User talk:KaYuI

Class Project Blog 1 on Online Visibility
The anxious thoughts that reverberate in my mind before I post anything on any of my social media always tends to be along the same line; what would people think of this? Whether it is an opinion, an outfit or a holiday, I question whether this is how I want to be seen in the eyes of 500 odd people- not even 50 of I would consider close friends. But even with this being said, the amount of information I feed to my various social media astounds me. For a lot of people online visibility may have a separation between the public and private. Public being who everyone with access to the internet is able to see, and private being who you truly are and feel. Often, a false persona is set up on social media in order to portray a 'better self'. To be honest, the ability to sculpt and portray yourself in a light that you have control of is one that many would take advantage of. As 'always on' culture ' suggests, online image embeds itself into everyday life. Employers often look up their prospective candidates on platforms such as Facebook to see how they represent themselves. So, if you look like you spend your average day getting black out drunk and posting damaging images on every possible platform- it is safe to say some employers may not be keen on having their company represented in that light. This could be a reason many people hide behind a cryptic username to rant about controversial topics or bully other users- otherwise known as trolling. This has shown to be negative when it is linked to an individual, especially recently with tweets from celebrities being dug from archives in order to 'out' them as a bad person. But who hasn't posted something they now regret? There are aspects of our life that we obviously would not want shared on social media, because it in turn is private. I personally have my socials on the strictest settings, and my location on snap chat is never on. I do this because I am overly paranoid, yet with the little ounces of information I give out, a very accurate persona of me can be found. As I have said previously, the countless friends on platforms such as Facebook have lots of information about who I am. I mainly share things on Facebook for family and close friends that live far away, or I am unable to update on my life 24/7. But even though I do not tend to post a lot on Facebook, Instagram and such, due to the amount of time I spend on it the information that is out there about me is and never will be under my control and mine only. The first rule of the internet tends to be- nothing can ever be truly deleted. So with the many years I have spend on the internet, and the data policy of most platforms (looking closely at terms and conditions, the websites are allowed to track your data in order to personalise your experience) and the information I do put out. Whatever tracks me, will sure know a lot more about me than I want it to.

Here are some links to websites that I found useful in discussing Online Visability and some related stories on how online visibility can go wrong. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/better-living-technology/201408/why-the-online-trolls-troll https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/03/facebook-track-browsing-history-california-lawsuit https://www.careerbuilder.com/advice/social-media-survey-2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-42858738 KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 20:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 20:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Comments
1. I really resonated with your post Kate - especially the notion of anxiety stemming from the feeling of wider-scale judgement. It's often quite easy to lose sight of how massive the pool of data surrounding us is, and the real-world ramifications it holds. I like your measures taken to secure your data on social platforms, in fact I made sure to double-check my settings and found that I wasn't secured as I had believed, which speaks to the fact that you can never truly be too certain in the security of your online persona. In short, this is a well-sourced, compellingly written piece - much kudos, and I'll be sure to keep up with your posts in the future


 * 1) JamesFDTD99 (discuss • contribs) 20:43, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

You have a really beautiful writing style that makes me forget I'm reading a post for a university blog. I relate to the Ongoing anxiety social media brings about. I also have to admit that there are certain things I wont post online because I am hyper-aware of future employers finding these posts and deciding not to hire me. I am also very guilty of not reading websites terms and conditions - not because I trust them- but just because I don't want to read so much text. Honestly, I think they make them that long on purpose knowing people wont read them. Also, websites and apps are always updating their terms of conditions and rarely ever do they make their users aware of this. That worries me too, not knowing how much information I am giving away to begin with, but also not knowing how much information I may be giving away in the future. It is definitely an odd thought to think that we do not own the information we post about ourselves online but I guess that it is just a hard fact in the end. Thank you for your post and I hope that your collaborative essay is going well as well as all your other studies!

Digitalmediafiend (discuss • contribs) 19:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography- Transmedia Storytelling
Article- Scolari, C. A. (2009). Transmedia Storytelling: Implicit Consumers, Narrative Worlds, and Branding in Contemporary Media Production. International Journal of Communication, 3, 586-606.

