Wednesday, April 28, 2010
A Vision of Students Today
In Michael Wesch documentary about students at Kansas State University it shows students in class like their normal everyday lives with signs showing some interesting overlooked statistics, information and thoughts related to their lives. Information that is gathered from the video is that students waste a lot of money on textbooks and resources that will never get used. Students who after graduation will be twenty- thousand dollars in debt are wasting money on things that will put them further in debt. Statistics say that only a quarter of what is taught in the classroom relate to students in their everyday lives, so what students are spending thousands of dollars on to go to school is big waste cause what they are learning in the classroom will most likely not relate to what they are working for for their futures. The problem today is that technology needs to be used in education to help me more relative to kids everyday lives. With kids having jobs while going to school maybe it would be more helpful if classes could be taken online or some other way. Not to say that all education should be used with newer technology but I don’t think that it would hurt to start better using our resources to help improve education.
Michae Wesch - A Vision of Students Today video response
At the very beginning of the video clip asks that if the walls of a classroom could speak what would they say? What are students learning from just sitting in a classroom? 200 students responded to an email that asked them what it was like to be a student today. They also surveyed themselves to convey a public message about what happens in the classroom.
What I got from it is that not a lot of learning really goes on in the classroom for various reasons.
Students today are spending an average of six hours a day doing class related things. A lot of money is wasted on textbooks and other supplies for classes. Some students never even show up to classes and many will be in at least $20,000 in debt after they graduate.
What I got from this video clip is that students today are more interested in using newer technology and thechniques in the classroom, but there hasn't been many changes made in methods of teaching with something other than the chalkboard and textbook. Perhaps if new technology and things that interested and applied to a students life were incorporated into teaching the experience of college would be a lot more enjoyable. Students pay for it so why can't they have school their way?
What I got from it is that not a lot of learning really goes on in the classroom for various reasons.
Students today are spending an average of six hours a day doing class related things. A lot of money is wasted on textbooks and other supplies for classes. Some students never even show up to classes and many will be in at least $20,000 in debt after they graduate.
What I got from this video clip is that students today are more interested in using newer technology and thechniques in the classroom, but there hasn't been many changes made in methods of teaching with something other than the chalkboard and textbook. Perhaps if new technology and things that interested and applied to a students life were incorporated into teaching the experience of college would be a lot more enjoyable. Students pay for it so why can't they have school their way?
Michael Wesch video response
It is truly a shame that more people do not know about Michael Wesch. However he has gained quite a lot of popularity on the online video sharing site Youtube. His video. “A Vision of Students Today”, gives a very strong example of how college level students look at the education they are receiving, as well as some of their circumstances. The main issue of focus is how technology is affecting students in college.
The video shows that students have a wellspring of knowledge at their fingertips courtesy of the Internet. However if students want a string chance to receive a well paying job, they have to sit through lectures and classes in a stereotypical lecture setting, take down enormous amounts of notes, and read books and other texts that have little to no bearing on their daily lives. Most of the things that students study in college and other forms of schooling are forgotten for this very reason.
The video itself has no spoken dialogue and is shot in a scattered text form. Meaning that in order to receive the message the viewer is shown bits of text in seemingly random locations. Later on the text is shown from signs written by the students in the room. This scattershot viewpoint gives a more universal point of view of the student’s circumstances.
Personally I think this video should be used as a lightning rod for reform. In this new digital age students should not be subjected to massive amounts of debt over books thy are not going to read or keep. Nor should they have to pay to take a class where they are not learning anything.
"A vision of Students Today" summarry by Derek Turner
The video opens up as an empty classroom, with questons on the chairs. Then the camera is focused on the chalkboard with it saying "The information is up here." During this video, the video text looks at how students are paying attention to everything else in the classroom instead of whats on the board. Shortly after music starts playing and i t shows short notes and quotes that each student has written. These notes range from, " I spend 2 hours a day eating." to "I complete 49% of the readings assigned to me." The video text shows that all these students have different views, when all the information is up front on the chalkboard, njot whats going on around you, the internet, etc. Pay attention in class, the views are interesting, and the learning is in your hands not your teachers. Finally, at the endof the video it refers to "back to the basics" and shows the chalkboard again, insisting that students should pay more attention or focus on the education at hand instead of all the other random factors and distractions.
Corrina B. A Vision...
After watching Michael Wesch's video "A Vision of Students Today" what I really took from it is how unrealistic the demands from our schools are today. We have a technology that allows us to access and send information at the speed of light and yet our schools barely incorporate online learning with our classroom learning. So many students are practically forced to buy books that we hardly use and yet we have a computer that we can google any information we need, and virtually not even use our books. Our teachers don't know our names and half of us never even show up to class and somehow some of us can still pass with flying colors. Our learning program needs to be evaluated and altered in ways to work more with our computers. People may believe that we need the classroom to keep our students involved but even when we do show up to class we are using our computers to surf the web, facebook and twitter. We are opening up to these online classes, we need to better construct those classes and open them up to more students. While I still believe that all the computer use is numbing us as an American society I do believe that if we tried to incorporate all the new technologies while still communicating with humans and teachers we can all find a happy medium between our “old fashioned ways” and the new craze of the internet.
A Vision of Students Today
Michael Wesch's "A vision of students today", is a fairly accurate representation of today's students view of school. It starts out with reading stuff written on the back of chairs, and on the walls. It shifts to students holding notes/signs written on notebook paper that describe what schools like. It elaborates on the fact that students have to multi task to get everything done, the fact that they go on facebook during class, and that some students never show up to a class they payed for.
It was a very eye-opening video that describes the way students feel. I've been in the same position as most of the students in the video, but have never expressed it.
It was a very eye-opening video that describes the way students feel. I've been in the same position as most of the students in the video, but have never expressed it.
Corrina B. New Literacy
After reading Clive Thompson’s “The New Literacy” I had a completely different perspective on the somewhat new craze of technology use. I had first believed that all the computer and palm pilot use was numbing us as an American society. While I still feel that the constant use of computers and other technology items is cutting off some values we as Americans should always uphold, I have to put my defenses down and agree with some of the positive changes that are coming about now days. Clive Thompson explores the benefits that our generations are taking advantage of through computers. Andrea Lunsford, a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University had conducted a study to see if the papers that students write today are affected at all by the constant use of computers. “Young people today write far more than any other generation before them.” (Thompson par 4). Because so many people, especially students are using computers and phones to communicate we are actually writing more than any generation has before. Majorities of this writing is happening outside of the classroom in emails over facebook, text messaging, and even twitter Lunsford has a special name for this writing called Life writing. Before the internet and computers for that matter ever really came about people would not write. The only writing people would do was what would be required for class assignments or in some cases a job that required daily writing. “They’d leave school and virtually never construct a paragraph again.” (Thompson par 5). In his paper Thompson states that “The fact that students today almost always write for an audience (something virtually no one in my generation did) gives them a different sense of what constitutes good writing.” (Thompson par 7.) When you post something online someone else can always have access to this and read what you post. From your facebook status to an online journal. People are realizing that they are having an audience and because of that they are taking more seriously what they post and write. They want what they say to mean something to someone else. Writing isn’t just good or bad anymore. People are realizing that it is knowing who we are writing for and why we are writing what we are is quite possibly the most important thing in today’s writing.
UNHAPPY students!!! Slavik S
Michael Welch has created an amazing video. The video describes and shows thoughts, dreams and problems of today’s students. Students are packed into classes on average of 115 students. They all worry about the future also students are concerned about their future. They know that technology is changing and it has a large impact on their education. It is believed that technology can save human beings. As they encounter problems around them they state “we don’t create problems but, they are our problems”. A lot the students are concerned about world around them. They believe that they are the lucky ones but, at the same time their spending a lot of money for books and end up not using them. In addition tuitions are VERY expensive and students are ending up with large depts after graduation. Already in universities they understand that life isn’t easy. The education is something that they need but sometimes they are not excited about it.
One of the college students on you tube states “I go to college and it is overrated. I literally learn more from watching the discovery channel and going on the internet than I do in my classes. I am dropping out as soon as I get my AA, because I have spent too much time and money to leave empty handed. The whole college experience is a sham. I can't believe there aren't more people saying this; you can see it on the students faces every day. No one cares. They made learning painful. Even most of the professors feel this way”. (GTRrocker666)
A lot of the students are just simply concerned about the cost of education, the education in colleges are not as much effective and doesn’t worth the price. In my opinion this video is a good example how today students feel about education. A lot of the times when I come home from college, I often feel overwhelmed to the point that you feel like quitting.
One of the college students on you tube states “I go to college and it is overrated. I literally learn more from watching the discovery channel and going on the internet than I do in my classes. I am dropping out as soon as I get my AA, because I have spent too much time and money to leave empty handed. The whole college experience is a sham. I can't believe there aren't more people saying this; you can see it on the students faces every day. No one cares. They made learning painful. Even most of the professors feel this way”. (GTRrocker666)
A lot of the students are just simply concerned about the cost of education, the education in colleges are not as much effective and doesn’t worth the price. In my opinion this video is a good example how today students feel about education. A lot of the times when I come home from college, I often feel overwhelmed to the point that you feel like quitting.
Emily M. on Michael Wesch "A Vision of Students Today"
Michael Wesch and his students from KSU produced a video “A Vision of Students Today”. This video shows how students view their lives in the classroom. The first scene is of different views of an empty classroom with writing on the walls, “If these walls could talk… What would they say?” On the backs of the seats it reads, “What are they learning sitting here?” I ask myself this question often. What are we learning sitting in the classroom if we can use our technology to teach us, such as Moodle. Our teachers check in on us every now and then, but why have a teacher there to tell you what to do or teaching a lesson if we can have these things handed to us on the computer? The video next moves on to show a survey that 200 students made 367 edits to a document and surveyed themselves on the question, “What is it like being a student today”. I can answer this in many ways myself, so it doesn’t come to any surprise to see the following scene of students holding up signs with statistics and their feelings on everything in the classroom, i.e. “I spend hundreds of dollars on books that I never use”, “I use 26.5 hours every day”, and the last one “I am a multi-tasker, I have to be”.
The last statement hits home to me. I don’t find the time in the day to relax. I constantly have to be moving, going during the school week. Life as a student is fast paced. We multitask in everything we do. This has to do with technology a lot. A girl in the video types on her laptop that she views her facebook page during class. Another types that although she brings her laptop to class she isn’t working on class work. I think that we all suffer from that. We all want to rather put things off, procrastinate until the last minute. We’re obsessed with technology. While we sit at home we grab our laptop as well as the T.V. remote as we finish our assignment that’s due in two hours. Or while working on the computer another tab holding our Facebook, or Myspace account is waiting and ready for our use. We listen to music, talk on our cellphones, text, play video games, read all those Facebook or Twitter updates. Everything we do, we have something else going on at the same time. That’s the only way we can function as college students. We mix life writing with classroom writing.
From watching this video I thought to myself that the students felt like being in college was a waste of their time. A girl in the video wrote “my neighbor pays for this class but never comes”. That’s how it is. Other things are more important than going to the class to listen to a teacher when you can get your assignments online and you can do the work without sitting through a hour long class. Technology has made it so that we don’t need classrooms anymore.
The last statement hits home to me. I don’t find the time in the day to relax. I constantly have to be moving, going during the school week. Life as a student is fast paced. We multitask in everything we do. This has to do with technology a lot. A girl in the video types on her laptop that she views her facebook page during class. Another types that although she brings her laptop to class she isn’t working on class work. I think that we all suffer from that. We all want to rather put things off, procrastinate until the last minute. We’re obsessed with technology. While we sit at home we grab our laptop as well as the T.V. remote as we finish our assignment that’s due in two hours. Or while working on the computer another tab holding our Facebook, or Myspace account is waiting and ready for our use. We listen to music, talk on our cellphones, text, play video games, read all those Facebook or Twitter updates. Everything we do, we have something else going on at the same time. That’s the only way we can function as college students. We mix life writing with classroom writing.
From watching this video I thought to myself that the students felt like being in college was a waste of their time. A girl in the video wrote “my neighbor pays for this class but never comes”. That’s how it is. Other things are more important than going to the class to listen to a teacher when you can get your assignments online and you can do the work without sitting through a hour long class. Technology has made it so that we don’t need classrooms anymore.
Technology complex claim
Christian Mcginnis
Kailey Unruh
Pinky Singh
04/28/2010
The internet is more advanced today than it was 10 years ago. Many of us use to communicate with others. For example, facebook, myspace, blogger, and chat room are a great way to communicate with others all over the world. Before the internet people would sent letters around the world and it would a while to receive it but now you can sent an email and you would receive it automatically.
