Rough Draft w/o comments: Berg_Task4_RoughDraft
Rough Draft w/ comments: Berg_Task4_Draft Review by John
I feel that my CARS model was fairly well-developed and successful because of the amount of time I spent and the amount of work I put into it. The rest was, more or less, copy and paste. I do remember writing my CARS model and thinking, “This is amazing, why couldn’t I do this earlier?” I did also get that feeling when working on my Discussion section, which I did in tandem with my CARS model revision. In fact, two of my peers commented that they were well-written and great, so that’s a plus.
My least successful, I feel, was when writing my Future Research. It’s obvious why: I panicked last-minute and cranked out all my final draft revisions before the due date—April 18, 2016—and had to bust out a Future Research section in only 8 minutes. Not too thrilled, but I did it and that is what really matters. I can always revise it, make it better, and get that “Fuck yeah” feeling.
The most useful course concepts I needed to know was the Activity Systems and Activity Theory (both could be classified as the same, but one is slightly different). I used these to analyze my community, as the definition of Activity Systems is literally based on community-driven activity. I also needed to know the parts of the Activity Triangle, mainly the Tools, Motives, and Community. These were extremely useful in finding a focus for research, mainly because analyzing six parts of a triangle for a limited community like Clash of Clans is difficult, especially when there is a minimal amount of rules, division of labor, and subject.
John’s feedback was DIRE to the partial success of my paper. I used his comments fairly quickly as I had no idea where to begin. Granted, he is still a dingus, and his humor made it through the text and irritated me like it usually does… but I used his feedback because it was important to making a successful paper.
Final Draft: Berg_Task4_FinalDraft
Final w/ Revisions: Berg_Task4_Revised