Journal 8
Feb 26 - Mar 1
Part I: Review Other Teams' Final Projects
Video 1: AI Companionship
1. Is the topic well covered?
Yes, the topic is well-covered and goes in depth. They offer a lot of examples of AI companionship and give both pros and cons.
2. Is the presentation clear?
The presentation is clear and has slides with lots of images and information.
3. How is the quality of the research?
The quality of the research seems to be quite expansive as they covered many examples of AI companionship from the lens of history, programming, and ethics.
4. How is the quality of the video production?
The audio quality is a bit muffled, but I imagine not everyone in this course has access to a high-quality microphone and many do not have experience in sound editing.
5. Is the video engaging and interesting?
The video is interesting, but could have been more engaging if they included short video clips rather than just slides.
6. Is the team work evident?
The team work is evident as each group member read different portions of the information.
7. Is the video appropriate to the audience?
The video is appropriate to the audience as the longer one delves into the technical aspect. The short one utilizes an AI voice as many videos targeted towards younger audiences tend to have, and the jargon is less present so that children can understand the concept.
Video 2: Bridging the Digital Divide
1. Is the topic well covered?
The topic is very well covered, there is a lot of information on the slides and there are many images and graphs to further convey information.
2. Is the presentation clear?
The presentation is very clear and has a lot of information to portray a full breadth of the topic.
3. How is the quality of the research?
The quality of research is very in depth as it includes expansive history, statistics, examples, issues, solutions, and challenges.
4. How is the quality of the video production?
The quality of the video production is good, most of the reading has good quality audio and the slides are well-developed.
5. Is the video engaging and interesting?
The video is interesting as it contains a lot of information and interesting photos. The use of short video clips could have made the video more engaging.
6. Is the team work evident?
Team work is evident as each member read different portions of the video script.
7. Is the video appropriate to the audience?
The long version of the video is appropriate as it delves into many aspects of reusable rockets and satellites, explaining the building and use of each. The shorter video seemed a bit too advanced for young kids, but the general public would be able to understand the content.
Video 3: The Metaverse
1. Is the topic well covered?
The topic is well covered as the video includes history of, making of, uses of, and challenges of augmented reality and the Metaverse.
2. Is the presentation clear?
The presentation is very clear and has excellent slides with the perfect amount of information (not info-overload, not barren).
3. How is the quality of the research?
The quality of the research is extensive. There are many examples of potential uses for the Metaverse outside of the more well-known examples.
4. How is the quality of the video production?
The quality of the video production is good, the animations of the slides times up perfectly with the audio.
5. Is the video engaging and interesting?
The video is engaging and interesting even without short video clips as there is a certain level of movement onscreen with slide animations, and the slides are aesthetically pleasing in their graphic design.
6. Is the team work evident?
Teamwork is evident as only two members are in this group, so one likely did one portion while the other read the script for the audio portion of the video.
7. Is the video appropriate to the audience?
The video is appropriate for the audience as it delves into many different aspects of the topic that would be well understood by industry professionals. The short version is suitable for the general public, but may be a bit too advanced for children.
Part II: Learning Journal
Overall, this course has taught me a lot about the importance of teamwork. Before this course, I was often the student that would choose to work alone if given the option on group projects, simply because I enjoy working on things at my own pace and making all of the decisions on work I submit. This course has revealed the importance of teamwork, not only in school settings, but also in the workforce. I learned a lot from the OLI Modules about how to be a helpful teammate, as well as how to understand my own communication needs.
I am really happy with the team I ended up with. We all get along really well and have similar senses of humor, so our meetings are never dull. We make working on projects fun, and we each communicate effectively and contribute our fair share. I will miss our weekly meetings since our next course does not have group work until the final, and I hope the four of us will still communicate often. Next time, the only thing I can recommend to make collaboration more effective is by creating formal meeting agendas prior to our meeting time. We got all of our work done, but a portion would also be spent on deciding what to do next. None of us had time constraints to adhere to, so we did not really mind spending extra time in the meetings, but should we have a deadline in the future, we can be more meticulous about our pre-meeting planning.
Comments
Post a Comment