Criterion A-
For criterion A, we were first supposed to visit various thinkquest websites that won the competition and identify which aspects of the website you liked and disliked. Then you had to read 3 major articles along with sub-articles that were tips about making a website, what to be careful on, etc. Then you had to summarize them and post it on the blog. You also had to find the connection between the project and the society.
I followed all directions as followed. I identified which websites i liked/disliked and stated why. I had a bit of a hard time reading the articles because I wasn't familiar with the HTML language, but I understood the key points of each article and tried to summarize them best to my ability. I also found and stated the link between the project and the society.
In this criterion, I still think there are various methods to improve. For example, I could have read further articles to broaden my knowledge, since I didn't have any to start with. I could have looked into more specifics in evaluating the thinkquest websites. I could've also asked people with experience of HTML to translate for me some of the languages I didn't understand in the 3 articles I read.
Criterion B-
In this criterion, you first had to think of 3 ideas for your website. Then we had to evaluate them using the design specifications from criterion A that you developed. Then you had to choose one website that you will work with and also evaluate that against the design specifications. Then you had to have a paper design on a rough idea of the layout of your website.
I think I did ok for this criteria. I gave explicit explanations to the three ideas i thought of, on what was good, what was bad, why i would choose it, what would be required, etc. Then I evaluated them against my design specifications and knocked off two of my ideas. The thing was, I had already chosen an idea to begin with, but I nonetheless made three feasible ideas. Then I also made a paper design. However, it was very quickly-done and it looks a bit messy.
I could have done better in this criterion through various methods. First of all, I could have spent more effort on my paper design. I could have actually colored in the thing, could have had some sample pictures that I would have inserted, etc. I could also have thought of more ideas, and explain them in a greater detail.
Criterion C-
For this criterion, you had to make a feasible timeline to make your webpage. You also had to state which materials you would need, how long it would take, the dates, and also list the steps you would take. Furthermore, if you didn't follow your plan as you have made, you had to alter your plan and edit it and post it again.
I actually did a good job in this criterion. I made a detailed schedule with timelines. I was first worried that I couldn't follow my plan, because of the getting-used to and the unfamiliarity towards HTML, but I actually followed my plan, so I didn't have to change anything.
The only thing I could have improved in this criterion is to have a more detailed timeline.
Criterion D-
Fir this criteria you had to create the actual website. For us, we had to use the Coffee cup software to make the product, and we also had to stick to our plan and design specifications as best as we could.
I used the coffecup software, since there were no other open choices. I chose one of the templates the software had from the start and used that as the base to create my website. i used the research that I have done for my project and put the content in the areas. I also made an additional navigation menu on the top (it originally had 3, I made it 5). I also changed some headings, made some links, and inserted some images. Since we had to site our images, rather than having a separate URL on the bottom of the image, I instead inserted the URL so that it shows the URL when you have the mouse over the image for 2 seconds, for the purpose of making it look neater. I also tried changing the color of the template to match my paper design of criterion B, but I failed miserably. However overall, it looked very neat and I thought it was a small success (especially considering my 0-knowledge on HTML and creating websites).
I could definitely have improved on this criterion. I could have read the coffeecup help to change the colors of the template to match my design specifications. I could also have made my own template after practicing and researching to a great extent. While I did like my final webpage, it wasn't "perfect." I could also have done greater research on this subject; instead of the list of universities I could have found all the pages and linked them directly. There are so many things that I could have improved upon, but that's for next time, since i now have more experience in website-designing.
Evaluating my product (self)-
Here was my design specifications:
1. My website will provide reliable information
2. The information on my website will be useful and easy-to-see
3. My navigations will facilitate the exploring of my website
4. The design (layout, color choice, etc) will not inhibit the eliciting of the information from the website (basically it won't be a distraction, but it doesn't need to be an appealing website either)
5. The website will not have an automatic video on the home page
6. The content of the website will have more importance than the design of the website itself.
I think I followed my specifications pretty well.
In my opinion (I may be biased since I made the website myself) the information I provided was reliable, especially with all the links I have attached. I organized the content so that it is easy-to-see and easy-to-find while it is useful (for me). i suppose the navigation within the template helped the exploration of my website. My website looks professional and it doesn't distract the eliciting o information. It doesn't have an automatic video on the home page. The content was more important than the appearance. So in my opinion, I followed my design specifications quite well.
The only thing, though, is that it felt the work had been already half-done because of the template. But without it, I would have failed in making a website miserably, so I am very happy with it.
Evaluation of my product (according to my test method)-
We judged each other's WebPages on the 25th of May. We judged on three aspects: Navigation, Content, and Visual Appeal.
For my website, I received an 8.5 for Navigation, 9.8 for Content, and 4.9 for Visual Appeal, giving an average score of 7.7.
Here were some of the comments received from peers:
" A lot of info explaining almost everything"
"Wow, this website could be a 'real' web. But sometimes it's too much info"
"I'm a visual learner and I think your website could have been much better if you put some more pictures or colors, or separate the content into separate pages"
"Not that many pics"
Basing my standards upon my design specification, my website is a complete success. The information on my webpage held the most importance and was useful. It was easy to see and was guided by the navigation that was easy and also that worked. My website looked very professional (according to the comments received). Even though I received a mediocre score for visual appeal, my design specification was that it will not be a distraction and that it will look professional, which it was. it also wasn't required to be colorful or fancy, so I thought that even though the score was low, it was actually a success, since that was what I was aiming for.
The impact of my product as of right now is somewhat unclear. because it has not been yet uploaded to the Web, not many people could see it. However, I believe that once I upload it and people start visiting, it will help them greatly, since it is very well organized. It also influenced me since I want to apply to some of these programs.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Criterion B - Design & week 3 Moodle
paper design-
Even though I already have a detailed design specification with a certain topic of my website of my choice, here are some other designs (topics) that i could talk about and what areas I need to focus on.
1.
Topic: Horror Films
Content: It will contain information on new horror film releases as well as horror films of the past. It will also have rankings of horror films in different categories (such as ratings, audience numbers, earnings, etc
). It will also have a page that has a list of recommended horror films of my choice and follwing explanations of it. It will also have a page of history of horror films.
Layout: This will be as important as the content. People definitely needs to get the feeling that the website is scary, spooky, or at least flashy. As the nature of movies admit importance of advertisement and visual aids (including the movies themselves), the mood that people sense needs to be strong, and in this case, scary. So probably a black background will do it's job with blood patterns. As for the text, it will be a black text on white background, but on the white, there should be scary factors like drops of blood, etc.
Problems: The major problem for this kind of website is that it needs to be constantly monitored and updated. As for the nature of this assignment, it will be close to impossible to keep on updating it. Also, the time it will take for me to create the product will be so long that by the time I finish the website, new films and new information would have arose.
2.
Topic: Recommended Online Games of Korea
Content: It will mostly contain information on different online games. It will have a seperate page on different genres of games (FPS, MMORPG, RPG, social, etc.). In the pages, I will give an image of the game itself (the official title, etc) as well as some screenshots. I will also give pros and cons of the game itself, and state whether you have to pay to play, or whether it is a free online game. I will also give short explanations of the games themselves. I will also give ratings of the games according to my standards. I could also have another page of foreign online games that are worth playing too. Each game should also include the official age of permission to play the game.
