Our Dear Friend Wikipedia

"50% of all examined case of vandalism on Wikipedia were repaired with 2 or 3 minutes." (Kohl, 170)

Haha not so in Miles City, MT, Wikipedia, not so. Somewhere around my sophomore year of highschool, two guys that I know and was going to school with at the time, decided it would be awfully funny to test Wiki's "author" boundaries. They managed to change the knowledge in the government section of the Miles City page to read their names as president and vice-president of said town, along with a few other personal touches. A print out of that page, last I know, was hanging on their walls.

Wikipedia didn't find the inaccuracy for almost a full 24 hours - probably because Miles City isn't high up in the importance department of maintenance but still. That begs the question of just how well Wikipedia is contained - and when, and which pages are more important? If someone did something like that (albeit in a subtler manner) and I read two different things in two different days, which to believe? Sigh.

I know this isn't even close to the recommended 500 words, or very "deep" persay, but thinking about that story still makes me grin. My apologies. I will do better in the morn.

Infograph

Child Marriage

CPE

My critical photo essay (which may be a video, I'm not sure yet) is going to deal with the psychology behind font choice in different book genres. This may (most likely) feed into the way in which digital texts are created as well. I'm still working out the fine details, but that is the main gist.

Mid-October

"By studying actual texts as they function in particular contexts, we can gain an improved understanding of what constitute appropriate, effective strategies of rhetorical organization. At the same time, we can learn from such studies how successful texts are composed and what part schools can play in encouraging students to become able, creative composers" (Bernhardt).

I found this article extremely appropriate given what I've been discussing in my blogs most recently, which is how font and visual features affect the way we read things (most notably for me, in the way I distinguish fiction or novels from essays and academic articles). The way the Wetlands handout is structured is often how I wish that some of these articles could be structured - in broken up chunks of information that are more easily digested than long form paragraphs. The amount of information that I'm able to retain from short form pieces like that is pretty different from what I can grasp from many of the articles we've covered this year.

It makes me wonder if I should break down my notes from these into formats like that example. I'll experiment and see what happens, I think.

"Through these laws of gestalt, visual features take over the load of structuring and organizing the reader's processing, thus reducing the role of those semantic features which organize a form like the essay. Instead of a smooth, progressive realization of the text through initial previewing and a chain of logic which ties each paragraph or section to the preceding or following one, the visible text relies on localization, on a heightening of the boundaries, edges, and divisions of the text. ... In the visible text, the goal is to call the reader's attention visually to semantically grouped information, focusing the reader's attention on discrete sections." (Bernhardt)

Though it's a different topic, the above paragraph drew my attention to something else that's come up in conversation with my roommates a couple of times: the psychology of restaurant menus. Random? Yes. Relevant? Also yes. Food for thought.

Mishra

So, basically Mishra is telling me that all the illustrations in childhood textbooks, etc...were all a lie? KIDDING. Mostly.

I find it really interesting that not many studies have been done on how illustrations affect education, whether it be on a small elementary scale or a university level. I would think that, in relation to the different ways people learn, whether it be visual, hands-on, aural, or any of the other methods, there would have been a couple of different ones. Based on the way Mishra sums up the article, it's seems like a pretty fascinating area of study, especially regarding how well we learn something when we see it in front of us in an image and not spelled out in words.

How useful are images for learning though? When two people see on one image, they come away with different constructions of it in their minds - and the point the image is trying to convey may take root in different ways in different minds. So maybe images are less of learning tool (at least at a higher education level - I think they are invaluable in kindergarten classroom) and more of a jump off point for discussions that they might inspire? A starting point for the swapping of ideas?

It actually makes me think a little bit about the responses to the McCloud pieces we read last week. They didn't really have a midway point, at least from the people I talked to; they either liked it or didn't like it, which is something I've heard a lot in discussions about the different ways we learn (i.e. the person who says, "I can't stand teachers who read off powerpoints to teach a class! I can't focus" or the person who really likes dissection labs because of the hands-on aspect). While I found the visual images of the comic really helpful when trying to understand the material, other people didn't. So how does that affect me as someone who is learning? Am I doomed in my line of study because it largely favors picture-less texts?

I think I got a little away from the main point of the article, but these were some of the things I was thinking about as I was reading it.

AV Short of Awesomeness

Here is the last minute, shot an hour ago, edited a half hour ago AV Short Video by me! OF AWESOME! Large enormous thank you to one of bestest roommates ever EMILY JO!