Tag Archives: digital humanities

Pedagogical Intervention 2: Edmodo: The Academic Facebook

Posted on by under Mini Projects

Pedagogical Intervention 2: Edmodo: Educational Facebook

Edmodo is built for educators and students by educators and students. This digital sharing forum functions as more of a social Moodle/Blackboard-type site, but greater focus on qualities of those similar to microblogs and social networking sites. The biggest thing that caught my attention when exploring the site was its uncanny resemblance to the Facebook layout, which, I am sure, was no accident. Though I could find no philosophy statement rationalizing the layout of the site as rooted in the social aspect of academia, the proof is in the pudding. (I think I used that term correctly. I’m still never sure after Bernstein.)

This is the general view of Edmodo when opening a student home page, which is extremely similar to one’s Facebook home page:

Edmodo_StudentView

Additionally, when one posts a picture, the visual layout is also the same:

Edmodo_PicturePost

One can also comment on a photograph or post in the same fashion that a Facebook user is able to:

Edmodo_CommentFeature

After looking more deeply into the site’s constructs, its collection of mission statements refer to this site as K-12, availability for entire school districts, and emphasis on Common Core educational standards and a variety of networking between teachers and teams to share curriculum. However, I think that this would be a great tool for undergraduates, who are still in the transition between 12th grade and Freshman-level coursework. This site location provides a low-risk environment that capitalizes on an architecture that so many students are already familiar with (Facebook). However, the framework is redesigned and reimagined into an educational context, thus forcing the collaboration between social and academic. This makes the transition from social network to a sociable scholarly network—the point of college.

One way that this site endeavors to shift the sociable aspect of Facebook to the academic sense is the functions of posts. On Facebook, you are able to “Like” and “Comment.” With Edmodo, you have the ability to “React.” There is an option where you can “Reply,” “Share,” or “React,” with any of the following emoticons in a drop-down list: Awesome!; Like it!; Interesting!; Tough/Challenging; Not taught in class; Need more time; Bored; Need help; Lost interest

Edmodo_Reactions

Further similarities between Facebook and Edmodo can be visually noted throughout the other screenshots offered in this post.

For this intervention, I created a teacher account and a student account so that I could see how the site functions from both ends.

Edmodo is free, but does have options to upgrade for larger spaces. With the teacher account, you have the ability to create different groups (classes), where each page functions as a different class page. There is a library, similar to the “Content” section of d2l or Moodle, which provides a space for uploaded files. For students to join your page, all they need to do is sign up with a username and have your access code. Feel free to join my test page to try it out for yourself: Go to Edmodo.com, fill in the needed information and use the code: dfys3d (Post, take the quizzes, etc.—you are most welcome to anything. I suggest you take the expert quiz. Dr. Sherwood may make an appearance in one of the questions.)

Assignments

There is the option to create assignments, quizzes (matching, multiple choice, fill in the blank, short answer), and polls. (I have one of each created on my site if you’d like to check it out.)

Students can also upload their own documents to this site, similar to a Dropbox for assignments or an online submission. There is also a library for students to see what they have submitted, so that things can’t “magically disappear.”

Edmodo_SubmittingAssignment

Edmodo_turnedin

Grades:

Grades for the assignments are taken care of for you. All grades are calculated and made into a table on the site. There is also an option to export the grades to an Excel file. You can adjust the point value and the time permitted to take each test and assignment when creating the type of assignment, as well.

Edmodo_Grade_Export

Students also have the ability to view their progress throughout the course, as it is all tracked through Edmodo. There are two visualizations that are available when viewing their progress. The bar graph shows the completion of the assignments, while the line graph shows the quality/actual grade of those completed assignments.

Edmodo_StudentProgressBarGraph

Edmodo_StudentProgressLineGraph

The poll that I created was would this be an effective classroom tool for classrooms in higher education? My response: I’m not sure. As I stated earlier, I could certainly see something like Edmodo holding promise in a Freshman course. But, the tool is limited by its use for the classroom–just as Moodle, Blackboard, etc. I’m not sure how long this material is available online, or if students have forever access to this site. No information is available for that. I’m guessing with only so much space, with a teacher account, it is only a matter of time before I have to delete a group and all of its contents, including its pages and all student work, posts, pictures, files, etc. So, I’m not sure of the viability that this would have. But, I’m also not sure if it is the viability or the longevity that is the point of using DH in the classroom and beyond the classroom. And, we’ve talked about this before. With having DH in university standards, but no clear objectives to advocate those standards, it is difficult to understand what that means within the confines of our own classrooms, and even our own pedagogies. If using DH in the classroom means using a tool that get students genuinely involved, then I think Edmodo could do that for incoming Freshman. Beyond that, I’m not so sure.

