Education: In the Age of "Second Life"

Kevin Huels
Forget the rumor about digital classrooms as a possibility for the future. The simulation of “Second Life” is one that should not replace the body of education. But many instructors are striving for the new incorporation of this medium into the everyday curriculum. The foundation of teaching and learning is about the necessary interaction between teacher and student, right? Not for some.

“Second Life” offers a substantial claim to be the first virtual reality of all means of communication. This virtual land was designed by Linden Labs just at the peak of the millennium. Today, the Linden land of simulated opportunities consists of about ten-million people worldwide. But what are the implications of having “Second Life” as another facet of teaching the classroom information that could be more beneficial in a tangible setting?

“Second Life” is an online database, not specifically run by anyone, that costs nothing other than the cost of a few megabytes. The idea is simple, within “Second Life” your character that you create, the Avatar, is designed by you and it may roam free to pursue any event that you might come in contact with throughout your virtual pad. Your character can be almost any object imaginable; a cat, an alligator, a potato, or tomato. Any characteristics from our three dimensional world can be applied; entertainment, business, currency, music, fashion, sports, violence, sex, or even digital drugs can be brought to life. While this is all amusing, the real glitch is that people of all forms of education believe that it is somehow an even substitute for the public sphere of schools across the globe.

Perhaps if you take certain elements of “Second Life” and apply them to the classroom it could be deemed useful, although I would suspect that the real learning still resides in the human interaction of interpersonal communication. As a media analyst, I am driven to take a closer look at how “Second Life,” could obstruct the natural learning environment of students. But still, teachers from all over the globe and particularly in our Western culture are deciding to cater to this “second classroom.” Many of these instructors are building their own curriculum around the “Second Life” environment prior to considering possibilities of ineptitude.

I put the program to the test and tried to see what the hype was all about. When I logged on to Second Life, I became so frustrated with the lack of help the program offers. Like any other computer game it had its help menu, but that did not seem to be enough. Call me technically impaired, but I grew up in the 20th century, and my childhood consisted of pseudo-educational technology as well as video gaming. What I really needed was for someone to teach me how to use it so that I could learn the technical tools and special nuisances of how to be a part of the Linden country—which should prove a strong point in itself. Teachers of all professions cannot expect to give a fully comprehensive curriculum-based course in the absence of human interaction and guidance. Not only is it poor teaching, it detracts from real knowledge that can only be obtained in a social environment. If educators want to provide substantial ways to learn in different nodes of communication, it would be advisable to offer Media Literacy courses, particularly early education K-12, about the effects of jumping on board with the rapid growth of new technology.

In highlight of what this all means, it brings me to what a prominent media critic and analyst would say. Mr. Neil Postman, if he were alive today, would accumulate a windstorm of criticism for this technology because of his in depth passion for studying the possible detriments of new technology, and the apparent lack of mankind’s knowledge about it. He comments in his novel Amusing Ourselves to Death, on the agenda of modern technology. “Of course, like the brain itself, every technology has an inherent bias. It has within its physical form a predisposition toward being used in certain way and not others. Only those who know nothing of the history of technology believe that a technology is entirely neutral.”
We as the Media Communication scholars of this new generation, we must ask ourselves is it about the media, or the communication when it comes to education? Neil Postman was correct in the fact that we must be skeptical about the flaws in new technology. I hate to sound inflexible with the new era of potential, but all that needs to be gained is a skeptical review of something before it is thrown into the public sphere. Sure “Second Life” is great fun at first but when education starts to come into play we must ask, “Are we ready for this?”

When new technology is created to increase the efficiency and convenience of communication; human connection and social interaction often shows a decline. Should this be overlooked? Do we need to step back from our creations to them? What will happen if we do not? In an inspiring way, Postman offers a metaphor that amplifies the idea that when new inventions come into existence, our true understanding of what the media means is lost. “There is an old joke that mocks that naive belief [in technology]. Thomas Edison, it goes, would have revealed his discovery of the electric light much sooner than he did except for the fact that every time he turned it on, he held it to his mouth and said, “Hello? Hello?”

Officer Looking For Trouble?

Check out the harassment done by a federal officer to a 20 year-old kid in St.George Missouri. Shockingly true and a total violation of Right of Privacy. This video was sent to YouTube and now it has become a key factor in a possible investigation. If you live in Missouri check out the video, and read up on it. I was blown away, and very angered. The "victim" of this harassment had cameras and scanners in his car to record the actual incident. Now please watch the video in its entirety and I would also love to hear your responses about whether you think it is a violation
of rights, and whether or not the media that is on YouTube and STLToday is viable evidence for police misconduct.

Take me to the VIDEO

CENSORSHIP AT THE EMMYS

Fox censors Sally Field for Anti-War speech, and her personal feelings on our government. Apparently you may not speak your mind about your feelings--and under the Patriot Act you may not have the First Amendment of Free Speech that you thought you did.

