Great idea, but ... Some years (?) ago Thandi (now Thadiwe?) Newcomb put out a hybrid audio/print text. Its a simple extension of what you (all) have used here, but reaches out a bit more to the audience (in this case me.)
Why? Because it allows scanning, and active selection, so I start being a producer, rather than a consumer - of meaning, (which is where I like to be.)
This podcast 'feels' a bit dated. So my first reaction was to use the 'jump forward 30s' and the 'jump back 15s' facilities. But that doesn't do it (for me.) Maybe add it as a choice?
I spend most of my time, these days, exploring visualisation, and I love the hybrid texts (which must be available in the machine learning playbook, no?) but I really find this format a bit 'oudoos' to quote a phrase.
And ... I keep seeing absences in the conversation - there is very little discussion of the issues, and looooots about the process. That could be reconsidered, no? I too vote for process, but here it comes across a bit like ''too much sauce, and not enough food.' Thanks anyway.
Thanks Roy, we consciously decided to discuss the process here. There have been many responses to HE4G, some of which I've put into the notes, including reviews and blog posts. And of course the book itself is freely and openly available and can be searched and dipped into as well as read cover to cover. So we were trying to see what opened up from a consideration of this aspect. However, the podcast is a brand new project and there is a lot for me to learn, so I am keen to take all feedback on board. Please keep listening!
Great idea, but ... Some years (?) ago Thandi (now Thadiwe?) Newcomb put out a hybrid audio/print text. Its a simple extension of what you (all) have used here, but reaches out a bit more to the audience (in this case me.)
Why? Because it allows scanning, and active selection, so I start being a producer, rather than a consumer - of meaning, (which is where I like to be.)
This podcast 'feels' a bit dated. So my first reaction was to use the 'jump forward 30s' and the 'jump back 15s' facilities. But that doesn't do it (for me.) Maybe add it as a choice?
I spend most of my time, these days, exploring visualisation, and I love the hybrid texts (which must be available in the machine learning playbook, no?) but I really find this format a bit 'oudoos' to quote a phrase.
And ... I keep seeing absences in the conversation - there is very little discussion of the issues, and looooots about the process. That could be reconsidered, no? I too vote for process, but here it comes across a bit like ''too much sauce, and not enough food.' Thanks anyway.
Thanks Roy, we consciously decided to discuss the process here. There have been many responses to HE4G, some of which I've put into the notes, including reviews and blog posts. And of course the book itself is freely and openly available and can be searched and dipped into as well as read cover to cover. So we were trying to see what opened up from a consideration of this aspect. However, the podcast is a brand new project and there is a lot for me to learn, so I am keen to take all feedback on board. Please keep listening!