Learning disabilities affect many students in the United States – 5% of the students enrolled in public schools have been officially diagnosed with at least one LD while many more go undiagnosed. There is a certain amount of stigma attached to this label with many individuals mistakenly linking learning disabilities to a lack of intellect or a manifestation of autism (NCLD). In reality, students with LD’s are of normal or above-average intelligence, they simply have trouble receiving, processing and storing information that other people do naturally. While some schools, mostly private and charter, attempt to address these disabilities by varying the teaching methods in the classroom, public schools make little effort in mitigating the struggle that these students face. Standards and test-based pedagogy dominates the public system, leaving little room for alternative methods including visual and oral teaching. In order to assist this under-represented demographic, and to make reading more fun, I’d like to propose a new web and app-based tool to improve youth literacy. Cartoonclopedia would bring together illustrators, artists and cartoonists from around the world in order to build a database of drawings for as many words in the English language as possible.

When a student encounters a word they don’t understand while reading, they’re expected to go look it up in a dictionary. In our current era of ubiquitous tech use, it’s much more likely that the student will look up the word online. If you Google a word with the term “define” in front of it, the first search result is a definition. Furthermore, resources such as Dictionary.com and Thesaurus.com offer free definitions for anyone seeking them. Unfortunately, these sites require a revenue stream of some sort, so students get advertised to in exchange for finding a definition for a word. Additionally, both dictionaries and online databases rarely offer context for the definition. Occasionally the definition is followed by a sentence with the word in it, but at least in my experience, I’ve found that the sentences have obscure references and would certainly be difficult for a younger student to understand. Visual learning is a vital tool in children’s pedagogy; children’s books, computer games and instructional toys all illustrate the importance of a visual aspect in apprehending basic reading and writing skills. Even Vannevar Bush states that the human mind “operates by association,” and by offering an image for students to refer to when thinking of a word, we’d create a link to make comprehension easier. Few of these tools for improving a child’s literacy are free, so this restricts their usage to children of middle and upper-class families. Hence, students with LD’s tend to be from lower-income families. This is due to the fact that it is possible to substantially mitigate the effects of LD’s with instruction, but this requires equally substantial time and financial resources from the parents or school. What is missing in this market for instructional tools is a free resource to be used both at home and in school that would help all students with different learning types understand new terminology: Cartoonclopedia.

Cartoonclopedia would be a prime example of what can be achieved through crowd-sourcing in our constantly more connected and globalized world. The Oxford dictionary has about 170,000 words in it and it is generally assumed that our language uses about 250,000 words, so this would have to be a globally collaborative project. I’d aim to begin the project with an educational grant of some sort, whether it be from the government or a foundation which would allow the project to pay the first illustrators to contribute substantial amounts of drawings to the database. The framework for the website and mobile app would be relatively simple and cheap to construct, it wouldn’t need complicated user interfaces nor functionality. In the long run, it’d be ideal to have user accounts so that instructors and students alike could build their own lists of words. Teachers could compile a list of illustrations for the words they thought were the most challenging or recurring in a text which then students would look over before and while reading. Students could save the words that gave them the most trouble in order to return to them later and consign them to memory. In the short run, however, simple access to the database would be more than substantial. We would conduct studies including both surveys to teachers about what terminology their students found most challenging as well as usage of scholarly tools to identify the most commonly used words in school texts to base the beginnings of our database from.

One of the most exciting aspects of Cartoonclopedia is that, since it’s a global collaboration, the illustrations will be from artists with all different types of cultural backgrounds. The project won’t attempt to standardize the type of illustration, we’ll only check to make sure the content is both appropriate and intelligible to younger students. This will result in the proliferation of many different cultural values and traditions: the New Yorker-style illustration about what the word “chore” means might be contrasted with a South American or Indian illustrator’s interpretation of the word “work.” The individuals portrayed in the cartoons will often wear the garb of their own country and reflect their own traditions, as the illustrator won’t necessarily be American at all. In a world where many cultures are being forced to collide at a rapid pace, this would aid the new generation’s understanding and acceptance of the diverse population around them. It will help guarantee that cultural “knowledge evolves and endures throughout the life of a race rather than that of an individual,” (Bush). Cartoonclopedia would both help students with disabilities have a visual resource to understand what they’re reading, as well as give all students a break from reading to look at something fun (and often funny) while still instructive.

While some picture dictionaries do exist, they’re not widely used, and Cartoonclopedia would work to bring the resource to any individual’s fingertips. The concept behind an illustrated word bank is reflective design, where we see vocabulary, “as alterable rather than immutable.”(Kraus) The images we associate with certain words come from our surroundings: social and media inputs. Cartoonclopedia seeks to furnish students (and all users) with a range of worldly perspectives about what words mean, allowing them more breadth of understanding. Let’s learn and laugh together!

Works Cited:

“What Are Learning Disabilities? | Learning Difficulties.” National Center for Learning Disabilities. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2014.

Bush, Vannevar. “As We May Think.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 01 July 1945. Web. 09 Nov. 2014.

Kraus, Kari. 2013. Bibliocircuitry and the Design of the Alien Everyday (2013), The New Everyday, Textual Cultures.

The product that I would like to propose to the class is one that prizes versatility. It does not serve just one purpose. Its functions are so vast that it becomes a Swiss army knife for readers and writers. It can help organize, clarify, correct and inspire those who use it. What makes this possible is an intelligence that is ever growing and can adapt to one’s needs as a writer. I am talking of course about using AI technology to the best of its ability. It will act within the word processor itself making the writing process more efficient. The actual product though will take the form of both a software program containing the AI and will hook up directly to a pair of glasses that will aid the writer’s efforts. I will call this new invention “Mirrors” because it is a reflection of the individual’s thoughts during his or her writing process.

Much of this product is inspired by tools that already exist. Search engines always put the most relevant and popular searches at the top of the list. Google even makes recommendations for what the user wants with the “I’m Feeling Lucky” button. Typing in key words also triggers a drop down with a variety of options for other popular searches involving those words. The AI in my device will act in a similar manner. As the user writes, the AI will provide a number of references and sources for the writer to utilize if he or she wishes. The writer may incorporate quotes from well-known books or movies. In these instances the program will automatically recognize the words and provide quick references from the internet for the writer to use so that the writer does not have to search for the reference him/herself. In addition, the program will also pickup on the subjects that the writer discusses. Sensing key words like “pharaoh” or “pyramids” will result in a dropdown list of available resources that have information on Ancient Egypt. Kirschenbaum criticizes that some technologies force the user to switch between “different screens or interfaces” which he calls “modes” but as technology increases, these transitions are made “as invisible and seamless as possible” (Kirschenbaum, 8). Although these technologies exist, the program streamlines the process by making the searches by itself while the writer is still in the word processor. Hayle makes claims that the research process for scholars has changed due to the inclusion of digital media and states that “the main advantages are worldwide dissemination to a wide variety of audiences, in many cases far beyond what print can reach” (Hayle, 3). Similar to how the efficiency of digital media expedites the research process by eliminating manual searches through book shelves, the AI removes the manual search on the internet.

The real innovation here, however, is the AI’s ability to predict and think about the content of what the writer is expressing. As the user continues to write, the AI will also sense writer’s block if the computer experiences little activity. At this point, the AI will attempt to make sense of the writer’s thought process and come up with a number of words that can best complete sentences if the writer stops midway in a sentence. Technology these days are “a material matrix against which we manufacture an ongoing array of haptic, affective, and cognitive engagements” (Kirschenbaum, 10). Essentially, the tools a writer uses should be just as engaged in the writing process as the writer. If the writer stops after a complete thought, the AI will even give suggestions and comments on the flow of the paper as well as make valid recommendations on the possible next step by searching for content relevant to the paper on the internet. It is important to note though that the AI is not attempting to replace the writer but simply give inspiration for the writer’s next move.

While the AI helps with the cognitive side of the writing process, the glasses serve a more physical use. While I already see the connection between computer screens and eyewear in the form of Google Glasses, my glasses will specialize in the writing process by utilizing scanners. The glasses will scan the user’s pupils and sense their movements. Through this, the glasses can detect what lines the user is reading. I often sometimes lose my place while reading or reread what I just read to help get a better understanding. The glasses will sense perplexity or confusion if my eyes dart up and down trying to find the previous line. The lenses in my glasses will act as an additional screen that will highlight what I have already read using a yellow tint and use a green line to highlight the last line I just read. If it senses that I am reading the same lines over and over again, the AI that is connected to both the computer and the glasses will kick in. At this point the AI will attempt to reword or restructure the sentences to better help the user’s understanding.  If the reworded sentence is still awkward, the writer can always refresh for more options that the AI came up with. At the same time, the glasses are a form of engagement for the user making the writing experience so immersive that they do not lose focus or concentration. Because the scanners are constantly fixated on the user’s eyes and need to correlate the eye movement to the words on the screen, there is almost no room for distraction for the user. The document and the user become one blocking out any outside distractions. When the user turns his or head away from the screen, the lenses in the glass disengage and wait to be reconnected. In a similar manner, George R.R. Martin claims that his “secret weapon” for combatting distraction was WordStar, a basic and archaic program that “accounted for his long-running productivity” (Kirschenbaum, 6). Although Martin’s method was to utilize a basic program to block out his environment, I want to have the same effect but move forward with technology in the form of Mirrors’ glasses.

These tools can be used by both professional writers and the everyday user. Due to its simple user interface, it is easy to use and learn by all. In fact, there is very little to learn as the AI does not need commands to function. Therefore, the AI will take care of the processes by itself resulting in a practically non-existent learning curve for this product. All the user needs to do is connect the glasses so that the user’s computer recognizes the device and follows the guided installation for the program. After these simple steps are completed, the user will be utilizing the program with quick succession. With its user-friendly interface, I plan for my product to target a multitude of different customers. The main consumer base will be comprised of students ranging all the way from elementary to college level. This tool would also be effective for businessmen and white-collar workers in general. While its functions serve many purposes, I intend to market the product for educational or work-related uses.

Because this product is both software and a physical object, there will be two different processes for manufacturing. The program will obviously be worked on by computer science professionals who will code and distribute it digitally or put the data on discs for those that want a physical copy. The glasses, on the other hand, will be manufactured by a number of engineers who will carefully put the lenses that will act similarly to a computer monitor. While the majority of the glasses will be made of simple plastic materials, the engineers would have to incorporate putting in certain technology that will help the glasses connect to a computer wirelessly as well as scan the user’s eyes to detect movement.

As with most other products, much of the success can be attributed by the marketing. Wanting to associate my product directly to writing, my catchphrase will be “Mirror, mirror on the wall, who will answer the writer’s call?” Going back to the meaning behind its name “Mirrors”, the logo will be comprised of the famous statue of “The Thinking Man” inside a mirror. This will further enforce the idea that Mirrors is supposed to help guide the thinking and writing process. Advertising will be restricted to a few TV commercials but will not involve anything too elaborate. I believe hearsay and good critic/customer reviews will be enough publicity. That being said, the commercials will be strictly informative and will rarely utilize humor or other methods of marketing. A website will launch explaining the key features and give examples of its usage. I would rather the consumer research and evaluate the product themselves because the ones giving the time to do so will be the kind of people interested in buying my product. Any other marketing would be unnecessary expenses. Because of its technological nature, it would only make sense to have this product be found in stores such as Best Buy. Another outlet would be Staples because it stresses work and school related usage.

As the consumers will soon see, Mirrors is a product that values professionalism while still maintaining a certain openness through simple user interface. Just as Microsoft Office is a staple product used by millions, I want the same for Mirrors. A couple years after its initial release, I would hope that Mirrors finds itself on every home computer or school/work environment.

Works Cited

Hayles, Katherine. How We Think: Digital Media and Contemporary Technogenesis. Chicago:         U of Chicago, 2012. Print.

Kirschenbaum, Matthew. Track Changes, A Literary History of Word Processing. N.p.: Harvard                       UP, 2014. Print.