Composition's Reach: The Legitimization of a Discipline?

Some questions have been lurking in my brain for awhile now, ethereal and recurring; but before I raise them in this blog I want to issue a disclaimer. What follows is by no means an attempt to undermine, incite, or attack. What follows is an attempt to negotiate what, for me, and I think some of my fellow classmates, have been some difficult issues we’ve struggled with throughout the semester as we discussed the topics of technology and English pedagogy. In reading Wysocki’s Writing New Media, I cannot help but think about the distinction between disciplines.

At which point does English overstep its bounds in teaching technological composition? If a graphics design syllabus was submitted as an English syllabus, bound by ties to composition practices, wouldn’t somebody over in the comp-sci or art building (and I’m not sure which: this uncertainty may be an indication of a greater, underlying issue of obscurity in course/discipline relationships) get upset? I mean, some film studies courses are taught by English instructors: what’s the difference here? Is there one?

Dr. Dorn’s “Bibliographic Strategies” class last spring got me thinking about how others view the English field (how are the humanities valued? Why does our field matter?). Dr. Barton’s “Teaching College English” this past fall got me thinking about how English has tried to legitimize itself (cognitive theory, empirical research, scientific language, etc.). I see the connections between technology and composition; I see the value of teaching certain principles regarding technology; I understand the desire of some English instructors to defy tradition, upset hierarchies, and teach outside the norm; I understand all this, but still wonder.

How far can our discipline extend itself in the quest to teach composition? Does any creative act, when defined as composition, license us to seize the reins? Are there even such boundaries, borders, or bifurcation between fields? Does the academe have those types of politics? I cannot imagine it doesn’t. At what point does a friendly, scholarly interest in a field marginally (and this is a loaded adjective, I realize) related to English overreach? I’m interested to get some comments/replies/feedback/input from my readers. What do you think?

Viral Videos: Lesson Plans A-Plenty

Viral videos, or, more broadly, Internet memes, are infectious clips of video, audio, or photos that contaminate the web. Most people probably have a crazy aunt that spams their mailbox with forwarded content whose subject lines bare titles like “LOL, Check this out!!” and contains pictures of lolcats or funny redneck pictures. You’ve probably encountered memes despite not knowing how to label them: think the Christian Bale rant/remix recently, or the dancing baby of years past (yes, the one from Ally McBeal).

Internet memes can serve an important pedagogical purpose: creating common ground with our students. While it takes a firm finger on the pulse of the web to stay current with the latest memes, the commitment can be worth the effort if approached from the proper angle. Not to mention that a bit of lag can’t hurt as to ensure a majority of students are familiar with the clip. Viral videos are, to an extent, like the clips from America’s Funniest Home Videos – they entertain people with short, often comical deviations from ordinary life. And our students watch them.

Outside of a means to connect with students (I can’t believe Mr. Reimer knows about the Techno Viking!) or a bridge to current events (Rick Astley, the “Rick Rolled” guy, appearing at the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade because of the resurgence of his solo hit musical career as a meme), ‘net memes provide teachers with a variety of lesson plans. In conjunction with Weezer’s song, “Pork and Beans,” memes become an easily relatable example of intertextuality or the acknowledgement of sources. With a proper selection, viral content can be extrapolated into lessons about details, elaboration, and context—how meaning is made through association (many memes need some level of explication to be understood).

Additionally, the videos allow instructors to engage students on the topic of “engagement,” or what media theorist Henry Jenkins calls “participatory culture.” How are people participating in culture by creating it? How does YouTube change media consumption? How do shifts in consumption affect production? How is production different across mediums? How has technology altered the way we process media?

The mainstream has always lagged behind the frenzied pace of the web. What was viral six months ago is part of tonight’s nine o’clock news roundup. Advertising companies are said to be “going viral” and some even capitalize on previously e-famous videos (Geico just released a viral video with the Numa Numa guy). An episode of the popular animated show South Park shares a showcase similar to the Weezer video.

There is something about these videos that traditional students (and the crazy aunt who keeps spamming your e-mail) are relating to. Below is a list of the content referenced in this post. Watch a few and see what connections there are; think about how this esoteric, yet infectious cultural participation might work in a classroom.

Lolcats: http://www.lolcats.com/
Christian Bale rant (NSFW language): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrvMTv_r8sA
Christian Bale remix (NSWF language): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTihsJQHt48
Dancing Baby: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W4EBoQmWPs
TechnoViking: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1nzEFMjkI4
RickRoll Original Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
RickRoll Macy’s Parade: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wL-hNMJvcyI
Spider Payment: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/1052395/
Numa Numa guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60og9gwKh1o&feature=related
Numa Numa Gieco: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80586862/
Weezer’s “Pork and Beans”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muP9eH2p2PI
Weezer’s “Pork and Beans” contains references to: Chocolate Rain with Tay Zonday, Numa Numa Guy, Dramatic Chipmunk, Afro Ninja, Coke+Mentos, GI Joe dubs, T-Shirt Guiness Record, Chris Crocker, ZeroWing, Miss Carolina, Evolution of Dance, Daft Punk dancers, Star Wars kid, Peanut Butter Jelly Time, Candy Mountain Charlie, to name just a few. YouTube the Weezer song or any of these items to find the viral video.

