September 10, 2012

Teaching with Depth

Grasping for words. In search of just-the-right language. Looking for richer metaphors. These best describe what has been occupying my think time in recent months. You see, the expression ‘3D’ carries a lot of unwanted baggage. 

For most, the expression ‘3D’ conjures to their minds little more than movies—‘pokey’ entertainment.  Some people immediately associate the term ‘3D’ with architectural drawings (CAD), Google Earth, gaming, or other types of “rendered 3D” objects or scenescapes. Then there’s a well-known film critic, who speaks for many, in suggesting that “‘3D—it just makes me sick.” (He was unaware of the research findings that indicate his discomfort is caused by underlying vision issues, which are easily addressable. But that’s another story.) For many others, ‘3D’ is simply not a part of their generation and therefore not on their radar.

Using the term “stereo 3D” doesn’t seem to help either. Adding that double-fisted adjective merely adds a pinch of technophobe seasoning to the mix. No, I’ve been looking for a kinder, gentler pathway. So far, I have settled on the following:
Teaching and learning with DEPTH is a pleasant way to describe how we use 3D in educational settings. It’s an expression that is, at once, both hopeful and free of the past, largely unwarranted, baggage. So far, it seems to resonate well with educators and educational conference leaders. 

Do you have any similar musings? Other ways to word the notion of the 3D experience? Please post them as a comment below.

1 comment:

  1. Very common thing!

    I hope within some time this issue will be eliminated due to lack of non-3d content.
    What about "volumetric"?