User talk:Martiparti15

My name is Claire and I'm working on a digital media project at university.

Wiki Exercise #1: Online Visibility and Footprints
I am fairly visible online as I do have social media accounts on many major social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, LinkedIn), however I don’t consider myself to be as visible on social media as many of my friends who have social media accounts on every social media account imaginable, such as VSCO, Tumblr, Reddit, YouTube, etc. Additionally, I do not post very often on social media, so I would consider myself to be less visible than a lot of people I know, specifically those that post on Instagram daily or those who post albums containing hundreds of photos on Facebook, as I reveal less about my life than the aforementioned individuals. However, the concept of how visible people are online relates to Graham Meikle’s book Social Media: Communication, Sharing and Visibility, in which he argues that social media platforms are examples of presentational media in which “the individual is both presenting and performing versions of themselves” (Meikle 11). This therefor begs the question of whether what is visible about us online through social media is actually about us or simply about the image we want the world to see.

We are encouraged to provide lots of very personal information about ourselves online by social media platforms in order to find our friends online and learn more about each other’s lives, even when we are far apart. Facebook in particular encourages users to add a plethora of information such as their birthday, hometown, current city, education, relationship status, religion, and even more to their account. Social media platforms such as Snapchat and Instagram even encourage us to share our location by using filters personalized to our location, and Snapchat has even gone as far as creating the Snapmaps so that people are able to see where their friends as at any time. I personally choose to share only basic information about myself, such as where I’m from, where I go to university, and a few photographs on social media.

I have chosen to share the information the I post to my friends and followers because we want to be able to keep up with each others lives even when we are far apart.. However, once you put something online the information is available to the world. The only thing that you can really control once you post information online is whether it is currently visible on your social media account. While you are sometimes able to see if someone, for example, screenshots your story on Instagram or Snapchat, you are unable to prevent them from spreading the screenshot once it has been taken. I know that social media platforms have more control over our information than we think because the advent of memories on Snapchat has shown me stuff I posted on my Snapchat story two years ago that I thought would never be seen again. Martiparti15 (discuss • contribs) 19:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

I find that what you have to say about your limited visibility on social media to be very refreshing especially in consideration with both how visible our generation and myself personally. I am curious though as to why this is? Is this a conscious or unconscious decision you have made and does this reflect who you are and what you are like "in real life/person"? I also agree with the question you posed about how authentic or true to ourselves is our online visibilty/footprint. If I had to try and answer it I would say yes and no and I think it depends on each person. Because there are definitely people who use social media to manipulate others and how others view them and people (like myself) who are more authentic about our posts and don't always really care sometimes how many likes or comments we get because we just want to share part of our lives with our friends on social media. A reading I found that also relates to this question is a book, LikeWar: the weaponization of social media, by P. W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking in which they write that "In a world of smartphones, 'everyone's an editor,’ tweaking each word and image until it conforms to an idealized sense of self. “Now everyone is a reality star,” Pratt added. “And they’re all as fake as we were” (Singer and Brooking, 2018, p.158). In relation to the point you made about choosing to share your information with friends and followers in order to keep up with each other, I think that the reading from Yasmin Ibrahim also adds to your point. She writes, "The desire to see ourselves being validated and consumed by others facilitates a whole new economy where the self is rebirthed through new mediated platforms where sharing and community endorsements make the solitary self a form of transaction" (Ibrahim, 2018, vii). This adds to your point because I think we do all have this desire to check in on others and portray our "wonderful" lives on social media and when others engage with us and vise versa we do get this satisfaction that we are doing something right and that social media really works and we are using it correctly. Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 15:53, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree with many of the topics you address in your discussion point. In comparison to your social media use, I am very active on scoial media. Especially, while studying abroad. I enjoy showing my friends about my adventures and the world that I am seeing. I see your point about Facebook's abundance of photo sharing as I do that for my family to access my adventures. Facebook is a very demanding technological platform. Facebook asks for lots of information about its viewers to help them connect to things they may enjoy on the site, but it can viewed as intrusive. I like your point about how what you share with your friends and followers is help you remain connected to them. Social media is very evident in all peoples lives as the growing era of technology expands. You make an exactly point about how social media platform are constantly developing and adding new features such as Snapchat's Snapmaps. These new develops make these social media platforms more competitive and more intrusive on the users lives. I raise the question for you, when is there a point that social media expansions can not longer expand? What might be your thoughts on this point? Cornelius06 (discuss • contribs) 14:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)Cornelius06

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.


 * 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. 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 especially good. You have engaged in discussion in an open and critical way with other users who have commented on your work (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). Keep this up!

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: To what extent are my online and offline identities aligned?
I believe that the way we present ourselves online reflects in part who we are, however, I don’t think social media can ever fully and accurately represent who we are. I think the way we present ourselves online and how much information we provide about ourselves varies over different social media platforms and that we do not have one specific identity. For example, I post different things on Facebook, where my family and adults make up a portion of my friends, than I would on Instagram, where most of my followers are young people. Additionally, how we present ourselves on social media is constantly changing meaning that we do not have one fixed identity, we have multiple changing ones.