What's up with Worlde?

Lately I’ve blogged a lot on technology applications in the classroom. From texts to Twitter, YouTube to machinima, I have focused on a variety of applications that have potential in pedagogy. One web application I would love to incorporate into a lesson plan is Wordle. You can find it here:

http://www.wordle.net/

Visit the site; play around; use a paper written for a class to see what the results are. Wordle creates word clouds based on the text users input. The clouds are based on the frequency with which the data uses certain words. Words that are used often are made to stand out more; users of Wordle can alter the style of the word clouds: changing fonts, colors, layout, etc. Besides a really fancy tech-savvy way to bolster a PowerPoint, this application can help visual learners map their key ideas.

Instead of rereading a paper, outlining a thesis and topic sentences, graphing the trajectory of the paper, students can copy-paste their essays into Wordle and see what words they’re using most often. The implications of this are numerous: students can see which words they are repeating most often. If non-key terms appear large, the student may want to consider revising the essay with the notion to whittle those repetitions down; if key terms come up big, the student can compare which of those terms seem most important based on frequency and see if it aligns with the important words they wanted to use.

But those are just a couple examples; the benefits don’t end at editing. Students can analyze the rhetoric of a popular essay by using the essay as the data for Wordle’s word clouds. Instead of asking them to write an essay based on Swift’s “A Modest Proposal,” imagine what fun results pedagogues and students would come up with when they analyzed Wordle’s interpretation of Swift’s famous essay.

Viewing language as an art can be a difficult concept to convey, and Worlde can help. Students can step outside what they feel is stagnant text while staying within the confines of the course goals and aims of the discipline.

Utilitarianism in the Classroom

Last Friday I taught one of my favorite articles: Sirlin’s “Play to Win.” The class was learning arguments for position and had read the corresponding chapter in our Faigley rhetoric. The essay, which I found years ago, argues that when playing competitive games, players should be competitive. Sounds difficult, right? Well in gaming circles it can be difficult to convince players to “play to win” -- a lot more difficult than it sounds; but Sirlin handles the matter effectively. His article became so popular amongst the niche gaming culture that he was given a book deal. Before going further, here is the link to the first part of his argument (the only part we read in class):

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.html

I preface the article with brief information on the world of competitive gaming (big LAN tournaments, cash prizes, team sponsors, etc.) and also show them this YouTube clip to get them whet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7cW2nMf1gk

The clip shows a full parry (trust me, it is more impressive than most people realize) in a 2004 Street Fighter tournament. A packed crowd that erupts to the outcome of a video game helps alleviate any doubt about the veracity of my preface for students unfamiliar with the world of competitive gaming. Sirlin’s position is relevant even to non-gamers. I draw parallels to sports and board games; and because nearly everyone, at some point or another in their lives, has undertaken some competitive venture, they can relate.

Now, I could talk at length about why I like the article and how it matches suitably with teaching argument, but that is not what today’s particular blog entry is about. As the title indicates, utilitarianism is the focus here. My readers have probably gleaned my direction already: the article is not too popular amongst the females in the class. However, the males absolutely love it. I get more discussion out of the guys in the class period I teach this article than the entire rest of the year combined.

So that brings me to my question: Is it wise to practice utilitarianism in the classroom? Is alienating the females to entice the other gender to discuss the topic conscionable? Will men only participate when they’ve been given something they’re intimate with? Don’t misunderstand: in my mind, there is no reason for the women not to discuss Sirlin’s position; and this is not to say no females do discuss (or that males never discuss other topics), because they do; but rather, for the most part, the women remain silent while their counterparts come alive.

My female students are generally more talkative (in the interactive, discussion, good way) than my males, so I don’t feel too sore about serving a dish suited mainly to the menfolk once a semester. But I’m curious to hear feedback from my readers.

Machinima

Last semester I wrote a paper titled "One Fish, Two Fish, Red versus Blue Fish" for a new media class. The paper aimed at contextualizing the burgeoning new art form machinima within game studies and new media scholarship. Machinima, as defined in the paper, is: "film-making within the real time 3-D virtual environment of a video game. It's the use of video game graphics technology to create animated films. Machinima combines aspects of film making, animation and game design to transform an interactive medium (a video game) into a production studio complete with sets, props, special effects and virtual actors; and all you need is a video game and desktop computer."

So why write about it here? I contend that machinima can be used as an effective pedagogical tool. More entertaining than a PowerPoint (PPT), more effective than a lecture, an educational machinima video would harness students' passion for pop culture and technology. And, like PPT, machinima is reusable. Once you've created it for a certain lesson, section, or educational enterprise, you don't need to do anything with it unless information changes or you decide a new video game platform may be more fun to deliver the information through. A lot of effort and time goes into creating good machinima -- and thats the key, the video needs to be good -- but the process of production involves playing video games, not hunting google for pictures that fit your PPT theme; besides, a good PPT takes a lot of effort too.

This blog will focus on new media pedagogy, with a focus on machinima as a supplementary and auxilary teaching tool.