When I first noticed your blogs on OU, you were drawing similar pictures to this one. I wasn't quite sure why, then. Perhaps this is a good way to do a perfect essay, but I'm not in that subject area & neither am I in management, thank God.
Who said I could count I see what I expect to see. Or is it deliberate to prevoke a response (no, though the modus operandi with engagement is to make mistakes, to stand correction). Rather it says why in the public (or published) domain I require a second set of eyes to proof read.
Yes, I put these images up a year or so ago. The difference is stumbling onto the zizzy tool Animoto, and having one teenager doing GCSEs, another doing exams and even I had the first written paper I've had to sit in three decades at the end of April. It helps to have a construct that works for you. For one of my three essays I drew a six or seven petalled daisy-thingey and scribbled my arguments and counter-arguments into each. My introducton was short, the conclusion shorter still.
I've also got anything between four andeight months before my next and final module. I'm using this opportunity to back pedal, the beauty of the blog is this is a journey through the contents of my head, I've been there before so can correct, simplify or elaborate.
I found myself in a Twitter conversation with Professor Martin Weller last night as I'm re-reading his book 'The Digital Scholar' (detailed in this blog), adding images and charts and links and further comment, posting into my external blog 'my mind bursts' and alongside this Tweeting both what I wrote and highlights from the book @JJ27VV for this very reason, to seek out feedback. To be corrected or vindicated.
The re-aggitation of my e-learning synapses is an intriguing thing as I feel I can now draw on 2 years of studying with relative ease, and importantly can dip back into where my head has been.
The cheekiest post in this regard is in February 2010 when I criticise academics for quoting themselves, picking out Martin Weller. It still makes me feel uncomfortable, like someone in a Radio or TV interview slipping in 'as I said in my book' I would prefer if their default position is to cite a colleague or if and where they refer to somethign they have written in the past then do so on the basis that the only person who knows what they are talking about is them.
Comments
New comment
But it has 7 petals.....
New comment
When I first noticed your blogs on OU, you were drawing similar pictures to this one. I wasn't quite sure why, then. Perhaps this is a good way to do a perfect essay, but I'm not in that subject area & neither am I in management, thank God.
Thanks for the picture & reason to go with it.
New comment
Who said I could count
I see what I expect to see. Or is it deliberate to prevoke a response (no, though the modus operandi with engagement is to make mistakes, to stand correction). Rather it says why in the public (or published) domain I require a second set of eyes to proof read.
Yes, I put these images up a year or so ago. The difference is stumbling onto the zizzy tool Animoto, and having one teenager doing GCSEs, another doing exams and even I had the first written paper I've had to sit in three decades at the end of April. It helps to have a construct that works for you. For one of my three essays I drew a six or seven petalled daisy-thingey and scribbled my arguments and counter-arguments into each. My introducton was short, the conclusion shorter still.
I've also got anything between four andeight months before my next and final module. I'm using this opportunity to back pedal, the beauty of the blog is this is a journey through the contents of my head, I've been there before so can correct, simplify or elaborate.
I found myself in a Twitter conversation with Professor Martin Weller last night as I'm re-reading his book 'The Digital Scholar' (detailed in this blog), adding images and charts and links and further comment, posting into my external blog 'my mind bursts' and alongside this Tweeting both what I wrote and highlights from the book @JJ27VV for this very reason, to seek out feedback. To be corrected or vindicated.
The re-aggitation of my e-learning synapses is an intriguing thing as I feel I can now draw on 2 years of studying with relative ease, and importantly can dip back into where my head has been.
The cheekiest post in this regard is in February 2010 when I criticise academics for quoting themselves, picking out Martin Weller. It still makes me feel uncomfortable, like someone in a Radio or TV interview slipping in 'as I said in my book' I would prefer if their default position is to cite a colleague or if and where they refer to somethign they have written in the past then do so on the basis that the only person who knows what they are talking about is them.