The end of our iMovie project contained a great deal of reflection on the project itself and the concepts we were working on and how they connected, but there was not a reflection on the process. Our process was one of many changes. I personally began working with a concept that was a much different than the end result. I had turned away from exploring how new media literacy can enhance our understanding of cultural literacy to content that had to do with simply emphasizing the importance of expanding new media studies in the English department. It seemed I worked too much at first on making my ideas blend well with Melanie and Todd’s. After a week of meeting and trying out new plans for the project, I realized that I could indeed carry on ideas I developed through the quarter (i.e., my post, my literacy conference proposal) and expand on them while still staying cohesive with my group. This was not easy and I think the connections were still being made in the later stages of the project or during the executions of our plans. While my argument addressed purpose, Todd’s addressed pedagogy, and Melanie’s addressed theory, all of us were looking at how new media can be expanded in English. While our approaches to this were different in many aspects, I think this further validated our argument because our varied approaches to implementing new media in the classroom shows that there is much to learn for students and much to research for teachers.
While I had a rough start getting into a group and finalizing my argument for the collaboration, I feel I was a part of a hard-working, cohesive group. Todd and Melanie were open to change and encouraged me to add onto their proposal until I had something I really wanted to work with. We were a little worried at first, but as we started planning the steps and taking them (especially after we captured footage on iMovie), our confidence grew as well as our trust in each other.
Outside of our ideas and plans for the project, I had the opportunity to spend some time with Todd and Melanie talking about being a TA, managing the demands of grad school, and planning for future quarters. While this was not a goal of the project, the fact that it brought us together created a valuable opportunity for me to reflect on where I am going and issues I am dealing with being a first year Rhet./Comp. MA. We also took time to vent about how composing on computers outside of the word processor is undervalued by not only our common institution, but English departments nationwide.
The time it took us to complete this was considerable. Editing on iMovie is not a simple, quick process; it is repetitive and sometimes tedious. Given that we made ourselves a rigorous meeting schedule, we met our goals with time to spare to our suprise. While we leaned on my experience in editing and shooting because of time constraints, I think Todd and Melanie made marked gains in their comfort and knowledge of how iMovie works in the time they had to sit down and edit with me over their shoulders. Furthermore, I will be the first to say that I am not a pro at iMovie. I had to re-learn things from my previous experiences and I think my confidence grew by leaps as we neared our completion. Looking back on this project I realize that in order to expand and improve on my iMovie composing abilities, I have to do it regularly. I hope my future classes will support me in this effort and provide me with opportunities to continue studying the multi-modal discourse iMovie provides and how it is an asset to English studies.
Blog Response “Portfolio” and reflective Essay Assignment
Russell Crooks
Overall, the blogging element of our class was a new experience for me, but it helped that I had some experience using myspace and myspace blogs prior to this class. I achieved a comfort level rather quickly after some initial frustration. As for the dynamic of our communication, I think it was playful and informal, but not at the expense of content discussion, meaning making, and sharing of ideas. This element of communication within coursework is an excellent way to keep ideas static and reviewable as opposed to class discussions that can be forgotten and fleeting. I am working over break to add a blog element to my 151 class in the winter because of the usefulness of the blog and how it fosters a sense that mental achievement is primarily social.
Melanie’s post received a comment from me that attempted to add on to Wysocki’s argument about the Peek advertisement. I felt it was important to say how text can portray us as one-dimensional similar to how images do. Melanie responded that text is no match for describing the gassing of Jews as a picture does, which is true, especially conveying pathos, but I think she missed my point about the sweaty man stuck to the barcalounger. Images of mass graves after the holocaust are multi-dimensional because they represent the holocaust, hatred, suffering, sons, daughters, wives, and husbands. However, an image of a naked woman or a written text description of a sweaty, lazy man is much less descriptive. Images are powerful and can filter out many aspects of reality, but text is capable of this as well.
I commented on Julie’s post about how I relate to articulation theory and how selection and connection is completely creative and holds potential to make meaning. On page 230 from “Blinded by the Letter,” there was a web search activity which I felt could have considered the problems with composing as a social act and information being prioritized by the highest bidder, given Google, etc. are profit driven enterprises. Jules asked me what the implications are and I think the implications are that a few powerful people filter the information we receive. Certainly we can access information without a Google search engine, but so many people rely on it as their sole or major source of information in the modern world. This has Orwellian implications, big time. It was cool how Julie went and checked out my song. Thinking about “Twin Cocoon 4” while reading about selection and connection in composition as a social act helped me make sense of “The Database and the Essay…”
My comment on Lydia’s post combined some ideas from previous readings and blog comments with the current reading. It seems the prior readings led well into her post, especially the idea I carried over about new media giving us a more realistic perspective on how we contribute to communities of information rather than make autonomous, individual compositions.
Considering how Lydia opened the post in weighing the positive and negative influences of new media, I had to argue for the investigation and study of new media in composition, but new media carries over into entertainment as well. This is where we need to think more actively and tread more cautiously, given the power of iconic media driven by advertising dollars. While new media holds negative influences over society, it has many uses and can empower us in new ways, especially when we use it to compose our critical thoughts and insights. Just as the advent of printed text created opportunities to exploit the masses, distribute misinformation on a large scale, and encourage destructive behavior, it also improved quality of life, connected individuals, and empowered many common people. I really liked Lydia’s reference to those cautionary of new media and how they overlook its advantages when she reflected on reading comics and said, “Contrary to the limited attention span the new "digital" media is accused of causing, I was forced to be much more deliberate in my reading.”
Again, I considered a composition community theme in Rebecca’s post. I think the most interesting concept to me was that blogs help to keep writing informal and help us to see how we build off of others ideas. There is no doubt that my post would have been much different had I not experienced Melanie’s or Julie’s posts, or others that came before mine.
My comment to Dave needed some clarification. The part about in-field literacies could be vague to some and what I meant to describe was the literacies within professions: literacy of painting, literacy of welding, literacy of playing piano, etc. It was really interesting how Dave went onto Black Planet to understand the reading. The fact that he did this led me to question online identity and be skeptical of the connection between who someone is online and who they are offline. But given this skepticism, I found myself wondering how our online identities can influence who we are as individuals even if it is just “for fun” or a “joke”
Reading my kudos to Craig at the beginning of the post reminded me of an epiphany I had at that point in the quarter: we all need praise. I wish I was more direct to others in complementing them for the good work they produced. It’s important to give regular compliments in an academic setting, but it’s easy to overlook. This was especially true in our case where everyone was trying on new ideas and testing theories. Sometimes when I posted I was rather rushed though and thoughts about complimenting went by the wayside. Craig provided a MOO activity after this post in class and it helped to solidify my comment about how online identity can give us a sense of anonymity and therefore our preconceptions about gender, race, ethnicity, etc. must be questioned given anyone can portray whatever they imagine as themselves. It was like how I changed to be the sexually ambiguous Pat, or how Brett changed into a woman. Online identity is helpful for transcending differences, but it is limited as my comment and our discussion covered. Once online for long amounts of time and through regular exchanges, real-world identities can start to leak through the characters we try to portray online.
In response to Brett’s post, I wrote about how sites like Gay.com will not necessarily abandon the stereotypical portrayal of gays given all the financial incentives to keep those stereotypes in place on their sites. In some sense this leads to those who don’t identify as “gay” to form unrealistic opinions about those who are. As Lydia, Craig, and Melanie brought up gay stereotypes in the classroom and how they would address those or other stereotypes, I think the most important thing is to call the student out on a lack of understanding of the subject matter and how a derogatory term or statement without supporting evidence does not lead to strong arguments in the classroom and therefore should not be considered valid outside the classroom either. I think I missed on my comment in trying to articulate that. What struck me most about Brett’s post was how I was prompted to search gay sites myself. I guess gay is more associated with males, but before this exercise I considered the term gender neutral. On the internet it is clearly not because to find gay female sites you would have to search under lesbian. I wonder why that is so.
In looking at my OSU Literacy Conference proposal, I realize how much of it I drew off of in my final project. It seems I refined some ideas and took certain ones further with the final project though. Now, I see the idea of making a biography of a video essay much clearer and that while I did borrow or continue these ideas in my final project, I can still take this proposal and create another video essay that builds off my argument in the final project. I see what I’d create for the conference now as a documentary in how I approach the video essay; providing more hands-on proof than what is provided in our final project. No comments were given.
Looking at the book review comments, I found I actually received a comment from an outsider I didn’t notice before! Unfortunately, they did not leave me anything of content though. They were trying to give me cheat codes to EverQuest. I guess that gives proof to Gee’s findings that this game is followed en masse and a point of interest to many internet users. That person was desperate to form an alliance or promote the game I guess. I agree with the e-mail grade/comments from Rouzie that I overlooked the fact that Gee’s book was lacking in images given the subject matter (games) are highly dependant on visual information. I also think I was being pretty picky about the errors in the text, but for some reason it threw me off and I thought I should mention it. I guess I should be more concerned with my own writing errors. It was too bad the images I collected did not make it to the post. I wish you could just copy a word doc with images right into a blog post so you don’t have to save the images and then refigure them into the post on the blog.
Finally, looking at the final project proposal post and all the pre-posts that came before, it is funny how much my ideas changed (not sure how funny it was then). It was a matter of my finding a group late, thinking I needed to drastically change my ideas to fit with my group, and then realizing that I should not “re-invent the wheel” as Craig commented. I went from trying to argue about cultural literacies being more accessible through the use of new media, to a focus on the dangers of avoiding new media or multi-modal discourse in the English classroom, and the benefits of reading and composing it alongside traditional written text essays within a course. Something missing from the final project proposal (the last one with the Ray Charles images) was how all our ideas connected as Prof. Rouzie pointed out to us. This comment sort of stewed in my brain for a while and then I realized that adding a conversation element to the end of the piece would give us a chance to draw our connections and show how we have diverse approaches to a common argument: English studies must expand to teach new media compositions. It is not only profound that text is present in new media domains, it’s also profound that we have unique approaches to how new media can be taught and utilized to improve the traditional print essay.
James Gee began as a linguist then turned to the field of education. He published What Video Games Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy in 2003 following two works of his, Social Linguistics and Literacies and The Social Mind. These two previous works argued that our perception of mental achievement in literacy and thinking fails to recognize that the achievement is “primarily social” (1). Gee claimed in these books that “when you read, you are always reading something in some way,” you are reading from your experiences interacting with social groups and their values (1). In writing What Video Games Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy, Gee has a desire to say about learning what he said about reading and thinking in the previous two books. He states 36 learning principles that are “relevant both to learning in video games and to learning content in classrooms” (197). Most of the examples he shows carrying over from video games to good learning practices are set in the science classroom, where Gee seems to have spent much time.
This book is primarily interested in challenging the value of “skill and drill” teaching methods that dominate our country’s primary and secondary (but certainly not limited to) educational systems; he suggests that educators have a lot to learn from good video games in how they apply knowledge and lessons, and provide trial and error learning that allows students to recognize patterns. While some students trust and thrive in a “skill and drill” classroom setting, many do not who are very intelligent and capable, perhaps those who prefer hands-on, learn from experience setting. Furthermore, His book argues how approaches to teaching could benefit greatly from understanding the nature of “good games” in how they encourage and exhibit applied, active learning, rather than passive “skill and drill” that is encouraged by the “current standardized testing regime” (200). As science lessons in schools adopt simulations, projecting real identities into virtual or practice identities, and hands-on learning, so do many video games that are good. Lessons such as these allow students to practice the ideas and concepts in a low stakes, low-risk environment while still attaining practical experience, witnessing real world relevance, and building confidence in their problem solving skills. However, science courses (his common academic reference throughout the book) spend a great amount of time on “skill and drill” lessons and in disciplines outside of science it’s even more common in the classroom. Gee suggests there is much to improve in shaping our lessons as educators and video games, despite their notoriety, hold great potential in helping us understand learning, the importance of practicing concepts and taking risks in the classroom, and how to successfully captivate our students.
Chapter two (as Gee calls the first chapter), Semiotic Domains, asserts that “in the modern world, print literacy is not enough…” because of the existence of semiotic domains which involve symbolic or representational resources (19). It claims that people must be able to adapt to learning new semiotic domains throughout our lives because “our modern, global, high-tech, and science driven world…certainly gives rise to new semiotic domains and transforms old ones at a faster rate” (19). In studying the family of semiotic domains known as video games (family of genres) and citing specific examples within, Gee works to build a perspective on learning, literacy and semiotic domains that apply to domains outside of video games.
Gee uses the game Pikimin, a game played by his the six year old son at the time, to show how a game models good learning opportunities and why games can go beyond just ‘wasting time’.