Scolari explores a phrase coined by Henry Jenkins- Transmedia Storytelling- looking closely at expanding narrative structure, fandom and reading of texts. I enjoy its relation to text, and how it allows for a greater exploration of the plot. The aim of this article is to explore how TS allows a text to more than just that- there is a lore. The authors state that the narrative of a text is expanded by micro-stories and a user-generated platforms.Harry Potter started off as novels and transcended into film- this new medium allows for a separate aspect of the novel to be explored. Adding to this, when relation to user-generated platforms it is has a huge online fan base. This article is useful to my collaborative essay as it highlights the importance of TS in creator and consumer engagement. A limitation of this article is the lack of the negatives of TS on the text to be explored, and how it can alter it.. Scolari describes the many aspects of transmedia storytelling which help expand the narrative. I hope this article will help form the basis of my collaborative essay, it will be an extremely useful source in understanding the importance of transmedia. KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 00:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC) KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 00:37, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

comments
Once again, you've delivered a solid piece, following the conventional method of typing up an annotated bibliography - which makes it quite simple to break down. Lore is quite often neglected when discussing the overall canon of a text, so I think that choosing an article highlighting the importance of it was a great choice - a good deviation from what I tend to read about transmedia. Your language is descriptive where needs be, but concise enough to fit well with the format of an annotated bibliography - which is definitely a plus. Also, a paper with emphasis on Harry Potter is a good fit for this kind of analysis, as the franchise spans a great deal of mediums, pretty much a prime example of transmediality (novels, films, theatre, video games, fan-sites etc…), and quite an interest of mine. Just out of curiosity, what would you say drew you to this paper in particular? Upon reading it myself I was certainly taken in by the clear formatting and abundant usage of infographics – so I’d say it was a fine choice. I do concur that the article is weighted quite in favour of transmedia storytelling, and that perhaps exploring some of the detrimental aspects that come along with it might have provided greater insights – are there any specifically that you would have included? Regardless, good work Kate, keep it up!

JamesFDTD99 (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

You have chosen a great article of your research! Transmedia storytelling is a fascinating field, and I think this is a good article to use for your research. Again, I think Harry Potter is a strong choice for exploring transmedia storytelling, especially because it was so influential for so many people in our generation. I like your point that the article does not explore the negatives of transmedia storytelling- when presenting research like this, I do think it is important to reference both sides of an argument. Overall, you did an excellent job! Mom00107 (discuss • contribs) 15:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey, Thank you for your response. Transmedia story telling is something I am very interested and want to explore in a greater depths. If you enjoyed this then you would enjoy our collaborative essay - Team Tarantrio. KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography Reply to JamesFTDT99
Thank you for commenting on my post. I certainly agree that there are many neglected aspects of the lore and important to the core idea of transmedia. I would say that the aspect of this article that attracted me is the discussion and expansion of narrative through certain processes. I particularly enjoyed the aspect in which the article states how narrative and lore is explored in order to add to the story line, creating an almost 'ongoing world'. I feel like the idea of 'ongoing worlds' is important especially in relation to children's films and television as it adds an aspect of magic and reality which seems to hook certain audiences. What do you think of this idea of ongoing worlds, what are your interests when it comes to expanding a narrative and do you think it is important? In relations to the limitations of Transmediality. I feel it would be important to include that often in user generated fan bases it can alter a creators initial intent of the text. Think of this in relations to memes. Memes are something that are posted on social media, that are altered in some way to make a joke or promote an agenda. While they can be entertaining, they can be negative as often the original text is subconsciously associated with the meme. Okay, I will stop ranting about memes. But altogether I feel though they are the downfall of transmediality. I would be interested to know what you feel the downfalls of transmediality are?

KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 18:31, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

