User talk:Klp00015

Hi and Welcome to my discussion page,
I am Klara, and this page will mainly consist of exercises for an online project for one of my classes at the University of Stirling. I am looking forward to discussing new ideas and sharing my thoughts and knowledge with you!

Please don't hesitate with discussion and comments.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs) 14:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Screen Time Survey
Nowadays, with all the advanced technology, our screen time has increased. A lot of people blame screen time to mental health aggravation which led to a new tactic. Taking a break or completely delete social media accounts. However, how big of a percentage does it make your screen time decreased? We still are using screens for checking the time, buying a train ticket, watching movies or buying food at McDonald's. This realisation of how many screens is around us came to me after counting and categorise my screen time. We live in a growing reality of the continuous presence of screens.

Not all screen time is wrong for you. It all depends on the content and context. I wasn't sure how to categorise my screen time. First I did it by screen types such as tv, phone, cinema, laptop. However, then I realised that it doesn't explain its purpose and if it's voluntary or involuntary. I decided to categorise by:

1. Productivity = reading articles, studying or writing assessments, lectures 2. Free Time = cinema, social media, Netflix

3. Consumption = ticket boxes, analogue watch, shop screens, billboards

These three categories represent my screen time on an average weekend, and it is how a divide my time. Productivity or consumption are involuntary, but we can decide how we spend our free time. Other people might be dividing their time differently, and that is alright. Overall, however, the use of screens of other participant's was very similar because we are in the same age group. If we were looking at younger or older age groups, their categorisation and especially the content of categories might be different. For example, older people watch regular TV much more as well as young kids using gaming consoles. It all depends on other factors as well.

When you try lookup for articles about screen time, 90% of the articles are about screen time and kids, and how it affects their cognitive behaviour and health. It also includes only using social media, phone, tv or gaming. "Total screen time, and in particular television time, is positively associated with metabolic risk factors in school-aged children and youth" That is how screen time is shaped, people don't realise there are screens everywhere around us. Doe's screens in classrooms affect their metabolic risk factors as well, or it is just the "bad" screen time? There is a gap where more research can be done, which is very exciting.

Everything connects to the theory of always-on, which is a semi-permanent condition of persistent connectivity. With all the screens around us, phone connected to the network or laptop paired with your phone: we are always-on. It is impossible to disconnect ourselves from screens. However, our generation doesn't mind the use of technology. "Technology performs a key role in a mediating human desire, imagination and identity." We can be somebody else than in real life. With advancing technology, our use of screen time will be increasing. Part of which we can control, but do we want to?

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise 1

 * Posts 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:

Merit. Among other things, merit 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 upper end of this grade band, but even so, little improvement will go a long way to attaining a higher mark. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to take a closer look at the assessment brief to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets.

Detail:
 * You make use of the wiki functionality and markup, and there’s plenty of evidence that you are trying things out and finding new ways to present material on the platform. Please do continue in this vein. I suspect that, as you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, this will make a difference.
 * A very well written, considered response to the brief. Some good pointers to reading which you use to support your argument.

General:
 * 'Reading and research': evidence of critical engagement with set materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material. Merit.


 * '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. Merit.


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

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:07, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography Exercise (Part 2)
Grimm, C., & Chiasson, S. (2014). Survey on the Fate of Digital Footprints after Death. Proceedings 2014 Workshop on Usable  Security. doi: 10.14722/usec.2014.23049

In this Scholar article, Grimm & Chiasson are investigating and reviewing how users want their digital footprint to be handled after their death, how they would like to communicate these preferences, and whom they would trust with handling this part of their will. The authors created a survey to collect data and recruited participants from crowdsourcing marketplaces through CrowdFlower. The data were supposed to give insight into how participants from different countries and religious backgrounds view the topic of digital death. Their research also focuses on whether participants want unified services by a non-profit or for-profit organization. This article is useful to my research topic as a digital footprint links to a private sphere. The main limitation of this research is that only a few participants shared their experiences. Thus the authors suggested doing further research using interviews or focus groups. Authors concluded with a fact that digital death should be handled by a non-profit using extremely careful and respectful design. This information will be used in my private sphere essay, exact if the digital footprint after death becomes available to anybody.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Social Movement Case Study
When thinking about social movements, I think about a group of people who are trying to make a positive change in our culture. They work together to reach the same goal and make a great impact. With new technologies, social movement can become viral, bring awareness and make the impact even bigger. Anthony Oberschall defined social movements as large-scale, collective efforts to bring about or resist changes that bear on the lives of many. Whether these collective efforts succeed or fail depends on how many people join, how determined they are, and what sacrifices are willing to make.



