Analysis of Crowd Sourcing

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Keeping in mind the themes discussed by McConigal in Reality is Broken, what topic interests you and what is the research question you hope to research for your annotated bibliography?

For example, McGonigal argues, “there will be many more challenges for us to tackle together as crowds” (242).

A research topic to consider could be “crowd sourcing in the future”. And a research question to help focus could be: What kinds of problems will be solved by crowd sourcing in the future?

This can be further refined to what kind of educational problems will be solved by crowd sourcing?

What is your research question and how will you respond to the following sections in the annotations that you create for McGonigal? Comment on one or two of your classmates’ research topics.

NOTE: I have colored the sentences to guide you. You don’t need to color them. You also don’t need to post the five points.

1.A summary of the theme/purpose of the source,

2.an evaluation of the author’s background or authority,

3.a comment on the intended audience,

4.a comparison of this source to a previously cited source, and

5.an explanation of how the source helps define, complicate, or clarify the topic.

For example:

Research question: Why are students reluctant to participate in group activities?

In “Stronger Social Connectivity” McGonigal mentions how video games have helped create a stronger connection with family, friends, and strangers. She argues that we seek these connections which are not available in our “disconnected” reality.

McGonigal is not only a prolific writer but also a respected researcher, famous for promoting the benefit of gaming concepts in society. This chapter is from Reality is Broken, which is written for the general public, but in it, she has referred to many rigorous studies.

According to Docksai, “her book should be a fascinating addition to the home libraries of tech enthusiasts, sociologists, and anyone interested in how society and technology are shaping each other. (Links to an external site.)Despite not having an academic audience, her ideas have been received well by researchers and those who study future trends.

I plan to refer to this chapter to create a context of the assumption that young people enjoy working in groups. I might also refer to later chapters that discuss the need to use game-related strategies to benefit society. I will then suggest how group work needs to be structured to encourage students to collaborate.

Write your research question.

Copy and paste the citation and annotation for the peer-reviewed journal article. Add the URL for the article to provide easy access.

1) A summary of the theme/purpose of the source, 2) an evaluation of the author’s background or authority, 3) a comment on the intended audience, 4) a comparison of this source to a previously cited source, and 5) an explanation of how the source helps define, complicate, or clarify the topic.

Please see the sample to write draft one. what topic interests you and what is the research question you hope to research for your annotated bibliography? Think about one topic that relate to McConigal in Reality is Broken.

Annotated Bibliography: Group Work in the Classroom (First Draft)

Research Question: Why are college students reluctant to participate in group activities?

King, Paul E., and Ralph R. Behnke. “Problems Associated with Evaluating Student Performance in Groups.” College Teaching, vol. 53, no. 2, Spring 2005, pp. 57–61. EBSCOhost, doi:10.3200/CTCH.53.2.57-61.

After analyzing trends in group work in education, the authors discuss the challenges of grading group activities and provide practical suggestions. Both the authors are professors of Communication Studies at Texas Christian University.

College and University professors would benefit from this article, published fifteen years ago. Where McGonigal discusses the benefits of group work, these authors focus on how to evaluate such work in the classroom. Despite the article being a bit dated, the information is still relevant in classrooms today.

One suggestion about not including a grade for every activity seems interesting. I will use this article as a key source of information to respond to my research topic.

McGonigal, Jane. Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. Penguin. 2011

In “Stronger Social Connectivity” McGonigal mentions how video games have helped create a stronger connection with family, friends, and strangers. She argues that we seek these connections, not available in our “disconnected” reality.

McGonigal is not only a prolific writer but also a respected researcher, famous for promoting the benefit of gaming concepts in society. This chapter is from Reality is Broken, which is written for the general public, but in it, she has referred to many rigorous studies.

According to Docksai, “her book should be a fascinating addition to the home libraries of tech enthusiasts, sociologists, and anyone interested in how society and technology are shaping each other. Despite not having an academic audience, her ideas have been received well by researchers and those who study future trends.

I plan to refer to this chapter to create a context of the assumption that young people enjoy working in groups. I might also refer to later chapters that discuss the need to use game-related strategies to benefit society. I will then suggest how group work needs to be structured to encourage students to collaborate.

“What Are the Challenges of Group Work and How Can I Address Them? – Eberly Center – Carnegie Mellon University.” What Are the Challenges of Group Work and How Can I Address Them? – Eberly Center – Carnegie Mellon University, Carnegie Mellon University,

1) A summary of the theme/purpose of the source, 2) an evaluation of the author’s background or authority, 3) a comment on the intended audience, 4) a comparison of this source to a previously cited source, and 5) an explanation of how the source helps define, complicate, or clarify the topic.

[Order Now]

Analysis of Crowd Sourcing

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.