comments
I certainly think you've struck upon an important point when discussing 'ongoing worlds' - as quite often this is what defines the post-release ongoing discussion/expansion of any text. The Harry Potter 'universe' is a prime example of this, by paying close attention to world-building and structuring your lore to have plenty of room for interpretation, the 'shelf-life' of the fandom can be vastly improved. If a text is too ironclad or doesn't leave this intellectual wiggle-room, it will quite often falter a few months post-release, yet the HP fandom carries on strong to this day. If I were to outline a certain basic criteria for a successful expansive narrative, it would be the following - well-developed characters, creator/fan interaction (twitter, Q&A's), a coherent but debatable plot (open resolutions & foundations within the texts to create branching stories), and most importantly, a platform on which to discuss and propose ideas. I was actually going to raise the 'issue' of memes in relation to texts as my own issue with transmedia culture - but you've done a great job of opening the discussion about it already! Whilst a vital aspect of any community is discourse and fresh interpretations, quite often fans will hijack or intentionally misinterpret media to give it new meaning (and whilst this is a fascinating practice, it can be jarring for creators). I think a prominent example of this would be 'Pepe' the frog, who originated as a character in a comic called "Boy's Club" by cartoonist Matt Furie. Over the last decade, this once fairly simple and innocent figure has been absorbed and mutated by meme culture to the extent where images of him are labelled as 'hate imagery' by the Anti-Defemation league (As they were linked to far-right groups). Seemingly anything on the internet may now be dissected and have utterly bizarre meanings placed upon it - in a sense it is utterly chaotic. Fan culture can certainly (and does) lead to some brilliant creations and homages to beloved works, but every coin has two sides - and whilst I am a steadfast believer in freedom of expression, some fandoms can utterly ruin the image of their respective media. I'll leave this tangent aside, but it's certainly an area worth discussing - when media can overlap numerous mediums, it is only more susceptible to malicious influences. Thanks for the response, very insightful Kate - definitely led me down a rather unorthodox but fun avenue, keep up the good work! JamesFDTD99 (discuss • contribs) 17:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Hey , I really enjoyed your comment. Especially when relating to Pepe the frog, and it turning into hate imagery. It really does relate to the idea of fandoms going to far in many respects. I certainly agree that fandoms often ruin the thing they are a fan of. Take Rick and Mort for example, the amount of hate that the show has created purely due to its fan base is incredible. This can hugely effect the social part of any text. Say you want to talk to people about enjoying a certain show, but you feel awkward about saying you're a fan due to the stigma around it. Anyway, thanks for your insight it was very helpful to see someone else's thoughts. KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 19:28, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Week 11 lecture notes.
eg. how the weather has changed over decades, how it will act in the future. software- codes ect hardware- data and storage -neolibrial big data ideology. -technological fix to social problems. -Broader economical, political and ideological context: 9/11 and neolibralism. -Military-industrial-corporate complex. -Big data surveillance of citizens, consumers and workers. (ethical and economical issues) -Neolibral fetishism of quantification (measuring and ranking everything) -Algorithmic logic of data analytics strengthen instrumental and administrative understanding of society. -Environmental problems. -Unemployment and precarious labour. -Big data devide Andrejevic 2014. (if C then take A) -Algorithms become the agency. -Big data is in a condition and an expression of surveillance capitalism. -Internet of things, smart objects and wired things. -Logic of accumulation. -Black box algorithms. ''Epolluton' -Myth of dematerialisation of production and immaterialisation of consumption digital and material are interwoven. -20-50 million tones of e waste produced per year. -Planned obsolescence. -E waste mostly produced in developed countries and disposed of in developing countries. -Water and soil contamination. (stuff gets recyled because there is always updates and new things in developments which make old things unusable- then goes to Ewaste. -Data centres use electricity for power and cooling (24/7). -Diseal powered generators back up systems. -Big data sublime. -Corporate privacy protection of data centres. -Outsourcing IT labour to the cloud. -Offshore production sites. -Precarious and deskilled labour.
 * Big data are the vast amount of data generated by large-scale computing operations in order to analyse and predict the development of certain aspects of society and nature.
 * Cloud computing: the way computer resources are being used to store big data. Associated with storing vast amount of data storage in data centres. eg apple icloud, google cloud ect.
 * Fuchs, Christian (2017) Social media, an introduction.
 * Zuboff: Big other;
 * Mosco (2014) The Cloud.
 * Working in the cloud (or not).

Thoughts I found many parts of this lecture interesting. I find big data and internet of things go quite hand in hand with the tracking of data to almost predict the future or what needs need to be met. The idea of something being able to track and predict outcomes is something that can be both beneficial and detrimental to society.

Geek Economy Week 12 Lecture and Seminar
Lecture:

Seminar: The development of platforms has allowed for companies such as Uber to grow, and meet demand more than regular taxis. Apps have allowed for less workers due to it being more of an information site, needing only developers, lawyers and accountants ect. Perhaps this was a way in which society dealt with the financial crisis, creators needed to find a new way to generate money without employing more people. Group task- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/28/sharing-economy-internet-hype-benefits-overstated-evgeny-morozov If we always rent, order, Lyft do we truly ever own anything.
 * Glamorises economic failure.
 * Small start ups rely on facebook to succeed, for information ect.
 * No one really owns anything.

Collaborative Essay reflective account: The Taran-Trio adventure.
Over the past couple of months, I have been introduced to the Wikibooks website and slowly but surely gotten used to its workings. I struggled to grasp the way in which the website works at first. By almost coding in your posts, it allows users to almost structure their own post in a way most suited to an individual. Wikibooks is a different kind of platform from that of more social mediums- it is an academic user discussion page which allows for sharing of collaborative knowledge in order to form a collective reflection.

While Wikibooks is a good way to record and share, there are many exposing aspects of it. Firstly it is important to note that Wikibooks does have a sense of anonymity, usernames are custom and no full name has to be shared with the public. However, when publishing a post, anyone can edit and view all the slight changes you have made or mistakes. This emphasises the visibility as everyone can see the edits and changes you make- exposing any errors or weak spots. This is also an issue, because anything stated as true is imminently shared with in the public eye which can problems with the reliability of the page-now many scholars saying Wiki is an illegitimate source of information.

The experience of Wikibooks our group collectively was one of initial confusion, but through our growth of knowledge on the platform, it allowed us to communicate and divulge into ideas. I also feel it allowed us to view each others research on our individual topics in order to avoid repetition of sources or information. While useful in many lights, Wikibooks is limited through its lack of an instantaneous reply form. Its formulaic response code makes it more difficult to engage in a constant conversation, plus if more than one person tries to edit a post at once it does not work. This makes it harder to fully facilitate the needs of a group when partaking in collaborative research.

While there are many tricky aspects of Wikibooks, it has allowed a community to grow through being able to find and comment on other peoples posts. The comments I have gotten both on my own page and through the Collaborative discussion page has highlighted topics from another persons point of view and allowed me to further expand on my points. This engagement is a tool which I found extremely useful in my understanding and enjoyment of the platform, it exposed other peoples views and feelings which started a conversation on many tricky topics. I feel like this is important as it has allowed for anonymous people to engage in their knowledge, without exposing yourself in a negative light. This is an example of Henry Jenkins participatory culture, in individuals collaborating to create a unified idea.

Wiki Commons is a branch of Wikibooks that helps with the problem of copyright. Wikibooks forbids owned images to be republished as ones own. Online collaboration represents a digital commons as it creates an idea of shared ownership of information, allowing people to create with certain ideas and images that are not copyrighted. In regards to emancipation, Wikibooks is extremely free in its rights to post anything and edit anyone's posts. Therefore, any works can be contributed to the platform meaning that their is no real restriction.

As a whole, Wikibooks is a platform that has expanded my knowledge in different and interesting light. I feel as if I have gained experience in working on a online platform and the information I learned could be useful in the future.

References Jenkins,H(2011). Transmedia 202: Further reflections. Confessions of an aca fan. Jenkins,H(2002).Interactive audiences?The collective intelligence of media fans.The new media book,157-76

KaYuI (discuss • contribs) 16:34, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

comments
Hello!

I completely understand the struggle with the Wikibooks platform. For the first couple weeks honestly I felt pretty lost like I had absolutely no clue what I was doing or where I was supposed to be typing responses and assignments or how to go about starting the collaborative essay. I like that the Wiki platform allows for personal "coding" so each individual user can have a slightly different discussion page set up suited to their liking. Even some of the book pages have a different formatting which is fun.

The thought of Wikibooks being so visible to anyone never truly occurred to me until I wanted to compare my contributions with other users at certain points throughout the essay writing process. I find it strange that we can click on anyone's name and see each and every edit or mistake they have made. However, I also find it quite useful that anyone is able to go back and edit another person's original work if it has become outdated or is no longer relevant. This could raise red flags though if someone were to deliberately go in and change someone else's work, much like I thought was quite funny to do in middle school when I learned that it was possible.

I also found the Wiki platform to be quite useful overall for the process of researching, collaborating, and writing the collaborative essay. It was confusing at first that none of us knew how to correctly format anything to get it to look how we wanted it to look, but we slowly learned and were able to help each other when we learned something new. I also agree with you that the response algorithm is not ideal. My group, VCSI, often found ourselves messaging each other on Facebook Messenger simply because we had urgent questions that couldn't wait until the rest of us logged back in to view the notifications. This downfall took from our contributions.

I feel as if our class has formed our own little community through the Wikibooks platform. Even extending beyond the classroom, this community reaches to all other users on Wiki*edia sites. I highly enjoyed the aspect of other users freely being able to join in and add their comments and ideas and continue to build the knowledge community. It was so nice to see so many ideas flowing across our discussion page for my group and it surprisingly made me more interested in our own topic (always-on culture) and want to continue to learn more about it and what it can all entail. I wasn't expecting to be excited to learn about something such as the always on culture!

