Rants about digital arts, photography and university.

Why don’t schools create flexible testing methods?

We know for sure that different people learn in different ways and can better apply their skills in different ways, so why don’t schools try to vary teaching/testing methods? Sure this may just be me, ranting away because I don’t like exams.  But that’s not to say I don’t like all my school work. It’s specifically those 3 hour bursts for which I have to memorize a bunch of stuff that I will forget about within two weeks of the exam. But not everybody’s like me. Some people will remember that stuff because they had to memorize it for the exam. I, personally, remember things when I have to use them. Remembering a definition to say: Yes! It’d d) not a)! Doesn’t help me in the slightest. I’ll remember it long enough to write it down during the exam and that’s it. I won’t remember it ever again.

There are other ways though. What if schools were to offer students a choice where they could either choose to do the quick memorization thing, or a take home or a practical of some sort? (this would depend on the course as well, obviously) I definitely feel like I would be more likely to retain the information I’m being taught if I’m forced to research it and apply it a few times. (once won’t cut it)  The repetition in the practice or even just rereading (say, because I have to look something up to work out a question) helps me remember things.  For example, when I work on my 3d skills… I’ve got a bunch of books on 3d animation, different software, techniques, etc. I can memorize different parts of the book if I want, but the only way I actually got to remember for longer than a few days what an inverse foot rig is, was by actually reading through the book while creating the rig on my computer.  Otherwise it didn’t mean anything to me for longer than a few days.

Anyway. That’s just my opinion, and old habits are hard to break. The schooling system is the way it is and is highly unlikely to change or innovate any time soon.

I’d love to hear people’s comments on the subject.

So, I’ve recently decided to start posting videos on youtube.  I’m not entirely sure why.  I think it may be a sort of exploration of self? But by choosing to post the videos to youtube, I feel like I have a responsibility to make them.  Otherwise I probably wouldn’t take the time.  I think it’s also an excuse to explore certain interests of mine, develop them and learn more about them in the process.

The first two entries are just rants about stuff.

The last one I posted was about one of the products I ranted about in the first video: the JJC flash triggers.  They’re really low cost flash triggers. They can work on 4 different channels, use two AAA batteries in the slaves, one of those funky small/fat batteries in the master and work at distances of up to 30 metres.  They don’t support TTL obviously, being such cheap triggers, but as long as you take the time to set up your flashes individually they work great.

Here’s the video:

I don’t know what is the best educational system in the world. I have a friend in Kenya who runs a college and claims that the Japanese system is amongst the most impressive he’s read about.  I, however, don’t know how to classify an educational system.  I do, however, know that everybody has a different learning style.

I don’t know what my learning style is, but I’ve figured out a couple things through my years in the IB system and Concordia University’s system.  I am best at working on creative projects under extreme pressure.  The thrill of having my creative juices -forced- out of me during the last 24 hours available for a project gets me super hyped about the project.  This isn’t to say that I stupidly attempt to create entire projects the night before a project is due, but I might leave a few, significant sections that I know are achievable and I would like to do under pressure for the last couple days.

Essays work nearly the same way, except that I’d rather get working on them a bit earlier than creative work (around 4-5 days ahead) because I’m not the best of writers (but I can type superfast! Hurray!).

There is one thing that I have yet to figure out, though… how to go through readings whilst trying to keep a genuine interest in what I’m reading.  You see, just recently I bought a book for one of my classes. It’s actually a pretty interesting book, and I got into it a couple days after receiving it from Amazon.ca.  At the time, I hadn’t figured out what we were supposed to read from it for the class, and I was really enjoying it.  As soon as one of my classmates told me exactly what I had to read by what date, I suddenly lost all interest.

For some reason, associating a book with a class and having to read it in steps rather than just go through it any way I please, creates a complete and total lack of interest in me.  A book which I was reading on the metro, on the bus, walking, in bed or just sitting down, suddenly seemed to have a magical effect on my eyelids, pulling them down in complete and utter boredom.

I don’t understand.

Or maybe I do? Maybe there are things in my life that require me to do them under complete lack of pressure? maybe.  I feel like it’s also a question of education for the sake of education.  You see, I love educating myself.  I’ve got tons of books about software, photography, philosophy, art and more. I really enjoy reading them.  When I have to read something for the sake of getting it done for school (not at all the same thing as “for the sake of education”) I suddenly feel like it’s a chore.  It’s no longer about gaining knowledge about our world and how it works, but making sure I’ve got information so that I can make some sort of vaguely relevant comment in a classroom environment.

