MS3307

1
MS3307

• Tips for Auto Editing

2
Whats Left before the break
7th Feb Today Feedback returned for Cw1 Looking ahead
14th Feb Thesis structure - Overview
21st Feb Thesis structure - Literature review part one purpose, approaches, structuring
28th Feb Thesis structure Literature review part two critical thinking
7th Mar Thesis structure Drafting the introduction and auto-edit session
14th Mar Pre booked tutorials with Tony to look at draft intros
21st Mar Pre booked tutorials with Tony to look at draft intros
3
MS2306 Presentations in G1.10
28th Mar Vacation
4th April Vacation
9th Apr Pitching ideas to MS2306 (EBG.10) 4.30-5.45 Mark Landers (Mary and Gosia), Anna Chiampesan (Tony and Marian), Magdalena Maslach (Tony and Marian), Aswin Gurung (Mary and Jeff)
16th Apr Pitching ideas to MS2306 (EBG.10) 4.30-5.45 Thushanth Packiyanathan (Tony and Marian), Ahmed Al-Issa (Tony and Marian) , Sarah Russell (Mary and Jeff), Matthew Cornell (Tony and Jeff)
23rd Apr Pitching ideas to MS2306 (EBG.10) 4.30-5.45 Aaron Bartlett (Mary and Marian), Rosa Da Conceicao (Mary and Jeff), May Le Floch (Tony and Marian), Konstantinos Nikolis (Tony and Jeff),
30th Apr Pitching ideas to MS2306 (EBG.10) 4.30-5.45 Alex Hughes (Mary and Gosia), Sahithya Jegatheeswaraiyar (Mary and Marian), Rahel Zeremariam (Gosia and Marian) Ray and Yunes to present thesis ideas.
Week beginning 6th May prep for show Thursday 16th May Student Presentations in WB G.02
Friday 17th May Student show
4
Prepare to share experiences with level 2

•  
• The presentations will be held on Tuesdays
  (4-5.30pm) in room EB.G.14
• Each individual presentation will be a maximum of
  10-15mins Groups to divide this time.
• Each presentation will directly address the
  research question (stating the user experiences
  and problems it addresses) and how it will result
  in a practical outcome.
• Please draw attention to the independent and
  dependent variables in your question
• Focus on rationale of the methodology
• The presentations should aim to be like
  workshops and provide interactive moments for the
  MS2306 students.

5
(No Transcript)
6
Tips for Auto-Editing

• MS3307

7
Time management

• You need to plan ahead and build in an thorough
  editing process into your workload

• If you do not build in time to edit, you will not
  benefit from it!
• Your work will have
• Errors
• Typos
• Structure problems
• In the worst case, it will not be as readable as
  you intended
• It will lose marks

8
Proofreading/Editing

• You must check for typos, grammar errors and
  spelling
• Make use of it, but do not rely on spell checker
  alone It can be very stupid.

• Editing involves a lot more than correcting
  typos!
• Stepping back from the first draft
• Think about the poor reader
• Cutting it down and cutting it out
• Error-Free
• Format
• Auto-editing and drafting

9
Give yourself a break step back

• Write it up and then walk away

• You are too close to your work to spot errors or
  readability problems

10
Reader/Author

• Read your work from a reader perspective

• Forget you are the author

11
Readability

• Think about
• How your ideas are introduced
• Is the reader properly guided through what you
  have to say

• Make everything you state, argue and discuss
  CLEAR!

12
Cut it Down Cut it Out!!

• Cut down overly wordy sentences
• Use full stops and commas
• Look for words that are unnecessary or could be
  replaced by a better synonym

• Provide the reader with breathing space
• Cut out unnecessary clutter

13
Good Writing is Error Free

• Bad spelling can be embarrassing.
• It can undermine all of your efforts
• to/too/two
• their/theyre/there
• its, its

• Spelling of authors names
• McLuhan
• MacLuhan

14
Format

• Format correctly. Check
• Margins
• Spacing (1.5 or 2.00)

• Consistent style
• headings
• fonts
• bold and italics
• capitalization
• Font
• Serif or san serif?

15
(No Transcript)
16
Calibri
Palatino Linotype
17
Go over it again

• Print it, do not it read on-screen
• Go over your corrections
• Read it out loud

• Get someone else to read it
• Submit a draft to your supervisor

18
Editing tools
Track changes
Accept/Reject
19
Writing the Intro

• Look at your work and consider edits
• Tips
• Does the intro begin by identifying a specific
  purpose?
• Does it establish the importance of a
  question/problem?
• What are the underlying concepts/theories?
• Is there a coherent set of logical transitions
  from topic to topic?
• Are conceptual definitions of key terms provided?
• What assumptions are made?
• What points of view are expressed?
• Are factual statements supported? Data! Expert
  opinion!
• What conclusions are made
• Do the specific research purposes, questions, or
  hypotheses logically flow through the
  introduction to the conclusion?
• What implications are there?

