My Nephew Nicholas
I just found out how to post photos, so I am putting up this Post-Holiday Post.
Here's a photo of my Nephew Nicholas with my Sis Cheryl, who came over for a visit over the holidays.
Cute little guy isn't he :-)
Sunday, January 08, 2006
I just found out how to post photos, so I am putting up this Post-Holiday Post.
Here's a photo of my Nephew Nicholas with my Sis Cheryl, who came over for a visit over the holidays.
Cute little guy isn't he :-)
Saturday, December 17, 2005
All-Consuming Fetishes? A Guide for Design Students (In Singapore)
You’ve heard of fetishes, of course.
The common meaning of fetishes are: objects that certain groups of people use as substitutes for sexual gratification.
Now that I’ve gotten your attention, I just want to state up front that we’re not here to JUST talk about sexual fetishes--not that I am an expert in this area, in the first place!—but to examine how the concept of fetish has mutated into its capitalist form. We’ll be talking about two other forms of fetishes, just to round off our discussion in relation to capitalism and design matters.
Sexual Fetishes
The common media representations of a fetish are usually consumable objects like furs, shoes (stilettoes to be precise), leather gear, whips and even exotic food, used by fetishers—who can apparently only get sexually aroused by (and through) these objects. Why this is the case is beyond the scope of our discussions and my expertise.
Of course the objects of obsession can also be certain body parts, like soles of feet or earlobes, or other obscure body parts not usually associated with sexual activity by “normal” folks to get turned on (you can use your imagination here…)
In the cases described above, the meaning of fetish is taken to be an unnatural sexual obsession. It is considered a sexual deviation in psychiatric manuals—which goes to show how far “civilized” humans have been purified of their “wild” instincts, their "polymorphous perversities," desexualised and compartmentalized by the sterile dictates of modern life into capitalists, consumers, labourers, and—only when they have any re-creational time left—lovers. And in this case, lovers, not of other humans, but of inanimate (?) objects.
Anyway, here are the two other meanings of fetish that I’d like you to consider, for our discussion.
Divine Fetishes
In a more religious context, fetishes were once repositories of divine favour—much like magical charms blessed by the gods. The Native American Zunis used fetishes in this manner. Thus the fetishes were religious icons used as amulets to increase the tribesman’s chances of success in his foraging activities. A hunting fetish would thus imbue the hunter with enough of a spiritual boost to his confidence to hunt well.
This example shows, if nothing else, how far humans have become alienated from their “native” state of communion with divine forces, in the same way that they’ve been alienated from their "whole" sexual natures. We are way off from the ideals of the tantric worshippers who fused sexuality and spirituality into one compact package. No longer are we “holistic beings” with divinely sexual connections to the cosmos, it would seem.
Commodity Fetishes
Wait, there’s more. In contemporary society, or rather, capitalist society, the meaning of fetish takes on another twist. Post-Marxist analysts use the term commodity fetish—which is the separation or “alienation” of the product from the context of its production. This is the third meaning of fetish I’d like you to consider—one that shows the next big fall humanity has taken, in our headlong transformation from homo sapiens to capitalist consumers.
Here is an excerpt from the article “The Reproduction of Daily Life” by Fredy Perlman on this topic:
The real danger of fetishism is that it reverses the ontological status of the parties and activities involved in the creation of a product, confusing the real “value” of labour, and productivity. Why is this dangerous? Because it devalues the work we do, and dehumanizes us, and turns us into mere “factors of production” known as human resources—a form of economic capital. The world is thus “magically” created through these “animated” and “automated” entities like “market forces” or “technology” without any mention of “human” intervention. Fredy Perlman again:
The consumer is alienated on a number of levels.
The first and most obvious form of alienation is the consumer's belief that he has a choice when he is deciding whether or not to buy a product. The slogans that you have more “choice” when you buy from a range of products is really a bogus proclamation—a consumerist wolf in sheep’s clothing. Never once is the consumer really given any chance to stop to think that real choice might well be to “not buy”, or to get involved in some other alternate activity other than consumption. So conditioned is he to live within the bounds of capitalist ideology, so bombarded is she by the incessant barrage of media ads that she no longer questions this state of things or the meaning and validity of this kind of social-capitalist configuration.
The second form of alienation is the disconnect of consumer from the actual contexts of production.
