Here's my next video. I made this for my Multimedia class and figured I would share it here too.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Monday, March 05, 2012
Weekly videos #3 and #4
I've had some trouble with YouTube (all on me, not them), but I've finally got my next 2 weekly videos uploaded.
This one, from February 26th, is my family playing on the swing in our front yard.
This one, from today (March 5th), is just some rambling while my son sleeps off a cold.
This one, from February 26th, is my family playing on the swing in our front yard.
This one, from today (March 5th), is just some rambling while my son sleeps off a cold.
YouTube - Weekly Video #2
To me, YouTube is the benchmark for content uploads. If a site is slower or less intuitive, then it's not worth using. Creating an account was simple, especially considering they are linked with Google now. Uploading is easy as well.
SoundCloud
Audio Recording on Monday morning
I must say, SoundCloud is a great site. Uploading is as easy as it is on YouTube and they even have a built in recorder. Creating a quick and simple audio message couldn't be easier. I was about 4 clicks away from recording my file and getting it uploaded.
Sharing was as easy as it was on Flickr. Blogger is big enough that both of those sites can share with it very easily. All I had to do was click on "share" and then start typing this post. It opened in another window and everything. SoundCloud seems like something I'll be using far into the future.
I must say, SoundCloud is a great site. Uploading is as easy as it is on YouTube and they even have a built in recorder. Creating a quick and simple audio message couldn't be easier. I was about 4 clicks away from recording my file and getting it uploaded.
Sharing was as easy as it was on Flickr. Blogger is big enough that both of those sites can share with it very easily. All I had to do was click on "share" and then start typing this post. It opened in another window and everything. SoundCloud seems like something I'll be using far into the future.
space
space, a photo by instantdonut on Flickr.
Here's a cool picture that I was able to find on Flickr. I had trouble finding something that was completely open to share, but I did find a group of pictures that were free except for attribution, so as long as I tell who created the original picture I could display it or even change it if I wanted.
If I were to take a picture or create a video, I think I'd share it under the same license. As long as I was given credit for it's creation, people could share it. I make my money from teaching; I'm not sure how to make money from art. However, if someone can figure out how to make money from one of my pictures, by including it on packaging or on a webpage, then more power to them. If I spent a lot of time on a video/picture though and I did have plans to monetize it, I would license it.
I imagine that's what this artist did as well. They created something that other people would enjoy. By making it open to share, more people can enjoy it and their name is spread a bit further. It sounds like win-win to me.
Sunday, March 04, 2012
Mid-point Course Reflection
Teaching an online class is difficult. It's easy for a professor to stand in front of and talk off the cuff about a topic they know a lot about (and I've been in a few of those classes). It's harder when the course is taught online. Sure, the professor could just write what they were going to say, but we all know people have limits to what they're willing to read. How many multiple page articles have you started online and never finished? A computer screen just isn't conducive to reading a lot of information.
However, finding a video of someone like Michael Wesch who is giving a lecture that includes video and graphics, which is much easier to pay attention to. In addition, having an hour long lecture that can be stopped, started, and restarted on your own schedule is another positive that does not exist in a physical classroom. You were too sick to attend the lecture? Sorry, I guess you'll have to borrow notes from someone else. That's just an example of a problem that can be avoided by working online.
With that said, there are some drawbacks to online learning. First, it takes a while to master. Learning how to create a video of a certain quality is difficult and requires more planning. Instead of learning a few pieces of software (PowerPoint, prezi, etc), online learning requires the use of many different programs, both online and off. For this one class I have established accounts with YouTube, Wordle, Second Life, Blogger, Wikimedia, Delicious, Flickr, and Classroom 2.0. There are also technological limitations - computer hardware requirements, computer crashes, sluggish internet, etc.
One positive I have run across concerning Web 2.0 software is its ease of use. Many of the websites and tools we have used have been fairly straight forward. They have all had easy to use tutorials and work with common sense. Take YouTube for example. Loading a video is as simple as signing in and clicking 4 buttons. They also make sharing that video easy. Flickr was just as easy; I had a dozen pictures uploaded and shared in a matter of minutes.
With that said, there are some annoying aspects of Web 2.0. The worst part of webpage creation is redoing links when new pages are created. Linking our Moodle to all of our sites, and then linking them to each other is tedious. I understand the rationale behind it (all sites are becoming social, even Wikipedia, and should reflect that), but it does not make it fun.
And then there's my previously documented privacy concerns. How much information am I willing to share? Is there a difference if I put that information on one site? On 10? When does that information become a liability? In this day and age, when massive companies like Sony and Microsoft are being hacked and having customer data and credit cards stolen, all companies should be working toward new security practices. I like what Google is doing. Any user can link their account to their cell phone. When you log in Google texts you a short number, which you then enter to gain access to your account. Yes, it slows things down a bit, but I have no concerns that my information is safe - even if my password is taken that person can't get into my account without my cellphone.
However, finding a video of someone like Michael Wesch who is giving a lecture that includes video and graphics, which is much easier to pay attention to. In addition, having an hour long lecture that can be stopped, started, and restarted on your own schedule is another positive that does not exist in a physical classroom. You were too sick to attend the lecture? Sorry, I guess you'll have to borrow notes from someone else. That's just an example of a problem that can be avoided by working online.
With that said, there are some drawbacks to online learning. First, it takes a while to master. Learning how to create a video of a certain quality is difficult and requires more planning. Instead of learning a few pieces of software (PowerPoint, prezi, etc), online learning requires the use of many different programs, both online and off. For this one class I have established accounts with YouTube, Wordle, Second Life, Blogger, Wikimedia, Delicious, Flickr, and Classroom 2.0. There are also technological limitations - computer hardware requirements, computer crashes, sluggish internet, etc.
One positive I have run across concerning Web 2.0 software is its ease of use. Many of the websites and tools we have used have been fairly straight forward. They have all had easy to use tutorials and work with common sense. Take YouTube for example. Loading a video is as simple as signing in and clicking 4 buttons. They also make sharing that video easy. Flickr was just as easy; I had a dozen pictures uploaded and shared in a matter of minutes.
With that said, there are some annoying aspects of Web 2.0. The worst part of webpage creation is redoing links when new pages are created. Linking our Moodle to all of our sites, and then linking them to each other is tedious. I understand the rationale behind it (all sites are becoming social, even Wikipedia, and should reflect that), but it does not make it fun.
And then there's my previously documented privacy concerns. How much information am I willing to share? Is there a difference if I put that information on one site? On 10? When does that information become a liability? In this day and age, when massive companies like Sony and Microsoft are being hacked and having customer data and credit cards stolen, all companies should be working toward new security practices. I like what Google is doing. Any user can link their account to their cell phone. When you log in Google texts you a short number, which you then enter to gain access to your account. Yes, it slows things down a bit, but I have no concerns that my information is safe - even if my password is taken that person can't get into my account without my cellphone.
Curious
Here is a picture of my son from flickr. I don't know how to create a slide show yet. All it seems I can do it add one picture at a time.
Flickr itself is very easy to use. Since it is owned by Yahoo, where I have an email address, I was able to sign in and post pictures in less than 30 seconds. Their upload is quick and intuitive. I like that they have a robust privacy setting, allowing pictures to be public or only shared with a few individuals. This seems like a quick and easy way to share lots of pictures with family members and find some public domain stuff for other projects.
Flickr itself is very easy to use. Since it is owned by Yahoo, where I have an email address, I was able to sign in and post pictures in less than 30 seconds. Their upload is quick and intuitive. I like that they have a robust privacy setting, allowing pictures to be public or only shared with a few individuals. This seems like a quick and easy way to share lots of pictures with family members and find some public domain stuff for other projects.
Wesch on YouTube
This was yet another fascinating video by Michael Wesch on digital ethnography. I was very surprised that he could discuss YouTube for nearly an hour and always have something new to say. He also gave a lot of history behind some of the most famous videos, which changed the way I looked at some of them. I knew about LonelyGirl15, but I didn't know that there was such a push back from the YouTube community when her authenticity was in doubt.
As for what we need to include, and I'm not sure that it should be a requirement, but I plan to make some of my personal videos for this class a reaction to other YouTube videos.
And here's a video that I kept thinking about during Wesch's talk. It's by Weezer and it a tribute to the YouTube sensations of the last 10 years.
As for what we need to include, and I'm not sure that it should be a requirement, but I plan to make some of my personal videos for this class a reaction to other YouTube videos.
And here's a video that I kept thinking about during Wesch's talk. It's by Weezer and it a tribute to the YouTube sensations of the last 10 years.
Friday, March 02, 2012
Wikimedia
The Wikimedia Foundation was officially founded in 2003 by Jimmy Wales. It consists of many different free educational sites, including reference (Wikipedia, Wikibooks), and social (Wikiveristy, Wiki Incubator). Wikimedia represents probably the most significant open-source repository of information in the world. Articles are written in dozens of languages and if free to access anywhere in the world. It is also perhaps the most democratic repository as well, allowing anyone to create a profile and make improvements to articles.
The first aspect of Wikimedia I chose to focus on was Wikibooks. Wikibooks is a collection of articles that all relate to a specific topic. Image that all of the Wikipedia articles on European history were arranged, in chronological order, in one place.
The article on first aid is a good example. It opens with a brief overview of the book as well as a table of contents. The chapters are listed in an organized way that makes it easy to learn. Clicking on the links in the table of contents brings you to the specific articles. This is a very nice way to learn specific things as it is more organized that Wikipedia.
