Brandon+Fong

= = =Community Building & Maintenance=


 * October 17th 2006**
 * Finished first //Analysis and Reflection// component


 * November 6th 2006**
 * Created YouTube and added content
 * Inserted table of contents, picture, and header for Accessibility
 * Added table of contents for Google Maps
 * Inserted table of contents to Pay by Touch


 * November 9th, 2006**
 * Added additional content to //YouTube//; expanded significantly upon economical and political implications as well as adding usability goals, more to consider, conclusion, and references.
 * //Data Mining –// inserted table of contents, adjusted header size, added dividers, and adjusted spacing
 * //E-Commerce –// inserted table of contents


 * November 16th, 2006**
 * Finished second //Analysis and Reflection// component


 * November 19th, 2006**
 * Created Biometrics and added content to page


 * November 20th, 2006**
 * Contributed the following to //Artificial Intelligence://
 * Changed headers, font, removed *, and sourced picture
 * Created CAVE and added the page content
 * Inserted //References// to //Biometrics//
 * Added //Collaboration Systems within business// component to //Collaboration Software//
 * Car Fascination – changed the spacing, it looked odd and is now more aesthetically pleasing


 * November 21st, 2006**
 * Added //Artificial Systems// component to //Artificial Intelligence//
 * Added more content to //Biometrics// – //Biometrics on campus & Sacrificing Convenience//

> >
 * December 8th, 2006**
 * Made grammatical change to edit of //Biometrics//
 * Hyper-linked //CAVE// and //Collaborative Software// to //CSCW// – since both are relevant to the discussed topic
 * Inserted //CCIT Celebrities// to //Facebook//
 * Added //Revenue Model// component to //Facebook//
 * Finished final //Analysis and Reflection//
 * Hyperlinked //Pay-by-touch// to Biometrics - note when i was editing
 * Proofread and added final //Usability Goals// component to Biometrics - Note: when I was editing the biometrics page ([|raooft]) was as well, somhoe her component got deleted we were both editing, she didn't re-add it so I did, please give credit to her.

>
 * Original Content created for:**
 * YouTube
 * Biometrics
 * CAVE

=Analysis and Reflection=

**First Post**
My previous experience with Wikispaces was in C//C//T 205. I found it a useful experience which taught me the meaning of contributing to an online community. Through various postings, maintenance, and further contributions the class as a community created a sense of ever expanding knowledge. It is this understanding of "ever expanding knowledge" which applies to a collaborative learning environment. I expect the members of CCT333 to contribute interesting topics which will enlighten the class as a whole. I am particular interested in how the topics discussed in class will transcend to the topics created here. As an experienced participant I will contribute my understanding and skills throughout the course of the wikis. I would also like to help my fellow classmates as many of them are new to the idea of a "wikis" and what it entails - my skills and understanding are at the disposal of the community. Ultimately, I hope to be an effective contributor to CCT333's "ever expanding knowledge."

**Second Post**
I am particularly fascinated by technological revelations which alter human interaction and ultimately the "user experience." Consider my posting regarding the famous YouTube. I chose this topic since it is an excellent example of an evolved person-to-person interaction through innovations of the internet. The concept of sharing information with people is not a new idea. Consider the Wikis which we are using now, it's purpose is to share knowledge, likewise is the purpose of YouTube except with media - which is arguably knowledge. Videos offer channels of encompassing beliefs, opinions, humor, and culture. People from all over the globe can now have their 15 minutes of fame in the form of a video blog, video edit, music video, or anything else posted. We have come to identify YouTube as a source of information regarding multi-media whether it be for the activity of entertainment, humor, or education. Nonetheless, the user experience that encompasses the internet has fundamentally changed via YouTube. Editing and contribution is handled by what I consider interesting as well if a page needs more content. If for example I am viewing a page and it lacks direction, topic, flow, or aesthetics I will simply add some work to better fulfill the page's coherence.

