 |
Author |
Topic: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director? (Read 7238 times) |
|
arielm
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #15 on: Jul 2nd, 2003, 10:50am » |
|
i'm too afraid they would go for flash anyway 
but i like the approach of having the initiative coming from the students...
a propos goals and processes, i think the constructivist approach of canceling the curriculum (i.e. the goals) and focusing exclusively on the process (student centered ecological development) is wonderful, risky (in a way that you have limited control as a teacher), but wonderful...
with M.I.T / Mitchel Resnick / Clubhouse concept in mind:
http://llk.media.mit.edu/projects/eThinking/tree.html
(scroll down to chapter 6: "Ecological Learning Environments")
i would love to have _ instead of a classic course _ the students immerged _ as wandering apprentices _ in a multimedia development studio, with real developpers working on real projects (without paying too much attention to the students, neither trying to influence them)...
|
Ariel Malka | www.chronotext.org
|
|
|
pollux
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #16 on: Jul 2nd, 2003, 11:00am » |
|
dear all,
for me the answer is:
depends on what do you want to teach.
i am an interaction designer, and director proved a valuable prototyping tool for software, interface and applications. even though i've done them also in flash, and even processing, i still consider director a great environment to fast application/interface sketching and prototyping. methapors included, it is fast visually, and quite capable through lingo.
i am also a web designer, so i value the strenghts of flash and actionscript together, to deliver interactive experiences on the web, and even as a visual programming tool, as levitated.net has showed and inspired me.
i am NOT a programmer, and as such i really appreciate processing, for giving me and the rest of the non-programmer mortals the ability to go beyond, to learn about applets, visuals, serial ports, and programming made easy (and fun).
that is my experience.
|
pollux | www.frwrd.net
|
|
|
benelek
 
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #17 on: Jul 3rd, 2003, 12:28am » |
|
Quote:i am NOT a programmer, and as such i really appreciate processing, for giving me and the rest of the non-programmer mortals the ability to go beyond, to learn about applets, visuals, serial ports, and programming made easy (and fun).
|
|
i haven't done more than a tutorial or 2 in both director and flash, but pollux does that mean you can't do the same kind of serial port / webcam / network / etc, exploration with flash & director? or just that it's much less intuitive to do so?
|
|
|
|
|
arielm
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #18 on: Jul 6th, 2003, 3:14am » |
|
on Jul 2nd, 2003, 11:00am, pollux wrote:for me the answer is:
depends on what do you want to teach. |
|
Well, i'm just asking myself this exact question and it seems to be one of the keys to the problem...
If i don't set "goals", then i don't want to teach something in particular, but rather expose the students to programming, hoping that fruitfull connections will emmerge in the future.
I took this direction already (not in a programming course but during introductionary courses on "interactivity" that i've been teaching), and the results were mixed: it was destabilizing and not tangible enough for some of students (they eventually left), and for others, the "fruitfull connections" i mentionned eventually happened, but long after the end of the course.
(of course, i don't mean that the whole "process-oriented" approach is a failure, it's much more my pedagogical qualities that are to blame...)
Now, to complicate (or simplify) the story even more, i think that it's maybe a problem to think in a binary way that oppose "goals" and "processes"!
Btw, you'll excuse me for using this thread as my personal verbatim-process-oriented-blog 
So let's try to define goals and later-on processes:
I want to teach digital-media beginners a course on programming, in the context of interactivity (todo 1: define why).
The goals of the course could be:
1) To expose the students to programming (and yes, in this case, director or p5 may not the big issue... really todo 2: re-evaluate later... oh no ).
2) To give them a minimal programming knowledge that will later on help them to express themselves (e.g. build prototypes that not only rely on the "timeline".) (but... todo3: even the most simple prototype i can think of requires a programming knowledge that won't be realistically reachable by most of the students!)
