Summaries

SUMMARY 7
November 16, 2014

7.1

Main Idea:

Chapter 9 from "Digital Storytelling: Capturing Lives, Creating Community" entitled “Designing in Digital: Working with Digital Imaging, Audio, and Video", by Joe Lambert discusses what makes a good design in a digital story. Lambert analyzes two movies and uses illustrations from each of the movies to examine various concepts that were used.

Supporting Key Concepts:

*          What makes a good design in a digital story?

*          Design: Originality vs. Cliché'

*          "Camaro Boy"

      - The fragmentary approach - pieces of a puzzle

      - The concept of the frame - use of blank space for effect

      - Visual pacing or timing - to highlight certain puzzle pieces

      - Implicit use of images - use of two central images

      - Planning and zoning - focuses on distance and the connection

*          Barcelona Marathon and A Traveler's Postcard Home

      - The travel memoir approach - allows for intimacy with audience and defines story basis

      - The visual treatment - utilizes visual themes through symmetry, shifts, and points

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

                        I enjoyed this chapter, partly because it was written in a way that the common reader could understand. The two movies that were analyzed were interesting and unique. I enjoyed the way the movies were put together because they were different from most descriptive films. Both of the film-makers displayed photos and videos in a unique way in order to hold the audiences' attention and tell a story.

Questions for Discussion:

*          What do you think makes a good design in a digital story?

*          Which movie did you like the best? Why?

*          Can you think of other ways to make a digital story unique?

*          Do you agree with Lambert that intuition is the largest part of experimentation?    

7.1 Map

7.2

Main Idea:

                        Chapter 10 from "Digital Storytelling: Capturing Lives, Creating Community" entitled “Distribution, Ethics, and the Politics of Engagement", by Joe Lambert is about how the Center for Digital Storytelling (CDS) discovered that the best storytellers are those who have experienced the issue that is being told first-hand. The concept of First Voice, or individuals speaking for themselves, was and is strongly encouraged in this process. The chapter explains how workshops were used to help "give the tool of publication to the people".

Supporting Key Concepts:

*          The concept of First Voice - individuals should speak for themselves

*          Conscientization - personal reflection

*          Utilizing workshops to give "the tool of publication to the people"

*          Participatory Media Practices - how lower prices and the web expanded opportunities

*          Using practitioners to put ethical considerations into perspective

*          Ethics - why is this such a concern?

*          Examples of personal experiences through digital storytelling          

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

                        As a budding social worker, this chapter was interesting to me. It is good to hear that the concept of First Voice is highly regarded over the use of a second party. I am also happy that ethics are being considered in this process. I realize that ethics do not always prevail in the digital storytelling world, but it is good to hear that there are ongoing efforts being made to encourage ethical considerations.          

Questions for Discussion:

*          Do you believe that a second party can relay a story as well as the individual telling it?

*          Do you believe the internet has provided more benefits for individual storytellers or has it             provided more trouble than it's worth?

*          Do you think ethics should be a top priority when relaying a digital story?

*          Other than your mandatory school or job-related postings, do you have a digital avenue    for telling your stories?

7.2 Map

SUMMARY 5
October 10, 2014

Main Idea:

The article “Art Education Technology: digital storytelling”, by Sheng Kuan Chung, describes a course in art education technology at the University of Houston that teaches art educators how to apply digital storytelling to art education. The article defines what digital storytelling is: “. . . the practice of incorporating digital text, imagery, video, and audio into the presentation of a computer-mediated, multimedia story” (Chung, 2007). The article also describes each step the students took during the class to create their own digital stories.

Supporting Key Concepts:

·         Why use digital storytelling in modern art education?
·         What is digital storytelling?
·         Description of the steps taken at the University of Houston’s digital storytelling course: exploring topics; script; storyboard; production; image preparation; criteria evaluation; presentation; peer critique of presentations; and peer critique of the project.
·         The benefits of applying digital storytelling to art education.

Example and Assessment:
See attached map.

Personal Response:
This is my favorite article so far because it completely relates to my reasoning for taking Digital Creativity at Grand Valley State University. The article was well laid out and easy to follow. I like the fact that Chung explains, in detail, the steps and how each was taken. I also appreciate the examples given of some of the student’s completed projects.

Questions for Discussion:

·         What do you think of art-making through digital technology?

·         Do you believe that too much focus has been put on using computer technology to make art in lieu of paints, chalks, easels, and smocks? Not enough focus?

·         Do you agree with the process that the University of Houston used in their art education technology class? Do you think they overlooked any steps?

·         Do you think the concluding benefits stated in the article are valid and substantial?

Main Idea:

The article “Co-creative Media: Theorizing Digital Storytelling as a platform for researching and developing participatory culture”, by Christina Spurgeon, outlines what co-creative media is and why it is useful in social media research. Further, the article continues to explore and define the practice of digital storytelling. Additionally, Spurgeon examines three separate projects involving individuals of different ages and backgrounds. These projects studied how different individuals engage with new media and how that media is used to convey themes that concern such individuals.

Supporting Key Concepts:
·         What is co-creative media?
·         How is co-creative media used and applied?
·         What is digital storytelling?
·         The Youth Internet Radio Network project: examining co-creative media and young people.
·         The Sharing Stories project: examining co-creative media and older individuals.
·         The Finding a Voice project: examining co-creative media and individuals who do not normally have access to digital storytelling media and the like.

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

 Personal Response:

I think co-creative media is a very beneficial process. I like the fact that Spurgeon explained the three projects that she examined to make her conclusions. I found the second project, the Sharing Stories project, most interesting. The project involved older residents of an inner city Brisbane location. I could relate with the older residents who, while interested in the subject of the project, had little interest in using computer applications to complete the project. Because of this, the researchers chose to recruit students from local schools to help and train the older residents about utilizing computer applications. The study was interesting because it had an unintentional benefit which involved two generations teaching one another and collaborating.

Questions for Discussion:

·         Do you think the process of co-creative media is beneficial in facilitating participatory culture?
·         Do you think that using digital storytelling as a co-creative media technique is a good way to bridge various participation gaps such as age and background differences?
·         Do you think that participatory media is more socially beneficial than less participatory forms?

Mindmup 1

Mindmup 2

_________________________________________________________________________________________





SUMMARY 4
September 26, 2014

Main Idea:

The article “Five Ways to Integrate: Using Strategies from Contemporary Art”, by Julia Marshall, explains various methods that art teachers can use to integrate art into their classrooms. Marshall believes that art can be integrated to students in three basic ways: integration of art in combination with other subjects; integration of art through life experiences; and integration of art through methods and models. Marshall’s main focus is on the utilization of five conceptual art integration strategies: depiction, projection, reformatting, mimicry, and metaphor.

Supporting Key Concepts:

·         Strategy 1, depiction, can be applied by students of all grade levels. Depiction is described as the creation of an object from a topic being studied.

·         Strategy 2, projection, can also be applied by students of all grade levels. Projection is described as the expansion of an object of study into a futuristic setting or view.

·         Strategy 3, reformatting, should be introduced to students at middle school and high school levels. Reformatting is described as a combining of two areas of study into one using artistic means.

·         Strategy 4, mimicry, should be introduced to students in upper grade school levels and above. Mimicry is described as acting out a profession or practice in a school setting.

·         Strategy 5, metaphor, should be introduced to students at high school levels. Using metaphor is described as taking an image or idea from one discipline to describe concepts in another.

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

I really enjoyed this article. I liked the fact that Marshall described the methods in layman’s terms and used examples to reinforce what was being described. I think that strategy 1, depiction, and strategy 4, mimicry, can be excellent, realistic teaching tools. Strategies 2, 3, and 5 involve more of a creative twist, and can be utilized to expand upon student’s artistic creativity.

Questions for Discussion:

·         What strategy did you find most beneficial? Most intriguing? Why?

·         Do you believe that art should be integrated in combination with other subjects of study or as an “art only” type class?

·         Do you think art and creativity is learned mostly through life experience or through educational settings?

·         Do you think the subject of art in schools should be encouraged more or less? Is art a dying subject in the public education setting?


Mindmup 4:



  

SUMMARY 3
September 19, 2014

Main Idea:

The article “Creative Cognition”, by Thomas B. Ward, Steven M. Smith, and Ronald A. Finke, uses cognitive psychology in the attempt to advance the idea and understanding of creative cognition. The two main goals expressed in the article are: advancing the understanding of creativity through utilization of the findings based on cognitive psychology, and extending the understanding of cognition through the observation of the cognitive process during generative tasks.  

Supporting Key Concepts:

·      The nature of creative thinking

·      Using cognitive psychology to explore creative cognition

·      Non-creative contexts vs. creative contexts in studies

·      Examining (creative) problem solving and internal imagery

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

I agree with Ward, Smith and Finke that creativity is not limited to a small portion of the human population. I also agree that the more established theories and concepts from the study of cognitive psychology can be utilized in the study of creative cognition. I appreciate the fact that the research was mostly based on the creative process of the general population and not focused on exceptional cases.  

Questions for Discussion:

·      In what ways do you agree/disagree with Ward, Smith and Finke?

·      Do you believe that creative thinking is based on mental recollection from prior experiences?

·      Do you believe that creative thinking is more or less influenced by present experiences?

·      Do you believe that creativity can have no distinct definition because the definition is based upon personal and individual viewpoints?

·      What are your beliefs regarding insight and creative cognition?

____________________________________________________________________________________

Main Idea:

            The article “Thinking Outside and On the Box: Creativity and Inquiry in Art Practice”, by Julia Marshall, elaborates on Wallas’ four stages of creativity. The article is based on a study of a teacher-directed high school art project. A total of 23 students participated in the project, but two students and their creative process’ were the main focus. The art students were invited to create according to a ten step system. The first four steps were based on Wallas’ preparation phase, the following three steps were based on the incubation phase, step 8 was based on the illumination phase, and steps 9 and 10 were based on Wallas’ final phase: verification. Marshall concludes that structure and creative theory are helpful to the creative process.

Supporting Key Concepts:

·      Creative processes are a form of learning

·      Wallas’ stages of creativity

·      Extension of Wallas’ stages

·      Understanding how structure and creative theory can and should be used in the creative process

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

I thought the elaboration on Wallas’ stages of creativity proved helpful in the implementation of this art project and study. Because the four stages were expanded to ten, the students were able to expand more on their ideas and create detailed and intricate outcomes. The ten stages allowed for more understanding and, I believe, enhanced creativity. I enjoyed reading about how the students navigated each step and concluded with truly unique creations.

           

Questions for Discussion:

·      Do you think that the ten step process enhanced the students’ creativity level?

·      Do you think the project was too teacher-directed and therefor limited the creative process?

·      Do you think the creative process should always/sometimes/never be restricted to a step-by-step system?

·      Do you think creativity theories are beneficial? Do they create limits and boundaries of any kind?

_____________________________________________________________________________________






SUMMARY 2
September 12, 2014

 “Handbook of Creativity”

Main Idea:

The main focus of chapter 20 of the book, “Handbook of Creativity”, which was written by Robert J. Sternberg (Handbook of Creativity, 1999), but refers to the views of Raymond S. Nickerson, is on the enhancement of creativity. Although Nickerson lists many assumptions about creativity, he is most intrigued about the possibility of creative enhancement and ways to achieve a higher level of creativity.

 Supporting Key Concepts:

-         There are many assumptions about creativity.

-         What steps can be taken to enhance one’s creativity?

-         There is no easy method to enhance creativity, however,

-         Education and instruction, personal experience, and tools and technology are three considerable and viable methods to enhance creativity.

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

I agree with many of Nickerson’s points. I believe that both nature and nurture are important considerations when analyzing all aspects of human behavior, including creativity. Nickerson states that an individual should not dwell upon the degree to which nature and/or nurture have influenced one’s inherent creativity and one’s ability to enhance their creativity. I share that belief as well. In the end, some individuals may be born with certain talents, but all individuals can expand upon those talents if they have a desire to do so.