The game encourages him to think of himself an active problem solver, one who persists in trying to solve problems even after making mistakes; one who, in fact, does not see mistakes as errors, but as opportunities for reflection and learning. It encourages him to be the sort of problem solver who, rather than ritualizing the solutions to problems, leaves himself open to undoing former mastery…(44).
Furthermore, Gee’s son worked outside his real identity, customizing and playing with a projected identity as a problem solver. While learning no content is “wasting time” as critics argue, they overlook the importance of how games like Pikmin stress active and critical learning, and how that emphasis has a lot to teach educators about the limitations of passive learning or having students group information into “lists” without a clue about the internal design grammar. For example, knowing modernist architecture because it was on a prescribed list, or because you understand the attributes that are instrumental to modernist architecture (30). However, active and critical learning in games relies heavily on internal design (as Pikmin provides), but more importantly, people around the learner encouraging “reflective metatalk, thinking, and actions in regard to the game” or other semiotic domain (46).
The game Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? not only teaches content (geography, history) to young learners, but also influences them to become active problem solvers much like Gee’s son playing Pikmin.
In Chapter three, Learning and Identity, the role playing game Arcanum provides the example of how video games deal with three identities: virtual, real-world, and projected or “James Paul Gee as the virtual character ‘Bead Bead’ in Arcanum” (55). This games ability to allow players to first customize and name their characters provides the real-world identity (Gee) with the opportunity to project his values and desires onto the virtual character. This “tripartite play of identities” in good games transcends identity with characters in movies or novels because it is both active and reflexive (unique player-virtual character identity shaping), and it “is at the root of active and critical learning in many other semiotic domains, including learning content…in school” (59). The application of this for educators is to build bridges for their students between their real-world identities and the virtual identity at stake in the classroom.
Educators often bemoan the fact that video games are compelling and school is not. They say that children must learn to practice skills (“skill and drill”) outside meaningful contexts and outside their own goal: it’s too bad, but that’s just the way school, and indeed life is, they claim. Unfortunately, if human learning works best in a certain way, given the sorts of biological creatures we are, then it’s not going to work well in another way just because educators, policymakers, and politicians want it to (68).
Real world identities as learners previously damaged by being “failures” must be fixed if there is to be much success in trying on any virtual identity in the classroom that leads to any impressionable, meaningful projected identity. Much like how Gee is intimidated by real-time strategy games:
1. The learner must be enticed to try, even if they already have good grounds to be afraid to try.
2. The learner must be enticed to put in lots of effort even if they begin with little motivation to do so.
3. The learner must achieve some meaningful success when they’ve expended this effort. (61)
These issues about identities in education that are as Gee finds, unfortunately “left out of most of the current debates about education” (62). Furthermore, it is in video games where education can learn good practices with identity and learning because the virtual worlds and identities captivate students. “If the virtual world and virtual identity at stake in learning is not compelling to the learner, at some level, then little deep learning is liable to occur…” (63).
Chapter four, Situated Meaning and Learning uses the example of a combination FPS and RPG called Deus Ex to display how games provide “situated, experiential, and embodied forms of learning and thinking” (76). What he means by this is that games like Deus Ex have many different ways to solve one problem, and making decisions to solve them in a particular way can have an effect on how you face the next problem or series of problems later on. Gee finds that this type of simulation is quite similar to how learning, thinking, and problem solving actually occur in the real world. It also fosters the idea that learning and mental achievement are social and it’s okay to contribute to a new solution even if one is already found. Furthermore, good games embody learning because the “stories are embodied in the player’s own choices and actions” (82). Player’s get emotionally invested in the games’ problems, which leads to a very compelling virtual identity through which they form meaning.
Receiving information and discussing it apart from real consequences is much the state of classrooms and has likely led me to state over and over, “I’m a hands-on learner.” I have to go and make mistakes a couple times, try on new identities, reshape my hypotheses and test them until I feel I have really “learned” something. Gee’s example in this is that knowing what “democracy” is in a textbook definition will not prepare you think critically of a claim about the impact of wealth on democratic elections. Furthermore, abstractions arise from embodied experiences (research, testing hypothesis), so how can we expect anyone to retain information if they do not engage in embodied experiences in the domain they are learning about? Gee argues further showing how video games create good, embodied, situated learning because meaning is made through multi-modalities you can interact with rather than just words.
