Computer games have cleverly designed levels. There are designers who create compelling spaces and environments. But creating compelling levels is not same as creating compelling spaces. Thus, designing levels is a different ball game. You have to keep refining your moves to create a compelling level. At the heart of any great computer game are expertly designed levels: the locales and stages that define gameplay. And at the core of any strong game development team are the level designers: the people who create the spaces and environments that you move through while playing the game. Thus a teacher cannot just be an architect. She has to be a combination of an architect, planner, and a game designer to design good lesson plans and levels within the lessons. It is a very difficult task to be a teacher in the current technology world. Today the teacher has to be a jack of all trades and master of all.
Generations Online in 2009:
It was a surprise for me to see so many from the X Generation online. There is a sharp rise of 76+ year old that are using the internet as a tool. Is it because the X Generation needs it more than the others? As more old people are living alone and have very few people to take care of them, they are falling for this tool which does not require them to physically move out for work. However, my part of the story is different. In this globalized world it is cheaper to stay in touch with my parents if they were internet savvy. I have been trying to get them to use the internet more often but in vain. Though my father has retired as a chemical engineer and has handled machines, he is very uncomfortable with the computers. Every time he clicks the mouse button he simultaneously does a head banging. There are a lot of problems and I have finally given up trying. Maybe if my father was educated in English medium, he would have found it easier to adapt to computers. I feel that the X generation from non-English countries would have a language barrier. I would be very happy if my parents could be in this bandwagon that the report talks about. There was no increase in percentage of people in age bracket 25-29 and 35- 39. Did the internet have nothing to offer extra to this age group in the three years? What might be the reason for this age group to have a steady usage? I really want to know why this age group with a handsome buying power did not grow substantially.
Adults and Video Games:
Older population playing games was again a surprise for me. How can a generation who did not grow up with video games be addicted to games? What happens to all the conditioning theories? Maybe because of the loneliness and spare time that this generation now is making themselves search new modes to spend their time. Again a dispersed family might be a factor contributing to the rise in this population. Or is it the media that is targeting this age group? Educated people play more games than high school students. I was of the view that educated people would be more busy with jobs and professional goals and high school students have all the time in the world. This Myth of mine was shattered. Students play more games than non students. What might be the reason? Is it peer pressure? Or is gaming an alternative to Social Networking? If the time spent on Social Network increases, will the time spent on games by this population decrease? Income and affordability was not a factor as all income groups participate equally. But I surely expected rural population to be more active than urban population. I believed that urban centers have more outlets for entertainment like pubs and shopping centers and thus urban population will rely less on games as compared to rural centers. This myth too of mine was shattered by this report and I now feel that I come from another part of the world.
Writing, technology, and teens:
This report shows that students and parents view writing with technology differently. Students do not think e-writing is real writing, and it does not substantially improve their writing in the coursework. They feel that additional writings should be given to them to increase their creative writing abilities. Parents on the other hand feel that with technology, students can better reflect on their writing and thus will improve their writing as a whole. Is the help with spelling and grammar in a Word pad spoiling our spelling skills? Are we becoming better writers? Or is the SMS culture getting into creative writing? Can FYI be a part of a technical paper? I really don’t know if technology is helping creative writing and would like the class to discuss on this.
In photography there is a different category called Portraiture. How does portraiture differ from general photography? Well not very different. It is well within the boundary and rules of photography in general. Still there is a difference. What is it? I see the subject held very close. All the details are visible. The texture ,color and emotions are much more obvious. You are able to read each line and the emotion behind that. You now don’t just think about the subject in the frame but also start to question the motive of the artist. Sometimes we de-saturate the background to bring all the focus on to the subject.
Do we have similar bridges in teaching? How often do we pick the subject and put it at large. Something like a zoom facility where the details are very visible. But it is not so easy in teaching. If you pick up the subject without the context, students might become confused. Still there is a need to focus on the subject. I think this can be achieved by giving the context of the subject and then zooming in detail of the subject ,whereby we desaturate the context and focus on the subject itself. We then need to look at all the emotions. It can be achieved by looking at it through different angles. This is when the teachers motive and design skills will count for. The subject will then become clear to the pupil and stay in their memory as the smile of Monalisa.
