User talk:Melsperspective

Welcome to my discussion page!

The following posts are part of a university project, so please contact me before deleting it or if you find anything unsuited or offensive. Melsperspective (discuss • contribs) 14:41, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1: Screentime Survey
About Screentime Survey exercise on 29 September 2018, Living in a Connected World class:

Firstly, 8 people in the class separated to 4 groups and they discussion about how many hours spent on screen time on the previous week from Friday night to Monday morning. Then they started to calculate. Some groups divided devices, others divided actions. Devices divided by phone, TV, laptop and tablet while, others separated the actions. For example, communication, entertainment and work etc. According to the survey people’s daily spent screen time’s average is 6 hours.

The survey shows that people use mostly smart phone. They spent their most time with their smartphone and this situation shows that people spent their most of time with communicate. The average of spending time with smartphone is 50 %.

The second devices are laptop. People who taking this class are secondly use are laptop. They spend their time working or researching on the laptop. The average of spending time with laptop is 40%.

The least using devices are TV. They spend their little time with entertainment. The average of spending time with TV is around 10 %.

When I looking at the proportion of time spent on my smartphone, laptop and television it would be like:
 * -Smartphone 65 %
 * -Laptop 25 %
 * -TV 10 %

When we look at the results, we can say that people spend their screentime mostly using with smartphones. I think the reason are developing technology and growing social media. This situation gives accessibility to people and this provided that always-on situation affect everybody voluntary or involuntary.

On the other hand, we spend lesser time on TV. We used to spend much time on TV, because we have just a TV. However, nowadays we have a smart phones and we use smart phones for everything including watching something. For example, we can buy  Netflix and we can watch a movie or TV series on the smart phones. And we can read a newspaper on the smart phones. Also we can buy Spotify and we can listen to music on the phone.

Overall, we don’t have to use another devices for doing things. Everybody has a smart phone and everybody spent their time on smart phones. Its always on situation and we can access everything when we want and we can reach everything with our smart phones.

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:

Marginal-Poor. Among other things, poor entries may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. They may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. They may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). They might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard.


 * This work is at the upper end of this grade band, so a 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. Clearly, we have a case here where you need to be engaging with the set reading as well as your own independent study. Drawing from those kinds of materials would have improved your argument considerably.


 * Also, 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 will make a considerable difference.

Detail:
 * You make a couple of general assertions which are problematic. One of these is a very general statements ("I think the reason are developing technology and growing social media.") is too general to be of much use. It is not that this sort of statement is incorrect: more that you cannot make such statements in academic work without substantiation though appeal to evidence of some sort. Therefore, it is mostly a case of not including reading and research that lets you down here.
 * You can write fairly well, so the ability to communicate effectively is present here, although your grammar and syntax could be improved.

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


 * '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. Marginal-Very Poor.


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

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 13:51, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Annotated Bibliography
(1) Myers, Greg. 2009: Discourse of Blogs and Wikis. Bloomsbury, UK. 15-27

(2) In this chapter Myers explain, where blogs and wikis are come from, what is the difference between them and how they construct social identities and communities. (3) Myers aims to explain the genres and where they come from and also what are these stories. (4) He used table on his book in order to explain the conventional histories of blogs and wikis, which are divided into different stages. (5) This book (chapter) is useful for me because, I have a project on Wikipedia in my module and I need to understand how it works and this book is located in my resource list which is required for my module.

KEY

(1) Citation

(2) Introduction

(3) Aims

(4) Unique Features

(5) Usefulness

Wiki Exercise #3: Social Movement Case Study
Social movements and protest cause of to see the society and shows what they needs (Godwin & Jasper,2015). With the technological developments social movements and protests are evolved with the growth of the social network sites. I want to mention that social movements and protests in Turkey in this study.

Social movements gained speed after 1960s in the whole world. In Turkey there had a lot of social movements happened against to government. It started on universities, associations, foundation with Lefthish people. (Simsek, 2007). However, these protests and social movements started at the real places. People got organized and decided at real places like universities or associations. With the growth of the technology and the growth of the social network sites protests and social movements changed direction. Now, everybody communicate on social network sites and everybody get organized on social network sites.

In 2013 there was a big social movement in Turkey which is called Gezi Park Protest. This protest started on social network sites. A lot of people who are used Facebook and Twitter talked about governments wrong decision about planning to destroy Gezi Park and on the night of 28 May 2013 thousands of people communicated on social network sites and then they went to Gezi Park for protect for this park against the government. This movement continued for 3 months.

This protest has grown and spread to whole country in one night. Everybody went outside and protested to the government. When this protest got serious, peoples life was in danger because of polices 11 people died and 8.000 were injured (Bellaigue, 2013). Use of social network sites helped a lot of people, because if somewhere have a dangerous people posted a tweet and the others didn’t go there. If there is a new protest people would learn on social network sites and got organized. If somebody needed help another people would go there instantly because of the social network sites.

When the protest was over, people and the government realized that social network sites has a big power. Everybody says that traditional media is the fourth power but now social media is more powerful than traditional media.

Wiki Exercise #4: What Are Wikis? What Kind Of Resource Are They?
We can define Wikipedia as a Internet encyclopedia basically. The Wikipedia users prepare a lot of information as be free, independent and jointly. Also they prepared using MediaWiki software. These information never be completed because people will always add new information and they can always change everything. The users (writers) or Wikipedians (Weltevrede and Borra, 2016) are also writing as a volunteer. Moreover, people don’t have to need an account for writing something or editing. However, Wikipedia has some rules for writers. These are being unbiased, using references, being objective and discuss both sides as positives and negatives.

One of the founders, Jimmy Wales, describes Wikipedia as “an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest quality to every person in the world in their own language.”

There are a lot of discussions about Wikipedia’s reliability and also the site is strongly exposed to vandalism. The discussions still continuous about system errors and the accuracy of information. Sometimes information may be unconfirmed and may be questionable or resources may be missing. Turkish Professor Murat Bardakcı argued that in a previous TV show, using Wikipedia would be bad effects for students academic life, because there are a lot of plagiarist.

Before I took this lecture (Living in a Connected World), I didn't use Wikipedia so much, because in Turkey Wikipedia is blocked by the government. The reason for this is because in Turkey there are a lot of protest campaigns against the government and the government always block lots of social network platforms because of the same reason. They are blocking our freedom of getting any communications or information. Although during and after this lecture, I realized that Wikis are really important in the digital world but still not sure if they can be trusted 100%. Hence, it’s a very helpful tool for research and learns. I also improve my Wikis skills like, creating and editing wiki books, using commons and editing discussion page etc.

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:


 * Pass . Among other things, pass entries may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. They may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. They may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. They might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture and/or cursory reading. They may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse). The wiki markup formatting will need some work.

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 take a closer look at the assessment brief to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Additionally, 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 will make a considerable difference.

Detail:
 * Ex#2: this annotated bibliography entry is a little dry and would benefit from more creative use of the platform to generate a more visually-engaging price e.g. captioned images. Although well written generally, there is a little repetition, the engagement with the reading veers on the descriptive rather than analytical, and is a little short – you could have added at least one more sentence, if not two to flesh out your account here.
 * Ex#3: you have chosen a very good case study as a vehicle to illustrate social movements in relation to connected media campaigns, as well as demonstrate your understanding of social movements as civic activities. It is a little conversational in tone at times, as well as being a little on the descriptive side, but articulates your ideas in a fairly straightforward manner I would have liked a little more explicit connection made between one or two of the elements in your argument. Good use of images to frame your text although I would have worked a little more on the formatting to match the images up with the piece a little better, visually-speaking.
 * Ex#4: This piece is characterised mainly by factual description - whilst empirically accurate, this doesn’t really add anything to your response. Once the piece gets moving, you draw some connections between different approaches, using a (albeit limited) range of set reading. There are lots of grammatical slips in here, and I wonder if you would find it of benefit to seek additional support to help improve your academic writing. Certainly, additional proofreading prior to submission would improve your work immensely.

General:
 * 'Reading and research': evidence of critical engagement with set materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material. Pass.
 * '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. Pass.
 * 'Presentation': good use of wiki markup and organisational skills. Pass.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:03, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on your contribs to Essay Discussion Page
Contributions to discussion 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:


 * Among other things, contributions at this standard may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. They may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. They may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). They might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard.

In addition, you were asked in the brief to address the following guidelines in terms of contribution, engagement and conduct, Here is an evaluation of those elements of your activity on the Essay Discussion Pages: •	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: 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 o	It is expected that you will make at least one contrib per day, for the duration of the project


 * Marginal. Inconsistent engagement throughout the duration of the project. A small number of smaller, but very important edits made on both your own pages and on the main essay discussion page. Unfortunately, there are very few of these and not at all at the frequency or volume expected for this level. There are, additionally, no contribs that could be considered substantial, significant or considerable by the criteria above, as set out in the assessment brief: although it’s important to acknowledge that this is about quality of engagement much more than quantity, one would expect at least one or two of these more weighty contribs in there which would have made a positive difference to the essay and to the project overall.

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

•	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 	Marginal.

•	Civility. Your conduct is a key component of any collaboration, especially in the context of an online knowledge-building community. For further information about this in a Wikimedia context, please go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars. Please respect others, as well as observe the rules for civility on wiki projects. All contribs are moderated. 	Merit.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 12:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC)