Hi Bonnie, and others,

Here's a YouTube video that you -- and your students might find  
interesting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g

Do you (everyone reading this) know what mashup means?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mashup

What happens when you combine mashup and publishing?  You might get  
Philip M. Parker, an accomplished writer (and publisher) of  85,000  
books on Amazon.com alone (he has "written" perhaps over 200,000  
books altogether.)  He holds a Ph.D. in Business Economics from the  
Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and has Masters  
degrees in Finance and Banking (University of Aix-Marseille) and  
Managerial Economics (Wharton). He also happens to be dyslexic.

How does he do it? Are the books worth reading? Are these real books?  
Are they really "written" or are they "mashed up"? How big a  
difference is this, especially with the kinds of technical books  
Parker writes?  Is mashup software the new Gutenberg printing press  
for the 21st century? Should we all know about this? Should our  
students? How do you critically read a mashed up book? Same set of  
criteria as for other books, or some new ones, too? Has anyone read a  
Parker book? Tell us about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_M._Parker

David J. Rosen
DJRosen at theworld.com

On Nov 25, 2008, at 7:56 PM, Bonnie Odiorne wrote:


> David, and colleagues,

> Thank you for the timing of this article. I began my English  

> composition class with some articles that appeared here, I believe,  

> about the impact of technology on reading, and most particularly on  

> newspapers. My students didn't seem terribly bothered about this,  

> or about the fact that they may be reading in "sound bytes" (to mix  

> a metaphor.) Coming now to the end of the course, I'm convinced  

> more than ever that this is true for the majority of the students,  

> who seem unable (or unwilling?) to sustain reading enough to trace  

> an argument, or to perform analogous operations in writing. Of  

> course, it sounds as if your article implies that the manipulations  

> of a fluent text reader should be available to the fluent screen  

> reader as well. But, as we approach Black Friday, I wonder if we've  

> become consumers of the text as much as of the screen without doing  

> more than scratching the surface. I gave the class an exercise of  

> describing in detail an object in their possession. Most of them  

> waxed eloquent about their cell phones: how "cool" they were,  

> extolling their features to the extent that these descriptions  

> became little more than product specs for the latest gadgetry. Far  

> be it for me to decry the convenience of the cell phone; I'm the  

> owner of a Smartphone, which I use to manipulate the texts of my  

> daily life: schedules, memoes, and, if I could get Documents to Go  

> to work, of actual texts and spreadsheets as well. Are we  

> suggesting that visual literacy should proceed to critical  

> literacy, analyzing these images, or learning to manipulate the  

> technology to create yet more images? I can't wait to read the  

> article to find out. I intend to use this text to end the class.  

> Thanks for helping me come full circle.

> P.S. Some of these students are superb writers, or would be if they  

> could shed their consumerism of both language and "stuff." Not the  

> "stuff" of adult literacy, but many of our students are  

> "underperforming" (how I hate that word) which means we as teachers  

> need to meet them where they are.

> Gratefully yours,

> Bonnie Odiorne

> Post University Writing Center

>

> --- On Tue, 11/25/08, David Rosen <DJRosen at theworld.com> wrote:

> From: David Rosen <DJRosen at theworld.com>

> Subject: [Technology 1802] People of the Screen

> To: "The Technology and Literacy Discussion List"  

> <technology at nifl.gov>

> Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2008, 8:13 AM

>

> Colleagues, Can you read fluently? Of course, you say. But maybe  

> not. Although I meant, can you read text, I also meant, can you  

> read screens? Very few of us can. Some of our younger students are  

> more screen literate than we are. Is screen literacy important? If  

> getting to meaning, and to the truth, is important, screen literacy  

> is as important -- some would argue more important -- than reading.  

> However, "If text literacy meant being able to parse and manipulate  

> texts, then the new screen fluency means being able to parse and  

> manipulate moving images with the same ease. But so far, these  

> 'reader' tools of visuality have not made their way to the masses."  

> I hope I have tantalized you to read this short and fascinating  

> article on screen literacy by New York Times writer Kevin Kelley:  

> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/magazine/23wwln-future-t.html? 

> _r=1 I would also like to invite you, when you read -- or see --  

> something that we in technology and literacy might be interested  

> in, to post the URL to this discussion list. If we are a community  

> of practice on this discussion list, then let's help each other to  

> learn new things, think in new ways. Your thoughts on the article?  

> David J. Rosen DJRosen at theworld.com  

> ---------------------------------------------------- National  

> Institute for Literacy Technology and Literacy mailing list  

> Technology at nifl.gov To unsubscribe or change your subscription  

> settings, please go to http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ 

> technology Email delivered to bonniesophia at sbcglobal.net

> ----------------------------------------------------

> National Institute for Literacy

> Technology and Literacy mailing list

> Technology at nifl.gov

> To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to  

> http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/technology

> Email delivered to djrosen at theworld.com


David J. Rosen
DJRosen at theworld.com




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/technology/attachments/20081126/3fa2f450/attachment.html