𝙴𝙽𝙶 𝟻𝟷𝟻𝟸 | 𝚁𝚎𝚜𝚙𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎 𝙿𝚘𝚜𝚝 #𝟻: 𝙸𝚗𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚏𝚊𝚌𝚎

First, Selfe & Selfe's article calls for a "critical and reflective stance" toward the adoption of computers in the classroom (482). Selfe & Selfe argue that software interfaces reintroduce forms of marginalization and oppression that educators have been working to omit from classroom environments. Second, Drucker's article argues that the interface is perceived as a boundary space, whereas the interactive interface becomes part of the action and experience of reading. Instead, the interface causes an in-depth analysis of reading, which becomes more than just breaking down the meaning of words. At the literary interface, reading is mainly constituted through interactive aspects rather than fixed linguistic systems and structures. The connection between the text and reader continuously occurs and manifests itself in performative acts. Third, Wysocki and Jasken argue that because of the focus on computers and the shift to online texts, this has led to a situation where interfaces themselves are ignored and not considered. In addition, the authors argue that learners should also focus on seeing interfaces and how those interfaces "take part in the wide-ranging, and certainly not always positive effects that computers have in our practices, lives, and relations with others" (37). Fourth, Buck argues that scholars who are associated with technical communication should focus their attention towards the subject "interface", which has been analyzed within various fields such as composition theory, rhetoric theory, and pedagogy. Fifth, Carnegie argues by comparing the role of digital interface into that of traditional rhetoric. She further argues that the concept of interface-exordium is a successful method, because it potentially develops interaction and active interest within online learners. In result, this approach reflects many objectives in the classroom and the interactivity among online learners, which is a key point in applying digital interface. Sixth, Arola argues that Web 2.0 is not creating a freely-based learning space that positively affects students from diverse educational backgrounds. Finally, Gallagher claims that templates can be used in a way that is effective and practical, in which featured content can still be generated by applying the template.

The first text that I want to focus on is Selfe & Selfe's article, which touches base about the impact of technological interfaces. As noted earlier, the article calls for a "critical and reflective stance" toward the adoption of computers in the classroom (482). Computers were perceived as an advantageous but effective method to update classrooms and pedagogical approaches. This is interesting to me because as a modern day student, computers are highly used and are important within the classroom structure. In addition, the environment space that students develop are engaging and interactive. This space really does make a significant difference, in which students generally prefer a comfortable and easily accessible classroom where they can have a fun learning experience. Unfortunately, many universities do not possess the luxury or finances to provide these types of environment spaces for students. The second text that I want to focus on is Arola's article, which describes that the access and transparency appear to be denied in Web 2.0 tools in practice. According to Arola, the design "remains primarily beyond a user's control" and the interface seemingly "functions in an arhetorical way" (7). This article was interesting to me as well because I associated Arola's argument with today's social media platforms. As an avid user of social media platforms (mostly Facebook and Instagram), I realized that these two in particular do not necessarily allow customized options regarding the aesthetic appeal and design format of their platforms. Although one can post various types of content, posts have to meet and fit the specifics of these platforms. Therefore, this realization reinforces Arola's argument and conclusion. Lastly, I was interested in dissecting Gallagher's article, which heavily mentions about the feature of website templates. When I think of templates, my mind automatically goes to WordPress or Wix, which are both web development services. Now, I personally have a Wix website and as someone who has zero knowledge and experience in coding or web design, this had me wondering how someone like me can create and develop a decent looking website that actually works. My opinion is that I believe these web development programs define the general idea when Gallagher mentions placing "templates under the general category of constraint" (2). Templates determine the set of choices for online users and should be considered as an element.

Questions to Consider & Discuss:

1. How do we redirect our attention from the interface to specifically targeting critical explorations of our potential to keep learning?

2. How does the use of technology help to create and disseminate cultural hegemony?