Melea O’Dell
I really like Melea’s website and the way in which she presented her material. She uses several videos/stories and connects them in a way where it shows that they are all interrelated and share the same idea. Not only does she give a little short summary, in some, she even goes as far as providing not just one, but several links that tie it all together. She uses a unique format by having her navigation be at the bottom of the page, and her color scheme is really nice; it’s not too flashy yet not too plain. By using the same template, it allows readers to know that they’re still on the same site.
Sean Lee
I really like Sean’s Website. He does a nice job at using hyperlinks throughout his page. Instead of plainly hyperlinking it to its main source, he uses the links to connect to various pages on his site. He goes into detail, and he provides in depth information about the subject matter, despite it being a one-thousand word minimum. I like his format and the way he distinguishes his material by making it a bigger size font than the font on the navigation bar.
Myrna Mungal
I enjoy viewing Myrna’s website. I really like the way in which she connects her subject matter with things that are relevant to her in her real world such as talking about a singer’s (Rihanna) video, the way it gets the message across, and the way in which her words are powerful; it definitely is a sufficient and very effictive way of bringing forth the subject and getting it to stick in other people’s mind, especially in my mind since I’m able to relate it to the music world which interests me. I love how she uses different colors and font sizes to stress the importance of a particular word, and she uses a wide variety of different pictures.
After viewing all of my classmates’ websites, I really got inspired. I am really impressed with the way in which the same assignment can be displayed in so many different manners. You originally asked us to choose three that we think deserve an A, but I think we all do. You also wanted us to tell you how our project can be compared to our classmates, but in no way is it comparable. After doing so, I really don’t have many nice or exciting things to say about mine since all of the others look so good and are unique in their own individual ways. When I created mine, I thought my format and idea was good only because it seemed perfect to me, but when I see all the others, I stumble upon many ideas in which I can incorporate into future projects. I really enjoyed looking at everyone’s work, and I must say, it is extremely interesting. Not one website was similar to another; I now understand why you never get bored of teaching this class. No matter how often you repeat the syllabus, each and every single student will always come up with a different outcome.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Response to Response Essays
The three response hypertexts that I think are deserving of an A grade are those published by Alycia Rose-Isaacson, Randy Holaday, and Lauren Tsugawa. I chose these three for several reasons. One is that all three displayed a continuity in their hypertexts, by means of both the formatting of each linked page as well as with the flow of the contents on their pages. This is something I tried to do with my response as well, and can therefore appreciate the effort that goes into keeping things simple yet scholarly.
Alycia’s response was one of my favorites because it did a few things that I wanted to do with my own page extremely well, and I think that I could learn from her in order to make my pages even more effective. To begin with, she chose a simple, yet sophisticated style for her background, and by keeping this the same for each page, she maintained a continuity that I have great respect for. In addition, by putting the navigation bar on the right, she did something atypical and different, making her page a little more unique than most others. With regards to content, I also really enjoyed reading through the pages. She kept them clear and easy to navigate. She presented to subject matter without digressing on any tangents. She also asked a lot of questions within the report, and one thing that I learned from her was that at the end of each page, she presented a paragraph about the importance of what she was talking about. I left my pages more open-ended for the reader to build off of on his or her own, whereas she did a good job of wrapping up each topic in a more circular manner.
What drew me to Ryan’s website was his manner of writing. He takes a neutral stance in presenting the data and at the end, poses questions for the reader to consider and jump off of when navigating the rest of the pages. It provokes critical engagement, something that I hope my own response was able to do. Each of the pages in Ryan’s website is succinct and to the point. I think I can learn from this because some of my pages make several points that have the potential to be broken up into individual pages for the sake of keeping the readers’ interest.
Lauren’s response appealed to me because at first sight, you see a very scholarly looking page. Before one even gets to the content, the page is aesthetically eye-catching. Interestingly, while this same format is not maintained in the subsequent pages, I enjoyed the writing and examples presented in these pages. What I learned is that while I thought that continuity meant keeping each background the same, Lauren was able to do so with a different design to each page. This is something that I can consider doing on my projects in the future. I particularly enjoyed the “It’s raining 300 men” mash-up example she posted on her site. Another thing that she did which I would like to incorporate into my websites in the future is her way of incorporating examples into the writing in such a way that the writing directly next to a picture or youtube video will be describing the purpose of putting that video there. She manages to do this without breaking the continuity of the whole page because the videos seamlessly fit into the larger topic presented on the whole page.
Overall, I think all three website deserve a good grade because they did a good job at balancing both content and presentation, making sure that neither one was over the top so that there remained a balance between the two.
Alycia’s response was one of my favorites because it did a few things that I wanted to do with my own page extremely well, and I think that I could learn from her in order to make my pages even more effective. To begin with, she chose a simple, yet sophisticated style for her background, and by keeping this the same for each page, she maintained a continuity that I have great respect for. In addition, by putting the navigation bar on the right, she did something atypical and different, making her page a little more unique than most others. With regards to content, I also really enjoyed reading through the pages. She kept them clear and easy to navigate. She presented to subject matter without digressing on any tangents. She also asked a lot of questions within the report, and one thing that I learned from her was that at the end of each page, she presented a paragraph about the importance of what she was talking about. I left my pages more open-ended for the reader to build off of on his or her own, whereas she did a good job of wrapping up each topic in a more circular manner.
What drew me to Ryan’s website was his manner of writing. He takes a neutral stance in presenting the data and at the end, poses questions for the reader to consider and jump off of when navigating the rest of the pages. It provokes critical engagement, something that I hope my own response was able to do. Each of the pages in Ryan’s website is succinct and to the point. I think I can learn from this because some of my pages make several points that have the potential to be broken up into individual pages for the sake of keeping the readers’ interest.
Lauren’s response appealed to me because at first sight, you see a very scholarly looking page. Before one even gets to the content, the page is aesthetically eye-catching. Interestingly, while this same format is not maintained in the subsequent pages, I enjoyed the writing and examples presented in these pages. What I learned is that while I thought that continuity meant keeping each background the same, Lauren was able to do so with a different design to each page. This is something that I can consider doing on my projects in the future. I particularly enjoyed the “It’s raining 300 men” mash-up example she posted on her site. Another thing that she did which I would like to incorporate into my websites in the future is her way of incorporating examples into the writing in such a way that the writing directly next to a picture or youtube video will be describing the purpose of putting that video there. She manages to do this without breaking the continuity of the whole page because the videos seamlessly fit into the larger topic presented on the whole page.
Overall, I think all three website deserve a good grade because they did a good job at balancing both content and presentation, making sure that neither one was over the top so that there remained a balance between the two.
peer review
Adam Ringler
Evaluation of Hypertext Response Essays
Many of my fellow English 138 students produced thoughtful, well presented responses to the underlying tension between media ownership and democracy. I chose three students n particular that I find particularly deserving of A’s.
Nicolas Feigenbaum: When reading site after site I began to notice a trend in the way that the essays were introduced. Nicolas began his discussion with an anecdote that drew me into his discussion. His introduction was fresh and made me curious to read more. The substance of his work is complete, clear, and intelligent. His argument for democracy is presented in an unbiased way, yet he makes his position clear. One of the challenging parts of this essay was to include a variety of authors, sites, and groups into the discussion of democratic media. The most effective presentations did not appear to force these elements into their discussion. Nicolas used them strategically yet naturally, strengthening his argument with each example. Finally, his design is unique, mature, and easy to navigate. It is clear he is one of the most advanced and experienced in our class when it comes to Dreamweaver and site development.
Lauren Tsugawa: Lauren’s site has all the elements I would look for
A-quality work. Her layout is both aesthetically pleasing and easy to navigate. The site has the feel of a professionally designed page, from the organization to the presentation. The content of her discussion is also of the highest quality. She clearly has a thorough understanding of the fundamental concepts presented by Jenkins and Lessig, She uses these ideas to engage in a important discussion of fan participation content. Like Nick, her inclusion of the required material does not feel forced. Overall, Lauren’s discussion is both accessible and extremely intelligent.
Jamie Coakley: Jamie’s essay is one of the best because she provides a detailed, well written argument that is fair to both sides of the debate. She makes her own opinion clear while remaining fair to the other side. Her inclusion of authors, sites, and groups is balanced and complete. It is clear she is very comfortable with the material Stylistically, her design is in no way the most flashy or advanced. It is black and white and in standard font. It is not clear from this page that she possesses the Dreamweaver mastery of Nicolas and Lauren. Yet in a sense, such a presentation is most effective. For me, an essay where the design becomes more elaborate than the discussion is not successful. Jamie’s layout has a scholarly feel presented in a very simple, yet pleasing fashion.
I believe my own essay is comparable, yet not quite at the level of these three sites. Though I feel as though I have an equally complete understanding of the material, my discussion is not quite as thorough or well constructed. I believe my writing is on par, but my design elements are definitely lacking. Nicolas and Lauren clearly have a fuller mastery of the Dreamweaver software. Their designs are fresh and stand out compared to the others. I also find Jamie’s simple presentation to be elegant and effective. One element of my work that is unique is my creation of participatory media.
Evaluation of Hypertext Response Essays
Many of my fellow English 138 students produced thoughtful, well presented responses to the underlying tension between media ownership and democracy. I chose three students n particular that I find particularly deserving of A’s.
Nicolas Feigenbaum: When reading site after site I began to notice a trend in the way that the essays were introduced. Nicolas began his discussion with an anecdote that drew me into his discussion. His introduction was fresh and made me curious to read more. The substance of his work is complete, clear, and intelligent. His argument for democracy is presented in an unbiased way, yet he makes his position clear. One of the challenging parts of this essay was to include a variety of authors, sites, and groups into the discussion of democratic media. The most effective presentations did not appear to force these elements into their discussion. Nicolas used them strategically yet naturally, strengthening his argument with each example. Finally, his design is unique, mature, and easy to navigate. It is clear he is one of the most advanced and experienced in our class when it comes to Dreamweaver and site development.
Lauren Tsugawa: Lauren’s site has all the elements I would look for
A-quality work. Her layout is both aesthetically pleasing and easy to navigate. The site has the feel of a professionally designed page, from the organization to the presentation. The content of her discussion is also of the highest quality. She clearly has a thorough understanding of the fundamental concepts presented by Jenkins and Lessig, She uses these ideas to engage in a important discussion of fan participation content. Like Nick, her inclusion of the required material does not feel forced. Overall, Lauren’s discussion is both accessible and extremely intelligent.
Jamie Coakley: Jamie’s essay is one of the best because she provides a detailed, well written argument that is fair to both sides of the debate. She makes her own opinion clear while remaining fair to the other side. Her inclusion of authors, sites, and groups is balanced and complete. It is clear she is very comfortable with the material Stylistically, her design is in no way the most flashy or advanced. It is black and white and in standard font. It is not clear from this page that she possesses the Dreamweaver mastery of Nicolas and Lauren. Yet in a sense, such a presentation is most effective. For me, an essay where the design becomes more elaborate than the discussion is not successful. Jamie’s layout has a scholarly feel presented in a very simple, yet pleasing fashion.
I believe my own essay is comparable, yet not quite at the level of these three sites. Though I feel as though I have an equally complete understanding of the material, my discussion is not quite as thorough or well constructed. I believe my writing is on par, but my design elements are definitely lacking. Nicolas and Lauren clearly have a fuller mastery of the Dreamweaver software. Their designs are fresh and stand out compared to the others. I also find Jamie’s simple presentation to be elegant and effective. One element of my work that is unique is my creation of participatory media.
Response Hypertexts
After reading all the response hypertexts written by the class and looking at their websites, I think that Nicolas Feigenbaum, Lauren Tsugawa and Craig Benko are three exceptional papers that deserve an A. They all showed that they read and understood the assigned readings and were able to turn it into a cohesive discussion that showed the readings relationship with the websites we were required to look at. Along with an understanding of the material, they all created websites that were well organized and suited their projects. The designs of the websites were able to get me interested and I found myself going through the various pages with interest.
I noticed that will all of these three projects, they were able to effectively split the essay into several pages that made it easier to read. Each page was not long with text and provided interest in the design and with pictures, photos and color. This is one area where my project was lacking. I was not able to divide it into small, easy parts that allowed for the reader to read them all, or just pick the pages they were interested in. I also failed to create a layout of my project that was visually stimulating to the reader in a way that would capture their interest and keep them reading my page. In particular, Nicolas did a wonderful job of partitioning the paper into 7 different pages where the titles effectively conveyed what the page was about and he kept the text to a minimum that made it seem like less of a job to read.
All three students did a good job of linking the assigned readings to the various websites we were required to use. They were able to connect them all with a cohesive theme that was also interesting for people to read. The language used was also well done because they kept the tone light in a way that made the reader feel more connected to the project, rather than boring them with a serious tone. For example, Lauren made her paper feel more like a conversation between the reader and herself by using language often seen in casual conversation between two peers. This creates a feeling of intimacy between herself and the reader that allows the reader to feel more comfortable and confident while visiting the site. I think that I did a good job of connecting the text to the different websites and made it into a comprehensive essay that showed an understanding of the material. However, after reading these essays, I think it would have been better for me to have concentrated on keeping a more casual tone and less of an academic one. I think it is a more effective form of writing when dealing with websites. People do not look at websites expecting an academic environment. That would only make them feel like they were in school and it would discourage them from reading further into the site. By keeping a casual tone, the average reader feels like they are having a conversation with the author in a more natural and comfortable environment, encouraging the reader to continue to read and engage in the conversation.
I noticed that will all of these three projects, they were able to effectively split the essay into several pages that made it easier to read. Each page was not long with text and provided interest in the design and with pictures, photos and color. This is one area where my project was lacking. I was not able to divide it into small, easy parts that allowed for the reader to read them all, or just pick the pages they were interested in. I also failed to create a layout of my project that was visually stimulating to the reader in a way that would capture their interest and keep them reading my page. In particular, Nicolas did a wonderful job of partitioning the paper into 7 different pages where the titles effectively conveyed what the page was about and he kept the text to a minimum that made it seem like less of a job to read.
All three students did a good job of linking the assigned readings to the various websites we were required to use. They were able to connect them all with a cohesive theme that was also interesting for people to read. The language used was also well done because they kept the tone light in a way that made the reader feel more connected to the project, rather than boring them with a serious tone. For example, Lauren made her paper feel more like a conversation between the reader and herself by using language often seen in casual conversation between two peers. This creates a feeling of intimacy between herself and the reader that allows the reader to feel more comfortable and confident while visiting the site. I think that I did a good job of connecting the text to the different websites and made it into a comprehensive essay that showed an understanding of the material. However, after reading these essays, I think it would have been better for me to have concentrated on keeping a more casual tone and less of an academic one. I think it is a more effective form of writing when dealing with websites. People do not look at websites expecting an academic environment. That would only make them feel like they were in school and it would discourage them from reading further into the site. By keeping a casual tone, the average reader feels like they are having a conversation with the author in a more natural and comfortable environment, encouraging the reader to continue to read and engage in the conversation.
Three A's
I must admit, I enjoyed almost everyone’s response essays. However since only three were requested, three shall be given.
1. Randy Holaday – his discussion of the readings was dynamic and interesting. He laid out the questions and hashed out both sides of the argument in a clear and articulate manner. He did not provide answers as to who was correct and who was wrong, but rather used the vocabulary and ideas presented in the reading to frame his discussion. I particularly enjoyed his discussion entitled Silenced Voices in which he talked about the power of the internet thanks to its anonymity. This is not something I discussed but thought it was a really good point. I think this essay was well researched and presented the information in an academic, linear manner. Reading over his essay I feel I should have used the readings more to frame my arguments since it gives the essay some authority.
2. Alycia Rose-Isaacson – her essay is fun and thought provoking. I really enjoyed how she incorporated examples outside of the assigned readings and websites. Her discussion about who owns the media we consume was particularly interesting. I agree with her argument that it’s odd that we pay so much money to consume media and in return have no rights to it. It really is like the media is trying to colonize our minds: they control how it is delivered to us, how we process it, and what we do next with it – nothing (since we have no rights to it). After presenting us with this information, Alicia then goes on to discuss the limitations on consumers and how much is enough. I really love how she engages the audience to start thinking about the issue and then presents them with some really difficult questions. It is an excellent way to get people thinking about questions that probably will not be answered any time soon. So for her thought provoking situations and excellent questions I believe Alicia deserves an A.
3. Adam Ringler – his essay is very well written. I loved how he analyzed remixing in both its serious and comical forms. I think he does a really great job emphasizing that both forms are equally legitimate and important. It made me think about the authority I give to serious remixing and the lack of authority I give to comical remixing. Adam utilized the course readings as the vocabulary for his arguments in an illuminating manner. I think he posed excellent questions, incorporated the readings well, and also created an awesome mash-up of the Notorious BIG and Chris Martin.
After reading all of these examples that I feel deserve A’s I think I should have been a bit less one sided in my presentation of my argument. These are some serious questions and only through an open dialogue about these issues will any answers arise. I shut the argument down on some sides when they should have been left open to free discussion.
Peer Review
After reviewing all the websites that my peers created, there were a few that stood out to me. The way in which a website was structured led me to want to read more about it. The layout, style and graphical design caught my eye and enticed me to read more on what each person had to say, much like the first few pages of a book are meant to capture a reader’s attention. I know that we were supposed to judge based on content, but this made me realize a huge mistake I made on my own project. While I personally felt a little stressed due to work and other school activities, I think that I definitely could have put more effort into my project. In looking at it, I can see that it’s really boring. If I were on the internet and came across my page, I wouldn’t even bother reading it.
The three pages that I feel deserve A’s are the three by Nicolas Feigenbaum, Alycia Rose, and Kate Lanier. A lot of other web pages were really great, but these kind of stood out to me. The first thing I noticed about each of these sites was how imaginitive they were and how easy they were to navigate.
What I liked about Feigenbaum’s site, aside from the cleaniness, was his use of an important idea – that of an anti-gay marriage ad, that he effectively used to convey his ideas on remixes and to introduce his analysis on media authorship in general.
For Rose’s Site, I liked the fact that she had an incredibly easy format to navigate, as could be seen on the right hand side. I need to have more creative in my creation of my website.
Lastly, I really liked Kate Lanier’s site because she clearly put in the extra effort to create that background picture, which also is great because it makes a primary point for her in her essay.
Again I feel that the creative aspect of a website is a strong basis to actually explore the site, much like in the way it’s hard to listen to music without a good melody or beat. After being enticed into viewing the sites in their entirety, I felt that these three also wrote great essays.
The three pages that I feel deserve A’s are the three by Nicolas Feigenbaum, Alycia Rose, and Kate Lanier. A lot of other web pages were really great, but these kind of stood out to me. The first thing I noticed about each of these sites was how imaginitive they were and how easy they were to navigate.
What I liked about Feigenbaum’s site, aside from the cleaniness, was his use of an important idea – that of an anti-gay marriage ad, that he effectively used to convey his ideas on remixes and to introduce his analysis on media authorship in general.
For Rose’s Site, I liked the fact that she had an incredibly easy format to navigate, as could be seen on the right hand side. I need to have more creative in my creation of my website.
Lastly, I really liked Kate Lanier’s site because she clearly put in the extra effort to create that background picture, which also is great because it makes a primary point for her in her essay.
Again I feel that the creative aspect of a website is a strong basis to actually explore the site, much like in the way it’s hard to listen to music without a good melody or beat. After being enticed into viewing the sites in their entirety, I felt that these three also wrote great essays.
Critique
Nicolas Feigenbaum has a minimalist approach to his site but is able to appeal to a reader visually. While the text is a bit small, the use of a white background works to his advantage, adding life to the page with his headers and graphics. The site functions well and is easy to browse. The content thoroughly explains the issues and does a good job of tying pages together. I would recommend an A for his efforts.
Collen Sinsky uses graphics as a major component of her site and does so tastefully. The background for her hypertext is original, although the link color is difficult to read for some. The background for her content is gentle on the eyes and is easy to read through. Text is thorough, although it could be broken up to give the reader some guides to follow per page. With the addition of many resources and distinct links per page, the overall site is well done and deserves an A.
Kate Bradley has a layout unlike any other person in the class, and it’s a good difference. The site feels more like a blog as she comments per article after a summarization. The contrast of the yellow borders with the white text background works well. While the content seems a little less tied together, the design allows for a reader to bring each section together. I would give her an A for the originality in layout and personal commentary on the subject.
I’m impressed by the work these three students put in and can take many tips from them on improving mine. I see that being technical is not a requirement to making an interactive site; rather, thinking the site out and having an intention with each piece of the design makes the site worthy. I believe that I have made a good amount of progress since I started my site and can match up with these sites. With a little more work, I believe I can make mine just as appealing in all their strengths combined.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)