TOO DISRUPTIVE – Reaction to Readings on Identity

David Buckingham. Youth, Identity, Digital Media. Chapter 1 “Introducing Identity.”

Etienne Wenger. Communities of Practice. Chapter 6 “Identity in Practice.”

RICHARD:

BUCKINGHAM–
The Giddens-Foucault binary is especially revealing of talks concerning identity. On one hand there is Giddens who believes in the “choice” of identity. On the other, is Foucault. Michel Foucault, whose theories revolutionized 20th-century thinking (yet is as of late becoming known as being old-fashioned and almost cliche) aligns himself with the idea that people’s identities are shaped by the world they live in. I believe that each scholar has their own merit. As the lines between “identity” and “identification” are perceived to be more blurred, so do these two arguments. Technology seems to serve as the catalyst for self reflection with regard to others.

Buckingham also critiques (overly harsh in my opinion) Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical sense of self. Goffman argues the idea of the situational self. The situational self can be regarded as a person that presents his or herself with regard to the current definition or “rules” of the situation. For example, a person that maintains a job as an elementary school teacher will present in a different way than we they work in a bar on the weekends. In terms of the Internet, the web may be seen as a particular situation that one may choose to identify in a certain way. However, I also believe that the technological methods of information and social transfer are slowly changing the way in which a “base” or “backstage” or “ideal” or “felt” self is constructed.

The ways in which the Internet may or may not affect identity (transcendent- vs. desocialized-technological determination) calls to mind the idea of the medium. What or who is the medium? At this point I’m still not sure if people are or are not.

WENGER–
The biggest point in the Wenger article that stands out is his idea of the “trajectory” of identity as the rest of his ideas align with general sociological teaching. I believe that making the focused distinction that not only does identity form over time (which sociologists agree on), but that it is the cumulative process (including all points along the self-growth timeline) is what separates Wenger’s identity theory. In this way, it aptly reflects a CoP form of tradition: the CoP in-group is formed over time.

CHRIS:

Wenger

Wenger speaks about the community’s ability to speak for us, about our nature, qualifications, knowledge base, etc. This works to our benefit in organizational environments, where membership and participation indicate status and value. In some cases, especially in communities based on a single attribute, the projection of the community stereotype is limiting. Several negative outcomes caused by generalizing based on single/limited communal attributes: racial profiling, use of stereotypes to justify escalating “objectively” determined risk levels–leading to sanctioned violence, and genocide.
Increasing the complexity of the community’s membership positively influences the trajectory of the identificational trajectories. A wider membership, experience-base, knowledge base, and access to resources, [networking] culminates success.

Buckingham

Buckingham’s theories indicate that social progress, mutation, and/or development occurs on a timeline that has departed from chronological realism. Such identity changes are more closely measured by events and experiences.

Our digital facades allow us to explore communities in any way that we choose to approach them, making the experience unique to that digital exploration of self.

KATHERINE:

David Buckingham. Youth, Identity, Digital Media. Chapter 1 “Introducing Identity.”

social identity should be seen not so much as a fixed possession, but as a social process, in which the individual and the social are inextricably related
Individual selfhood is a social phenomenon, but the social world is constituted through the actions of individuals. As such, identity is a fluid, contingent matter—it is something we accomplish practically through our ongoing interactions and negotiations with other people. In this respect, it might be more appropriate to talk about identification rather than identity”
the Internet provides significant opportunities for exploring facets of identity that might previously have been denied or stigmatized, or indeed simply for the sharing of information on such matters. Such arguments presume that media can be used as a means of expressing or even discovering aspects of one’s “true self,” for example, in relation to sexuality.
Yet on the other hand, these media can also be seen to provide powerful opportunities for identity play, for parody and subversion of the kind promoted by queer theory. Here, the emphasis would lie not on honesty and truth, but on the potential for performance and even for deception. Sherry Turkle’s discussion of the fluidity of online identities—for example, in the form of “gender bending” in Internet communities—provides one well-known (and much debated) instance of this kind of approach.
Technological determinism – from this perspective, technology is seen to emerge from a neutral process of scientific research and development, rather than from the interplay of complex social, economic, and political forces.

Wenger. Communities of Practice. Chapter 6 “Identity in Practice.”

Identity as negotiated experience. We define who we are by the ways we experience ourselves through participation as well as by the ways we and other reify ourselves.
Identity as community membership. We define who we are by the familiar and the unfamiliar.
Identity as learning trajectory. We define who we are by where we have been and where we are going.
Identity as nexus of multimembership. We define who we are by the ways we reconcile our various forms of membership into one identity.
Identity as a relation between the local and the global. We define who we are by negotiating local ways of belonging to broader constellations and of manifesting broader styles and discourses.

