Professor Stoner's study of culture shock is something that I could strongly relate to. The evidence she presented holds true to some of the things I have been through myself, specifically when I came to UIC.
The "Honeymoon" phase was the days before classes started and everyone was moving in. It was exciting and I was meeting a lot of people. Time went by and classes started. After a couple weeks, classes began getting tougher; and then months, friendships both at school and from back home started falling apart. This lead to my culture shock.
I went through a period where I just didn't like college period. Asher Roth's song "I Love College" came out the summer before the semester started and school was nothing like the song or the video. I wasn't talking much, to my roommate or anyone else. It was a stressful period that lasted the rest of my freshman year.
I didn't adjust until my sophomore year. By now I had accepted that the school I chose wasn't anywhere near the cliche college experience I expected. I now knew to focus on class and just go with the flow socially. Since UIC is in Chicago, I realized that I didn't have to limit myself to one area socially or professionally, which made things a lot better.
I still haven't mastered the concept of college yet. Things are always changing and there is always something shocking me that I need to adjust to. Since campus housing is no longer affordable (it never was really) I have to adjust to commuting. Commuting I'm sure will be much easier to master.
Professor Steele's lecture on the Internet and Information Design was very confusing. The only parts I understood was the first part on theory and practice and the Social Capital Theory. I have encountered both these principles in life through growing up and through being in college working towards a career.
The idea that theory informs practice, practice refines theory is logical in how humans approach life lessons. The saying "an ounce of experience is more than a pint of advice" is the first thing this principle reminded me of. Humans form theories on things in life, but the practice that these theories apply to causes us to refine these theories because of how situations change due to the many individual circumstances that affect them.
Social Capital Theory is the principle that is most important to me. I believe that a strong network is more important than a GPA. For a career, it isn't always about what you know, but who you know. Building a strong network of important and trusted individuals enables you to also be trusted by the people in positions of power. It can be the difference between you getting the job or not getting the job you desired.
Showing posts with label Calvin N.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Calvin N.. Show all posts
Friday, July 20, 2012
Friday, July 13, 2012
Professor Barnhurst: Storytelling
Professor Barnhurst lecture on storytelling involves all of the elements of communication we have studied so far. In order for someone to tell a story in a way that will keep attention and get their point understood by the audience, all elements of communication must be used effectively.
In the abstract, depending on a person's use of kinesics and paralanguage, you can begin to determine what kind of story they are about to tell. Kinesics can and are often used in the other steps of storytelling in order to place emphasis on certain points and give imagery.
Setting is the stage of giving who, what, when, where, why, and how. This process uses verbal communication and non-verbal communication. When the story is being told between friends, it can involve shared meanings and symbols.
The complicating action is where you begin to see most of the communication elements. This is where the storyteller presents their ethics in relation to the complicating action, and explains their perception of the situation.
The response/resolution stage is where agreement or disagreement between the storyteller and the audience surfaces. This must happen because each side may or may not have the same ethics and/or perception depending on the complicating action and certain details involved.
The interpretation stage really begins at the abstract. People will begin to have an interpretation on what kind of story it will be based on the storyteller's use of kinesics and/or paralanguage.
The judgement stage is the final stage where both sides finally decide what they are going to take away from the story. This portion of the lecture was cut off but it can be understood that all elements of communication are summed up by the audience, and depending on how they were used by the storyteller are used by the audience to form their judgement.
What was most important about this lecture to me was how the brain functions during storytelling. Our ability to narrate and pick out specific details using our senses is interesting. We take the event, and categorize stimuli by importance almost instantly when its time to tell a story. The audience also uses stimuli to determine what they hear and categorize what they heard by importance. This is then used to form their judgement as well.
Calvin Nichols
In the abstract, depending on a person's use of kinesics and paralanguage, you can begin to determine what kind of story they are about to tell. Kinesics can and are often used in the other steps of storytelling in order to place emphasis on certain points and give imagery.
Setting is the stage of giving who, what, when, where, why, and how. This process uses verbal communication and non-verbal communication. When the story is being told between friends, it can involve shared meanings and symbols.
The complicating action is where you begin to see most of the communication elements. This is where the storyteller presents their ethics in relation to the complicating action, and explains their perception of the situation.
The response/resolution stage is where agreement or disagreement between the storyteller and the audience surfaces. This must happen because each side may or may not have the same ethics and/or perception depending on the complicating action and certain details involved.
The interpretation stage really begins at the abstract. People will begin to have an interpretation on what kind of story it will be based on the storyteller's use of kinesics and/or paralanguage.
The judgement stage is the final stage where both sides finally decide what they are going to take away from the story. This portion of the lecture was cut off but it can be understood that all elements of communication are summed up by the audience, and depending on how they were used by the storyteller are used by the audience to form their judgement.
What was most important about this lecture to me was how the brain functions during storytelling. Our ability to narrate and pick out specific details using our senses is interesting. We take the event, and categorize stimuli by importance almost instantly when its time to tell a story. The audience also uses stimuli to determine what they hear and categorize what they heard by importance. This is then used to form their judgement as well.
Calvin Nichols
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Professor Meraz: Gendering of the Internet
After viewing Professor Meraz's lecture, it is my belief human perception and common stereotypes of women have had an effect on the number of women joining the field of computer sciences. The same goes for women and the struggles they face in the field of blogging.
Stereotypes and gender roles are assigned to males and females from childhood. The common narrative is that females are the care-givers, are passive and submissive, and do light work in service industries. Males are often the strong providers, do the hard work, and are dominant and aggressive. From Meraz's lecture, evidence can be seen that these stereotypes have made their way in to the information age of technology. Males dominate hardware and software engineering, while females are the majority of designers. In industries such as the gaming industry, games with action themes are geared towards males and feature males in the protagonist role. Light games like Diner Dash and ones similar that are games of mainly multitasking duties, are geared towards females and feature mainly female characters. What we have studied about the traditional perceptions of what men and women are supposed to be has a lot to do with this.
How children are raised have much to do with who they grow up to be. What they have seen and grown up around develop their perception, specifically their interpretation of things. Less than 1% of females listed a major in computer sciences as a possibility at the time of the research. In many cases, these females may have not grown up in an environment where females working in computers was seen or encouraged. So when the subject of computers is brought to them, they attach them to males and are not interested in working in the field. Females of this current generation now perceive computer science as a field for men, even though they are equally capable of doing the jobs successfully; and there are women already in the field.
In the field of blogging, the same holds true. In this field, however, we start to see schema. The sexualization of women in our society have built up expectations of what women are supposed to be presented as in our media. In Web 2.0, men, and even women, expect to see the same behaviors of women they have seen in older forms of media. In blogging, when a woman steps in and goes against those expectations, it shocks the cognitive structures built up in the minds of the receivers, also known as cognitive dissonance. The receivers then reject the material, which is why women have struggled in the field of blogging. Some women in order to gain some success in the field have behaved in ways that are identical with the schemas of the men and women who hold these perceptions. They then use it to their advantage to get their real objectives across. Depending on personal opinion, this can be seen as smart or as giving in.
-Calvin Nichols
Stereotypes and gender roles are assigned to males and females from childhood. The common narrative is that females are the care-givers, are passive and submissive, and do light work in service industries. Males are often the strong providers, do the hard work, and are dominant and aggressive. From Meraz's lecture, evidence can be seen that these stereotypes have made their way in to the information age of technology. Males dominate hardware and software engineering, while females are the majority of designers. In industries such as the gaming industry, games with action themes are geared towards males and feature males in the protagonist role. Light games like Diner Dash and ones similar that are games of mainly multitasking duties, are geared towards females and feature mainly female characters. What we have studied about the traditional perceptions of what men and women are supposed to be has a lot to do with this.
How children are raised have much to do with who they grow up to be. What they have seen and grown up around develop their perception, specifically their interpretation of things. Less than 1% of females listed a major in computer sciences as a possibility at the time of the research. In many cases, these females may have not grown up in an environment where females working in computers was seen or encouraged. So when the subject of computers is brought to them, they attach them to males and are not interested in working in the field. Females of this current generation now perceive computer science as a field for men, even though they are equally capable of doing the jobs successfully; and there are women already in the field.
In the field of blogging, the same holds true. In this field, however, we start to see schema. The sexualization of women in our society have built up expectations of what women are supposed to be presented as in our media. In Web 2.0, men, and even women, expect to see the same behaviors of women they have seen in older forms of media. In blogging, when a woman steps in and goes against those expectations, it shocks the cognitive structures built up in the minds of the receivers, also known as cognitive dissonance. The receivers then reject the material, which is why women have struggled in the field of blogging. Some women in order to gain some success in the field have behaved in ways that are identical with the schemas of the men and women who hold these perceptions. They then use it to their advantage to get their real objectives across. Depending on personal opinion, this can be seen as smart or as giving in.
-Calvin Nichols
Monday, July 9, 2012
Professor Andrew Rojecki's Lecture on the Politics of Insecurity
When Professor Rojecki's lecture started I was immediately interested. Since President Obama's election in 2009 there have been many changes; the Tea Party is one of them. My beliefs prior to this lecture was that movements like the Tea Party did not exist prior to Barack Obama's election, and that the nature of the rhetoric and beliefs being sent from the Tea Party are heavily based on right-wing Evangelical Christian beliefs and the president's race.
