Ammon Shepherd

First off, I’d like to admit my inability to design. I’d much rather be given a blank text file and told to fill it with pretty code. I could spend hours (and often do) banging out some pretty php functions and what not. My brain hurts after trying to apply the other side…

I spent way too much time on finding the background for this site. I was looking for a piece of parchment to poach, but there was nothing I could see for free (as in cost and copyright). So I just decided to grab any ol’ image, and not worry about it, since my design page will probably disappear before any ill affects come from pilfering. But, lady luck was with me, and the image I wanted to use was available for free (both kinds) anyways. I hope I didn’t botch it too bad.

The theme I went with didn’t have much color to work with (no, Dr. I didn’t do that on purpose, it just happened that way). Black and brown were about all I had to work with. I wish I could have fit more images in there as well. Some of Remington’s paintings are just spectacular. (Do a search on the Library of Congress site for images by Frederic Remington. They’re pretty neat.)

Anyhow, here’s it is. My Design Project

Gee… what to say. I made all of my comments with out reading the book first. Now that I have, here are my comments on it.

First of all, I think Gee has some good points, but is also a little bit off. He starts off by saying that everybody reads books (or does anything in life, like learn from video games, etc) with different “characters.” I read this book as a historian, or father, or religious person, and I get different meanings out of it. Makes sense. I’ll agree.

I’m having trouble putting my thoughts to words on how I disagree with Gee, so here it goes.  He makes the claim that video games help us learn.  It even seems that he thinks video games are the best way to learn. His reasoning: survival of the fitest in the capitalist market of video games.  The games are hard for him to play, yet millions of dollars worth of these games are sold, therefore they must have evolved their teaching ability to the greatest level.  Well, maybe it’s because their addictive.  We wouldn’t say that cigarettes are the most evolved form of substance that humans should use because the tabaco companies are selling millions of billions of them throughout the world.

Gee also tries to say that the way we learn by playing video games is the best way to learn.  He wants to take the realm of video-game-learning and apply it to other realms of life.  I disagree in this way.  A person does not learn real life social skills by playing video games.  That person may learn how to interact with other players in the World of StarCraft (the aliens attack, so you blow them away), but that doesn’t necessarily apply to real life (a bully at school, or people who tease).  Does learning to beat level 4 on the hottest new video game really teach a child the best way to interact with siblings and peers, which builds habits that later construct how they will treat their spouse and children?  Or would actually playing with friends and siblings be a better way to learn that?

I guess my bias is that video games (at least the ones Gee described) have their place as entertainment, but do little to enhance learning (at least as much as Gee would have us believe).  (That’s my ‘semiotic domain’ as a father who doesn’t think it’s a good idea to have his kids play video games all day long.)

One last critic. Gee states that in order for video game playing to be effective learning, the playing must be done actively and critically.  I can give him that one.  That is how ‘certain’ video games can facilitate learning.  But, in reality, how much of the video game playing is done with the intent to learn things that can be applied to other ‘semiotic domains’. It just doesn’t happen by itself.  The parents have to be involved.  And many other things….

I was at a funeral in Arizona all weekend and yesterday, and just got back to Fairfax at 3pm today. So I’m a little behind…. But my comments are coming.

The following are some comments on this weeks readings.

• Useit.com

  These are great reminders when planning your links. I especially like the reminders about coding for those with color disabilities, and making the visited link a different color. I like those reminders, because I inevitable fail to remember them.

• Boxes And Arrows

  This article makes plain the issues about visual organization of web pages. Favorite quote: “effective visual communication does not “speak” loudly. It quietly educates and guides the audience through the interface.”

• Digital Web

  The rule of three, eh? The web is advertising, eh? Let’s continue the shortening of attention spans, eh?

• Stop Design

  This article could have benefited with a list of the phases right after the initial introduction. As it is one is left wondering what they are, how many there are, and in what way one is to prepare one’s mind for the coming instruction.  Overall, though, the article was a great template for how to structure a project from inception to completion.

Each of the assigned articles are insightful. Although I have spent some time thinking about accessibility of websites, these sites provided some clues and suggestions on how to accommodate users with different disabilities.

Human Factors was a great way to hear how all of those websites that use a billion tables are really annoying to those who use screen readers.

The UK government site was also pretty enlightening on how various users with disabilities would view the demonstration site. Although I found the original site pretty hard to use even in the non-diabled mode.