The Conundrum. . .

Eating crow
I do not like to argue because I often get too passionate about the issue being debated and find myself short on facts. It is not a situation in which I am comfortable, and it can be a very frustrating experience. Generally, I state my opinions after carefully considering all sides and ensuring I can defend myself against opposing viewpoints. Occassionally, I find myself having formed an opinion that is weakly supported; once I have sorted through my misconceptions and misunderstandings, I am prepared to admit that I was wrong.

Well, it has happened. And publicly, right here on this blog. This post, this quote:  "I have said before how insufferably boring I find podcasts."

It's time I made myself a podcast pie.

Or, an audiocast pie? Or a blogcast pie?

There is some discrepancy in the academic world as to the correct terminology. Richardson (2010) calls it podcasting, "the creation and distribution of amateur radio, plain and simple" (p. 112). Berger & Trexler (2010) agree partly: "in its simplest form, a podcast is an audio file recorded on a computer and later shared with others over the Internet" (p. 128), yet, then state that "podcasts come in three types: audio, screen, and video" (p. 128). Lee LeFever (2011) adds another definition in his video, "Podcasting: In Plain English":

 This screenshot on the left is the end of a demonstration of the difference between "broadcasting" and "podcasting". The point being made is that podcasting allows for "personalized, time-shifted content for your consumption whenever you feel like" (Richardson, 2010, p. 113).

To minimize confusion, and to contribute to Apple's quest for world domination (for all you conspiracy theorists out there), this blog will use the term podcast for audio files created and shared.

Now, let me unpack my previous thoughts on podcasting, because I cannot ignore the fact that I labeled podcasts as "insufferably boring". Perhaps Richardson (2010) can help with this caveat: "Be prepared: This is not the highly polished professional radio you might be used to. Cracks and pops, obscure music, and "ums" and "ahs" are all a part of the podcast genre. . . .Try not to let production value overwhelm what might be really interesting content" (p. 113). I confess, I am rather judgmental. I have felt, at the end of some podcasts, that the knowledge I gathered from them could have been better delivered, and more quickly delivered, via the written word. I think it is time I lightened up a little and lowered my expectations. After all, I have yet to make a podcast. . .

I'll take a scoop of vanilla ice cream with my podcast pie.

References
Berger, P. & Trexler, S. (2010). Choosing Web 2.0 Tools for Learning and Teaching in a Digital World. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Common Craft, LLC (Producer). (2008). Podcasting in Plain English [Video podcast]. Retrieved from http://www.commoncraft.com/video/podcasting
Richardson, W. (2010). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Improving on the past

In the real world it is not possible to go back in time and change the outcome of a certain event; as my husband says when playing Hearts, "a card laid is a card played".

In the blogging world it is far too easy to edit posts that have already been published.

In my previous post you will have learned I am missing elements of the criteria for this blogging assignment. I could go back and revise my published posts so that they better reflect the assignment requirements, but that is cheating. Blogging is a social media tool, and to be true to my readers (all three of you - thanks Pam, Joanne, and Jenn) and to be true to me, I am not going to cheat. I am going to try to publicly (granted to a small, safe audience) fix the problem.

Watch for the supplementary pages titled, *Web 2.0 tool* - The Missing Pieces.

Reflecting . . . and a bit of ranting (just a bit)

I am at the halfway point in my blogging project. On Friday, I received informal feedback from my professor on my blog to date. It was not great, but I am not surprised. I have deliberately neglected including certain aspects of the overall assignment criteria in this blog. Not because I am a rebel, although I can join a good cause in a heartbeat, but because I am struggling to find a space in my blog for the very things I do not like reading in others' blogs.

Bloggers lose my attention when their posts are lengthy and when they descend into the how tos of a task, with those awful "and then, and then, and then" that I tried to beat out of my Grade 6 and 7 students when I was a classroom teacher. (Not beat in a violent sense, more in a repeated reminder sense.)

If I want "how to" instruction, I'll watch a step by step video on YouTube: I do not like to wade through written instructions. I would even suffer through a podcast, although I have said before how insufferably boring I find podcasts.

Herein, lies my problem: I do not want to produce something which I would not like to read.

I am not a technical writer. I prefer to teach by demonstrating. I am not the kind of teacher who provides her students with reams of notes to "learn" from. My lessons are mostly of the "demonstrate and apply" format, followed by an assessment of the application.

Yet. . .

This blog is for an assignment. I want to do well on this assignment, and I want to conclude this project in December having met the following four goals set in my proposal:

• to achieve the level of "proficiency" in all six tools
• that my future Web 2.0 experiences, through self-regulation, will be rich with deep learning 
• that each post will be a place “of critical thinking, analytical writing and reflection”
• to become a resource for teachers and students in my school (See my full proposal for further explanation of these goals, including references for some of the language appropriated here in quotations.)

I believe my readers are knowledgeable and they can infer a great deal from what I am not telling them. I believe my professors can do the same.

But. . .

Can my professors assess what they infer? I do not think so. To date I have demonstrated proficiency in Diigo, Jing, and VoiceThread. I believe I am becoming a resource for teachers at my school, and I have provided some evidence of this in these blog posts. But my posts have yet to be places "of critical thinking, analytical writing, and reflection", nor have I explained much of the deep learning that I have experienced.

Hmmm. . .

So. . .

My challenge from this point forward is:

• to include the "how tos" in a critical, analytic, and reflective style that will hold my readers' attention; and, 
• to provide evidence of my deep learning through connections to academic literature

My posts are going to get longer. I just hope they get better, too.

P.S. The rant: I HAVE SHINGLES! According to The U.S. National Library of Medicine, when you have had chicken pox as a child the virus lives on forever in your body. And for about 20% really fortunate people (sarcastic tone necessary) it can reactivate during a time of lowered immunity. Say, when your husband is away with the senior boys soccer team and you are single parenting and trying to stay abreast of your Master's level coursework. . .ARGHHHH!

For further information on shingles, refer to this page. Caveat: the images are disgusting!