Professor Rojecki's lecture related to several topics we have already discussed in class. He started out his lecture by breaking down societal functions such as work, bureaucracy, and politics. These three societal functions have built up American's perception of how they should function in our country. With our country growing and changing rapidly with technology, perception changes as well. Differences in perception results in the growth of politics. Movements like the Tea Party have grown because one side of the political spectrum perception of what the bureaucracy should look like and do differs from what was elected in 2009. The Tea Party has mastered the politics of insecurity by using salience, interpretation, framing, schemas, and stereotypes to grow and last as a movement. For example, Tea Party leaders use framing techniques in order to make voters vote for them out of fear. Conservative politicians often use lingering anxiety from 9/11 to build themselves up as terrorism fighters and believers in strong national defense. Right-wing politicians also use salience to frame opposing ideas as "socialism" or "communism" even if those labels are falsehoods. Even though they are falsehoods, they have been successful because most Tea Party supporters are older citizens who have lived through the Cold War when communism was a popular ideology across the globe. The labeling of opposing ideologies go hand-in-hand with stereotypes and prejudices as well. A possible reason why more centrist or left-leaning policies are being labeled that way is because their goal is to help people of ethnic groups who are seen as threats by the Tea Party's core. This is where the lecture gets into verbal communication.
The Tea Party's use of verbal communication centers mainly on codes. Professor Rojecki repeatedly brought up how minorities are never mentioned by name, but rather as "poor people" or "illegal immigrants." This relates to codes because if they were to come out and blatantly say Black people and Mexicans, even individuals outside of the movement would know exactly who they are talking about and would be angered and inclined to do something about that. He also brought up the fact that any policies that involved sacrifice from others to benefit everyone was immediately labeled "socialism." The growth of the internet has also done no justice itself. It has allowed anyone to say anything and spread it instantly, and has created an atmosphere where you can't be in the middle. Now it is just people attacking others instead of everyone coming together for a solution. The part that struck me the most was when Rojecki brought up the "culture wars." Culture wars brings me to ethics.
The idea of big government, and any culture war, whether it be gay marriage or women's rights, all boils down to ethics. The Tea Party is a group mainly composed of old Caucasian men who are used to a country that is governed by their ethics and their past generation's ethics. Now that a new generation is coming under them, they are very insecure that the future governments controlling America will not be governed by their ethics. This is how the Tea Party as a movement is a giant contradiction down to every single one of their ideologies; mainly their opposition to "big government." They are not entirely against big government. Many in the movement are at or past retirement age, so they are pro-Social Security and pro-Medicare, both big government programs. They are anti-welfare, yet many of them are rural and dependent on it. They are against government telling its citizens what to do, unless it is telling them who to marry and what religion is the correct one. So as long as big government benefits them, it is not a problem. When it benefits others, it is a problem.
-Calvin Nichols
Professor Rojecki's lecture related to several topics we have already discussed in class. He started out his lecture by breaking down societal functions such as work, bureaucracy, and politics. These three societal functions have built up American's perception of how they should function in our country. With our country growing and changing rapidly with technology, perception changes as well. Differences in perception results in the growth of politics. Movements like the Tea Party have grown because one side of the political spectrum perception of what the bureaucracy should look like and do differs from what was elected in 2009. The Tea Party has mastered the politics of insecurity by using salience, interpretation, framing, schemas, and stereotypes to grow and last as a movement. For example, Tea Party leaders use framing techniques in order to make voters vote for them out of fear. Conservative politicians often use lingering anxiety from 9/11 to build themselves up as terrorism fighters and believers in strong national defense. Right-wing politicians also use salience to frame opposing ideas as "socialism" or "communism" even if those labels are falsehoods. Even though they are falsehoods, they have been successful because most Tea Party supporters are older citizens who have lived through the Cold War when communism was a popular ideology across the globe. The labeling of opposing ideologies go hand-in-hand with stereotypes and prejudices as well. A possible reason why more centrist or left-leaning policies are being labeled that way is because their goal is to help people of ethnic groups who are seen as threats by the Tea Party's core. This is where the lecture gets into verbal communication.
The Tea Party's use of verbal communication centers mainly on codes. Professor Rojecki repeatedly brought up how minorities are never mentioned by name, but rather as "poor people" or "illegal immigrants." This relates to codes because if they were to come out and blatantly say Black people and Mexicans, even individuals outside of the movement would know exactly who they are talking about and would be angered and inclined to do something about that. He also brought up the fact that any policies that involved sacrifice from others to benefit everyone was immediately labeled "socialism." The growth of the internet has also done no justice itself. It has allowed anyone to say anything and spread it instantly, and has created an atmosphere where you can't be in the middle. Now it is just people attacking others instead of everyone coming together for a solution. The part that struck me the most was when Rojecki brought up the "culture wars." Culture wars brings me to ethics.
The idea of big government, and any culture war, whether it be gay marriage or women's rights, all boils down to ethics. The Tea Party is a group mainly composed of old Caucasian men who are used to a country that is governed by their ethics and their past generation's ethics. Now that a new generation is coming under them, they are very insecure that the future governments controlling America will not be governed by their ethics. This is how the Tea Party as a movement is a giant contradiction down to every single one of their ideologies; mainly their opposition to "big government." They are not entirely against big government. Many in the movement are at or past retirement age, so they are pro-Social Security and pro-Medicare, both big government programs. They are anti-welfare, yet many of them are rural and dependent on it. They are against government telling its citizens what to do, unless it is telling them who to marry and what religion is the correct one. So as long as big government benefits them, it is not a problem. When it benefits others, it is a problem.
-Calvin Nichols
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)