Reflection Prompt #3

With the final project, what did you discover about archival literacy? How did the creation of the Doig archive project affect your thinking about using “analog media” (media that was created offline) to create a multimodal piece?

I honestly really appreciate that the final project forced us to work with an archive. As I have probably stated numerous times, I have never worked with an archive before. It is always nice to work with new tools and mediums, especially as writing students because we can use all the tools we can get in terms of research platforms. As far as archival literacy in particular, I definitely discovered that archives are so rich with information. I also discovered that most archives are going to require a lot of digging. Now when I think about this as a student who just needs the research so I can get my paper done on time, this is frustrating, but when I think a little more deeply I can appreciate the “digging”. After reading “Googling the Archive” I wrote in my blog post:

“I caught myself thinking how wonderful life would be if digital information was somehow easier to search and find, but then I had to take a step back. Solberg wrote in her conclusion, “Embracing these technologies can help rhetoric and composition scholars pursue the goal of recovery work for revisionist histories, but it may also change the way that our work is valued and result in altered expectations” (71). I think this statement is worth considering in terms of accessibility. If research were easy, how would that change the value of our own discoveries. I wrote on Friday to Kate about the power of the chaos behind Doig’s archive. If everything were tagged perfectly. If all of his thoughts were laid out linearly, what work would there even be to be done? Solberg talked about Library searches as being rather closed. We must have a title, an author, a keyword, and then the work is up to the scholar. I definitely think there is value in research being difficult and obscure. It sometimes forces us to look at and take on a question that we would not have thought about before. Research does have the power to steer our arguments, and I don’t necessarily think that is a bad thing”.

I really think I have developed an archival literacy and I think I have definitely come to appreciate all of the research, curating, and work that is required to sift through an archive. I am a firm believer that the more work you put into creating something, the more satisfaction you have when it is finished (even if the process itself sucked).

I also really like the idea of creating a multimodal piece using “analog media”. As we well know, the internet is a big place and bringing things to the internet allows for so much more circulation. I love that the pieces we create online can be viewed not only by so many people, but for years and years to come. Multimodal pieces are there to stay and they are accessible. They won’t be burned in a fire or shoved in a box in the attic, which is great. I love that we were able to share some of Doig’s work, and I think that the multimodal platforms really brought some of that work to life. Placing his notecards and quotes overtop pictures that can be scrolled through, or looking at a picture and relating it to an actual location on a map really adds an aesthetically pleasing element to all of the work that he did throughout his lifetime. I think placing analog media in a multimodal setting is very beneficial and engaging, as was seen in all of the projects and presentations.

Reflection Prompt #2

How do you now apply rhetorical theory to digital/multimodal texts? How might this knowledge be important/applicable outside a classroom setting in terms of issues like power and ethics?

I think this is a wonderful question because it is a question that I would have read in the beginning of the semester and been like, “what the heck is that supposed to mean?” But now, at the end of the semester, I feel like I can actually answer this, which is an awesome feeling! I would say that rhetorical theory applies very heavily to digital/multimodal texts. It just takes a little bit of digging to recognize how it applies and in what ways rhetorical theory is working in these multimodal texts. One of my favorite class discussions was when we talked about digital rhetoric and persuasion. If digital rhetoric isn’t only persuasion, what is it? We came up with this list of ideas including self-expression, participation, and collaboration. From this list I have kind of been able to dig out how I see rhetorical theory working in digital/multimodal texts.

In Zappens’ article we read titled, “Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated theory” he wrote, “Studies of the new digital media also explore some of the purposes and outcomes of communication in digital spaces; not only persuasion for the purpose of moving audiences to action or belief, but also self-expression for the purpose of exploring individual and group identities and participation and creative collaboration for the purpose of building communities of shared interest” (322) Digital rhetoric works in a different manner than traditional rhetoric as it is kind of exploratory in nature.