Kailey Unruh
Pinky Singh
04/28/2010
The internet is more advanced today than it was 10 years ago. Many of us use to communicate with others. For example, facebook, myspace, blogger, and chat room are a great way to communicate with others all over the world. Before the internet people would sent letters around the world and it would a while to receive it but now you can sent an email and you would receive it automatically.
Technology Complex Claim
Chandra, Maddie and Victor
The mainstream use of information technology is the only major influential factor that has caused us to nonverbally communicate with greater frequency and ingrain a new lexical, grammatical, and syntactical format for this specific mode of communication.
The mainstream use of information technology is the only major influential factor that has caused us to nonverbally communicate with greater frequency and ingrain a new lexical, grammatical, and syntactical format for this specific mode of communication.
Technology Complex Claim
Andrea, Joey and Ellie
The ability to communicate at a much faster rate than prior years, and the complexities of electronic communication have moved us from the state in which we travel long distances to visit others, to simply flipping a switch and waving hello from our webcams. People who wish to keep up with the rapid pace of today’s world will be forced to shift from the ways in which they once communicated to today’s newer and faster methods.
The ability to communicate at a much faster rate than prior years, and the complexities of electronic communication have moved us from the state in which we travel long distances to visit others, to simply flipping a switch and waving hello from our webcams. People who wish to keep up with the rapid pace of today’s world will be forced to shift from the ways in which they once communicated to today’s newer and faster methods.
LIa: Michael Wesch's "A vision of Students Today."
Michael Wesch opens his video with a quote by Marshall McLuhan, "Todays child is bewildered when he enters the 19th century environment that still characterizes the educational establishment where information is scarce but ordered and structured by fragmented classified patterns subjects and schedules." When I first came upon this quote I was very confused and still a little confused by it, but somehow it does make me think. I really do believe that this means that today when a child is brought into the world they are subjected to all the technology and what can enable them to do something the easy way. The other day my brother Shane, who is 15 years old almost a freshman in high school, was on the computer doing a writing assignment for class and was copying and pasting information from the internet into his essay. What does this say about teaching today? Wesch showed a very indie film made by his Anthropology class, that showed college students and what they do with their time and money, for college. Most of them were telling us how many hours a day they work on homework and studying, working, listening to music, facebooking, emailing, etc. It came out to 26.5 hours a day, and the last time I checked there are only 24 hours in the day. Students in college today are acting like super humans, they multi-task and are too distracted by outside things rather focusing on their education. What was and is shocking, is that one girl said about 18% of her teachers know her by her first name. Another girl said there were an average 115 students in each of her classes. Where is the student teacher relationship in that? Our class started to hypothesize that teachers may be getting lazy or that technology has become so vastly used, that they rely on it to do their lesson plans. Has our society lost interest or has our teachers fell down at the waist side on how they capture students attention to want to learn by the teacher and not by the internet? We brought up an interesting concept in class, why do we still have teachers when there is all the information we learn in a classroom on the internet? I believe it is because we need structure, technology is a wonderful thing but at the same time its enabling us from focusing on what is actually important. Even right now as I am typing this blog post, I have been Facebooking and texting. I have sat here and tried to take apart Weschs video and what is the message behind it. I am still confused, is it for technology or is it against it?
Technology Complex Claim
Electronic technologies such as text messaging, blogging, and online social networking, are enabling today's youth to communicate and share information with greater ease than ever before. While this ease can initially seem purely beneficial, students spending an increasing amount of time utilizing these new forms of technology may be hindering their ability to communicate one-on-one.
technology complex claim/ Kelly, Cai, Sheila
As society comes to accept new technologys, such as the Iphone, the way we interact socially, personally and in bussiness will be reshaped.
Technology Complex Claim
Aaron, Martin and Amber
One of the aspects of technology that has broadened the youth of americas ability to communicate is the internet. The youth of america are able to Instant Message and chat online so much that they start to simplify the way they talk, thus their grammer standards have begun to lower.
One of the aspects of technology that has broadened the youth of americas ability to communicate is the internet. The youth of america are able to Instant Message and chat online so much that they start to simplify the way they talk, thus their grammer standards have begun to lower.
Alexandria's take on "A vision of students today"
“A Vision of Students Today”, is a video created by Michael Wesch and his 200 students he surveyed in 2007. The video gives a voice to the many questions that are still out there concerning whether or not technology and education can peacefully coexist. The video makes you question if human relationships are suffering from this new rise of technology and if it separates people. Many people have become annoyed with the ever persistent saying “technology is the down fall of man”, but can there really be some truth to this saying?
The video’s introduction starts off with a text describing how even in the “19th century our educational environment still demands order and repetitious schedules and subject patterns”. The camera scans an empty classroom with writing on the walls and chalkboard. The sound track playing is very eerie and has a lonely melody to it. Then the classroom fills up with students, holding up cards that talk about the difficulties and facts they go through in everyday life because of them trying to balance education and technology. One student holds up a card that says “I will write 42 pages for class this semester and over 500 pages of emails”. This seems to be a demonstration of what Clive Thompson in his essay on “The New Literacy” was describing. Thompson main argument was that more people today write more lifetime writings then formal papers (1). Another student’s card says “18 % of teachers don’t know my name”, illustrating that with the rise of technology, many teachers are not doing there job of teaching or bonding with their students. This makes another question, is technology to blame for this educational pit we seem to be in? Or is it that teachers haven’t learned to use technology to their advantage? The video continues with how little time in a day there is to accomplish the demands students have thrust upon them. It also shows because of how accessible technology is, it has made it easier for us to zone out in class and not learn the material being taught to us, instead we find ourselves looking up face book in class. The video has left me feeling that there needs to be more of a structure when using technology to help in educating students. I believe students need to learn to balance their time better and have better discipline when using technology. I also believe that if teachers and students learned how to use technology to their advantage, we could grow stupendously in the educational environment. There needs to be time where technology can help educate students and time for hands on learning from an instructor that can relate to students. In my opinion, what our educational environment truly lacks is balance.
The video’s introduction starts off with a text describing how even in the “19th century our educational environment still demands order and repetitious schedules and subject patterns”. The camera scans an empty classroom with writing on the walls and chalkboard. The sound track playing is very eerie and has a lonely melody to it. Then the classroom fills up with students, holding up cards that talk about the difficulties and facts they go through in everyday life because of them trying to balance education and technology. One student holds up a card that says “I will write 42 pages for class this semester and over 500 pages of emails”. This seems to be a demonstration of what Clive Thompson in his essay on “The New Literacy” was describing. Thompson main argument was that more people today write more lifetime writings then formal papers (1). Another student’s card says “18 % of teachers don’t know my name”, illustrating that with the rise of technology, many teachers are not doing there job of teaching or bonding with their students. This makes another question, is technology to blame for this educational pit we seem to be in? Or is it that teachers haven’t learned to use technology to their advantage? The video continues with how little time in a day there is to accomplish the demands students have thrust upon them. It also shows because of how accessible technology is, it has made it easier for us to zone out in class and not learn the material being taught to us, instead we find ourselves looking up face book in class. The video has left me feeling that there needs to be more of a structure when using technology to help in educating students. I believe students need to learn to balance their time better and have better discipline when using technology. I also believe that if teachers and students learned how to use technology to their advantage, we could grow stupendously in the educational environment. There needs to be time where technology can help educate students and time for hands on learning from an instructor that can relate to students. In my opinion, what our educational environment truly lacks is balance.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Were not Robots BpAlstatt
Bob Alstatt
Were not robots
Michael Wesch A Vision of Students Today
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o
The door opens to the echo of an empty room. Fading in Marshell McLuhan comments “Todays child is bewildered when he (the child) enters the 19th century environment that still characterize to educational establishment where information is scarce but ordered and structured by fragmented classified patterns, subject and schedule”. Wesch brings to our attention by using students to convey a message the need for change. Wesch students use word presentation to reflex a quorum of their daily life and stagnation they deal with. Throughout the video viewer learned the quorum’s observation of how learning is taking place. The video constructs ways that learning would benefit student’s addition in teaching. The students provide ammunition a plea “will the collective just see what I do daily”. Why is what I know given no accreditation? Adding technology relevant to students learning, incorporating today’s youth communication network giving students a voice. Students could relate, relax, participate placing a personal stamp in student development.
Wesch frustration in teaching restriction plays out with students showing viewer pertinent message tagging “What are they learning sitting here” “18% of my teachers know my name” “I paid for a text book I didn’t even open”. Wesch see the need to bring relevant to teaching adding today’s open communication forum. Using life experiences to enhance student’s education, advancing the educational establish farsightedness and acknowledging the need to remodel the ordered structure.
Were not robots
Michael Wesch A Vision of Students Today
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o
The door opens to the echo of an empty room. Fading in Marshell McLuhan comments “Todays child is bewildered when he (the child) enters the 19th century environment that still characterize to educational establishment where information is scarce but ordered and structured by fragmented classified patterns, subject and schedule”. Wesch brings to our attention by using students to convey a message the need for change. Wesch students use word presentation to reflex a quorum of their daily life and stagnation they deal with. Throughout the video viewer learned the quorum’s observation of how learning is taking place. The video constructs ways that learning would benefit student’s addition in teaching. The students provide ammunition a plea “will the collective just see what I do daily”. Why is what I know given no accreditation? Adding technology relevant to students learning, incorporating today’s youth communication network giving students a voice. Students could relate, relax, participate placing a personal stamp in student development.
Wesch frustration in teaching restriction plays out with students showing viewer pertinent message tagging “What are they learning sitting here” “18% of my teachers know my name” “I paid for a text book I didn’t even open”. Wesch see the need to bring relevant to teaching adding today’s open communication forum. Using life experiences to enhance student’s education, advancing the educational establish farsightedness and acknowledging the need to remodel the ordered structure.
Meagans's summary of Michael Welsh's movie
In this video text by Michael Welsh and his students from the Kansas State University, it first off being the movie with a quote written on a wall saying, “If walls could talk..”, then the camera goes to other objects and you get to see what each object has written on it. Then as more times goes on it shows a typical full university classroom and random students holding up statics and quotes. One example of other of the statics used was “I complete 49% of the readings assigned to me, only 26% are relevant to my life.” One example of a quote would be “My neighbor paid for school, but never comes to class.” Towards the end the students start holding up more and more statics and problems that they are facing with everyday going to school that I am sure many other students experience now, one of the problems is that how when in class what students are really doing their classes where they have access to computers, most students are checking their Facebook, or their MySpace. Are students spending more time learning what is being taught in the class rooms or are students spending more time checking their profiles. Some ideas that came to my mind was that maybe the teachers do not know what there are teaching, maybe the reason for the assignments that are assigned to students are not relevant to life. As a society, I think that students are becoming more self-taught. Another idea that I see is that the classes being taught are way too structured and that why you look at Facebook, etc, is because what you are learning in the classroom is not interested. A quote that I heard in a class discussion was that “education has not caught up with the technology yet”, meaning that maybe the teacher do not know what they are teaching. In Clive Thompsons “New Literacy” he states “It didn’t serve the purpose other than to get them the grade”, maybe in a sense the video text is trying to say that teacher don’t really have to incentive to teach that they say they do, maybe they are just doing it for the pay check. Technology has hurt us as a society but it has also made us grow.
Jim On: Michael Wesch's "A Vision of Students Today"
In Michael Wesch’s video text, “A Vision of Students Today”, you first are shown an empty lecture hall, with the camera panning in and out of different graffiti type text in the lecture hall, on walls, behind seats, etc. Then there is a blurb that lets you know that the contents you are about to see have come from many different student postings from the web site that the query came from. Then the video text goes to a full lecture hall. Then it goes to what seems to be random students that are holding up hand made signs that have what they want to say on them, concerning classroom education or so it would seem. One after another they seem to go on about the time spent with technology, but not on school work, money spent and owed on their education, is or will their education be relevant now or in the future. They seem to wonder if they are learning what they need to know in life.
The video text itself is clever in that it makes you think that it is heading in a certain direction, say for instance technology might be the problem. But then other issues come up like the cost of education, world issues, or how the world has dumped its problems on a new generation. So what I mean by clever, is that the video text never states or blames a single issue on education today. It lets us know the problems that students face today are many as they always have been.
Although I do like the video, I really see nothing new in it. The concerns that student have today, although they may differ in context, I believe, are the same as they have always been in content.
The video text itself is clever in that it makes you think that it is heading in a certain direction, say for instance technology might be the problem. But then other issues come up like the cost of education, world issues, or how the world has dumped its problems on a new generation. So what I mean by clever, is that the video text never states or blames a single issue on education today. It lets us know the problems that students face today are many as they always have been.