It might have something to do with my attitude about education and it might be something I have to change, but for now I certainly don’t know how.  I just hope my education system does.

I just read about the possibility that the U.S. Congress may pass a bill that would allow for internet censorship.

Read more about it here and here and here.

Isn’t it impressive that a country that claims to be the “land of the free” should even consider passing a bill that could allow for the government, or large companies or anyone with any push to decide what their citizens may or may not see? I think it’s ridiculous.

The idea is to more strictly enforce copyright laws.  On this page, however, they suggest (rightfully so, in my opinion) that passing a bill like this one would be a stepping stone into all sorts of censorship.  I think that would be a huge problem.  Once censorship is allowed for certain legal (and consequently, moral) reasons, it opens the gate for anybody with enough power to enforce their morality upon others through it.

I also want to make another point.  All this business about copyright… it doesn’t make sense to me.  People download cracked software usually because they can’t afford it, or because the can’t justify the cost, relative to the use they are making of the software (personal learning, education, fun).  The point is that the software being downloaded is largely used for personal, non-commercial use, and the people who are using it in this context probably can’t pay for it.  People who are looking for fun software who have no intention to educate themselves about the more expensive, complex software usually have no problem buying cheaper more limited alternatives.  If people are forced to stay away from the sites where they can obtain this software, they will probably just switch to open source alternatives.  This prevents the big commercial players from developing a potential market in that those who downloaded the cracked software are more likely to be future customers.  Also, people using open source software often feel compelled to donate: just look at the millions of dollars Wikipedia is able to raise off donations.  Basically, these software manufacturers may in fact be losing customers and, more importantly by their [obvious] standards, money by eradicating cracked software sites.

An ideal plan might be to provide a free (maybe mildly diluted) version for non-commercial use as some companies are already doing , and maybe even invite some innovation into the process by making some (not necessarily the core) code open to the public, to see where the creative potential of the masses can come up with; all the while, another, paid, license would be available for all commercial applications.  If the fear is that non-commercial licenses will be used for commercial purposes, they should keep in mind that it is much easier to sift through commercial work, looking for appropriate licenses, than to look through all the work being produced with their software.

As for music, people are generally quite loyal to their favorite artists.  If they don’t find the artist particularly worthwhile, the audience won’t bother buying a CD.  If  they do like an artist, then they’re quite likely to support the artist, whenever the funds are available.  If they don’t have the funds, they couldn’t buy the music anyway, so the record companies aren’t losing anything.

In the end it’s a battle of morals.  Some believe that everybody deserves profit from their work, regardless of the context.  Some, such as myself, believe that creators of art/music/software have to have some sort of profit to encourage them and sustain them, but that context plays a part in determining where and when one should be profiting.  Others believe that no one should profit, and that everybody should share everything.  Yet others believe that everything should be shared and should be technically free, but that the users/audience should donate if they deem the product donation-worthy.

I’d love to hear others’ opinions on the subject! Comment and maybe we can have a good discussion.

In one of my classes last week, a few people began discussing the problems with packaging in stores.  They spoke of “clam-shell” packaging, amongst other forms and how the amount of plastic or other materials used, compared to the size of the actual product was ridiculous.  They were suggesting the use of more eco-friendly packaging solutions.  One of their solutions was to bags made of recycled paper, sized specifically for the product.

I, personally, think that wouldn’t work at all.  One of the reasons being that clam-shell packaging was designed not to be incredibly wasteful, but to be strongly discourage theft.  Unfortunately, I doubt small paper bags would have the same effect, and I don’t believe they will soften the conscience of any thieves.

It did get me thinking, though, about how it would be possible to create a system to limit packaging using technology.  Research would have to be done comparing the energy used/emissions/bio friendliness of used resources, but I think it would be very interesting if we could come up with systems to limit the amount of packaging, and potentially completely restructure the way a store functions.

Imagine walking into a store and NOT seeing a bunch of products stacked upon each other, filling aisle upon aisle of walkthrough storage space.  What if there were only one product in the place of each stack, with an identification number, or a card reader of some sort?  That’s how I imagine a store of the future.  It would be a sort of strange combination between shopping online and regular shopping.  You would find the products you like then, using some sort of interface, specify how many you would like then pay for them and pick them up (excessive packaging-free) as you leave.

It’s just a thought, but I’m thinking of turning this into a future project of mine.