Identity-Be Yourself

• Considering that only 7% of human communication is verbal, and we strip away the other 93% of nonverbal, tonal, and physical communication by interacting through digital technologies, what are some of the societal side effects we can expect?

Already we are mistaking digital communication by misinterpreting the sender's           message as angry, irritated, etc. This has caused arguments and long                   conversations about what message the other person truly meant to convey. 

In my opinion the loss of the other 93% of communication has caused us to suppress our feelings and sense of empathy. When we are limited to merely text, we miss out on basic human interaction. This also causes us to become accustomed to missing nonverbal cues and other types of nonverbal communication. If we continue down this path of increasing technology for communication purposes, these types of nonverbal communication may soon become obsolete.

• What key differences between the generations that have "adapted" to digital technologies and those that have grown up "native" with digital technologies does Rushkoff point out? And why is it relevant to identity?

In terms of identity, the digital "natives" (aka teenagers) are currently wrestling with the lack of privacy and loss of identity. Their social lives are consumed with social media even after they leave school for the day. 

Seemingly, they are going through the tumultuous time of adolescence and are constantly searching for an identity. Interestly enough, this quest for identity typically takes place in nothing other than the digital realm where we are faced with innumerable identities to potentially choose from.

 The author points out that the experimentation, which defines one's adolescent experience, is ultimately being robbed from teenagers today. This type of free experimentation no longer exists because of the net and the many social platforms that adolescents use. 

In this desensitized environment, we are seeing more children that are becoming increasingly narcissistic as a result of social media. The "selfie" trend has become are way for adolescents to feel noticed. The number of "likes" has begun to determine their own self-worth. 

Identity is no longer something that occurs by self-discovery in real-life experiences, but rather becomes the social media profile you generated.

• Respond to this proposal: No one should post anything online anonymously unless under threat of physical or legal persecution. And even then, the ideal behavior would be for everyone to post their similar sentiments and thus make persecution impossible.

Hiding behind anonymity while online is a breeding ground for arguments and completely uncensored and unrestricted commentary. In my experience, I have found that people that hide behind the computer screen are generally out to wage wars on the internet. 

I do agree with Rushkoff 100% when he says that we should always reveal our identity on  a social networking platform. When we are our true selves, there isn't room for negativity or brutal attacks on others. As the author points out, we have too much to lose. 

Engaging in online digital communication normally takes place on some type of social platform, and these people create a reputation for themselves. Not only would you risk losing your reputation, but your online community that you have worked so hard for as well. 

Scale-One Size Does Not Fit All

What are "vertical and "horizontal" integration mentioned by Rushkoff in this chapter? And how do they differ from the new requirement of "scaling up?"


According to the author, going vertical means establishing your business as the place to do it all in a particular industry. This means that your business is the one-stop shop for sports equipment, hardware supplies, etc.

Going horizontal means to offer a service that applies to all of these category's transactions. (Rushkoff uses the example of credit card transaction software.)

Formerly, businesses of various industries adhered to only one of the aforementioned integrations. However in the current age of the digital, we find businesses that are scaling up, or cutting through both the horizontal and vertical integrations.  These newly aggregated businesses that utilize both the horizontal and vertical integrations are what we use as our search engines and other various web portals.



While abstraction allows us to use such important tools as language and math, it also makes us more dependent on centralized standards, such as the presentation of online identity and the categories and genres of cultural objects. What does this dependency do to the power structure of contemporary society, especially in the worlds of business and politics?



When the author says that abstraction makes us more dependent on centralized standards, he speaks of the central authorities such as indexers, aggregators, and currencies through which all of our digital activity must pass. So his argument is that rather than 'liberating the people and their ideas from hierarchies, the digital realm enforces central control on a whole new level.'

In a nutshell, Rushkoff maintains that the abstraction of the digital universe causes its users to rely even more heavily on trusted brands and companies. And I cannot say that I am fully exempt from this-I prefer to use my more trusted and reputable websites such as Amazon.com and the search engine Google.

Rushkoff takes it even one step further to generalize that the teenagers or digital natives of today are surprisingly the most common victims of this digital abstraction trap.

And I agree with him wholeheartedly on this assumption, however haven't we always relied on the familiar brands and trusted authorities? Even in the times before the rise of the internet? Is this concept really new or any different from the 80's and 90's in which we shopped in our most trusted department stores?