Although I do like the video, I really see nothing new in it. The concerns that student have today, although they may differ in context, I believe, are the same as they have always been in content.
Video Response - Darci Peterson
In Michael Welche's documentary, the students in his class create a short film mainly containing statistics about school and their lives. All of it takes place in the classroom because the students are demenstating what they learn from their classes.
One of the things they are trying to say is that we are wasting money.There are still students who carry giant text books from class to class. Students spend hudreds of dollars on books they hadly open or do not open at all. They read about half of the assigments they are suppose to and not even a quarter relate to their own life in anyway. We get a lot of stuff for our classes from the internet and heavily use a laptop, some people do not even make as much in a year to pay for a computer. Students are getting bored or are finding that they do not need to go to class to get by, so they don't; there are people who pays thousands to be in school, to not go to school.
Clearly, since sudents do not feel a lot of the subjects in school relate to their life, they get bored. They spend time on facebook during class and they text message. There is a lot of multitasking going on. Students found an average of the amounts of time they spend doing every day things and added them all up. One would guess that would be 24 hours in a day however the students showed that it atually equaled more than that, so there is indeed a lot of multitasking. We are being pressured to do so many things that we have to.
Some students are going to school for a job that will not exist by the time they are done with school. So many things have become self-suffient with machines. At some point, there may not even be teachers, why bother if a machine can do it; it could save money to keep profit levels high, thats what they teach you in life anyways, right?
At the same time, technology is allowing students to have the power to teach themselves whatever they want to. It appears that students do not learn or care about things that do not affect them or they will never use. This means that if they are doing things that they want to do, that they are more likely to learn it and even remember it.
Basically, the problem is that education is behind technology and there needs to be a balance. If students do not need books, why have students buy them? If there are going to be classes with over a hundred students in them, it might as well be online. Education needs to incorperate technology to education in a way that is relative to today. They should be working hand in hand rather than against each other. Some of the statisics are rather shocking but they are saying that we need to be more organized and find a happy balance.
One of the things they are trying to say is that we are wasting money.There are still students who carry giant text books from class to class. Students spend hudreds of dollars on books they hadly open or do not open at all. They read about half of the assigments they are suppose to and not even a quarter relate to their own life in anyway. We get a lot of stuff for our classes from the internet and heavily use a laptop, some people do not even make as much in a year to pay for a computer. Students are getting bored or are finding that they do not need to go to class to get by, so they don't; there are people who pays thousands to be in school, to not go to school.
Clearly, since sudents do not feel a lot of the subjects in school relate to their life, they get bored. They spend time on facebook during class and they text message. There is a lot of multitasking going on. Students found an average of the amounts of time they spend doing every day things and added them all up. One would guess that would be 24 hours in a day however the students showed that it atually equaled more than that, so there is indeed a lot of multitasking. We are being pressured to do so many things that we have to.
Some students are going to school for a job that will not exist by the time they are done with school. So many things have become self-suffient with machines. At some point, there may not even be teachers, why bother if a machine can do it; it could save money to keep profit levels high, thats what they teach you in life anyways, right?
At the same time, technology is allowing students to have the power to teach themselves whatever they want to. It appears that students do not learn or care about things that do not affect them or they will never use. This means that if they are doing things that they want to do, that they are more likely to learn it and even remember it.
Basically, the problem is that education is behind technology and there needs to be a balance. If students do not need books, why have students buy them? If there are going to be classes with over a hundred students in them, it might as well be online. Education needs to incorperate technology to education in a way that is relative to today. They should be working hand in hand rather than against each other. Some of the statisics are rather shocking but they are saying that we need to be more organized and find a happy balance.
Elizabeth Blake's summary of KSU's "A vision of Students Today"
In 2007 Michael Wesch in collaboration with Kansas State University has conducted a survey of student life that consisted of two-hundred participating students, they completed the survey with 367 edits to one single document. KSU's efforts to show us a glimpse of the hectic life of college students in current society is a well known fact to people like me, current students, but may come as a surprise to some. Being a student should be considered a full time job, but not all students are fortunate enough to be in postions where they can solely attend college. Single parents and working adults not elligable for grants and financial aid are left to take night classes, leave their children in childcare or take out dreaded student loans. Many college life issues are addressed in this study ranging from hours slept per night (seven), how unprepared college leaves students to face life after college, and the effects of technology in the classroom. Interestingly, they present their information in the form of a video filmed with a shaky camcorder and written messages on walls, chairs, notebooks and laptops held by students as well as the traditional image of a teacher writing on a chalkboard.
Another topic addressed in this video is the uncertaintly experienced by students who are preparing for jobs in a future market that may be unpredictable in the world we know today. To prepare for something they do not know the requirements for while undergoing a considerable amount of debt for their education, an average of $20,000 among those surveyed, it's easy to see where the stress comes in, coupled with the actual requirements of college courses; required reading, writing assignments (calculated at 42 pages of writing per semester), hundred dollar books that they will never open ... it's shocking to think that students today don't possess superhuman powers or Hermione's Time Turner as presented in J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. How these students manage this inhuman amount of course work and a social life or work life should be submitted to the Vatican as evidence of a true miracle.
In the closing scenes of the video, they state the some people have suggested that technology is our only hope of fuctioning in the high expectation enviroment we've emerdersed ourselves in. Despite the many useful applications to new technology we've aquired over the years, technology still poses a threat in an educational setting, With more and more options for cheating and of cheating yourself of your education through easy to reach distractions like cellular phones and surfing the internet while looking as if you are taking notes on course material, I would not be suprised to see a small backlash of technology in classrooms. Even now teachers are banning cellphones in class rooms, with very marginal success, not without protest of the student body who are so connected with technology that it is disoreintating to hold out from it.
While the future of education and our job market is uncertain, it seems as if Mr. Wesch and Kansas State University plan to keep us informed and I, personally, am all ears.
[word count: 523]
Taylors thoughts on "A Vision of Students Today"
In “A vision of students today” by Michael Wesch, and his students at Kansas State University, I think they are implying a few things. One problem is that Americans are not taking their education for granted, and that our education system is failing. A couple of the statements mentioned included that the average class size is 115 people, and that only 18% of their teachers know their names. So how would the ever know if the students even attended class, just like when the girl held the statement saying her neighbor paid for class and never shows up. Last year at my old college, in one of my classes I only attended three days of class, and I did not show up for the final, but somehow I passed with a 4.0! How about the boy who says he pays hundreds of dollars for books and never reads them, or the girl who says she will be twenty thousand dollars in debt by the time she is done with school. I think that those who do not pay for their own school tuition and our books don’t take their classes seriously because they are not spending their own money. America’s kindergarten through the twelfth grade system has even a bigger problem. One of my friend’s parents used to teach in Asia and they say that they hate teaching in the US because kids are rude, lazy, and don’t appreciate what they have, unlike kids in other countries who are lucky to get an education or lucky to EVER own a computer. The signs that said over a billion people make less than a dollar a day, or how some people don’t make enough money in a year to buy a laptop. Our society is consumed by technology, like the people in class who don’t do their work instead they surf the Internet and check their face book updates. I do it to. Children our learning younger and younger how to use these technologies, like my girlfriends little sisters who are 7 and 9 and can do more things on a computer than I can. Or how in the middle of this video if you stop it at three minutes and twenty three seconds, enlarge it and there is a boy I the middle of the class texting while the rest of the class is holding up their statements. We are all distracted by technology but that is not why our education system failing. Its our society, and our class room structure that set us up for failure.
In “A vision of students today” by Michael Wesch, and his students at Kansas State University, are implying that a few things. One problem is that Americans are not taking their education for granted, and that our education system is failing. A couple of the statements mentioned included that the average class size is 115 people, and that only 18% of their teachers know their names. So how would the ever know if the students even attended class, just like when the girl held the statement saying her neighbor paid for class and never shows up. Last year at my old college, in one of my classes I only attended three days of class, and I did not show up for the final, but somehow I passed with a 4.0! How about the boy who says he pays hundreds of dollars for books and never reads them, or the girl who says she will be twenty thousand dollars in debt by the time she is done with school. I think that those who do not pay for their own school tuition and our books don’t take their classes seriously because they are not spending their own money. America’s kindergarten through the twelfth grade system has even a bigger problem. One of my friend’s parents used to teach in Asia and they say that they hate teaching in the US because kids are rude, lazy, and don’t appreciate what they have, unlike kids in other countries who are lucky to get an education or lucky to EVER own a computer. The signs that said over a billion people make less than a dollar a day, or how some people don’t make enough money in a year to buy a laptop. Our society is consumed by technology, like the people in class who don’t do their work instead they surf the Internet and check their face book updates. I do it to. Children our learning younger and younger how to use these technologies, like my girlfriends little sisters who are 7 and 9 and can do more things on a computer than I can. Or how in the middle of this video if you stop it at three minutes and twenty three seconds, enlarge it and there is a boy I the middle of the class texting while the rest of the class is holding up their statements. We are all distracted by technology but that is not why our education system failing. Its our society, and our class room structure that set us up for failure.
In “A vision of students today” by Michael Wesch, and his students at Kansas State University, are implying that a few things. One problem is that Americans are not taking their education for granted, and that our education system is failing. A couple of the statements mentioned included that the average class size is 115 people, and that only 18% of their teachers know their names. So how would the ever know if the students even attended class, just like when the girl held the statement saying her neighbor paid for class and never shows up. Last year at my old college, in one of my classes I only attended three days of class, and I did not show up for the final, but somehow I passed with a 4.0! How about the boy who says he pays hundreds of dollars for books and never reads them, or the girl who says she will be twenty thousand dollars in debt by the time she is done with school. I think that those who do not pay for their own school tuition and our books don’t take their classes seriously because they are not spending their own money. America’s kindergarten through the twelfth grade system has even a bigger problem. One of my friend’s parents used to teach in Asia and they say that they hate teaching in the US because kids are rude, lazy, and don’t appreciate what they have, unlike kids in other countries who are lucky to get an education or lucky to EVER own a computer. The signs that said over a billion people make less than a dollar a day, or how some people don’t make enough money in a year to buy a laptop. Our society is consumed by technology, like the people in class who don’t do their work instead they surf the Internet and check their face book updates. I do it to. Children our learning younger and younger how to use these technologies, like my girlfriends little sisters who are 7 and 9 and can do more things on a computer than I can. Or how in the middle of this video if you stop it at three minutes and twenty three seconds, enlarge it and there is a boy I the middle of the class texting while the rest of the class is holding up their statements. We are all distracted by technology but that is not why our education system failing. Its our society, and our class room structure that set us up for failure.
In “A vision of students today” by Michael Wesch, and his students at Kansas State University, are implying that a few things. One problem is that Americans are not taking their education for granted, and that our education system is failing. A couple of the statements mentioned included that the average class size is 115 people, and that only 18% of their teachers know their names. So how would the ever know if the students even attended class, just like when the girl held the statement saying her neighbor paid for class and never shows up. Last year at my old college, in one of my classes I only attended three days of class, and I did not show up for the final, but somehow I passed with a 4.0! How about the boy who says he pays hundreds of dollars for books and never reads them, or the girl who says she will be twenty thousand dollars in debt by the time she is done with school. I think that those who do not pay for their own school tuition and our books don’t take their classes seriously because they are not spending their own money. America’s kindergarten through the twelfth grade system has even a bigger problem. One of my friend’s parents used to teach in Asia and they say that they hate teaching in the US because kids are rude, lazy, and don’t appreciate what they have, unlike kids in other countries who are lucky to get an education or lucky to EVER own a computer. The signs that said over a billion people make less than a dollar a day, or how some people don’t make enough money in a year to buy a laptop. Our society is consumed by technology, like the people in class who don’t do their work instead they surf the Internet and check their face book updates. I do it to. Children our learning younger and younger how to use these technologies, like my girlfriends little sisters who are 7 and 9 and can do more things on a computer than I can. Or how in the middle of this video if you stop it at three minutes and twenty three seconds, enlarge it and there is a boy I the middle of the class texting while the rest of the class is holding up their statements. We are all distracted by technology but that is not why our education system failing. Its our society, and our class room structure that set us up for failure.
Robert G. Brown's take on "A Vision of Students Today"
I just recently viewed a video done by Michael Wesch in which a group of students are being surveyed regarding the use of today’s technologies in response to how its either helping them or hindering them in their pursuit of gaining a higher education at a college level. From the various responses one could conclude that we are experiencing a problem with being able to integrate this use of technology into the learning process without loosing our social awareness of who we are and where are we going. Some of the contributing problems seemed to be related to class size (quantity over quality), time management indicated by the statement “I complete only 49% of the readings assigned to me, only 26% are relevant to my life.”; and waste reflected by this comment made during the survey “I buy hundred dollar textbooks that I never open.”
