Before I begin analyzing the hell out of iLearn again, I have an observation to make:
Something I have found myself doing since I have subscribed to RSS feeds via Google Reader, is editing what I read, and how I read it within the context of RSSing. I wind my way into Reader, scroll through my little blog list and skim...for...what? If I find something, a sentence, a word, or maybe a title post that particularly strikes me, I make it a point to visit that person's blog. I don't mean read it through the lense of GoogleReader, but I go to their site and take it all in. (I think Dustin had a similar feeling). Individually visiting these sites makes me more focused on what it is I'm reading while in the blogosphere. If I'm simply scrolling like a crazy person through Reader, and glazing over posts like a mindless zombie, then the application has no use for me. [I should note here that zombies will be a recurring theme in today's post.]
Anyway, back to the topic at hand...which brings me to Joseph's post. He is right on target with how I've been feeling concerning the subject of iLearn as a new media application. As he cleverly points out, textbook publishers have learned the lesson of aesthetics the hard way: by finding a balance between what is distracting and useful. iLearn seems to have opted for neither of these things. There is no happy medium, just plain dullness. If we are "reading the interface" as Coopman and Kotkamp suggest we do, then what we're reading when we examine iLearn, is a vision of greyness without form.
Something I have found myself doing since I have subscribed to RSS feeds via Google Reader, is editing what I read, and how I read it within the context of RSSing. I wind my way into Reader, scroll through my little blog list and skim...for...what? If I find something, a sentence, a word, or maybe a title post that particularly strikes me, I make it a point to visit that person's blog. I don't mean read it through the lense of GoogleReader, but I go to their site and take it all in. (I think Dustin had a similar feeling). Individually visiting these sites makes me more focused on what it is I'm reading while in the blogosphere. If I'm simply scrolling like a crazy person through Reader, and glazing over posts like a mindless zombie, then the application has no use for me. [I should note here that zombies will be a recurring theme in today's post.]
Anyway, back to the topic at hand...which brings me to Joseph's post. He is right on target with how I've been feeling concerning the subject of iLearn as a new media application. As he cleverly points out, textbook publishers have learned the lesson of aesthetics the hard way: by finding a balance between what is distracting and useful. iLearn seems to have opted for neither of these things. There is no happy medium, just plain dullness. If we are "reading the interface" as Coopman and Kotkamp suggest we do, then what we're reading when we examine iLearn, is a vision of greyness without form.
The eyes have a way of glossing over any general announcements, or assignments that might be posted to the News Forum, or any other forum that is created by the professor. As Meagan points out there really is a little person, a little blue university student crammed into the letter "i" of iLearn. We're boxed in, we've been had! What is it that iLearn is bringing to us as students and teachers? Well, I started tooling around with iLearn while blogging this, and I went into my account for the class I'm TAing for. There I have a teacher role, with the option to turn on the student role. In student mode, this online space feels like an empty gap. There's just something missing. There is a disconnect between the classroom discussion of the online assignment, and actually viewing, processing and accessing said assignment. No matter how many times the professor repeats that the syllabus for the class of 135 students has been posted to iLearn, that as a university we aren't allowed anymore to make that many copies of anything, the students still seem to be confused as to where the document actually is, and show up to class in a state of confusion and annoyance...or they don't show up at all. It seems that it would be easier to send a mass email with attachments to the students, rather than go to the trouble of posting documents onto iLearn.
The frustrations with this CMS stems from a variety of sources:
The frustrations with this CMS stems from a variety of sources:
Interactivity, as I said in my previous post, is also limited. With something like a blog, or a forum in Ning, anyone can contribute to anything that is posted. Yeah yeah, okay we all know this. But also, there is this strange feeling that comes over a person while logged into iLearn that they are required to be here. They must engage in online dialogue in strictly an academic fashion. Which of course might be the bee's knees for some students, while others happen to detest it. For these other students, (Coopman's "off task" students) they find rather difficultly that within the confines of iLearn, they are unable to express any personality to their post, (no sidetracked thoughts, rambling, ect.) or their words must be screened for errors or slang phrases (ex: Bliggity Blog). But for me, it's in these distractions sometimes, that I come up with some of my best ideas, or things that turn into ideas. I mean, my most recent learning moment stemmed from my nonsensical sidetracking while at work. So who is to say an entirely academic environment and methodology is best for learning?
