Museums these days are growing and changing with the times. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say "I don't like museums, they're so boring", but then when you go there, you can't get them to leave! They are fascinating places that have adapted to the newest technologies, just like the rest of the world. The problem is our conception of them hasn't changed since the facade of the building hasn't changed.
My recent visits to MOMA and the Met have been indicative of these changes. On the surface, their collections haven't changed much. You still see the Knights and Armor room at the Met, and you still see Monet's Water Lilies at MOMA. What is different is the amount of interactive programs they have for all ages. There are audio programs you can take online (without going to the museum itself), they are art programs, there are also investigative (treasure hunt) type activities as well.
If I were to integrate the technology from the Sony Tech lab into one of these museums, of course, I would make it something interactive. What I think most people like to do is make the art their own in some way. Instead of only seeing the art, have them make are too (on a computer perhaps). Or somehow have them choose or edit which art to see through a computer.
What I was also impressed by in the Sony lab was sound editing. I think museums need more noise! Why not have the visitor listen to the sounds of an exhibit. For example, have nature sounds at the Pyramid of Pernib, or war sounds at the armor exhibit or even someone reading Van Gogh's letters to his brother in a Van Gogh exhibit. Granted, that's not totally interactive, but I think it would enhance the museum experience for the visitor.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Tappedin
I was really impressed with Tappedin. The first time I logged in, the help desk people immediately welcomed me in and asked me how they could help. It makes it so personal! The real life humans make the site incredibly user friendly.
Along with a few of my buddies from class, I participated in a social studies forum. It was my first time using the chat format for professional development. I thought that an hour would seem like 4 when you're online typing all the time, but it didn't. It went by very quickly. The "side" talk was a little distracting, but not terribly so. Honestly, it is exactly what would happen if we were sitting in class.
I got some good ideas from the professor, but like most things, I need to read it through and digest it a bit. It is difficult to make these ideas "your own". That's what takes all the time.
I am thinking of showing this website to my Director of Curriculum and Technology. I think she would like it a lot. From an Administrator's perspective I would think they would like the cost benefit of these classes, but I wonder if they would have any control over who actually did the seminar and who just said they did it. I'm sure they would want some type of control over that before they grant us credit for having done it.
My criticism would be too fold: the site is not very visually appealing. It looks like a text book. The font is small and boring. Otherwise, it is very user friendly and informative. My second criticism is that I still prefer learning in person, with other human beings in the room. I honestly feel you learn more that way. Then again, this certainly cuts down on the commute time! I guess the answer is that this is good, but so are other things. It is just one of many formats in which to learn effectively.
Along with a few of my buddies from class, I participated in a social studies forum. It was my first time using the chat format for professional development. I thought that an hour would seem like 4 when you're online typing all the time, but it didn't. It went by very quickly. The "side" talk was a little distracting, but not terribly so. Honestly, it is exactly what would happen if we were sitting in class.
I got some good ideas from the professor, but like most things, I need to read it through and digest it a bit. It is difficult to make these ideas "your own". That's what takes all the time.
I am thinking of showing this website to my Director of Curriculum and Technology. I think she would like it a lot. From an Administrator's perspective I would think they would like the cost benefit of these classes, but I wonder if they would have any control over who actually did the seminar and who just said they did it. I'm sure they would want some type of control over that before they grant us credit for having done it.
My criticism would be too fold: the site is not very visually appealing. It looks like a text book. The font is small and boring. Otherwise, it is very user friendly and informative. My second criticism is that I still prefer learning in person, with other human beings in the room. I honestly feel you learn more that way. Then again, this certainly cuts down on the commute time! I guess the answer is that this is good, but so are other things. It is just one of many formats in which to learn effectively.
I've been Google-Earthed!
My brother called me from Los Angeles the other day to talk about our family reunion this summer. It is going to be at my house, here in Pelham, but he has never been here. As we talked about the big upcoming party, he asked about hotels and rental cars in the area, as well as information about the train to Manhattan. So, what did he do? He google-earthed me. He took a look at my house from space and commented that my yard looked large enough for a party. Then he asked me if it was creapy to live next to a cemetary. Afterwards, he got all the info he needed on hotels, cars and the distance from my house to the train. All of this through Google Earth.
Well, my first impression when I heard about it was that I felt "spied" on. When I went to the site myself, it was cool. I loved finding out all the things I could do. But when it was done to me, I felt a little strange about it. It's just too much information!
My second impression of the Google Community or the tours etc, is that although it is cool looking and fun to play with, I'm not sure it is all that useful. Yes, I could think of something to do, like take my students on a virtual trip of Madrid. But then again, I could do that from pictures in a book as well. A science teacher could compare land forms, like the article said, but I think he could do that from a book as well. I certainly don't think this is a bad website, I just think that it is incredibly fancy technology with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of research, that isn't all that useful to the regular Joe, besides for amusement.