The next aspect I looked at was Wikispecies. Wikispecies is a catalog of all species that is directed at scientists rather than the general pubic. As a history teacher, I can hardly understand anything in the articles. Here's an example from Abrothallus halei:
Supergroup: Unikonta
Cladus: Opisthokonta
Regnum: Fungi
Divisio: Ascomycota
Subphylum: Genera incertae sedis
Genus: Abrothallus
One thing that Wikispecies has going for it is the fact that it is geared for a specific audience. Yes, fewer people will use it than Wikipedia, but it could grow to be an invaluable tool for those that do use it, especially advanced college students.
Overall I am very impressed with Wikimedia. The foundation seems to be working very hard to be everything to everyone, and is very successful. The fact that they have remained non-profit is also another selling point; there is no chance for advertiser bias.
The first aspect of Wikimedia I chose to focus on was Wikibooks. Wikibooks is a collection of articles that all relate to a specific topic. Image that all of the Wikipedia articles on European history were arranged, in chronological order, in one place.
The article on first aid is a good example. It opens with a brief overview of the book as well as a table of contents. The chapters are listed in an organized way that makes it easy to learn. Clicking on the links in the table of contents brings you to the specific articles. This is a very nice way to learn specific things as it is more organized that Wikipedia.
The next aspect I looked at was Wikispecies. Wikispecies is a catalog of all species that is directed at scientists rather than the general pubic. As a history teacher, I can hardly understand anything in the articles. Here's an example from Abrothallus halei:
Superregnum: Eukaryota
Supergroup: Unikonta
Cladus: Opisthokonta
Regnum: Fungi
Divisio: Ascomycota
Subphylum: Genera incertae sedis
Genus: Abrothallus
One thing that Wikispecies has going for it is the fact that it is geared for a specific audience. Yes, fewer people will use it than Wikipedia, but it could grow to be an invaluable tool for those that do use it, especially advanced college students.
Overall I am very impressed with Wikimedia. The foundation seems to be working very hard to be everything to everyone, and is very successful. The fact that they have remained non-profit is also another selling point; there is no chance for advertiser bias.
Thursday, March 01, 2012
Second Life
Last night we had our meeting in Second Life. I must say I left the experience underwhelmed.
First, Second Life is not every intuitive. It requires a lot of time to get things set up. We met on Catamount Island, which included a short tutorial. After that meeting I explored some other islands, all of which had their own tutorials. This was after I played through the short tutorial when I signed up (which was not available ever other time I tried to access it). Is the game so difficult that most places assume you could use a tutorial?
There are also many idiosyncrasies that I had trouble with. Why is hair style considered an article of clothing? In addition, I have a fairly beefy computer and one of the fastest DSL connections available (short of business class), but I had to crank down the view distance and resolution to avoid game-breaking choppiness. And we were unable to get voice chat to work yesterday so we had to type everything out. I couldn't imagine that working with 20+ people in a group.
We explored a lot on the island. There was a nice display on the Cherokee that included two of their myths and their alphabet. It was very interesting to look at. We stepped into a classroom that auto-played a YouTube video as we entered. Jason informed us that second life could also play PowerPoint presentations. My initial reaction was "That's it?" I was even more dumbfounded when he told us WCU pays about $4k a year to "own" that island. That doesn't seem to be a great return on investment.
After my 3 hours of playing around with Second Life, I'm not sure how well it would work in educational settings. Paying $4,000 to play YouTube videos and PowerPoints, which YouTube already does for free, seems counter-intuitive. We'll see how I feel after attending a SLED event.
First, Second Life is not every intuitive. It requires a lot of time to get things set up. We met on Catamount Island, which included a short tutorial. After that meeting I explored some other islands, all of which had their own tutorials. This was after I played through the short tutorial when I signed up (which was not available ever other time I tried to access it). Is the game so difficult that most places assume you could use a tutorial?
There are also many idiosyncrasies that I had trouble with. Why is hair style considered an article of clothing? In addition, I have a fairly beefy computer and one of the fastest DSL connections available (short of business class), but I had to crank down the view distance and resolution to avoid game-breaking choppiness. And we were unable to get voice chat to work yesterday so we had to type everything out. I couldn't imagine that working with 20+ people in a group.
We explored a lot on the island. There was a nice display on the Cherokee that included two of their myths and their alphabet. It was very interesting to look at. We stepped into a classroom that auto-played a YouTube video as we entered. Jason informed us that second life could also play PowerPoint presentations. My initial reaction was "That's it?" I was even more dumbfounded when he told us WCU pays about $4k a year to "own" that island. That doesn't seem to be a great return on investment.
After my 3 hours of playing around with Second Life, I'm not sure how well it would work in educational settings. Paying $4,000 to play YouTube videos and PowerPoints, which YouTube already does for free, seems counter-intuitive. We'll see how I feel after attending a SLED event.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)