Chapter five, Telling and Doing, discusses how games give directions or rules on how to play, but will let you go outside the directions or rules and even reward you for it from time to time. In this way, games challenge our assumptions about the world and ourselves. Gee also introduces ideas about transfer in which successful problem solving in one domain aids or informs it in another, but more importantly that it requires some tweaking or modifying to fit it (127). Gee explains this in how he adopted a strategy from a game he played earlier to one he was stuck on at a later time. Understanding how transfer and modification of transfer between domains we encounter is essential to problem solving in the real world; games tend to foster this while schools generally do not.
Chapter six, Cultural Models, explains the power of video games in how they create worlds where players take on various identities (139).
Cultural Models about Learning Principle
Learning is set up in such a way that learners come to think consciously and reflectively about their cultural models of learning and themselves as learners, without denigration of their identities, abilities, or social affiliations, and juxtapose them to new models of learning and themselves as learners (166).
To explain, Gee held a cultural model that “when faced with a problem to solve, good learners solve it quickly or soon thereafter. If you have to try over and over again, this is a sign you are not very good at what you are trying to learn.” (164) However, playing video games that allow you to ratchet up the difficulty or that contain level gatekeepers or bosses who are meant to be defeated after several attempts and failed hypotheses showed Gee that there is more to his cultural model than he realized. This was also evident when he played the game “Operation Flashpoint” a military game which is far from the individual heroics modeled in games like Wolfenstein 3-D or Duke Nuke ‘Em. Gee found that military operations are actually boring, a constant state of paranoia, interdependent, unpredictable, and “manly” behavior “gets you dead quickly” (157).
Gee found this game (OF) provides a cultural model unlike many first person shooter games such as Return to Castle Wolfenstein because it models how war is boring, exciting while at the same time confusing, unpredictable, and a constant state of paranoia among other things. This far from the Rambo, one-man army, romantic notions of war found in most other FPS games, as well as what many believe war is like based on movies.
In Chapter seven, The Social Mind, the game EverQuest is used as an example. This game is played online and has no end. What intrigues players, is that it is an enormous virtual world shared by hundreds of thousands of other players. What is interesting about the game is that there are all sorts of social predicaments from virtual players with greater skills picking on those with little to no skill in order to advance themselves, to insults IM’d from other players, to players trying to hack the game server in order to manipulate the environment to their liking or other’s inconvenience. Games like EverQuest encourage “affinity groups” (http://eqplayers.station.sony.com/index.vm). What’s unique about EverQuest is that it has internal affinity groups as well. Not only are there real world social groups who spend time talking about the game online or calling each other and really care about how others are doing in the game, you can also form guilds of virtual identities within the game and work together with very large groups of people. This type of social modeling carried over to the classroom has many positive applications.
In his conclusion, Gee states that what people are learning in video games is not always good, but what they are “doing when they are playing good video games is often good learning” (199). Gee emphasizes, again, that projective identity is what video games model well, and educators need to carry that model over to the classroom so learners value their own experiences in interpreting and solving problems within unfamiliar domains while also putting the lessons into action. Gee finishes by claiming that games have a lot of evolution to undergo still, and with that may come a rise in canonical games which lend themselves “to elevating the aspirations and imaginings of all people for better and more just worlds” (205). Nonetheless, without adopting the learning strategies in current good video games and preserving the standardized testing regime, the education system will continue to “think poor children should be content with schooling for service jobs” (205).
While I found Gee’s assertions to be very useful to helping the broken state of education in our country, and I realized how good games actually do provide many effective teaching strategies, this book came off as redundant and confusing at times because so many examples were given on certain concepts, especially in chapters three, four, and five. I wasn’t sure if he was trying to say something new about the concept or just making sure that all readers were absolutely clear. Nonetheless, it was a book where I found myself zoning out and losing interest in because of the repetition that didn’t develop the concepts any further (perhaps this was my misunderstanding). Also, every school example was based in a secondary science classroom or lesson which made me feel ostracized. Finally, I found some textual errors that were seriously minor and did not affect the text to the point where I couldn’t plug in the correction, but it made the book less credible, especially when it proposes such radical changes for the education world (Pages 61, 100, 123, 149, 165). Another minor error was false claims about an example of his, Sonic the Hedgehog, originally appearing on Sega Dreamcast.