Audiences and Purposes

Posted on by under Uncategorized

#18: Electronic Sources: Audiences and Purposes (Schreibman, Siemens, and Unsworth) provides to us the argument and complications surrounding the purpose and function of electronic texts.

Birkerts and Baker seem to share some of the same anxieties that we have been discussing all semester: the threat of codex extinction. They both “mourn the changes wrought by the development of electronic media, and fear that books, once decoupled from their physical presence, will lose their meaning and historical importance.” While I don’t think we are close to a Fahrenheit 451 post-codex-apocalypse, I understand and share some of their anxious notions. In conversation with procuring electronic texts, however, the rebuttal to this possibility and fear is that electronic texts may actually do the opposite, as this chapter indicates that Birkerts, specifically, “does not consider other possible outcomes, such as one in which general readers and scholars alike have a better sense of the concerns and ideas of peoples and historical periods with increased access to works otherwise available in only a few libraries.” While I agree that the increase of access provides a larger space and opportunity to interact with rare texts, I don’t think that it directly responds to the possible extinction of the codex. Even the authors’ response to this does not clearly answer that: “The development of digital collections does not require the destruction of books; instead, it may provoke more interest in their existence and provide different opportunities for their study through keyword and structured reading.” To me, this doesn’t answer the concern of Birkets and Baker. Even though this process “does not require the destruction of books,” the possibility of the extinction of the codex is not ruled out.

There is also the issue of access. Electronic digitizations of texts simply for access seems to miss the point, according to Hockey, where “access is the least interesting aspect of electronic texts, for it leaves largely unexploited their real power: the ability for texts to be searched and manipulated by computer programs.” For me, and perhaps for the electronic text collections available, Hockey’s stance on what should be the focus of electronic texts seems to be a bit ahead of the game, at this point. It seems that gaining access to a wide range of texts is the fundamental first step toward anything more complex, such as Hockey’s suggestion for electronic text possibilities.

While there is an array of electronic texts available, it is also very limiting: “The initial hindrances to reading works by lesser-known writers, perhaps insurmountable in the past, can be much more easily overcome in this new medium.” While this is true, those texts also need to be made available. Progressing through the chapter, it is clear that finding out what exactly is available is an “immediate problem” since there is no institutionalized cataloging order of what electronic collections are available. It seems to me, that perhaps before dedicating the studies in this field to all that it can be, there needs to be some rational organization of material, increased standards for electronic collections (publisher and edition choices, for example), and an e-Dewey-type system for categorization before the shift to digital humanities can be curbed to anticipate and refute the foundational concerns of skeptics.

Clash of Clans “Story of the [Unattainable] Quest”: A Promising New Model for IFs?

Posted on by under Responses

Viewing the nearly antiquated experiences associated with hypertextual narratives in comparison to FPS-esque games and MMOs suggests a point of further inquisition and study that I think is worthy of attention. (I am bridging connections between some of the characteristics of FPSs with MMOs, as the quotations directed from this chapter apply to both, simultaneously.)

As we have learned, narrative scripts can be relayed in either diagetic, mimetic, or an enacted mode. The third, concerning digital literacies, according to Marie-Laure Ryan, is “enacted not for the benefit of an audience, as is the case in drama, but as a self-rewarding activity.” Throughout Chapter 28 (A Companion to Digital Humanities), this “reward” is mentioned and questioned, but never fully answered. Perhaps the answer to what this reward (or motivation) is can influence a reconfiguration of digital texts/IFs/hypertexts in a way that will engage the user to replay the narrative.

