To what extent does Charlie 13 represent a hopeful or a bleak future? How you answer this may depend on whether you see Charlie, and the resistance he represents, as a genuine alternative to the social and technological forces at work in this future society.
I didn’t really see Charlie as having much personal autonomy at all: he was carrying around so much baggage from his dysfunctional past, and so much expectation from his dysfunctional present, that it was almost impossible to resist. When he expressed his unhappiness at being chipped by trying to run away, he was pinned down and the chipping took place anyway.
His choice was resistance by running away, chopping out the chip (did he have to chop off a fingertip? Or was it just an incision and removal?) This is often the only alternative for those caught up in dystopian presents in film and literature – resistance has to go underground. Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale; Orwell’s 1984; the Star Wars franchise.
For now, for me, a Mooc is an add-on, an interest, an opportunity, not a replacement for HE – if I could afford to do a doctorate I would, but I can’t so I’m moocing, because I enjoy study. For some of my students, moocs are a preparation, slightly above what they can understand or cope with, but equivalent in some ways to doing some background reading before going up to University. One student wants to study medicine, so she has enrolled in Mooc courses in physiology and diagnosis.
Moocs are experimental at present, and Moocers are guinea-pigs – one feels this especially on the EDCMOOC, as the TAs from the MA course in EDC join to observe and contribute to what’s going on. And one imagines that the tutorial staff are gleaning plenty of data from this experience for future research papers ….
Johnston (2009) explores the metaphors of the Internet. It occurred to me that one reason it seems to abound in metaphor could be the fact that it is perceived as unreal or as a reflection of reality and not a true reality. Observing this disjunction from reality causes us to find ways of making sense of what the Internet is, and so we turn to metaphorical language. The language of the Internet is still evolving, and neologisms are spawned with remarkable speed. My recent favourite is blogject.
The metaphorical nature of the Internet has started me thinking about how producing the artefact at the end of the course could be approached. I had been thinking in very concrete, traditional terms, but I think it needs to be a metaphor in some way. I’m not sure how yet …
I’m convinced that a Powerpoint or any kind of Office-style document is not what elearning or digital cultures is all about.
Watching the two commercial visions of the digital future: Day Made of Glass and Productivity Future
- Education is presented as seamlessly integrated with ecology and environmental issues, especially in the Corning film. Socialisation seems to occur effortlessly, as though magically inspired by the technologically advantaged environment – no jockeying for places around the worktable. One wonders where the disaffected kids have gone, or is disaffection cured by technological advantage?
There are no questions in the classroom, nor at the park – factual representations of science and the past are presented as artefacts – is there any room for personal interpretations or responses? Students are seen as consumers of images and manipulators of educational products but not necessarily creators who can express themselves. Technology is often shown as telling humans what to do or where to go. Even the translator specs make learning a foreign language redundant.
In these versions of the future (especially the Corning view) reality is always behind glass.
- Communication is instantaneous, unproblematic and efficient. There is no room for incomprehension – everything is tagged and accurate – arriving in Joburg is no challenge for the woman – even the location of tomorrow’s meeting is tagged. All this, of course, presupposes a flawless and totally integrated dataset.
Everything in this future is mediated through technology.
- I guess the challenge posed by these utopian visions is to maintain a connection with the natural and the human, allowing the flaws of reality to persist. The imagery is enticingly utopian, but one has to ask where are the impoverished and disenfranchised? Who is caring for them? Who is paying?
The hangout discussion at the end of last week had a number of points to make about the oppositions at work in the discourse surrounding the digital world. Prensky’s metaphor of natives v. immigrants came in for some criticism, and I think it has become clear that the metaphor does not work as well as it first appeared to. We all know of supposed ‘natives’ who have grown up in the digital world being all at sea when asked to use the technology. Equally, there are ‘immigrants’ who are very much at home and whose ‘accent’ is native!
I recently came across another, related and perhaps more helpful opposition: the digital resident and the digital visitor. Obviously, someone born into the digital age could only be a dabbler in facebook and mobile phone use etc, while someone who was born in a pre-digital era could have learned to use digital media and have become proficient.