Looking back over week 3 (week 2 for me in reality) it looks like I take a rather humanist approach to most aspects of cyberculture.
My end of block visual artefact was not intended to represent my view of digital technology. I don’t see ‘it’ as something to be feared, although it’s clear that many do. It is the use we make of it as a species that is my primary concern. Reflecting on the media linked by my fellow students and content I have found myself brings some of this into sharp relief. Indeed the blog post mid-week that followed reading Katharine Viner’s article in the Guardian was rather more from the heart than the head. From a thematic point of view I’ve definitely been more interested in ‘the preservation of the authentic human’.
The Google Hangout on Friday was useful. As an on-line student it’s always good to know that you’re not alone and to hear first hand that others are having a similar experience. Availability of previous iterations of the course was queried and it left me in something of quandary. I had found Tweets and post from the 2015 course when researching some of the terms used in the reading, but I had avoided looking for the Lifestreams so as not to be influenced by them, or risk inadvertent plagiarism. However, I came away from the Hangout with two thoughts; firstly that the blogs posts of our predecessors would be useful in helping me understand the concepts we’re studying and, secondly, that I’m leaving a legacy in my own Lifestream. This latter galvanised me into making my Lifestream more accessible, with the bonus effect of helping me understand the inner workings of WordPress a little better.
I’m still catching up on the reading and film clips and have saved up (put off) the Cyborg Manifesto until early next week.
some really good reflection here Nigel, and a very useful summary of week 3, well, week 2!
‘I don’t see ‘it’ as something to be feared, although it’s clear that many do.’
I think that is a potentially very important step to take, particularly for ‘us’ in education technology; to recognise that many will come from radically different perspectives, and may well be influenced by all sorts of assumptions embedded in cultural understandings.
“From a thematic point of view I’ve definitely been more interested in ‘the preservation of the authentic human”‘
Indeed, but just where we draw that line may not be easily identified where technology increasingly encroaches on our bodies?
‘and, secondly, that I’m leaving a legacy in my own Lifestream.’
Really interesting point Nigel. I’m not sure I’ve thought of it precisely like this before, but it’s a really important point I think. It definitely says something about the permanence of digital memory…and does that make it distinct from our own (fallible) human memory? If that is the case, why is so much of education focused on memorisation? Is that why technology seems the perfect solution?