I do feel that my online presentation differs from the way I am in online situations; I am often more confident online because I have time to consider what I am posting while in face-to-face situations, such as conversations, I have to think on my feet when responding. However, I also feel that in face-to-face situations I don’t have to worry as much about being misunderstood as it can explain myself more easily. I feel that other people can play a major part our online identities; as mention in the video ‘Is Social Media Hurting Your Mental Health?’ by Bailey Parnell and TEDXRyersonU, many people will post on they make on social media if they do not receive the desired number of likes, comments, or shares. By deleting these posts they are indirectly and subconsciously letting other people curate the content they post on social media.

Overall, I try to let my social media represent my true self. If someone were to look at my Instagram they would see that I like travelling, sports, and concerts; all true statements. However, I will say that my social media accounts are essentially a highlight reel of my life and they often leave out the negative times, are Bailey Parnell mentions. I believe that our identities change over time to reflect the experience we have and changes that occur in our lives.

Over time I have become more conscious of the fact that once something is on the internet it will be there forever, so I spend a lot more time thinking about what I post than I once did, which therefore makes the information I post more curated than before. While my status as a user has remained the same, however the amount of times I post on average in a year has definitely decreased. Over the last year I have attempted to use social media, specifically Instagram, less as I have noticed it having adverse effects on my mental health, something noted as common in the TEDx Talk. From September to January I did not post one photo on Instagram (other than on my story- but I cut down the number of times I did this) and I only allowed myself to use Instagram for 30 minutes each day. Unsurprisingly my number of followers decreased, however I found myself with more free time, spending less time thinking about social media in general, and happier overall. Martiparti15 (discuss • contribs) 01:12, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Comment Section
Hello, reply to| Martiparti15}} I agree with the concept that people have multiple identities, which are presented and controlled by the individual. I would say I am more cautious about the information I share online as well as when interacting with others offline, it is possible for other people to misinterpret words, in that sense the words or actions we make can have a lasting impression on others, more than online. With the rise of trends it is impossible to remain switched on all the time. The fact that you create set times for your online involvement as you suggested created more time to discover yourself, which is what society needs. Overall this is well written and clarifies your standpoint on identity whilst I evaluated my online and offline presence and identity. Thegirlwiththewhitebrother (discuss • contribs) 13:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Martiparti15! I really enjoyed reading your mini essay, and I agree on that we can have multiple facets of our identity displayed on social media. I like your point on how we curate ourselves according to how we want to present ourselves, and that we definitely become more cautious when engaging online. However, personally I don't believe this is behaviour that is exclusively showcased on social media. Wouldn't you agree that you change aspects of yourself depending on who you're hanging out with, and in what circumstances? For instance I definitely do not act the same way around my parents as I do around friends, and I behave much differently in school as opposed to my job, and I change myself in the same ways online. Nevertheless that is just my viewpoint and would love to hear if you find any similarities in this? Though I did really enjoy your take on this essay, the video was quite interesting as well! Bangingbese (discuss • contribs) 00:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Annotated Bibliography Exercise (Part B)
Wright, E. J., White, K. M., & Obst, E. J. (2018). Facebook False Self Presentation Behaviors and Negative Mental Health. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21, 40-49. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.stir.ac.uk/10.1089/cyber.2016.0647

This study by Wright et al. explores false self-presentation behaviors on Facebook their relationships with negative mental health. The authors surveyed 211 Australians between the ages of 18 and 29 about their false self-presentation behaviors on Facebook, mental health, social influence, and well-being in order to determine false self-presentation behaviors on Facebook as well as their predictors and outcomes. Their research assesses the results of the Facebook False Self-presentation Behaviors Inventory (FFSBI) taken by participants and analyzes the result in order to categorize false self-presentation behaviors. This article is useful as it reveals correlations between anxiety and false self-presentation on social media and categorizes false self-presentation behaviors. One limitation of this study is that all those surveyed were Australian and social media practices may differ depending on nationality or geographical location. The research done by Wright et al. revealed that there are two types of false self-presentation behaviors, lying behaviors and liking behaviors, and revealed predictors of false self-presentation on Facebook, such as moral and group norms, and outcomes, including increased levels of anxiety and depression. This article will be used to support the idea that impression management on social media can lead to increased levels of anxiety.

Wiki Exercise #4: Collaborative Essay Critical Evaluation- What are Wikis?
After researching wikis, it is clear that they are often defined by their collaborative nature, their editability, their transparency and their self-management by users. Therefore, based upon these definitions and my experience contributing to Wikibooks and  Wikipedia, I would define wikis as online collaborative resources or knowledge bases that can be edited by users and provide users with access to prior versions of the work.

The type of resource that a wiki is depends on the wiki itself and how it is used by users. For example, Wikiquote is an online collection where users can find quotes from "notable people and creative works in every language" as well as translations of quotes into different languages. It is essentially a database for quotations, where they are categorized according to the topic mentioned or the speaker. Another example of wikis would be fan wikis, which are wiki created by fans that are dedicated to a specific topic, such as a books, film, television programmes, and other popular works. An example of this would be the Harry Potter series which has its own wiki a plethora of information for users to view and contribute to. In both scenarios, wikis are used as knowledge bases for users to contribute to.

However, today wikis are being used more and more often for educational and professional purposes. The use of wikis in education has been shown to improve learner comprehension of the course and provides students with access to different audio and visual resources to connect to their work as well as a place where students can collaborate to enhance the quality of content. Wikis used for educational purposes are also values for their transparency, as editing records allow professor to see which students are actually contributing to the project. The Wikibooks project we just completed is the perfect example of how wikis are being used in education. As groups we all contributed to the knowledge we gained about a topic from our research to our page. We were then able to gain a better understanding of our topic by reviewing each others contributions and then collaboratively decide what topics best suited our page. Overall, I felt that this project not only improved my editing skills on Wikibooks, but gave me a more in-depth understanding of my group's topic through collaborative work.

Within the professional sphere, many companies have been utilizing wikis instead of intranets as they require minimal technological knowledge and provide users with access to previous versions of work. In the educational and professional worlds, wikis are typically used more for their collaborative attributes than necessarily as a knowledge base, as is the case with Wikibooks and fan wikis. While their uses may differ, all wikis share common characteristics such as their collaborative editability, transparency, and self-management. This is why I have decided to define wikis as online collaborative resources of knowledge bases that can be edited by users and provide them with access to previous versions of the work.

User Comments
I found your views on both students and the workplace use of wikis to be very accurate. Similarly, I found research about students use of wiki sites especially with our use of Wikibooks in the Impression Management group project. I never would have related my use of wikis to my coursework until now. It is a very common tool amongst students to use Wikipedia, especially, to find answers to everyday commonalities and access information. Wikicommons on the other hand, provides access to images, sounds, and other media sources without needing copyright licenses; you talk briefly about this in your writing and your provided source is factual. You make a very valid point by addressing how the use of wikis is evident in students lives and is a growing field. One thing you could have addressed here is how students communicate through wikis. Your research raises the question: are wikis a source of validity? I find that in the classroom we are commonly asked not to reference wikipedia, but with the research you and I have conducted, I would like to hear your thoughts about that.

In the professional world it not common to think of using wikis. I like how you addressed this topic in your essay. It is interesting to learn how companies use wikis instead of intranets due less requirements and possibly even more cost effective. Your summed up definition of wikis is very concise and criticises wikis effectively.

This connects to web 2.0 and the equal collaboration efforts between the two. They are related to one another and wiki is a form of web 2.0. Although, you do provide great examples about wikis, one thing that you could have added to connect your research back to the course objectives is how web 2.0 and wikis are related.

You answer the question: in what ways does it emphasis visibility, and why, by talking about how both students and professionals use wikis in their everyday lives. You provide both examples effectively as they use wikis for different reasons. Student are looking and using more for knowledge as professionals are using more for collaboration. This answers the previous question, because it shows how people interact with wikis and how they are visibly active. One key concept that would have helped to further advance your ideas on the topic of wikis is by answering the question what kind of platform is wikibooks? You provided evident examples of wikis, but I feel that you could have answered this question with more extensive research specifically about Wikibooks. Wikibooks most definitely is a collaborative platform engaging people all across the world to work on a topic, such as we did in our group project.

Lastly, I liked how you gave an example about Wikiquote because it is not as common of a site and yet provides very valid information. This was a good example to use. You stated, “wikis are used as knowledge bases for users to contribute to,” I believe that is a very accurate point. It explains how wikis are communities of collaboration. Nice work! Cornelius06 (discuss • contribs) 21:32, 2 April 2019 (UTC)Cornelius06

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:
 * Excellent. Among other things, contributions 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 formatting, 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 and transparent way on the Discussion Pages. They will make insightful connections between original examples and relevant concepts, justifying decision-making with transparency. 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 as well as for fellow researchers collaborating. The wiki markup formatting will be impeccable.

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:
 * Consistent contributions made pretty much throughout the project period. Many of these classed as substantial according to the above criteria. Additionally, the Annotated Bibliography contribs are notable as of good quality, and excellent commentary alongside in most cases.

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

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

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.
 * Excellent

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:30, 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:


 * 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 upper end of this grade band, but even so perhaps a little improvement would go someway 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 look at the Grade Descriptors and criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets.


 * Your use of wiki markup and formatting was creative and well organised generally. 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 generally good, on time and to the point. You are discussing ideas 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). This is solid work.

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


 * 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 good.


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

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)