Final SII Reflection Paper

       New media and new literacies was an eye opening course into many of the issues and theories in learning and emerging technologies.  This course lays a foundation for this Master’s degree program in that it introduces the terminology of this modern and still developing discipline.  Without understanding the language and possibilities of emergent technology, it is difficult to pursue any higher or sequential learning in this curriculum.

The SII Method for Assessment Reporting (Wasserman & Beyerlein, 2004) offers a framework for assessing learning that is, "concisely stated, supported by evidence, and delivered in a positive manner" (para. 1). The SII method includes three sections: 1. a thoughtful description of the assessee's strengths, 2. areas if improvement, and 3. insights that can be transferred to other contexts.

Self-assessments always make me feel uncomfortable for many reasons.  The most important reason is that I have learned that sometimes my opinion of myself is simply quite wrong often.  If I ever question this notion, I just have to ask my wife.  I think my strengths in this course are aligned with the academic training I have undertaken previously.  I also believe that this course has strengthened and honed this skill that is integral to Library and Information Science: academic research.  I think that I have some experience finding relevant and credible resources.  I used my reference skills to access appropriate information to the assignments.  I also believe my previous training has given me the ability to comprehend the theoretical aspect of this course.  Many of the learning theories we delved into included Information Literacy and other 21 century literacies. I have some experience with this subject.

I feel more comfortable identifying the improvements I have to make as I move forward in this program.  At times I can be a little too self-critical, I believe.  This my wife would disagree with.  My biggest concern with my aptitude for learning with emerging technologies is getting more comfortable with using technology tools.  I feel more comfortable with the researching and writing for the course, but not so comfortable with the video presentation aspects.  After I finished my YouTube presentation at 1030 PM before the midnight deadline, I was thinking of a couple of ways I could have improved the video.  In a way I am glad I stopped editing the video because YouTube wouldn’t accept the video in the format it was in.  I had to convert the file format which took almost an hour.  Around 11 PM I was getting nervous.  I was thinking: Is this going to convert in time before the deadline?  What if it converts and YouTube still does not accept it?  Luckily, the format was changed in time and YouTube accepted the video.  What would I have done differently if I had more time?  The part of the video in which I use the webcam should have been stronger.  I should have a better webcam – there is a lag between the audio and video.  It should have been more rehearsed.  I had cue cards, but the images still look unnatural to me.  During the slide presentation, I think that I found better slides to use after I already put the presentation together.  I think that when you are attempting to engage a student through video, the facilitator should always shoot for a “wow” factor.  Since I have the advantage of multimedia, I could have used more visually attractive slides to engross the learner.  The problem was not just the shortage of time, but it was also with my slack of experience with the technology I was using.  Every time I spotted a mistake or something that needed improvement, it would take at least 15 minutes to edit.  Sometimes 15 minutes to edit a couple of seconds of video.  For example, if I made a mistake during the slide presentation portion of the video, I had to make the edit in the Blue Berry software, then change it in Windows Media Player.  Then I had to use the editing features on both software applications.  I believe that the intentions of both software companies was to make their products intuitive and easy to use – but if you have very little familiarity, it’s a trial and error experience.  For example, sometimes during the cutting part of production, I cut too much or too little.  Then I needed to re-take the part.

In the end, the final video presentation was the best I could do in the time allotted and the skills I possessed.  Even though I am hyper critical of the video, I am also somewhat proud of the video.  I have used YouTube as a learning tool, now I have a little more confidence that I can use YouTube as a learning facilitator.

The insight I have gained in this course goes back to the 2 main areas I have discussed in this self-assessment: academic research/writing and video tools for learning experiences.  I hope to pursue a career and academia and this course was heavy in reading in writing.  Although the course work was difficult at times, I must accept this challenge.  A career in academia will provide an abundance of scholarly research, reading and writing.  This type of learning in new media and new literacies will prepare me for the rigor of academic writing.  Using video tools for learning experiences is a challenge.  I will take my experience in writing, performing and producing this video as a benchmark for future multimedia learning modules.  This video production experience will be applied to many other contexts including an emerging technologies academic librarian.