As Ewan McIntosh noted on his blog before the event, the strapline for this event: “How is social media shaping the future of learning?”, gave our panelists a broad topic to discuss, but at Matt Locke’s capable hands the debate soon narrowed down to a few overall memes:

• - Use of digital media in the classroom
• - The demand for qualifications-led publishing
• - Integration with existing social media products
• - The concept of “control” in the education system

The debate around these issues was feisty, with Ewan McIntosh providing the perspective of the technologically-savvy, modern teacher - Ewan has blogged his opinions on the debate here. Ewan’s perspective is that students get a lot more from creating their own content using free tools than they do from using publishers’ packages. One example he gave was of Sandaig Primary School, where pupils collaborated to create wonderful audio-poetry at a minimal cost.

The other side of the debate was cogently argued by Owen White of Pearson Knowledgebox, and members of the audience, who stated that whilst publishers recognise the value for pupils in using the technologies and techniques outlined by Ewan when creating products, they must also respond to the demands of the LEAs and an education system which places an ever-increasing emphasis on exam results in assessing the progress of both pupils and teachers.

Sarah Gavin from the social network Bebo explained how Bebo is providing a space in which their users, mainly from the teen demographic, can discuss ideas with their peers which they might not be able to debate in physical spaces, where peer pressure can have a limiting effect on the topic of conversation. As a result, Beboers are becoming increasingly involved in campaigning on social issues, and Bebo has set up Bebo Be One to help them to navigate around these ideas.

Sarah also described how schemes on Bebo such as writing continuations to stories, and composing poetry, have been phenomenally successful, with many thousands of children taking part. And although Sarah sees the average Beboer’s 36-minute daily visit to the site as an extension to their social lives, often driven by the relationships they establish at school, she agreed that Bebo has not become the de facto destination for young people to discuss their homework. Is this a niche that could be filled by publishers?

All parties recognised the issue of control in education, with Owen White pointing out that despite the innumerable technological advances in the past century (e.g. radio, TV and software), formal education is still reliant on the principle of one teacher standing in front of a classroom of pupils, creating a power relationship between the teacher and pupils which some teachers can be reluctant to undermine. The fear of loss of control was highlighted as a very real factor for some teachers in their decisions about what techniques, and hence what media, to use in the classroom.

The debate revealed that there is still plenty of road left for all parties to travel before social media becomes mainstream in education, but change in that direction has happened, and publishers want to be, and are already becoming, a part of that change. Additionally, it was suggested that the educational environment itself would have to alter radically if we were to see a full-scale adoption of social media in the classroom. It would be interesting to discuss this topic in further detail on a future occasion.

Online would like to extend its thanks to the panellists for giving up their time to give us the benefit of their experience and knowledge, and to everyone who attended for helping to provoke lively debate during and after the session. We were asked many times to put on more events of this type in future, and we will be delighted to oblige. Please don’t hesitate to get in contact if you would like to be in the audience next time. We’ve also set up a LinkedIn group here - please feel free to join up and meet the other delegates.

Posted: November 28th, 2007 under Education, Publishing, Web 2.0, Events, Education Unbound.
Comments: none

I’d have hoped my first post would have concerned something grander than the misappropriation of features in video games. But hey.

When I was at university (all those…weeks, ago), and trawling the very depths of YouTube as any self respecting student should, I would occasionally stumble across videos mysteriously tagged: ‘machinima’. These videos would typically involve awkward animations of computer game characters in 3D environments, in sequences involving the kind of esoteric references and in-jokes that I imagined I would understand if I only spent more time playing video games (and don’t think I didn’t want to).

At the time I dismissed them and altered my search terms so that I could find, well, anything else. However, having worked at Online for a few months now and had a couple of dips in the new media ocean, I started thinking about it again.

For a better grasp of what exactly machinima involves, I turned to Wikipedia: ‘As a production technique, the term concerns the rendering of computer-generated imagery (CGI) using real-time, interactive (game) 3D engines, as opposed to high-end and complex 3D animation software used by professionals.’ That is to say, the manipulation of 3-D characters in a digital environment to create animated videos. It is far less costly than the high-end CGI of the kind that Disney Pixar have made their speciality, but it also affords a film-maker greater control over what happens, and often gives them higher production values, than can normally be achieved using basic hand-held video cameras.

Machinima represents quite a curious development in computer gaming culture; beginning in the early nineties when first person shooter games like Doom allowed players to record their gameplay in realtime. These demo files could be shared between and viewed by players. To paraphrase Wikipedia – it turned the player into a performer, with gamers comparing their runs on various levels and tasks.

Whilst games with 3D graphics became more numerous and sophisticated (the Grand Theft Auto series being perhaps the most controversial) the greater emphasis of the creation of these sequences was gradually placed on making engaging pieces of film, rather than demonstrating any kind of gaming prowess - hence the name of the movement; a combination of machine and cinema.

Because of the way in which it developed, machinima began as an inherently subversive movement; the videos I found at university mostly consisted of taking established characters and making them do things they weren’t supposed to do. I think I’m right in saying that there’s nothing quite like seeing a bunch of World of Warcraft characters dancing the Macarena – which is not, of course, to say that it’s a good thing.

But machinima has now evolved into quite a sophisticated and well-established medium. Just reading the Wiki article we hear that Roger Ebert has described it as an ‘extraordinary’ new art form; that it is such a recognized aspect of popular culture that it’s used in an episode of South Park. An Academy of Machinima Arts & Sciences has been set up, and holds Machinima Film festivals. Entire computer games like The Movies have been developed which allow players to manipulate 3D characters in order to make films. Machinima dramas with runs outlasting most television sitcoms have appeared on, and are still on, YouTube.

Why is this important? Machinima’s redefinition of the notion of computer game authorship represents another manifestation of that ever-cited change in the way that people perceive media and communications: the move towards user-driven content, Web 2.0, interactivity…all of the usual buzzwords. Machinima provides people with a very easy way of telling a story or making a film or expressing themselves without the need for even a video camera.

It also keys into that odd fascination with easily manipulating our environment that you see in model railway enthusiasts and strategy gamers alike. The ability to represent yourself in a world over which you have more control than in physical reality holds great appeal – the success of Second Life and the excitement generated by the Playstation 3’s Home feature have shown us as much. How long before people are making sophisticated films, with elaborate stunts and lavish settings, starring themselves? There are programs which allow 3D characters to automatically lip synch any piece of spoken text; how long before people are making presentations in custom built virtual offices, via their avatars?

The effects these kinds of development have on how young people use the internet, and their learning, can only be guessed at. Although it hasn’t been too long since I was at school, it’s been a while. If, back then, my teacher had allowed me to make a presentation in class on the Battle of Hastings using animated 3D characters, I’d have loved it. Academic institutions worldwide have established themselves in Second Life to allow students’ avatars to attend online lectures. Why not animate an entire lecture, allowing your avatar to call up video and imagery with the mere gesture of a digitally rendered hand, to thousands all over the world?

Whether these ideas end up being practicable or not, they remain very exciting possibilities.

Posted: November 20th, 2007 under Education, Design, Web 2.0.
Comments: none