Project 2: Collaborative Wiki

Part 2: Digital Rhetoric

1. Wiki­Work Sum­mary & Ratio­nale:
dis­cuss your efforts, par­tic­i­pa­tion, and effects — espe­cially edits and revis­ing (check/reference activ­ity log on Wikia pages)

• 5 points; 300–500 words; due M Nov-02 (by 2pm)
• Post as page on your blog

Instruc­tions:
Dis­cuss con­cisely and thought­fully your work on the class wiki, in terms of your com­pos­ing process (all stages) and ratio­nale (most impor­tant):

— changes you made to your class­mates’ page(s) dur­ing review/edit process
— updating/revis­ing your pages, after receiv­ing edits/feedback and adding mul­ti­me­dia (espe­cially screencast)
— final­iz­ing your page for future audi­ence con­sul­ta­tion (and poten­tial contribution/change?), espe­cially through reader-focused composing/revising using pub­lic con­ven­tions for wiki genre

→ In all dis­cus­sions of your work, be sure to ref­er­ence spe­cific parts of the wiki (link when pos­si­ble), as well as our main goals — par­tic­u­larly com­pos­ing as part of a col­lab­o­ra­tive wiki (not on your own, like an essay) and writ­ing for net­worked audience/s
(reader expec­ta­tions, acces­si­ble language/style, media, format/links, etc)

 

---

 

2. Reflec­tion: insights & learn­ing from project experience

• 5 points; 400–500 words; due M Nov-02 (10pm)
• Post as page on your blog (can be same page as Summary)

What have you learned from this project? Dis­cuss thought­fully your insights from project expe­ri­ence about:

net­worked for­mat (from start, not con­vert­ing essay to web­page; and as part of a wiki)

wiki as genre & for­mat of writ­ing (espe­cially in terms of con­ven­tions observed and applied. con­sider this in comparison/contrast to Aca­d­e­mic Writ­ing you’re famil­iar with…?)

pub­lic writ­ing, con­sid­er­ing audi­ence expectations

com­pos­ing process (con­sider stages/steps, espe­cially review/edit process in collaboration)

par­tic­i­pa­tory cul­ture — apply­ing research in par­tic­i­pa­tory (?) form of outcomes/production

imag­ine Web read­ers learn­ing from your page…. (did you con­sider dur­ing process at all?)

sep­a­rately, does the wiki add/enhance/facilitate the cul­ture forms dis­cussed in any ways? (poten­tial?) or change/inform per­spec­tives on technology/media and culture?

mode or model for learn­ing and work­ing (con­sider, how did you know how/what to com­pose? and what could oth­ers learn from your pages them­selves, as mod­els for composing?)

author­ship and iden­tity (e.g. what hap­pens to “voice” in net­worked plat­forms like wikis unlike blogs? were you able to express “your­self” in your com­pos­ing? compared/contrasted with Aca­d­e­mic Gen­res? what were instances more or less so—and were they related to writ­ing style/genre, plat­form, media, public/open/online context?)

look at your Wikia badges: what do you make of this author-identity, mak­ing vis­i­ble typ­i­cally invis­i­ble work?

writing/composition, time, pub­li­ca­tion: what effects/implications do you think about con­sid­er­ing that the wiki is not finalized/finished? in terms of time and com­ple­tion: future con­sul­ta­tion and changes, and unknown contributors/editors (whether Wikia users or stu­dents in future classes; or even our class if you choose to con­tinue work­ing). did you con­sider this at all dur­ing com­pos­ing process? what about now, end­ing the wiki project with­out it being finished/finalized — ideas, con­cerns, new per­spec­tives about this, espe­cially as an “aca­d­e­mic” project…? 

*Note: con­sider these ques­tions before com­pos­ing. Avoid sum­ma­riz­ing or repeat­ing any points from Summary/Rationale Doc, instead dis­cussing new outcomes.
You should address at least 2–3 of these top­ics (but not all!), in para­graph form (not a list) — as well as any other/broader insights about our course top­ics (tech­nol­ogy, media, cul­ture, and dig­i­tal identity).