So we can see that in the world of business and commerce there seems to be a trend towards dealing with the most trusted companies and authorities. In my opinion, this is a natural human tendency that can be witnessed as far back as the dawn of time. Rather than taking a risk, we assess the situation and stick with the "tried and true."




According to Rushkoff, how can the German philosopher Walter Benjamin's ideas help us navigate and appreciate our abstract world?


The early twentieth century philosopher Walter Benjamin proposed an idea about photography and other reproductive technologies, and how these reproductions change our relationship to real art. He observed that when photographs of art were found in a mass-produced book, these reproductions somehow altered the "aura" of the original. He found that this mass production of photographs made the original more sacred.

So if we think of this proposed philosophical idea in terms of our abstract, digital world-it has a similar effect. If we use this digital bias of abstraction to our advantage, we can use the digital realm in the same way that Walter saw the art reproductions being used. Rushkoff says it best when he says-

"...our digital abstractions work best when they are used to give us insight into something quite real and particular."

Complexity-You are Never Completely Right

While there are obvious benefits to having aggregated personalized content, what are the cultural implications of filtering out what does not fit your profile?

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe

Due to the various algorithms that continuously filter our news feeds and Google searches based on our preferences and "likes" we now see only what we want to see. And this is serious-very serious. If we continue with this trend, we're going to create a narcissistic group of people that are more narrow-minded than ever. 

Being exposed to different opinions and ideas teaches us to value cultural and political diversity-it opens our minds to new horizons. It teaches us how to be critical thinkers and appreciate another person's opinion without accepting it. Ultimately, diversity is not only good but essential to the development of empathy within our human race.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

What does Rushkoff mean by a "data-point?" How have data-points been used in political debates? Is this a new phenomenon? What makes it seem different now?

As Rushkoff puts it, data points are internet information we now substitute for facts. This could be any information that we find after doing a quick "google search" on the web. He argues that these so-called data points retrieved from digital archives are falling short, because they are devoid of the process of authentic inquiry. 

Back in the day prior to the age of the internet, we were forced to delve deep into academic study to "search" for something. Rushkoff even criticizes the use of encyclopedias-stating that they are "watered-down digests of knowledge [that] deny a person the learning that takes place along the way."

Personally, I was born in 1990 so I cannot even recall a time before encyclopedias. However, the process selecting a data point to me is synonymous with what we call cherry-picking. And the process of cherry-picking has been around for ages. We will scan through material, whether it be in an online or paper format and pick out the lines that best support our argument. Isn't this simply argumentative writing?

But, what makes this digital selection of cherry-picking different from years before is the speed and method in which we can find these so-called data points. At the touch of a screen, we can do a quick search and find any answer we're looking for. The problem is that we are not reading multiple sources to find our answer-the first link that pops up under a Google search will suffice.

But I'd like to argue that these data-points can be used positively, particularly in the field of education. These quick answers should be used as simply another entry-point into the process of inquiry and discovery. Just as we as educators design lessons to facilitate multiple entry-points for students of all levels and ability, these data-points have the potential to be used in a powerful way.

Reflect on how, in your life, exposure to unexpected people, places, events, and ideas have shaped who you are. What are the ways the bias of digital culture filters out these unexpected and complex encounters?

Sometimes there is beauty in the unknown and the element of surprise, because that is precisely what life is-an unexpected journey.

We can't deny that digital culture has become a huge part of our lives-we are truly connected at all times. So, when our networks filter out things that don't fit our preference profile we risk losing these unexpected events and ideas.

So, funny story alert ahead. My boyfriend (of about a year) and I met on Facebook. Yes, your read that correctly. Normally I wouldn't even respond to a message from somebody unknown, but the tone of the message seemed so kind and warm-hearted that I decided to reply. Several conversations and a few days later we went to dinner, and like they say-the rest is history.

However, a few months before I realized that Facebook actually filters your messages automatically to your "spam" folder. A friend pointed this out to me, and I proceeded to turn this feature off. Had I not actively turned that feature off, we might have never met. Who knows?

The point I'm getting at is that these unexpected digital encounters can shape the person we are, just as previously real-life unexpected adventures and people used to do.

What are some of the effects of this digital oversimplification on education? What are the effects on skilled labor and the experience of discovery? 