What it is probably most useful for is what people are putting on top of it. As the article said, people have put sex offenders addresses on it, or other felons. I have a student whose father works for the FAA who said his Dad is working on a program that puts the weather on top of all the maps. That way you can fly around and check out the weather all over the country. Kind of reminds me of the weather segment of the nightly news. Except it is in your home!
This technology is fun, it's interesting and has lots of possibilities. But as I have said with other technologies I have recently discovered, it is just a tool. It is one of many things we use on a daily basis to get our jobs done. It should never be the only tool used.
Well, my first impression when I heard about it was that I felt "spied" on. When I went to the site myself, it was cool. I loved finding out all the things I could do. But when it was done to me, I felt a little strange about it. It's just too much information!
My second impression of the Google Community or the tours etc, is that although it is cool looking and fun to play with, I'm not sure it is all that useful. Yes, I could think of something to do, like take my students on a virtual trip of Madrid. But then again, I could do that from pictures in a book as well. A science teacher could compare land forms, like the article said, but I think he could do that from a book as well. I certainly don't think this is a bad website, I just think that it is incredibly fancy technology with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of research, that isn't all that useful to the regular Joe, besides for amusement.
What it is probably most useful for is what people are putting on top of it. As the article said, people have put sex offenders addresses on it, or other felons. I have a student whose father works for the FAA who said his Dad is working on a program that puts the weather on top of all the maps. That way you can fly around and check out the weather all over the country. Kind of reminds me of the weather segment of the nightly news. Except it is in your home!
This technology is fun, it's interesting and has lots of possibilities. But as I have said with other technologies I have recently discovered, it is just a tool. It is one of many things we use on a daily basis to get our jobs done. It should never be the only tool used.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
How Can Technology Support Museum Content?
Interestingly, I was just on the Metropolitan Museum’s website looking for information on a field trip. As I was there, I bumped into some interactive activities for kids that were very informative and fun to use. From that site, I found that they have Saturday night programs for kids at the museum, where they take you to some of the art work, talk about it, and then have you produce your own art. It seemed like a wonderful program, so we went the following Saturday.
If it hadn’t been for that online experience, I’m sure we wouldn’t have gone into Manhattan and paid the admission to the museum. They have done a wonderful job educating their patrons about the art, as well as encouraging them to come experience it. For example, one of their interactive web pages tells the kids all about the Temple of Pernib. There are historical facts, lots of pretty pictures, buttons and links to press as well as some entertaining features. Best of all, it encourages you to come to their museum (and we did!)
I think that all museums or public businesses could use an interactive aspect to their websites, since it encourages the customer to learn more, participate and ultimately to buy!
I checked some other famous museums, thinking they might probably have the same thing. MOMA for example, has all their audio tours online, as well as interactive resources for kids. The one I participated in was a space alien explaining “how to make an animation”. It was interesting and accessible to the younger set. Again, as with the Met website, I’m sure it encourages people to find out more, or to see the museum in person.
My recommendation for them would be to make more interactive aspects for adults. It seems like many of them cater to kids, when I think the adults would love to “play” around the website also. I’m sure it could be designed as a little tease, or a wetting of the appetite to get more adults into the museum as well. Of course, every museum website gives information about exhibitions, hours of operations or samples of the works, but I think they need to be more interactive for them to be more effective.
If it hadn’t been for that online experience, I’m sure we wouldn’t have gone into Manhattan and paid the admission to the museum. They have done a wonderful job educating their patrons about the art, as well as encouraging them to come experience it. For example, one of their interactive web pages tells the kids all about the Temple of Pernib. There are historical facts, lots of pretty pictures, buttons and links to press as well as some entertaining features. Best of all, it encourages you to come to their museum (and we did!)
I think that all museums or public businesses could use an interactive aspect to their websites, since it encourages the customer to learn more, participate and ultimately to buy!
I checked some other famous museums, thinking they might probably have the same thing. MOMA for example, has all their audio tours online, as well as interactive resources for kids. The one I participated in was a space alien explaining “how to make an animation”. It was interesting and accessible to the younger set. Again, as with the Met website, I’m sure it encourages people to find out more, or to see the museum in person.
My recommendation for them would be to make more interactive aspects for adults. It seems like many of them cater to kids, when I think the adults would love to “play” around the website also. I’m sure it could be designed as a little tease, or a wetting of the appetite to get more adults into the museum as well. Of course, every museum website gives information about exhibitions, hours of operations or samples of the works, but I think they need to be more interactive for them to be more effective.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Darfur is Dying Videogame
Wow. What an incredibly interesting topic. The entire concept of a game that deals with a genocide is certainly cause for discussion!
As I started to listen to the NPR segment, I was very conflicted about the idea. Right now it seems almost cool or politically correct to raise money for Darfur, wear "Save Darfur" t-shirts or even to mention it as one of your "concerns". This game struck me as almost superficial at first. As if it was just capitalizing on this hot topic. All I could think of was how difficult it would be to have fun, or play a game regarding such a serious topic. I likened it to making an Adolf Hitler videogame. No one would go for that! Yet that was another genocide.
As I listened, and then read the article, I was incredibly intrigued. I realized that a videogame would reach an "audience" that we don't normally associate with political action or commentary. I associated this game with a phrase I have often said regarding technology in the classroom, that it is a way of "communicating with adolescents IN THEIR TERMS". A game like this is educational, fun and raises questions in the minds of it's players (which is a good thing).
In regards to your specific question about how to make it more complex, I'm afraid I don't have an answer. My first reaction was to make it more personal, making each character based on a real person. There could be details about what he looks like, how he was abducted or how his life has been effected. But I'm not sure if that doesn't trivialize the situation also.
In my quandry over this issue, I researched a little. I asked my class of seniors (12th graders) what they thought. As usual, they had good commentary. They felt it was in poor taste, they couldn't believe that a videogaming company would pay to have that produced, and they also couldn't imagine that any parent would purchase this for their child. On the other hand, they also felt it was a good idea to bring the serious topic like Darfur to the minds of videogaming-aged kids. They had similar commentary to the article that said these are not the same people who would pick up a copy of the New York Times and research genocide. But they ARE the people who would pursue a topic they don't feel is fair, raise money for a cause or join a protest. In either case, just by bringing up the topic of this game, we had a lengthy discussion of politics, morals and what is "fun". If nothing else, the game was, as you said, an entryway into a complex political topic.
My final research was with the utmost authority, my 10-year old son. I had him play the game with only minimal prior instruction from me as to what Darfur is. He liked the game, but I'm not sure he understood the gravity of the topic. What certainly captured his attention was the end, where it gives you the option to "send a message to President Bush". He said "really?? You mean the REAL president?" He could just not believe that you could actually send a message to the President or to the congress or senate. He was absolutely blown away by that idea. So, he started to craft a message, but kept confusing the terms "militia" with "refugee". For example, he said "Dear President Bush, please help these militias because life over there is really hard!" Maybe he is on the young side of the educational aspect of this game.
What I liked most about what I read and investigated was the idea that there is plenty of room for MORE educational "games" or consciousness raising activities about world politics, cultures or problems. I think I would feel more comfortable with the entire idea of this game if I knew there were many games like it and many more people had access to it. That way learning and gaming would go more hand in hand, and not be the exception.
As I started to listen to the NPR segment, I was very conflicted about the idea. Right now it seems almost cool or politically correct to raise money for Darfur, wear "Save Darfur" t-shirts or even to mention it as one of your "concerns". This game struck me as almost superficial at first. As if it was just capitalizing on this hot topic. All I could think of was how difficult it would be to have fun, or play a game regarding such a serious topic. I likened it to making an Adolf Hitler videogame. No one would go for that! Yet that was another genocide.
As I listened, and then read the article, I was incredibly intrigued. I realized that a videogame would reach an "audience" that we don't normally associate with political action or commentary. I associated this game with a phrase I have often said regarding technology in the classroom, that it is a way of "communicating with adolescents IN THEIR TERMS". A game like this is educational, fun and raises questions in the minds of it's players (which is a good thing).
In regards to your specific question about how to make it more complex, I'm afraid I don't have an answer. My first reaction was to make it more personal, making each character based on a real person. There could be details about what he looks like, how he was abducted or how his life has been effected. But I'm not sure if that doesn't trivialize the situation also.
In my quandry over this issue, I researched a little. I asked my class of seniors (12th graders) what they thought. As usual, they had good commentary. They felt it was in poor taste, they couldn't believe that a videogaming company would pay to have that produced, and they also couldn't imagine that any parent would purchase this for their child. On the other hand, they also felt it was a good idea to bring the serious topic like Darfur to the minds of videogaming-aged kids. They had similar commentary to the article that said these are not the same people who would pick up a copy of the New York Times and research genocide. But they ARE the people who would pursue a topic they don't feel is fair, raise money for a cause or join a protest. In either case, just by bringing up the topic of this game, we had a lengthy discussion of politics, morals and what is "fun". If nothing else, the game was, as you said, an entryway into a complex political topic.
My final research was with the utmost authority, my 10-year old son. I had him play the game with only minimal prior instruction from me as to what Darfur is. He liked the game, but I'm not sure he understood the gravity of the topic. What certainly captured his attention was the end, where it gives you the option to "send a message to President Bush". He said "really?? You mean the REAL president?" He could just not believe that you could actually send a message to the President or to the congress or senate. He was absolutely blown away by that idea. So, he started to craft a message, but kept confusing the terms "militia" with "refugee". For example, he said "Dear President Bush, please help these militias because life over there is really hard!" Maybe he is on the young side of the educational aspect of this game.
What I liked most about what I read and investigated was the idea that there is plenty of room for MORE educational "games" or consciousness raising activities about world politics, cultures or problems. I think I would feel more comfortable with the entire idea of this game if I knew there were many games like it and many more people had access to it. That way learning and gaming would go more hand in hand, and not be the exception.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
