“School train” made very little sense to me at first. Its “stated intent” would rate rather low (“stated and restated intent” in a media clip would stand-in for an essay’s introduction and conclusion), but those parts may account for only about 30% of the content grade – 15% of the overall grade if style and convention are weighed equally with content. Boldness both in content and idea rate rather high in this case, but boldness doesn’t count for very much either. Unexpectedly for such a disconcerning piece of media, “School Train” may get most of its grade from the successful use of conventions (i.e.: technological tricks in the right places), and a demonstrated understanding of the material.
I would probably rate “Fox becomes a better person” higher, because its content and style are both nearly flawless. While the production isn’t quite as smooth, it makes the best possible use of the original video’s quality. Also, the use of the scooter, traditional introduction, digitally done introduction, drawing, and music, are bold and successful. While it may have been tempting to “improve” on the original material with, for example, some music in the background, I would uphold the author’s decision to maintain a respectful, ouside position.
The “2015” clip was first made in 2004, so we are supposedly halfway to the metastasized mediascape. Googlezon doesn’t exist, and even if it did, there just isn’t a whole lot of noise from the New York Times. The paid online subscription service debate is a timely one indeed, but things seem to be moving toward an uneasy state of balance. Even “The Economist” is putting more and more content online for free, and the NYT’s “NYT select” program was purely and simply a short-lived flop. Paid archived material does make sense, though. For a while, even the Anchorage Daily news was charging for fairly recent material.
Beyond the details, “2015” makes an interesting point: the digital information soup is so democratic and subversive in nature, that naturally elitist institutions such as newsprint and – yes – schools are going to see themselves swept into the tide when their pedestals are eroded through by bored, opiniated geeks in dirty sweatpants. Podcasting is great, but it has the same initial appeal and unexpected problem as the video phone: “cool – in five years everyone will use it all the time.” And “who wants to dedicate themselves 100% to someone when they really want to be multi-tasking in a privacy gray area?”
So just as the video phone flopped and text-messaging became an unexpected hit, it’s probable that podcasts will keep being in that awkward area between “I care enough to really pay attention to this,” and “this is kinda funny, and I may peek at it from time to time.” Of course, there are great applications; I myself subscribe to two podcasts.
“Sabrina Journey” is a good example of digital content gone right. After all, it is visually rather flat and unappealing, but I must say that the text itself is unusually focused and coherent, especially in contrast to most of the writing that high school freshmen have been generously plying me with. In the classroom, I would use it in contrast to a largely scriptless, very visually intensive video.
I enjoyed reading your reaction, Paul. As educators, we certainly need the ability to look past the use of technology itself and focus on the content. Many students seem to know their grades are based on flashy technology, and are simply waiting for a teacher to call them on their lack of content. I especially enjoyed your comparison of podcasts to video phones.
ReplyDelete