The video above is an example of a completed student multimedia project. You can use either iMovie or MovieMaker to construct your project. If you don’t have access to either, use WeVideo at WeVideo.com. Once you sign up for a free account, you can access and view instructional videos that will walk you through the process of navigating the WeVideo video editor.
The annotated bibliography you submit on the day that you present your Prezi must do three things:
- Present at least six credible sources. Two of which should be multimedia sources.
- Be correctly formatted per MLA guidelines.
- Present an annotation that contains all of the information highlighted on the assignment sheet.
For further guidance, click this link for an example of MLA formatted Annotated Bibliography entry. You can also view this Youtube video to get an overview of what an annotated bibliography is.
Click the link below to view an example of what your Prezi should look like. The questions are slightly different from yours, but you should follow the same basic format.
Sample Student Prezi
In The Psychology of Blogging, Laura Gurak takes on the “social-psychological features of computer-mediated communication (66).
Guraks seems to suggest that blogging represents a blurring of the lines between one’s private and public persona. “…(A)lthough ‘the first person narrative…can make us feel that we are partaking in a one-on-one exchange,’ blogging also promotes a high level of self-exposure to the audience often largely unknown to the author” (64).
Gurak also suggest that blogs are constructed both individually (the blogger) and collectively (the commenters). “Through the use of blogroll, links, and comment features, and through development of communal norms, the blogger reveals and creates his or her group identity” (64).
So now there are two dichotomies at work within the psychology of blogging. “Being at the same time private and public, individual and collective, Weblogs invoke the notion of a contradictory genre and activity, with “you,” “me” and everyone in between being brought into a single, semiprivate or semipublic space and experience” (64).
What do you think?
Gurak, Larura. “The Psychology of Blogging: You, Me and Everyone in Between.” American Behavioral Scientist 52. (2008): 60-69. Print.
In their article Counterhegemonic Discourses and the Internet, Warf and Grimes focus on the power of the Internet (Big I) to produce counterhegemonic discourses right along side the well-known , and often ignored, hegemonic discourse. Arguing that by sheer size and reach the Internet, though often not commonly viewed as, is a tool of the educated and powerful. They actually put together some convincing numbers to back up their case. “Access to the skills, equipment, and software necessary to gain entree to the electronic highway threatens to create a large-predominantly minority-underclass that is substantially disenfranchised from the benefits of cyberspace” (262). Their numbers however are about 15 years old, and thus should be subject to a bit of well-earned scrutiny.
That aside, they also posit that the Internet can and does still work for the good of the traditionally disenfranchised. “The Internet can also sustain counterhegemonic discourses, challenging established systems of domination and legitimating and publicizing political claims by the powerless and marginalized” (260). This is because the “(i)increasingly easy access to e-mail and the World Wide Web allows many politically disenfranchised groups to communicate with like-minded or sympathetic audiences, publicizing causes often overlooked by the mainstream media and offering perspectives frequently stifled by the conservative corporate ownership of newspapers, television, and other media outlets” (260). Jump to 15 years later and add even greater cyberspace access through social media and blogs.
But Warf and Grimes are quick to point out that this access serves both progressive and conservative groups. “Counterhegemonic is anything but synonymous with progressive: Right-wing groups have harnessed the Internet as readily as anyone on the political left…” (260). So if all sides benefit equally who wins and who loses?
“The Internet obviously does not guarantee the emergence of counter hegemonic discourses, but it does facilitate the opening of discursive spaces within which they may be formulated and conveyed” (270).
Warf, Barney and John Grimes. (1997). Counterhegemonic Discourses and the Internet. Geographical Review, 87, 259-274.
In the article “Is Google Making Us Stupid,” Nicholas Carr poses an argument that educators have pondered in smoked-filled teacher’s lounges for decades. Is all the double-clicking and surfing and tweeting and FBing making our students stupid? Or politically-corrected, how has our society’s growing reliance on the internet affected the ways in which we learn?