Category: Facebook

Chapter Review: “The World of Digital Storytelling”

1024px-Family_watching_television_1958(Photo by Evert F. Baumgardner [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons)

Chapter 3 of Joe Lambert’s book Digital Storytelling: Capturing Lives, Creating Community gives a broad overview of how the author came to San Francisco and helped found what would later be known as the Center for Digital Storytelling (CDS).  In Chapter 4, Lambert discusses the components of a digital story and how these types of personal narratives fit into what he calls “the taxonomy of media practices” (p.38).

At the start of the chapter, Lambert lays out seven components the CDS values as important in a digital story.  In addition to elements such as photos, soundtrack, length and design, there are a couple of attributes I found interesting.  First is the concept of personal narration.  Unlike documentaries, which sometimes include narration by a celebrity or a professional voice-over artist, the first-person perspective offers more insight and emotional subtext in the tone of the voice.  Second is the “self-revelatory” component that gives the viewer awareness that the author experienced a significant turning point in the course of his/her life. Lastly is the idea of intention, where, as Lambert says, the digital story is “process over product” (p.38) where personal self-awareness by the author is the primary goal and concerns over the social media audience is a distant second.  This final component is significant.  In a Facebook world, it’s challenging for people to tell a revealing story without thinking of pandering to wider audience for the sake of a popular, trending topic.

When Lambert delves into the idea of “the taxonomy of media practices”, there is a statement that caught my attention.  He says, “In our view, the defense of creative control by the specialist creative class tends to ensure voice is not democratically distributed”(p.41).  These words made me reflect on my past experience working in television production.  Often times, it is the cable programmers and production companies who have the editorial power in deciding which sound bites from on-camera individuals make the final cut into the program.  Honestly, I like having that creative control to determine what media elements will be included as well as deleted from the project.  In the world of the decentralized YouTube programming, smartphone cameras and iMovie editing, the common citizen has more opportunities to create and distribute their own stories.  “Creative class” professional such as myself have come to see the impact in both positive and negative ways over the years.  Perhaps the biggest impact has been the steady downsizing in the media industry since the start of the 21st century.  Still, I like the fact that anyone with the proper skills and technology can voice their opinion on the World Wide Web.  This is something that Lambert and his collaborators emphasize in his organization when he states, “We are seeking a broadly applicable method for participatory media production” (p.42).

Overall, I like the simplicity of what Lambert and his cohorts at the Center for Digital Storytelling have established with facilitating the personal narrative.  To be sure, people can feel reluctant to express themselves to a cyberworld of strangers, but Lambert’s model makes storytelling an easy process that can be used by anyone.

Scholarly Response: “Why Your Department Needs Social Media”

Every now and then, I like to check out educational “trade” publications for articles on the pros and cons of new technology in the classroom.  On The Chronicle of Higher Education, I found a piece by Rachel Herrmann entitled “Why Your Department Needs Social Media.”  Herrmann,  a Ph.D. lecturer at the University of Southampton in England, gives a faculty member’s perspective on the best ways for instructors to utilize applications such as Facebook and Twitter to better communicate with students.

Herrmann gives some very concrete first-hand examples of how using social media enables her to post information about upcoming events, announce details regarding grants and share photos of faculty-student social functions.  Likewise, she mentions how students give her feedback about their accomplishments and receive live-Tweets of major lectures and recruitment-day information sessions.  Herrmann does admit that there are a number of university policies and administrative oversights that slow down the process of establishing a faculty social media presence.  She goes on to offer several suggestions (fewer rules, a department social media manager, etc) to make the overall process more efficient.

After reading this article, I thought about what many of the students I have talked to in the Student Success Center at the Community College of Denver have mentioned regarding communicating with their instructors.  Few to none of these students mention their instructors connecting with them on any social media platform whatsoever.  In addition, many of the students say they have, at times, a difficult time getting a simple email response from their instructors regarding an assignment question.  I realize many of the instructors are temporary/part-time adjuncts who can only commit so much of their time for the amount of money they receive for their efforts.  Plus, both instructors and students are entitled to a certain amount of privacy.

Social media can be an effective tool of group communication, but that effectiveness is dependent on the pro-active engagement of all the people in the group.  Maybe things are different in England, but I’m sure here in the United States, educators want to find the best ways to reach their students.  Just not 24/7.