I've been sitting around trying to figure out
my presentation for Computers and Writing. That means, of course, that I've been fidgeting with trying to find information on the conference online, researching this and that, and other "prewriting" activities.
Yesterday, I sadly realized that I actually have to read
the Lakoff book very soon. So I've been trying to plug through it, but I'm not making much progress. Not because it's hard to read, but because I'm having a hard time figuring out how I'm going to connect something that is so firmly grounded in Republican-Democratic political ideology to my ideas about technological literacy. In my heart, I just feel like I'm going down some crazy road, where none of this really will make sense. If anyone comes to the session, they'll just wonder where I got the crack that helped me come up with these ideas.
I seem to be taking more breaks from reading than actually reading, so I've been at the computer. I posted that question about computer teaching space names on TechRhet, thinking that since Lakoff is talking about the process of naming perhaps that would be the thing that would tie the elephants to the laptops. I've been compiling the names in a spreadsheet, and the answers are, indeed, interesting. Still, I don't think that I have seen the fundamentally important difference in language use that fits Lakoff's discussion of language. Sigh.
So I decided to reread my notes from the last CCCC session that I attended:
M.20: Info-Ecology, Info-Architecture: Growing and Designing Rhetoric for Critical Technography. That was about an hour and a half ago, and as I read my notes I had this sudden realization. I had -one of those moments-. An epiphany? I don't know what to call it. I don't have them often, and the most vivid one came when I was studying for my master's exam and suddenly realized how everything related to everything else. At that moment, I knew that I understood and that no further amount of studying would make any difference. You could have given me any 4 texts to relate, and I would have been able to do it.
That's that it felt like. Suddenly, I thought that I saw how everything connected and made sense—technology, architecture/ecology, elephants. My notes aren't all that complete however; so I used
the lazy researcher's friend. Either I completely understand, or I am totally lost.
| |
A |
B |
| M.20 session |
information ecology, loss of agency
organic human interaction with technologies
Dickie: "we need a citizenry that understands the best way to live" |
information architecture, control of agency
human control of interaction with technologies |
| wikipedia |
Quotes
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_ecology:
"Information ecology" often is used as metaphor,
viewing the informational space as an ecosystem.
describe and analyze information
systems from a perspective that considers the distribution and abundance
of organisms,
their relationships with each other, and how they influence and are influenced
by their environment.
|
Quotes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_architecture:
The practice of structuring information (knowledge or data)
for purpose
In the context of web design (or design for related media) Information Architecture is defined by the Information Architecture Institute as
- The structural design of shared information environments.
- The art and science of organizing and labeling web sites, intranets, online communities and software to support usability and findability.
- An emerging community of practice focused on bringing principles of design and architecture to the digital landscape.
designing the architecture around the needs and capabilities of the intended
user audience.
|
| Lakoff's explanation of national politics via the family metaphor |
nurturing parent
". . . children are born good and can be made better. The world can be
made a better place, and our job is to work on that. The parents' job
is to nurture their children and to raise their children to be nurturers
of others." (12)
Values in "a community as in a family": freedom; opportunity;
prosperity;, fairness; open, two-way communication; community-building,
service to the community, and cooperation in a community; trust; and
honesty. (13)
Types of progressives. #3 of 6, "Environmentalists think in terms
of sustainability of the earth, the sacredness of the earth, and the
protection of native peoples." (14). |
strict father
"Children [citizens] are born bad, in the sense that they want to do what
feels good, not what is right. Therefore, they have to be made good." (7)
"the strict father [government] is a moral authority who knows right from
wrong" (7).
Government takes the role of the father, knowing right from wrong, and making
decisions that reward those who are self-reliant, those "whose prosperity reveals
their discipline and hence their capacity for morality" (9). |
| Cindy's Technology and Literacy in the Twenty-First Century |
Technological literacy "refers to the complex set of socially
and culturally situated values, practices, and skills involved in operating
linguistically within the context of electronic environments, including
reading, writing, and communicating. The transformed term, critical
technological literacy, suggests a reflective awareness of these social
and cultural phenomena." (148)
|
"The prevailing cultural
understanding of the term as simple competence with computers" (xx).
|
| K12 literacy education |
whole language instruction
"instructional philosophy which focuses on reading as an activity
best taught in a broader context of meaning. Rather than focusing on reading
as a mechanical skill, it is taught as an ongoing part of every student's
existing language and life experience. Building on language skills each
student already possesses, reading and writing are seen as a part of a
broader 'whole language' spectrum." |
phonics, NCLB, standards, testing, "scientifically-based" reading
instruction, direct instruction
picture the guided reading instruction shown in the clips where GWB is
observing a classroom read "The
Pet Goat" while the planes fly into the
WTC.
|
| tengrrl's musing |
organic, holistic |
structured, determined |
Um, that's more than enough for now. I started trying to get this explained hours
ago. It's 2 am now. But I do have to summarize somehow. I'm not trying to set
up a Good/Bad dichotomy here, especially not as it might apply to the CCCC session
on info ecologies versus info architecture. I'm trying to look at the way that
metaphors and language fall out in these discussions and to think about how the
metaphors that are chosen influence the ways that instruction and learning is
(or is not) sustained. I'm still not at all sure how that works. It's just that
I think I finally figured out how everything parallels the dichotomy that Lakoff
set forth.
I think, also, that we are close to the dangers of technological thinking
that Heidegger explains—totally via Cindy's explanation: "When humans have
a technological understanding of the world, we see technology in a very narrow
way: as a tool for solving problems, as a means to an end" (140). "As humans
adopt this 'instrumental' understanding of technology, we also begin to think
that all problems can be solved with technology and that the newest technology
is all we need to master the natural environment as well" (141). And finally,
"This way of 'enframing' the world (20) becomes dangerous when it limits
our repertoire of response to a 'single way' (32) and when our other ways of
understanding the world atrophy and disappear" (141). I think, and I really
emphasize
think there, that that Heidegger might well fall into the B
column, the strict father view, with its singular focus on good and scientifically-determined
ways of doing things, without attention to other existing ways.
i think...
I no longer know where any of this is going. I'm not sure how it relates in any
way to
my
original C&W abstract. Hell, I'm not even sure if it makes any sense
to anyone other than me. On that one level, as I typed hours ago, it feels like
I suddenly know how everything relates to everything else. On the other, I'm
not at all sure what it means or if it's even right. It's 2:21 now. Perhaps it's
time to sleep on it.