Do you feel that overall you had a pleasant experience learning and working with the Wikibooks platform? Although the platform does have several drawbacks, I'm happy to have used it as opposed to just gathering a group and typing a collaborative essay in a Word or Google document because the process of using Wikibooks enhanced my overall learning and experience for this module as a whole. I was able to learn more about other topics as well that we didn't necessarily cover in the online video lectures. I'm glad that you were able to expand your knowledge as well through this platform.
 * Summer.schnellbach (discuss • contribs) 22:35, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi KaYuI! I too initially, well, to be honest throughout struggled to get to grips with the Wikipedia and then wikibooks especially with remembering how to time stamp and the format in which to reply to people. I also lost our module page numerous times and found it tedious to find it.

I agree with you in the sense that the Wikibooks is almost like a social media platform for academics with the almost professional and civil exchange of information/ knowledge. Though as you've said user anonymity is a factor, however I think this is a positive aspect as social media platforms can get quite personal its nice to have a format where there is no intimate profile or face/ name to go with it. Meaning its purely about the exchange in information.

As you've said the freedom of allowing anyone to edit causes issues with trusting the information published, especially due to the edits. Personally, I don't trust wikipedia and even when I got to my last years in high school my teachers told me not to use it because the information is altered and not fully trust worthy. Therefore I have been an avid avoider of the site since then. So to now have to use the platform has been quite a challenge, additionally the format of the website his not user friendly and very much needs updated, along with wikibooks, which in itself needs to be more accessible and advertised as i'd never heard of it and I think its a good space to academically share information.

We too struggled and were confused to begin with! Although i think being in a group really helped us get through as before I think all three of us were quite lost with what was going on but then having the support of each other we managed to piece things together. Additionally it made it easer to help each other out with commenting on each other pages and then when all three of us commented on other peoples work we have thrice fold the amount of information to play with. Therefore as you've said it made gathering information about our essay topic easer to gain. Though as you've pointed out, yes, the non instant reply was difficult to deal with and then the gathering of all the comments in one place is very clutter-some. It almost felt like information overload, a lot of voices speaking at once and then myself and my group had to wade through the comments and then decipher which information was useful or not.

I think I fully agree with you though found wikibooks difficult operate, I do appreciate the platform and what it does for building a community of information sharers. The tool of being able to comment on each others work, though it may not be instant, maybe this is actually a good thing as this shows how people have taken time to reply and put together a well thought out and engaging response. In comparison to social media platforms things are said quickly and without thought.

AS this I my last comment on wikibooks and our last task for the module I wish you all the best and hope you enjoyed the module. Your reflective account was clear informative and relatable to read! (#Rachelmm0037 (discuss • contribs) 23:25, 12 April 2018 (UTC))

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: DISCUSSION, ENGAGEMENT, CONTRIBS

 * Engagement on discussion pages of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for contribs. 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:
 * 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.

Students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement is evaluated.


 * You have managed to create an evidence trail for a fairly sustained, meaningful engagement over a period of time. Although by no means every day, certainly for a percentage of the duration of the project. It shows that you had taken on board the kind of project this is, and the challenges specific to working in collaboration across this kind of platform. Some very good engagement indeed.

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: o	Each item on a contribs list that are 3000+ characters are deemed “considerable” o	Each item on a contribs list that are 2000+ characters are deemed “significant” o	Each item on a contribs list that are 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial” o	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


 * Several contribs registered as being under 1000 characters. A small number classed as “substantial”, and a discursive contrib that classed as “significant”. Some good engagement and discussion in evidence here.

•	Engagement with and learning from the community on Discussion Pages o	Evidence of peer-assisted learning and collaboration o	Evidence of reading, sharing, and application of research to the essay o	Evidence of peer-review of others’ work


 * There is evidence of peer-assistance and peer-review, commentary and discussion with users outside the group, and application of the discussions to the essay page itself. This was a fairly strong element of your work.

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


 * You seem to be the instigator of much of the discussion, as well as some planning and structure organisation.

•	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.


 * Very well conducted!

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 13:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
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. More generally, your posts evidence a real effort to engage others. Undoubtedly, this engagement would have been significantly more in-depth had you engaged in further and wider independent study around the subject matter.


 * In addition, it is reasonable to suggest that 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, if a little brief or functional at times. 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. I also note 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),

General:
 * Reading and research: although there is some evidence of critical engagement with set materials, more evidence required for independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material


 * Argument and analysis: generally fairly well articulated. Whereas there is evidence of critical thinking and relational thinking, this would almost certainly have been improved through wider reading habit. This is something that you can take forward into future years.


 * Presentation: see above comment on use of wiki markup and organisational skills.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 9 May 2018 (UTC)