In response to “Praxis 2.0: Escaping the edu-travelogue”:

This article was very diverse. I found some concepts really easy to understand but some things I found very hard to grasp. The argument of the article is, to me, saying that we are very limited in how we teach and learn in our society because of rules and laws. The author wishes that this would change. There are other ways of learning that are beneficial. One thing that really stood out to me was when the author was talking about the new ways of learning out side the classroom. It was mentioned that this new way or learning needs to have a different type of evaluation system, and I totally agree. I like this argument. From what I understand, traditional teaching is considered the travelogue while the kind of teaching that the article is aiming for is the traveling. This traveling relates to the ds106 class because…. well it defines our class. It is a very different way of teaching. At first, this class really stressed me out because I was given so much independence, and now, I’m excited to see what creative things I get to do when new assignments are given (except when we are assigned to read articles, because, isn’t that going back to the traditional way of teaching?). We are thrown out there and expected to figure things out on our own, which is how the world actually works right? But what is so great about figuring this stuff out on your own is that, Jim is not being a lazy teacher, he wants us to learn in a different way, and he really does pay attention to what we do. His feedback is really important to me because when I see a comment from him it’s like “hey I struggled with this and figured it out the way I think he’s asking for it and now he’s commented on it, so I was doing it right.” So yes, this class is definitely “traveling.” I actually really like using this word for it because I feel like it’s traveling from traditional teaching to this new, more free way of teaching that is almost necessary given the change in society and technology that has come about.

In response to “Dr. Mashup; or, Why Educators Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love the Remix”:

Is the remix/mashup an assault on originality? Technically you are using someone else’s creation, BUT you are using it in a different way than the original author. To do this requires creativity. So I wouldn’t necessarily describe it as an “assault” on originality because it’s not an “assault.” It’s more like “borrowing.” It’s just a different kind of originality. It might not be your own stuff that you are remixing, but it takes originality to remix it the way you envision it. I mean, seriously, there is only so much in the world that can be thought of before it seems to start repeating itself a little bit. The remix/mashup is certainly a new art. It’s entertaining, it shows emotion, and it’s self expression, so it’s art!

So, basically, after reading these two articles, I guess I would sum it up like this: With changing and advancing technology comes new ways to learn. Copyright laws and school rules that have been around forever are putting stress on this new kind of learning. Learning needs to take place outside of the traditional classroom and students need to be able to use others’ work to learn and help with self expression. The remix/mashup is a perfect example of this new learning and creativity that is burdened from rules and laws. With new types of art needs to come new rule governing that art.

I had no idea what a remix/mashup was until…. well I heard Jim mention it when we had the first orientation class and he has mentioned it a few times since then, but I really truly didn’t know what it was until…. today So I know nothing about the remix/mashup culture and haven’t really played around with it that much. It’s still not absolutely concrete to me what can be defined as a remix/mashup so I couldn’t really tell you if anything I’ve already done for this class could fall into that category. The readings didn’t really challenge my understanding of the remix/mashup, because half the time, I didn’t know what the articles were talking about. I don’t really think something you don’t understand can challenge you about something if you don’t understand what it’s saying in the first place, right? But hopefully through creating my own remix/mashup, I’ll be able to answer this question. Maybe after I create my remix/mashup, I should go back and read the articles again to see if my definition of a remix/mashup is challenged by the articles. Although I doubt this will happen because I probably won’t have the time. And as for the last question, “Do you think remix/mashup can be authentically taught?” I’m not even sure what this question is asking. Can it be taught with originality? Well, I mean every teacher has a different teaching style, so I guess the answer is yeah.