It is natural for people to add their thoughts by editing or re-arranging existing work. However, it should be done in a constructive manner. People should not delete other work or criticize, the wikis' intent is building knowledge and thus that is what people should do. Furthermore, people who add their ideas or opinions should thoroughly research the topic before doing so, or else you get a lot of redundant and inaccurate information. My work has received some edit, I am glad it has since I have obviously chosen a topic which insights interest and discussion. For the most part those who have edited my work add meaningful constructive thought. Additions come as either content or general community maintenance - either I appreciate. Some users however may feel offended towards additions, perhaps feeling that it out shines their work or it wasn't necessary, my answer to this, “research your topic well before posting,” or simply take it positively. Additions, whether in the form of edits or beautification is necessary for the wikis to grow and prosper and thus should be understood by all.

**Third Post**
Last year I had the opportunity to participate in the CCT205 Wiki and I can't help but contrast this year's experience to lasts. After completing the CCT205 Wikis I felt a strong sense of collaborative learning, I had in many ways learned for the first time how effective wikis truly are. Through my personal edits and to creation of pages I felt my contributions as whole affected the well being of the CCT205 Wikis. However, my experience in CCT205 is somewhat different. This year I felt most postings were done for the simple sake of posting something up. For example, through various readings it seems I was simply reading someone elses "quotations" of someone's elses cited material. While this material has been properly sourced, there is no input from the author of their reflection or views - it is simply a post of something already known. Thus the component of personal reflection or contribution I expect from the Wikis environment is completely lacking. Postings should be well thought out prior to posting and when done so should be put into the context of the course. Too many times have I read a page which simply talked about the topic with complete disregard to the user experience - if i wanted to learn more about "topics" I would go to Wikipedia, from CCT205 Wikis I expect material relevant to course content. My views have changed considerably. Wikis present a place to share create, share, and maintain knowledge. The success of the Wikis is a collective effort and can only be met those willing to contribute valuable knowledge. I think it is this understanding which has changed over the course of the Wikis. Although I do not deny the value the Wikis has provided, since I have learned a lot more and for the most part it is everything I wanted and expected, yet I think this issue should be addressed.

Regarding the cited problems mentioned above I believe a more stringent guideline in respect to what topics should be covered would be better – Perhaps a list of potential topics or even a specific guideline. An instruction of some sort would allow the content of the Wikis to stay on course and avoid redundant issues. It is also worthy to consider a page cap to avoid content hogging. Often enough people will start a topic and simply write one paragraph on it and expect people to add to it to get user involvement. While this is great, the person who creates it gets most of the credit vs the people who simply added to their idea. This also brings on the issue of how meaningful the information people actually add to their pages. I recommend perhaps an administrator, a student who can be voted or a community of people to ensure quality content. This would also make it much easier for marking, as I can imagine reading through hundreds of posting is hard and tiring.

Overall the CCT333 Wikis was productive in its cause. Students participated once again into creating a successful Wiki through personal content and wikis maintenance. For me one of the best experiences I received from Wikis is learning about topics I previously had no idea about. For example, one page talked about PayTouch, an excellent idea and inherently ties to Biometrics, something of great interest to me. Expanding knowledge is of great value especially in our knowledge-driven-society. In context to Wikis, they are an important tool in facilitiating knowledge, look at Wikipedia (the most actively used encyclopedia source int he world). While CCT333 is not on a scale comparible to Wikipedia it does offer the same concept but applicable into a classroom context. Applying this internet technology added emmense value to the CCIT program and further demonstrates its goal in equiping students with the necassary assets in the realm of [|Communication Culture Information Technologies].

User Technical Recommendations
I personally found that when typing large pages it was often a nuisance to scroll back up to the tool bar to make a font change in size or style. Incorporating a toolbar which follows the movements of the user (like Microsoft Word) would increase the overall utility of the interface. Furthermore the actual functionality regarding text capabilities is severely limited. Allowing the user better customizability in terms of text size, color, font, paragraph formats, is greatly needed. The writing component of the Wikis should mirror all the capabilities that users have come to expect from Word Processing, ignoring this severely hampers user experience goals. Perhaps the most “Should Have” requirement is a spell check. I know for a fact I am not the only one exporting their edits into word before final posting. It appears that the administrators/creators should sit down with their users to collect better requirements and prioritize them to MOSCOW to deliver a better Wikispace – although for the most part it does the job.