For example, the consumer has no idea how a product was created—an example is how urban folks who have never been to dairy farms, think that milk originates from cartons of milk, rather than from cows. Or kids who think that orange juice appears magically from bottles found in the supermarket, not squeezed from real oranges plucked from orange trees in Florida—activities they would never have a chance to witness in their lives, unless they’ve gone on tours of these exotic locales.
Another way to think of fetishism, is that it is an applied form of idolatry, the substitute of the image for the substance, so to speak. Thus the fetish object is projected, or imbued with magical, sexual, or divine, attributes—obscuring the real “virility” or productive power of the individual. Fredy Perlman again:
This is the next level of alienation that occurs—that people do not see the “invisible hand” of capitalism shaping their lives, and reproducing the very system that enslaves them.
Is there any way we can escape our wage-enslavement and have more equitable exchange between life and labour? That's the question we'll be pondering for a bit ...
Thoughts to labour over
I’d better stop this part of the discussion here for now, lest this article becomes way too long! In any case, for my Design Thinking 2 students, I’d like you to think about the issues of commodity fetish discussed above, and how it relates to your work as graphic designers:
To what extent do your creative works ...
We can never go back in time to the time of the Zunis, whom I believe had a more healthy relationship with the divine—in the sense that their use of the fetishes were more “inspired” than its modern manifestations (this is of course my assumption). I mean "inspired" here to mean a return to a "right relationship" to reality (a big task indeed!), not distorted by mediating forces like capitalism.
My hope is that we can learn to fully understand the mediating function of commodity fetishes so that we do not fixate our attentions wrongly on the fetish object, but understand their original divine functions, like the Zuni fetishes that act as conduits that "channel" power to its user via its association with a divine presence.
Perhaps it's still not too late for us to reconnect soulfully to the world again, and for us to realise now that we are collaborators with the world, with the divine, and that our actions CAN have some impact.
Also, I hope that we will be able to expunge the wrong and disempowering views relating to our lack of creative "virility", and NOT lose sight of our real productive power to make a difference in our life and in our work. In this way, we can make our way back to a "soulful" and authentic existence, and gain access to true "divine" inspiration, through our creative works, and the designs that we create. This of course is an ideal, but an ideal I believe to be worth fighting for.
Students: after reading this article, and mulling through the issues presented, I’d like you also to reflect on the issues of fetishes and alienation, and think about how you could use your creative work to:
So let’s do some thinking and writing! Go for 500 words, okay!? (More is better, of course!) Create a visual journal of this topic and post it online!
_______________________________________
References:
Chapter 3: Alienation of Living Activity, by Fredy Perlman.
Chapter 4: The Fetishism of Commodity, by Fredy Perlman.
The common meaning of fetishes are: objects that certain groups of people use as substitutes for sexual gratification.
Now that I’ve gotten your attention, I just want to state up front that we’re not here to JUST talk about sexual fetishes--not that I am an expert in this area, in the first place!—but to examine how the concept of fetish has mutated into its capitalist form. We’ll be talking about two other forms of fetishes, just to round off our discussion in relation to capitalism and design matters.
Sexual Fetishes
The common media representations of a fetish are usually consumable objects like furs, shoes (stilettoes to be precise), leather gear, whips and even exotic food, used by fetishers—who can apparently only get sexually aroused by (and through) these objects. Why this is the case is beyond the scope of our discussions and my expertise.
Of course the objects of obsession can also be certain body parts, like soles of feet or earlobes, or other obscure body parts not usually associated with sexual activity by “normal” folks to get turned on (you can use your imagination here…)
In the cases described above, the meaning of fetish is taken to be an unnatural sexual obsession. It is considered a sexual deviation in psychiatric manuals—which goes to show how far “civilized” humans have been purified of their “wild” instincts, their "polymorphous perversities," desexualised and compartmentalized by the sterile dictates of modern life into capitalists, consumers, labourers, and—only when they have any re-creational time left—lovers. And in this case, lovers, not of other humans, but of inanimate (?) objects.
Anyway, here are the two other meanings of fetish that I’d like you to consider, for our discussion.
Divine Fetishes
In a more religious context, fetishes were once repositories of divine favour—much like magical charms blessed by the gods. The Native American Zunis used fetishes in this manner. Thus the fetishes were religious icons used as amulets to increase the tribesman’s chances of success in his foraging activities. A hunting fetish would thus imbue the hunter with enough of a spiritual boost to his confidence to hunt well.
