Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

About the discussion in voice thread about teaching Microsoft Office programs, I agree with the statement in the voice thread. Teaching the programs should not be the goal. Besides, there are a lot of other alternative options that is free to use. Only teaching the commercial programs makes educators become like sales people for big corporation. Educators need to provide other options when, for example, ask students to turn in a paper using word processing program. Unfortunately, many schools don't provide the environment for using alternative programs. But fortunately, more and more educators are aware of this and are working on providing a free and open environment of software using. Web 2.0 technologies might serve as one of the alternative.

I agree with you about wanting to make the most of this first life. I do wonder if we can separate these lives, or if the distinctions will become academic.

The ideas of empowerment and participation (descriptors from our week 1 definitions of Web 2.0) make it possible for a user like this one to post a tutorial on a site like worth1000. In this case the user is offering a how-to that uses the color and texture of a raspberry as the shape of a frog. In my opinion, this is more surrealism or juxtaposition than remix because the two images together do not offer a critique, refer to, or change the meaning of the original. I see remix practice as being a form of creative resistance for than a fun formalist excericise.

I enjoy the concept of this site. It is a fun way for visitors to be creative and add their own interpretation of how they can twist and change this idea of creating a sign for this lost frog. It could be used as a great introduction project or as examples of how a simple concept can be turned into so many different perspectives and images. I like how some people created their own images, while other remixed popular media images to fit the overall goal of the site!

I like the concept of this site too. When I look at all of the frogs placed in different contexts, it makes me want to join in. Knobel and Lankshear (2008) claim that the appeal of a site like this is "to express solidarity and affinity." Perhaps one would be a sense of belonging by contributing to a project like this. The main image on the index page of this site looks like it was drawn by a child. Do you think that this site was put up by a youngster? Another question for the group - As a teacher/facillitator would you incporporate a project like this in your art classroom or educational context? Does participating in a project like this have any real educational benefit for the student? What might a student learn from creating and contributing? Is this Web 2.0 pedagogy? P.S. Don't miss Ashley's Frog on our remix Google doc!

I like this site too. Haven't found out how to participate, but would love to. I actually think this is like a Net art project. Don't really think this is put up by a child. I think Participating in this project would allow students to be involved in a collaboration, but also allows their imagination and creativity. Also understanding meaning changes in different context. An interesting way to learn visual culture.

I think wikipedia is one of the representative exemplar of remix.

Speaking of wikipedia, this is one of my favorite Ted Talks: Jimmy Wales on the birth of Wikipedia. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jimmy_wales_on_the_birth_of_wikipedia.html

Ouch. But I am leaning toward this criticism.