Google is my Friend: Literacy in Searching
by Pascal Routledge
by Pascal Routledge
Topic 1: Affinity Space
What is an affinity space? An affinity space is more than just occupying a here and now or presence. An affinity space refers to: “Approaching FFN as a space rather than a community then, is a way of focusing attention on the interplay among engagement, active participation, a sense of belonging, and the production of social space” (Black, 2008, p. 9). In application of this definition, affinity space is a place where participants can share their ideas and discuss topics affiliated with the website. Users are able to be involved in the shaping of the content of the space and the interactional organization of the space (Black, 2008, p. 22). In traditional learning we were intimidated by others because of their size, race, gender, or age. With the face to face space participants often feel unwilling to engage due to intimidation factors, thus valuable opinions and ideas are often lost. However in the new literacy mechanism all are equal as no one can see the other. According to Black “…“newbies,” or novices, and experts share the same activities and participate in the same space” (Black, 2008, p. 14). This lack of personal identity encourages experimentation and involvement within the website. In our research we found this to be true. We experimented with affinity spaces, we were able to test solutions and none of us felt intimidated. As a researcher note, we felt mandated to examine our unwillingness to participate in online discussions. That is as users we could have made comments and entered into discussions with others on the site. We all chose not to and after some discussion realized it was due to our established learning styles, and lack of experience in using this learning mechanism-affinity space.
Topic2: Becoming an Insider
It is important to discuss what is an insider in the construct of an Affinity Space? An insider is someone who is involved in discourse about a particular area which is at the basis of the affinity site or the social practice. “This means that being an ‘insider’ to a new literacy practice presupposes sharing the ethos values in question; identifying with them personally” (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007, p. 228). An insider is someone who can make inferences, connections and interpretations of all kinds of levels to text within a certain construct of the affinity web site that may only make partial sense to the outsider whereby the insider fully understands (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007, p. 225). The act of being an insider carries a certain important understanding or “mindset” (Lankshear & Knobel, 2007, p. 231) that is affiliated with the shared knowledge within the website involving new technology stuff. In analyzing the definition and reviewing our data we believe that an insider is someone who has knowledge and experiences therefore able to provide solutions to problems and issues. These solutions are based on the insider’s previous work within the affinity domain. It was imperative for us to become insiders for our current research. As insiders, we gained experience with the production of the stop animation film; we began to use terms and words that were specific to the making of our movie artefact all elements of insider traits. We were now using knowledge and experiences that labelled us insiders. Furthermore should we continue to develop our skills to produce a stop film animation movie we would be considered experts. We had become insiders to the stop film animation movie affinity websites due to our knowledge, experiences and confidence; we even published our artefact on such social sites as YouTube and Facebook. This one publication did not qualify the team as experts in this affinity.
Topic 3: Assessing Expertise
In affinity sites it is stated according to Black that ‘newbies’ and experts share the same activities, “ and that there is a wide range of expertise and many forms of knowledge that are valued; thus, the roles of “expert” and “novice” are highly variable and contingent on activity and context at any given moment” (Black, 2008, p. 14). Moreover our difficulty became, how to decide, who were the experts? We used trial and error to assess the value of the information and our willingness to grind (Jenkins, 2006, p. 23) through the stuff. In a practical application this meant taking an offered solution from the affinity list applying it to our project and evaluating the effectiveness. For us this pattern in our own data suggests that we were willing to work through the parts of our project that were not fun, try, try and try again. The literature refers to this technique as just-in-time-learning concept. Our media production was on hold until we found a solution to move forward. The team required knowledge and or a skill in order to proceed, thus just in time learning method.
When we returned to the affinity sites seeking solutions it became apparent there were two distinct issues. One of our problems was to solve technical issues and the other was a requirement to increase our knowledge of the topic. Technical issues were in the production of the stop motion film, items such as how to do inserts, floating objects and fading. The other requirement was to ensure we were being true to the Star Wars history. Knowledge of characters, events and roles was required to continue with our project. We tested the solutions that were posted, or were offered on the Fan Fiction Sites, our concern here was the reputation of the source – was this insider or an expert. By using the trial and error method, we tested the solutions offered and it soon became apparent that not all suggestions were solutions. If the suggestion failed we deemed the suggestion given from an insider but not an expert. We then went back to the website and found another solution, tested their suggestions and if it was successful, and we were happy with the result, we deemed that they are an expert. Students use this technique regularly in finding solutions to learning problems.