This example shows, if nothing else, how far humans have become alienated from their “native” state of communion with divine forces, in the same way that they’ve been alienated from their "whole" sexual natures. We are way off from the ideals of the tantric worshippers who fused sexuality and spirituality into one compact package. No longer are we “holistic beings” with divinely sexual connections to the cosmos, it would seem.
Commodity Fetishes
Wait, there’s more. In contemporary society, or rather, capitalist society, the meaning of fetish takes on another twist. Post-Marxist analysts use the term commodity fetish—which is the separation or “alienation” of the product from the context of its production. This is the third meaning of fetish I’d like you to consider—one that shows the next big fall humanity has taken, in our headlong transformation from homo sapiens to capitalist consumers.
Here is an excerpt from the article “The Reproduction of Daily Life” by Fredy Perlman on this topic:
Thus Economics (and capitalist ideology in general) treats land, money, and the products of labor, as things which have the power to produce, to create value, to work for their owners, to transform the world. This is what Marx called the fetishism which characterizes people's everyday conceptions, and which is raised to the level of dogma by Economics. For the economist, living people are things ( « factors of production » ), and things live (money « works, » Capital « produces » ).
The real danger of fetishism is that it reverses the ontological status of the parties and activities involved in the creation of a product, confusing the real “value” of labour, and productivity. Why is this dangerous? Because it devalues the work we do, and dehumanizes us, and turns us into mere “factors of production” known as human resources—a form of economic capital. The world is thus “magically” created through these “animated” and “automated” entities like “market forces” or “technology” without any mention of “human” intervention. Fredy Perlman again:
The fetish worshipper attributes the product of his own activity to his fetish. As a result, he ceases to exert his own power (the power to transform nature, the power to determine the form and content of his daily life); he exerts only those « powers » which he attributes to his fetish (the « power » to buy commodities). In other words, the fetish worshipper emasculates himself and attributes virility to his fetish.
The consumer is alienated on a number of levels.
The first and most obvious form of alienation is the consumer's belief that he has a choice when he is deciding whether or not to buy a product. The slogans that you have more “choice” when you buy from a range of products is really a bogus proclamation—a consumerist wolf in sheep’s clothing. Never once is the consumer really given any chance to stop to think that real choice might well be to “not buy”, or to get involved in some other alternate activity other than consumption. So conditioned is he to live within the bounds of capitalist ideology, so bombarded is she by the incessant barrage of media ads that she no longer questions this state of things or the meaning and validity of this kind of social-capitalist configuration.
The second form of alienation is the disconnect of consumer from the actual contexts of production.
For example, the consumer has no idea how a product was created—an example is how urban folks who have never been to dairy farms, think that milk originates from cartons of milk, rather than from cows. Or kids who think that orange juice appears magically from bottles found in the supermarket, not squeezed from real oranges plucked from orange trees in Florida—activities they would never have a chance to witness in their lives, unless they’ve gone on tours of these exotic locales.
Another way to think of fetishism, is that it is an applied form of idolatry, the substitute of the image for the substance, so to speak. Thus the fetish object is projected, or imbued with magical, sexual, or divine, attributes—obscuring the real “virility” or productive power of the individual. Fredy Perlman again:
But the fetish is a dead thing, not a living being; it has no virility. The fetish is no more than a thing for which, and through which, capitalist relations are maintained.
The mysterious power of Capital, its « power » to produce, its virility, does not reside in itself, but in the fact that people alienate their creative activity, that they sell their labor to capitalists, that they materialize or reify their alienated labor in commodities.
This is the next level of alienation that occurs—that people do not see the “invisible hand” of capitalism shaping their lives, and reproducing the very system that enslaves them.
In other words, people are bought with the products of their own activity, yet they see their own activity as the activity of Capital, and their own products as the products of Capital.Thus the common notion of people selling their souls—that wage labour is a form of social and spiritual prostitution, in this context, according to Perlman.
By attributing creative power to Capital and not to their own activity, they renounce their living activity, their everyday life, to Capital, which means that people give themselves, daily, to the personification of Capital, the capitalist.
Is there any way we can escape our wage-enslavement and have more equitable exchange between life and labour? That's the question we'll be pondering for a bit ...
Thoughts to labour over
I’d better stop this part of the discussion here for now, lest this article becomes way too long! In any case, for my Design Thinking 2 students, I’d like you to think about the issues of commodity fetish discussed above, and how it relates to your work as graphic designers:
To what extent do your creative works ...
