‘The Checks P.2’

In the process of working on my Beta I am required to engage in other students’ digital artefacts – providing them with feedback, suggestions and potential sources; essentially creating a feedback loop. For this task I must engage with three students’ Beta posts and share what I believe they did well, what they could improve on, provide any additional sources that might be relevant to their DA and then suggest any potential directions they could take their research.

 

Comment 1

comment1

My first comment was on Emma’s digital artefact, which is looking at the underrepresentation of females in video games. I first of all wanted to share the aspects of her Beta video/ blog she did well such as the structure of her video and her ability to write a very engaging yet concise post – basing this feedback on the marking criteria. I then shared with her a suggestion she could take with her digital artefact based on multiple option games and how although they may have gendered options, the females are never presented on the cover. Finally, I closed off the comment by doing my own research and providing Emma with two additional sources that may be beneficial to her DA.

 

 

comment3

Comment 2

My second comment was on Mackenzie’s digital artefact where she is exploring nostalgia in video games and its power, looking specifically at the evolution of Mario and how Nintendo uses nostalgia. First of all, I commented on the positive aspects of her Beta based on the marking criteria, including her structure of her video and her preparation and planning of her remaining blog posts. Next, I wanted to contribute to her project by sharing a suggestion that she look not only at those who do feel nostalgia in video games but also those who really don’t experience that feeling and learn what they think of remakes. In closing up my comment I shared an article I found in doing some research on her topic and commented on the interesting takeaway I had.

 

 

Comment 3

comment2

My final comment was on Jack’s Beta, which is looking at Microtransactions in sports gaming. Maintaining the same structure as my other comments, I first started off by sharing positive feedback based on the marking criteria, which included his ability to iterate based on change and feedback loops and great engagement levels. I then suggested he potentially look into microtransactions specifically in relation to young children and those under 18. Once again, I ended my comment providing Jack with some sources I believe to be valuable to his research.

 

 

After going through this process once before for the Pitches, I was slightly less hesitant to get started on commenting on my peers’ work. If there’s one thing that didn’t change it was my concern that not being a “gamer” was going to hold me back again from making critical comments. I discovered in this subject that sometimes being a “non-gamer” can actually work to my advantage so I tried to make the most of this and engage in the content I was being presented as much as possible – which I didn’t find to be too difficult as the work of my peers’ was really interesting and executed well. I did find however, that coming up with suggestions for other students proves to be quite difficult when I do feel I can lack extensive knowledge in some areas.

 

When providing feedback to my peers I wanted to ensure I was providing insightful feedback and contributing relevant sources and additional information for their digital artefact. I created a structure I would follow when writing each comment in order to cover all requirements.

Providing the feedback to other students not only gave them valuable information and useful insights but also taught me a lot about critical reflection. Being the one critically analysing someone’s work and providing feedback puts you in your tutors’ perspective and allows you to learn how to take a step back and reflect on your own work whilst looking at someone else’s. I found that my own knowledge on the gaming industry and concepts within it were growing and learned that research is an important aspect when in this position – in order to truly engage with the posts, I needed to conduct extensive research to understand the topic and provide insightful feedback.

 

In comparison to my last round of comments I believe I improved as I had gone through the process once before and knew what to expect and how to engage with my peers’ work. One aspect I could potentially improve on in my comments is keeping them concise. This would not only be beneficial to me and cut down my word count but also make it easier on the person I’m commenting on. I believe this stems from my limited knowledge in some particular aspects of gaming which therefore leads me to another way I could improve – which is to conduct even further research on each individuals’ topic in order to give more concise yet useful feedback.

 

I believe my contributions were overall very useful for each DA, as I provided both positive feedback, additional sources and suggestions for each Beta. When writing each comment, I wanted to engage in a convivial manner, remaining mindful of how I presented my feedback so there were no misinterpretations or concerns with the tone of my message.

Overall I was really impressed with the work of my peers and am excited to see everyones final DA!

 

 

 

 

 

One thought on “‘The Checks P.2’

Leave a Reply to nicolepap07 Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s