JAY:

Buckingham and Wenger coincided in their discussions on identity in several ways. Both authors emphasized that identity is neither static nor steady; instead, they describe how it is a “state of becoming,” and that the process of “identification” is going on all the time. Wenger and Buckingham discuss several perspectives on identity in the modern era, and how identities are perceived and projected in digital realms. One of Buckingham’s most compelling arguments is that he juxtaposes common concepts of identity politics (focused on gender, ethnicity, age, etc.), with the way digital technology and the web function as tools for people to create constantly changing projections of their identities through content production online. In his discussion he contrasts the fluid expressions of identity through social media with fixed ideas of identity that characterize certain aspects of traditional identity politics mentioned above. Buckingham suggests the term “identification” as a possible replacement of “identity,” to emphasize the dynamic process that is involved in the way people are constantly defining themselves in different ways. Wenger contributes to this discussion on identity by describing several specific ways that people participate in the procession of “identification.” He says that identity is “lived” through “participation and reification,” and that a person’s perception of self is in a constant process of “negotiation;” this process is not reserved only for adolescence. Wenger emphasizes that identity is also lived out in community, and we understand ourselves through the “familiarity that we experience in certain social contexts.” He goes on to say that our identity is the result of a “nexus” of interlocking contexts and our ability to function “across boundaries of practice.” According to Wenger all of this “identification” takes place both locally and globally.
One of the most interesting parts of these readings for me was the paradoxical etymology of the word identity which Buckingham described in the opening of his chapter. From its roots, the word identity describes both sameness and difference at once. On one hand, our identity is something that indicates who we are and defines us (somewhat consistently) by setting us apart, but at the same time our identity is also defined by who we are connected to. As the Spanish proverb says: “Tell me who you hang with and I’ll tell you who you are.” “Dime con quien andas, y te dire quien eres.”

 

Jay Loomis Identity Discussion: IDk

Identity on film in 2:22 – that’s a challenge! I created a mix of video and photos with original artwork that I hope speaks more eloquently than I can with 120 seconds worth of words, on such a complex topic: IDENTITY.

I mixed my music and voiceover on two audio tracks to accompany the visuals. It would be great to have more control over the transitions. I was also hoping to have more flexibility and control over the amount of time that each picture is shown, and I couldn’t figure out how to get rid of the “Ken Burns Effect.” I was not able to upload the film directly from my iPad to You Tube – You Tube was asking for security updates that would not allow my .mov to transfer. After multiple time-consuming unsuccessful tries, I decided to save “IDk” to my Mac via AirDrop, then upload it to You Tube. Here it is:

Educational Culture Shock & the End of College

Check out this disruptive article on higher education: NPR Interview with Kevin Carey, author of The End of College, Creating the Future of Learning and the University of Everywhere.

This is not specifically related to our new section on identity, but it resonated with some of my musings over the past couple of weeks on how CDT450 is causing me to experience “educational culture shock.”

Since we started with this class, CDT450, our forward thinking approach has required me to consider my learning process in the university classroom setting from a new perspective. One of the main challenges and opportunities that I am facing in this class is using social media as a tool for learning new material, communicating my thoughts and ideas, and engaging in this class to a degree that I have never experienced before.
I have always thought about and experienced education as a passionate learner; since this class started I have become more conscious and aware of one aspect of my traditional perspective on learning in a university setting: I go to a classroom to be both active and passive in a collective learning experience, in a shared space with a teacher/facilitator and other students.
I read material, listen to music, watch videos, and consume information outside of class to prepare for the interaction inside the classroom. Sometimes I have been required to meet with other students in groups online, or face-to-face, but these interactions with other learners outside of the classroom has been sporadic.
I recognize that I have had a compartmentalized perspective of my personal learning process, and of the educational institutions that I have been part: it’s as if learning is a constant part of my life, but the active interaction with other scholars, students, professors, researchers, people, etc. is mostly reserved for class time.

ALL OF THIS IS CHANGING.
Now in CDT450, my concept of learning and participating has expanded and my engagement with the subject matter and students, and professors has become more commonplace and I find myself making more connections.

A big part of this change has to do with this course being specifically designed to integrate technology into the learning process by using hardware like the iPad, and software which includes social media and other tools for finding and engaging in material related to topics covered in the class.
Now I’m using social media apps as part of my learning process inculding WordPress, Yammer, Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc.
I have used Google Docs many times to collaborate with students and professors on projects inside and outside of class, but now I’m using Google Docs in a way that’s completely new – as a space to dialog online with other students who are part of a study group that I’m in. We log in to a document and have a conversation about the topic at hand in the Google doc, where we share links, socialize, discuss, and preserve an evolving record of how our conversation develops, and how it specifically relates to the task at hand and the material presented in the classroom.

All that to say: I can’t get away from this class – which is good, because I’m passionate about teaching and learning and participating in the present revolution that is taking place in education. In one sense I feel the burden of constant connectivity that can cause stress for people who are always plugged in through mobile devices and social media networks, but at the same time I’m inspired because the sharing and developing of ideas is no longer compartmentalized for me – now I am more conscious that my learning process is multi-modal discourse that’s going on continuously on a local and global scale.

