Thursday 23 February 2017

Task 1b

As I'm sure everyone is aware the aim for this task it to read and evaluate Reader 1. This immediately got me thinking, define evaluate. The word evaluate can be used in so many different circumstances: mathematical, scientific, literal etc. but what did it actually mean? Well by definition of the
dictionary:

 ( http://www.dictionary.com/browse/evaluated )

I found that in this circumstance number two was the most useful. Therefore my personal aim for this task is to read and asses how useful reader 1 was for me, what questions it brought up and what i discovered from reading it.

As a beginner on the course it can all seem a bit overwhelming to begin with - a baptism of fire if you will, with many things to read, sign up to and digest. For me seeing Web 2.0 written everywhere was a bit intimidating (I didn't really know what they meant by it!) but the reader quickly cleared this up for me. It also mentions Web 3.0 and 4.0 and I couldn't leave this stone unturned so decided to clear this up for my own learning. I found some really useful graphs that helped me to understand:



The article I found these on is absolutely brilliant to read and is so easy to understand, if you fancy a browse take a look here: https://flatworldbusiness.wordpress.com/flat-education/previously/web-1-0-vs-web-2-0-vs-web-3-0-a-bird-eye-on-the-definition/


The world wide web is such a vast space and with so many people online or having access to the Internet, is Web 2.0 a good thing? This question sprung to mind when reading about the blurring of lines between the producer and the consumer. My reasons for questioning this are many, for example:

Ethical consideration - not a lot of people are aware of how the web works or how what they put out for the world to see can affect people. Do you know what comes up when you Google your name? I myself have tried to keep my personal and professional online presence completely separate. My main reason for this is it keeps things simple. Everything for both categories is in separate places and easy to keep a track of, the line rarely blurs and I'm quite old fashioned in a way that I like simplicity (If I could do things on a type writer I probably would!). Anyone can anything at anytime and not give you credit, this begs the question, can they take it if it belongs to you or does it belong to what I call 'the free space' of the Internet? I found an interesting article from the BBC about the boundaries between private and public property.


Social interaction - communication is so easy which is wonderful because it allows us to talk to others through Facebook, Twitter and other platforms at ease without a second thought. But what about face to face conversations? Yes of course people will still meet up and talk but social interaction is literally in the palm of our hands. With access to the latest smart phones and tablets do we forget about those who do not have this ability? However, the article and the research it talks about below would argue otherwise:


I often forget the benefits of Web 2.0 when it comes to learning and developing skills, knowledge and ability. Being able to see the other side of the argument has opened my eyes into how beneficial it can be. I am writing a blog for others to read and comment on after all! I certainly can't deny how useful being able to read other people's blogs and opinions has helped and broadened my knowledge on things. 

Expectation - online the world is seen through completely different eyes. If we think honestly about what is shared, is it aways honest? Tabloids have a reputation of bending the truth, magazines for photoshopping. How can humans in the real world live up to the expectations if they aren't real to begin with. This is an issue that has been spoken about many times and there are many discussions to watch and read available. Is something where the truth is so easily bent a good thing? As the reader discusses emancipatory practice, how do we know that everyone using Web 2.0 is suitable and able to use correctly and not for wrong doing such as cyber bullying, shaming.

The reader certainly raised a lot of questions for me, while it paints Web 2.0 in (my opinion) in a positive light, does it fully consider the negative effects it could have? Do the positive outweigh the negative when it comes to Web 2.0? There is a plethora of research to support both arguments, will we ever truly know the answer? The reader is thought provoking and give insight into theories I hadn't previously considered, because of this it has given me the opportunity to research further and analyse my own professional communication which is been very helpful. Overall I'd say that the reader helped me immensely to begin thinking 'outside of the box' on this topic and it did answer a lot of questions I had before reading. 


4 comments:

  1. Jessica this blog has made things even clearer for me - thanks! It's structured so clearly and would be useful to pop inside the Module 1 Handbook as a helping hand in future. I found the 'Expectation' section particularly interesting. I have read up about a girl, Essena O'Neill, who was an Instagram famous model - who gave it up due to the contrived perfection online.
    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/nov/03/instagram-star-essena-oneill-quits-2d-life-to-reveal-true-story-behind-images
    ^ in case you want a read!
    Eleanor

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Eleanor, thank you! Im glad it's cleared some things up. That's brilliant I'll definitely have a read, thanks!

      Delete
  2. Like this blog for additions to Reader 1 Jessica.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello Jessica.

    This is an excellent blog. I never thought to understand the definition of evaluation before setting out on this task. It was interesting to see that you did this first. I will now use this as my practice developed further and have to evaluate other readers.

    The diagrams you found are very interesting and thought provoking particularly as they have predicted how the web 2.0 will evolve for the future... quite scary!

    ReplyDelete