::fibreculture:: Microsoft and the critical classroom

[David Teh]

----- Forwarded message from Hugh Brown <hughie at onlineopinion.com.au> -----
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 11:28:32 +1000
From: Hugh Brown <hughie at onlineopinion.com.au>
Reply-To: Hugh Brown <hughie at onlineopinion.com.au>
Subject: Re: ::fibreculture:: Microsoft and the critical classroom
To: David Teh <dteh at arthist.usyd.edu.au>

David wrote:
> How do you get the students to view the programs with critical eyes? how
do you get
> them to demand more of their tools, to be conscious of what the tools
CAN'T do,
> or perhaps what they SHOULD do?
>
> is it necessary to treat the software as a TEXT for the purposes of the
class/
> course, so as to encourage critical 'readings' (a la lit.crit.)? or are
practical
> means (workshops etc) more effective for this?

I have never attended any kind of IT course, but one of the first things I
learned from using and being taught to use a number of (not only platforms,
but) even application packages was the relative strengths, weaknesses,
abilities and inabilitites of each one.  I view this knowledge as essential
to anyone who intends going into an endeavour that requires IT skills (ie
nearly everything these days).

It occurs to me that the very exercise of using multiple applications or
platforms to perform the same task (in my case, desktop publishing) brings
this consciousness to the fore. Conversely, since most education facilities
are limited to a single version of something, mainly for economic reasons,
asking students "What CAN'T this do?" is absolutely essential.

I believe Microsoft and others regard this as a marketing strategy: provide
(cheap/free) MS training to  students to decrease the probability they will
subsequently purchase/use anything else.  In light of that tendency from the
companies, as exemplified by the Redfern school, it is essential that
teachers in all forums bring the limitations of any single solution to the
attention of the students.

Unfortunately, critical flexibility is often abandoned regardless of
training.  For example, "enlightened" workers who once chose Netscape 4.xx
(which was superior at the time) over IE, still cling to it despite its
current obsolescence (for example, its inability to cope with the
<blockquote> tag in html 4.0).  This causes as many problems as ignorance of
alternatives to MS.  This is the result of limiting the critique to anti-MS
sentiment, rather than an appreciation of best-possible solution choices.

Teaching a genuinely critical appraisal of available options is what should
be sought.  Some MS products are state-of-the-art, but that doesn't mean
they're ideal.  Teaching students to continually reappraise and seek
improvement (whatever that means) should be the desired end.  Shouldn't it??

Hughie


----- End forwarded message -----



David Teh
Power Department of Art History and Theory
R  C  Mills  Building   A 26
University   of   Sydney     
N S W   2 0 0 6  AUSTRALIA

Tel:(H) 9569 9970              (M) 0402 257 324
    (W) 9699 7707 (mid-week)   (U) 9351 6905
    (E) dteh at arthist.usyd.edu.au


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: admin.arts.usyd.edu.au