Digital work does not have to persuade the reader as much as it simply has to appeal to a reader’s interests. However, that appeal is still an element of rhetoric. Appealing to interest is a tool of persuasion, but we see digital work ending with appeal and not necessarily developing as far as the persuasive argument. Why not? Because the internet is so large! We did an assignment in class, the internet and identifiers, which proved how just tagging pieces causes so much circulation and variety. Digital pieces don’t have to go as far as the full-blown persuasive argument simply because relatable communities make way for the persuasion. From there outside communities may become convinced based on following. As Zappen said the internet has become a place for self-expression and community building, but the rhetoric is still there if you dig it out.

Another reading that I really enjoyed that pertains to this topic was “Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric.” My blog post really illuminates how I felt about this reading if you would like to look back: Blog #2 on “Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric”. Basically, I just think this idea of the lost canon of delivery re-emerging in digital rhetoric is just really amazing. It totally makes sense that we have shifted away from delivery as an important rhetorical canon when shifting from oratory rhetoric to written text. However, delivery heavily applies to multimodal texts which I kind of got at in my last post when talking about redesign, images, and aesthetic appeal. Overall, I think this is a very interesting consideration when applying rhetorical theory to digital texts.

I think this knowledge is extremely important outside the classroom, especially in terms of issues like power and ethics. Understanding digital rhetoric and how it works as a community building tool can be extremely powerful. Since the election I have seen so many TV programs talking about Donald Trump’s campaign in terms of internet use such as Facebook and Twitter. I even overheard someone talking about Trump having an entire team of individuals (I think in Michigan somewhere, don’t quote me) that basically sat at computers all day creating posts and then boosting and aiding in circulating posts. I mean if you know how to get things moving and circulating, digital rhetoric is extremely (like scary) powerful. After all, Donald Trump did win the election. Is this type of power always ethical? No, I would argue not. There are a lot of extremely unethical things circulating digitally. From discrepancies such as plagiarism to flat out bogus lies, I think this is definitely something we will have to take into consideration in the coming years. The internet is a very powerful place and unfortunately more and more people are using it and reading things at face-value, so I think internet ethics is definitely a growing area of concern.

Reflection Prompt #1

Discuss ways multimodal composing differs from and is related to your composing practices for alphabetic, print texts. How did this class affect your previous experience with digital writing both as a reader/consumer of digital media, and as a creator of digital media?

Over the course of this semester, I feel I have developed an entirely new understanding of multimodal composing. I think that my generation tends to feel like we would all be magnificent multimodal composers purely because we have grown up in such a technological era. I know personally, technology is something that kind of comes easy. Even if I don’t know how to use a program or software, I can typically figure it out rather quickly. I have grown up with technology and learning it becomes somewhat inherent. However, I have learned over the course of this semester that just because I am able to figure out how to use something, it doesn’t necessarily make for an effective multimodal piece. There are so many more considerations that need to be taken into account when composing a multimodal project than just learning how to use a program and creating something.

I would argue that even though technology is kind of second nature, the same thought and effort has to go into a multimodal piece that is put into an alphabetic text (honestly probably even more-so). We talked about some important composing considerations in class such as purpose, audience, and aim. I think these considerations are important to keep in mind when composing multimodal works as well as alphabetic texts. You still have to have a purpose for writing, a goal, and a desired audience in which you hope to appeal to specifically.

As far as differences are concerned, there are many! Most obviously, multimodal pieces are visual and visual appeal and aesthetics really has the power to make or break your piece. When surfing through the internet we are drawn to and most interested in things that look good. I mean think back to our discussion in class after we first looked at the Kairos website. Everyone thought it was rather terrible visually. I know my little group, for one, had a really hard time separating the material from the outwardly appearance. I probably never would have dug into the actual subject-matter of the site had we not been required to, simply because it did not look professional or cohesive. Samantha and I also did an analysis of Fox.com, where even though I don’t watch a lot of television, the site really appealed to me visually. This is a consideration that we don’t necessarily have to worry about in regards to written text because we are usually given a format to use such as MLA or APA, and that is how the paper is going to look.

I think the visual aspect of multimodal composing was the biggest eye-opener for me when constructing my multimodal revision. I was so excited to be able to support my writing with visuals such as videos and pictures. However, when it actually came down to finding and creating such aids, I began to realize how difficult visuals can be to work with. I think it is easy to become so caught up in the excitement and fun of adding pictures that we can sometimes forget their purpose and power. It is actually really difficult to construct a multimodal piece that contains proper supporting visuals. You don’t want to lose the power of your piece to a bunch of subpar graphics and videos. I would say that even though they are very powerful tools they are also tools that should be given proper consideration.