If we are to succeed at incorporating these technologies into our learning institutions then we also need to find solutions to the apparent problems that are arising from this collaboration of people and machines. Where there’s a will, there is a way, let’s hope we can do it in time before any further repercussions occur.
If we are to succeed at incorporating these technologies into our learning institutions then we also need to find solutions to the apparent problems that are arising from this collaboration of people and machines. Where there’s a will, there is a way, let’s hope we can do it in time before any further repercussions occur.
Dylan Daugherty on A vision of students today
In "A vision of Students Today," a video by Michael Wesch, Michael attempts to connect to 3 audiences in my opinion. Firstly the the video text addresses college students, secondly teachers and educators, and finally students who are not yet in college. This video tries to make a connection by showing an empty classroom with the all too familiar writing on walls, and backs of chairs. The writing poses a question, "If these walls could talk, what would they say?" They reveal to us that desks and walls cannot speak but the students can.
Attention is focused to an online blog where another question is posed. 200 students 367 edits to the blog and surveyed themselves. The question was, "What is it like to be a student." Initially as a student I am already thinking of answers, but suddenly the empty classroom is filled with about 80-100 students. Several students show either a paper with a statement on it, or a laptop with a statement typed. They range from "I use facebook in class," "My average class is 115 students," "I use my laptop but i don't do class work."
Another scene shows students making statements about the time they spend in the day. Eventually all the hours are summed up and a statement says, "I spend 26.5 hours a day" or something. This statement is followed by the statement, "I am a multi tasker, I have to be."
I feel like this video text's meaning lays in the the last statement. As a culture students are frustrated, and technology is bombarding students with countless information. And the fact that all the new medias are forcing younger generations to multi task because of all the available activities set before one self. We are surrounded by so many options of what to do. Like in birkets essay he talks about the village only having a few books, and those books would be read over and over. Now we just have too many options and this leads us to doing a little of both, or even overlapping several activities. Personally I dig multitasking and having my mind operate at that kind of capacity.
Attention is focused to an online blog where another question is posed. 200 students 367 edits to the blog and surveyed themselves. The question was, "What is it like to be a student." Initially as a student I am already thinking of answers, but suddenly the empty classroom is filled with about 80-100 students. Several students show either a paper with a statement on it, or a laptop with a statement typed. They range from "I use facebook in class," "My average class is 115 students," "I use my laptop but i don't do class work."
Another scene shows students making statements about the time they spend in the day. Eventually all the hours are summed up and a statement says, "I spend 26.5 hours a day" or something. This statement is followed by the statement, "I am a multi tasker, I have to be."
I feel like this video text's meaning lays in the the last statement. As a culture students are frustrated, and technology is bombarding students with countless information. And the fact that all the new medias are forcing younger generations to multi task because of all the available activities set before one self. We are surrounded by so many options of what to do. Like in birkets essay he talks about the village only having a few books, and those books would be read over and over. Now we just have too many options and this leads us to doing a little of both, or even overlapping several activities. Personally I dig multitasking and having my mind operate at that kind of capacity.
Clive Thompson "New Literacy"
In Clive Thompson’s article called the “New Literacy” he talks about today’s new revolution of writing. People think that in this era, kids have no sense for writing because of technology. Andrea Lunsford, a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University, thinks differently. Lunsford thinks that we are enhancing our writing and not losing our sense of literacy. The term she uses for this is our “Life Writing.” Lunsford stats in the article that “Technology isn’t killing our ability to write, it’s reviving it and pushing our literacy in bold new directions.” There is writing surrounding us everywhere these days with the use of texting and online resources such as Facebook, Myspace,and email, but according to College of London English professor John Sutherland this has “dehydrated language into a bleak, bald sad shorthand. Today kids write more than they did in the past according to Lunsford, and Thompson agrees that kids in todays society are gaining literacy.
Write New - Clive Thompson Slavik Shportko
Clive Thompson on the New Literacy Writes an interesting message to the readers about today’s writing, which is quite different from before.
The interesting part of his essay is that he mentions how technology has embraced into the New Literacy. Clive states that modern writing includes a lot of slang. However, as the study has been done is several American Universities, the results show no slang errors in freshman students work.
According to Thompson today’s writing is somewhat similar to Geeks Civilization. I assume that he states that writers are practicing more and are more educated. Writing is heading into a new way.
Interesting point that Clive brings is that students and young generation write way more and more. Not a single generation has wrote as much as today’s. Also, the writing involves more and more technology and the web. Before in America people didn’t write anything besides what school has required.
Most of the writing is practiced for performance; Americans are trying to explain messages in their writing. For example, Students
In Stanford University are not trying to be very creative as they write in-class essays because it’s only for a grade. However, the essays for other readers are more and more important. Therefore, they put much more effort into performance essays.
Today writing is graded or known as only “BAD” or “GOOD”. There is no fair writing.
The interesting part of his essay is that he mentions how technology has embraced into the New Literacy. Clive states that modern writing includes a lot of slang. However, as the study has been done is several American Universities, the results show no slang errors in freshman students work.
According to Thompson today’s writing is somewhat similar to Geeks Civilization. I assume that he states that writers are practicing more and are more educated. Writing is heading into a new way.
Interesting point that Clive brings is that students and young generation write way more and more. Not a single generation has wrote as much as today’s. Also, the writing involves more and more technology and the web. Before in America people didn’t write anything besides what school has required.
Most of the writing is practiced for performance; Americans are trying to explain messages in their writing. For example, Students
In Stanford University are not trying to be very creative as they write in-class essays because it’s only for a grade. However, the essays for other readers are more and more important. Therefore, they put much more effort into performance essays.
Today writing is graded or known as only “BAD” or “GOOD”. There is no fair writing.
Clive Thompson's Literacy
In Clive Thompson's recent essay “The New Literacy”, he describes how our literacy is changing, and not necessarily for the worse. He cites John Sutherland talking about how kids today cannot write, because “Facebook encourages narcissistic blabbering, video and PowerPoint have replaced carefully crafted essays”. Andrea Lunsford provides an opposite point for his paper. She is doing a study of student writing at Stanford, and has collected over 14,000 student writing samples of all sorts. She concludes that students are now writing more and more out of class, and are usually writing to an audience. Lunsford says that students are especially good at kairos, which is assessing the audience and changing what they're saying to fit the situation.
Thompson makes a strong point that we are writing more than people of past generations, and what we classify as 'good' writing must change. People usually classify good or important writings as essays or books that are long and boring. People are writing more and more today, and it is usually just enough to communicate the necessary idea. Who is to say this isn't good writing? Who gets to decide whats good and bad? For someone to be able to judge any writing, they need first to understand why the piece was written. Writing without a set purpose is useless. A true judgment of writing must not be made on the length of the piece. Thompson's essay is about a page long, making a page long summary of it pointless, they could just read the original piece. Text messages and Facebook messages are usually short, but still communicate all the necessary information. If someone is swimming through the sea of Facebook statuses, they are unlikely to read all the long ones.
The problem with English classes today, is teachers believe that they are teaching people valuable life skills, that will benefit them later. Granted there is aspects of the English language that is relevant to every day life, but most of it isn't. Poetry isn't possible to teach or evaluate, because of what it fundamentally is. Looking for the symbolism in a book is irrelevant to everyone except English majors. Being able to write an effective letter could benefit everyone eventually, but that isn't taught in English class. English itself isn't a science, there is no right and wrong. Beyond spelling, grammar, and sentence structure, it isn't any one person's ability to judge if a writing is good or not, it is the collective opinion of the intended audience that is true judge of writing. Language, at its root, is a tool to allow people to communicate effectively, to share their ideas, and to further understanding of other subjects.
Thompson makes a strong point that we are writing more than people of past generations, and what we classify as 'good' writing must change. People usually classify good or important writings as essays or books that are long and boring. People are writing more and more today, and it is usually just enough to communicate the necessary idea. Who is to say this isn't good writing? Who gets to decide whats good and bad? For someone to be able to judge any writing, they need first to understand why the piece was written. Writing without a set purpose is useless. A true judgment of writing must not be made on the length of the piece. Thompson's essay is about a page long, making a page long summary of it pointless, they could just read the original piece. Text messages and Facebook messages are usually short, but still communicate all the necessary information. If someone is swimming through the sea of Facebook statuses, they are unlikely to read all the long ones.
The problem with English classes today, is teachers believe that they are teaching people valuable life skills, that will benefit them later. Granted there is aspects of the English language that is relevant to every day life, but most of it isn't. Poetry isn't possible to teach or evaluate, because of what it fundamentally is. Looking for the symbolism in a book is irrelevant to everyone except English majors. Being able to write an effective letter could benefit everyone eventually, but that isn't taught in English class. English itself isn't a science, there is no right and wrong. Beyond spelling, grammar, and sentence structure, it isn't any one person's ability to judge if a writing is good or not, it is the collective opinion of the intended audience that is true judge of writing. Language, at its root, is a tool to allow people to communicate effectively, to share their ideas, and to further understanding of other subjects.
Clive Barker's New Literacy article
Wherever you go, you will most likely hear people saying, "Oh writing and literature are dying out. Its all because of these new fangled gadgets like text messaging and emails". To this I say, "WRONG"!! Literature and writing are not dying out. Like the rest of mankind and every other living things on this planet, it is simply evolving. Times are changing, therefore so must our way of doing things. One prominent writer, Clive Thompson of Livewire magazine, seems to agree with this statement. He published an article on how writing is evolving rapidly thanks to texting and emails.
In his article, Thompson writes, "As the school year begins, be ready to hear pundits fretting once again about how kids today can't write—and technology is to blame. Facebook encourages narcissistic blabbering, video and PowerPoint have replaced carefully crafted essays, and texting has dehydrated language into "bleak, bald, sad shorthand"… An age of illiteracy is at hand right?
Andrea Lunsford isn't so sure. Lunsford is a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University, where she has organized a mammoth project called the Stanford Study of Writing to scrutinize college students' prose.”
He goes on to give examples of how text messaging and emails are adding up to a considerable amount of writing, far more than someone from, say, 50 years ago might have written. Thee main reason that electronic writing is so popular and successful is due mainly to the fact that students can, and are, writing to an audience. If a student were asked to write something like an essay in class, they would be utterly bored and the only person who would read what they wrote would be the teacher.
Another issue that someone who clings to old ideals would complain about is possible slang used in modern works of literature. This I strongly believe is also false. I myself, as well as Clive Thompson and his associate Andrea Lunsoford, have seen other students use slang in everyday conversations and text messaging. However when looking at their professional work, its easy to see that they are trying to keep slang out of their work, or at least keep it to a minimum.
Now one must consider what slang and abbreviation terms are used for. When you are writing a text message, you are constrained to a certain number of characters per message. This being the case, people use phrases and terms like b/c, w/e, wtf (I will not discuss what that means) and so on and so forth. This allows one to convey a message, keep it to the point, and save a large amount of space. As for other slang terms that do not apply to shortening a text message, there are many uses for slang terms. However they may have only certain meaning to the one that the student or person is trying to address. You wont find someone in professional writing coming up to you and start spewing slang unless you know, or they think you know, what it means.
word count: 503
Robert G. Brown's view on"Clive Thompson on the New Literacy"
Clive Thompson in his published article"Clive Thompson on the New Literacy" introduces two
viewpoints representing the writing and literacy level of todays culture; incorporating the use of
Hi-Tech medium. The main debate seems to center around whether or not this technology is
helping or hindering our cultures ability to write. Clive Thompson seems to suggest that the audience that the writer feels that they're writing too constitutes their style of writing as opposed to the older days when writers wrote essays and didn't take into account of the audience that they were writing to; they just picked a topic and style and hoped that the reader would appreciate their work. Well, it doesn't work that way anymore. A shift has occurred and it is suspected that the use of technology has brought this about. He feels that writing today is more a matter of persuasion, debate, and organizing than anything else. I tend to agree. I remember when I was growing up and learning to read and write, that there seemed to be more of an emphasis placed on being gramatically correct and making sure that your spelling and punctuation was correct than there was to focusing on a writing "style" and trying to envision an audience to convey your thoughts to; but since I started incorporating the use of technology into my writing it has challenged me in ways that I was never challenged in before and one way was in the internalization of my audience. Thank you computer! Clive Thompson's article also is written in a style so as a broad range of people could comprehend the message as opposed to Birkert's style which incorporates so much sophistication that only narrow range of people can comprehend the message and that at best would require at least two readings. Anyway, keep up the good work Clive and I'll be looking forward to your next article; whatever that may be on.
viewpoints representing the writing and literacy level of todays culture; incorporating the use of
Hi-Tech medium. The main debate seems to center around whether or not this technology is
helping or hindering our cultures ability to write. Clive Thompson seems to suggest that the audience that the writer feels that they're writing too constitutes their style of writing as opposed to the older days when writers wrote essays and didn't take into account of the audience that they were writing to; they just picked a topic and style and hoped that the reader would appreciate their work. Well, it doesn't work that way anymore. A shift has occurred and it is suspected that the use of technology has brought this about. He feels that writing today is more a matter of persuasion, debate, and organizing than anything else. I tend to agree. I remember when I was growing up and learning to read and write, that there seemed to be more of an emphasis placed on being gramatically correct and making sure that your spelling and punctuation was correct than there was to focusing on a writing "style" and trying to envision an audience to convey your thoughts to; but since I started incorporating the use of technology into my writing it has challenged me in ways that I was never challenged in before and one way was in the internalization of my audience. Thank you computer! Clive Thompson's article also is written in a style so as a broad range of people could comprehend the message as opposed to Birkert's style which incorporates so much sophistication that only narrow range of people can comprehend the message and that at best would require at least two readings. Anyway, keep up the good work Clive and I'll be looking forward to your next article; whatever that may be on.