Take me to the VIDEO

Also check out the video of Comedian Kathy Griffin on her thoughts about religious gratitude during the Emmy speech. Is cencorship good or bad in this case? Is it a violation of Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion? SHOULD THERE BE A DEBATE LIKE THE ONE ON CNN Give me your opinion--

Take me to the VIDEO

Media Coverage of Gay Airline?

Hey, check out this website about a gay flight. I want to hear all of your comments on how you think the media covered this on MSNBC.

Link to BBC Article "MEDIA STUDIES"

--BBC ARTICLE link

PBS COVERS MEDIA AND CHILDREN

by Kevin Huels
“PBS: Children and Media,” is a group of articles placed as one solid form on the PBS website. Taking a look into the article I began to see the quantity of information thus proving that the article is a quantitative research study. The writings topics focuses on; TV and Kids under 3, How prevalent is TV in the lives of young children, How much research has been done, Does TV viewing replace other activities, Does it matter if this happens. Given that this article’s central array of information is secondary research, I would conclude that a scholarly journey might be a good home for it. With few modification on organization, and a literature review/methodology section it would make an excellent analysis in a journal.

The secondary research was what the article seems to use because of the sources that PBS gave for it’s statistics and information. The source of primary research, which would be a new “concept,” or new “study,” is simply within the collection of all of the data. For example, this article has collected multitudes of research from secondary sources and it groups them in a way so that if you ask a new primary research question such as “Does TV viewing replace other activities?” one could answer in a new way that perhaps has never been answered before.

“PBS: Children and Media,” establishes the credibility by the amount of data, and the sources in which have the reputation and scientific credibility that is unquestionable like the Kaiser Family Foundation. For this reason alone, the research stands as a solid debate on whether or not this information can persuade parents of toddlers.

PBS chose this article because it is in fact one of the most influential developing agents in child development, and the media of television is newsworthy to parents. Parents have a responsibility on being media literate as well as anyone else. PBS’s focus is on education, and for Media Literacy education, the subject of Kids and TV benefits greatly upon how the influence is affecting early education in America.

Analysis of Neil Postman's Article

ANALYSIS OF POSTMAN’S LEARNING IN THE AGE OF TELEVISION
by Kevin Huels

The article entitled, Commentary: Learning in the Age of Television is a popular piece of reasoning by Neil Postman and published in the Education Weekly magazine. The editor of the popular press utilized this, because in the growing educational system television has influenced curriculum-based schooling by invading the traditional system of education in the public decorum.

The format of the article is a feature story in which seems to be the focal point of this particular issue. The editor’s choice is perhaps a brave one in that they published this heavily anti-television article and because of its content, the article could be seen as an elitist argument. I would agree with the choice of the article’s appearance strictly because of the seriousness of mass media development in the school environment. The article creates a realm of questioning, particularly about popular entertainment and thus resulting in the criticism of what technology brings to the classroom--infotainment.

Throughout the argument Postman makes a clear claim for traditional education and how it works to improve a better social understanding of the world. Television blurs distorts, and simplifies the complexities of reality. Television’s powerful influence on children shapes the way they learn in a traditional environment. Postman basis his theorems on television shows such as Sesame Street, Nova, National Geographic, MTV, and Fantasy Island in comparative analysis to further indicate that the sustenance of television does not provide a balance between what is an educational, realistic rendition of the world and what is purely for entertainment value. Postman brings up an example of Sesame Street being a replica of the American mass-media agenda in current society. According to Postman, “Its use of cute puppets, celebrities, catchy tunes, and rapid-fire editing was certain to give pleasure to the children and would therefore serve as adequate preparation for their entry into a fun-loving culture."

Neil Postman assesses his ability to critique the television medium by multitudes of comparative studies, for example a classroom with text books and one with a televised curriculum. He focuses on the social implications that result in the inept ability of children to communicate properly in a functional traditionally educated society. Postman also draws back history to conduct a more potent metaphor for the current problem of growing interest in television in the classroom.

Neil Postman chose the topic of television in education because he believed very passionately that education is taking a giant step in a new direction, perhaps the wrong direction. He is the author of Amusing Ourselves To Death, which contains media-based criticism that provides rational thinking above entertaining the public.

Postman established his credibility with his non-fiction novels and reputation as one of the greatest founding fathers of media criticism that the world has ever known. A professor for New York University for forty years, the founder of the Media Ecology curriculum, he has written over twenty popular books and twice as many essays on media criticism. Postman’s technique of establishing credibility within his writing is apparent because of the richness in subject matter, and his ability to bring history into the writing to provide retrospective analyses.

The only criticism I can give to Neil Postman’s article Commentary: Learning in the Age of Television is that it is formatted in opinion without citation. The article is grounded in metaphorical speech and heavily focused on meticulous analysis. Those whom are not familiar with his writing may get lost in the analysis, but according to Postman himself it would perhaps conclude that his article does “entertain” the American audience.