The last difference between the two composing practices that I really want to touch on comes from the reading we did titled, “When Revision is Redesign.” This was honestly one of my favorite readings because it put a lot of things in perspective for me in terms of how to revise my drafted piece. Multimodal composing is hard. There are so many added considerations that are rather wonderful, but it can be difficult to fit all of the pieces together into one cohesive project. I wrote in my blog post after reading this article, “ I am so used to revising written texts, which honestly for me is very simple. I am one of those people that take FOREVER to write a paper because I constantly revise as I go, so when I actually get to the “revision” stage, it really doesn’t consist of a whole lot (as bad as that might sound).” I realized that when drafting my multimodal piece there were so many things visually that I just did not like. Things were not flowing the way I had intended. To be perfectly honest, it looked to me like a complete disaster. Reading Delagrange’s article allowed me to realize that revising my project meant redesigning, and that was completely acceptable. Multimodal composing is definitely a different process. Overall, there are many added considerations when composing digitally, but the piece should also be grounded in the composing considerations that are taken for any written text.

As far as how this class has affected my previous experience with digital writing, I guess I already kind of answered that question. My eyes have definitely been opened to the process and the considerations. I now realize that it must be valued and thought out just as any alphabetic text and that pictures are not necessarily an “easy” aide. I also have found that as a consumer, I have become more aware of other digital and multimodal pieces. It is crazy how much more critical of other pieces I have become now that I have gone through the process of creating my own.

Doig Project Link and Reflection

Here is the link to Kaycee, Claire, Jack, and I’s project:

Ivan Doig in Butte, Montana 

Over the course of this project, I would definitely say that I have developed an archival literacy, as well as a newfound appreciation for archives in general. Considering I honestly had never even browsed an  archive before this class, I learned a lot about the concept of archives, as well as about their usefulness and importance. There really is so much valuable and interesting information housed within archives, it just generally takes some digging and curating on our own part to make meaning of the information provided. This is especially true of the Doig archive.

Our group for example dove very blindly into this project and decided we really liked the photos (as it seemed was a common theme among other groups). We then began noticing all of the Butte photos and started talking about how historical and interesting the town of Butte is. We found that Work Song was a novel that Doig wrote set in Butte and we decided to read the book and go from there. After reading and browsing the archive, our project really began to fall together. We were able to look at Work Song and realize that Ivan Doig’s “Butte-related” subject matter housed in the archive was extremely relevant to and intertwined with the novel. As a group we began to construct a storymap illustrating a small chunk of the research Doig conducted in order to write Work Song. It was absolutely astonishing how the themes of the book reflected real history, all the way down to the descriptions of the neighborhoods and buildings. I think as a whole we were able to illustrate how much work Ivan Doig put into writing the novel, just in terms of research and learning the “backstory” if you will.

I think using the Doig archive for this project was definitely a new and exciting challenge. In constructing papers and projects, I often find myself resorting back to the same tried and true search tools that I have always relied upon in the past. It was definitely interesting to work with an archive and piece together a project from a totally new source. I personally enjoyed digging through Doig’s Butte research and making connections to what I had read in Work Song. The amount of research Doig conducted was astonishing, but it was also fun to dig through and make connections to the story. There was just a different type of satisfaction while looking through the archive, probably because this project was so focused. As far as using StoryMaps, I have to admit I kind of stood back and let other members of my group use the platform. I mostly dug through the archive, found pictures and related quotes from the book to add, but they actually worked those things into the StoryMap. So I can not say I am now well-versed in StoryMaps but it is definitely a cool platform. I love the visual appearance of our project and I am glad that, at the very least, I now know that StoryMaps exists!

Overall, our project really came together quite nicely, and as a group we were able to work together and figure out a platform as well as find what we needed in order to create our finished product. We definitely did not utilize the librarians as much as we could have, but it was nice to have them around for little tips and advice. Jan shared the google books tool with us which was helpful and we embraced the suggested StoryMaps, but other than that we really worked together as a group and found what we wanted. I think we all worked very well together and I am happy with our finished project. Enjoy!