Jim on:Clive Thompson on the New Literacy
I do like the way that Clive Thompson, in his article on the New Literacy has taken the work of Andrea Lunsford a professor from Stanford University, and used it as a defense against those that say that modern literacy is dead. I would have to say that until he pointed out this study of professor Lunsford, my first thought would have been to agree with the statement that Thompson quoted Professor John Sutherland as saying that, “An age of illiteracy is at hand.” (1) In reading the points that Thompson brought out from Lunsford’s study I would have to agree the w are indeed entering a new and bright age of writhing. What I found of particular interest is the idea of what rhetoricians call kairo in which the idea that people writhing today have a great ability to assess their audience and adapt their tone and technique to best get their point across (1) I believe that this is a character quality that are society is teaching us all, for better or for worst, I am not sure.
So I would have to agree with Thompson when he states,” But its also becoming clear that online media are pushing literacy into a cool direction.” (2)
So I would have to agree with Thompson when he states,” But its also becoming clear that online media are pushing literacy into a cool direction.” (2)
Lia: Clive Thompson Review
Clive Thompson on the "New Literacy" wrote an article on the new revolution of writing. Thompson brings in interesting perspectives that are very intriguing and in my opinion, to be very accurate. Most people today believe that we are loosing all the common sense of writing due to technology and its enabling us to not come up with things of our own to write. Andrea Lunsford makes an interesting point when she says that we are "life writing" in today's world-we are not loosing our sense of literacy, we are actually enhancing it. With all of the texting, emailing, blog posting, Twittering, and other forms of writing, there is writing all around us. Even writing this blog post is adapting to today's society in writing. John Sutherland, an English professor at the University of London, has an interesting counterpoint that we are, "dehydrating our language...narcissistic blabbering," and that all of the online text is, "bleak, bald, sad, and shorthand." This point might be true but we aren't loosing any literacy. According to most we are actually doing more writing than people did back in past years, when they would have graduated they would have never written a single word again. Today we are constantly writing for an audience and striving to please them. So this "new writing revolution" is probably in fact a good thing for us and Thompson agrees; we are gaining literacy and not diminishing it.
Meagan's post about Clive Thompson
In his recent work, Clive Thompson suggests that “kids today can’t write- and technology is to blame.” This states Thompson believes that many students today in America do not know how to write and that we can blame computers and cell phones and things like that. Thompson claims “Lunsford is a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University, where she has organize a mammoth project called Stanford Study of Writing to scrutinize colleges students’ prose.” Lunsford to 14, 672 writings from students and observed what they were saying. No where is any of the essays and writing did she see any words or texts that were related to texting. Lunsford claims “ I think we’re in the midst of a literacy revolution the liked of which we haven’t seen since Greek civilization.” In Andrea Lunsford’s observation she realized that most students or “young people” do a lot more of writing then the generation before them. Lunsford claims” That’s because so much socializing takes place online, and it almost always involves texts.” In this essay Thompson claims “Before the Internet came along, most Americans never wrote anything, ever, that wasn’t a school assignment.” So many people no of days have the ability to write something and post it online and no one will find out who they are. You can use fake names while posting a blog and no one will no. In Thompson’s essay he describes how students have a great ability now of days for “assessing their audience, and adapting their tone…” Many students can get their point across in the write way. Students were saying in interviews how they feel that good writing is only good writing if it has “had an effect on the world.” Almost every time a student writes something it is about persuading, summarizing, debating and so on. The writing that was assigned at Stanford the students did not look forward to because the only person that was going to read it was their professor and they are writing to determine a grade not really to get a certain point across. Thompson claims “When Lunsford examined the work of first- year students, she didn’t find a single example of texting speak in an academic paper.” Most teachers in give your prompts were you need to persuade in your essay or debating the subject that you are talking about. Thompson also claims that “good teaching is always going to be crucial, as is the mastering of formal academic prose.” As I said many teachers give prompts that cause you to write as if you were debating. A the end of Thompson’s essay he states “What today’s young people know is knowing who you’re writing for and why you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all.” Most writing even in High school is based upon the fact or knowing who you are writing to, I think that things like this are just pushed into your brain at such a young age that, that type of writing is the only way that you know how to write. My own view is that the reason why we write the way we do is because it is how it is taught to us.
Dylan daugherty on Clive Thompson
In the article, “Clive Thompson on New literacy”, the author explains the new form we receive media in is actually successfully making the public better writers. He comments that most people believe that texting, online chatting, and networking sites as well as video texts, and other medias is “dumbing” down the young writers of this generation. But in truth according to Andrea Lunsford’s stanford study people are writing more now than they ever have. In the past students would almost never write anything outside of a school assignment. Now with the internet at our finger tips we can write short blurbs all day long. And sites like Livejournal or face book, and even blogs give people and students a chance to write whatever they feel like whenever they feel like it. Right now writing is at an all time high compared to the past. Andrea’s study proved that even though people use the internet and may use shorthand sometimes, students are not losing prose and voice and technique as they write. In all her academic samples not one had any kind of “internetspeak”. Not only are people writing more often and freely, they are usually writing to an audience. They know who they’re writing to, and what to say, and how to best convery their point. This is an advantage because when writing an academic paper you have to keep your audience in mind. Over all new medias are increasing literacy.
I agree with a lot of things in this article but I still believe that students should get into old literature so they can have a base understanding of older texts even if they’re out of date. Our old knowledge is valuable. Thought its true knowing your audience is valuable it’s hard to say whether or not the internet and other medias have helped to increase our literacy, or if we as a whole have been brought up with a good knowledge of writing and know the structures but the internet has increase our use of these techniques. Still his article fails to mention the importance of real experience. A great essay will be more like an in depth conversation, than quick handfuls of information. It is important to realize the use of the internet is great. But one must know where to put their boundaries.
word count 400
I agree with a lot of things in this article but I still believe that students should get into old literature so they can have a base understanding of older texts even if they’re out of date. Our old knowledge is valuable. Thought its true knowing your audience is valuable it’s hard to say whether or not the internet and other medias have helped to increase our literacy, or if we as a whole have been brought up with a good knowledge of writing and know the structures but the internet has increase our use of these techniques. Still his article fails to mention the importance of real experience. A great essay will be more like an in depth conversation, than quick handfuls of information. It is important to realize the use of the internet is great. But one must know where to put their boundaries.
word count 400
Alexandria's Blog on Clive Thompson and the New Literacy
The article “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy” from Wired Magazine is an essay that is clearly stating that we are going through a literacy revolution. Thompson talks about how the Internet has created a world that revolves around writing, which connects many people, and gives them an audience where they will feel less pressured to write a formal essay, but just want to get their thoughts and opinions out there. Thompson claims we do more life-time writing today (since the Greeks) than the generations before us. Andrea Lunsford demonstrates his claim by showing how 38% of writing is done out of classroom from her collection of 14,672 student writing samples, (1). Thompson believes our American culture uses different texts to get their point across instead of writing a formal paper. Texting, blogging, emailing, and twitter are all forms of writing we use to persuade our audience and express ourselves these days. Thompson shows how although some people, like English professor John Sutherland, may think students have become illiterate, in reality we have just evolved in writing styles over the last 10 years. In the generations before, they almost never wrote anything again, once they were out of school, unless absolutely necessary. Andrea Lunsford states “That’s because so much socializing takes place online, and it almost always involves text”, (1). In other words, our American culture consists of writing and reading written texts. Thompson’s argument goes on to say that we write extremely well when it comes to giving our writing a tone and getting our views across.
Although Thompson does not say so directly, he apparently assumes that technology is what is bringing about this change in our generation to where we can write better. He states “What today’s young people know is that knowing who you’re writing for and why you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all”, (2). In my opinion, what he is saying is that our generation is always writing to an audience, whether they associate this audience as a friend or professor, their main goal is to persuade them or get their point of view across. Thompson seems to believe that this is one of the most important factors in writing. In order to be better writers, we need to write as if we are having a conversation.
My own view is that although we are very skilled at “kairos” we still need to make changes by not allowing technology to do all the work or allow us to become lazy. Though I concede that Thompson may be correct that technology is helping transform a new literacy, I still maintain that we shouldn’t lose the ability to write a formal essay. For example, my younger sister can’t write a formal paper, because she has become so use to having words abbreviated and just getting her point of view across, and doesn’t fully develop her thoughts or truly take the time to write a full paper because she doesn’t like to get too “wordy” as she calls it. She doesn’t see the point. Although some might object that these new forms of texts don’t limit the ability to express one’s thoughts in the way an audience can truly analyze; my response is that we must begin to use these new forms of life writings to our advantage. This will help us become wise and analyze them to form more complex formal essays. We can hopefully learn to keep the important factor of writing to an audience in mind, like we do when we are texting or blogging.
(word count 594)
Although Thompson does not say so directly, he apparently assumes that technology is what is bringing about this change in our generation to where we can write better. He states “What today’s young people know is that knowing who you’re writing for and why you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all”, (2). In my opinion, what he is saying is that our generation is always writing to an audience, whether they associate this audience as a friend or professor, their main goal is to persuade them or get their point of view across. Thompson seems to believe that this is one of the most important factors in writing. In order to be better writers, we need to write as if we are having a conversation.
My own view is that although we are very skilled at “kairos” we still need to make changes by not allowing technology to do all the work or allow us to become lazy. Though I concede that Thompson may be correct that technology is helping transform a new literacy, I still maintain that we shouldn’t lose the ability to write a formal essay. For example, my younger sister can’t write a formal paper, because she has become so use to having words abbreviated and just getting her point of view across, and doesn’t fully develop her thoughts or truly take the time to write a full paper because she doesn’t like to get too “wordy” as she calls it. She doesn’t see the point. Although some might object that these new forms of texts don’t limit the ability to express one’s thoughts in the way an audience can truly analyze; my response is that we must begin to use these new forms of life writings to our advantage. This will help us become wise and analyze them to form more complex formal essays. We can hopefully learn to keep the important factor of writing to an audience in mind, like we do when we are texting or blogging.
(word count 594)
On the New Literacy
In Clive Thompson's article on the New Literacy he suggests that technology is not killing our ability to write but reviving it. He mentions a professor of writing and rhetoric, Andrea Lundsford, who conducted a study of 14,672 student's writing. The types of writing she collected were everything from in-class assignments to blog posts and chat sessions. What Lundsford discovered was fascinating--today's youth actually write much more than any previous generations. These previous generations almost never wrote anything that wasn't school or job related. In Lundsford's study, a striking 38% of all writing was done outside the classroom which She calls "life writing".
My own view is that its pretty impressive that my generation can express themselves so well. I don't think that this would have been possible without all the technology we have today.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Elizabeth Blake's "The New Literacy" Summary
In his recent work, "The New Literacy," Clive Thompson speaks of his assessment that newer generations are improving on our current age of literacy through the daily use of multiple mediums of text writing, most surprisingly of them-emails, blog posts, forums, chat rooms and text messaging. Thompson’s claim is contrary to popular belief that the new age of keyboards and monitors is making the youth of today in to a sad mock up of past generations. In his essay Thompson cites a study conducted by Andrea Lunsford, Professor of Writing and Rhetoric at Stanford University, to support his claim. From 2001 to 2006 Lunsford and her team assessed 14,672 student writing samples, mediums include; in-class assignments, blog posts, journal entries, and chat sessions just to name a few. The results they found are quite a juxtapose to what youth today are used to hearing about the negative effects of sitting on their computers. Newer generations are writing more than any generation before them, 38 percent of writing samples collected for the study took place out of the classroom, while past generations may have never composed a paragraph after high school unless it was career orientated, young adults and teens today can be found writing concise structured text on a daily basis. Another surprising conclusion found in Lunsford's study was that the students in their study were "remarkably adept at what rhetoricians call kairos-assessing their audience and adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across." Students today are almost always writing for an audience and are highly attuned to this aspect of writing, another thing not so commonly found in past generations.
