User talk:QueenElsaIngrid

This is my Wikibook user discussion page and I will explore this through a series of assignments in my university studies. Please feel free to add comments to enhance my experience and help me learn. QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 14:16, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1 : Educational Assignment
During the startup of the small production company, which my friend and I created over the past year I realised the love I feel for Google Drive and its features within.

Even though it’s main features, Google Docs, Google Spreadsheets, Google Slides and Google Forms were available earlier, the Google Drive service was launched during 2012. Google Drive is a file storage and synchronization service created by, you guessed it, Google. With Google Drive you can upload files to your drive, which functions as a cloud that can only be reached online. You can use this service for storage, sharing of those files or creating completely new files in Google Docs, Slides, Forms and Spreadsheets.

As we started our production company when we were both in different countries and Google Docs was our saviour. It’s simple but effective ways to share and edit files made the process much easier. We started off by writing a script; and with Google Docs we could both edit and write the script even when we were apart. The process without Google Docs had been much longer and much more complicated.

During pre-production my love for the service deepened and my usage expanded to Google Spreadsheets. I used it for budgeting, schedule making, casting and production designing and this process was a much simpler one when I could share the load with my co-founder and friend. We also created a folder to organise information further, and this now holds everything that we need to keep this production going.

Currently, during the production of our first film we use the features within Google Drive to reach our cast and crew with all information they need to know. By using the different options in the editing softwares we can share our different documents and such to cast and crew but easily control who can access what. Another feature that simplified the process is the fact that they all can be accessed through apps on other devices. With this I can edit, plan, schedule, budget and much more on the go, adding that I can easily access my files if needed urgently.

I now use my Google Drive for many other things as well; from everything to poem writing to University work and it is my belief that everyone using Google Drive is simply an eventuality. QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 22:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Links
* Google Drive * Google Docs * Google Spreadsheets * Google Slides * Google Forms

Comments
I definitely want to check out google drive after this! I am an active member on google. I have a gmail account and I don't know how I would service without it. I use google docs and google slides for almost every group project and organization I'm in. For some reason I haven't looked to much into google drive, but now i want to since you said it was less complicated then google docs. I am a part of my schools start up advertising agency back home in the states, and we do a lot of production as well. I bet google drive would be an awesome way for me to stay connected with them while I'm here. I think my favorite part that you mentioned is that you can access google drive through your apps. I feel like I live on my phone and am always on the go! Thank you for your post! Your production company sounds awesome and well organized. Kacollins95 (discuss • contribs) 12:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm glad I could invite you to the world of Google Drive, it really is super simple and truly work perfectly for whatever you need it for. I do enjoy the apps mostly yes, it really simplifies organising life and such when i can access it all at all moments. So impressive you're starting up an advertsiting agency in the states! Is it something you've been doing a long time?(google drive will be perfect for you!) QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 22:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

This is great! Google docs part of their google drive then I take it? I'm a huge fan of google drive because it's great for storing and transferring videos, scripts, notes you name it. Its kind of scary, though, that our organization/life is all online. I learned recently that sometimes it's a bit risky (i.e. when your article gets deleted) but because google is so connected to other accounts and apps I feel that adds some extra security. I feel like we are using other social media sites and apps as storage as well, like Facebook and those long long lost websites we used to put our agnsty teenage pictures up, like Bebo. But there is so little privacy with those websites that google seems to be a much better option. PurpleHan (discuss • contribs) 12:58, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, Google Docs is a part of google drive. I usually explain Google drive as a better, more universal version of the cloud. I think about the whole "life online" thing so often, but I usually keep many notes written by hand, and I do organise my life in a calendar I can write wee notes in and stuff. But when i have to organise other people aswell, google drive comes in handy. Google is such a powerful thing nowadays I have many mixed feelings about it, I like the safety, and being able to reach my things anywhere i go, and if i forget to send or save or what not. However, the internet knows too much! QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 22:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1: Formative Feedback
This is a clear review of Google Drive and its features, as well as how you use it. This could have been expanded through talking further about how this has changed your workflow and how it links to module themes. The links section shows competency with wiki markup, although they could be integrated in the main text. Your comments engage with your colleagues' discussion but require a greater deal of critical reflection in response to their original posts.

A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor: 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. Sprowberry (discuss • contribs) 10:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Educational Assignment
I believe it is difficult describing how visible online you are. We could argue this way or the other, but as we leave footprint everywhere we go online, we cannot control it all. I put a lot of who I am online, of course my purpose it simply to share it with friends and family but I am aware I can not control who sees it. Again, on social media as Instagram or Facebook you can set your privacy settings to whatever you want them to be, but I am sure that even then someone could access it if they truly wanted.

I am visible through mostly social media, Facebook, Instagram, Tumblr and such and my visibility takes form in mostly pictures I would believe, sometimes I write things to share stories or my opinions but mostly pictures are taken by me or of me and put online for the internet to see. What kind of information exists online about me is a question I find difficult to answer. Again, I choose to put up specific information about myself, but I also trust that many things I am unaware of could be found about me online. From my current perspective you could find my date of birth, my family relations, my friendships, my opinions about feminism and LGBTQ+ and many other things.

I remember a few years back when an internet hacking virus went around unlocking the profiles of people on different social medias and I, amongst many people got emails from respective social media saying we should change passwords and such to protect our privacy. This is an example of how easy it is for some people to hack into accounts they need into for information a person might have chosen not to share with everyone, but now could be opened up to everyone through a hacking. It is my knowledge of stuff like this that stops me from saying I am in control when it comes to my online profile and footprints. I am aware that I am not in much control of who sees my online self.

But even as the Internet, and how easy it is for some people to know so much about me it is still such a massive part of not only my life but almost everyone’s. It’s used for jobs and petitions and spreading the word about opinions one might have, getting to know friends and foes, storage our memories in pictures and text, contacting everyone. Even as the internet is terrifying, it’s also terrifyingly great and effective. QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 10:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Common Social Media Links

 * https://www.facebook.com/
 * https://www.tumblr.com/
 * https://twitter.com/
 * https://www.instagram.com/

Comments
I think you raise a very interesting point I had not really thought about which is as much as we would like to control all of our online presence, it is actually impossible. How we share things, or say things all the time on the internet that we are not aware may be saved and can be revealed later. For instance, Simon telling us that even when we type something and delete it (having no intension to release it) it is still actually saved somewhere in the world. That concept to me was brand new and I bet I am not alone in thinking that. Also, when you are talking about privacy and how you feel someone could hack in if they really wanted to, for me, that raises an interesting point of because you are aware of this do you feel you alter yourself online so if they did hack in it would not be so bad? I ask this because you, like most people, like to keep some things private from people you do not know, but by you being aware that there is always a potential of being hacked, do you maybe think twice before thinking to put something out there? Because once something has been revealed things can travel fast on the internet, like the images of people saying "How fast can this get around Facebook?" and I do not know what to make of it and would like to know what other people's take on that is. But really thought provoking for me. User The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 00:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Education Assignment
Information overload can point to many different phenomenons on the web, we are in constant access to a huge amount of information, but in this text we will discover how this can lead to bad things.

Sam Goundar writes of the phenomenon born within the past decade called checking – “…checking is a new phenomenon for those that cannot seem to endure a day without repeated and regular access to mobile connectivity devices. Checking is checking for text messages, checking Facebook updates, checking emails, checking Twitter, checking web sites, and checking whether my friends are checking me…” which I think perfectly sums up how distracting the web nowadays can actually be. The amount of information there is out there and how easily distracted one can be is a bit worrying. The information overload that today’s society face each day could add to the struggle many face with concentrating on one thing. This is a phenomenon I struggle with everyday. Checking my phone is something I do so frequently, when someone asked how many times I do it a day, and I actually counted I was surprised and disappointed that I felt the need to check it so often. A friend of mine, recently mentioned when discussing why he did not have Snapchat, that he felt it was more gratifying to find out about people’s day in person, rather than online as it is happening. This is something I felt very touched by, and since then have actively chosen to opt for the 'real life' experience rather than checking my phone.

Another issue with the information overload in today’s society is how easily accessed inappropriate certain things can be for certain people. As we can read in Teaching and Reading the Millennial Generation Through Media Literacy, there are situations where information reach an audience for it was not meant for. “The problem affects both girls and boys. For example, when 9- to 17-year-old girls encounter advertising about weight-loss products they are “cognitively vulnerable” with limited ability to recognize “persuasive construction strategies, including message purpose, target audience and subtext””. This quote proves the point of certain materials being inappropriate for certain audiences. That younger audiences nowadays can so easily find and explore subjects that are not for their eyes can be scary, not only for particular audience, but like in the instance with the younger girls, it affects people around the person who found the information as well. The information can spread amongst their peers, and parents will have to deal with their daughters thinking about their weight far too early. This particular audience, reaching this particular information is deeply worrying and can lead to much larger issues than one can expect from an information overload.

As written in the text above, information overload, as hinted with the suggestive choice of word, is in fact not the best thing. It affects us al if different ways, distracts us from life, teaches us but also informs us of things we are not meant to know. Information overload is a struggle in today’s society and it is important we are aware of it. QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4: Educational Assignment
The Internet, a place where everyone and anyone can create, produce, view, search is often the home of collective intelligence produced content. The Wikibooks project that we, collectively created this past few weeks is a produce of collective intelligence. Many students working together to create this book, in theory seemed like a great idea and we did in fact end up with a massive and impressive book. However, calling this a ‘collective intelligence’ is accurate but comes with flaws. As David Gauntlett claims as he discusses user-generated content online it takes passion to create greater things, “But, thinking beyond the Web, it may also be valuable to consider Web 2.0 as a metaphor, for any collective activity which is enabled by people’s passions and becomes something greater than the sum of its parts.” Because the Wikibooks project was generated out of a university topic, chosen for us, with a pressing deadline and simply a grade to work towards, this project lacked the interest, passion and previously existing knowledge from it’s contributors to work successfully in practice.

As the Wikibooks project started the contributors, all, evidently had different engagement levels to this project, which set it off to a rocky start. If you arrived into the discussion later than many other, you were easily confused and lost in the massive paragraphs of discussion and writing. As we were set of into smaller groups, one would originally have thought these smaller groups would have more of an impact on the work we were set out to do. However, seemingly, having the smaller groups, amongst the massive group with almost 30 people was just unnecessary. My group met up once to discuss how to tackle this project, before really getting into working on the Wikibook. However, in hindsight, meeting up more often would have been beneficial to us all, as the discussion page was very confusing and you easily lost your place when doing the work. I, as I was dealing with personal issues during the busiest weeks of the Wikibooks, unfortunately missed out on most of the progress of our chapter and arriving later on was very confusing, and you were easily pushed over writing your segment or cast aside when not doing it on someone else’s time schedule. If this had been a ‘true’ collective intelligence produce, one could suggest that the collaboration part would have been smoother and as everyone would have been on the same level of passion and interest, and not done to reach a certain grade, the teamwork part would have worked better.

Another relevant discussion point regarding this Wikibook is cognitive surplus, that the amount of time people spend on media consumption could/should be harnessed and put to a civic collaboration, such as this Wikibook. Nevertheless, this again brings us back to passion for a project. Even as people are surprised that contributors to a project might be setting down to do a lot of work for the general public, for free, just out of the will to do it, this project was difficult to harness out of the student’s cognitive surplus because they did not want to do it, they had to.

If the Wikibook had been a project made, under different circumstances, I believe I would have, everyone would have treated it differently. It was not a work of passion or will, simply a struggle towards a good grade, or simply the finishing line. For myself, as I unfortunately did not manage to spend the amount of time on the project that it needed, my contribution to the book was unsatisfying. I also believe that the information put into the Wikibook could much easier have been harnessed out of the cognitive surplus if done individually, as the massive group-work aspect to it, made it quite intimidating and confusing.QueenElsaIngrid (discuss • contribs) 02:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments
I liked your review of the wikibooks project for several reasons, most notably because while analysing the assessment you actively include the human factor. By actively discussing the passion and desire to complete the project for its own sake, as opposed to meeting a educational deadline, I feel as though you confront many of the pitfalls of the assessment in general. The inclusion of Gauntletts views was a nice touch.

Your discussion on the collaborative aspect of the project was also interesting. I myself found the discussion page did indeed move very quickly in periods of high activity, and could often be hard to keep track of. Although, in my own experience, I found meeting up with my group members in person to discuss the chapter was useful. I appreciate that you had other commitments, so this would not have been possible for you, but I suppose that might have helped dispel some of the confusion? Regardless, I felt your analysis with a focus on the simple human factor to be an interesting take! CaDowns (discuss • contribs) 23:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

You have written an extremely interesting analysis of the wikibooks project, especially the points about how it lacked the passion and commitment of typical online collaborative projects, as we were not 'doing it for the enjoyment and because we want to' as Gauntlett argues, but rather for a grade. I agree the discussion pages were often very fast paced which is difficult for students who don't have the time to constantly check their internet devices (such as working/childcare/other subjects), and feel it was very inaccessible for some. I don't know if you would agree, but I think in future wiki could still be used successfully like the weekly assignments, and then group work could be incorporated through having regular discussion and commenting within seminar groups, not massive groups of 30. I also fully agree on the point that if I had done the task individually my work would have been better? as the group and the way the task was handled by some individuals within the group was very intimidating. Lyndzcmedia (discuss • contribs) 23:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

This is an incredibly insightful analysis into not only the theoretical flaws of the project, but also how it was, at times, a personal inconvenience. I agree with your discussion on the misplacement of motivation surrounding the project, as I believe the intention was to create a collaborated piece of work that added to previously submitted content in a manner that embodied the theory of cognitive surplus. However, since cognitive surplus can partly be defined as voluntary and free submitted content, the project contradicted this idea. It was definitely free, but it can hardly be considered voluntary if there are extreme consequences by lacking sufficient or any contribution. I myself have also been wondering the relevance of the assigned smaller groups in which we were placed, as I spent most of my time discussing with other contributors, who like myself, began the project at an earlier stage than most. Beespence1 (discuss • contribs) 23:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

I had not really thought about how the project was decided for us and would therefore lack our own passion to write about said subject. In saying that though and thinking about it now I definitely agree that this is the case. I mean we could link this to thinking about fandoms and how since the topic was predetermined we lacked the passion and drive to create this project, but of course the fact that it is for our grade I think was all the motivation and drive we needed. We did as you said though create an impressive array of articles that could very well be argued as collective intelligence. I do like your thoughts on how everyone engages on different levels, again something I had not thought about, but of course it is true. The different levels can either work harmoniously or in reality can clash a lot. This was the case with the project and the phrase ‘too many cooks spoiling the broth’ comes to mind. I would also strongly agree with you that if you were not on someone else’s schedule they could complete the task you wanted to do, even id you have more knowledge on it. I think this sparked some panic in people though as they fought at some points for sections they wanted to do and then how could this be collective intelligence as it is more the battle of who is the fastest to complete it? (if we all know roughly the same knowledge on the subjects given). But I do agree the project delves into cognitive surplus with too many people trying to contribute to the same thing and I think a lot of people have found this to be a similar case. I do think though that this project was done so we would encounter all the terms addressed in the lectures, which I do like in a way as we have experienced them first hand. But overall I like your analysis of this project and find your insights very useful. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 15:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
While your contributions are all relatively last minute, and therefore there is only limited evidence of engagement, you present some interesting reflections although you should try to move beyond the personal reflections to integrate critical analysis. Try to integrate further reading, which comes in further down the exercises. You demonstrate some understanding of concepts in chapter contributions although, again, further conceptual orientation would be helpful

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives a good brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a good range of concepts associated with your subject, and the effort to deliver critical definitions, drawing from relevant literature and scholarship, and your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is very much in evidence. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a good range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of limited critical engagement with set material, although most ideas and procedures insecurely grasped
 * evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material limited, displaying a qualified familiarity with a minimally sufficient range of relevant materials
 * Argument and analysis:
 * poorly articulated and supported argument;
 * lack of evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * lack of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of independent critical ability limited, due to the fact that your grasp of the analytical issues and concepts, although generally reasonable, is somewhat insecure.

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content suggests minimally sufficient standard of engagement (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Acceptable engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Limited reflexivity and creativity, and a somewhat insecure management of discussion pages

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)