Week 8 - Article Reviews

Article 1

Whilst I found this article on ‘Academic search elite’, the style and content seemed a bit colloquial; it wouldn’t have been out of place on a blog. The author is a teacher who is observing his pupils interaction with various new technologies. He names the new technology, such as Nintendo DS or myspace.com and explains their functions and appeals. He, like Prensky, tended to generalise who technology was aimed at and used by. He focussed on students, when a lot of older people have and use the internet and games technology. This section also seemed to me to be very derivative, it all seemed very obvious. This could seal my status as a digital native, or perhaps it challenges his status as an academic author of new technologies. Although some parts were witty ( I particularly liked his “any passport to the digital world is likely to stay current for ten months at best” quote at the end) I don’t feel although I learned anything in particular from the article.

Article 2

This article focused on the interaction of elementary school children in America with games to improve their English skills. Prensky referred to the amount of video games that children play and how they could be used as a teaching aid. The article recognizes that there has been little research in the field to prove or disprove the theory. Without referencing him directly, the author pays tribute to Prensky’s ideas. “Successful teachers have long co-opted the existing interests and activities of their students into their curricular materials and instructional practices.” I found the article interesting. It recognised that its findings were not concrete evidence for the use of game-based learning, and that there needed to be more work done in the field, but is a small stepping stone to finding if these new ways can benefit the education system.

Article 3

This article is a self confessed precautionary tale about online courses and the ‘slackness’ of the use of copyrighted material. Whilst as soon as I read the title, I thought I would disagree instantly (it seemed like it would be written by a technophobe stuck in their own ways) I found the article interesting. It brings into light another problem that e-learning creates, without disregarding or undermining the use of digital learning. It advises the reader on the dangers of using copyrighted material through the internet, and the universities that make texts available online without getting the proper permission. The case study it looked into was Georgia State University, who got sued by Cambridge University Press and Oxford University Press for “pervasive, flagrant, and ongoing’ unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material through its electronic course reserves service, its Blackboard/WebCT” Although the links to students and youths is quite weak in this article (though not non-existent), I found the new information and the fresh look at the subject reason enough to include it.

Article 4

This article was concerned with the future of marketing and new technologies. It was easy to read yet was witty and informative. It was extremely short so couldn’t go into too much detail and simply gave a general overview on a consumer’s link with new technology. He criticized more senior members of big corporations for not being tech savvy and implies a need for a better understanding of the enormity of the potential for marketers to reach people (in particular the young) through new technologies. Although it was an academic essay, it wasn’t an in depth look at a theory, or a critical analysis. In some parts I felt it was too general and lacking in new information.

Article 5

This article deals with produserism, without referencing it directly. It focuses mainly on the use of mobiles as a tool of empowerment, “We are the eighth mass media. We are the distribution, the content, the medium, and the message carried with it.” I feel that the author took a long time to say very little. The gist of the article could have been condensed into two paragraphs. Whilst the issue was something pertinent to the unit, and the course, it didn’t offer a fresh perspective on the matter and was a general and basic overview of something that is key in understanding new media.