Interestingly enough, Lunsford's study also sheds light on a close relation between the types of writing seen today and traditional Greek argument. The idea that an argumentative structure could resurface between such a time gap is fascinating. Lunsford states that even the simplest of text is valued for its persuasion and intellect-Students in her study defined good writing as something that had an effect on the world. To me this shows the eagerness of current generations to leave behind the kids table and join their fellow adults in real debate. In an age where each contestant is armed and ready with intellect, style and infinite amounts of resources it's hard to imagine their elders not having to put up a fight, but who could expect anything less?
This refreshing article reminds us that just because the comfort of familiarity feels safe, doesn’t mean there aren’t benefits to the new ways of things. Scientific discoveries are made every day and the applications of these discoveries will continue to reshape life as we know it, it is important of current generations to remain open to the new practices and tools that will be presented in the future. The ease of newer technology has helped predict weather patterns of major storms and saved thousands of lives, knowing this, who is to say that new technology can’t help boost this new age of literacy after all? Maybe it’s about time to say a not-so-tearful goodbye to age of the pen and paper and take welcome step forward in to the new walk of life.
534 words, Microsoft Word
On the New Literacy - Darci Peterson
In his essay, Clive Thompson brings to recognition that the new technologies many say are destroying out literacy are infact doing something completly different. He borrows from Andrea Lunsford, organizer of the project Stanford Study of Writing, and engages the idea that there is a new literacy from today's technology.
Many people today are text messaging on their cell phones, updating their social websites such as myspace and facebook, blogging, and going into chat rooms. Before these things existed, there was a lot less writing done. Lunsford says that before the internet, American did not write out of school unless their job required it as a duty. This means, that even though many who are unfamiliar with this new literacy do not think highly of it, it has kept people literate for they are always reading or writing something, at least much more than before.
A lot of times students will end the school year in June and enjoy the sun until September. The things taught throughout the year slowly leave the mind as one does not use the information. Any subject works this way. It is common for math and science concepts, as well as others depending on the person, to need a refresher at the beginning of a new school year. Well, in the case of writing, Americans use it so often that skills have the opportunity to build anytime. It is to our benefit that this is available, aside from entertainment purposes.
Lunsford's project found that in any kind of writing a student used in school, the bad habits the unfamiliar dislike are not influencing the writing in the essays, journals, and in-class writes. This means that the lazy styles we love can live on without destroying our literacy. If we write well in school and we write more often in ways to entertain ourselves, it should not matter how we write when it is for personal enjoyment.
As someone who uses the new technologies, I can agree that if these were not available that I would not be writing. Creativity and the desires to write to different audiences expressing ideas that we want are what drive this. People are unique and they want to be. Fortunatly, the art of writing and filling this need is helping us stay literate and good at what we do. Thompson says that, "knowing who you're writing or and why you're writing might be the most impotant factor of all," (Par. 7) meaning that if you know how to get the point across to your audience, that the author can do what really matters in writing.
Although it is great that we are coming to a new literacy and that people are writing now more than ever, we need to be sure that we are not lacking in other departments. In order to write something well thought out and knowledgeable, one must have the knowledge or wisdom to do so. The technolgies make it harder to gain that wisdom however keep us literate. One must find a way to balance out the two. nowing how to write does not do the job if one does not have the knowledge to write about.
Many people today are text messaging on their cell phones, updating their social websites such as myspace and facebook, blogging, and going into chat rooms. Before these things existed, there was a lot less writing done. Lunsford says that before the internet, American did not write out of school unless their job required it as a duty. This means, that even though many who are unfamiliar with this new literacy do not think highly of it, it has kept people literate for they are always reading or writing something, at least much more than before.
A lot of times students will end the school year in June and enjoy the sun until September. The things taught throughout the year slowly leave the mind as one does not use the information. Any subject works this way. It is common for math and science concepts, as well as others depending on the person, to need a refresher at the beginning of a new school year. Well, in the case of writing, Americans use it so often that skills have the opportunity to build anytime. It is to our benefit that this is available, aside from entertainment purposes.
Lunsford's project found that in any kind of writing a student used in school, the bad habits the unfamiliar dislike are not influencing the writing in the essays, journals, and in-class writes. This means that the lazy styles we love can live on without destroying our literacy. If we write well in school and we write more often in ways to entertain ourselves, it should not matter how we write when it is for personal enjoyment.
As someone who uses the new technologies, I can agree that if these were not available that I would not be writing. Creativity and the desires to write to different audiences expressing ideas that we want are what drive this. People are unique and they want to be. Fortunatly, the art of writing and filling this need is helping us stay literate and good at what we do. Thompson says that, "knowing who you're writing or and why you're writing might be the most impotant factor of all," (Par. 7) meaning that if you know how to get the point across to your audience, that the author can do what really matters in writing.
Although it is great that we are coming to a new literacy and that people are writing now more than ever, we need to be sure that we are not lacking in other departments. In order to write something well thought out and knowledgeable, one must have the knowledge or wisdom to do so. The technolgies make it harder to gain that wisdom however keep us literate. One must find a way to balance out the two. nowing how to write does not do the job if one does not have the knowledge to write about.
New Literacy Review by Derek Turner
After reading the article, "Clive Thompson on the New Literacy", by Clive Thompson, i have made a few assumptions of my own. This essay abnout "New Literacy", is in comparison about how todays modern age society is based by using text messages, games, emails, and other such forms of writing, compard to years ago. In this review, Thompson has a few speakers that are included, and each one of them has different views. I would have to say that some of the writers such as Andrea Lunsford have great points as to how much society is actually communicating today. In my opinion, i think that the sms way of text messaging is a weak way to get ahold of people, and sometrimes frankly it is just hard to read. Certain people will message " I gtg ttyl ilu", now honestly, what kind of bull is that? I just recently recieved a cell phone message, and it means " I got to go talk to you later i love you" isnt that ridiculous? Im gonna drop a few names here shortly, John Sutherland speaks in a angry tone and says, "bleak, bland, sad shorthand" when he is referring to the text messaging, blogging, and etcetera. Sutherlands tone is reffering to the modern age of writing as bad, illeterate, and unexperienced writting. Another way to look athtis conversation, is the way Andrea Lunsford has. She conducted a study from well over 14,000 writting samples of students, and has found out that society today writes way more! Lunsford quotes," I think we are in the midst of a literacy revolution the likes of which we haven't seen since Greek civilization," (Lunsford) and in this she is reffering us to dating back to a modern form of language. Those oare tow of the main views of the essay, now heres mine. I think that Lunsford is onto something witht he entire dating back to greek times, but as far as Sutherland feels, stop griping! Todays society is filled with internet and cell phones, and strait up vast communication. I know in my own opinion that if i want to talk to someone, i will not write them out a letter with correct punctuation, if it is a note for a friend, so take a chill pill dude! And as far as everything else goes, simplified text is cool, but the " omg your ngfbt ***" shut it down! Thanks for reading, and by the way, i love all my fans.
Bob Alstatt Thompson new Literacy
Bob Alsatt
The New Literacy
A recent article posted in Wired magazine by Clive Thompson on the new literacy purpose a exciting new swing on technology and the effect on our literacy. Thompson survey two Professor John Sutherland and Andrea Lunsford. Sutherland perspective was that “kids today can’t write- and technology is to blame” (1). Lunsford 180 degree difference on the effect of technology on kid’s literacy was substantiated by Lunsford project “Study of Writing”. Lunsford over 6 years beginning in 2001 collected a variety of writing samples from 14,672 students ranging from essays to chats sessions. Lunsford conclusion is today’s kids are in the midst of a literacy revolution and technology isn’t killing our ability to write it is reviving literacy. Thompson in agreeing with Lunsford, see technology as knowing the audience young kids write for. In other words if the students were writing academically there paper were polished, serious and didn’t show text speak in any form. Lunsford confirm this with examining first year students paper which showed no text speak in any academic paper submitted. Thompson in closing writes “What today’s young people know is that knowing who you’re writing for and you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all”(7).
The New Literacy
A recent article posted in Wired magazine by Clive Thompson on the new literacy purpose a exciting new swing on technology and the effect on our literacy. Thompson survey two Professor John Sutherland and Andrea Lunsford. Sutherland perspective was that “kids today can’t write- and technology is to blame” (1). Lunsford 180 degree difference on the effect of technology on kid’s literacy was substantiated by Lunsford project “Study of Writing”. Lunsford over 6 years beginning in 2001 collected a variety of writing samples from 14,672 students ranging from essays to chats sessions. Lunsford conclusion is today’s kids are in the midst of a literacy revolution and technology isn’t killing our ability to write it is reviving literacy. Thompson in agreeing with Lunsford, see technology as knowing the audience young kids write for. In other words if the students were writing academically there paper were polished, serious and didn’t show text speak in any form. Lunsford confirm this with examining first year students paper which showed no text speak in any academic paper submitted. Thompson in closing writes “What today’s young people know is that knowing who you’re writing for and you’re writing might be the most crucial factor of all”(7).
Clive Thompson by Emily M.
In his recent work, Clive Thompson suggests that our new technological way of online writing, and texting is actually increasing our want to write. Professor John Sutherland disagrees with this. He states that "texting has dehydrated language into "bleak, bald, sad shorthand"(1), as well as suggesting that kids today can't write and technology is to blame(1). Clive Thompson also introduces us to Andrea Lunsford who takes what Sutherland has said and thrown it away with her multiple examples of why hes wrong. Ms. Lunsford comes forward saying that "technology isn't killing our ability to write. Its reviving it- and pushing our literacy in bold, new directions" (3).
After reading Clive Thompson's writing on "the New Literacy", I myself thought about how Lunsford and Sutherland both share an equally right opinion. As i view myself in this new generation of texting as a second nature, i realize how much i actually do write. You don't think about how many of those Myspace surveys about your life you fill out, or how many texts you send each day, or how many Facebook updates you post in one week. Although Lunsford's studies have shown that we don't use SMS Text in our academic papers(7), it seems to me that our youth has the most at stake here. They are writing papers, but with the internet so close at hand they can so easily take right from another author without thinking twice. When Sutherland states "texting has dehydrated language to "bleak, bald, and boring shorthand"(1), i can't agree with him more. Who really likes getting texts saying something in shorthand that is hard to understand. I admit that i give into the IDK, IDC, B/C, SMS every once in a while.
To me Clive Thompson is basically summarizing that we use short hand words to express what we are feeling in a text message, a LOL or a =D, but although texting has become a second nature, we can still write like civilized individuals. Also that we really don't realize how much we do write outside of class. When Lunsford states "before the internet came along most Americans never wrote anything, ever, that wasn't a school assignment"(5). We do most of our writing on the computer, mostly without even realizing how much writing is actually going into what we're doing. Lastly a must in our generation's writing today is knowing the purpose of why your writing what you are and who you're writing for.
After reading Clive Thompson's writing on "the New Literacy", I myself thought about how Lunsford and Sutherland both share an equally right opinion. As i view myself in this new generation of texting as a second nature, i realize how much i actually do write. You don't think about how many of those Myspace surveys about your life you fill out, or how many texts you send each day, or how many Facebook updates you post in one week. Although Lunsford's studies have shown that we don't use SMS Text in our academic papers(7), it seems to me that our youth has the most at stake here. They are writing papers, but with the internet so close at hand they can so easily take right from another author without thinking twice. When Sutherland states "texting has dehydrated language to "bleak, bald, and boring shorthand"(1), i can't agree with him more. Who really likes getting texts saying something in shorthand that is hard to understand. I admit that i give into the IDK, IDC, B/C, SMS every once in a while.
To me Clive Thompson is basically summarizing that we use short hand words to express what we are feeling in a text message, a LOL or a =D, but although texting has become a second nature, we can still write like civilized individuals. Also that we really don't realize how much we do write outside of class. When Lunsford states "before the internet came along most Americans never wrote anything, ever, that wasn't a school assignment"(5). We do most of our writing on the computer, mostly without even realizing how much writing is actually going into what we're doing. Lastly a must in our generation's writing today is knowing the purpose of why your writing what you are and who you're writing for.