The excellent example of recent social movement is the Mauna Kea resistance on Hawai'i's Big Island. In 2009, an international consortium of scientists decided on a location for $1.4 billion thirty-meter telescope. They choose Mauna Kea, the highest peak of the Hawaiian Islands (4,207 m) because it is the ideal place to look deep into space. After a decade of court battles, they announced that the construction will begin in mid-July 2019. Activists then decided to engage in non-violent action to halt the project at an elevation of 2,022 m, stretching the site across a two-lane highway to stop construction vehicles from reaching the summit. Protest on site started in July and are still ongoing with over 400 Native Hawaiians camping. Native Hawaiians are resisting the project for many reasons: it violates indigenous rights, threatens Mauna Kea's fragile ecosystem, and is an affront to Native Hawaiian cultural and religious traditions.

Hawaiian youth were helping the elders, especially spreading the word on social media. Social media provides an alternative and extra-institutional channel for individuals to participate in civic movements and, thus, emancipates them from existing structural barriers due to the range of involvement opportunities that social media affords them. The tag lines #protectmaunakea and #wearemaunakea was created and chat rooms, social networking sites such as Twitter and Instagram have exploded with comments, support and encouragement. Encouragement came from many people including celebrities, which some of them visited the site (Jason Momoa, Dwayne Jonhson) to give a speech and support. However, the most important is that these tag lines have connected their concerns and efforts online with other movement and initiatives in social justice, human rights and environmental protection.

The internet may have connected indigenous peoples in networks, where they are creating new conceptual models for the community.



We are Mauna Kea.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs)

Collaboration Essay Critical Evaluation
The creator of the original WikiWikiWeb site, Cunningham, defined wiki as "the simplest online database that could possibly work" Wiki was the first kind of database for online collaboration, where people can have immediate access to the document, all previous versions and modifications, and it has simple communication features as well.

For one of our assignments, we were given a task to write a collaborative essay using Wikibooks, which is another form of a wiki. Wikibooks is simply a collection of open-content textbooks. Every group in our class choose a chapter of a book, on which they wanted to create content. Then each person in the group had to write a part of the chapter. As a group, we had to meet first to discuss our topic and make a strategy. After our first meeting, it was straightforward to write the essay because Wikibooks provides discussion page where we could interact with each other to clarify and share ideas, and express our thoughts and opinions. We used face-to-face communication (meetings) but mainly online communication through discussion. Moreover, we could reflect on each other and our work. All of these aspects are crucial for collaborative writing, and Wikibooks is providing them. However, it has one more point which any other tool for online collaboration doesn't have: Everybody can discuss your work and suggest ideas, including your professor, classmates and other wiki users.

In fact, Wikibooks creates visibility; not only it shows the final product, but it also reveals the entire creative process. As said, you can access previous versions and modifications, and you can see the changes in real-time. A wiki is one of the tools that are now available to all to become more literate, not only by increasing writing skills and communication but by understanding the importance of digital literacy. Wikibooks also creates communities. Communities of people who recognise each other's work and try to encourage one another. However, these communities are not as social networks where you build friendships. Instead, it is sharing knowledge and furthering education with a world community.

In conclusion, my experience with Wikibooks was positive. It made my course work more diverse, and I learned many new things. I used to think that Wikis are not a credible source to look for ideas; however, I now know that people put a lot of work and reflection into every article and book. In my opinion, Wikibooks is a great way to learn how to collaborate and learn strategies on how to overcome the challenges of collaboration. Wikibooks is a good example of using appropriate technology in learning and should be used more in future learning activities.

Klp00015 (discuss • contribs) 10:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: ESSAY DISCUSSION PAGE
Grade Description for Collaborative Essay (individual):

Students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement was 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 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial”: none
 * 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: a few of these, but certainly not for the duration of the project, and not near the level, standard, nor quantity advised in the wikilabs
 * It is expected that you will make at least one contrib per day, for the duration of the project: see above

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
Posts 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:


 * Merit. Among other things, merit 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 some room for improvement here. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to take a closer look at the assessment brief to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. In fact, it seems quite clear to me that, as the semester went on, you became more familiar and proficient with the platform. This made a considerable difference to the flow of your work and their readability.

General: In addition to the common marking scheme, there are three broad criteria widely employed in the Division, which are used to help assessors evaluate your work in a more general sense:

Reading and research: is there evidence of critical engagement with set materials?; is there evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material? For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

Argument and analysis: Is argument well-articulated and well-supported?; is there evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position)?; is there evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections)?; is there evidence of independent critical ability? For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

Presentation: academic writing style and structure, and organisational skills For this element, your work has been evaluated as: Merit

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 14:22, 19 December 2019 (UTC)