The word “Avatar” comes from Sanskrit. My take on avatar is a bit different and I will try to explain myself here but it might be a case where I may sound very ambiguous as it is beyond the scope of 400 words to explain everything. I grew up listening to stories of “Ramayana” and “Mahabharata”, two epics that are integral parts of life in India.
In fact according to the “Jataka Tales”, Buddha was born as a human in his approximately 43rd birth. He began as a monkey king and every life he would do good deeds to be born as a better creature. Every birth was a different avatar and you go from strength to strength. I was given to learn that an avatar is God incarnated as a human being. Lord “Rama” is an avatar of the best man ever born. “Goddess Durga” has 10 hands and symbolizes supreme power that is needed to overcome evil. Two hands are just not enough to kill the demon and thus she has different weapons in different hands. Similarly there are hundreds of Gods in Hinduism and each symbolizes a different trait and is worshiped for their respective qualities. So when I sit for an exam, I pray a different god and at other time I may worship a different god depending on what quality I am looking forward to. Sounds funny? Yes it is but the whole thing is very complex and I have not been able to completely understand everything myself.
But what I understand is that we do the same things in real life. We take different roles in different places and different times. As a child I had wanted to become a tennis player whenever the Wimbledon Season came and would want to be a pilot every time a plane flew by. But as I have grown, the scope of those roles closed down and now I know that I am a graduate student and might stick to academics for the rest of my life. My Avatar will never be a pilot or doctor again. However whenever I see a tennis player I become nostalgic and might be that my behavior with him will be completely different as compared to a football player. People change, philosophies change, so do the Avatars. Or should they? Can I not be a tennis player in my Fantasy? While reading the papers of this week I was reminded of a German Movie I had seen called “Das Experiment”. In the movie a bunch of common citizens were broken into 2 groups and were assigned roles of prisoners and police officers. Strangely enough the common citizens had behavioral changes and the acting police was much harsher than actual police and the situation spirals out of control. I have not played MMORPs but was once given the role of a Class Representative in school. The very first day I had hit my best friend, trying to maintain the decorum of the class and my newly found post. It had a very bad effect on my friendship. My personal experience is that give people responsibility and they will change accordingly. So do Avatars too have such influence?
But surely our experiences have an effect on us whether real or virtual. “By default” has become integral part of our common day language and is not just limited to computers. Its not far when we would start to act our Avatars in our real lives. I just wish we go from strength to strength and improve our lives and not tread the opposite way.
This week’s module is on Fashion. I was wondering if buying a whole range of local clothes is better than buying a few branded ones. Should I have 2 Versace Trousers or have 15 from the Walmart for the same price? What is good, Variety or Quality?
I am personally very confused on the topic. Most of the time I want variety and would not want to wear the same clothes to a party. But again these clothes don’t last as long as my branded clothes, which I can wear for ages. Though I would like to have a variety of branded clothes, my pocket does not allow me to do that.
Similarly there is a constraint in teaching and learning. Should the teachers expose students to a lot of subjects or should they go deep into few subjects in depth? What is better? Lateral Vs Vertical is a choice we have to make because academic hours are after all limited. Also when we choose subjects to go in depth, should it be just science and math?
I like variety and quality both, but my resources are limited. Can someone suggest me how to prioritize myself? Is there a way to take the middle path between quality and quantity?
This time when I traveled to US, it took me 40 hours. In my span of almost 2 days of travelling with 2 other passengers, I hardly talked to them. Looking back I feel that the small screen provided in front of my seat along with the remote was the culprit. But was it? The other 2 persons travelling with me were Indians and I had felt that I knew enough about my own country. I was travelling by Emirates and so had access to Arabic music and movies which I had not had much access to before. I found it more interesting to learn and experience something new.
Hollywood movies have played a great role in my life. Back at home, my family might have thought that I was wasting time, but it has taught me to some extent about the American culture. Now when I am in US, the online experience that I carried along with me has tremendously helped my face to face communication. So was that time really a waste?
