To characterize what I do as “making” is either to mistake the methods — the research, the editorials, the workshops, the courses — for the purpose or, worse, to describe what I do as “making” other people, diminishing their own agency and role in sensemaking, as if their learning is something I impose on them.
As someone mentioned in class on Thursday, its possible some digital humanities writings intend to direct their works toward a student audience since that’s likely where it’d apply the most. In this case, It indeed did resonate with me because of how it made me rethink the way school systems operate over the course of many years. To my knowledge and experience, when taking a course, regardless of level be it high school or college, most if not all instructors tend to reuse material and only alter it during the year according to students needs, or if it becomes outdated. In addition to this, like mentioned within the passage, certain resources often don’t come from the instructors themselves.
This passage and quote in particular rekindled vivid memories of a “maker” vs “User” conflict in high school, and in such instances district administrators would enact changes to curriculum with teachers having little to no say in the matter. Despite others being the creators and makers of such content, instructors are still able to shape things into understandable material for students.
Over the course of this term I think I’d be most eager to pursue and study things revolving around 3D modeling, maybe thinking in the context of video games, as well as website creation. The main reason these topics have interested me is because of how they played a major part in my childhood. Of course, my generation grew up in a time where we could watch technology develop and use it as it became more widespread and efficient. With this, I’d like to take advantage of the tools given to try and use and make more diverse and unique creations.