Questions for Discussion:

·         What are your assumptions about creativity?

·         Do you believe that creativity can be enhanced?

·         Do you favor one way over another to enhance creativity?

·         Do you believe some individuals are naturally “blessed” with more creativity than others?

 Alternate Beliefs and Views Regarding Creativity:

·         Society considers creativity of value if it has a level of usefulness.

·         J.S. Bruner states that the element of surprise in addition to usefulness defines whether an act is creative or not (1962).

·         A great number of theorist’s state multiple characteristics when defining creativity, such as: uniqueness, usefulness, of some value, true, expressive, novel, original, and meaningful.

·         T.B. Ward states that new ideas in creativity are developed from preceding ideas (1995).

·         The creative process is often seen as congruent to the scientific process in the sense that new conceptions are developed through time-based prior conceptions.

·         Many theorists believe that the creative process is closely-linked to the problem-solving process because it involves a level of persistence while formulating thoughts in different ways, thus the term: creative problem-solving.

·         Some theorists believe that creativity and critical thinking go hand-in-hand, while others believe they are completely opposite and have little linkage to one another.

·         Creativity is seen by some as “genius” (He-paradigm) and by others as more common (I-paradigm).

·         M. Csikszentnihalyi categorized creative people into three groups: individuals who express unusual thoughts; individuals who see worldly experiences in unique ways; and individuals whose ideas change culture (1996).

·         Many theorists agree with Nickerson that creativity CAN be enhanced.

·         The process of brainstorming was promoted by A. Osborn (1963) and is widely used in creative processes.

·         There have been attempts to create programs which enhance creativity, such as The Productive Thinking Program (Covington, Crutchfield, Davies, & Olton, 1974), however, evaluation of such programs remain in question.

More Questions for Discussion:

·         Which of these beliefs do you subscribe to?

·         Why do you agree with these beliefs?

·         Which of these beliefs do you oppose?

·         Why?

·         Do you have alternate beliefs about creativity and the enhancement of creativity?

·         If so, what are they?

Works Cited

            Bruner, J. S. (1962). Contemporary approaches to creative thinking (pp. 1-30). New York, NY: Atherton.

  

          Covington, M. V., Crutchfield, R. S., Davies, L., & Olton, R. M. (1974). The productive thinking program: A course in learning to think. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    

        Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

            Osborn, A. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York, NY: Scribner's.

Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Handbook of Creativity (pp. 392-430). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Ward, T. B. (1995). The creative cognition approach (pp. 157-178). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

 ____________________________________________________________________________

“Digital-Synthesized Photographs”

 Main Idea:

The article “Understanding Digital-Synthesized Photographs through Theories of Knowledge: A Case Study of Tom Bamberger’s Cultured Landscapes”, by Yi-Hui Huang, focuses on Bamberger’s work and the concept behind it. Bamberger uses digital synthesis to modify his photographs. His ultimate goal, through digital synthesis, is to create a “perfect” view. The article details Bamberger’s creation process through cloning and repetition. The article also focuses on creation strategies and interpretation of reality through digital art.

Huang focuses on understanding an artist’s viewpoint in order to understand their artwork.

 Supporting Key Concepts:

·         Bamberger’s use of cloning and repetition

·         Using science to explain nature

·         Using new methods to create beauty or perfection

·         Using current theories to interpret artwork

·         Applying layers

·         Formalism and pragmatism

Example and Assessment:

See attached map.

Personal Response:

I agree with some of Bamberger’s views and not others. I think Bamberger focuses too much on science and discredits God. I think that nature is a form of perfection and that altering it falsifies it. I enjoy many of Bamberger’s creations and believe he has certain talent, but do not see eye to eye with some of his views.

 Questions for Discussion:

·         What do you think about Bamberger’s view: “Reality is what you make of it”?

·         Do you agree with Bamberger that science, not God, is the best way to explain the truth in beauty?

·         Do you think that nature should be altered and made “perfect”?

·         Do you think that digitally synthesizing a photograph makes it better or discredits it?

