. Retrieved from https://www.student.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~cs492/papers/neil-postman--five- things.html

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York, NY: The Penguin Press.

Monbiot, G. (2016, April 15). Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot

I'm gonna learn something in ICT. What I hope to learn or want to learn in ICT!!!!!!

I Want to LEARN Excel to aid me in Mathematics.

I want to play around with Website Design!

Nerd Out!

http://newictlearning.blogspot.ca/2015/06/information-communication-technology.html

When DONE publish your First Post!