My exigency for composing this creative video essay is the need to provide students with the tools necessary to evaluate and compose in the popular, identity shaping domains such as video and challenge the notion that teaching discourse other than text belongs for the most part, outside of English studies’ domain. Furthermore, this video presentation argues that teaching the composition of multi-modal discourse such as video will help students exercise writing skills not used on the traditional print essay, help them broaden their perspectives on the use of text in combination with other modes, and get them excited about, and proud of, their educational achievements.
Proposal
While having the tools necessary to build a strong print essay is essential for college students, they must acquire different tools to build strong discourse relevant to their cultural identities and the skills they need in the workplace.
Connecting the Academic to the Cultural Emphasis on Multi-Modal Discourse
My creative performance will be a video that exhibits the versatility, complexity, power and appeal of video essays and why they should be taught in the English classroom. Through teaching students that more than one literacy exists, that there are visual, audio, and form literacies as well, this video presentation will emphasize the cultural necessity to think critically or actively about these modes of discourse and practice compositions within them. Teaching students composition in video format will help them become more savvy critics of the video texts they encounter, will give them a stake in shaping their cultural identities in the popular domains, will lead them to create compositions they can share with the internet or their friends and family and be proud of, and will add a dynamic component to their portfolio in whatever field they wish to pursue. Furthermore, teaching students video composition in the English classroom will help them re-evaluate the uses of text when combined with other modes of discourse, get them thinking rhetorically about composing with and reading image, sound, and video, and will get them excited about, and invested in, their interdisciplinary education.
The video composition does not mean less writing (in the conventional sense) practice in the classroom. In fact, students will learn multiple writing skills at once by writing proposals, drafting, re-drafting, and storyboarding their video essays. They will experience the unique difficulty, fun, frustration, and accomplishment in composing video even before they start capturing images, sounds, and video clips. Video composition may actually entail more writing than a traditional print essay in some cases.
While the tradition of text in any given English Department is highly regarded, it should not prevent the expansion of the English umbrella to include the study of multi-modal discourse. Studying discourse where text is one of multiple components should always be in the interest of English departments; the domain of text continues to change and grow whether or not universities acknowledge it. Shouldn't we follow the evolution of text? Expanding our studies to include multi-modal discourse will also show our critical attention to history. In “Toward an Ecology of Hypermedia,” John McDavid considers the transition from oral tradition to the printing press and from word processing and printing to digital communication and asserts that, “each medium (mode) arises by building recursively on its predecessor…taking the previous technology as ‘content’.” With text taking on new uses and working in other domains such as video, we need to embrace what the technology in those domains has to teach us about text, rhetoric, our students and ourselves.
In emphasizing the urgency to supply education that’s critical of the “popular spheres” (The Web, Iconic media such as movies and magazines) where our youth, as Alexander puts it, form cultural identities for themselves much more so than in the classroom…
We will ask…
• Should there be critical analysis of video games, the copious audio/video compositions that exist in mass and variety, and Web pages? What about e-mail? Should the above modes or multi-modes receive proportionate critical attention to that of literature? Will this lead us to production of stronger compositions in these genres? Will this provide students with the skills (literacy) needed to analyze and think critically of increasingly complex compositions to come? How do we teach active “reading” of multi-modal discourse?
• Can we teach students to approach multi-modal discourse by separating, isolating, and thinking critically of the streams of information one-by-one?
We will give examples through experience…
• By creating both a textual composition and an a/v composition with the same exigency to contrast the separated audiences’ reactions in a way that shows why critical thinking of multi-modal discourse should receive greater attention in the classroom.
We will consider forces of resistance… • You can’t even look up the word literacies (notice the red squiggle) because the dictionary publishers are skeptical or disturbed, and the acceptance of such a word would advocate both considering, then closing the gap between the composers and audiences, the fortunate and unfortunate, in multi-modal critical thinking skills.
Video: One camera shot dominates the video. It is of a blank space on a table that slowly gets filled with images participants collect, select, and assemble (speed elapsed)
Then, ask participants to read the composition and contrast their responses in another shot.
Afterwards, I will transcribe their responses to text and write a textual overview of the assembly project.
One group at the conference will see the video while another will just be given transcribed text. We will then assemble and talk about the imprecision and deception of images as well as text.
*I feel like this is a poorly grounded idea in the readings, but there is some relation to Sirc, Alexander, and Wysocki.