20
Apply

• Purpose
• Questions, problems solutions
• Concepts and ideas
• Assumptions
• Points of view
• Data, information and evidence
• Interpretation, inference and conclusions
• Implication

21
Draft Introduction

• The Web 2.0 phenomenon and the development of new
  media technologies have transformed the Web into
  a truly participatory space. The user-generated
  content of sites such as Wikipedia, YouTube or
  Flickr demonstrate the emergence of collaboration
  in online content production. Since the 1960s,
  media as centralised power has been challenged by
  theorists noting the introduction of new media
  and technology. The McLuhanesque argument that
  Web 2.0 has provided opportunities for a two-way
  flow of information, thereby challenging the
  existing theoretical framework of cultural
  production.
• What has been challenged?

22
lack of references and contrast between
participatory and centralized

• The Web 2.0 phenomenon and the development of new
  media technologies have transformed the Web into
  a truly participatory space (ref Jenkins??).
  The user-generated content of sites such as
  Wikipedia, YouTube or Flickr demonstrate the
  emergence of collaboration in online content
  production. (Ok this needs to be clearly
  contrasted with examples) Since the 1960s, this
  view of media as centralised power (what is
  this?) has been challenged by theorists noting
  the introduction of new media and technology. The
  McLuhanesque argument that Web 2.0 has provided
  opportunities for a two-way flow of information,
  thereby challenging the existing (old)
  theoretical framework of cultural production. (in
  which case I think you need to return to the
  opening sentences and add something on
  participation perhaps being a reflection of a
  more democratic society, if thats what you are
  saying?).

23
Draft Introduction

• The Web 2.0 phenomenon and the development of new
  media technologies have transformed the Web into
  a truly participatory and democratic space
  Jenkins, 2001). The user-generated content of
  sites such as Wikipedia, YouTube or Flickr
  demonstrate the emergence of collaboration in
  online content production. The celebration of
  participatory modes of new media is in sharp
  contrast to earlier critiques of 20th century
  media forms. For example, in the 1940s, theorists
  such as Adorno and Horkheimer (1948) argued that
  standardisation served to shape and control
  society rather than culture reflecting society.
  Since the 1960s, this view of media as
  centralised power has been challenged by
  theorists noting the introduction of new media
  and technology (McLuhan, 1967). The McLuhanesque
  argument that Web 2.0 has provided opportunities
  for a two-way flow of information, thereby
  challenging the existing old theoretical
  framework of cultural production.

24
Draft Introduction(assumptions, support and
importance)

• In contemporary new media contexts, it is clear
  that cultural production can be equally
  constructed by the individual as it can by the
  commercial media. User creativity and new media
  may present an opportunity for widening cultural
  citizenship. However, this is not a given. It is
  important therefore to devise strategies for
  promoting user content creation and cultural
  participation. The rationale for the present
  research project then is to find ways to utilise
  new media technologies for the promotion of
  creative user participation. The aim is to
  explore the way in which new media designers can
  use digital art to foster participatory and
  collaborative user content. The wider context is
  to examine the potential for democratising art
  and cultural production.

25
Too assumptive and lacks support

• In contemporary new media contexts, it is clear
  (well, ARGUABLY - youll need to set out why it
  is clear) that cultural production can be equally
  constructed by the individual as it can by the
  commercial media (again this is something that
  will need support, perhaps a reference and
  example). User creativity and new media may
  present an opportunity for widening cultural
  citizenship. However, this is not a given. (Why
  is this important?) The rationale for the present
  research project then is to find ways to utilise
  new media technologies for the promotion of
  creative user participation. The aim is to
  explore the way in which new media designers? can
  use digital art to foster participatory and
  collaborative user content. The wider context is
  to examine the potential for democratising art
  and cultural production.

26

• In contemporary new media contexts, it appears
  that cultural production can be equally
  constructed by the individual as it can by the
  commercial media. This represents an apparent
  paradigm shift from the standardisation of
  cultural production to collaborative user-led
  production of content. Active participation and
  creative content production seem to be in a
  process of convergence with increasing
  significance for both creativity and new media
  technologies in a wider field of research (Smith,
  2006 p. 9). User creativity and new media may
  present an opportunity for widening cultural
  citizenship. However, this is not a given. It is
  important therefore to devise strategies for
  promoting user content creation and cultural
  participation. The rationale for the present
  research project then is to find ways to utilise
  new media technologies for the promotion of
  creative user participation. The aim is to
  explore the way in which new media designers? can
  use digital art to foster participatory and
  collaborative user content. The wider context is
  to examine the potential for democratising art
  and cultural production.