Thopson by Taylor
In his recent work Clive Thompson suggests that technology is overall making us better writers, although others like John Sutherland disagree and think that it is diminishing our writing skills, I believe it is doing a little bit of both. Sutherland suggests that technology is to blame for all our writing problems, and that “face book encourages narcissistic blabbering” (1). I disagree with Sutherland simply because I myself use face book and not everyone (which he generalized) writes narcissistically. Thompson then follows a study lead by Andrea Lunsford who is a writing professor at Stanford University, where she collected 14,672 student-writing samples of all kinds. She concluded that technology is not killing our writing; it is reviving it and pushing our literacy in bold new directions (1). She also found that our generation writes more than anyone has written before because we use the Internet socially, and that before the internet people never wrote unless they had to for school or for there jobs. I will admit that I did not realize how much I actually wrote until I read this essay. She talks about “life writing” which consists of text messaging, emailing, twitter posts, face book updates, blogging or video game walkthroughs Lunsford believes that our best asset is that we know how to write to our audience and are able to adapt, she calls this kairos. She claims that modern day chat rooms are similar to the tradition of Greek argument. Once she looked over the writing sample she realized that she did not find any form of text language. I believe that this is true only because they were college students, and that if she were to take samples for junior high and high school students the results would be different. Clive goes on to say that we should not judge writing as good or bad, and that we are in the midst of a literacy revolution (1)
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Reading Response #3 Chris Peake
This commercial I thought in particular was good example of a sign. In this old advertisement they use the children’s cartoon The Flintstones to sell cigarettes to an audience that more than likely going to be the children. The commercial as a whole is sort of one big denotation because it being a cartoon immediately directs it in my mind to kids. It starts off with Fred and Barney talking to one another alongside a fence. Then they show both their wives working around the house. This signifying a typical family role being played and being friends with your neighbor culturally reinforces what socially was the norm back in the day. As Fred and Barney are discussing the cigarettes and why they taste so good, Barney says “here in front of the pure white filter”. White has always symbolized innocence and purity, so the connotation that a cigarette be that it’s clean and pure and also maybe healthy is what the company wants. As they are talking by the fence they eventually both run out back to get away from real work that the wife’s were doing in the front yard. So they go out to the back to get some “fresh” air and take a break. These are the things that the cigarette companies want you to associate with their brand. That it’ll be a breath of fresh air and a nice relaxing break from the chores of the day. At the end of the commercial it shows the roles being reversed and the wife’s both want Fred and Barney to pick up doing the chores they started. After this both a male and a female hand reach for a cigarette, implying that both genders can enjoy this brand of smokes. Also the cultural knowledge that narrates this commercial lends to the myth that “boys will be boys”. Overall I was a little appalled by this commercial. It was made featuring a cartoon that would be watched by majority of kids.
Andrea Response Three
Andrea
English 100 F
Week 3
Reading Response #3
April 21, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWVzw4yswrc
In this Jell-O ad, the viewers are introduced to their new product Mousse Temptations. As the commercial begins, the music plays with the tilting of the camera, and the narrator introduces the product’s name and brand. The song is music with humming or singing but with no real words. The tune is nice to listen to. It is as if the singer is just humming along because she is happy. Her song sounds as if she is singing/humming as if she were whistling. This matches the tone of the commercial. The lady in the commercial is happy and instead of singing to match her happiness, she dances the spoon around. This is her way of humming. She may even be about to, but the spoon does justice for now.
The cup’s dark color and elegant script shows the audience that it’s a fancy treat. A hand peels the top off, and spoon lifts a bit out. Its interesting texture fills every inch of the screen. A lady in loungewear then plops it in her mouth. The camera shows that she’s actually sitting on a clock hand. She watches the time fly off. The Jell-O seems to make her slaphappy. She nudges an hour to shoo. She kicks another away, and drunkishly waves goodbye to one with her spoon. She’s free-spirited and kiddish. The narrator says, "Because after you've washed the bills, and paid the dishes, it's finally Me-O'clock." The commercial focuses once more on her enjoying the mousse. The narrator then says, "Enjoy it..with Mousse Temptations!" After the last hours fall, she takes another bite and then kisses her spoon.
The commercial is hoping their viewers will be tempted into buying their prodcut. The ad hopes the viewer will surrender to the idea that he or she deserves it. It’s expecting us to relate to their character and then realise that we deserve a break. The creators’ motive is to get us persuade ourselves into giving us the things we wish we could do all day long instead of tending to responsibilities. With the commercial’s tempting treat, the pleasures of rich taste are put into our heads. They counting on us to think of their product as a solution. The direct ideological value at play here is that it is okay to focus on yourself. They are holding the idea that, after being governed by the clock, and dedicating yourself to a list of odds-and-ends and other people, that it is respectable to give yourself a coffee break. They are putting out there, that you are welcome to something even more relaxing than a trip to the coffee house. Their view here is that you are deserving of endulging yourself, and that you are worthy of exposing yourself to fine foods and delacacies.
English 100 F
Week 3
Reading Response #3
April 21, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWVzw4yswrc
In this Jell-O ad, the viewers are introduced to their new product Mousse Temptations. As the commercial begins, the music plays with the tilting of the camera, and the narrator introduces the product’s name and brand. The song is music with humming or singing but with no real words. The tune is nice to listen to. It is as if the singer is just humming along because she is happy. Her song sounds as if she is singing/humming as if she were whistling. This matches the tone of the commercial. The lady in the commercial is happy and instead of singing to match her happiness, she dances the spoon around. This is her way of humming. She may even be about to, but the spoon does justice for now.
The cup’s dark color and elegant script shows the audience that it’s a fancy treat. A hand peels the top off, and spoon lifts a bit out. Its interesting texture fills every inch of the screen. A lady in loungewear then plops it in her mouth. The camera shows that she’s actually sitting on a clock hand. She watches the time fly off. The Jell-O seems to make her slaphappy. She nudges an hour to shoo. She kicks another away, and drunkishly waves goodbye to one with her spoon. She’s free-spirited and kiddish. The narrator says, "Because after you've washed the bills, and paid the dishes, it's finally Me-O'clock." The commercial focuses once more on her enjoying the mousse. The narrator then says, "Enjoy it..with Mousse Temptations!" After the last hours fall, she takes another bite and then kisses her spoon.
The commercial is hoping their viewers will be tempted into buying their prodcut. The ad hopes the viewer will surrender to the idea that he or she deserves it. It’s expecting us to relate to their character and then realise that we deserve a break. The creators’ motive is to get us persuade ourselves into giving us the things we wish we could do all day long instead of tending to responsibilities. With the commercial’s tempting treat, the pleasures of rich taste are put into our heads. They counting on us to think of their product as a solution. The direct ideological value at play here is that it is okay to focus on yourself. They are holding the idea that, after being governed by the clock, and dedicating yourself to a list of odds-and-ends and other people, that it is respectable to give yourself a coffee break. They are putting out there, that you are welcome to something even more relaxing than a trip to the coffee house. Their view here is that you are deserving of endulging yourself, and that you are worthy of exposing yourself to fine foods and delacacies.
commerical ad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epOg1nWJ4T8&NR=1
In a commercial found on Youtube.com, there was a 30 second segment called Dove’s New “Onslaught” Ad which starts off with a young innocent girl with redish orangish hair standing on the road in the front of the camera. Then suddenly there’s pictures , billboards and other commercials of older women that are petites, dieting, weighing on a scale and eating less. What the commercial is portraying is that this skin product will make your skin look beautiful and by taking diet pills you will lose weight easier and faster. Also the ad shows how getting plastic surgery will make you feel beautiful and look like the models or actresses seen in magazines or on television. After seeing this ad several times I realized that the beauty industry has taken over the world we live in. What we see is out there and what is trendy, we as the people tend to navigate towards it. The last message in the commercial it states, “ Talk to your daughter before the beauty industry does.” After hearing that message I felt like parents should talk to their children more and remind them that they are beautiful just the way they are and they don’t need to change because of what they see on television or magazines cause that’s not real. What you see is the outer appearances of someone that is selling something that may work on that significant person but not to everyone else. Even the models or actresses we do see don’t look like that at all, it’s basically computer generated and camera editing that makes them look perfect when in reality they probably are not due to them only to be hidden in front of a camera to make money. No one is prefect in this world and everyone has there flaws but the message young teens and young adults get they tend to gravitate towards it. That is why so much girls these days go on diets and many of them have eating disorders or health flaws due to they want to look like the famous people seen on the screen in front of them. Hopefully one day this world and the society we live in changes and where everyone is comfortable in there own skin and know that what we see is not always true or who we see is not what you want to become or else the beauty industry will get you before you realize it.
In a commercial found on Youtube.com, there was a 30 second segment called Dove’s New “Onslaught” Ad which starts off with a young innocent girl with redish orangish hair standing on the road in the front of the camera. Then suddenly there’s pictures , billboards and other commercials of older women that are petites, dieting, weighing on a scale and eating less. What the commercial is portraying is that this skin product will make your skin look beautiful and by taking diet pills you will lose weight easier and faster. Also the ad shows how getting plastic surgery will make you feel beautiful and look like the models or actresses seen in magazines or on television. After seeing this ad several times I realized that the beauty industry has taken over the world we live in. What we see is out there and what is trendy, we as the people tend to navigate towards it. The last message in the commercial it states, “ Talk to your daughter before the beauty industry does.” After hearing that message I felt like parents should talk to their children more and remind them that they are beautiful just the way they are and they don’t need to change because of what they see on television or magazines cause that’s not real. What you see is the outer appearances of someone that is selling something that may work on that significant person but not to everyone else. Even the models or actresses we do see don’t look like that at all, it’s basically computer generated and camera editing that makes them look perfect when in reality they probably are not due to them only to be hidden in front of a camera to make money. No one is prefect in this world and everyone has there flaws but the message young teens and young adults get they tend to gravitate towards it. That is why so much girls these days go on diets and many of them have eating disorders or health flaws due to they want to look like the famous people seen on the screen in front of them. Hopefully one day this world and the society we live in changes and where everyone is comfortable in there own skin and know that what we see is not always true or who we see is not what you want to become or else the beauty industry will get you before you realize it.
Reading Response #3
Video Clip Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT86iWiH2mI&feature=related
The video starts off at a quick pace; the setting is in a dimly lit room with a desk, a large map or chart of some kind, radios, perhaps radar equipment, communication devices, et cetera. We can immediately assume it to be a navigation room of some sort. Two people are present in the room and they’re both speaking to each other in a foreign language, id est, they’re not speaking English. The setting appears to be semi-formal or lightheartedly professional and we can instantly deduce who is in charge based on the nonverbal communication or body language being used. It looks as if there is an older person showing an apparent younger rookie the ropes, even though, unless the individual viewer knows German, that supposition can’t be inferred through verbal comprehension alone. After the superior displays a few objects, tools and probably discusses some of its functions and components, he gives his ostensibly naive trainee a fleet and moderately forceful, but friendly pat on the back, a gesture which might symbolize expectation and commitment; he then takes his mug and walks away. The rookie gives off a distraught, frustrated and nervous impression, possibly due to it being his first time on the job and his superior may have placed too much trust and confidence in his ability to do the job satisfactorily. In the next scene, a radio call comes in from what I assume to be a British vessel, they frantically call “mayday” repetitively over the radio, an emergency is certainly transpiring. The shipman repeatedly says over the radio that they’re sinking, but never refers to his ship, which is what we usually instantaneously presuppose to be actually sinking. Alas, the rookie doesn’t seem to fathom what he is trying to say. The rookie attempts to be articulate and understandable, he tells them that he is with the German Coast Guard in English. The shipman once again reiterates, “We’re sinking!” Now with the rookie being apparently confused by this message asks, “What are you…sinking about?” A quick pause is given and is then followed by sonorous classical music which interrupts the sober awkwardness, or from the audience’s perspective, the comical anecdote. The text “Improve your English” shows up, proceeding with a company logo and slogan, “Berlitz®” “Language for life” exemplifying that this was indeed an advertisement, and a rather humorous one at that.