When we do research, we do literature study and begin our research from where others have left and carry it forward. There is no point reinventing the wheel. You cannot afford to spend your whole life and experiment all the facts that have been stated already. You take the results to be true. Similarly we can learn through other’s experiences and need not experience it all ourselves. I am sure that this learning might not be as effective as learning by creating mistakes . The choice is yours. It is for you to choose if you want to go in depth or explore laterally. Games can help you socialize or you can choose to go to a football field yourself. After all there is only 24 hours at your disposal.
The first thing s that we learn in early childhood are rhymes. Why? I never questioned. But looking back today, I find that music is a language that a child understands more than anything else in that stage. During my time, T.V was not that pervasive but in present situation I have seen my nephew, glued to the T.V whenever there is a song playing. What compels a 1 year old kid to pay so much of attention.
I think music is a language. We feel it more than we can speak about it. Traditional education has always taken help of music to overcome hurdles. Even the Math Tables that I memorized had a particular tune to it.
I can’t say I know a lot about music but this is what I have discovered for myself; set a tune to something and it is easy to repeat it, humm it. In this act of ours, we are putting a structure to the system that allows for easy repetition. Repetition or practice as we know is the crux of moving short term memory to long term memory. Am I seeing a bridge somewhere?
Securing 3rd rank in a class puts you in high esteem in front of others. But when they learn that there were only 3 members in the class, the scenario changes completely. It isn’t fun, winning a race where you run alone. The win really makes no sense even though the records might speak highly of you.
I have been a 100 meter sprinter in school and college. I used to practice against the clock. But on “Sports Day”, I would have better timing than ever. Personally I perform better when I compete against others. I have never figured out till date,”Where from that extra energy came????”
Private tuitions can teach you a lot but we still prefer sending our children to schools and classrooms. Presence surely allows for better learning. Presence also brings in a scale of competitiveness which allows for better calibration of talent.
Michigan State University is the first place where I have taken online classes. I think the presence of others and their comments motivates me but I am not sure if it resulted in cognitive learning. The subjects I have taken online are mainly arts subjects and thus am in no position to quantify the learning. If I would have taken differential Calculus or Algebra online, I would be in a better position to quantify my cognitive learning.
I am also not sure if presence in FTF communication is always helpful if the syllabus is not designed properly. You may be discussing in small groups consisting of your near friends. However the syllabuses in India don’t require you to discuss much and thus Social Constructiveness was a word that I heard only after coming to US. Books and teachers were the one I would look for help in case of a confusion. It is here, that I am truly exploring the potential of presence.
Will we be able to get that world where we will never have to grow up? A world where whatever we imagine can become true? While going through the readings I am reminded of the movie “Finding Neverland”. A deep dive in the world of imagination,where you can imagine anything and it is possible. It is a story of four boys who never want to grow up. As you grow up your imagination dwindles. Things that were real to you become virtual. In Physics I read the difference between the real image and virtual one. A mirror image looses its energy and is fainter than the original due to the reflection. In this world of digital technology, where there is no loss of pixels, we can go on endlessly recreating.
This Week I read Searle (1998); Berger & Luckman (1967), Smullyan (1977), Prisig (1974):
Searle (1998) : He begins his chapter by explaining Enlightenment Vision. The world was intelligible and we understood reality. But then in the beginning of the twentieth century a number of events happened and challenged the traditional optimism of both nature and our ability to comprehend it. He moves on from the postmodernist challenges to the concept of Reality. He does a very good job of explaining our cognitive limits of understanding the same. He then explains different theories of realism existing, explaining and pointing out their limitations. Perspectivism looks at reality from a point of view, whereas idealism isolates it in a different context.
Again you can choose to be a skeptic . At the end he talks about religion and how it is unfashionable to talk about it in the current light of things. Religion is a choice, a preference. Knowledge of a lot of things have demystified religion. He ends the article by summarizing that all these arguments are flawed, as they make sense only in particular contexts. They look good when looked through individual lenses. He goes in to say, maybe that reality is not a theory at all but instead it is a framework.
