Task 6 - More about "Interactivity"

This post is based on the article "Interactivity: a concept explication" by Spiro Kiousis.

In overall Kiousis seems to have taken investigation fo interactivity really seriously. I liked his way of Although it might also be affected by his abstract where he says that in his view interactivity has both media and psychological factor.

Like a correct metaanalysis, Kiousis gives an overview of previous articles and definitions about interactivity. He also uses several thoughts and theory from Jensens article that we read for task 5. His way of working and analysis is really interesting, for later understanding he explains visually and puts together 3 dimensions: technology, communication and user perception. Later in the article he builds his theory on the same graphic.


Kousis finds it important to consider both computer mediated and non-computer mediated communication. It seems to him that several researchers consider too much on technological tools that are used for communication and that help to fill the criteria that they have set for "interactivity".
In article conclusion it's said that interactivity could be defined as the degree to which a communication technology can create a mediated environment in which participants can communicate (one-to-one, one-to-many, and many- to-many) both synchronously and asynchronously and participate in reciprocal message exchanges (third-order dependency). 

I find it interesting that Kiousis also explains user perception because it's really subjective and not easy to measure. But I agree it's important and while the article started with searching the definition mostly form psychological and media point of view those who actually take part in action are important.
As the graphical picture above already gives all the important terms of Kiousis definition, I will not start to name them once more.


Like said above, Kiuosis tries to build together one stronger theory that would fit several previous definitions under it. For me it seems a logical way, often researchers look at the things too narrowly and a metaanalysis helps to take most important details and sew them together into a big picture.



References: 
Kiousis, S. (2002) "Interactivity: a concept explication", New Media & Society, 4(3): 355–383.

Task 5 - Interactivity, finding the true definition?!

This post is based on the article "‘Interactivity’ Tracking a New Concept in Media and Communication Studies" by Jens F. Jensen.
Jensen's article is long explaining article, giving an overview of the background of "Interactivity" definitions. I am always a critical person, so I ask - why he wrote that he will also give a new possibility to define the term - when all he did for me seems like he put the different theories together. And he has now a lot more information than those researchers he citates. But as he didn't still use any social network examples I started to think when was the article written - 1998 it seems. It's more than 10 years ago!


Like he says "Interactivity" comes from the word "Interaction" which means different things depending on what is one's background in scientific field. It was the most important thing for me in this article - I started to truly think how I take the word and term "interaction" really self-explanatory, and have never thought about how physics or neuroscientists see it, or if they even use it. 


The 3-dimensional model that Jensen gives at the end fits well in the world we know today. I would also say that other researchers who had their theories also thought them really well depending on the information they had, especially Heeter in 1989, this really surprised me. Although in her table she also used media tools, she also explained the change of interaction and communication channels that will change. And there wasn't even Internet yet!


Jensen takes into consideration 3 different variables that help to understand the depth of interaction and interactivity

• Conversational interactivity
• Registrational interactivity
• Selective interactivity

Interactivity cube - 
not Jensen's but the one meant for 
children to play and understand 
the meaning of different sides connecting 
and influencing others.

Before I haven't read some newer versions of scientifically trying to prove the meaning or theory of "interactivity" the one Jensen gives with his conclusion, seems to be working one.

The picture on the right is a toy for baby's. It's name is "Interactivity cube". I think it shows really well, how different sides influence each other and are connected. And I know that children growing up today, will have the touch of it much more than we did on 80's. With different tools (I mena internet tools, tv tools, all kinds of technological wonders) we, the people, will be able to find more and more needs that we didn't know we even had.

Task3 NIE - comparison of study plans

Last week I wrote how I made plans for my semester and chose the subjects to register in. This week I took a look on other students ways to plan their semester.

I chose some of the students I personally know and some randomly, so that I could hopefully see different things.

Jakob
Valeria
Maarja
Ottavio
Maris S

All of their schedules and especially descriptions of making their study plans are really different. Starting from Jakob, who has designed a really cool and enjoyable visual overview of his studyplan and how different elements were drawn from each other.
Two students (Maarja and Maris) have said that they needed to plan their studies in Estonia while actually being abroad most of the semester, this gives them different perspective of choosing the subjects and preferring online courses to those that have seminars for example every week and it would be compulsory to take part of them.
Maris seems to be different from the others also because she is not studying IMKE and she just needed to take 2 courses, but needed online ones so she could be in Prague while taking them. This certainly narrowed her choice making.
In overall I think that as we have all been studying in different universities, at least for 3 years now (I guess some of the first course IMKE master students might suit in this) it's not so much planning or problematic to register and plan the semester.

It would be nice if all of us would be really structurized and have strong plans of their subjects and views of what they want. But it's reality that most of the students first choose the subjects they really want and then also concentrate on the curriculum to make sure that they would fulfill all the requirements.
While writing Task 2 I started to think that would it be actually useful to teach students on how to plan their semester. Yes, we are all grown-ups and should know how to handle our duties, but what if there are really easy and creative ways to be able to handle all the school things and also remember homework. But many students form IMKE also have to consider often work duties that might come first eve if their interests would prefer some IMKE courses.

Google seems to be the tool center that everybody use. It's no surprise, as it allows to have many needed things in the same place (although the power that Google has is enormous - but this is already different subject :P).

Conclusion
My main critic looking at these plans, is that they are all made after all the registering and semester planning has been done. I am sure that most of the students started to think now how they would have handed better their semester study plans while actually doing it.
I really liked two visuals from Jakob and Valeria, they really do say much more than words. But at the same time Maarja has written really detailed overview, that could probably taken as an example how a student should handle his studies.

Task 2 NIE - How I should schedule my semester

This is my third year doing IMKE which means that I have to concentrate on getting the necessary amount of credit points – but also covering all needed modules in certain amount.

I had to consider what courses are availabe and complementary for me depending on IMKE 2008 curriculum.

Because last 3 years I have been working for a company in a position where it was really hard to do real timescheduling – many quick things came in several times a day and it was my responsibility to cover them. I am not really good at timescheduling anymore. I do those things that are burning already, and at the last minute.

Overall I use different tools to remember things I have to do.

Google tools – Google Calendar (it's good that IMKE schedule is also in Google calendar now, that allowed to copy it to my own calendar). All together I have 5 different calendars – personal, IMKE, work, team, to-do. I have managed to come up with my own system how to keep track of them.

With several calendars I use reminders with SMS and Email. For example with IMKE and personal calendar.

Google Bookmarks. I have also used other bookmarking tools before. Althought with most of them synchronizing can be done easily, I have still lost important bookmarks when changing computers. And I have had to do it several times this year for example. Therefore I planned now in September to keep at least all IMKE related bookmarks in Google Bookmarks.

Google mail. As I use Google calendar and some reminders, then Google mail is the central place that brings everything together.

As a phone I use Iphone and also it's calendar tht has been syncronized with iCal that again has been syncronized with Google calendar as well.

At the same time I am also kind of old-school and sometimes I need to see things in real, with handwritten in my real bookcalendar. I also tend to remember things much better that I write down with my hand. Otherwise I tend to forget tasks or even forget to check onine what tasks I needed to do – and doing those that I do remember currently.

I created a mindmap of how I scheduled my things for this semester. I have to be honest to say that I am taking week by week and know the basic things I have to manage every month, to be able to get as many needed subjects as possible.