One game narrative that seems to withstand the test of time is the game narrative that never ends. The chapter includes commentary on The Sims, which is an example of this game narrative. Though somewhat outdated in comparison to the game culture of 2015, The Sims is still popularly played. However, the analysis of the game in coordination with its narrativity is similarly applicable to Clash of Clans. This is one of the most highly rated and most played MMO strategy video games since its release in 2012, which may prove to be more helpful in the search for what makes this particular game narrative popular and sustainable.

As Ryan brings to our attention, IFs “can develop very imaginative scripts that spice up the solving of problems with narrative interest [but] offer very little incentive to re-enter their world once the game has been beaten.” Well, what if the IF can’t be beat?

Is it possible to create an IF with “the story of the quest” that is ultimately unattainable? This speaks to Hayden White (1987) and his critique of a narrative’s “blindness…to the complexity of the problem of truth.” Ryan’s summary of White’s argument is simply that “narrative is not a reliable way to gain knowledge about the past, because it always involves a fabrication. Reality, he claims, does not offer itself to perception in the shape of a story.”

Like The Sims, Clash of Clans is one of the “God” games, where the player is in control of their clan base. There is no “beating the game” with either of these games, which could provide the point of motivation for continuing to play in comparison to IFs. Instead of “beating the game,” these narratives consist of overcoming various challenges, completing achievements, and, in Clash of Clans, winning/losing battles/wars. There is no end to the game. As players progress their clans and bases, the program continues to build the narrative as the players advance.

Why, if these games are never able to beat, are they so popular? I think that White’s argument plays into the possible answer for this. If we are making the analogy of game narratives (or classical narrative) to truths of reality (i.e. life), then IFs and classical narratives are unrealistic. Reality can’t be beat and life can’t be beat. Perhaps the motivation for playing “the story of the quest” presents more of a connection to the reality and truths of the narrative of our own lives: overcoming challenges, achievements, winning and losing. What if IFs were able to create this same narrative or mirror these basic constituents of them?

FPS, and, arguably, MMO “stories…remain in a virtual state until they are mentally replayed” (Ryan). Even though these games “are played over and over again, players rarely ‘replay’ in their minds the story of a game, because these stories only differ from each other” in trivial details (Ryan). While “the stories they generate are worth experiencing in the first person but rarely worth telling to a third party” (Ryan). Clash of Clans refutes this by forcing collaboration between its players and introducing the collective first person. Collaboration between players is forced by individual users having to attack other clan bases and by other users attacking one’s own base. There is no control over who attacks your base. As a result, you have to attack other clan bases in order to sustain your own clan. It isn’t possible to advance the game narrative if the collaboration between players is non-existent. Additionally, as clan bases advance and upgrade, it becomes difficult to stand alone in the Clash world. One must join a clan. Once in the clan, all members can look at each other’s bases, donate troops, go to war, share replays of attacks, and participate in the clan chat. It is constantly collaborative. It is so much so that I know of clans that choose to also meet outside of the clan chat in person and discuss the game narrative, their own experiences, the collective clan experience, layout strategies, attack styles, and troop fulfillment. The greater a clan works together, the more successful the clan will be. This also goes directly back to White’s argument of narrative reality. While the game is fictitious, collaborating with others, learning to ask for donations, sending help to others, problem-solving, dealing with victories as well as losses, and more, are all experiences of the multiple truths of reality (i.e. working together as a community for a purpose). This collaboration is certainly a motivation for continuing to participate and co-create the game narrative as it exists in real time. What if IFs were able to extend this same type of collaboration that seems to be so popular?

If, as Ryan argues, “the motivation of…players is much more narrative than that which drives the players of FPS’s [and MMOs],” then I think that there are two important elements of a successful narrative that seems to foreground the base of player motivation: “the story of the quest” and player/narrative collaboration. If the IF world were to reconfigure the way that game narratives are constructed and tailored the narrative to player’s motivations (as those above), perhaps IFs would have a greater presence in the gaming world. However, this brings into play an entirely different argument of whether or not it is possible, considering the limitations of IFs (recognized vocabulary, number of rooms, actions, etc.). Is it even possible to suggest this reconfiguration with the given platform of IFs? What will happen to IFs if they do not adapt to the motivations of its players? While I have no answers, I think that these points are ones that shouldn’t be dismissed.

Skip to toolbar