Jay Loomis – Weekly Create – ID poster

Screen Shot 2015-03-03 at 4.24.00 PM

One of my favorite things to talk to talk about is family history. Heritage. Roots. What are roots? Why do they matter? When I think about my own identity a number of different ideas, sounds, and images percolate in my mind. My mother’s side of the family is mostly Norwegian; her great grand parents travelled to America from Norway, and with help from the American government they set up a farm on lands taken from the indigenous Lakota people. My father’s family has been in America for many generations, now a mix of many ethnicities. What does that have to do with me?

Jay Loomis – iPad Reflection

I’ve been experimenting with an app called Lemur. I have used this app previously as a MIDI controller for Ableton Live, but now I’m examining new possibilities that will allow me to use my iPad to construct and control samples of  urban soundscapes so I can emphasize different noises that are present in a variety of cities around the world. Even though the Lemur app is very user friendly and gives me the ability to construct button and slider configurations using my iPad, I find that the button and slider configuration software on my laptop is easier to control. Maybe it’s a matter of practice. I like to be able to swipe between windows and desktops to compare information quickly, which is not an option with the iPad. I’m trying a new note taking app called Notability – it is very similar to Good Notes, which I use on a daily basis, but Notability offers voice recordings connected to notes. I think this feature could be useful, but I need to test it out.

Jay Loomis – Cluetrain Picks

3 – Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.

34 – To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.

95 – We are waking up and linking to each other. We are watching. But we are not waiting.

These thesis seem to communicate an “us vs. them” perspective. The tone in general sounds adversarial; I’m intrigued that the human voice is a main indicator of which side you are on…

Jay Loomis – iPad Thoughts

I’ve been using the iPad for all of my courses for several semesters and it keeps me organized and paper free. One thing I like about taking notes in GoodNotes is that I have about 100 different colors to choose from with different styles of writing utensils. I use a lot of different colors when I take notes which helps me to stay organized and aware of different topics that come up during a lecture or discussion. I also like to be able to look back at notes that I took, and articles that I read last semester in a class that is related to my Urban Soundscapes class this semester – it’s all on my iPad.

I did find something the iPad will not do – I’m a TA in a class and I have to input the attendance for each class into Blackboard. I tried to do it using my iPad, but there is something about the mobile app for Bb that does not allow me to scroll through the spreadsheet where I need to input the attendance information.

Jay Loomis – Trad Community

I  intensely “feel community” when I play music at a pub in Greenport, NY – it’s called The Whiskey Wind. Every Thursday around 8 pm locals gather to jam out and play traditional music including American Songbook folk tunes, blues standards, sea shanties, original songs, and traditional Irish music. We sit in a circle and play, and each person gets a chance to lead a tune or sing a song. It’s a positive atmosphere full of laughter, music, and the sound of friends and acquaintances shootin’ the breeze. As a community, our joy for that evening is to share with each other and hopefully entertain the patrons at the pub.

This week I was especially disturbed by the constant news of violence and killings in NY, USA, and all over the World – I’m not sure why THIS week… maybe because our recent focus on community has made me more attuned to how violence destroys communities in so many ways.

So I put together the sonic expression, “Pub Glass,” which tries to capture the joy of participating in community, along with some of the other feelings that I just described. (Make sure to listen all the way through to get the full effect.)

 

Jay Loomis – Ants, Wenger, & Communities of Practice

In the writings on communities of practice by Etienne Wenger, there were several specific characteristics that the author described that caught my attention. To start, he made a point of defining his terms: community and practice. He specified that for his purposes these ideas need to be considered has a whole: communities of practice. One of the most important defining characteristics is that these groups of people are bound together, not only by having a common goal, but also through the collaborative actions that individuals in the group undertake to achieve that goal.

The author explains three elements of a community of practice: mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and common repertoire. An important aspect of “mutual engagement” is that members are not required to have similar skill sets or backgrounds; in fact, diversity is valuable and can help a community of practice to achieve their objectives. “Joint enterprise” refers to the collaboration that takes place and the accountability that is a necessary part of this system. The “shared repertoire” refers to shared expectations and experiences that accumulate from the group; after spending time acting together as a team, they know what to expect and have common references related to their objectives that help them to act effectively.

A community of practice can be described as a purposeful, intentional group of people who act together to achieve common objectives, with a variety of individual perspectives on how to approach problem solving situations.

As I read these articles by Wenger, I was thinking about some examples of this type of effective community action in nature: ants. There are many examples of the extraordinary feats that ant communities can achieve, from creating huge underground colonies, to creating the paths through perilous jungle terrain, to their singular focus on providing for and caring for their queen. For this reading on communities of practice, I found the following YouTube video of ants creating a bridge to be especially informative while thinking about effective collaboration as a community of practice.

My questions relate to the section where Wenger talks about the need to cultivate communities of practice. What are some specific ways that administrations or managers in hierarchical institutions can encourage this semi-informal yet effective style of team work? What is it about this type of collaboration that sometimes makes managers uncomfortable? What changes in perspective need to take place in hierarchical systems to help managers embrace this style of collaboration?

Fast forward to about 2:20 to see the moment when the gap is bridged.