- act as substitutes/fetishes for things in reality (is that a good or bad thing anyway?)
- sell you and your target audience (out),
- attempt to break away from the cycle of commodification to liberate humanity.
We can never go back in time to the time of the Zunis, whom I believe had a more healthy relationship with the divine—in the sense that their use of the fetishes were more “inspired” than its modern manifestations (this is of course my assumption). I mean "inspired" here to mean a return to a "right relationship" to reality (a big task indeed!), not distorted by mediating forces like capitalism.
My hope is that we can learn to fully understand the mediating function of commodity fetishes so that we do not fixate our attentions wrongly on the fetish object, but understand their original divine functions, like the Zuni fetishes that act as conduits that "channel" power to its user via its association with a divine presence.
Perhaps it's still not too late for us to reconnect soulfully to the world again, and for us to realise now that we are collaborators with the world, with the divine, and that our actions CAN have some impact.
Also, I hope that we will be able to expunge the wrong and disempowering views relating to our lack of creative "virility", and NOT lose sight of our real productive power to make a difference in our life and in our work. In this way, we can make our way back to a "soulful" and authentic existence, and gain access to true "divine" inspiration, through our creative works, and the designs that we create. This of course is an ideal, but an ideal I believe to be worth fighting for.
Students: after reading this article, and mulling through the issues presented, I’d like you also to reflect on the issues of fetishes and alienation, and think about how you could use your creative work to:
- reconnect humanity to its creative (divine and imaginative) roots,
- un-alienate us from the systems of production that dehumanizes us into mere consumers, and capitalist tools, and
- reclaim our symbolic power to determine the form and content of our daily lives
- recover our “SOUL” through alternate ways of relating/communicating to an audience with/through our artworks.
So let’s do some thinking and writing! Go for 500 words, okay!? (More is better, of course!) Create a visual journal of this topic and post it online!
_______________________________________
References:
Chapter 3: Alienation of Living Activity, by Fredy Perlman.
Chapter 4: The Fetishism of Commodity, by Fredy Perlman.
A new Re-start~~!!
Hi everyone,
I've been neglecting this blog for quite a while. I'm back, and doing my best to be consistent! The first post I'm putting up is an article to be used by my design thinking students--an elearning week activity. An article on fetishes in the context of capitalism. I know the topic sounds a bit dramatic to restart my blogging activities... Oh well.... Have fun reading it!
Your amiigo,
Mun Ying
I've been neglecting this blog for quite a while. I'm back, and doing my best to be consistent! The first post I'm putting up is an article to be used by my design thinking students--an elearning week activity. An article on fetishes in the context of capitalism. I know the topic sounds a bit dramatic to restart my blogging activities... Oh well.... Have fun reading it!
Your amiigo,
Mun Ying
Friday, August 06, 2004
Ideas for new probes
Okie,
After reading some of the journal entries, some ideas popped up for Visual Probe journals:
Stress and time:
Elements to work with:
Embody time--sense of time + split time (juggle tasks)
Feelings of anxiety -
Negative self talk
Also to continue to set goals: give them one goal? and to give me one goal: via email.
I'm finding that putting the thoughts in a blog helps me centralise my thoughts. I now have one place, rather than an assortment of places that only confuse me!!
After reading some of the journal entries, some ideas popped up for Visual Probe journals:
Stress and time:
Elements to work with:
Embody time--sense of time + split time (juggle tasks)
Feelings of anxiety -
Negative self talk
Also to continue to set goals: give them one goal? and to give me one goal: via email.
I'm finding that putting the thoughts in a blog helps me centralise my thoughts. I now have one place, rather than an assortment of places that only confuse me!!
Thoughts for the week! (Before National Day!)
As I was sleepily drowsing into sleep, I realised something.
It's an aha. Although it was kind of subdued. But I feel it is important.
All this time I'd been searching for the courage to back up my convictions, so that I can pursue whatever I wanted to do without fear. Somehow in that half drowsy state, I managed to step back a few steps--and I understood something. Perhaps it's not the courage to be able to do something--but rather courage itself is the state to achieve. Anything else is a means to an end. But I've always seen it the other way around. Courage is the ends, not the means.