My Stand : I have a stand close to the author. I completely agree to the facts that the theories look credible in isolation, but contradict each other when put together. I agree to his stand that all these can be true, without confronting each other. I can be 72 kgs and still be 160 pounds. It depends on the context you choose and the vocabulary adopted to explain the same. I connect with his thoughts more so because I hail from a country which is multicultural, multilingual and multi religious. I have grown up to accept point of views without necessarily contesting or challenging them. I believe in existence of God in multiple formats (being a Hindu), yet I am a student of science and understand that God is one. So I will say that I am something else.
My Questions: 1. Just because the advancement of science allows us to experiment with a lot more things now than when these theories were formulated, should we look at it in the new light? Should we use scientific methods to judge reality? 2. Can we send these authors to the moon and then ask them to comment on perspectivism? Will they say that there is no gravity any more? 3. What is the difference between reality and dreams?
Berger & Luckmann (1967): They at the very beginning differentiate their methodology from that of a philosophical task. They had adopted a phenomenological method analysis of everyday life to throw light on social construction of reality. The language of everyday life continuously provides them with necessary objectifications and posits the order within which these make sense within which everyday life has meaning. They go to great lengths explaining about the reality of everyday life and how it is organized around the “here and now” of the present. They also explain other realities that they are conscious of and its inter-subjectivity (namely dreams). They explain very clearly as to why face to face communication in reality is so massive and compelling. In the last part of the article they explain the importance of language in everyday life. They further probe into signs and how they make sense in terms of pragmatical and symantical context.
My Stand: I agree with the authors that Everyday Life has an inbuilt, organized objective order. It can be stated more like : intuition has an inbuilt logic. You can be very spontaneous but your spontaneity has a fuzzy logic. However on page 26, para 1, the author speaks of how he distorts reality of dreams as soon as he begins to translate his experience into paramount reality of everyday life. Salvador Dali would use his surrealistic techniques and came up with art pieces which cannot be said something that distorts reality. I would say that this distortion that the author speaks of is an act of creativity. I also believe that face to face situation is massive and compelling. However I would want to refute his stance that misrepresentation and hypocrisy is more difficult to sustain in face to face situations.
Questions: 1. I wonder as to what happens in a big group which involves face to face communication. Will it still be very massive and compelling? Or is there an optimum number in a group which will sustain a compelling experience? 2. Does typification bring in a sense of purpose in an act? Can it motivate a person to go out of his way and achieve something? 3. Language allows me to typify experiences in turn allowing me to subsume them under broad categories in terms of which they have meaning not only to myself but also to my fellowmen. So is Facebook a type of language? 4. Can we say “tutoiement” and “bruderschaft” serves as gestures to a given language? 5. Why are we interested in news of other countries even though they don’t concern me in my everyday life? According to the author we should not be interested, so how would I typify my this everyday act?
Smullyan (1977): I Loved both the stories. It was funny and cheeky to the core. The dream talks about nothingness. You can understand nothingness but when it comes to explaining it, there is a problem. There is no reference point relative to which you can explain it. The so called scientific ways of probing fails. A wonderful pun about the emptiness of the universe leaves you asking for more. So if I were to explain it in Indian terminology, I would say “Sab maya hai”. The same concept was taken forward to the next chapter. Zen master, asks a novice to answer how he could have a stick in his hand but at the same time not. The novice gives up and returns after 12 years to find out the truth, reality only to find that the master now does not believe that he could have asked such a question. Does reality change due to change in perspective? Or does perspective change as a result of reality?
Prisig (1974): In Smullyan, it was difficult to define nothingness. In this story of the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance , a father does a very good work of explaining an abstract concept of ghost to his son. Does it mean that if something cannot be proved by scientific means, it does not exist? Was there no gravity before 17th century, when Newton discovered it? And if something does not have matter or energy, does it mean it is non existent? An interesting comparison of ghosts with scientific laws leaves you with a lot of unanswered probes. An amazing perspective / angle of looking at things. My Question: Do you believe in ghost?
