User talk:JuliaWearsAScarf

This is where I will be posting my class exercises throughout the next few weeks :).

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 17:08, 26 February 2019 (UTC)JuliaWearsAScarfJuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 17:08, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1: Online Visibility and Footprint
I would describe myself as one of the people who missed jumping on the social-media bandwagon. The only social-media I have is a facebook account, and that account only exists because it seemed to be a requirement to have a facebook to survive first-year. And I wasn't wrong. For example, my room mates had used it to find out who they would be sharing a flat with and to get to know each other before moving into university accommodation. Fellow students would use group chats to talk to other students who were doing the same modules or wanted to check out the same events during fresher's week. Not to be left out, I decided to create an account myself and have been using it regularly, usually daily, every since. One of the reasons I never created a social-media before I felt like I 'had to' was because I did not want to put myself out there on the internet. I just didn't see any reasons why. My family and friends were all living in the same city and I would talk to them in 'real-life' or call or text them when I felt like it. On the other hand, I would hear horror stories of people getting fired from their jobs for posting inappropriate pictures of themselves on their facebook accounts or not getting hired in the first place because it had now become normal for companies to check potential employees for any potential negative internet presence or history. That made me think: Why risk it? Unfortunately, these days abscinence isn't a viable option for me anymore. And sometimes I wonder if I might have become a bit too generous with what I share online. When this thought first crossed my mind, I googled my name to see how 'popular' I had become on the internet. Would a quick google search really lead to people finding my facebook or even pictures of me on google pictures? And if, was that a bad thing? Fortunately (?) google didn't find me. At least I wasn't on the first page of search results and that was good enough for me since, let's be honest, who would care enough to check any further anyway? But that got me thinking. If someone really wanted to find out more about my online-self, how easy did I make it for them? My facebook is on private, of course, and while everyone can add me, I never accept people I do not 'know' in real-life. And by 'know' I mean met-once-at-a-party. So maybe I wasn't as private as I would like to think I was. Then, there would be my amazon account. My netflix account. My student e-mail account and at least 10 more e-mail accounts that I use more or less frequently. My bank account that I almost exclusively manage through an app. And then there is this website that my dad created for me over 12 years ago.. I had to accept that: While my online persona might not be totally 'visible' to everybody, I was definitely leaving virtual footprints in the online-sand. And just because I was unsuccessful googeling myself did not necessarily mean that companies hadn't had collected all the interesting data about me and stored it somewhere. Or even sold it to another company. The reality is, that it is quite difficult to know what others know about what we do online. I personally couldn't tell you what kind of user agreement I accepted when I signed up for facebook - and I am sure that I am not the only one. Maybe we need to start reading those lengthy agreements if we really want to protect our identity from being stored, used and sold by some random third party company we never heard of but sold our soul to when making that account on that website to download that free game.. Where does our responsibilty start and where does it end? When should we expect to be protected by the law, if ever?

What do you think? Can you relate to my situation or have you managed to make yourself 'invisible'? Is leaving footprints maybe even a good thing? I would love to hear your opinion.

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 21:20, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise #1
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:


 * Good. Among other things, good entries will make a clear point in a clear way. They will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. They will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). They may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and are likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.


 * This work is at the lower end of this grade band, so there’s clearly room for improvement here. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to look at the Grade Descriptors and (especially for this, perhaps, the Understanding) criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Less instrumentally, and more in relation to this particular post, making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, if you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this would have made a considerable difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are fairly good, although there was a requirement to post on TWO other people’s work, so you would have missed some marks there. Remember that the comments are "worth" as much as posts themselves. The reason for this is not only to help encourage discussion (a key element of wiki collaboration!) but also to get you to reflect upon your own work. This can all, of course be used to fuel ideas that might form part of your project work. I like that you have framed some of your responses as questions to solicit discussion (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about!) and also that you are beginning to discuss in an open and critical way (that is to say, you've responded to what other people are saying and are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about, which you clearly are).

