So I just found out that Liz and I received the provost grant!!!! Very excited to put the funding to use and create some awesome media projects with IDEPSCA. 
Filed under: Reflections
I suppose since we’re discussing video games I’m left to reprise my role as class cynic. Once again, I found it hard to believe most of what was being said. The paper lists four needs of organizations that games fulfill:
• Engagement and Outreach
• Constituent Learning and Training
• Direct Experience
• Relationship Building
Of the four, I definitely understand how games play a role in engagement and outreach. But I feel that is literally the only true role they are good for. I think that games function best for an organization as a means of enticement, as an interactive and entertaining commercial. I sincerely question the ability of games to provide meaningful learning, training, experience and relationship building. If someone is attracted to an organization, then there are substantially simpler and more effective and more concentrated ways to accomplish all those things. For example, I know that the army has successfully used a game to increase recruitment. Yet I have not heard of them using games to train soldiers or build bonds simply because games are ineffectual in comparison to traditional methods in those regards. I view games more as a means of stirring up a preliminary interest rather than a way through which one can sustain or develop an interest. I do agree to some extent with the idea of games as a social actor and think the example of a game that combats female stereotypes is a powerful one. But at the same time, one of the defining aspects of games is that they are almost never meant to be accurate or realistic representations of society the way many books or films are. Games for the most part receive the same amount of respect as Saturday morning cartoons since that’s what many of them amount to. Ultimately, I think games are mainly used as a way to kill time and that there is an inaccurate trend of overestimating the impact or influence of games. When they are used by organizations or for purposes beyond merely entertainment, they should be used simply to generate buzz or interest instead of being molded into highly substantive experiences since that goes against the very nature of games.
Filed under: Reflections
Project update:
This is the last week of Aprendamos, and the projects are pretty much done! Right now the students are taking cameras home to take pictures of the aspects of their community that they discussed in class, and hopefully they’ll relate it to the posters they drew:
I wish we got to use MapLib in the classroom or at least a desktop program to let them annotate their maps, but we didn’t have time. So instead, we did the project in pieces:
- drawing the posters
- writing descriptions of them on notecards
- typing up the descriptions on the computer
- taking pictures of the parts of their communities that are represented in the posters
And then we can put those pieces together and still put it on MapLib for the students and their parents to see.
Mobile Activism Research
Ubiquitous Information – Mobile Phones in the Classroom
This research studied mobile phone use in primary and secondary school classrooms in New Zealand, and the key finding was that students enjoyed using the phones and thought they could be useful, but only if used in a very structured way.
Here’s something that reminded me of the elementary school we’ve been going to:
“Students saw the biggest advantage in using the internet via the mobile phone being that sites were not blocked by the school system. One of the features most appreciated by Year 12 was the ability to view YouTube videos” (33).
The complete lack of internet access in my class was definitely a problem, but even Jason’s class had difficulty using the internet just because of all the blocked websites, YouTube in particular.
I wonder if using cell phones would solve any of those problems. There are some major roadblocks for us, though. I doubt the parents and teachers would approve of using cell phones in class.
The study found that even a lot of the students themselves didn’t think cell phones could be useful for education, and that they were just for text messaging. That was a surprise to me! In fact, the older students in the study all decided they preferred not to use the cell phones by the end of their semester. The younger students all loved using the cell phones, on the other hand — perhaps because they didn’t have as many preconceptions about what cell phones are useful for?
I defnitely think IDEPSCA can get more use out of cell phones, though. They’re already using Mobile Voices (which we all got to learn about last week!), but I know they want to find more uses for it in more of their programs. For Aprendamos, at least, I think using cell phones could be interesting if used sparingly, or maybe just as a way for students to engage in learning after class is over.
My class filled out this worksheet (made by Grecia and myself) to help them brainstorm their Dipity timeline projects.
Hopefully, it will all get done by the last day of the program (this Thursday!).
Although the “Games for Change” white paper was interesting and informative on many levels, I have to say that I also found it to be incredibly vague. I understand that the purpose of the paper is mostly to just provide a cursory mapping of possible practical directions for the field in terms of production of the games and their distribution to the appropriate audiences, but I also think that a crucial element that is missing from this discussion is a real interrogation of the specificity of games as a medium. To be sure, the paper repeatedly makes claims for the importance of this specificity in the context of social advocacy (especially in relation to more established genres like documentaries), but it really doesn’t go into what the specifics of this specificity might mean for authors and players in games for change. The paper makes a couple, really interesting points about performance and identification in gaming (ala Jenkins, the ability to try on alternate identities and points of view in a low-risk environment), but I kept on wishing that they would frame game literacy in the terms of systems level thinking. In fact, Ian Bogost, in his book Persuasive Games, explicitly connects the necessity of systems level thinking in gaming (seeing the relationship between multiple, dynamic processes and managing that complexity) to an understanding of the way complex systems work in the “real world.” For instance, in his analysis of Molleindustria’s McDonald’s Game, Bogost underlines the ways in which the game’s procedural rhetoric allows the player to cull an understanding of the complex relationship between private/public interests and global economies of production and consumption inherent to the interworkings of the fast food industries. At another point, he uses Chris Crawford’s 1990 title Balance of the Planet to demonstrate how a game might provide a more sophisticated model for understanding the interrelation and friction between political, economical, and ethical values in environmental issues. Clearly, games for change online provide more opportunities for direct advocacy and scalable outreach (although I’m not quite sure why the authors frame this as an opportunity specific to gaming…), but I also think that the game form provides a political potential beyond its status as an easily disseminated object that lives online. This is, of course, not to say that games by virtue of their capacity for systems level thinking are always already politically progressive (on the contrary, one could imagine an authored system that was politically reactionary), but I would argue that the capacity to track multiple interests, causalities, and feedback loops is a necessity if one is to understand the political context within which an activist can participate.
Filed under: Reflections
So the theme of this post: get help when needed.
It’s getting quite stressful during this time of year and scheduling is a nightmare when there is much to be accomplished.
I’ve learned that I can’t possibly do everything and that I need to delegate work in order to stay sane.
Here’s an update on ABC…
Video of James Rojas is up and running on our Facebook page!
Activity is low so far so I’m definitely going to be working on getting more eyes on our page by writing a small blurb about us.
I think I need to solicite James’s help in getting the word out via Facebook.
I typed a transcript up of James’s interview and is now sitting on the editor’s desk for approval. Unfortunately, she is out of town for vacation for a week so I’m afraid my deadline will be pushed back.
I’m not getting much help with editing footage from Alhambra High School so the man on the street interviews didn’t happen. Hopefully on the ABC meeting on Thursday I’ll be able to solicite some help from Efren, the other member of ABC.
Reflection on Games for Change…
I’m going to comment on the overall design of Darfur is Dying. I think that when the insert of a text blurb was needed to explain something, it was too long to digest and all it took was one click to get back into the game. What I think may be more effective would be to insert informational blurbs in a more design-savvy way. This could be using a better typeface, background color, length of message and when and where the message is conveyed. Users can easily avoid reading if the design of the message is poor and if avoiding reading the message is too easy.
Aside from some improvements on design, I think perhaps another way to raise not just awareness but actual concern for Darfur is for the user to start with a character within a family and to be able to play characters in different roles. For example, to be the mother or the child. Or even, what is it like to be a helper in a refugee camp? The gravity of the situation in the game didn’t get to me as I felt like it should have.
I’ve finished playing several series of Call of Duty and can say that I’ve been intrigued to learn more about wars after playing. This is because the game is centered upon a storyline and is effective in visual storytelling. This should be an area that is high focused upon when developing games for change: to tell the story that change is needed before it is possible.
Filed under: Reflections
Once again… I have posted on the wrong blog!
I published this on April 13th, 2011.
Check out what’s been happening!
ABC didn’t have a chance to meet at CicLAvia this weekend because of last minute flaking and conflicting schedules. Instead, I worked extensively on editing footage and was able to produce something of near substance. I have Scripps Kensington, AHS high school, and James Rojas footage to edit.
I also need to type up a transcript of the interview with James since I just video taped his interview to kill two birds with on stone. Minor edits on the photos I shot of James will also need to be done before publishing on the the Alhambra Source sometime this weekend or early of next week.
I met with three Youth Feeders on Wednesday to interview high school students crossing the busy intersection after school. I’m still going over the footage but if there isn’t a “journalistic” quality to what we shot, the editor of The Alhambra Source won’t publish the material. Regardless, I will be polishing the footage so it can be published onto our Facebook page.
After looking at the footage, I’ll talk to the editor to see if she’s still interested in having the Youth Feed come with me to do man-on-the-street videos around Alhambra city – not just the high school. If I don’t get their help, it may be impossible for me to take on more editing tasks.
ABC may be holding on meeting next Thursday, April 21st. I’m waiting on final confirmation by end of this week from James before I post on our media outlets.
The logo is a big accomplishment. It may look simple and easy to do, but it’s actually a long and arduous process. There still may be a few tweaks as we gardner more members and more brains to make the logo better but for now, this is the best we’ve got and we’re definitely going to be using it to full advantage. I’m really satisfied with the design.
Much to do!!
Filed under: Reflections
Hey Everyone!
I found this weeks’ class on “mobilization for social change” to be extremely insightful. The professor presented some very interesting comparisons on global use of internet and cellular devices. When I think of technology, I automatically think of internet and social networks along with the use of cellular devices. Just as the discussion about the “internet access divide” once again I was surprised to see the differences in internet access compared to cellular usage around the world. It definitely makes sense that more people would have access to cellular devices considering the variation of opportunity there is between the two (cell phones are more affordable and accessible).
Considering this, it makes sense to establish creative ways to use them not only as mobile phones but as a way to mobilize change amongst communities. There are so many applications on phones these days, applications that come with the most basic plans that can be utilized to benefit people and communities. I found the website [I forget the name, help please!] that monitors international social mapping to be VERY interesting. This is extremely beneficial for communities that are in need for certain things such as; water as discussed in class and for people who wish to raise awareness about things occurring in their community. I also found the activity that we practiced in class to be extremely exciting and interesting. Essentially, what’s happening here is people are making internet engagement accessible to all, to even people who may not have physical access to a computer and it think this idea is genius 
As discussed, technology is extremely beneficial and can be used for various reasons social change being one. However, all of this internet- techno talk makes me wonder about the drawbacks of these specific devices. I am an individual who falls in the grey area of technology innovation -I believe that it is extremely beneficial as I’m sure everyone else would. However, subsequently technology really makes me wonder where things are headed. Aside from the lack of face to face interaction which is definitely (in my opinion) a drawback in which I admire Liz for not having text messaging, I wonder how far (and fast- at the rate we seem to be) can we continue to innovate and technologically progress? Now this may seem a bit extreme, but I am really terrified to live in a society/world that is solely based around technology innovations, where everything is “backed-up” by technology… It scares me to think that people cannot function manually and that if something happened our society would not function without it. We have created a co-dependent society. A society that is fully dependent on technology, which is something man made that depends on man for its’ continual innovation. I think people forget this and it has led people to question their own capabilities and knowledge thinking that computers are far more competent than people. While in some cases this may be true, I have read a lot about this and have even experienced it for myself. For example, when I am writing a text message I often get words that are underlined insinuating a “misspell” which has caused me to question my own knowledge, something I know to be right. It causes me sit around and think to myself “I know this is right” default to browsing the internet for reference only to find out that of course I am right. Obviously this is a very minimal case of what I am trying to argue but I have read reports on people who face this on a regular bases, people who question their own skills because of internet/computers thinking they are more reliable and competent than a humans.
I don’t know…It just scares me that we are a society so dependent on technology that people can’t see beyond it. It reminds me of the housing economic crisis…this form of dependency is Americans weakness and what would happen if it suddenly disappeared?
Very scary….
Filed under: Reflections
Here is an updated timline! We thought it would be a good idea for Odilia to see the interview before we upload it. so we are just waiting to hear back from Odilia! other than that we are pretty much on track Also, Stasi and I realized that we showed the wrong footage in class on Wednesday, so we will be showing the final version of our first video next week for you all.
| Deadline | Task/ Deliverable |
| Saturday April 9th |
|
| Tuesday April 12th |
(Stasi & I separately) |
| Wednesday April 13th |
|
| Friday April 15th |
|
| Saturday April 16th |
|
| Sunday April 17th |
|
| Tuesday April 19th |
|
| Wednesday April 20th |
|
| Saturday April 23rd |
|
| Sunday April 24th |
|
| Wednesday 27th |
|
| Saturday April 30th |
|
| Tuesday May 3rd |
|
