Thanks to Dr. Cole Bennett and his ENGL 325: Advanced Comp class for sharing their Literacies projects again this year. .
The course introduces students to “theories of literacy from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, paying particular attention to readings that emphasize social and political issues related to reading and writing.” then concluded with student-produced videos introducing a cultural literacy of their own:
“Rhetorically, this video should attempt to convince the viewer that 1) the activity under consideration qualifies as an expanded form of literacy; and 2) society would benefit as a whole if such argument were accepted. How does the subject fall under a definition of literacy? Which definition? Why does it matter? How are our lives enriched if we agree with you? How might your opponents disagree with you, and how would you address such concerns?”
Here are a few examples of their work.
In August How to Read a Book hit 20,000 views. Congrats Hilary!
At the end of the semester, we get a lot of notes from faculty with strong examples of student video projects (we’ll share of few of those this next week). It’s typically a good sign when students begin sharing links to their classmates’ projects. High praise indeed.
This example came from a couple students who thought Hilary Commer’s “How to Read a Book in 2013” was the complete package. Strong, sharp writing. Carefully composed visuals. And directing and performances that accentuate humor without overdoing it. And shot on Learning Studio camera to boot! A great combination we think you’ll enjoy.
How to Read a Book in 2013
Produced for Cade White’s Introduction to Visual Media, How-To Video assignment
“Did you find an odd box with pieces of paper inside? It might be a book! Some of them still have real pages—and I’ll show you just how to read one.”
Several months ago Adam Hester, Department of Theatre chair, let us know that folks from the Tepper Semester program in New York would be on campus. They hosted a film casting workshop that gave ACU students experience working with professional casting directors.
Thanks to Matt Bardwell and Nathan Driskell in the Learning Studio for filming the auditions, giving students a glimpse of themselves on the big screen.
This last month we welcomed a remarkable group of faculty to join us for our first Scholarly Storytelling workshop in the Learning Studio. We wanted to explore the potential of mixed-media storytelling to communicate messages drawn from research and professional writing with a wider audience.
Al Haley and Kyle Dickson led the workshop which paralleled the basic structure of a three-day storytelling workshop with the exception that the final products didn’t follow any one basic format. Presentations included expanded training in the proper use and citation of digital sources and advanced production options like working with a green-screen or teleprompter. The workshop also coincided with planning for the One-Button Studio which will make these types of stories even easier to produce in the future.
Here are just a few examples from the workshop.
Copier – Al Haley
Different – Jeff Childers
Hope & Tragedy in Amos – Mark Hamilton
Modeling Intentional Community – Kent Smith
Each of the projects was produced with a particular audience in mind. Al was presenting at a conference and wanted a way to talk about his interest in mixed-media texts. Mark was thinking about videos to introduce biblical texts for a media commentary project he was considering. Kent was working with colleagues on a research project to share interviews with members of intentional communities around the country. Jeff had a particular role for his project to play within a graduate theology class. This last demonstrates the complexity of these messages for particular audiences:
“This project is intended to stimulate conversation about synthesis in a graduate class. All the students will have read assigned texts, and one of the themes on which I will focus in class is the attempt in early Syriac Christianity to have radically different styles of discipleship co-existing in the same communities. It was difficult for them, as for us, and I prepared a film that 1) underscores a range of related themes in certain texts (which they will have read), 2) grounds the topic in a particular socio-historic setting, yet 3) suggestively associates their struggles maintaining unity-in-diversity with our own struggles to do so, in several different arenas of interest to Christian communities (i.e. worship styles, fellowship, ministry, race, etc.). The music is that of Syrian Orthodox hymnody.”.
Overall, a remarkably diverse group of teachers and scholars thinking about the potential of media tools to forward their work across campus.
Thanks to Kenny Jones for sending along sample projects from ART 221, General Survey 1. Students worked in teams to produce an 8-10 minute comparison of three artifacts, two from their survey of art history and one more contemporary example.
Here are a few of their projects with a summary of the assignment.
I. Choosing a Topic for the Podcast:
Our goal is the analysis of the form, iconography and technique of artifacts within their historic context, so as to visually demonstrate their main paradigm characteristics. Use the visual media of the podcast to make a visual argument for your thesis, of course you should include verbal material as well.
If you aren’t showing us visual information you are not taking advantage of this visual media – be sure to show us and not just tell us. Consider the fact that what you are really doing is helping us to envision information. That being said, do not interpret this as a invitation to overwhelm us with useless decorative or ornamental packaging, e.g. distracting chart junk, vacuous clip art, baffling special effects, etc. Be sure to check out this resource on envisioning information.
Compare and contrast two artifacts from our textbook. It may be any significant artifact found in our text, e.g. painting, sculpture, architecture, piece of furniture, etc. In addition to these two artifacts compare a current physical, artifact from your primary, normal cultural environment, e.g. artwork, architecture, or appliance, etc. (current means it was substantively made, not remodeled or made famous but actually made within the 21st century).
This means you will be comparing a total of three artifacts:
1. the primary artifact from our text
2. the artifact that is older or newer than the primary artifact, also from our textbook.
3. the artifact that can help you see your paradigm – that was made in 21st century and is a relevant, physical artifact from your primary, normal cultural environment. (Do not use artifacts that were remolded, refurbished or made famous in the 21st century, these do no qualify for having been created and constructed in this century and are therefore not relevant reflections of your current paradigm).
for more details, ART 221: General Survey 1 Blog