 

Group Contributions and Plans

So far we have not really assigned any specific tasks to members of our group. However, we did talk about how we should all make it a goal to have finished reading Work Song over Thanksgiving break as well as searched through the archive for specific connections, photos, and other things that we may use in our project. So, I have already started on that and definitely plan on coming back to the group with a reasonable amount of content to contribute to the project. I think so far I have contributed mostly by asking various questions and trying to engage all of us and get us thinking about our finished project. I have asked my group questions such as what do we want the finished product to look like, how will we arrange it, what exactly are we trying to accomplish, and how do we want to to ultimately accomplish said goal. I think questions like this are important to think about so that we are all on the same page before we go off on our own and gather information. If we all have a different picture in our minds of what the finished product might look like, then we might all come back from Thanksgiving break with jumbled and disconnected information. So mostly, up until this point, I have been trying to get us all thinking about some of the specifics in hopes that we can all be on the same page and come back together with material that will be useful and cohesive.

Group Project

So far I don’t feel as though I have made any major contributions since we haven’t actually started our project, but I feel confident in our plan that we have begun creating. I was surprised at how easily we all came to an idea and agreed on a topic. We all agreed that we really liked the photos which made coming to a topic agreement so much easier in my opinion. We talked about looking into centering photos around a book, but we decided to incorporate location as well. I think this will make for an interesting, hopefully richer project. I am very analytical and I like to plan things out, so I think I will be able to contribute to the group by trying to keep us on a set path. I really like to think ahead, so I think I will probably try to help us stay on track and steered in the right direction.I definitely think we have a few more things to think about, but I am happy with our direction so far. I am also excited to work with story maps. It looks like a neat platform, so I am excited to get creative there as well. Should be a fun project, and I am eager to get started!

Digital Research

I had a lot of very random thoughts while reading through this article. I thought it was very interesting to think about how our digital searches are shaped and filtered, but I found myself having very conflicted thoughts about how the digital environment should be constructed in terms of accessibility. At first I thought that accessibility and digital construction needed to be altered in some ways. Solberg made some very interesting points about how our searches can be filtered because of things like location, search history, or just our search terms in general. It is interesting to think about all of the potential sources and texts that we are missing out on when conducting research. There is absolutely no way for us to get inside the heads of the individuals who have tagged certain material and for that reason we are unable to conduct searches in a manner that gives us everything we are looking for. It is then interesting to think about how our research then shapes our argument in contrast to how our argument shapes our research. I know I have personally found my ideas on a topic or project changing drastically over the course of my research. This is often times very interesting and I have always thought that this leads to the better argument, but does it? Is it instead just leading to the more accessible argument because of the search terms I have chosen to use? Hard telling I suppose…

I caught myself thinking how wonderful life would be if digital information was somehow easier to search and find, but then I had to take a step back. Solberg wrote in her conclusion, “Embracing these technologies can help rhetoric and composition scholars pursue the goal of recovery work for revisionist histories, but it may also change the way that our work is valued and result in altered expectations” (71). I think this statement is worth considering in terms of accessibility. If research were easy, how would that change the value of our own discoveries. I wrote on Friday to Kate about the power of the chaos behind Doig’s archive. If everything were tagged perfectly. If all of his thoughts were laid out linearly, what work would there even be to be done? Solberg talked about Library searches as being rather closed. We must have a title, an author, a keyword, and then the work is up to the scholar. I definitely think there is value in research being difficult and obscure. It sometimes forces us to look at and take on a question that we would not have thought about before. Research does have the power to steer our arguments, and I don’t necessarily think that is a bad thing.

Archive Experiences

I found the article for today’s reading very insightful and useful. Since we began looking at archives, I started to realize how much potential they house as useful knowledge and information banks. They house so much interesting information, but I agree with Potts that the user experience is typically lacking. Archives tend to house a ton of information in a manner that is hard to navigate and really engage with.