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments for Wiki Exercise #1

 * Good evening! I definitely felt the same way when I first got to Uni. I have never been a big fan of Facebook and I suddenly realised that using it would make my life so much easier. Communicating with my flatmates, finding out about the events on Stirling and asking on my modules' groupchats made me join in. Your descriptions about a feeling of "having to" start using these social media reminded me of a notion we discussed on the module's workshops, "cultural lock-in". Danah Boyd talks about this in "Participating in the Always-On Culture" (In Michael Mendiberg's (2012) The Social Media reader), and mentions how this is a lifestyle in which "where being networked to people and information wherever and whenever you need it is just assumed" (pp. 71-2). Nowadays, social media seems to be the most convenient place for interacting with one another. Despite trying to be off-line, I always end up getting back to my Whatsapp and Facebook group chats just in case I have been missing out on something. It is difficult to be invisible in a place where everyone participates. And it is really hard to stop using social media when everyone around you uses it on a daily basis.
 * As you mentioned, there is always this fear of how your online visibility could damage your career possibilities in the future, as well as your reputation. I guess that no matter how hard we try to make ourselves invisible online, there is always a chance that our data might be accessible somehow. I think I have never fully read the 'Terms and Conditions' page when creating a user for any of my social media, so technically my data could be used for anything and I would not be aware of it. I believe that we trust the companies and managers of these pages without considering how much control they have over us.
 * Nonetheless, I also think that in this new digital era it is almost impossible to be invisible. Therefore, I try to consider social media and my online footprint as positive tools that can enhance my social and job experiences. --Lucia.notifications5 (discuss • contribs) 20:52, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Good evening, Lucia. Thank you very much for writing such a detailed comment and sharing your experiences. I am happy to hear that I am not the only one who first got into social media during their first year at university! And I can very much relate to checking my whatsapp twice before going to bed just to make sure I didn't miss anything! It's a bit crazy if you think about it. I am sure if there was something truly important, people would make the effort to call or even come around in real life (if that is a possibility). I think many of us have just gotten used to doing everything online. After all, as you mentioned, it is just so incredibly convenient. And while we should be very critical of it, we need also not forget about all the positives that social media and other forms of online communication have brought us. Finally, I don't think anyone really reads the user agreements! Which I find to be a very interesting topic to discuss about. It almost seems that things loose their 'power' as soon as they are online. After all, user agreements are legal documents so you would think people would care at least a bit about what it is they are agreeing to.

I also appreciate that you referenced our workshops and even some books. I should have thought to include some references when writing my exercise, but somehow that didn't cross my mind - I will make sure to make everything sound more 'academic' next time around :).

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 22:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: To what extent are my online and offline identities aligned?
Today more than ever, we like to spend our time online. Figures from Ofcom’s Media Use and Attitudes 2015 report estimate that on average, adults spend 20 hours a week on the internet – that’s double the time an adult would have spent online just 10 years ago. Furthermore, many of us are digital natives, meaning that we grew up in this highly digitalised world, and have since childhood been used to living 2 lives: One offline and one online. And living our online lives is constantly becoming easier: recent advancements in infrastructure such as the 4G LTE network made internet on the go faster and more accessible than it has ever been, and for those of us who run out of their data there is probably a WIFI-hotspot around. With all the possibilities that are provided in a digitalised world it has become ever more difficult to abstain from being online. For one, especially as a digital native, there are a lot of societal expectations regarding online literacy and presence: One should lead a (positive) online existence, preferably make use of (multiple) social media, have an email account and just generally know their way around the internet. And of course, fix your grandmas PC. Moreover, it is seemingly impossible to disconnect- We are not only online when we actively choose to open up the facebook app or internet browser: In the gym, our smart-watch is counting steps, monitoring our workouts and sending that information to an app on our phone that automatically calculates how many calories we have left for the day. As Sherry Turkle (2013) puts it: ‘we are always connected to the network’. And that network is constantly collecting our data, making up one part of our online selves.

The second part of our online self is formed actively by ourselves through the things we put on the internet. In 1993, Steiner’s cartoon 'On the Internet, nobody knows you are a dog'was published in the New-York times and as of today, has become one of the most reproduced cartoons in the newspaper’s history. It has been transformed and memed countless of times, and the reasons for its ever-rising popularity are very clear: Steiner’s cartoon is concerned with internet anonymity and its potential outcomes, a topic that is more talked about today than ever. Being able to be whoever we want to be including being a nobody behind a silly alias is, without a doubt, one of the greatest perks of the internet. It liberates us from the constraints that can be experienced during personal interaction with another human such as being judged on our appearances or our accent. Ironically, by distancing ourselves from all of these features and characteristics that ultimately make up a big part of who we are, we are enabled to emphasise other aspects of ourselves: When no one knows who you are, the likelihood of experiencing any consequences for your actions is negligible which leads even the shyest of us to say what they think and loudly defend their opinions. Being able to freely self-represent can be an amazing feeling, so much so, that a study by Morahan-Martin and Schumacher (2000) on compulsive or problematic Internet use, has identified this aspect of online anonimity as one of the reasons being online can be so addicting. However, self-representation on the internet also takes on very different, contrary, forms: For many of us it has become not so much about anonymously showing our true selves through i.e. voicing our opinions, but more about putting a more perfect self out there for others to see. There are countless, many of them free of charge, tools through which this can be easily achieved: Thousands of apps advertise to beautify your picture without leaving a trace. Don’t like your lips? Make them a bit puffier. Eyes too small? One click and they are exactly the size you want them to be. And if there isn’t enough money to go on that trip to Spain, there is always the option to pay someone to photoshop you there. It is diffcult to say when such behaviour becomes problematic since showing your best side isn't necessarily unhealthy or uncommon in certain situations. One could argue that our online self is not 'deceptive' of who we are in our everyday lives but simply impression management and could be compared to dressing up for a date or job interview. However, there are cases, most notably when dating online, where people stray away so far from their offline self that the other person might feel like they have been deceived or 'catfished' by that person when they meet them offline for the first time.


 * To conclude, we live in a world where many of us are born into having an online existence next to our offline one. Not surprisingly, the fact that we simply don't know it any other way combined with societal pressures and the ever increasing ease with which we can live our online lives, makes it more and more difficult to differentiate between our offline and online selves. In fact, in many cases our online and offline selves might have become two integral parts of who we are and can't be looked at as separate entities. However, that doesn't mean that they are necessarily very similar. We might say and do things that we would never dare to offline, which can be a very freeing and even addicting experience. At the same time, it is easy to manipulate what aspects of ourselves we show to others online and while not necessarily harmful, it can be hard to tell when the line between deception and impression management is crossed.

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 10:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments for exercise #2: To what extent are my online and offline identities aligned?

 * Hi Julia I appreciate your insight into the connection of how we present ourselves offline as well as online. I found your input on online dating interesting and how it poses the question of how personal attraction/preference has been altered by the search for the better match in a faster paced society. I too have :found this to be more common in our digital orientated lives and have also found that the connections between dating in the real world and online are closely tied to social media also. If you have any further thoughts with regards to dating, online and offline feel free to respond or comment on my own insight into :the subject. Atari Darren (discuss • contribs) 11:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Darren, Thank you for taking the time to read through my essay! JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 11:23, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hey ! First of all, I want to say that I'm so impressed with your essay. Your academic writing and way of bringing in interesting sources in your text is so good!! I found the third paragraph about editing pictures to be particularly interesting. Using apps to change one's appearance (if only slightly) has become so common among young people using social media platforms today. Instagram celebrities with millions of followers tend to smooth their skin, or fill in their hairline to give them that 'flawless' appearance. But how is this affecting young people today? How is it changing our perception of beauty?
 * A few years ago, I had a bad habit of scrolling the never-ending feed on Instagram, looking for beautiful people. Seeing their flawless appearance and great sense of style gave me a feeling of admiration and awe. It made me happy, but it also made me miserable. I started to pay more attention to the way I looked and dressed at all times. And I was never content with my appearance. I spent more money on make-up and clothes, I dyed and cut my hair more times in a month than I had in the past few years, and found myself wondering why I didn't look like those beautiful models on Instagram. In hindsight, I've realised that I could never look that perfect, because not even the people in the photos look that perfect! The final picture has been edited and changed in such tiny discreet ways that we don't even realise that we're being presented with a fake truth. I took a break from Instagram for a while, deleting the app entirely off my phone, and it definitively helped me a lot. I have a much more relaxed relationship to social media apps now, and I don't look for beautiful people to follow anymore. Related to this, I found a subreddit on Reddit.com recently, called r/Instagramreality. It has some amazing content which shows photos from Instagram before and after it has been edited. Blew my mind the first time I had a look.
 * Anyway, that has been enough rambling from me. Keep up the good work!
 * Talljenny (discuss • contribs) 18:49, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Jenny, thank you so much for your lovely comment and sharing your personal experiences. I can very much relate to feeling pressured into unrealistic beauty standards. The real problem here is, in my opinion, that it has become normal to post edited pictures. You will rarely find someone who just posts something without any filter etc. and I am under the impression that this behaviour can be quite harmful, especially for children and teenagers, who might not be able to differentiate between what is real and what is edited. Like you said, people rarely look what they look like on their instagram picture simply because it isn't real. I'm also happy to hear that you were able to distance yourself from all the pressure and have a more healthy attitude towards social media now. That's amazing :)! I'll definitely check the subreddit out, thanks! JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 11:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, I found your essay very interesting, particularly the final paragraph on how people can exaggerate in their online profiles with edited pictures. I think there's a lot of discussion to be had about the dangers that unrealistic identities can cause. Similar to how Jenny has responded, I think the falsehoods that are presented on social media platforms like Instagram have the potential to be very harmful to the mental wellbeing of users, particularly young people being presented with unrealistic beauty standards. I would also say that the danger may not just be from edited pictures however, but rather to an extent the way that some profiles are constructed, they present unrealistic lifestyles. When people are being so selective in their profiles, and say, only posting images of nights out or holidays, it gives a false sense of what that users life is actually like and could cause a great deal of jealousy for other users who aspire to have lavish lifestyles that are in fact very difficult to achieve. Admitedly I think this is more of an issue with how popular media icons present themselves rather than the average user. Although as you've said, to an extent it is just impression management, of course users are going to want to make themselves look as good as possible, however I think in some circumstances the fakeness of certain online profiles are deceptive and do present a danger to the way people perceive one another. BowieAndQueen (discuss • contribs) 23:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello BowieAndQueen, thank you for your feedback. After reading through both your and Jenny's comments, I think I might have been a bit too easy on the negative effects that social media can have on our perception of others but most importantly ourselves. While I did mention, in my opinion, one very important instance of when deceptive social media becomes dangerous, that is being catfished while online dating, I agree that there are more aspects to it and it might have been a good idea to go into more of them. JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 11:42, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Julia! I found your commentary on the physical representation of ourselves online very interesting and an important thing to mention about today's society. The idea that it is not only the way in which we represent our personality but also our physical appearance e.g editing photos and posting Photoshopped versions of ourselves, trying to pass them off as real is a big issue when it comes to young people's expectations in the way that they look. I have seen many examples of 'fitness' influencers on Instagram altering the way that their bodies look which can cause unhealthy body image in their followers, as they are trying to follow these diets and workouts to achieve a body that is not actually real. Though photoshop in magazines has been around for many years, I find the fact that there are now so many apps readily available to the general public, the problem is only getting worse. Activists on social media such as the model Iskra Laurence on Instagram help to fight this unrealistic ideal by posting un-retouched pictures and bringing attention to the issue while celebrating the 'Body Positive' movement. I can only hope that this movement is able to grow and help to make people (especially teens) more comfortable in their own skin. Emmamchristie (discuss • contribs) 11:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography #2
Şeyma Esin Erben & Jale Balaban-Sali, 2016: ‘Social Media Use of Vegan Activists in Turkey’, Global Media Journal TR Edition, 6 (12)

