User talk:Chloetansey

This is my wiki books user discussion page. I will be exploring wiki books and registering my experiences on this page. As part of my project, I will be sharing ideas here. Chloetansey (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/smart-phone-iphone-giving-up-clive-martin

A very interesting article that takes a look at some of the topics we have been studying so far in the module. Instead of feeling lost without technology, the writer of this piece feels empowered when he ditches the iPhone. He enjoys the way he can experience the world without being engrossed in his phone, and feels as though he has an advantage over Apple users. He talks about this 'always on' culture, and how he was 'stood up' or 'forgotten about' numerous times just because he doesn't have a smart phone, which really emphasizes the power of the iPhone, and how people can feel excluded if they aren't part of this club. This article takes a look at something that is completely alien to a majority of us; life without a smart phone, and surprisingly, the author of the piece has had a very positive experience. Chloetansey (discuss • contribs) 21:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments
In this day and age it is very rare for someone to not have an internet enabled phone, and I agree with the writer of this article that people rely far too much upon them. The iPhone has a great pull on society and in turn has created a technological generation who is "glued to their screens". I am guilty myself of feeling like I have left a limb at home when I forget my phone, or it runs out of battery- but this is a flaw within society that is seldom questioned. However on another not the iPhone and other smartphones have allowed for individuals to become less distant in other ways- with new forms of communication having been created, allowing for people to communicate long distance and in a quick fashion. I agree that the iPhone has changed the society- and not always for the best- but it has also benefited society in terms of faster and more reliable forms of communication. Christiejayne123 (discuss • contribs) 11:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1: Formative Feedback
It's good to see that you are linking your review back to topics from the module. To push this further, you should make reference to the academic literature and think through more critically about the perspectives of the discussion. Your response would also benefit from more wiki markup to distinguish section titles and embedding further links in the prose where appropriate. You have failed to write any comments on colleagues' posts. Remember that engagement is an important part of the Wikibooks portfolio, so try to integrate this in further exercises.

A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor: Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory entries may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. They may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. They may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. They might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture and/or cursory reading. They may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse). The wiki markup formatting will need some work. Sprowberry (discuss • contribs) 10:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
Throughout the wiki workshops, we emphasised the importance of prolonged engagement with the assignment brief. Unfortunately, this is not evident in your contributions to both the wiki exercises and chapters. You have failed completely to undertake the wiki exercise portfolio, which constitues 50% of the mark for this assignment, and without this important part, it is difficult to gauge how much of the module content you have understood. The limited evidence of engagement with colleagues on the chapter talk page is territory claiming rather than true collaboration. Make sure to undertake all parts of the assignment - not just the part that appears to be the most important, as otherwise it can be very difficult to pass.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives a satisfactory brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a fair range of concepts associated with your subject, and an effort to deliver critical definitions. There is evidence that you draw from relevant literature and scholarship, however your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is slightly lost, perhaps due to a variable depth of understanding the subject matter or over reliance on rote learning. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a somewhat circumscribed range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * appreciably deficient evidence of critical engagement with set materials;
 * lack of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material
 * Argument and analysis:
 * poor articulation and lack of support in argument;
 * lack of evidence of critical thinking (you tended to not taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, nor did you support this position in discussion);
 * lack of evidence of relational thinking (you tended to not make connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, nor did you support these connections in discussion);
 * lack of evidence of independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * No evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * No engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Little or no use of discussion pages

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 3 May 2016 (UTC)