Talk:Digital Media & Culture: Collaborative Essay Collection 2018/The Internet of Things/Research Question 2:The Outsiders

Hi team!

None of you have yet notified me of a wiki username, so I can't send a "reply to" notification here. You'll have to find your own way!

This is the discussion page for collaborative essay. Use this pages to edit in discussions, decision making, project planning, and information sharing. Invite other groups to add to the discussion, and contribute to others. Ask for advice from others and share your knowledge. This builds contribs considerably. Start off your discussion by recording your decision-making process re: your research question, email the lecturer to get approval/suggested amendments.Once that's done, you're away.

You can leave notifications for other users by using the reply to template (as I've used in this notice). You can also use your own and each other's discussion pages, as well as the main discussion page on the general theme page. All of this adds to contribs, which are essential to getting a pass mark for this assessment. Don't be tempted to use social media group chat or other platforms to do this. It won't be marked and really misses the entire point of the wiki.

Don't forget to use the four tildes (~) to sign and date your contribution. Every edit you make whilst signed in is still traceable, but a signature makes it much easier to track and respond, and much less likely that the edit will be mis-recognised as spam or vandalism. However: don't sign your edits on the essay page - it looks messy and is unnecessary.

Good Luck!
 * GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 19:21, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Still no wiki usernames - what seems to be the issue? Where is your discussion guys? - we need to see lots of discussion recorded here for you to amass "contribs" which are used to evaluate engagement. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:54, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey team just wanted to say a big well done, I think we've all done massively well. Good luck to you all!MTxPrincipessa18 (discuss • contribs) 10:55, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Progress was made slowly but surely due to difficulties faced out with life that were out of our control. We decided to structure our essay in a different way due to having three in our group as a pose to four. A beginning and conclusion were used as the main crux of the assignment so we knew where to begin it and how to end it regarding scholars and topics Frosorsmoth (discuss • contribs) 11:11, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

If to carry out this teamwork we have always had communication problems and it has been difficult to agree on everything. User: Pantaxerca

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK
General Feedback
 * Essays of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for the collaborative essay. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this will give you a clearer idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level:
 * Poor. Among other things, work at this level may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. It may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. It may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics/images) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). Such work might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard.

Specific Feedback:


 * You have submitted a response to the brief which attempts to outline some of arguments that specifically address the theme of Internet of Things. However, your research question poses two questions, in fact, which are asking rather different things. Therefore, the discussion and argument is difficult to relate back to these, and seems a little disjointed at times. Your discussion of the research evidences some reading around the subject, but the citation method is rather poor, and at times it is difficult to judge when you are drawing from reading, or when you are making a statement or evaluation in your own words.


 * The essay is written in a fair style, although you could have made much, much more of the medium through embedding links, using illustrations (images from wiki commons for example) and interwiki links to other group pages. Your argument is rather disjoined as noted, and poorly structured, and this is not helped by the fact that each section is written by a team member, and does not really seem to have worked as a true collaboration. The work would have been greatly improved through this, both stylistically, and conceptually.


 * You have signed contributions and there are links to user pages throughout and none of this ought to be appearing on the essay page itself.


 * N.B.:’’’Feedback for your Discussion, engagement and contribs elements for the assessment will be given on your individual User Discussion Pages. Grades for all work will communicated confidentially via Canvas.’’’

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:33, 23 April 2018 (UTC)