Following on from my tutorial where me and Alan discussed the direction of my project, I have now completed the plan for my academic article which i will begin writing shortly.
Intro – 400 words
Theory Part to introduce main idea (200 words)
Introduce Carr’s idea and say how despite 2010, it is becoming increasingly more relevant to examine in light of eLearning and information retrieval.
Introduce Neil Selwyn Ideas
Shirky platform ideas
Aarseth link back to Carr
Explanation of paper (200 words)
Explain paper will look at context of bush’s memex and how it materialised into www.
Then list what will be looked at in order to examine the implications of online learning through internet.
History/ Context – 2500 words (1700 – 2000)
The issue in context – 1400 (1000) words
Explain Bush’s paper. As we may think. How Bush visualized a machine that would work ‘as we may think’. For machine to work by association rather than numerically and alphabetically.
Ted Nelson developed this vision by exploring the idea of hypermedia and TBL materialised the memex notion into the WWW.
To which we return to Carr’s work and present day in which we can look at Bush’s notion by, – As we have come to think.
Explore the idea that carr’s established ‘problems’ could be unintended consequences of the memex idea.
Support this by McLuhan’s idea that “We make the tools and the tools make us”.
This leads onto the idea that Bush devised the idea of the memex so that machine could operate the way we do, but taking Carr’s argument into consideration, do our minds now operate the way machine and hypertext do?
Support this with Susan Greenfield and her argument that our brain is accustomed to acclimatise to changing environments and the surge of the internet and its influence on our lives is the biggest change we have experienced – and it is having unprecedented effects.
On the cusp and bridging the gap – 800 (500/600) words
What is natural thinking? Singular or poly. Singular favours traditional paper reading – the book. Poly favours what is current – hyper reading and the www.
Introducing the change from physical information. – The library/ books/ concrete geographical locations – means limited. Singular, chronological reading/ dictating/ one to many
The internet/ hyper, ergodic reading and navigation/ multiple media at once/ not limited by location/ grassroots up/ liberating/ increased opportunities.
Talk then about Marc Prenky and Digital native etc…
Implications come with this, and these implications (mentioned in the intro) will be discussed in the following body to assess the limitations of eLearning and information retrieval. Explain the relationship with internet and its users and talk about their online behaviour.
State that the affordances the Internet offers in terms of learning and providing us with information are seriously undervalued. In many ways they are undervalued because individuals are unaware of the potential that the Internet facilitates and also due to the fact that they are unaware of how to harness these possibilities (this behaviour is explained in B1 and B2. In B3 we can establish the remedy for this and where these issues begin – in education.). At the present time, we are at a point where we have not been taught to deal with what is now. The state of information cannot be harnessed because it has not been taught. Teaching needs to catch up with where we are now, and the internet is at the centre. This is where B3 leads on and wraps up as the remedy or ‘solution’ to this article.
Explain the currency and relevance of the paper – 300 (200) words
Body 1 – 1400 words (1000)
Immediateness/ Our reliance on S.E/ The physical change
Body 2 – 1400 words (1000)
Reliability/ Democracy of content/ Active & passive learning online/ PC Culture
Body 3 – 1400 words (1000)
eLearning/ Mooc’s/education in the classroom/ Autodidacticism
Conclusion – 400 words
I decided that I would write a rough first draft and so the word count in brackets is my guide for the 1st draft which adds up to 5000 words. I have done this so I can then sumarise what is missing, what is needed and what isn’t to then add to it. I feel this is a better and smarter way to work than to write 7500 words and then realise I want to add more which could be another 1500 words. This means I am having to cut out content and not only does this take up time, it also means I may be reducing the quality by removing something that is valuable.
Below is the document of my notes. I have separated them under the headings for each section of my plan which for me, is the best way to organise my research. This way I know exactly where I need to make references and what to. It is also easy to refer back to when looking at my plan to see what I need to cover.