The other insight was that learning is also a social phenomenon to me. I found that when students presented their ideas, they struck me more powerfully and clearly. Somehow hearing the ideas, vs just reading them in the head helps my comprehension a lot more. The social also creates the relevance for the idea to manifest. Otherwise anything else is too vague or abstract to matter.
Anything else??
The Visual Journals seem to be really working. The students seem to be really into it. And it's so much easier to control the crowd. The big lectures seem to be really alienating somehow. They are not engaged. And we're not connected. I think there's some better way to do it, but how???
Incorporate VJs earlier the next run. Start off with it.
Kenny mentioned that perhaps we shouldn't have students present. He makes a good point, but ultimately, I think that I want them to work through the awkwardness, to share in the struggle.
The students seem to have trouble with some parts of the readings-- I'll have to take care of those. Overall it was quite okay, what they did. I'd like to get them to reflect on the relevance of the readings more with the design work they are doing.
Next week's Viz Journal exercise: Do the parts of myself worksheet, and remember to ask them to incorporate their learner into the equation. Get the parts to interact with themselves...
So far a lot of the responses to Viz Probe 1 and 2 have been quite encouraging. I think that once they become more comfortable with this, they'll just fly.
Oh, remember:
Metaphorical mapping from favourite activity to not so hot activity. Relevance finding.
Time to set question 2!!
What else ...???
Goal Setting for learning intentiosn: Oh yeah, email them request both a goal for them, and a goal they'll like me to handle ...?
Remember to switch iz to last slot, but also to reorder a few of the reading groups... and also to have them cover some essential readings by themselves, and everyone do their report on them ...?
It's an aha. Although it was kind of subdued. But I feel it is important.
All this time I'd been searching for the courage to back up my convictions, so that I can pursue whatever I wanted to do without fear. Somehow in that half drowsy state, I managed to step back a few steps--and I understood something. Perhaps it's not the courage to be able to do something--but rather courage itself is the state to achieve. Anything else is a means to an end. But I've always seen it the other way around. Courage is the ends, not the means.
The other insight was that learning is also a social phenomenon to me. I found that when students presented their ideas, they struck me more powerfully and clearly. Somehow hearing the ideas, vs just reading them in the head helps my comprehension a lot more. The social also creates the relevance for the idea to manifest. Otherwise anything else is too vague or abstract to matter.
Anything else??
The Visual Journals seem to be really working. The students seem to be really into it. And it's so much easier to control the crowd. The big lectures seem to be really alienating somehow. They are not engaged. And we're not connected. I think there's some better way to do it, but how???
Incorporate VJs earlier the next run. Start off with it.
Kenny mentioned that perhaps we shouldn't have students present. He makes a good point, but ultimately, I think that I want them to work through the awkwardness, to share in the struggle.
The students seem to have trouble with some parts of the readings-- I'll have to take care of those. Overall it was quite okay, what they did. I'd like to get them to reflect on the relevance of the readings more with the design work they are doing.
Next week's Viz Journal exercise: Do the parts of myself worksheet, and remember to ask them to incorporate their learner into the equation. Get the parts to interact with themselves...
So far a lot of the responses to Viz Probe 1 and 2 have been quite encouraging. I think that once they become more comfortable with this, they'll just fly.
Oh, remember:
Metaphorical mapping from favourite activity to not so hot activity. Relevance finding.
Time to set question 2!!
What else ...???
Goal Setting for learning intentiosn: Oh yeah, email them request both a goal for them, and a goal they'll like me to handle ...?
Remember to switch iz to last slot, but also to reorder a few of the reading groups... and also to have them cover some essential readings by themselves, and everyone do their report on them ...?
Friday, July 30, 2004
Paradigm shift?: From Learner to Knowledge creator
Here's a quick thought. An insight, which has some significant repercussions.
School has always created a culture of learners, which means a group of students absorbing knowledge. So the teacher/student relationship has been the mainstay of this paradigm.
However as I think about it, by getting the students to participate more fully in the creation of the class, they are also playing the role of teacher/learner themselves. More significantly, they become knowledge creators. I think, as I observed the students doing the presentations of the readings, and eventually asking them to create the readings to put on black board, this is exactly what they are doing--creating knowledge.
Certainly they learn, but that's the starting point only. They are also actively creating new insights. This changes many practices, and many assumptions we have had about education doesn't it? So what do the students have to do to become effective knowledge creators???
School has always created a culture of learners, which means a group of students absorbing knowledge. So the teacher/student relationship has been the mainstay of this paradigm.
However as I think about it, by getting the students to participate more fully in the creation of the class, they are also playing the role of teacher/learner themselves. More significantly, they become knowledge creators. I think, as I observed the students doing the presentations of the readings, and eventually asking them to create the readings to put on black board, this is exactly what they are doing--creating knowledge.
Certainly they learn, but that's the starting point only. They are also actively creating new insights. This changes many practices, and many assumptions we have had about education doesn't it? So what do the students have to do to become effective knowledge creators???
Arrghhh!!! Rush rush rush!!!
4 1/2 hours or so to the class! Am I ready for it!? I write this while steeling myself for a talk with my SH. I have not been very good with my own deadlines--so now I gotta answer for it. Yup, you guys are not the only ones with deadlines.
I am quite sure of at least two sets of activities--the Visual Journal intro and the group presentation (wonder how their preparations are going!?). Add my little summary of the general group readings. And also I think to clarify about assignment one. Many of them sure got questions one!~
Remember to talk about the journal summaries--ah, the miscommunication there. I assumed that you guys would take the initiative and print out your own sheets and then hand to me in class, rather than wait for me to pass the worksheets to you. Eventually I will have to wean you guys off the wait for worksheet from Mr Lau habit. Of course I also have to inculcate a give-everyone-enough-time-to-print-worksheets-out habit myself!!
Okay that's it for now. Gotta go for the meeting! C U in class!!
I am quite sure of at least two sets of activities--the Visual Journal intro and the group presentation (wonder how their preparations are going!?). Add my little summary of the general group readings. And also I think to clarify about assignment one. Many of them sure got questions one!~
Remember to talk about the journal summaries--ah, the miscommunication there. I assumed that you guys would take the initiative and print out your own sheets and then hand to me in class, rather than wait for me to pass the worksheets to you. Eventually I will have to wean you guys off the wait for worksheet from Mr Lau habit. Of course I also have to inculcate a give-everyone-enough-time-to-print-worksheets-out habit myself!!
Okay that's it for now. Gotta go for the meeting! C U in class!!
Sunday, July 25, 2004
Last Friday's Class 23rd July - What's this class about???
Last Friday's Class at the IDEA Studio wasn't too bad, I think, but it was kinda chaotic. With so many students, all lounging on beanbags. New environment. Stretching voice. R they unresponsive, or is it just because that it’s the end of the day. Will I ever know?
I had to redo the Tetrad Lecture. I skipped 02's Tetrad Lecture for last week, and coverage for 01 wasn't good. I think I really have to transfer as much as possible to worksheets for classroom activity. The class of 42 is way too big! I sometimes wonder if I really know what I'm doing. Well, I tell myself I do, but really, all I'm doing is trusting my intuition to guide me...!
Later I went to the Design Studio. Was asked, by Iz, I think, "what is this class about". Good question. I answered my normal standard answer, that this class is designed to help them be better thinkers. But is that the point even?
What I ‘m trying to do here is in fact to ask them to answer that question – oh, but of course, first it's to get them to ask this question, and answer it for themselves. It's good they are posing this question--makes me think. But equally important is that they come up with their own possibilities. How can I answer it for them, right?
Isn’t that what this whole week was about (and last few weeks)? I want them to define education for themselves, but not have me to do it for them. This only reinforces the old notion of spoon-fed education. Unconsciously, we are continuing to perpetuate this. How could they become more radically empowered if we stick to the comfortable way of doing things??? I wonder if the attempts at making them question education last week had an impact at all?
This means several things, I need to make my processes clear to them—to really do it, rather than just to say it and not mean it. If they are to model these thinking processes, then they should have some insight into how and what I am thinking. This is a class in progress after all. If I am to use all the insights from all the ideas from the readings, as well as to go with the spirit of this class.
So here I am with this BLOG for the class. Like in my email to them, I realised that I am crossing a private/public boundary line, much as what McLuhan said. It fits. And I need to learn to run this class, just as they need to help figure out what this class is all about. If we are all co-teaching it. This feedback and forward needs to happen continuously.
I'm thinking of using a learning contract – but how does that work? What do I need to take into account? My thinking: first few weeks were meant to confuse, and make them rethink reality, so as not to take it all for granted. Then, now with presuppositions all whacked out (I hope), it’s time to set goals, to create a direction for learning.