We can easily surmise the situational setting even though the location takes place in what we, or at least I believe to be a different culture and country; this relation of understanding in these events serves as evidence that we as nation-states, are bringing our global perspectives together as most of us, irrespective of cultural backgrounds, can relate to, a nervous amateur being given a highly important position especially one where even a slight mistake could result in outright failures, even if we haven’t personally experienced such an important task. If a person watching this video clip doesn’t know the German language, he or she would almost solely have to rely on nonverbal communication factors to understand the preliminary dialogue that takes place. Cultural differences can also change body language meanings, but in this context they remain relatively similar in comparison to Western culture, exempli gratia, United States or Canadian cultures. The body language used throughout the video exhibits the attitude of both the rookie and superior. The rookie is of course taking the role of a naïve novice and is nervous about his performance on the first night on the job. The superior on the other hand seems calm and secure as he entrusts his distressed subordinate to maintain careful watch at the post. The most prominent part of the video is when the communication between rookie and shipman takes place. This coincides with the point of the advertiser’s product that they’re trying to sell, language learning and cultural training courses. With English at the present time apparently becoming the global lingua franca, it is important for most employees and workers in international fields to acquire the ability to speak proper and fluent English. The joke ingrains itself into this message risibly when the lack of understanding the shipman’s dire condition by the rookie is given with confused feedback and questioning, hilarious to an outside observer’s perspective since we know that this circumstance is not really occurring, or else it probably wouldn’t be quite as funny.
The video starts off at a quick pace; the setting is in a dimly lit room with a desk, a large map or chart of some kind, radios, perhaps radar equipment, communication devices, et cetera. We can immediately assume it to be a navigation room of some sort. Two people are present in the room and they’re both speaking to each other in a foreign language, id est, they’re not speaking English. The setting appears to be semi-formal or lightheartedly professional and we can instantly deduce who is in charge based on the nonverbal communication or body language being used. It looks as if there is an older person showing an apparent younger rookie the ropes, even though, unless the individual viewer knows German, that supposition can’t be inferred through verbal comprehension alone. After the superior displays a few objects, tools and probably discusses some of its functions and components, he gives his ostensibly naive trainee a fleet and moderately forceful, but friendly pat on the back, a gesture which might symbolize expectation and commitment; he then takes his mug and walks away. The rookie gives off a distraught, frustrated and nervous impression, possibly due to it being his first time on the job and his superior may have placed too much trust and confidence in his ability to do the job satisfactorily. In the next scene, a radio call comes in from what I assume to be a British vessel, they frantically call “mayday” repetitively over the radio, an emergency is certainly transpiring. The shipman repeatedly says over the radio that they’re sinking, but never refers to his ship, which is what we usually instantaneously presuppose to be actually sinking. Alas, the rookie doesn’t seem to fathom what he is trying to say. The rookie attempts to be articulate and understandable, he tells them that he is with the German Coast Guard in English. The shipman once again reiterates, “We’re sinking!” Now with the rookie being apparently confused by this message asks, “What are you…sinking about?” A quick pause is given and is then followed by sonorous classical music which interrupts the sober awkwardness, or from the audience’s perspective, the comical anecdote. The text “Improve your English” shows up, proceeding with a company logo and slogan, “Berlitz®” “Language for life” exemplifying that this was indeed an advertisement, and a rather humorous one at that.
We can easily surmise the situational setting even though the location takes place in what we, or at least I believe to be a different culture and country; this relation of understanding in these events serves as evidence that we as nation-states, are bringing our global perspectives together as most of us, irrespective of cultural backgrounds, can relate to, a nervous amateur being given a highly important position especially one where even a slight mistake could result in outright failures, even if we haven’t personally experienced such an important task. If a person watching this video clip doesn’t know the German language, he or she would almost solely have to rely on nonverbal communication factors to understand the preliminary dialogue that takes place. Cultural differences can also change body language meanings, but in this context they remain relatively similar in comparison to Western culture, exempli gratia, United States or Canadian cultures. The body language used throughout the video exhibits the attitude of both the rookie and superior. The rookie is of course taking the role of a naïve novice and is nervous about his performance on the first night on the job. The superior on the other hand seems calm and secure as he entrusts his distressed subordinate to maintain careful watch at the post. The most prominent part of the video is when the communication between rookie and shipman takes place. This coincides with the point of the advertiser’s product that they’re trying to sell, language learning and cultural training courses. With English at the present time apparently becoming the global lingua franca, it is important for most employees and workers in international fields to acquire the ability to speak proper and fluent English. The joke ingrains itself into this message risibly when the lack of understanding the shipman’s dire condition by the rookie is given with confused feedback and questioning, hilarious to an outside observer’s perspective since we know that this circumstance is not really occurring, or else it probably wouldn’t be quite as funny.
Video Text
4/20/2010
Cai Pencil
Analysis of a Video Text
In a banned commercial advertisement by a insurance company from Apeldoom, Netherlands, known as Centraal Beheer, or more commonly “Apeldoom”, they retell the story of “Adam and Eve”. The ad starts out with a scenery with a bear naked lady, Eve, the character we all know, under a tree on top of a hill and surrounded with giraffes and zebras(being a bit mystical in their presence themselves), with volcanoes in the distance. They zoom in on Eve, and even show a little clip of a rabbit hopping nearby Eve’s feet. Eve then goes on to explores, looking around with innocence and curiosity. She stops to look at a tree with extraordinarily red apples with a serpent guardian looking over them. She looks at the tree with the snake; she smirks, and keeps walking as if she knew that they were there in temptation. She now enters the forest where she is greeted with a full array of natural beauty (lots of green trees, butterflies, flowers, and the songs of the creatures that live there). A butterfly lands on her hand, and she gently blows to lead the butterfly on its way. She then observes a couple of parrots exchanging their affection for each other. Finally she walks past a white horse and a family of ducks to an opening where she finds a breath taking water fall and oasis. Still in awe she hears a noise of branches breaking. A young man (also naked) steps out and seems a bit surprised by her presence (we can assume this figure is Adam) but none the less confidant. Eve looks him up and down and smiles. Adam walks up and says, “HI! I’m Adam”. This sounds normal on paper, but the way he says it and acts is the stereo typical “gay guy” as we all have seen on TV and movies. Adam then goes to sit on a rock next the pool to giggle like a little girl and play with flowers while Eve stares in utter confusion and even a bit disgusted. This commercial ends with a quote saying “just call us”, this doesn’t mean a whole lot to us but in its original text it said"Even Apeldoorn bellen" ("Let's call Apeldoorn"), which in the original context was supposed to have a meaning like “oops”.
The narrative structure of this story we all know. God creates man, man gets lonely, god creates Eve, Adam and Eve are happy, but they defy god by eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that no matter what was out of bounds (hence “forbidden”) after being tricked by the Serpent and are subjected to hard labor and pain from childbirth and are banished from the “Garden”. As we are a nation with cultural heritage rich in creationists, it is only normal that we all have the cultural knowledge of the significance of this story in creationist belief. This ads attempt was to surrender the audience to the story of creationism. All the subliminal messages in this ad play a big roll in the actual story telling that builds up to the climax. Eve is shown in an almost African mother land like portrayal of the Garden. Her nakedness shows her grace an almost innocent state of consciousness that we can relate to infants who generally are not known to dress themselves (Though they do wear leaves which are thought to be an after effect of eating the forbidden fruit). At all times Eve is surrounded by green (a color associated with life), and some animals that we culturally associate as being cute or beautiful (like rabbits, butterflies, horses, and a family of ducks). When Eve stops to look at the forbidden fruit which is accompanied by the serpent (“slier than every beast on the field”), she smirks. Now this gets you thinking, was she smirking because she knew better than to eat the forbidden fruit? Or was it because she had already eaten the forbidden fruit and therefore was smirking in the sense that she knew what she had gained from the fruit? It was most likely the fact that she knew not to eat it (because they were more likely placing the leaves on Adam and Eve in this ad to censor their nakedness). As she enters the forest she is greeted with even more green, and also with the pleasant songs of the forest and some butterflies. As the butterfly landed on her hand and Eve blew it away, it adds just a little more to her grace and her innocence. She is then seen on a creek side bed kicking the water (another image that shows Eves childlike innocence) as she observes a couple of love-birds (literally). As she finally walks past the white horse (the symbol of divine authority) and a family of ducks she enters another yet mystical scene of a heavenly waterfall. As Adam walks into the scene to both their surprise, Eve looks the muscular young man with satisfaction (obviously suggesting that to Eve, Adam looks like the perfect counterpart). Adam being a man who God created Eve for, the comical, “Hi! I’m Adam”, and giggling and girlish actions of Adam totally contradicts cultural reinforcement of the “Adam and Eve” story. In the end the ideological value in this narrative was not the whole myth behind Adam and Eve, but the clear statement that a man and woman are made for each other (or in the actual story, the woman created for man.) There for the commercial advertisement contradicts the fact that Adam and Eve are made to be with each other in the original narrative with a homosexual version of Adam.
Cai Pencil
Analysis of a Video Text
In a banned commercial advertisement by a insurance company from Apeldoom, Netherlands, known as Centraal Beheer, or more commonly “Apeldoom”, they retell the story of “Adam and Eve”. The ad starts out with a scenery with a bear naked lady, Eve, the character we all know, under a tree on top of a hill and surrounded with giraffes and zebras(being a bit mystical in their presence themselves), with volcanoes in the distance. They zoom in on Eve, and even show a little clip of a rabbit hopping nearby Eve’s feet. Eve then goes on to explores, looking around with innocence and curiosity. She stops to look at a tree with extraordinarily red apples with a serpent guardian looking over them. She looks at the tree with the snake; she smirks, and keeps walking as if she knew that they were there in temptation. She now enters the forest where she is greeted with a full array of natural beauty (lots of green trees, butterflies, flowers, and the songs of the creatures that live there). A butterfly lands on her hand, and she gently blows to lead the butterfly on its way. She then observes a couple of parrots exchanging their affection for each other. Finally she walks past a white horse and a family of ducks to an opening where she finds a breath taking water fall and oasis. Still in awe she hears a noise of branches breaking. A young man (also naked) steps out and seems a bit surprised by her presence (we can assume this figure is Adam) but none the less confidant. Eve looks him up and down and smiles. Adam walks up and says, “HI! I’m Adam”. This sounds normal on paper, but the way he says it and acts is the stereo typical “gay guy” as we all have seen on TV and movies. Adam then goes to sit on a rock next the pool to giggle like a little girl and play with flowers while Eve stares in utter confusion and even a bit disgusted. This commercial ends with a quote saying “just call us”, this doesn’t mean a whole lot to us but in its original text it said"Even Apeldoorn bellen" ("Let's call Apeldoorn"), which in the original context was supposed to have a meaning like “oops”.
The narrative structure of this story we all know. God creates man, man gets lonely, god creates Eve, Adam and Eve are happy, but they defy god by eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that no matter what was out of bounds (hence “forbidden”) after being tricked by the Serpent and are subjected to hard labor and pain from childbirth and are banished from the “Garden”. As we are a nation with cultural heritage rich in creationists, it is only normal that we all have the cultural knowledge of the significance of this story in creationist belief. This ads attempt was to surrender the audience to the story of creationism. All the subliminal messages in this ad play a big roll in the actual story telling that builds up to the climax. Eve is shown in an almost African mother land like portrayal of the Garden. Her nakedness shows her grace an almost innocent state of consciousness that we can relate to infants who generally are not known to dress themselves (Though they do wear leaves which are thought to be an after effect of eating the forbidden fruit). At all times Eve is surrounded by green (a color associated with life), and some animals that we culturally associate as being cute or beautiful (like rabbits, butterflies, horses, and a family of ducks). When Eve stops to look at the forbidden fruit which is accompanied by the serpent (“slier than every beast on the field”), she smirks. Now this gets you thinking, was she smirking because she knew better than to eat the forbidden fruit? Or was it because she had already eaten the forbidden fruit and therefore was smirking in the sense that she knew what she had gained from the fruit? It was most likely the fact that she knew not to eat it (because they were more likely placing the leaves on Adam and Eve in this ad to censor their nakedness). As she enters the forest she is greeted with even more green, and also with the pleasant songs of the forest and some butterflies. As the butterfly landed on her hand and Eve blew it away, it adds just a little more to her grace and her innocence. She is then seen on a creek side bed kicking the water (another image that shows Eves childlike innocence) as she observes a couple of love-birds (literally). As she finally walks past the white horse (the symbol of divine authority) and a family of ducks she enters another yet mystical scene of a heavenly waterfall. As Adam walks into the scene to both their surprise, Eve looks the muscular young man with satisfaction (obviously suggesting that to Eve, Adam looks like the perfect counterpart). Adam being a man who God created Eve for, the comical, “Hi! I’m Adam”, and giggling and girlish actions of Adam totally contradicts cultural reinforcement of the “Adam and Eve” story. In the end the ideological value in this narrative was not the whole myth behind Adam and Eve, but the clear statement that a man and woman are made for each other (or in the actual story, the woman created for man.) There for the commercial advertisement contradicts the fact that Adam and Eve are made to be with each other in the original narrative with a homosexual version of Adam.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)