Exer­cise 4: Sen­sory Expe­ri­ence Quan­ti­fied & Unclas­si­fi­able

• 10 points; 2 parts, media required for both 
• due 14-Nov; on your blog as entry or page (or in D2L if preferred)

 

 
» Objec­tive: in this two-part exer­cise, explore the range and lim­its of “mak­ing mean­ing” from expe­ri­ence, by artic­u­lat­ing as infor­ma­tion (if not nec­es­sar­ily knowl­edge).

For­mat: mul­ti­me­dia is required, for both parts (at least one instance each).
You might also com­pose the entire entry, parts 1 and/or 2, using media: for exam­ple, Part 1 as video.
 

» Part 1 prompt:

Choose a spe­cific sen­sory expe­ri­ence, directly encountered/engaged (not medi­ated, cul­tural, nar­ra­tive, intel­lec­tual, etc).
“Cat­a­log” descrip­tively to the great­est extent that you can, using as many angles/categories as pos­si­ble (as “thought experiment”).
Think of this doc­u­ment less as a typ­i­cal writ­ten genre (sum­mary, nar­ra­tive, mem­ory, dis­cus­sion, argu­ment, etc.) —
rather, more like an entry for ency­clo­pe­dia or data­base, encoded as infor­ma­tion and “leg­i­ble” in its quan­ti­ta­tive and objec­tive properties.

→ con­sider Drucker’s term capta (Ret­tberg Chap­ter 5): cap­ture the sen­sory expe­ri­ence and compose
data­base entry in place of sub­jec­tive mem­ory — one that is “leg­i­ble,” both quan­ti­fied and lin­guis­tic descrip­tion, for algo­rithms (like search engine or rec­om­men­da­tion sys­tem, A.I. / “machine learning”). 

* Be sure to con­sider and “tran­scribe” from sev­eral per­spec­tives; to “cap­ture” the numer­ous prop­er­ties, all empir­i­cal qual­i­ties, of the sen­sory expe­ri­ence as infor­ma­tion.
(note: this might not nec­es­sar­ily rep­re­sent the expe­ri­ence, espe­cially visu­ally, in any con­ven­tional way)
Con­sider the fol­low­ing angles, as well as any other “sys­tems of mean­ing” you use:

Vis­i­ble, as well as per­cep­ti­ble with any/all other senses
Phys­i­cal, mate­r­ial, chem­i­cal, biological
Numer­i­cal, mea­sure­ments, “ana­lyt­ics” or “metrics”
Data cap­tured by devices/applications (“machine vision” view), actual or imagined
Tax­on­omy, cat­e­gory, ref­er­ence; lin­guis­tic, non-verbal
 
*omit­ting mean­ings or val­ues social, cul­tural, moral, com­par­a­tive, historical
— in favor of strictly objec­tive observations.

 
 
» Part 2 (200−300 words):

Reflect­ing upon your “capta entry,” what is left out? Dis­cuss any/all aspects, par­tic­u­larly sub­jec­tive and qual­i­ta­tive dimen­sions, of the sen­sory expe­ri­ence that are not able to be doc­u­mented as infor­ma­tion — in quantified/empirical ways, as well as lin­guis­tic or rep­re­sen­ta­tional forms. (i.e. what can’t be made vis­i­ble or even put into words, possibly?)
Demon­strat­ing advanced con­tent knowl­edge and engage­ment, use at least one term/concept or quote from Ret­tberg or Knight readings.

In entire dis­cus­sion, be spe­cific, even while spec­u­lat­ing, and avoid gen­er­al­iza­tions or sim­ple comparison/contrast. Think of this as a sep­a­rate prompt, ask­ing you to con­tem­plate and con­vey “the expe­ri­ence” (moment) in itself — in ways not “leg­i­ble” (espe­cially to database/algorithm) as infor­ma­tion or per­haps even express­ible in language.
→ Using a media form to express or con­vey the sub­jec­tive dimen­sion is a good strat­egy (par­tic­u­larly as prac­tice for Project 3).

» The entire response should present insights about “the Expe­ri­ence Par­a­digm” through thought­ful dis­cus­sion about this par­tic­u­lar instance, dis­cussed con­cisely and precisely.
 

 

---

 

Assess­ment Cri­te­ria (from syl­labus):
Posted to per­sonal blog (or D2L), these infor­mal com­po­si­tions illus­trate atten­tive read­ing of assigned mate­ri­als, progress toward project, and engage­ment with class top­ics rel­a­tive to schedule.
Credit is assigned for (1) sub­mit­ting on-time, with required length and media (if assigned);
(2) demon­strat­ing atten­tion to class top­ics, con­tent knowl­edge, and crit­i­cal think­ing, par­tic­u­larly by describ­ing insights and connections;
(3) pro­vid­ing thought­ful and rel­e­vant responses to prompts, through spe­cial­ized discourse;
(4) with spe­cific exam­ples from per­sonal knowl­edge and/or respec­tive readings,
(5) while extend­ing rhetor­i­cal knowl­edge and mas­tery of writ­ing con­ven­tions, prac­tic­ing effi­cient prose (i.e. min­i­miz­ing /avoiding sum­mary, rep­e­ti­tion, digres­sion, and unnec­es­sary discussion).

 

---

 
 
 
 

» Video Notes

» WeV­ideo — Screen Recorder option

» other options:

SnagIt (Chrome exten­sion = free, plus unlim­ited stor­age in Drive with CU Login) 
— Tuto­r­ial video
also: Screncast-o-Matic , Jing / Screen​cast​.com , or EZVid (upload to YouTube)