Get them to set the direction of the class--more meaningful that way. I can handle this. I think. How else to make this class their own, and to make it work?
A few other things to note. In the background, several issues surfacing: information overload and workload overload too. How will they deal with it. Especially with all their assignments. Maybe that's a very specific area we can target their efforts.
I had to redo the Tetrad Lecture. I skipped 02's Tetrad Lecture for last week, and coverage for 01 wasn't good. I think I really have to transfer as much as possible to worksheets for classroom activity. The class of 42 is way too big! I sometimes wonder if I really know what I'm doing. Well, I tell myself I do, but really, all I'm doing is trusting my intuition to guide me...!
Later I went to the Design Studio. Was asked, by Iz, I think, "what is this class about". Good question. I answered my normal standard answer, that this class is designed to help them be better thinkers. But is that the point even?
What I ‘m trying to do here is in fact to ask them to answer that question – oh, but of course, first it's to get them to ask this question, and answer it for themselves. It's good they are posing this question--makes me think. But equally important is that they come up with their own possibilities. How can I answer it for them, right?
Isn’t that what this whole week was about (and last few weeks)? I want them to define education for themselves, but not have me to do it for them. This only reinforces the old notion of spoon-fed education. Unconsciously, we are continuing to perpetuate this. How could they become more radically empowered if we stick to the comfortable way of doing things??? I wonder if the attempts at making them question education last week had an impact at all?
This means several things, I need to make my processes clear to them—to really do it, rather than just to say it and not mean it. If they are to model these thinking processes, then they should have some insight into how and what I am thinking. This is a class in progress after all. If I am to use all the insights from all the ideas from the readings, as well as to go with the spirit of this class.
So here I am with this BLOG for the class. Like in my email to them, I realised that I am crossing a private/public boundary line, much as what McLuhan said. It fits. And I need to learn to run this class, just as they need to help figure out what this class is all about. If we are all co-teaching it. This feedback and forward needs to happen continuously.
I'm thinking of using a learning contract – but how does that work? What do I need to take into account? My thinking: first few weeks were meant to confuse, and make them rethink reality, so as not to take it all for granted. Then, now with presuppositions all whacked out (I hope), it’s time to set goals, to create a direction for learning.
Get them to set the direction of the class--more meaningful that way. I can handle this. I think. How else to make this class their own, and to make it work?
A few other things to note. In the background, several issues surfacing: information overload and workload overload too. How will they deal with it. Especially with all their assignments. Maybe that's a very specific area we can target their efforts.
First Post - what's a BLOG for???
Hi, This is a test posting.
My first BLOG. Should be fun. I wonder if I'll get addicted to this?
I'm still getting used to this whole thing, so if you're reading this, do bear with the gaps for now. I'll fill those in when I'm able to.
Perhaps a little intro, and a words on why I started this weblog.
It started with one of my students in my Design Thinking Class giving me his blog URL -- since I'd assigned them to make their personal journal entries for class. After reading his BLOG, I got to thinking about what the BLOG was. It was a journal, not private, but public. How did this differ from private journals? So I thought why not start one.
Okay, that's half the story. I admit that I still haven't fully embraced Internet Technologies, even though I surf the net, and do the nominal email stuff -- and buy plenty of books from Amazon.com. The other thing that prompted me to start this BLOG was the very fact that it could help me with the class itself. As a communications device, as a way for the students to better understand my thinking, and what I was trying to do in class. I do have to walk my talk after all. Otherwise how to connect with them??
My first BLOG. Should be fun. I wonder if I'll get addicted to this?
I'm still getting used to this whole thing, so if you're reading this, do bear with the gaps for now. I'll fill those in when I'm able to.
Perhaps a little intro, and a words on why I started this weblog.
It started with one of my students in my Design Thinking Class giving me his blog URL -- since I'd assigned them to make their personal journal entries for class. After reading his BLOG, I got to thinking about what the BLOG was. It was a journal, not private, but public. How did this differ from private journals? So I thought why not start one.
Okay, that's half the story. I admit that I still haven't fully embraced Internet Technologies, even though I surf the net, and do the nominal email stuff -- and buy plenty of books from Amazon.com. The other thing that prompted me to start this BLOG was the very fact that it could help me with the class itself. As a communications device, as a way for the students to better understand my thinking, and what I was trying to do in class. I do have to walk my talk after all. Otherwise how to connect with them??