Students nowadays run that quick Google search to find the answer they're searching for. This is only a negative effect when we stop seeing this as another entry-point for students to delve deeper into academic study.

Rushkoff argues that because of the digital oversimplification that we experience within the realm of our technological devices, we mistakenly assume that we live in a less complex world. And I partially agree with him on this. However, in the same token, I believe that the reduction of complexity has also prompted people to seek related real-world experiences. In essence, I try to look at what Rushkoff terms as a reduction of complexity as simply a way to get the ball rolling. But, I'm also a "glass half-full" kind of person-so I think this is just all in the way you view it.

For me, this so-called digital oversimplification can be used in a quite positive manner. Students can explore other people and cultures without traveling across the ocean, and we can take virtual field trips in various museums. So, I respectfully disagree with the author when he notes that digital oversimplification has society in a downward spiral.

Additionally, the experience of discovery can still remain intact if we implement Project-Based Learning into our educational curriculum. We no longer need to have a long process of inquiry to explore what is accepted as facts or common knowledge, because we have become too intelligent for mundane concepts. Rather we should implement rigorous, interesting, and challenging curriculum (such as PBL) that promote overall critical thinking skills and problem-solving.

Drawing on Education

What are the benefits to using children's drawings to do classroom research?

Children's drawings can provide insight as to what instruction and learning actually occurs within the classroom. Drawings can also be used to assess how the student feels about the subject and/or the teacher. 

Whereas children are not likely to write a synopsis of their feelings toward a class, they are much more apt to draw a picture of their emotions. Not only do drawings provide researchers with the resources to gauge students' feelings, but they also give rise to the students' overall perceptions of the classroom. 

I particularly enjoyed the section in the article Drawing on Education on student drawings of standardized testing. Researchers and educational policymakers aren't particularly aware of students' negative feelings and emotions toward standardized testing, and drawings have offered a glimpse into their mind. 

What have we learned about teaching and learning from children's drawings?

Through drawings, we have learned that teaching can be extremely teacher-directed. An example drawing from the article demonstrated a teacher standing in the front of the class while they lectured to students that were seated in rows. This type of drawing depicts the traditional teacher-student relationship in which the teacher lectures and the students listen and take notes.

What methods can be used to code drawings reliably?

In order to reliably code drawings, you can begin by reviewing the drawings and creating a checklist that documents the specific features found in the drawings. For instance, if you were to ask students to draw a picture of how technology is used in their classroom, you could use trait coding and number--

0-no technology present

1-technology only used in latter part of instruction 

2-technology present throughout the teaching and learning process

Holistic coding can also be used, which assigns a point scale based on the overall judgment of how the situation is depicted. The article Drawing on Education referenced drawings of classrooms that have been rated on whether they were depicted positively or negatively. 

Lastly, holistic review is used with a group of teachers that seeks to identify patterns, why these patterns occur, and what changes could be made in your school as a result of these drawings. This type of coding incorporates both analytical and holistic coding. 

What evidence is there of the reliability and validity of using drawings to make inferences about teaching and learning?

Reliability of using drawings is equated to the test/re-test use of other studies. The reliability of using drawings is enhanced by using coding to determine various inferences about aspects of education. Reliability of drawings is also distinguished by stability. This concept refers to the extent to which assessment results are stable over time. Stability of drawings can be determined by using trait-coding features.

Validity studies have been conducted by observing what teachers can learn from using drawings to improve their teaching and classroom practices. Oftentimes, children's drawings along with other types of quantitative data (i.e. student assessment scores) can provide elicited information about similar characteristics, and thus a direct correlation is observed. 

In what contexts have drawings supported change?

Children's drawings have supported change within the classroom by providing the opportunity for teachers to engage in reflection. Seeing their classroom through the eyes of the students is a powerful tool-as it enables teachers to reflect on their own teaching and instruction.

Drawings have purportedly been extremely influential in documenting the educational ecology of classrooms and schools. They can demonstrate teaching attitudes and styles, student-teacher relationship, technology integration, and the overall learning atmosphere. 

Write a prompt designed to elicit drawings from children in an after school program focused on STEM education that would help us understand change in student thinking about how technology can be used to solve problems.

-I definitely need some help refining these prompts, but I think I have a decent start. Here are several prompts that I came up with that would elicit distinctly different picture drawings ad responses. I would be extremely interested to see the differences between technology use to solve problems at home versus at school. 