This study, conducted 2016 by Erben et al., is concerned with the reasons and motivations behind vegan activists using social media as a platform for their activism, what means they use to spread their message and how they interact with like-minded individuals online. The authors use data collected through interviews with turkish vegan activists who actively work for animal rights either privately or as part of a group. Additionally, all of them were using social media on a frequent basis. Their behaviour was compared to the online habits of vegans who did not actively participate in any such animal rights groups. The study puts a focus on how this specific minority group is using social media to actively promote their, especially at the time and keeping the participants' background in mind, little known about movement. They found that people who were an active part of an animal movement would sometimes have multiple accounts on a single social media dedicated to spreading the cause, while those who didn't would usually post all their activism through their main account. The study is relevant to my research topic, as it gives great insights into how environmental activism can bloom even in a restricted environment through making use of the free speech platform provided by social media. The main limitation of the study is, that it looks into a very specific group of people whose living circumstances don't give them many platforms to spread their activism thus making their behaviour not generalisable. While this study will not form the basis of my research, it was a great introduction into the topic and shed light on many different problem areas that need to be addressed when talking about environmental activism online.

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 18:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4: Collaborative Essay Critical Evaluation – What ARE Wikis?
When hearing the word ‘wiki’, most of us probably think of Wikipedia, the famous online encyclopedia. Or maybe Wikileaks, which has been in the news quite a lot these past few years being known for hosting leaked government documents. However, there is many more lesser known projects which are part of the ‘Wikimedia’ such as Wikiversity, a community that is built around learning, or ‘Wikinews’, a news source written by users instead of professional journalists. So what is it that makes a wiki a wiki?

If we want to look at what Wikis are, it seems to be critical to understand what they are not. Looking at the Wikibooks project page on itself, we find there to be a rather small section dealing with some of the main ideas and uses for Wikibooks, which is described as an open-content textbook. Open-content refers to the part where everyone can modify the work that is posted on Wikibooks without the original author's (or anyone’s) permission. Because the term ‘’textbook’’ can refer to many different things, it is specified in the following what kinds of types of texts are appropriate to be posted on Wikibooks e.g. instructional guides and manuals. Below that, we find a second section twice the size of the first one, which is dedicated to all the things Wikibooks is not supposed to be used for. This includes text types like fiction, video game strategy guides, being used as a dictionary or for personal essays. Probably the most important point that is established is the distinction that is made between Wikibooks and Wikipedia. It is explicitly stated that Wikibooks is not an in-depth encyclopedia, which it might indeed look like to some on first sight due to its strong resemblances in colours and general structure of the website to Wikipedia. With all their differences, it seems that what all Wikimedia has in common is the open-content part. This is possible because Wikimedia is a digital commons, that is ‘(…) a form of commons involving the distribution and communal ownership of informational resources (…)’. Because question of ownership can make it difficult to create a place where information is constantly refined, due to being a digital common, are a great tool for collaborative work. Firstly, they are easily accessible: simply create an account and you can start contributing to the wiki. By creating an account, you also automatically gain access to the wikibooks community portal, where one has access to a multitude of useful links. Secondly, editing is made quick and easy without requiring its users knowing how to code, which greatly lowers the entry barrier and ultimately leads to greater user diversity. This in itself is a great first step towards online emancipation. Thirdly, there is a notification system in place that tells the user when their work or work they have contributed to has been modified, making it easier for a group to monitor progress.

To conclude, while there are many different types of Wikimedia, they are all characterized by being written by its user base and the freedom of users to freely add new work or modify other users’ contributions. This is possible because they are a digital commons, which itself is great to foster an collaberative environment. Because Wikimedia are easy to access and editing does not require any prior knowledge of coding, many different kinds of people can contribute. However, due to all these characteristics it is not a great place to be 'visible' online. While one has to create an account, the account is very impersonal compared to e.g. a facebook account and being recongnized goes against the idea of what wikis ultimately are - accumulation of knowledge over time that could have never been created by a single person.

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 13:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: ENGAGEMENT ON DISCUSSION PAGES & CONTRIBS
Grade descriptors for Engagement: Engagement on discussion pages, and contribs of this standard attain the following grade descriptor. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this descriptor 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:
 * Good. Among other things, good contributions will make a clear point in a clear way. They will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. They will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including formatting, links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). They may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and are likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material, discussing this in a transparent way with fellow researchers on the Discussion Pages. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.

As instructed in the labs, and outlined in the assessment brief documentation, students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement is evaluated.

Evidence from contribs to both editing and discussion of content (i.e. volume and breadth of editorial activity as evidenced through ‘contribs’). These are primarily considered for quality rather than quantity, but as a broad guideline:
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 3000+ characters are deemed “considerable”
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 2000+ characters are deemed “significant”
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial”
 * Items on a contribs list that are <1000 characters are important, and are considered in the round when evaluating contribs as a whole because of their aggregate value

Overall:
 * Some very good quality contribs in evidence through the project period. There is a bit of a lull midway through, but then you pick up again with a number of contribs deemed substantial if applying the above criteria. The annotated entries are particularly strong.

Engagement with and learning from the community on Discussion Pages
 * Evidence of peer-assisted learning and collaboration


 * Good
 * Evidence of reading, sharing, and application of research to the essay
 * Outstanding
 * Evidence of peer-review of others’ work
 * Good

Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of Discussion Pages
 * Clear delegation of tasks
 * Good
 * Clearly labelled sections and subsections
 * Good
 * Contributions are all signed
 * Good

Civility. Your conduct is a key component of any collaboration, especially in the context of an online knowledge-building community. Please respect others, as well as observe the rules for civility on wiki projects. All contribs are moderated.
 * Good

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:03, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly correspond to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:


 * Excellent. Among other things, these entries will probably demonstrate a complex, critical understanding of the themes of the module. They will communicate very effectively, making excellent and creative use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons), and may be written with some skill and flair. They will address the assignment tasks in a thoughtful way. They will make insightful connections between original examples and relevant concepts. They will be informed by serious reading and reflection, are likely to demonstrate originality of thought, and will probably be rewarding and informative for the reader. The wiki markup formatting will be impeccable.


 * Although this work is at the lower end of this (high) grade band, so there’s potentially room for improvement here. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to look at the Grade Descriptors and criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Also, ensuring that you adhere to the set deadlines is really important. Having said all of this, you have submitted what amounts to an excellent, well written, very well researched and well organised portfolio.


 * Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone some way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, if you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this would make a difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are especially good. You solicit discussion (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about!) and you have engaged in discussion in an open and critical way (that is to say, you've responded to what other people are saying and are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about, which you clearly are).

General:
 * Reading and research: evidence of critical engagement with set materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material – all excellent (particularly Ex2).


 * Argument and analysis: well-articulated and well-supported argument; evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position); evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections); evidence of independent critical ability – all excellent.


 * Presentation: good use of wiki markup and organisational skills.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)