Windowsill

Writing for Digital Media is a great course. I highly recommend it. As with anything, there is always room for improvement, so I will try to help in that endeavor.

Improving, Enhancing, Changing

I think the course closely follows the official course description. I can’t find any critique of the class not living up to the description.

My experience was very rocky at first, exciting in the middle and exhaustive by the end. I was amazed throughout by the number of posts that people made to the discussion board. The amount and the quality of the discussion often surpassed that of a typical brick-and-mortar class. On the one hand that is great, as it’s hard to see more discussion as a bad thing. However, it was overwhelming for me to see people making three or four posts a day, when three or four quality posts a week seemed fair. The discussion board was mentioned in the course description, but it probably should be emphasized much more, to prepare students for what’s expected. I made my peace with it as the course went on by easing back on my standards in order to make more posts. I don’t know if that was a good trade off or not.

The blog format is a natural idea for this course. I was nervous at first that all of my assignment feedback would be made public and that could be awkward, but this didn’t become an issue. I found the free WordPress program to be lacking in many ways. It had strange glitches in the WYSIWYG department and didn’t really support a more advanced HTML alternative. I was caught somewhere in between. Maybe it would be a good idea to give a summary or critique of the various publisher options for newbie bloggers.

My main problem was with the pace of the course. With the numerous weekly readings, discussion requirements and written assignments, there wasn’t much time left to really reflect on the ideas or hone new skills. Many times I felt like I wanted to take another long look, but the train was leaving the station and I could barely catch up to jump back on. If one makes the effort after the class to go back and re-read everything and apply it to daily work, then this problem may be mitigated. The great breadth and depth of this class create the break-neck pace, but maybe cutting back a little in each would be worth consideration.

The Readings

The blend of practical and theoretical readings seemed just about right. It’s clear that some theory should be discussed in a graduate level class, so the question is more about how much.

It seems like the theory was strongest when it weaved in and out of the practical material. The usability modules are strong in this regard. I found myself enjoying the ride, as the content of the text flowed from “how to” to “what if” and back again.

The module about interactivity also had a good balance. The text offered practical advice, links and research on the subject. The Aarseth reading gave me pause, as it questioned some of the hype surrounding digital media and interactivity. That pause really helped me hone my critical thinking and introduced a touch of sobriety in a technology-intoxicated realm.

There are three aspects of digital media that make it ripe for theoretical discussion:

1. Things are moving so fast in the information age, that the theoretical discussions seem to add perspective. We need to stop once and awhile and take a look at it all from 40 thousand feet.
2. Digital media has so many implications for our society and the way we communicate and live, so it seems only natural to discuss theoretical implications.
3. Digital media can be a lot of fun. The “what ifs” in the field of new media are fun to explore and debate. They elevate the discussion.

Additionally, Brian Carroll suggested a fourth aspect:

“Change with digital media removing boundaries or distinctions between producer and consumer, sender and receiver, publisher and reader, theoretician and practitioner. These once-sacred roles or divisions have been thrown into the wind, made irrelevant.”

I wouldn’t suggest changing this balance, but I think it was helpful when discussions or readings were identified upfront as theoretical. This helped me shift the old intellectual gears before I hit the gas pedal.