Even I feel that way when I'm required to use iLearn. During a required assignment, I sit there staring at the computer with either one of two emotions: a drooling-mindless-trance (zombie-like) that is spurred by my complete apathy toward the assignment; or a panic-frenzy (crazy person) who is haphazardly trying to finish the assignment before they are locked out of the system, only to suffer a failing grade.
I don't know which one of these feelings are worse. But I do know that using a blog, Ning, and having a chance to go over what we talk about in our blogs, within the physical classroom setting is entirely beneficial to me: in a way that iLearn has never been able to create for my mind. For some reason this blogging thing creates, like Joseph said, a more freeing feeling to writing and posting and interacting with other students inside and outside of the classroom. And for me that is crucial.
And yet, I don't mean to entirely destroy or put down iLearn. I'm not trying to do that, I just think that, as with any new thing--especially that involves technology and new media--it has great flaws, especially in conjunction with the university. iLearn can be useful, of course. Professors use it, and it works (as best as it can) because there is no other option. And of course this isn't the way it should be, but it is until something better comes along. Or until someone decides to make the effort to change. But back to what I was saying: iLearn can work. Teachers can post documents to the main page to download, forums can in fact be created and manipulated to the desires of the students. Just have the person in the teacher role create an open-forum-free-for-all in which everybody goes crazy posting whatever they want, despite the discouraging aesthetics of the whole system. Just imagine that the CMS is pretty, or something. I'm being silly, but the main thing to remember about iLearn is to what end is this CMS being used? What is the end goal, what is it that the teacher wants the student to learn and to take away from their class: whether online or not. Just a thought.
I don't know which one of these feelings are worse. But I do know that using a blog, Ning, and having a chance to go over what we talk about in our blogs, within the physical classroom setting is entirely beneficial to me: in a way that iLearn has never been able to create for my mind. For some reason this blogging thing creates, like Joseph said, a more freeing feeling to writing and posting and interacting with other students inside and outside of the classroom. And for me that is crucial.
And yet, I don't mean to entirely destroy or put down iLearn. I'm not trying to do that, I just think that, as with any new thing--especially that involves technology and new media--it has great flaws, especially in conjunction with the university. iLearn can be useful, of course. Professors use it, and it works (as best as it can) because there is no other option. And of course this isn't the way it should be, but it is until something better comes along. Or until someone decides to make the effort to change. But back to what I was saying: iLearn can work. Teachers can post documents to the main page to download, forums can in fact be created and manipulated to the desires of the students. Just have the person in the teacher role create an open-forum-free-for-all in which everybody goes crazy posting whatever they want, despite the discouraging aesthetics of the whole system. Just imagine that the CMS is pretty, or something. I'm being silly, but the main thing to remember about iLearn is to what end is this CMS being used? What is the end goal, what is it that the teacher wants the student to learn and to take away from their class: whether online or not. Just a thought.
Ryan - - the "required" element/feel of iLearn is a motif in the CMS blogging. I've been trying to figure this out - - whether it's a function of the "administrative" ideology of the CMS or part of the aesthetics/design or simply the way teachers use the CMS as a supplement. Maybe all three.
ReplyDeleteI think iLearn is a really conservative version of new media - - not in the political sense per se - - but in the sense that it tries to support teaching-as-it-is, or some representation of what teachers are doing (or ought to be doing). E.g. iLearn - - I think I noted this in another blog comment - - doesn't challenge us to think about teaching and may discourage us from this. Conservative then in the sense that iLearn discourages self-reflexivity - - it yearns to be an appliance (in the say way that we don't interrogate pens, paper, toasters). Maybe part of the definition of new media for me is a practice that encourages self-reflexivity - - however hi-tech, fancy, etc. the application/experience may be.