Final Reflections

A learning curve – the only way to describe the journey of UOSM2008. Using the Smyth (1989) template for self-reflection, the following summarises my progress and thoughts throughout the module.

1. Describing – The UOSM2008 Experience

What did I do?

This module entailed starting a blog, which served as a platform for the fortnightly process of posting, commenting and reflecting upon a specific topic, relating to the online World.

The graphic below outlines each stage of the procedure in more detail.

Dekkers (2018) created using the software Piktochart

What did other people do?

Not only did other students shape my comprehension through their own individual pieces, comments posted on my own interpretation provided me with constructive criticism and caused me to re-evaluate my initial thoughts.

2. Informing – Additional Background

Why did I enrol in UOSM2008?

Having completed modules virtually all specific to my degree, I wanted to try something different. Living and Working on the Web offered insight to an innovative way of learning and after reading the module assessment, alleviating an exam from my usual ‘end of semester schedule’ was an additional bonus.

What was I feeling at the start of the module?

During the first instructional lecture, it was explained that by the end of the course, we would be self-producing infographics and videos. Coming from a subject where constructing Excel tables was the extent to my digital creativity, I was apprehensive toward my capability of meeting the technological requirements. I did however, hope it wasn’t going to be too burdensome, considering that students from any faculty could enrol. Interacting with individuals that held different strengths to me was another prospect I looked forward to.

Moreover, it would be untruthful to say I wasn’t skeptical about learning in the way UOSM2008 proposed. Would it really be as effective as traditional face-to-face contact?

What were my strengths and weaknesses?

To begin with, it was apparent I was fairly competent at grasping the research and writing analytically aspect of the course, which I believe I was able to carry throughout. However, my creativity was at best, basic. Looking back at my first post, I think it fair to say I’ve made drastic progress, from using secondary infographics and videos to now creating my own.

Self-evaluating was another element I improved greatly upon as the course proceeded. By the last topic, no amendments had to be made by my assessor to what I had scored myself.

Although referencing was something I had not anticipated on struggling with, I attained lower marks in comparison to other criteria in the first couple of topics. This is because, being used to basic Havard referencing in essays, I was unaware that I had to cite my own material (with my surname etc) and failed to hyperlink sources within the text, although I was able to rectify this fairly easily.

The infographic below summarises my main strengths and limitations during the course.

Dekkers (2018) created using the software Piktochart

3. Confront – Self-Awareness

What was I aiming to achieve during this module?

My main aim for this course was to become familiar with a greater variety of software and tools available to me on the Web, for example, WordPress. Furthermore, I wanted to improve on my general reflecting and evaluative skills, which are invaluable to everyday life. Lastly, as a student who personally performs better in exams and is more lax when it comes to coursework, I aimed to improve my self-discipline and ability to meet deadlines. The below infographic summarises how my self-rating on various criteria has changed from the start to the end of the module.

Dekkers (2018) made with the software Piktochart

What values & beliefs impacted my approach to the module?

My belief that learning via the Web would be “easier” and “less time-consuming” was quickly reviewed during the introductory topic. Making valuable remarks on another’s work and responding to comments in a way which would be beneficial to my peers was something I definitely found challenging. Assuming this was something I already did before this module, I now realise it is something I rarely carried out and I now see the value in such an activity.

4. Reconstruct – Looking to the Future

What problems did I encounter & how did I overcome them?

Although I am pleased to say I didn’t encounter any major issues, struggling with the simplest tasks, such as setting up my blog, navigating WordPress and sourcing video and infographic software became minor setbacks in the initial stages. After some persistence and consulting other peers’ blogs and Google, I was able to overcome these issues.

What opportunities are available to me now?

Stating my newly found acquaintances with graphic software is likely to contribute to my employability and if blogging were to be of interest to me later in life, I would definitely have a good head-start. UOSM2008 has also allowed me to see the many advantages to virtual learning environments, through exposure to the MOOC. It has provided me with incentive to participate on such platforms, which I’m sure I otherwise wouldn’t.

How will I carry through what I’ve learnt to my everyday life?

The video below summarises what I gained researching and reflecting on each of the topics.

 

Final words – how have I been impacted by UOSM2008?

The journey of UOSM2008 has been thoroughly enjoyable and worthwhile. My original skepticism about learning through the Internet had been completely eradicated and I can truly see the benefits to living and working on the Web, significantly more than before.