• Draw a picture of how you would use a computer to solve problems at school.
• Draw a picture of how you would use technology to solve problems at home.
• Draw a picture of how you would use technology to solve problems in the world.
• Draw a picture of somebody using a computer to help save the environment.

Week #9 Choice-You may always choose "none" of the above

We are used to seeing “aggregated” (content pulled together from various other sources) content based on our own purchase history, but how do you feel about content created based on our own purchase his- tory? What does this mean for culture? 

First of all, I will begin by saying that America is a consumerist society. The notion of consumerism drives our everyday life and activities. The internet, in my opinion, has done everything to fuel the very idea of consumerism. 

In regards to this question, I feel that the 'aggregated creation of content based on purchase history' is a smart business move, however it feels somewhat like an invasion of my privacy. The feeling is quite odd-I would almost equate it to the way in which social media users nearly "stalk" other social media profiles. Just as it has become "socially acceptable" to 'stalk' other people, it has become acceptable for corporations to generate advertisements and content based on our internet search history and recent online purchases. 

Our culture is changing at an ever-rapid  pace as a result of this. Instead of going to the a store and having a real-life interaction with a human being, we now enjoy the ease of "one-click" shopping. Interestingly enough we mistakenly think that this gives us more power, but the reality is that we are rendered almost powerless by the corporate deception and manipulation of the "one-click" purchase. Because the reality of this situation is that it's not good for us, but it is good for the company because they will inevitably increase their production. 

What happens to content that doesn’t fit into any easy categories and demographics? 

This is an excellent question, and I assume that this unusable content is simply tossed by the wayside. In my life I have learned that money equals power, and Google is a corporation. Therefore, the aggregated content that supplies the most money and the most advertisements will always prevail. These ads will always bypass our local ads and companies. 

Why is the bias of digital technology so heavy toward
choice, rather than ambiguity? What are the human results of making so many digital decisions? Why would ambiguity be valued? 

Throughout the text I have discovered that digital technology is composed of binary code, which is simply a series or arrangement of 1's and 0's. And this is precisely where the lack of ambiguity begins. The digital world appears real, discrete, and absolute to us; and we like this. Soon enough, we begin to see this theory reflected in the entire digital world. 

This is where we have to realize that nothing in the real world is truly discrete, and this distinction seems to be very difficult to accept as we continuously switch from the digital world to reality. 

Every time we click our "gender" and "age", we are experiencing what the author referred to as "forced choice." Granted, this is a 'choice' that we are given, and the act of choice is equated with autonomy, freedom, and democracy. However, is this digital 'forced choice' really a choice at all?

The result of all of these digital decisions is that we have become an obsessive, less engaged, and ultimately controlled society. And this is particularly evident in our everyday interactions. It's quite the paradox-we begin to feel as if we have no choice in the matter at all. 

Ambiguity is valued continuously in our life experience. I have discovered throughout my young life that it is okay to be unsure about things. However, this has taken me quite a while to be able to accept, and the more that I think about it-the more I wonder if the digital world's 'forced choice' is propelling the idea that ambiguity is unacceptable...

Declining to post your political preferences and religious views on Facebook is the most appropriate example of when ambiguity is certainly valued within the digital realm. I consider myself to be politically aligned with the left, but I try to practice serious discretion when engaging in political discussions on social media. Unless all of your "friends" think and believe like you, there's really no reason to be explicit with your political or religious ideals-this only creates distaste and hurt feelings.

Rushkoff points out that this world of constant choice is a benefit for marketers and those who would use these decision points as pressure points to force sales. How exactly does this work, and what is an example of marketers using forced choice as a sales force? 

When you sign up for Pinterest, the site will prompt you to click on your favorite categories so that it can 'tailor' your news feed to your preferences. While this may seem like a novel idea, the 'forced choice' actually gives you fewer options. You are no longer able to view everything on Pinterest because of the selections you made, thus causing you to possibly miss something great that you haven't heard of. 

This idea of 'forced choice' stems from the original digital idea-that everything is digitized and composed only of the binary digits 1 and 0. This is translated throughout the digital realm where you cannot proceed without first making a choice. 

The idea of "choices" is a dream come true for marketers and sales forces. They now have the opportunity to tailor their sales schemes to our preferences in this new digital world, where they were previously unable to reach us in reality.