Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Recent Posts
    • Attending Computers and Writing 2025? Be a Session Reviewer! 
    • Charisse Iglesias: Community Engagement Beyond Academia
    • Addison Kliewer – Bridging Academia and Industry with Technical Writing Mastery
    • Philosophy of Technology in Rhetoric and Writing Studies
    • Call for Blog Carnival 23: Digital Circulation in Rhetoric and Writing Studies
    • Introduction to Robert Beck
    • Introduction to Alex Mashny
    • Introduction to Marie Pruitt
    RSS Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Digital Rhetoric Collaborative
    • Home
    • Conversations
      • Blog Carnivals
      • DRC Talk Series
      • Hack & Yack
      • DRC Wiki
    • Reviews
      • CCCC Reviews
        • 2023 CCCC Reviews
        • 2022 CCCC Reviews
        • 2021 CCCC Reviews
        • 2019 CCCC Reviews
      • C&W Reviews
        • 2022 C&W Reviews
        • 2019 C&W Reviews
        • 2018 C&W Reviews
        • 2017 C&W Reviews
        • 2016 C&W Reviews
        • 2015 C&W Reviews
        • 2014 C&W Reviews
        • 2013 C&W Reviews
        • 2012 C&W Reviews
      • MLA Reviews
        • 2019 MLA Reviews
        • 2014 MLA Reviews
        • 2013 MLA Reviews
      • Other Reviews
        • 2018 Watson Reviews
        • 2017 Feminisms & Rhetorics
        • 2017 GPACW
        • 2016 Watson Reviews
        • 2015 IDRS Reviews
      • Webtext of the Month
    • Teaching Materials
      • Syllabus Repository
      • Teaching & Learning Materials (TLM) Collection
    • Books
      • Memetic Rhetorics
      • Beyond the Makerspace
      • Video Scholarship and Screen Composing
      • 100 Years of New Media Pedagogy
      • Writing Workflows
      • Rhetorical Code Studies
      • Developing Writers in Higher Education
      • Sites of Translation
      • Rhizcomics
      • Making Space
      • Digital Samaritans
      • DRC Book Prize
      • Submit a Book Proposal
    • DRC Fellow Projects
    • About
      • Advisory Board
      • Graduate Fellows
    Digital Rhetoric Collaborative

    Building Social Networking Sites for Social Good

    0
    By Dawn Opel on March 10, 2017 Blog Carnival 11

    In fall semester 2016, I taught an advanced web design course in the undergraduate Professional Writing program in the Department of Writing, Rhetoric, and American Cultures at Michigan State University. The election coincided with the introduction to our final project—a team web development project to practice newly acquired skills in JavaScript, PHP, and MySQL. At this time, conversation trended in the media that directly related to students’ work in the course as newbie web developers; specifically, the ethical role of developers who may have built features of social networking sites that contributed to post-election tensions such as strained personal relationships and compromised media literacy as a result of facebook’s news feed-generating algorithm. Eager to discuss the election, students engaged in spirited discussions around these articles and how they might attend to these concerns. I knew then that the nature of the final project needed to change to reflect our engagement with ethical concerns raised as to how the structure of social networking sites may have affected the election.

    Changing the Project Assignment for the Post-Election Moment

    To do this, I revised the project prompt to create space for the imaginative potential of my students around ethics and social change in web development.

    Homepage for the original social networking site, Robin’s Nest

    Rather than ask my students to build a simple social networking site from scratch (the original project prompt), I instead provided a folder of files for a bare bones social networking site, created by our textbook author, Robin Nixon, and freely shared on the website for the 4th edition of Learning PHP, MySQL, & JavaScript (Nixon).

    The new focus was on building for social good: playing with, breaking, and remaking a pre-existing social networking site. This new prompt also better aligned this project and its evaluative criteria with a multimodal composition pedagogy focused on play, creativity, and speculative design (Shipka; Dunne & Raby). It was my hope that this new unit focus would enable students to critically assay the technology as it currently exists: tackling media literacy, siloing of information, relationship-building across difference, as well as other issues deliberated during class discussions.

    New Project Assignment

    In this four-week assignment, students assembled into groups of four and collaborated in team GitHub repositories. The five steps of the project were:

    • Read/re-read the articles on design, web development, and the election. Think about ways social networking could work for social good, and how to design and build for this purpose.
    • Fork the site files (in your team’s GitHub repository), play, and brainstorm a re-design. You can find discussion of these files in the final chapter of Nixon’s book, your technical resource for the project.
    • Create a mood board, wireframes, and a project plan with a timeline for completion of all tasks. Divide the work across your team. Designate a project manager and decide on other roles as suit your particular project needs.
    • Create all deliverables and build new or edited SNS files in GitHub. All changes to files must be documented in GitHub as we practiced in class.
    • Give a presentation and product demonstration in class. 

    Reflection

    What might it mean to teach digital rhetoric in a web design course after the election? For us, it meant a heightened and contextualized attempt to bring rhetorical literacy as well as functional literacy to a course in advanced web design. Final projects, and the discussions from the presentations of these projects, generated the following themes:

    • Structural changes to SNS sites: Each group challenged the primacy of the News Feed feature in the design of a social networking site, and attempted to create more agency for the user in choosing the content they consume. For them, this largely involved increasing the transparency of what the algorithm does (visibly asking users which media outlets or friends from whom they wished to read their news). Currently, this places the onus on the user to customize their accounts in ways that are onerous and confusing, reading through each and every friend and “liked” organization and placing them in buckets according to the user’s level of interest. This does not, however, always frame the work that this activity is for (choosing what we see as “news”). We discussed how designs could create spaces for users to consciously choose daily news outlets and highlight these in separate spaces on the interface.
    • Relationships between researchers, designers, and developers: The web development team approach to this assignment encouraged reflection for those teams who chose a member who would do the programming. Ultimately, the teams saw their success or failure hinging on that one person’s ability to put their redesign into working code, regardless of the dissonance of this with the evaluative criteria for the assignment. They all chose to put the build last, after research and design was completed. The very act of bifurcating theory from practice in these team roles reinforced the importance of the challenge that undergirded the assignment: can builders of software think ethically about structural decisions inherent in that building?
    • Functional [computer programming]literacy versus rhetorical literacy: The change to this assignment, prompted by the election, forced us all to reimagine what it meant to learn the functional literacy of PHP, MySQL, and JavaScript (as defined and discussed in Selber). Learning to build the moving parts of a social networking site does not equip us to build in such a way as to improve the lives of the users of that site. This project allowed us to question the contemporary climate of social networking, not simply replicate it. Teaching digital rhetoric after the election meant that future web-related professionals acted on a desire to rhetorically and ethically make digital technologies. After this assignment, students of web design and development saw how their designs and builds create online spaces where users make decisions—including decisions about how to vote.

    References

    Dunne, Anthony, and Fiona Raby. Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. Cambridge: MIT P, 2013. Print.

    Nixon, Robin. Learning PHP, MySQL, & Javascript. 4th ed., Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly P, 2014. Print.
    Shipka, Jody. Toward a Composition Made Whole. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 2011. Print.

    Selber, Stuart. “Reimagining the Functional Side of Computer Literacy.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 55, 2004, pp. 470-503.

    Author

    • Dawn Opel
      Dawn Opel

      Dawn is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Writing, Rhetoric, and American Cultures at Michigan State University. She researches the design of communication in clinical settings, with emphasis on design and use of information technology. Find her on Twitter @dawnopel.

      View all posts
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Recent Posts
    By Alyse CampbellMay 6, 20250

    Attending Computers and Writing 2025? Be a Session Reviewer! 

    By Thais Rodrigues Cons, Toluwani OdedeyiApril 25, 20250

    Charisse Iglesias: Community Engagement Beyond Academia

    By Toluwani Odedeyi, Thais Rodrigues ConsMarch 31, 20250

    Addison Kliewer – Bridging Academia and Industry with Technical Writing Mastery

    By Mehdi MohammadiFebruary 11, 20250

    Philosophy of Technology in Rhetoric and Writing Studies

    By Marie Pruitt, Robert Beck, Alex MashnyFebruary 4, 20250

    Call for Blog Carnival 23: Digital Circulation in Rhetoric and Writing Studies

    Digital Rhetoric Collaborative | Gayle Morris Sweetland Center for Writing | University of Michigan

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.