For today’s assignment I looked at the Google Arts and Culture archive. They don’t necessarily title it an archive on their site, but it is basically an online cultural museum. They have compiled a multitude of images, artifacts, videos, artwork, and other relevant items into a cultural archive. The site itself houses a TON of information, and might even be a little bit too broad but I think it provides a great example of how archives can be organized in a manner that caters to the user.

First off the archive is very visually appealing. It does not seem to stick to the same bland constraints that I have witnessed in the majority of the archives I have viewed. Secondly, it is extremely interactive. The home page features “your daily digest” at the very top which houses collections from an artist “born of this day”, images of events that happened “today in history”, and other relevant material. You then scroll down to a “featured project”, which today happens to be titled “American Democracy”. This collections houses photos, videos, artifacts, artwork, and virtual tours all pertaining to the evolution of American democracy. There are stories of the day, virtual tours, and categories broken down by things such as time, color, artist, and so forth.

Overall, the site is very large-scale which might be a little bit detrimental, but as far as usability I think the work they have done on this archive is absolutely fantastic. I think this project definitely works to cater to the user as Potts suggested necessary. Some of the virtual tours are a little confusing and glitchy, but I think they are definitely on the right track here in terms of “experience architecture” and a user friendly interface. Check it out and see what you think!

Digital Archive

After reading the assigned reading and browsing through a couple of different digital  archives, I was very intrigued. I honestly haven’t used archives or even explored one to any extent so I found this topic very new and interesting. I don’t know why I haven’t explored an archive up until now because they definitely seem to have the power to house a lot of valuable information. I am actually very surprised that I haven’t stumbled across one during any of my research over the years, weird.

Anyway, I mostly browsed through the 9/11 Digital Archive mentioned in the  exigence section of the reading. I really enjoyed this section on exigence because it really resonated with me in terms of framing archives as rhetorical works. The author states, “They (digital archives) function in response to a need or an exigence…typically marking archival exigencies is, of course, the “urgent” need to preserve important materials” (222). There are all sorts of tools and approaches to preserving information. We have preserved artifacts and various historical remnants and stories in museums and history books for years. I think the digital archive works at this same sort of preservation but on a very accessible level which is amazing. For that reason, I find them very valuable.

I also like the idea of “archival contributions.” I think that because these digital archives are such accessible platforms, they can become very powerful in terms of who can find them and share and contribute. Individuals from all different backgrounds, social classes, races, and what have you have the ability to mold these archives into very thorough and multi-dimensional works which is very interesting. An example of this was created by the author when talking about Chinatown (“Ground One”) and how it was “the largest residential area affected by 9/11” (224). The fact that this was never really reported on any media networks brings up an entirely new topic and basis by which 9/11 can be examined in terms of “racism and the allocation of media resources in times of crisis” (224). This was probably my favorite part of the reading because it shows how digital archives can function on many different levels, providing information that can be used in various sorts of contexts.

Surveillance, Privacy, and Net Neutrality

This Kairos page was definitely an interesting and thought-provoking read. I hate to admit that this is a topic I have literally NEVER really thought about. I mean I’ve always been cautious when posting on social media, using the approach that “anyone may see this” even though my settings are all private. However, I have never really thought about surveillance and privacy from a search engine prospective. I mean, I have obviously come to the realization that google search seems to know where I live (every time I type in a store looking for hours or something it automatically recommends “Target Bozeman” or what have you). I also have realized this sort of trend with Amazon and many other sites. However, I never thought anything of it. I have always just seen this as helpful and convenient, which in many cases I still believe that it is. What is interesting though, is that I have never thought about where this data is going and to what extent I am actually associated with the data itself. Is it just remembered on my devices, is my name linked? I guess I really have no clue which makes the whole thing kind of scary.

I was also really interested in Angela Crow’s section on WPA’s. As a student, I think her topic was definitely of concern and interest. It is another scenario where I am kind of frustrated by my shallow thinking. I have always known about such tools as student databases and plagiarism checkers, but I have never thought very much into the idea. It is interesting that I have no clue what type of database my own work may have been sent to and what exactly they are able to do with that work. I can definitely see why their argument for surveillance and privacy education is important. I know that after reading through this page, I have a lot of questions that I would have liked answered, or at least talked about, during my time in school. Very interesting read!