 

[Word count: 897]

 

Bibliography

Smyth, J. (1989). Developing and sustaining critical reflection in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 2-9

 

Topic 3: Reflection

Throughout the last few days, my understanding of online identities has largely deepened, owing to interactions with both colleagues’ own posts and comments within my own.

Comments on my Post

Challenging questions posed on my online identities post led to interesting additional research. The table below summarises each comment, in addition to how they shaped my own comprehension.

Dekkers (2018) created with the software Piktochart
Carl’s comment, Nikhita’s comment, Karishma’s comment, Tom’s comment

Others Posts

Reading Tewsdae’s post this week brought my attention to authenticity on the Web. Explaining that we still hold as a genuine individual, despite adjusting our character in different company, caused me to question if a loss of authenticity is not such a significant drawback from possessing multiple identities online as I originally thought.

Also regarding authenticity, Nikhita’s post stated that maintaining a single identity across all platforms is more integral. Researching singular identities, I found an article challenging this statement, which suggested that people generally portray the best version of themselves online and therefore, is anyone ever truly authentic on the Web (Dansky, 2017). This led to an interesting discussion, to which we both agreed authenticity is improving on the Web, owing to increased discussion of sensitive topics on social media (such as mental health and the #metoo campaign).

Furthermore, Nikhita suggested that transitioning into working life may change the need for multiple identities online. This led to my understanding that age and employment status are other contextual factors influencing the number of identities we have, solidifying my opinion that online identities is a circumstantial matter.

Conclusion

Despite holding the same original conclusion, in that the number of online identities a person holds should be circumstantial and down to each individual, connecting with others has introduced lots of factors I hadn’t considered. Additionally, my opinion has altered that authenticity shouldn’t be assumed with a singular identity and discounted with multiple identities.

[Word count: 299]

Bibliography

Dansky, J. (2017) The Struggle to Stay Authentic on Social Media. Available from: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jordan-dansky/the-struggle-to-stay-authentic-on-social-media_b_9563234.html

My comment on Nikhita’s post
My comment on Tewsdae’s post

Topic 3: Singular vs. Multiple Online Identities

What is an Online Identity?

60 billion online identities in today’s World (Versace, 2014), but what does it really mean to hold one? The short introductory video below aims to summarise some definitions and terminology.

Dekkers (2018) created using the software Powtoon
Information from Costa and Torres (2011)

Making informed decisions is crucial when establishing your first or an additional online identity and it is personal preference that determines how many to possess.

Singular Online Identity

Having a single online identity for either social, professional or a mixture of purposes has its benefits and drawbacks.

Firstly, you are less likely to be a victim of stolen identity. The less people display online, the harder it is for fraudsters to access necessary information. Furthermore, a person is far easier to contact if they have one online identity. However, people holding one online identity are unlikely to hold anonymity (Costa and Torres, 2011). This could mean they hold back some opinions (e.g. political views).

Multiple Online Identities

Numerous online identities can increase “…our ability to communicate and connect with different audiences through different voices online” (Casserly, 2011).

Separating our personal and professional life through multiple online identities can be hugely advantageous. It enables selectivity of information to be public or private.

However, having multiple identities can be regarded by some as unusual and raises eyebrows about which persona is genuine can be trusted. Garling (2011) counteracts this point by suggesting we carry over multiple identities in real life. It is unlikely we communicate similarly in the company of our friends compared with our bosses at work, so there shouldn’t be an issue with the same online.

The infographic below summarises the main advantages and disadvantages to a singular and multiple online identities.

Dekkers (2018) created using the software Piktochart
Information from Costa and Torres (2011)

Conclusion

To conclude, I believe that neither multiple or singular online identities unanimously overrides the other. I think it is circumstantial, who you are and how you utilise the Web, that determines that optimal number of identities for you.

[Word count: 298]

Bibliography

Casserly, M. (2011) Multiple Personalities and Social Media: The Many Faces of Me. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/meghancasserly/2011/01/26/multiple-personalities-and-social-media-the-many-faces-of-me/#21c12eb76d51

Costa, C. and Torres, R. (2011) To Be or Not To Be, The Importance of Digital Identity in a Networked Society. Available from: http://eft.educom.pt/index.php/eft/article/view/216/126  

Garling, C. (2011) Save the Pseudonyms: Why Having Multiple Online Personalities Is Not A Disorder. Available from: https://www.digitaltrends.com/opinion/save-the-pseudonyms-why-having-multiple-online-personalities-is-not-a-disorder/

Versace, M. (2014) 50 to 60 Online Identities, and Counting. Available from: https://idc-community.com/financial/financial-services-technology/50_to_60_billion_digital_identities_and_counting

Topic 2: Reflection

Reflecting on Data Literacy

Although prior to this topic, I was aware of the importance in assessing the reliability of data and statistics, conducting my own research and learning from others has really reinforced it.

Joanna’s comment provided me with some food for thought on my own post on data literacy – there is no point trying to interpret data from an unreliable author (Li, 2013) – to which I agreed with. However, this led to an interesting discussion where I learnt that even credible authors can take advantage of our trust and mislead us deliberately, to their advantage.

Learning About Information Literacy

As I researched data literacy, it was interesting to visit other students’ posts on information literacy.

Anna’s post introduced me to “fake news” and the term ‘digital naivety’, suggesting that although young adults are generally perceived digitally savvy, they can be equally as likely to be naive when exposed to fake news as the less digitally savvy population. Coinciding with my topic of data literacy, I reflected on the fact that we can also be naive to false data. Furthermore, some of Anna’s tips for evaluating the validity of sources were useful to add to my own.

Image from Mulraney (2017)

Conducting my own research on the topic, I challenged Anna’s post with some evidence that fake news can be beneficial in some aspects (McGregor, J), although we did agree it was predominantly detrimental to society.

Stefan’s post emphasised the damage fake news can cause politically and the efforts some organisations such as Facebook are making to reduce the spread of fake news. Investigating this, I learnt these tools are sometimes triggering the opposite effect.

Conclusion

Concluding this topic, I have learnt that media literacy is a skill that is becoming increasingly important as fake news and fake data becomes more abundant and easier to reach us. I look forward to adopting the new skills taught by others, to improve the authenticity of my work.

[Word count: 303 words]

My comment on Anna’s post
My comment on Stefan’s post

Bibliography

Li, J. (2013) 5 Ways to Avoid Being Fooled by Statistics. Available from: http://www.iacquire.com/blog/5-ways-to-avoid-being-fooled-by-statistics

McGregor, J. (2017) Two Reasons Fake News is Good for Society. Available from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaymcgregor/2017/02/07/why-fake-news-is-actually-good-for-the-world/#10b7ddae3771

Mulraney, F. (2017) Sharing “Fake News” in Ireland Could Soon Be Illegal. Available from: https://www.irishcentral.com/news/politics/fake-news-ireland

Topic 2: Assessing Online Information – Data Literacy

Dekkers (2018) created using the software Piktochart
Quote from Tanner (2016)

Data Literacy

As Barksdale succinctly expressed in the quote above – a claim, in absence of supporting data, is about as valuable as an opinion. Reliable data is imperative to virtually every sector of the economy (Olavsrud, 2013).

Whether we connect with data for educational, vocational or personal purposes, it is crucial we can make correct deductions, identify any accidental or deliberately misleading conclusions and evaluate its validity. Failing this could not only detrimentally impact our own learning, but others we interact with in online communities.

Common Data Mistakes

1. Correlation vs. Causation

Causality can only be inferred if there is proven cause and effect between two variables (Sidebottom, 2015) whereas correlation means a certain relationship (negative or positive) exists between two events, but they do not necessarily cause one another. We cannot say that hot weather directly causes increased ice cream sales, but there is certainly a correlation. The video below describes this fallacy more thoroughly.

ASAPScience (2017)

2. Incorrect Interpretation

As data becomes both more abundant and accessible, it’s important to ensure we are equipped to correctly interpret what we see. Misleading visuals can mean false inferences are easier to make.

Dekkers (2018) created using the software Piktochart
Diagrams from Wikipedia (2018)

Let’s say the pie chart represents UK GDP. Looking at the 3D pie chart, we might be inclined to say that C composes at least as much as A, and D composes more than B. However, looking from the 2D perspective, figures suggest otherwise.

There are numerous other visuals causing these types of errors:

• Improper scaling
• Truncated y axis
• Omitted data

(Kwapien, 2015)

Data Tips

So how can we ensure we gain reliable data and interpret it correctly? The infographic below outlines some tips.

Dekkers (2018) created with the software Piktochart
Information from University of Southampton (2017)

Summary

With ever-increasing data in our World, it is important to be vigilant upon encountering it. This helps to maintain an authentic online learning environment from which we can all benefit.

[Word count: 300]

Bibliography

ASAPScience (2017) This ≠ That. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxSUqr3ouYA

Kwapien, A. (2015) Misleading Data Visualisation Examples. Available from: https://www.datapine.com/blog/misleading-data-visualization-examples/

Olavsrud, T. (2013) 10 Intriguing Real-World Uses for Big Data. Available from: https://www.computerworld.com/article/2473691/big-data/92712-10-Real-World-Big-Data-Deployments-That-Will-Change-Our-Lives.html#slide3

Sidebottom, T. (2015) Correlation vs. Causation: Why Marketers Should Stop Saving For a Rainy Day. Available from: http://www.fourthsource.com/general/correlation-vs-causation-marketers-stop-saving-rainy-day-19411

Tanner, T. (2016) Why Data Matters in a Membership Organisation. Available from: https://www.ats.edu/blog/data-matters/“if-we-have-data-lets-look-data-if-all-we-have-are-our-opinions-lets-go-mine”-why-data-matters-0

University of Southampton (2017) Data Literacy. Available from: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/learning-network-age/4/steps/303355

Wikipedia (2018) Misleading Graphs. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_graph

Topic 1: Reflection

“Digital differences” was a phrase I had never encountered before this topic. I knew opportunities to access the Web were far from equal for everyone, so I was intrigued to explore the specific factors contributing to the existing biases.

In my post, I distinguished between macro and contextual factors on likelihood to use the Internet. Initially, I was convinced that the country you live in, therefore macro factors, was by far the more significant cause for digital differences and I still do believe that to a degree. However, Sinead’s comment drew my attention to a blog which pinpointed the importance of contextual factors. In my post, I had highlighted China’s censorship laws and this source proceeded to say that even in a democratised society, digital differences would still be very prevalent, because of variations between people.

Furthermore, Doug’s post really emphasised the impact of age on likelihood to use the Web with the data he illustrated, which is also something Natalie’s post touched upon. She stated that divisions in society are caused by differing levels of Web usage between the generations.

Image from Linalindberg (2015)

Having re-evaluated my thoughts, I was able to answer Tom’s comment on my post, posing the question – did I think macro or contextual factors mattered more for digital differences? My opinion is still that the macro climate you’re exposed to is the most significant predisposition to using the Web, but my view on the weight contextual factors have has increased.

It’s evident that technological inequality isn’t one that springs to mind when we think about all the inequalities that exist in the World. As such, it has been an eye-opening experience researching and writing about this topic and hopefully in the future, reducing digital differences will be more of a priority for governments to intervene.

[Word count: 299]

• • • Comment on Natalie’s post
    • Comment on Doug’s post

   

References

Linalindberg (2015) Interview: Two Different Generations Viewpoints on Technology. Available from: https://thecosmicunion.wordpress.com/2015/10/25/interview-two-different-generations-viewpoints-on-technology/

Topic 1: Digital Differences

Digital Differences

Exploring ‘Digital Natives and Immigrants’ helped to provide some insight into the various ways people perceive and use the Web. But access to the necessary technology is far from equal across the globe. This is what ‘Digital Differences’ aims to explain.

Research suggests there exists an abundance of factors affecting an individual’s likelihood to use the Web and thus, their online practices (University of Southampton, 2017).

Macro Factors

Where you live can impact Web interactions significantly.

Infographic made with Piktochart

Observing data from a low (Ethiopia), middle (Brazil) and high (UK) income country, the relationship between economic development and population accessing the Web is quite apparent.

Individuals Using the Internet (% of Population) – Graph made in World Bank (2017)

Furthermore, policies arising from cultural preferences can create barriers on the Web. China’s internet censorship prevents access to numerous platforms including YouTube, Google and Facebook, ultimately shaping civilians Web usage. Furthermore, bloggers and journalists can be jailed for promoting anti-establishment material (Xu and Albert, 2017).

Video from Youtube – BBC News (2014)

Contextual Factors

Despite exposure to the same macro factors, 10% of the UK’s population in 2016 were classed non-users of the Internet (University of Southampton, 2017). Contextual factors address the influences that are unique to each individual.

Infographic made with Piktochart

Amongst these factors, there are many interconnections. A graduate, for example, is more likely to receive higher income and therefore the ability to afford secure broadband and a mobile contract with data, as opposed to someone completing only primary school. Personal factors not only influence our likelihood to access the Web, but also our choices in online practices.

Do Digital Differences Affect Me?

As the infographic below illustrates, I am extremely fortunate not to be detrimentally impacted by any digital differences. I believe my age and growing up in the UK are pivotal in enabling me to make valuable interactions with the Web, both leisurely and educationally. However it is important to recognise not everyone has these opportunities.

Infographic made with Piktochart

Word count: 299

Bibliography

BBC News (2014) China Internet: ‘I Know We’re Being Suppressed But It Doesn’t Affect Me”. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QohBE1xPmOI

University of Southampton (2017) Digital Differences – Inequalities and Online Practices. Available from: https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/learning-network-age/4/steps/303344

World Bank (2017) Individuals Using the Internet. Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS?locations=GB-BR-ET

Xu, B. and Albert. E. (2017) Media Censorship in China. Available from: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/media-censorship-china

 

Introductory Topic: Reflection

When initially tasked with evaluating my digital literacies and presenting them in a blog post, I didn’t anticipate how challenging it would actually be, despite considering myself highly computer competent. What I didn’t realise entering this module from an Economics background – there are various skills I rarely exercise, such as my creativity.

Reflection – Digital Residents & Visitors

After eventually getting to grips with WordPress, I published my first blog and was fairly happy with the outcome. I was also confident my stance on Cornu and White’s spectrum laid close to the ‘resident’ end.

However, after reading posts written by fellow students, I began to doubt some of my initial thoughts. Sinead’s post introduced me to a particularly interesting concept by the Higher Education Academy, clarifying that you may be a heavy user of the Web, but you are not a ‘resident’ if you choose to be passive. This provided food for thought on the element of personal choice in the res-vis typology. I choose to be passive in virtually every aspect of the Web, bar social media. This made me question that I must be more of a visitor than I originally concluded. Furthermore, Sinead’s impressive self-made video reinforced my need for experience in creative software.

Iarina’s post introduced me to Prensky’s revisited notion of ‘digital wisdom’. Upon researching this myself, I agreed with her point that it was probably a better concept helping to describe technological users today, although I do believe the res-vis concept to be very relevant still.

Conclusion

A few weeks into the module, it has already been interesting to experience learning from others with no face-to-face contact. Now I am familiar with the routine of the module, I am excited to discover more of the benefits to living and working on the Web.

(Word count: 300)

My comment on Sinead’s post: https://sineadboyle376.wordpress.com/2018/02/10/digital-residents-and-visitors/#comment-1

My comment on Iarina’s post: https://itd1e14.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/introductory-topic/#comment-2

Introductory Topic: The Types of Web Users

Digital Natives & Digital Immigrants

The internet was created over two decades ago. For some, this is just a small fraction of their lifetime; for others, they have not known a life without it.

This fact led Prensky (2001) to believe there existed a negative correlation between digital competence and age. Having grown up in the digital era, he suggested that the ‘younger’ population were more adept, thus ‘natives’ to technology and the ‘older’ population, having to learn new skills, were ‘immigrants’.

Figure 1: Digital Immigrants vs. Digital Natives (Unicheck Team, 2017)

Digital Residents & Digital Visitors

The notion of digital natives and immigrants was widely accepted until recent years. Cornu and White (2011) challenged the typology, stating that a “significant proportion” of the younger generation do not possess the high level of technological ability theorised by Prensky and in fact, the same variation in ability exists in all generations.

They didn’t however, disregard Prensky’s ideas entirely. Instead, they evolved his analogy to digital residents and visitors. In short, a visitor uses the Web as a ‘tool’ and are hesitant to use it as a ‘place’ to belong and hold an online identity. On the other hand, residents very much view the Web as a ‘place’, living a proportion of their lives online. The video from Jiscnetskills (2014) below describes the typology of residents and visitors more thoroughly.

Personal Online Identity

Upon reviewing the self-test, I would say my online identity lies toward the ‘resident’ end of the spectrum. I use the internet as a platform for staying connected with friends and family through social media daily. Having said that, there are definitely some areas where lack of experience could mean I identify as more of a ‘visitor’, for example, rarely participating in educational online communities.

As this module progresses, I look forward to seeing whether my identity changes.

 

References

Jiscnetskills (2014) Visitors and Residents. [online video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPOG3iThmRI&t=27s

Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Available from: https://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf

Unicheck Team (2017) Digital Immigrants vs Digital Natives: Closing the Gap. Available from: https://unicheck.com/blog/digital-immigrants-vs-digital-natives

White, D. S. & Cornu, A. L. (2011) Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). Available from: http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3171/3049%20https://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~tefko/Courses/Zadar/Readings/Selwyn%20dig%20natives,%20Aslib%20Proceedings%202009.pdf