Topic 4: The act of “being” involved in affinity spaces
We engaged in a process in order to create our stop motion movie. We attempted to become 21st Century learners, go on line obtain information, knowledge and technical skills, use the information to complete a task, a stop motion animation movie. Our previous model of seeking information from texts, printed word was avoided; affinity web sites were our base information source. By being involved, “affinity spaces offer powerful opportunities for learning” (Jenkins, 2006, p. 9). In this type of participatory culture activity, today’s youth are far more willing and able to develop their reading and writing skills, their social skills, research skills, technical skills, and critical analysis skills which are mastered outside of the typical lecture style of teaching in the classroom (Jenkins, 2006, p. 4). By using the affinity web sites, which constitutes, the 21st Century learning style we produced our artefact. We experienced the volume of information available and the details involved creating a stop motion animation film, by using the click of the mouse. Thus we participated in and visualized the benefits of being involved in this type of participatory culture. This research experience vaulted us to test new ideas and review learning styles of our 21st Century learners. The feeling of everyone in the classroom watching learning was eliminated, the 29 pairs of eyes were gone, and I was able to experiment without being immediately judged. We there by judge this process in learning to be valuable and beneficial.
Topic 5: On the Edge
In our research we became takers, that is, just-in-time knowledge seekers. This technique follows a model you are stuck – require information and you seek a solution for the here and now to move your project forward. The information may be a skill or information, the process is to search a web site and solve your problem. Once we discovered the information and left the site, the term we ‘surfed’ the Internet applies in this instance. The approach is to find a solution and get out with the required information; there is no dialogue, interaction, or engagement with the site.
On the edge is in relation of how we viewed our interaction with the web sites. First, after viewing the information we felt we were in no position to comment either positive or negatively to the information. We had to go and test prior to making a comment; we were in no position to evaluate the information at this point. Secondly our established learning styles dictate take information, asses then comment. Today’s learner would easily comment from the beginning at the source of information, stating the solution looked cool or thanks we will try this solution and let you know. We were not that brave. Now that we have completed the artefact where we applied solutions from the affinity sites we could go back to them and enter discussions as to what worked and did not work. Thereby through this activity we would become ‘insiders’ and not just ‘surfers’. In analysing this approach for a classroom application the essential component is the student being able to use the 21st Century Literacy strategies. We are being driven to provide opportunity to move us away from the 100% “Broadcast” (Tapscott, 1998) learning leaning towards the “Interactive” (Example 1) 21st Century Learning.
References
Black, R. (2008). Adolescents and Online Fan Fiction. New York
Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Chicago: The MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved July 10, 2007 from http://www.newmedialiteracies.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007). Researching New Literacies: Web 2.0 practices and insider perspectives, E–Learning and Digital Media. doi: 10.2304/elea.2007.4.3.224
Tapscott, D. (1998) Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. New York, NY McGraw-Hill.
Pointers for group meeting:
· Define what you/we are doing.
o How that definition applies to what we did.
o Give example of what the data did
o Connects back to what the literature says.(like a loop)
· Does the writing reflect the research and the data?-the citation must connect to our data? How does it connect? How is it supported in our data?
· References/Citations: Specific research material not an opinion, it must be connected to the research no fluff and filler writing
· Find the literature to support the research
· Apply it to the research data and experiences that we have had
· Conclude / Applying it to the classroom? Are they drawing from research which is supported by data, now that we participated in the 21st C. learning model we would do it again.
What are the conclusions?
Encouragement to write and further edit, using online discussion groups children need encouragement so that they can become insiders and practice and participate in the 21st century learning model.
Difficult to research online, want to print and have a hard copy,
Once we became insiders we became fluent of in the act of this new 21st century learning model
No comments:
Post a Comment