Layout: Layout, in this case, holds about 40% of importance (while content is 50%). One major aspect of games itself is because of the "cool" effects, graphics, and the visual aspects of it. So assuming that the people visiting my website will be those who play online games, the visual aspect is important. The designs would be different for every page. For example, the homepage could be a collage or a mix of different genres of a game. FPS page would mostly include guns, knives, and militarty uniforms. RPG page would mostly include characters with ID's and status of the characters, and etc.
Problems: Since it is about Korean online games, the language use itself is a problem. Also, Korean online game market is ever-expanding, so again, it will need constant updating. Also, it would be kind of pointless to create this website for the audience of foreigners because korean online games require a social security number and even if foreigners wanted to play, they would not be allowed uinless they are korean citizens or working in Korea.
3.
Topic: Baccaulaureate of Science, Arts/ Medical Doctor (BS/MD or BA/MD programs) offered in universities in the United States.
Content: The content is of 90% importance here. The audience who will come to visit my website are people who seek for information, not people who are bored and want to explore the web. So giving reliable, profound, and organized information is crucial to the success of this website. hence great research needs to be done to gather the information. The main pages of this website will be: List of BS/MD prgrams in the states (along with universities that offer it, tuition, and other basic information). Another page will be an overview page (possibly my home page) on "what is BS/MD?". Another page will be the necessary or the recommended requirements of high school grades, official test grades, etc. it should also have a ranking page (if i can get the ranking information). It should also have another page on the paperwork required for admission (including the financial aid, admission itself, scholarship paperwork, etc.)
List of pages: Homepage, Introduction page, Basic requirements/recommendations page, list of universities offering BS/MD page, financial/tuition/scholarship page.
Things to include: Font- Times New Roman 13-15. Bckground color- dark or smooth green. Color of font for navigation: white. Text- White bakground black writing. Images- Have not decided yet. Reliable information under the pages listed above.
Layout: The layout for this page will be of minor importance. Again, the visitors come to elicit information, not for boredom. But one thing that i do need to keep in mind is that the page needs to look professional : in the sense that it must look as if it was recently created (because old information is the last thing anyone would want for BS/MD programs). So overall, it should just be neat, and not flashy or tacky. (more design layout shall be on the paper)
Problems: The research itself will take a lot of time, so extra extra effort is required. Each university program differs with each other, so having a great content would take a lot of effort. But other than that, there are no major problems.
Again as mentioned before, I already chose what my website is going to be. however, the major factors of my design spec were that : my information is reliable, the information will be easy-to-see, have good navigations, no automatic video, the designs will not be too noticeable, and that the content will be more important than the design itself.
So idea 1 will not work. My information will be less reliable (since I need constant updating). The information would be easy to see as well as have good navigation as well as i work hard. But the major problem is that the design part will hold equal importance to the content itself (as metioned above).
Idea 2 will also provide problems. As mentioned above, it will be useless for foreigners. Some aspects of the designs should be eye-catching, and the design holds quite some importance in the website.
Idea 3, however, will work. The information will be reliable (as I only need to update it once a year), and the content holds greater importance to the website itself. What i really did was i set the design specification to meet this topic itself, so it really is a perfect match.
The reason I chose idea 3 was mainly because I was personally intersted. I am thinking of applying to BS/MD later and the research would do myself good. Furthermore, it won't be impossible to do, as long as I put adequate effort into it. But mainly, I chose this because of my personal gain from this assignment as well as the level of difficulty of creating this website compared to my other ideas.
I've also made a model of the website on paper. The paper idea included everything that I wanted to have. However, it does seem quite a big job since there were many pages. I am still a little skeptical on including images though, since most of the images will be useless. But for the sake of the design layout itself, I might include some images. I'm really not sure on which type of font to use. I want something formal like Times New Roman, but it would sometimes look too boring. But anyways, the model itself met all the design specifications. It had everything i wanted to include. The layout would hold less importance compared to the content. There was no automated video in my design.Also my information (even though i have not collected) will be most definitely reliable since they will mostly come from university websites themselves and other famous scholastic websites (such as collegeconfidential, etc). The navigations to me seemed fairly straight forward, so the readers will not have trouble trying o find where to go.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Criterion A- Research and Investigation
Our new unit is called "websites". For our product, we have to create an individual website on a topic that we chose. It needs to contain various avigations and informations. The topic should be something that one should be interested in.
This unit/project is most definitely important in society. As society is developing side by side with technology, it is crucial for us, the generation with developing technology, to have a firm grasp upon the modern trend of technology. This of course includes website designing. Websites are one of the most popular resources to research. Nowadays, it is used for even more various purposes such as shopping, calling (telephoning), conferences, entertainment, and even educational purposes. Websites are an inevitable part of our life no matter what, and it is extremely important for us to learn how to use them as well as make them. By learning to use and make the websites, it will facilitate our lives greatly, enabling us with more various options of activites such as learning, shopping, etc. Therefore, it not only holds a temporary value of being able to have other options, but as society is becoming more dependent upon the cyber world and the internet, it will give us a productive long-term effect. It also aloows us to follow the trend of modern society.
One of the phases that we were introduced was to go to thinkquest.org and look at different student-made websites about random topics. We had to then explore different websites they have made and pick one that was most appealing to me in a design standpoint. The most appealing website for me was the leadership page (http://library.thinkquest.org/08aug/02289/). I thought that the website seemed very smooth, while very clean and organized. They did not insert any pictures that looked cheap (unlike the chocolate website)and it seemed easy to navigate. I also like how they had the intro video on the hompage but did not make it automatically start, because I never watch the videos and think they're annoying. Furthermore, it didn't take a long time to load despite it being quite colorful. I also thought the inserting-your-name when you went to the site was interesting. however, I thought it was a little unnecessary, but because it didn't take a long time, it was excusable. The colors they used and the targeted audience fit quite well too.
There were some website topics that seemed interesting while others weren't. I thought that chocolate, portable stuff (cellphones and games), and leadership were interesting topics, while topics such as "save the rainforests", "Amazonia: Endangered Beauty" didn't even make me want to visit the website. Again, the leadership site was interesting too. It had a lot of content in different media (games, videos, text) and so it did not bore me out immediately. It was a very interactive website, which i think was appropriate for the audience the website designers targeted. The content itself was also interesting. THe reason I believe I am not interesting in the websites related with amazon or rainforests is because of personal taste (in my opinion) since i'm really not into "save the nature" schemes.
Week 2
what designs scare you-
I think I can relate to almost all of the comments on this article. I most especially agree with "automatic video" and "Red...". i am especially annoyed by the automatic video features in several websites, even more than normal people would because we have such a slow internet connection in Mongolia that if there is an automatic video website, the internet browser would just freeze and I'd get frusttrated. I also could relate to the "red" article. Red is the color that excites, while tires one's eyes. It is very annoying to have a red background, especially if it is bright beight red. For me, it not only applies to red, but any other color that is heavily bright to hurt my eyes. I also do not want the blue website links, because not does it only hurt my eyes, but it makes the website look so cheap. I am not so sure on the black text though, because I like it in the sense that it is simple. I also could agree with other comments, such as disliking websites that have an automatic advertisement or audio with weird and repetitive music. It is just pointless, and because of the sound it creates, I naturally turn my speakers off if i ever have to visit again (which were very few out of the millions) or not go back at all. I also agree with PerAb's statement about the animated images and navigations, because that was what made the "chocolate" website look cheap.
Accessibility-
I most definitely agree with the "Website navigation", It was basically tips on what is a good website navigation. It said that it needed to be simple and accessible while having a good bread-crumb trail. Also, it is best to have a common layout that is accepted by most people.
"content accessibility" is basically about tips of content of a websie, in general terms. It basically says you should consider various audience with different needs or handicaps (such as deaf people, color-blind people, etc). Also, it said that you shouldn't use different colors for emphasis, but rather add a * or sth like tht.
I honestly did not understand much from "Logical Style". I was jsut recently introduced to HTML by Ms.Wilson, and I do not understand the concept of logical and presentational elements. But if there was anything that i understood, it was the last part of the article that said each browser has different formats, so rather than saying "bold", saying "strong" would be more effective because a website can be an audio webpage.
I thought that "Testing your pages" was much more easier. Even though I didn't understand it completely, I believe the main point it tried to say was to consider your webpage for different and different versions of browsers. So do not make it super high tech, and have the resolution set so that you wouldn't have to scroll sideways. Also, the hand-code might contain various errors, so have it checked with a software.
"10 Bad things" was quite intersting. I do agree with many of it, such as "page under construction" or "slow webpage". I thought the progressive downloading idea was really interesting and a good idea for a big webpage. But i don't necessarily agree with the part of the updates. i mean, for me, I go to webpages to just get information, not to get updates or new information. But maybe i'm not very involved in the cyber world.
All I understood from the next article was that the web designers musut consider different webbrowsers for different people. Also, it said to use CSS which is the most preferred. But it said that flash player isn't recommended unless absolutely necessary.
The article about colors seemed a little more clearer. it talked about dithering colors, colors that are non-pixellated for different platforms and web-browsers. Also it showed a list of colors which will prove to be useful in the future.
The HTML 4.01 discusses the advancedment and a little short history of the HTML. It is obviously very confusing to me. But as i understood it, there are 41 new additions to it that one can use. Furthermore, HTML 4.01 is the most standard script that is supported in almost every browser.
XHTML is sort of a extension or another version of XML. In many cases, it is known to be more useful because it is more reliable in the sense that it checks your work. Also, it is more accessible (meaning that it can work with pretty much any browser). The coding is similar to a normal HTML or XML. The only difference is that all tags must be closed, all attributes must be in lower-case, and some other special forms. But as long as the coding is done right (which according to te article is not hard t do), it provides greater benefits. Also, it should be considered as another language and the format the you need to put at the to of he document is different from XML or HTML.
The "mobile" was about how phones now have developed and uppots different web browsers. It said that the web technology for phone has developed incredibly. Before say the iPhone, the phone browsers did not support HTML and therefore needed an entire different coding. But recently, almost all kind of language are supported with equally good browsers. It als gave few tips on how to design a website for phone users so that it wouldn't be too uncomfortable to browser your website.
The "redesigning" article was a little confusing. But it was basically about what to consider when you rebuild your page. The most important things were fonts, navigations, background, search box, and logical structure. I don't think i will be considering this article too heavily, since i doubt i will be even able to make a webpage itself. But still, these were things that i could consider for even the first website i'd make.
I did not read the "bookmarklets" article. It is bcause i will be designing my page in HTML, and bookmarkletsonly work in Javascript.
Sidebar: A list of Reminders-
I do quite agree. To summarize it greatly, it's basically saying make your website idiot-proof. Do not have a fancy website that is hollow, since your content is more important. Be concise and straight-to-the-point. Be consistent and check your content. That was pretty much it.
Design Brief-
There are some basic steps that i will do to create my product. The first one is to investigate how websites are made through going through various websites and looking for information on HTTP as we are doing in class. Then, I will hopefully work with dreamweaver to start creating the website. I will also research information about the topic of my blog (BS/MD prgrams) and think about methods to make the information more accessible to the readers.
Design Specifications-
1. My website will provide reliable information
2. The information on my website will be useful and easy-to-see
3. My navigations will facilitate the exploring of my website
4. The design (layout, color choice, etc) will not inhibit the eliciting of the information from the website (basically it won't be a distraction, but it doesn't need to be an appealing website either)
5. The website will not have an automatic video on the home page
6. The content of the website will have more importance than the design of the website itself.
Testing method-
Since my product will be a creation of an informative website on the BS/MD programs in the States, I should ask 2 or more students in our school who are planning to go into a medical career in the States and ask them to evaluate my website from 1-7 on these criteria: Content, Layout, and Design.
Bibliography-
White E.B. "Sidebar: A list of Reminders". Webstyle Guide 3rd Edition. 2009. 21 Mar. 2010. 'http://webstyleguide.com/wsg3/1-process/5-list-of-reminders.html'
Kyrnin, Jennifer. "What Designs Scare You?" About.com. 21 Mar. 2010. 'http://webdesign.about.com/u/ua/webdesignbasics/what-design-scares-you.htm'
Shannon, ROss. "Accessibility". 2000-2010. 21 Mar. 2010. 'http://www.yourhtmlsource.com/accessibility/'
This unit/project is most definitely important in society. As society is developing side by side with technology, it is crucial for us, the generation with developing technology, to have a firm grasp upon the modern trend of technology. This of course includes website designing. Websites are one of the most popular resources to research. Nowadays, it is used for even more various purposes such as shopping, calling (telephoning), conferences, entertainment, and even educational purposes. Websites are an inevitable part of our life no matter what, and it is extremely important for us to learn how to use them as well as make them. By learning to use and make the websites, it will facilitate our lives greatly, enabling us with more various options of activites such as learning, shopping, etc. Therefore, it not only holds a temporary value of being able to have other options, but as society is becoming more dependent upon the cyber world and the internet, it will give us a productive long-term effect. It also aloows us to follow the trend of modern society.
One of the phases that we were introduced was to go to thinkquest.org and look at different student-made websites about random topics. We had to then explore different websites they have made and pick one that was most appealing to me in a design standpoint. The most appealing website for me was the leadership page (http://library.thinkquest.org/08aug/02289/). I thought that the website seemed very smooth, while very clean and organized. They did not insert any pictures that looked cheap (unlike the chocolate website)and it seemed easy to navigate. I also like how they had the intro video on the hompage but did not make it automatically start, because I never watch the videos and think they're annoying. Furthermore, it didn't take a long time to load despite it being quite colorful. I also thought the inserting-your-name when you went to the site was interesting. however, I thought it was a little unnecessary, but because it didn't take a long time, it was excusable. The colors they used and the targeted audience fit quite well too.
There were some website topics that seemed interesting while others weren't. I thought that chocolate, portable stuff (cellphones and games), and leadership were interesting topics, while topics such as "save the rainforests", "Amazonia: Endangered Beauty" didn't even make me want to visit the website. Again, the leadership site was interesting too. It had a lot of content in different media (games, videos, text) and so it did not bore me out immediately. It was a very interactive website, which i think was appropriate for the audience the website designers targeted. The content itself was also interesting. THe reason I believe I am not interesting in the websites related with amazon or rainforests is because of personal taste (in my opinion) since i'm really not into "save the nature" schemes.
Week 2
what designs scare you-
I think I can relate to almost all of the comments on this article. I most especially agree with "automatic video" and "Red...". i am especially annoyed by the automatic video features in several websites, even more than normal people would because we have such a slow internet connection in Mongolia that if there is an automatic video website, the internet browser would just freeze and I'd get frusttrated. I also could relate to the "red" article. Red is the color that excites, while tires one's eyes. It is very annoying to have a red background, especially if it is bright beight red. For me, it not only applies to red, but any other color that is heavily bright to hurt my eyes. I also do not want the blue website links, because not does it only hurt my eyes, but it makes the website look so cheap. I am not so sure on the black text though, because I like it in the sense that it is simple. I also could agree with other comments, such as disliking websites that have an automatic advertisement or audio with weird and repetitive music. It is just pointless, and because of the sound it creates, I naturally turn my speakers off if i ever have to visit again (which were very few out of the millions) or not go back at all. I also agree with PerAb's statement about the animated images and navigations, because that was what made the "chocolate" website look cheap.
Accessibility-
I most definitely agree with the "Website navigation", It was basically tips on what is a good website navigation. It said that it needed to be simple and accessible while having a good bread-crumb trail. Also, it is best to have a common layout that is accepted by most people.
"content accessibility" is basically about tips of content of a websie, in general terms. It basically says you should consider various audience with different needs or handicaps (such as deaf people, color-blind people, etc). Also, it said that you shouldn't use different colors for emphasis, but rather add a * or sth like tht.
I honestly did not understand much from "Logical Style". I was jsut recently introduced to HTML by Ms.Wilson, and I do not understand the concept of logical and presentational elements. But if there was anything that i understood, it was the last part of the article that said each browser has different formats, so rather than saying "bold", saying "strong" would be more effective because a website can be an audio webpage.
I thought that "Testing your pages" was much more easier. Even though I didn't understand it completely, I believe the main point it tried to say was to consider your webpage for different and different versions of browsers. So do not make it super high tech, and have the resolution set so that you wouldn't have to scroll sideways. Also, the hand-code might contain various errors, so have it checked with a software.
"10 Bad things" was quite intersting. I do agree with many of it, such as "page under construction" or "slow webpage". I thought the progressive downloading idea was really interesting and a good idea for a big webpage. But i don't necessarily agree with the part of the updates. i mean, for me, I go to webpages to just get information, not to get updates or new information. But maybe i'm not very involved in the cyber world.
All I understood from the next article was that the web designers musut consider different webbrowsers for different people. Also, it said to use CSS which is the most preferred. But it said that flash player isn't recommended unless absolutely necessary.
The article about colors seemed a little more clearer. it talked about dithering colors, colors that are non-pixellated for different platforms and web-browsers. Also it showed a list of colors which will prove to be useful in the future.
The HTML 4.01 discusses the advancedment and a little short history of the HTML. It is obviously very confusing to me. But as i understood it, there are 41 new additions to it that one can use. Furthermore, HTML 4.01 is the most standard script that is supported in almost every browser.
XHTML is sort of a extension or another version of XML. In many cases, it is known to be more useful because it is more reliable in the sense that it checks your work. Also, it is more accessible (meaning that it can work with pretty much any browser). The coding is similar to a normal HTML or XML. The only difference is that all tags must be closed, all attributes must be in lower-case, and some other special forms. But as long as the coding is done right (which according to te article is not hard t do), it provides greater benefits. Also, it should be considered as another language and the format the you need to put at the to of he document is different from XML or HTML.
The "mobile" was about how phones now have developed and uppots different web browsers. It said that the web technology for phone has developed incredibly. Before say the iPhone, the phone browsers did not support HTML and therefore needed an entire different coding. But recently, almost all kind of language are supported with equally good browsers. It als gave few tips on how to design a website for phone users so that it wouldn't be too uncomfortable to browser your website.
The "redesigning" article was a little confusing. But it was basically about what to consider when you rebuild your page. The most important things were fonts, navigations, background, search box, and logical structure. I don't think i will be considering this article too heavily, since i doubt i will be even able to make a webpage itself. But still, these were things that i could consider for even the first website i'd make.
I did not read the "bookmarklets" article. It is bcause i will be designing my page in HTML, and bookmarkletsonly work in Javascript.
Sidebar: A list of Reminders-
I do quite agree. To summarize it greatly, it's basically saying make your website idiot-proof. Do not have a fancy website that is hollow, since your content is more important. Be concise and straight-to-the-point. Be consistent and check your content. That was pretty much it.
Design Brief-
There are some basic steps that i will do to create my product. The first one is to investigate how websites are made through going through various websites and looking for information on HTTP as we are doing in class. Then, I will hopefully work with dreamweaver to start creating the website. I will also research information about the topic of my blog (BS/MD prgrams) and think about methods to make the information more accessible to the readers.
Design Specifications-
1. My website will provide reliable information
2. The information on my website will be useful and easy-to-see
3. My navigations will facilitate the exploring of my website
4. The design (layout, color choice, etc) will not inhibit the eliciting of the information from the website (basically it won't be a distraction, but it doesn't need to be an appealing website either)
5. The website will not have an automatic video on the home page
6. The content of the website will have more importance than the design of the website itself.
Testing method-
Since my product will be a creation of an informative website on the BS/MD programs in the States, I should ask 2 or more students in our school who are planning to go into a medical career in the States and ask them to evaluate my website from 1-7 on these criteria: Content, Layout, and Design.
Bibliography-
White E.B. "Sidebar: A list of Reminders". Webstyle Guide 3rd Edition. 2009. 21 Mar. 2010. 'http://webstyleguide.com/wsg3/1-process/5-list-of-reminders.html'
Kyrnin, Jennifer. "What Designs Scare You?" About.com. 21 Mar. 2010. 'http://webdesign.about.com/u/ua/webdesignbasics/what-design-scares-you.htm'
Shannon, ROss. "Accessibility". 2000-2010. 21 Mar. 2010. 'http://www.yourhtmlsource.com/accessibility/'
Monday, February 22, 2010
Criterion E- Evaluation
Criterion A-
In Criterion A, we were supposed to research and investigate about wikipedia/wikiality. We had to learn what they were, and how they were run, edited, posted, created, etc. We also had to evaluate the reliability of wikipedia. We especially had to focus on the editing and posting aspect of wikipedia because that's what wikipedia/wikiality was all about: people editing and refining it constantly. We also had to find the relationship and importance of wikiality/pedia in our lives and society. Then we had to site all our sources properly. Then, we had to create a method of finding inaccuracies on wikipedia with my partner Brooke. Then I had to our method by finding an inaccuracy on wikipedia by:
- finding a suspected inaccuracy
- saving and citing the suspected inaccuracy
- then research to back up our corrections with citations
- then post the evidence.
We followed the guidelines/requirements of this criterion quite well. We answered what a wiki was, who creates them, why use them, who edit them. We described the relevance of wikipedia in our lives and society, and why they are especially important for our generation. Then with Brooke, we investigated where wikipedia gets their information from. We also tried to explore in depth how wikipedia is edited, how inaccuracies are found and we investigated the reliability of Wikipedia itself. Then with Brooke, we created a method for finding inaccuracies on wikipedia. The only problem was that we answered how to correct an inaccuracy correctly, but not really on how to find one (except pure luck). Then, we explored different wikipedia sites and found an inaccuracy on the Chuck site ( A spelling error). Then we saved it, and posted it on our blogs.
We could have done a better job in this criteria if we had explored the reliability and the history/creation of wikipedia, and where they get their information from since we only went through it very lightly.
Criterion B-
In this criteria, we had to post the wikipedia section that we planned to correct on our blogs and describe the suggested change. Then we had to show our corrections on our blogs, highlighting the incorrect information we wished to correct. Then we had to cite our sources (MLA). Then we had to make a list of 3 design specifications for our final wikipedia correction.
We followed this criterion well too. We posted the section that we planned to correct, giving our suggested changes, then we gave the dictionary definition as well as all the other pertinent sites in MLA format. Then we gave our 3 design specifications.
We could have improved on this criterion by giving more design specifications. We were very limited to giving redundant design specs since our change was very minor and quite insignificant.
Criterion C-
No C
Criterion D-
In this criteria, we had to first read and sign the "wikipedia responsibility agreement" then had to get it approved by Mrs. Wilson. Then we had to make the correction on Wikipedia including correct sources.
We did sign the agreement, got approved, and made the changed. but we could not include the source in wikipedia itself since it was a spelling error.
Evaluation-
Our project was a success. We have checked to see if anyone has changed our change, but no one did. It stands proudly. As much as I hate to admit, I doubt there will be a major influence in humanity/society. I mean, a spelling editing, at maximum, would have an influence on a little child reading the article (who is not a good speller) and now knows how to spell chagrin. Another influence can be that now people understand the paragraph more profoundly, since the spelling error could have marred the intention of the article itself.
It also met all the design specifications. Our spelling correction was accurate, it was properly cited, and we also made sure of our spelling correction. So it met all the design specs.
In Criterion A, we were supposed to research and investigate about wikipedia/wikiality. We had to learn what they were, and how they were run, edited, posted, created, etc. We also had to evaluate the reliability of wikipedia. We especially had to focus on the editing and posting aspect of wikipedia because that's what wikipedia/wikiality was all about: people editing and refining it constantly. We also had to find the relationship and importance of wikiality/pedia in our lives and society. Then we had to site all our sources properly. Then, we had to create a method of finding inaccuracies on wikipedia with my partner Brooke. Then I had to our method by finding an inaccuracy on wikipedia by:
- finding a suspected inaccuracy
- saving and citing the suspected inaccuracy
- then research to back up our corrections with citations
- then post the evidence.
We followed the guidelines/requirements of this criterion quite well. We answered what a wiki was, who creates them, why use them, who edit them. We described the relevance of wikipedia in our lives and society, and why they are especially important for our generation. Then with Brooke, we investigated where wikipedia gets their information from. We also tried to explore in depth how wikipedia is edited, how inaccuracies are found and we investigated the reliability of Wikipedia itself. Then with Brooke, we created a method for finding inaccuracies on wikipedia. The only problem was that we answered how to correct an inaccuracy correctly, but not really on how to find one (except pure luck). Then, we explored different wikipedia sites and found an inaccuracy on the Chuck site ( A spelling error). Then we saved it, and posted it on our blogs.
We could have done a better job in this criteria if we had explored the reliability and the history/creation of wikipedia, and where they get their information from since we only went through it very lightly.
Criterion B-
In this criteria, we had to post the wikipedia section that we planned to correct on our blogs and describe the suggested change. Then we had to show our corrections on our blogs, highlighting the incorrect information we wished to correct. Then we had to cite our sources (MLA). Then we had to make a list of 3 design specifications for our final wikipedia correction.
We followed this criterion well too. We posted the section that we planned to correct, giving our suggested changes, then we gave the dictionary definition as well as all the other pertinent sites in MLA format. Then we gave our 3 design specifications.
We could have improved on this criterion by giving more design specifications. We were very limited to giving redundant design specs since our change was very minor and quite insignificant.
Criterion C-
No C
Criterion D-
In this criteria, we had to first read and sign the "wikipedia responsibility agreement" then had to get it approved by Mrs. Wilson. Then we had to make the correction on Wikipedia including correct sources.
We did sign the agreement, got approved, and made the changed. but we could not include the source in wikipedia itself since it was a spelling error.
Evaluation-
Our project was a success. We have checked to see if anyone has changed our change, but no one did. It stands proudly. As much as I hate to admit, I doubt there will be a major influence in humanity/society. I mean, a spelling editing, at maximum, would have an influence on a little child reading the article (who is not a good speller) and now knows how to spell chagrin. Another influence can be that now people understand the paragraph more profoundly, since the spelling error could have marred the intention of the article itself.
It also met all the design specifications. Our spelling correction was accurate, it was properly cited, and we also made sure of our spelling correction. So it met all the design specs.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Criterion A- investigation, Criterion B- Design
We were introduced to a new unit. It is called wikiality. We are basically paired in twos to correct a wikipedia article that has faults. That is the final goal of this project.
A wiki is the short term for wikipedia, which is an online encyclopedia. It is created by people, and can be edited by people easily too. We use them as a source of information.
Our task for this unit is to work in a group of two to correct a wikipedia article that has faults and errors in it. It is definitely important for us to learn about wikipedia because wikipedia is a popular source of information in the internet world. As society is becoming more developed, the importance of internet is incredibly rising. Since wikipedia is a popular and common site for knowledge, is it crucial that we students, who are developing in a modern society with internet, learn about wikipedia.
I will be working with Brooke as a group of two for this particular unit.
Wikipedia gets its information from the people who edit it. These people have to cite their sources where they got it from for their editing to be finalized.
Furthermore, the people themselves decide what material will go on. But when major changes occur within a page, the wikipedia personnel looks over the change and decide whether or not to confirm the change.
I think that wikipedia is very reliable. Even though it is subject to constant vandalism, the vandalism is deleted almost instantaneously. For example, just for the sake of curiosity, I tried vandalism on the wikipedia page itself, but it was changed within 10 seconds. Furthermore, I heard that the accuracy of wikipedia is the same accuracy as a printed encyclopedia, which is amazing.
Since the people are required to site their sources when editing or publishing a wikipedia page, it naturally becomes an accurate and reliable page of information. When the correct sources are not given, the editing is deleted.
To make a wiki, all you have got to do is simply sign up for the website. Then, you just create a new page and write some things in it. It is a very simple process that takes a very short time as well.
Not much material has changed in our wiki. They just edited a few sentences and changed the names, but other than that, there were no major changes. I guess our page was a target of vandalism by our fellow classmates, without a particular reason. Personally, it didn't feel so bad. However, it was a little annoying, seeing all the weird changes that were made. But because nothing was insulting or very big, I didn't find it so bad.
To delete changes or go back to an older page, all the owner of the page has to do is go to page history. When the page is loaded, there will be options under each edit saying "view changes" or "delete". Therefore, the owner simply has to click on delete, and the change will be reversed.
Wikis could be used in various ways. For example, for a group project, one can post up a rough draft of a script, per say, and ask for their partner to look and go over it. So the partner can just edit the page to improve it, and so it can be used to do a group project without physically seeing each other, but having a better way of changing it better than IM, MSN, etc.
Another way it can be used is for an online encyclopedia, like Wikipedia itself. One can post one's knowledge and other people can constantly edit it.
It can be used for the purpose of facebook. where they leave posts and comments for each other. However, the probability is that it won't be used because other people might edit it in a bad way, like vandalism.
Also, it can be used for advertisements, surveys, a support group, a page for debate. Etc.
When there is a dispute between editors on whether a particular bit of information should or should not be included in an article, there is a process for deciding. First, one addresses the dispute on the talk page of that article asking other opinions of other editors or Wikipedia's dispute-resolving process. Then, they may either vote or dictate the way the editing will become.
How to find inaccuracies on Wikipedia:
1. Research the topic of the article title
2. Compare your answers with the Wikipedia entry
3. verify/Find out if there is anything that does not correspond
4. If there is something that does not corresponds, verify the validity of your research resource
5. If your research/resource is valid, then the Wikipedia entry has a fault and an inaccuracy
Bibliography:
"Wikipedia: About" Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia. 10 Feb. 2010. 8 Feb. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About>
Despite the effectiveness of our method, we did not use it to find the suspected inaccuracy. We were just exploring different Wikipedia pages and then we found a spelling error as shown below:
"As of Season 3, Chuck has willingly decided to become a real spy, to Sarah's chagin."
the correct spelling for the word "chagin" is chagrin.
"Chagrin Definition: n. A keen feeling of mental unease, as of annoyance or embarrassment, caused by failure, disappointment, or a disconcerting event: To her chagrin, the party ended just as she arrived."
and there were no dictionary results for "chagin" except a Russian person in dictionary.com. Therefore, this was definitely a spelling error.
Bibliography-
"Chuck (TV series)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 15 Feb. 2010. Web. 17 Feb. 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_%28TV_series%29.
"Chagrin." Dictionary.com. 17 Feb. 2010. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chagrin
Design specifications:
1. It needs to be accurate
2. It needs to be properly cited
3. We will make sure of the spelling using the online dictionary
A wiki is the short term for wikipedia, which is an online encyclopedia. It is created by people, and can be edited by people easily too. We use them as a source of information.
Our task for this unit is to work in a group of two to correct a wikipedia article that has faults and errors in it. It is definitely important for us to learn about wikipedia because wikipedia is a popular source of information in the internet world. As society is becoming more developed, the importance of internet is incredibly rising. Since wikipedia is a popular and common site for knowledge, is it crucial that we students, who are developing in a modern society with internet, learn about wikipedia.
I will be working with Brooke as a group of two for this particular unit.
Wikipedia gets its information from the people who edit it. These people have to cite their sources where they got it from for their editing to be finalized.
Furthermore, the people themselves decide what material will go on. But when major changes occur within a page, the wikipedia personnel looks over the change and decide whether or not to confirm the change.
I think that wikipedia is very reliable. Even though it is subject to constant vandalism, the vandalism is deleted almost instantaneously. For example, just for the sake of curiosity, I tried vandalism on the wikipedia page itself, but it was changed within 10 seconds. Furthermore, I heard that the accuracy of wikipedia is the same accuracy as a printed encyclopedia, which is amazing.
Since the people are required to site their sources when editing or publishing a wikipedia page, it naturally becomes an accurate and reliable page of information. When the correct sources are not given, the editing is deleted.
To make a wiki, all you have got to do is simply sign up for the website. Then, you just create a new page and write some things in it. It is a very simple process that takes a very short time as well.
Not much material has changed in our wiki. They just edited a few sentences and changed the names, but other than that, there were no major changes. I guess our page was a target of vandalism by our fellow classmates, without a particular reason. Personally, it didn't feel so bad. However, it was a little annoying, seeing all the weird changes that were made. But because nothing was insulting or very big, I didn't find it so bad.
To delete changes or go back to an older page, all the owner of the page has to do is go to page history. When the page is loaded, there will be options under each edit saying "view changes" or "delete". Therefore, the owner simply has to click on delete, and the change will be reversed.
Wikis could be used in various ways. For example, for a group project, one can post up a rough draft of a script, per say, and ask for their partner to look and go over it. So the partner can just edit the page to improve it, and so it can be used to do a group project without physically seeing each other, but having a better way of changing it better than IM, MSN, etc.
Another way it can be used is for an online encyclopedia, like Wikipedia itself. One can post one's knowledge and other people can constantly edit it.
It can be used for the purpose of facebook. where they leave posts and comments for each other. However, the probability is that it won't be used because other people might edit it in a bad way, like vandalism.
Also, it can be used for advertisements, surveys, a support group, a page for debate. Etc.
When there is a dispute between editors on whether a particular bit of information should or should not be included in an article, there is a process for deciding. First, one addresses the dispute on the talk page of that article asking other opinions of other editors or Wikipedia's dispute-resolving process. Then, they may either vote or dictate the way the editing will become.
How to find inaccuracies on Wikipedia:
1. Research the topic of the article title
2. Compare your answers with the Wikipedia entry
3. verify/Find out if there is anything that does not correspond
4. If there is something that does not corresponds, verify the validity of your research resource
5. If your research/resource is valid, then the Wikipedia entry has a fault and an inaccuracy
Bibliography:
"Wikipedia: About" Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia. 10 Feb. 2010. 8 Feb. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About>
Despite the effectiveness of our method, we did not use it to find the suspected inaccuracy. We were just exploring different Wikipedia pages and then we found a spelling error as shown below:
"As of Season 3, Chuck has willingly decided to become a real spy, to Sarah's chagin."
the correct spelling for the word "chagin" is chagrin.
"Chagrin Definition: n. A keen feeling of mental unease, as of annoyance or embarrassment, caused by failure, disappointment, or a disconcerting event: To her chagrin, the party ended just as she arrived."
and there were no dictionary results for "chagin" except a Russian person in dictionary.com. Therefore, this was definitely a spelling error.
Bibliography-
"Chuck (TV series)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 15 Feb. 2010. Web. 17 Feb. 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_%28TV_series%29.
"Chagrin." Dictionary.com. 17 Feb. 2010. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chagrin
Design specifications:
1. It needs to be accurate
2. It needs to be properly cited
3. We will make sure of the spelling using the online dictionary
Monday, January 18, 2010
Crtierion E- Evaluation
Criteria A: Investigation
For Critieria A, we were supposed to research and investigate podcasts in general. In order to do it, we were supposed to first discuss in class what podcasts are, listening to podcast of the teenagers that were on the New York Times. Then as homework, we were supposed to create a "mini practice podcast" to show that we understood what podcasts were, as well as a practice on the bigger assignment that we received later. Then, as homework, we were assigned to listen to 3 podcasts and comment about it, discussing the quality, topic, etc. I also investigated at home on my own what podcasts are through the internet. We also had to investigate how podcasts are made and recorded, and how to make them available for those who surf the internet. Also, I was then able to find a connection between the podcasts and society, how they are a new apparatus of expressing oneself and a new method of communication.
I think I did a fair job on criteria A. Through my research and investigation described above, I have been able to understand what podcasts are, and how they are made, and the types of podcasts. Also, my practice podcast was successful. I did everything that was required, and the outcome was also equally successful.
I could have improved on this criterion through basic improvements. I could have even researched and investigated even further, looking into deeper material. Also, i could have listened to different types of podcasts because for occasion, i listened to 3 podcasts done by the same person
Criteria B: Design
For criterion B, we were supposed to create an outline of our podcast. First of all, we had brainstorm several ideas and topics for the podcast. Then, we had to look at several methods of publishing and recording the podcast. We also had to give the intended audience. Then out of the methods, we had to choose which one we are going to use. Then we had to give design specifications, on what our podcast was going to be like. Then, we were to give 3-5 designs (just a simple outline) of possible podcasts that we could make. Then out of those 3, we were to pick one and give little more specifics.
We think that we have met all the necessary requirements for this criterion successfully. We have brainstormed and published several ideas for the podcast. We also investigated further from criterion A on methods to record and publish the podcast. We stated specifically who our intended audience was. Then, we gave 3 designs (outlines) that we could have made, and we chose one and gave what we will talk about (a bit more specifically than the other designs). However, we forgot to evaluate all three designs. But other than that, it was successful.
However, we could have improved this part. We could have designed even more designs. Also, we could have not forgotten to evaluate each and every design, giving the pros and cons of each design. Also, instead of just researching which methods were possible to use publish and record the podcasts, we could have actually tried a sample (because later, we could not do the one we actually decided upon).
Criterion C: Plan
For criterion C, we had to plan out our podcast. Rather than writing the script, we just had to give ourselves deadlines and steps in creating the product.
I successfully created the timetable giving specific and detailed steps with dates, resources, and other necessary items.
Other than even making the deadline more specific, I cannot think of improvements to be made,
Criterion D: Create
For criterion D, we had to create the product itself. But rather than creating it straight away, we had to write a script of what we are going to say in the podcast. We first had to create a rough draft, let the peers comment on it, and make improvements. Then we were to create the podcast and post it on a podcast website or our own blogs.
Therefore, we created a rough draft of our script. Even though it was not very specific, we could not decide the specifics (the body) because it was to be improvised for the sake of the flow of the podcast. After we posted it and received feedback, we improved the script and had the final script ready. Then using my laptop, we began to record multiple podcasts and saved them in wmv file. In total, we recorded 5 podcasts, of which 4 were rough drafts. Also, every rough draft podcast, we made our peers listen to it and give suggestions/improvements. So every time, the quality of our podcast improved every time. later, we faced a problem: we could not upload our podcast on http://www.mypodcast.com/ as we planned. Therefore, we used Windows Moviemaker to convert the wmv file into an mp4 file. Then, I added one image of both of us. Then, I uploaded the mp4 file on my blog instead.
there were several things that we could improve on this process. We could have searched beforehand on the podcasting websites before creating it so that we would not have had to go through the problem of finding ways to convert the file into a video file. Also, I could have made the podcast a bit more interesting. It was an interesting topic to begin with, however, because it needed to be appropriate for school, we had to delete many inappropriate but funny parts. But other than that, our product was quite successful.
Evaluation of our product:
I believe that our podcast was a mediocre success. Even though it was an interesting topic, the execution could have been better. First of all, here are our testing method and the results:
Questions we asked:
1- Can you relate to this podcast?
2- why or why not?
3- how often can you find yourself in this situation?
4- has this situation (dating in Mongolia) gotten any better?
5- from 1-7, rate how much you can relate to this podcast (1 being the least, 7 being I can totally relate to this)
6- What was good about our podcast?
7- What are some criticisms?
Brooke
1- Kind of
2- Because she is a teenager living in Mongolia
3- Not that often
4- Yes
5- 3
6- Informative, clear
7- kyu’s voice was painful
Ha Young
1-Yes
2-Because i live in Mongolia and am a teenager
3-Rarely
4-I think so
5-5
6-Imformative, funny
7-Could have added music
Elise
1-Yes kind of
2-Most things we said are true
3-Not that often, sometimes
4-No
5-4.5
6-Not that long, spoke clearly, interesting topic
7-Could be louder
Sonya
1- No
2- Doesn’t go on dates
3- Not that often
4- No
5- 2
6-Shorter, realistic, flowed well
l7- louder, repetition
Bilegt
1- Yes
2- Answers were true about Mongolia
3- Often
4- I don’t know
5- 5
6- Sound quality, entertaining, isn’t boring/dragging
7- Not as entertaining as previous trial podcasts
So looking at these testing results, our podcast seemed to be a mediocre success. Most people said they could relate with this podcast, but said the depth of their relatedness is rather just medium. Therefore, it was less successful then what we had hoped to achieve. Also, the sound quality seemed to be good, but we could have been louder. However, it said it was mostly good saying it was entertaining, and the sound quality was good. They also said that it was quite funny, and not boring. Still, we could have made a better podcast through performing a better execution. Furthermore, it could have been better with a more interesting interview. Also, while the topic was interesting, it is understandable that people cannot relate to it completely. Furthermore, the topic seemed a little niche, targeted towards teenage guys and girls. So those were some parts where we could improve and produce a better podcast.
I believe that our podcast had an influence on the society, as well as our surrounding. First of all, it was very clear that our podcast provided some insight upon the subject for Ms. Wilson. She says she has been clearly influenced, and that she became more knowledgeable upon the subject, and she was quite surprised of the new acquirement of the knowledge. However, this was only a small part of the influence that our podcast has had. For our practice podcasts as well as the final product, we made our peers listen to it. So as they listen to it, they have also gained (supposedly) the knowledge upon this subject of what their opposite gender thinks about this topic, as well as comparing their own ideas to their peers. Therefore, they will be able to now know what to expect on dates and the opposite gender's hopes/dreams. But more importantly, they will spread their knowledge to their friends and relatives, spreading their newly-acquired knowledge to the outer society. even though it might take a longer time and the direct evidence of our influence is not so clear as of right now, this is what we soon anticipate. Therefore, the society will slowly gain the knowledge and lead to a society where a better understanding of teenagers (for adult audiences) and opposite genders (for teenage audience) will be formed, leading to a better society and a harmonious world. Therefore, even though our results are not fully yet manifested, we anticipate that it will have a slow and a long-term effect.
For Critieria A, we were supposed to research and investigate podcasts in general. In order to do it, we were supposed to first discuss in class what podcasts are, listening to podcast of the teenagers that were on the New York Times. Then as homework, we were supposed to create a "mini practice podcast" to show that we understood what podcasts were, as well as a practice on the bigger assignment that we received later. Then, as homework, we were assigned to listen to 3 podcasts and comment about it, discussing the quality, topic, etc. I also investigated at home on my own what podcasts are through the internet. We also had to investigate how podcasts are made and recorded, and how to make them available for those who surf the internet. Also, I was then able to find a connection between the podcasts and society, how they are a new apparatus of expressing oneself and a new method of communication.
I think I did a fair job on criteria A. Through my research and investigation described above, I have been able to understand what podcasts are, and how they are made, and the types of podcasts. Also, my practice podcast was successful. I did everything that was required, and the outcome was also equally successful.
I could have improved on this criterion through basic improvements. I could have even researched and investigated even further, looking into deeper material. Also, i could have listened to different types of podcasts because for occasion, i listened to 3 podcasts done by the same person
Criteria B: Design
For criterion B, we were supposed to create an outline of our podcast. First of all, we had brainstorm several ideas and topics for the podcast. Then, we had to look at several methods of publishing and recording the podcast. We also had to give the intended audience. Then out of the methods, we had to choose which one we are going to use. Then we had to give design specifications, on what our podcast was going to be like. Then, we were to give 3-5 designs (just a simple outline) of possible podcasts that we could make. Then out of those 3, we were to pick one and give little more specifics.
We think that we have met all the necessary requirements for this criterion successfully. We have brainstormed and published several ideas for the podcast. We also investigated further from criterion A on methods to record and publish the podcast. We stated specifically who our intended audience was. Then, we gave 3 designs (outlines) that we could have made, and we chose one and gave what we will talk about (a bit more specifically than the other designs). However, we forgot to evaluate all three designs. But other than that, it was successful.
However, we could have improved this part. We could have designed even more designs. Also, we could have not forgotten to evaluate each and every design, giving the pros and cons of each design. Also, instead of just researching which methods were possible to use publish and record the podcasts, we could have actually tried a sample (because later, we could not do the one we actually decided upon).
Criterion C: Plan
For criterion C, we had to plan out our podcast. Rather than writing the script, we just had to give ourselves deadlines and steps in creating the product.
I successfully created the timetable giving specific and detailed steps with dates, resources, and other necessary items.
Other than even making the deadline more specific, I cannot think of improvements to be made,
Criterion D: Create
For criterion D, we had to create the product itself. But rather than creating it straight away, we had to write a script of what we are going to say in the podcast. We first had to create a rough draft, let the peers comment on it, and make improvements. Then we were to create the podcast and post it on a podcast website or our own blogs.
Therefore, we created a rough draft of our script. Even though it was not very specific, we could not decide the specifics (the body) because it was to be improvised for the sake of the flow of the podcast. After we posted it and received feedback, we improved the script and had the final script ready. Then using my laptop, we began to record multiple podcasts and saved them in wmv file. In total, we recorded 5 podcasts, of which 4 were rough drafts. Also, every rough draft podcast, we made our peers listen to it and give suggestions/improvements. So every time, the quality of our podcast improved every time. later, we faced a problem: we could not upload our podcast on http://www.mypodcast.com/ as we planned. Therefore, we used Windows Moviemaker to convert the wmv file into an mp4 file. Then, I added one image of both of us. Then, I uploaded the mp4 file on my blog instead.
there were several things that we could improve on this process. We could have searched beforehand on the podcasting websites before creating it so that we would not have had to go through the problem of finding ways to convert the file into a video file. Also, I could have made the podcast a bit more interesting. It was an interesting topic to begin with, however, because it needed to be appropriate for school, we had to delete many inappropriate but funny parts. But other than that, our product was quite successful.
Evaluation of our product:
I believe that our podcast was a mediocre success. Even though it was an interesting topic, the execution could have been better. First of all, here are our testing method and the results:
Questions we asked:
1- Can you relate to this podcast?
2- why or why not?
3- how often can you find yourself in this situation?
4- has this situation (dating in Mongolia) gotten any better?
5- from 1-7, rate how much you can relate to this podcast (1 being the least, 7 being I can totally relate to this)
6- What was good about our podcast?
7- What are some criticisms?
Brooke
1- Kind of
2- Because she is a teenager living in Mongolia
3- Not that often
4- Yes
5- 3
6- Informative, clear
7- kyu’s voice was painful
Ha Young
1-Yes
2-Because i live in Mongolia and am a teenager
3-Rarely
4-I think so
5-5
6-Imformative, funny
7-Could have added music
Elise
1-Yes kind of
2-Most things we said are true
3-Not that often, sometimes
4-No
5-4.5
6-Not that long, spoke clearly, interesting topic
7-Could be louder
Sonya
1- No
2- Doesn’t go on dates
3- Not that often
4- No
5- 2
6-Shorter, realistic, flowed well
l7- louder, repetition
Bilegt
1- Yes
2- Answers were true about Mongolia
3- Often
4- I don’t know
5- 5
6- Sound quality, entertaining, isn’t boring/dragging
7- Not as entertaining as previous trial podcasts
So looking at these testing results, our podcast seemed to be a mediocre success. Most people said they could relate with this podcast, but said the depth of their relatedness is rather just medium. Therefore, it was less successful then what we had hoped to achieve. Also, the sound quality seemed to be good, but we could have been louder. However, it said it was mostly good saying it was entertaining, and the sound quality was good. They also said that it was quite funny, and not boring. Still, we could have made a better podcast through performing a better execution. Furthermore, it could have been better with a more interesting interview. Also, while the topic was interesting, it is understandable that people cannot relate to it completely. Furthermore, the topic seemed a little niche, targeted towards teenage guys and girls. So those were some parts where we could improve and produce a better podcast.
I believe that our podcast had an influence on the society, as well as our surrounding. First of all, it was very clear that our podcast provided some insight upon the subject for Ms. Wilson. She says she has been clearly influenced, and that she became more knowledgeable upon the subject, and she was quite surprised of the new acquirement of the knowledge. However, this was only a small part of the influence that our podcast has had. For our practice podcasts as well as the final product, we made our peers listen to it. So as they listen to it, they have also gained (supposedly) the knowledge upon this subject of what their opposite gender thinks about this topic, as well as comparing their own ideas to their peers. Therefore, they will be able to now know what to expect on dates and the opposite gender's hopes/dreams. But more importantly, they will spread their knowledge to their friends and relatives, spreading their newly-acquired knowledge to the outer society. even though it might take a longer time and the direct evidence of our influence is not so clear as of right now, this is what we soon anticipate. Therefore, the society will slowly gain the knowledge and lead to a society where a better understanding of teenagers (for adult audiences) and opposite genders (for teenage audience) will be formed, leading to a better society and a harmonious world. Therefore, even though our results are not fully yet manifested, we anticipate that it will have a slow and a long-term effect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)