Now, to these "todos":
1) Defining why programming is important in the context of interactivity (oh the big word, there's a risk we're going to enter a huge parenthesis here, so i won't try to define too much what is my definition of interactivity...):
Programming can be seen as the lingua-franca of interactivity, in other words, the seventh sky of interactivity can be reached when an interactive application is open enough to be programmed by the users (think of the MOO...)
But there is a small problem here: as long as the majority of the users are still not acquainted to programming, interactivity will mostly remain in the closed, limited-form that it is today!
Of course, it's exagerated, but there's a point Anyway... it reminds me this chapter of the "Invisible Computer" by Don Norman where he states that interactivity is still in its prehistorical age because you can't just "speak" to a computer as you speak to a waiter!
Common Don, you spend too much time with Jakob Nielsen, or what
What if "speaking to a computer" were already possible call it "programming" ("programming an open system" to be more exact...)
Okay, it was a very short parenthesis on interactivity, it's definitly not enough, but in short: eventually, in two generations from here, people will know to program as they know to speak, and then, interactivity will reach some new heights... meanwhile, at least, interactive designers should be among the ones that know how to program.
(skipping "2" for now...)
3) Is it realistic to think that the students will acquire the minimal programming level required to be able to make an interactive application prototype which is not dumb
First, there is a debate about prototypes here... i've been seeing a lot of prototypes (e.g. final projects by 4th year students), most of them were simply not including any single line of code:
e.g, a prototype about "developping a set of user interface and communication tools for empowering the disabled", only made by creating cute icons and playing with the timeline!
In such a case, i think the problem is even deeper: you MUST program, otherwise, it will be extremely difficult to progress in the conceptualization itself, because you won't reach the real problems, and you won't have the opportunity to solve them!
It rejoins the previous "todo" where i tryed to explain my point about the the need for users to be "power-users", or in another words, programmers of the "interactive application" they use: if interactivity is about "learning", "understanding", "problem solving", etc. then we definitely talk about processes, because "knowledge", "wisdom", "solutions" don't come instantaneously... and more than talking just about processes, we talk about individual, ecological processes, based on each person's own starting point, not pre-defined, "closed" processes, as in most of the interactive stuff we can still see nowadays.
And then, programming is one of the most wonderful personal tools i can think of, when applied to learning, understanding, problem solving, etc.
Now, to be more pragmatic, and also based on my observation of the students: only a small percentage of them will persevere in programming anyway, so what can we do with that
continued on the next post...
|
Ariel Malka | www.chronotext.org
|
|
|
arielm
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #19 on: Jul 6th, 2003, 3:20am » |
|
the previous post was too long, and then rejected by the system so i had to split it...
...Keeping in mind that the ability to program is a key element to "raise" the level of the final projects: one of the options could be to "import" external programmers into the system: some of the students are doing it already, but in an unformal fashion, i.e. it's not part of the school's program to facilitate interaction between its design-oriented students and say, external computer-science oriented students...
But still, in order to be a producer, to give a blue-print to a programmer, you may need to have a basic knowledge of programming... a good-enough reason why every new student should get an introductionary course on programming anyway. no?
to be continued... gutten nacht!
|
Ariel Malka | www.chronotext.org
|
|
|
pitaru
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #20 on: Jul 8th, 2003, 3:53pm » |
|
I've been teaching a course at NYU (http://itp.nyu.edu) that uses both Flash and Processing. The course helps graduate students of various backgrounds discover why and how they would use code in functional and expressive ways. It is amazing to see how each mind is adapting to programming fundamentals in a unique way. Flash is a great tool to help visualize what a programmatic structure is, but at the same time locks students into Flash-specific concepts. Processing stays true to the 'real deal', but requires more abstract mind. Flash can be a good vehicle for helping students attain abstract thought. Somehow, they fit in the same course. Teaching this course is a balancing act.
It helps to:
a) Constantly show students how both environments relate to programming fundamentals.
b) Make students experience first hand how each platform lends itself to a different state of mind.
c) Be very clear as to the pragmatic benefits of using each tool.
In this course, each student must complete weekly assignments specifically for Flash or processing, but may use a platform of choice for the final project.
I find that each student will gravitate towards one of the two as the course moves on. Some observations:
- The ones who don't know Flash will want to learn it first.
- The ones who use Flash regularly will note that processing gives them much needed freedom to roam wild. They will usually not renounce Flash in the process of learning processing.
-amit
|
|
|
|
|
arielm
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #21 on: Jul 10th, 2003, 4:23pm » |
|
thank you for sharing your experience amit, i guess i'll interrogate you on the details soon
now, as a first attempt to summarize what i've learned from this passionate thread...
- programming is one of the corner stones of interactive-media, but this fact is not reflected into the curriculum.
- interactive-media students should get exposed to programming, from the very beginning!
- some of them may "catch" _ invest, persevere, more likely in an autodidact fashion (the school is not going to turn into a full computer-science program anyway) _ with programming.
- some of them may not, but at least the "box" would have been open, and hopefully it could affect the way they look at things...
now concerning the question "Processing or Director?"...
let's just replace "director" by "flash":
before amit's post, i was looking at flash only as the "carrot", i.e. the cool feature that will sell the course (processing + flash) to the students...
now, i can also look at it as a way to have "multiple points of views" when learning to program.
and yes, Janet and Nathan, we know that multiple points of views are a great ingredient in the "noise-to-understanding" process.
finally, let's focus on the "audience" and the experience we'd like to create for it, or in other words, the multimedia students and the best way to introduce them to programming:
here, i'm not sure that an hybrid course featuring processing and flash would help absolute beginners to understand something...
not because of the respective natures of flash or processing, but rather because it seems to me too much data at a time, which here means too much noise.
and here, i make a choice for processing, because it's the most minimalistic way to start with programming that i can think of...
with flash, before getting to the "action-script" panel, you must understand the zillions of basic features that comes before...
so if i go the hybrid-way anyway, i can easilly imagine the chaos that will reign in the (semesterial?) course for at least one month, and to my humble experience of teacher, it's not a good thing (half of the students will drop, etc.)
one other option, suggested by REAS a few posts before was to start with processing and then switch to flash after a month or so...
so maybe the "contract" should be something like:
"okay students, you baddly want to learn flash, aren't you? so we are going to start with processing for one month, meanwhile, you are going to teach yourself alone how to start with flash (everything that is not related to programming) and then, we start to look both at flash and processing..."
anyone that would like to react to the ethics / viability / etc. aspects of this (first-draft) "contract"?
|
Ariel Malka | www.chronotext.org
|
|
|
pollux
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #22 on: Jul 14th, 2003, 4:02pm » |
|
on Jul 3rd, 2003, 12:28am, benelek wrote:
i haven't done more than a tutorial or 2 in both director and flash, but pollux does that mean you can't do the same kind of serial port / webcam / network / etc, exploration with flash & director or just that it's much less intuitive to do so |
|
no, it means that's the way my experience developed.
maybe because i don't use director for programming (though i program in it), but processing i do.
and, a propos, there are many penumbrae that overlap, many common groups of shared characteristics between director, flash and processing (and many other programs not discussed herein). like those you and i mentioned, benelek; but each one of them deals with them in a different way (slightly or strongly, may it be the case).
|
pollux | www.frwrd.net
|
|
|
mike
Guest
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #23 on: Jul 22nd, 2003, 6:57am » |
|
Wow. Great thread.
A little background before my answer/comments:
I'm a "new media designer" (I feel like I'm at an AA meeting). I graduated from Savannah College of Art and Design (in Savannah, GA) in 2001 with a BFA in Computer Art (concentration in Interactive Design). SCAD was one of the few schools that had an interactive media program at the time along with the facilities to support it. Looking back now after all I've been through, I recognize the flaws and strengths of their program, which I'm sure has changed.
I'll try to make my points short.
I've been working with computers since age 12, so I don't fear them. So, at SCAD, there was no initial taboo with the computer (believe me, some of my peers had that). So, I'm going to present the perspective of a student who _wants_ to use the computer and isn't afraid of it.
I didn't know anything about programming when I got into some of my major's classes. The Java class I had flew right over my head. I didn't see how any of it applied. The Director class woke up something huge in me -- the need to know HOW the code worked. It was the catalyst that suddenly let all my preconceived ideas of interactivity fly out the door, and made me realize that with programming comes power, and inifinite possibilities. As an interactive designer, you sculpt and create the rulesets for interactivity. It made me want to know code.
Most of my peers were daunted by it though...however, the interest WAS sparked as well. The syntax was the trying part.
Since then, I have become quite fluent in Javascript, Lingo, Actionscript...you name it...and I do apply all the C/C++ style coding practices to my work...essentially eliminating timeline-dependent coding that Flash and Lingo introduce into beginners dealing with the media.
So, here's my stand.
1) Teach them to think. Problem solving is key to anything...specifically programming. Teach them to identify their goals, then delineate the process. Writing down in plain words what each step would be to reach the goal... i.e. a fake coding language.
2) As pitaru stated in his response, use both environments (Flash and Processing) to demonstrate how each can be used to solve these problems. Side-by-side comparisons would allow for more light-bulbs to go off when they can see their logic translated to syntax (which is ALWAYS the biggest inhibitor at first). If I had had that approach when I first started all this, I would have been able to make the connection that so long as you can understand programming fundamentals, syntax becomes your biggest hurdle when attempting to transfer that preexisting knowledge to other languages. Now, I can run through essentially any language and get a general understanding of it.
3) Teaching the two environments side-by-side would probably be best, but Flash's environment (GUI and all the rest of the non-actionscript related features) must be concentrated on for some time before jumping into actionscript demonstrations. You mentioned letting them do it on their own, which should be fine, so long as they're willing to go through those tutorials on their own.
Basically, I guess it comes down to this. People that are in school to learn 'new media' or 'interactive media' are getting what I feel to be the Website BFA. At least that was the case a couple years ago. I think students (and people currently in the field) need to recognize that HCI isn't limited to browsing the web or playing video games (which, when compared, video games are so much more robust in their overall variances of experience and interaction between the player and the software). Second Story is definitely moving it along...shifting the web perspective a bit for users.
I guess the most important thing about all this is that programming is our means of talking to the computer. It is the _key_ to human-computer interaction. The sooner people understand its simplicity of implementation, the more robust our human-computer experiences will become.
Well, I guess that wasn't short at all.
|
|
|
|
|
bzor
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #24 on: Jul 24th, 2003, 11:38pm » |
|
Quote:| Flash is a great tool to help visualize what a programmatic structure is, but at the same time locks students into Flash-specific concepts. Processing stays true to the 'real deal', but requires more abstract mind. Flash can be a good vehicle for helping students attain abstract thought. Somehow, they fit in the same course. |
|
Having covered for amit several weeks at his class at Pratt, I'd like to comment. Forgive me if I mention anything already discussed, I just skimmed the thread..
I found that in theory teaching both flash and P5 concurrently is an interesting approach. It helps the student to immediately abstract the fundamental concepts of programming, so they are not bound to any one software package or language. One of the biggest setbacks I've found in teaching/learning just one of these apps, whether it be p5, director, or flash, is that it becomes the baseline of comparison. For example, flash students will immediately want a movieclip/timeline class in p5, or java students will be confused as to "where things go" in flash. Showing both could help extract the concepts from the environments and get the student feeling comfortable comparing implementations, which is useful in learning more languages, apps, etc.
Quote: here, i'm not sure that an hybrid course featuring processing and flash would help absolute beginners to understand something...
not because of the respective natures of flash or processing, but rather because it seems to me too much data at a time, which here means too much noise. |
|
One method I briefly discussed with amit that would begin to help solve this and some other concerns from arielm's last post is to give the students an initial setup of constraints within flash to work from. For example you could set up a template .fla with an include statement that calls a .as file that has a setup and loop function. The student can only then write to the .as file. Another include could reference custom drawing classes for primitive shapes, etc. This would require them to generate all graphics/movements by code, and make the starting points somewhat more balanced. Techniques such as this can help the transition both ways and focus on the code.
all in all, interesting discussion..
|
|
|
|
|
arielm
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #25 on: Jul 25th, 2003, 7:12pm » |
|
mike and bzor, thanks for sharing your experience!
mike, we definitely agree that programming should be a de-facto starting point for interactive designers (and it's far from being like that today)...
but then, what it takes to become an apprentice-programmer?
motivation, perseverance and experience... which means a lot of time to invest.
but finding the time is not a trivial issue (at least when you're a student at Camera Obscura school) when you have already a heavy cursus full of courses on diferents subjects!
in addition, finding time is not the only barrier: you also have to deal with information overload (too much topics at a time)...
now back to bzor's method / suggestion "to give the students an initial setup of constraints within flash to work from": it sounds like good idea to me, since it can minimize the cognitive overload & level of efforts required to start learning programming...
and i can see that a lot of this thread's participants are promoting the idea of having an hybrid course, mixing processing and flash (or director), so it's definitely something to consider seriously, but i'm still hesitating because in the current cursus context, i'm afraid that the additional efforts required to get started with flash are too high in comparison to the benefits of having "multiple points of views"...
and now, i'm going to exagerate a bit and state that maybe the first year in the cursus of an interactive designer student should be totally focused on acquiring some solid programming bases!
the same way that in real-life you need first to acquire a language, prior to doing more complicate stuff!
|
Ariel Malka | www.chronotext.org
|
|
|
heidi
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma - goals or process?
« Reply #26 on: Jul 26th, 2003, 12:35pm » |
|
there are a lot of interesting dilemmas here.
one of them, how to optimally combine goals and process.
on Jul 2nd, 2003, 11:00am, pollux wrote:dear all,
for me the answer is:
depends on what do you want to teach.
|
|
on Jul 6th, 2003, 3:14am, arielm wrote:
Well, i'm just asking myself this exact question and it seems to be one of the keys to the problem...
If i don't set "goals", then i don't want to teach something in particular, but rather expose the students to programming, hoping that fruitfull connections will emmerge in the future.
|
|
------------
i think mike stated it very well:
on Jul 22nd, 2003, 6:57am, mike wrote:
The Director class woke up something huge in me -- the need to know HOW the code worked. It was the catalyst that suddenly let all my preconceived ideas of interactivity fly out the door, and made me realize that with programming comes power, and inifinite possibilities. As an interactive designer, you sculpt and create the rulesets for interactivity. It made me want to know code. |
|
*This* seems to me to be the right kind of goal.
Mike, can you elaborate a little on what it was that woke this up in you
It would obviously be different for each student... but the better we understand this process, the better able we would be to create an environment that would promote this process.
maybe others as well
|
|
|
|
|
heidi
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma:
« Reply #27 on: Jul 26th, 2003, 12:45pm » |
|
dilemmas: p5 or director (or flash).
goals or process.
theory or technology.
i, for one, vote *synergy*.
some background - i've been teaching client-side scripting for the last 3 years. my interest in the theoretical and artistic aspects have developed simultaneously, and as a result, my classes in basic scripting have become a platform to guide students towards making the conceptual shift necessary to really open up to the realm of possibilities.
the starting point for this is viewing the scripting/programming paramaters as the structure that shapes the kind of content you can create with it.
when it comes to providing learning that goes beyond a "website degree" as mike put it so eloquently - it's critically important to understand the social, philosophical, psychological implications of - for example - an open-source, universally accessible scripting language in order to be able to conceptualize what's possible with these technologies.
The technology generates the higher conceptual levels.
From this viewpoint, Ariel and I have been discussing the possibility of putting together a workshop that aims to integrally combine technology+theory.
on Jul 10th, 2003, 4:23pm, arielm wrote:
- programming is one of the corner stones of interactive-media, but this fact is not reflected into the curriculum.
|
|
There is a definite barrier to programming, and it often begins with the academic management, which is largely unaware of how fundamentally connected programming is with theory. However, there's also the problem of teachers. Interactive programming, art and theory are inherently so inter-disciplinary that it's damn hard to find one person who can competently bring all aspects together - and also be a good teacher!
on Jul 10th, 2003, 4:23pm, arielm wrote:
- interactive-media students should get exposed to programming, from the very beginning!
|
|
that's a very interesting point.
in a nice synchronistic bit (ariel, are we telepathic or what ), i just read a passage from _Zen in the Art of Archery_ where he discusses Japanese teaching traditions.
The first (and years-long) stage of the tutorship is having the student mimic the teacher, and concentrate entirely, fully and absolutely on technique. The idea is that through full mastery of technique, the student will then reach a point where he is able, without hinderance, to express himself through his art; the technique then freeing him to be open to all possibilities.
The Western mind works differently - first envisioning the freedom, the possibilities, (goals) and then working to develop the techniques/technology to ennable it. Basically, in line with the constructivist view that Ariel already brought up here.
However, wouldn't a synthesis be ideal
Some of what an optimal learning environment would include (summarized from other posts as well):
a: limit the students to a particular level, because it is only when everything is open,
that the noise to signal ratio goes out of whack. (a propos your comment, ariel).
teach within limits. those who grasp the fundamentals will then have the inner motivation
to go and learn independently... and teacher's visiting hours, bibliography and final
projects are designed just for that - to provide additional, more open and independently-determined, learning structure.
b: provide a number of 'hooks'. i.e., for those that come for the theory, guide them towards
the technology, and vice versa. endeavor to structure a kind of back-and-forth dialogue between theory and technique into the class.
c: particular goals must be made very clear. to the teachers and the students.
perhaps the means to reach those goals should be partially closed, partially open.
i'd even go so far as to suggest using the first class to bring up everyone's expectations and goals, and to involve the students already at this point in establishing the 'mission statement' for the workshop.
any more
~heidi
As for the future, your task is not to forsee it, but to enable it.
The Wisdom of the Sands, Saint-Exupery
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 26th, 2003, 12:47pm by heidi » |
|
|
|
|
arielm
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #28 on: Aug 17th, 2003, 5:45pm » |
|
latest news!
finally, the Camera Obscura School decided not to go for a proce55ing course this year (it's not that i didn't try hard _ even miss heidi, which happens to be my neighbor _ joined forces at some point!..)
i guess the reasons are more related to the fragile state the digital-media section at the school is for now than to a reject of the proce55ing concept.
we've been told that if there were more students and more budget, it won't be question at all.
so let's hope we are luckier next year!
meanwhile, heidi and me are trying to "sell" the concept of proce55ing workshops to other institutes in israel.
for now, we even received the beginning of a positive response for giving a workshop dedicated to artists and designers!
so i guess our focus is becoming wider: in addtion to "what to teach to new students", we need to figure out "how to attract artists and designers _with an interest in new media _ toward computational design"...
on my way to open a new thread on this very subject!
|
Ariel Malka | www.chronotext.org
|
|
|
pollux
|
Re: the teacher's dilemma: p5 or director?
« Reply #29 on: Aug 26th, 2003, 10:40am » |
|
pollux, the devil's advocate?
i have a reason to prefer processing over flash/director/shmirector...
processing is free! gratis! frei!
hehe, just tell that to your school board, they'll be more than happy to adopt it inmediately...
ps: add OpenSource, community, compatibility, new virtues and forum to it, and you have a deadly winning combo.
|
pollux | www.frwrd.net
|
|
|
|