Works Cited

Huang, Y. (2011, September). Understanding digital-Synthesized photographs through theories of knowledge: A case study of Tom Bamberger's Cultured Landscapes. ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection, 64(5), 35. Retrieved October 5, 2014

 Mindmup 2.1

Mindmup 2.2

___________________________________________________________________________________________





SUMMARY 1
September 5, 2014



Main Idea:
The article “Creativity: What Are We Talking About?” By Melody Milbrandt and Lanny Mibrandt (2011) attempts to clarify the meaning of the term creativity through the analysis of three categories for theories of creativity. The categories referenced are: Domain-Altering; SelfExpression and Meaning Making; and Creative Problem Solving. Throughout Milbrandt and Milbrandt’s article, the problem of a lax definition of creativity is referenced and reiterated.

Supporting Key Concepts:
 Milbrandt and Milbrandt describe Domain-Changing Creativity as defined by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1996): “. . . any act, idea, or product that changes an existing domain, or that transforms an existing domain into a new one” (p. 27).
 Milbrandt and Milbrandt describe Self-Expression and Meaning Making as derived from the point of view that creativity and art have a certain “survival value” and are biological necessities for Homo sapiens.
 They describe the third category, Creative Problem Solving as a creativity model which generates more than one or many solutions with no right or wrong answer(s).
 Additionally, they elaborate on societal lack of understanding regarding a clear definition of creativity.

Example and Assessment:
See attached map.

Personal Response:
My personal reflection regarding the effectiveness of this article is in response to Milbrandt and Milbrandt’s view that the definition of creativity should be clearer. I agree with the author, but am inclined to view creativity as Morris Weitz (1959) does. Wietz states that “. . . creative thought, at the core of artistic pursuit, continues to evolve, reflecting multiple changes and needs of society”. I believe that creativity cannot be clearly defined because it is a vague and ever-changing concept.

Questions for Discussion:
 Does the term creativity need to be intricately defined or should it remain vaguely defined considering constant societal changes?
 Which, if any, of the categories for theories of creativity do you believe should apply?
_________________________________________________________________________________


Main Idea:
The article “Paradigms in the Study of Creativity: Introducing the Perspective of Cultural Psychology” by Vlad Petre Glaveanu (2010) identifies three paradigms in creativity theory and psychology research. These three paradigms are: the He-paradigm, the I-paradigm, and the We-paradigm.

 Supporting Key Concepts:
 Glaveanu refers to the He-paradigm as the oldest of the three, and is based upon a link between genius, or guardian spirit, and divine inspiration. This paradigm exists due to a belief that creativity is genetically-based, individual, and exclusive to only some.
 The second paradigm, the I-paradigm, refers to the creativity of the “normal” person. The I-paradigm is described as an individual creativity in most Homo sapiens, but not as societal.
 The third paradigm, the We-paradigm is described as a paradigm in transition. The definition of the We-paradigm is based on internal dispositions, but is changing with time and research. Such research, involving both social and cultural factors influencing creative processes, is resulting in an emergence of a cultural approach regarding the psychology of creativity.

Example and Assessment:
See attached map.

Personal Response:
As I reflect on the above referenced article, I cannot profess to a perfect understanding of the true definition of creativity. Nor can I say that I have an exact comprehension of the He-, I-, and We-paradigms. In fact, my interpretation of both of the above articles is, quite likely, flawed. I can only hope to learn more about the creativity process during my time in this class.

Questions for Discussion:
 What is your interpretation of the three paradigms?
 Which paradigm do you most closely ascribe to?
 What is your view of the psychology of creativity?

Works Cited

          Csikszentmihalyt, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

          Glaveanu, V. P. (2010). Paradigms in the study of creativity: Introducing the perspective of cultural psychology. New Ideas in Psychology, 28, 79-93.

          Milbrandt, L., & Milbrandt, M. (2011, January). Art education. ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection, 64(1), 8.

          Weitz, M. (1959). Problems in aesthetics (pp. 27-35). N.p.: Macmillan



Mindmup: