When looking portfolio, isn’t description of what you did. It’s not the artist accompliament.
Engate in autoethnography. Graded on what you learned.
What sorts of things you consider for participation in modern tech.
Through the force of being forced to make things in groups.
Can work with anybody. Not just in the class. Can talk about that process.
You write your blog to this phatom reader who is yourself.
Downfall: Nothing I love to read myself.
Have own inhibitions.
Can talk about what gets in the way? What enables? What contributes to my engagement to the media. Can be many different things, technically, academic etc.
Can be:
Why did I use a public blogger?
Why did I choose this subject?
Nature of knowledge acquistion. How does it fit in the model of education? If it’s your model for journals and books, what difference is there? How do you categorise?
Portfolio:
Beginning: Overarching thing about what you learned about the course.
Can be organised however you want.
Each section must be 1 page.
Last year some 10-15 pages. Some went to 60 pages. Describe what you did is not enough. What you learned is the most important. About the broader phenomena.
Each portfolio is individual regardless if you do everything in a group.
Participation is more than showing up. It’s how you:
- learned on your own
- take things and help others
Can do all of the projects in one weekend. Just explain why you did / didn’t do all of the projects and what you learned. How did you reflect on your engagement of the excerise in the notion of participatory communication.
Facebook Group.
Did you check the credentials for the leader of a Facebook group?
So some guy starts a group. Then everyone says, “I should have start a group”
Participation on another level
- being active
- just being a member
We go to the places that are more like us than anywhere else.
We can go anywhere in the world, but we don’t. The chances are that despite the fact that we may engage with blogs from all over the world, the chances are you aren’t getting outside views. You’ll probably doing what you’re doing. You really aren’t sharing with anything new.
Expand your networks.
- talk to different people
- join different groups
- do different things
- parties / friends
Research is that most people don’t make it past the 1st page in Google, even less go past 2nd page.
Unless you go to a party that’s good, it’s usually your same circle. You tend to meet people through a connection. We follow our blind paths. The more we think we are expanding our network, we are only expanding through number but not perspective.
Those networks are a replication of another connection you’ve already have. But are all actually quite similar.
The ultimate in social media is to become a ‘source.’ When people come to you for information.
Harder to see what the social efficacy versus the political… some social may translate political.
Difference between social participation about a political vs social participation around political (organizing to do something vs organizing while doing something)
We lost a lot of cognitive energy. But when we aren’t purposely doing anything it’s called waste. But some say that is when we get the most done because we can recuperate or come up with new things.
It may not be a waste if you still learn from it. You may not need to take away something tangible.
What is the broader outcome of participation if nothing tangible comes from it?
What are the outputs? What do we get from our participation?
Micro-celebrity à most famous person in a room of 100 of people they’ll never know
We are willing to suspend in our belief in waste so we can keep up in our lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment