If interested, read on.
Q: What is the purpose of this blog?
A: The purpose of this blog is to explain the fundamentals of quantum mechanics to a person that hasn't had the background or time to study the subject in depth.
Q: Who is the imagined audience(s) of this blog?
A: The audience I have in mind for this blog, as the title suggests, is those who are curious about the subject itself. When a lot of people hear the words "quantum" mechanics, their eyes roll back in their heads. In addition to attempting to teach people who are curious about the subject, I would like to get people who may not care one bit about quantum mechanics interested in the subject at some level.
Q: Have my posts matched up with my purpose/audience? What/who might I be overlooking in defining my purpose/audience this way?
A: I believe my current content has aligned with my desires for this blog for the most part, but I do feel as though I might alienate people that quantum mechanics bores to tears. Some people just don't care about how things work, and there's no getting around that. The people that are curious about how things work, but aren't interested in quantum mechanics are the audience I need to work harder to draw in.
Q: What can I do to encourage more reader participation with my blog?
A: I have considered putting polls on this blog to receive feedback. I still don't have a decent channel for receiving input on what content I should have. While I encourage comments, I think I will try to keep up on having frequent polls.
Q: How can I expand my audience in this class? Outside of this class?
A: I should have more content relating to other people in this class' blogs. I have only done this once or twice, but as the subject of this blog is critical to nearly every other scientific field, I should be able to include a wider range of subject material in my posts. I have been posting my blog posts to facebook in hopes that people will spread the word of this blog to those that they feel might be interested. I should find a way to redirect people on other blogs to my content so that I can get more feedback.
Q: How would I characterize the tone of my blog?
A: The tone of this blog in intended to be inviting and conversational. I don't want my readers to feel as though they are sitting in on a physics lecture. If that's what everyone was interested in doing, all of my readers would be physics students. I want to convey quantum mechanics a rich and exciting subject, not a burden to learn.
Q: What do I hope to get out of writing this blog?
A: I believe that you only understand material as well as you can teach it. By creating this blog, I hope to expand my knowledge of the subject. Quantum mechanics is a difficult concept. By condensing the material into easy understood posts, it broadens my understanding. I love to talk about physics, so I get an enjoyment out of trying to convey physical principles to people that care.
Q: What would I like others to get out of it?
A: I would like my readers to be able to read each post and come out with an increased understanding of the concepts behind the subject. I hope that my readers can go on to read other information in related fields and understand how quantum mechanics underlies other subjects. As part of my content deals with current research, I hope that my readers can take what they've learned and share with other people they know that are curious about the subject.
Q: What are the strengths of my blog/my blogging?
A: Since physics is my passion, I believe that I know this material very well. I have been a physics teaching assistant for several years now, and believe this has helped prepare me for this attempt at teaching a subject that I am very passionate about and have spent a long time studying.
Q: What are the weaknesses?
A: I am very passionate about this subject, and because of this, I may overlook some subject material because I'm so used to it. I'm trying to take a step back from the material and put things on simple terms, but I may not always do this, and I encourage my readers to comment if you feel like my explanations are fuzzy or confusing.
Q: Have I used a deficit model in my writing, or something else? How would I know?
A: I suppose I have in some posts, but the nature of my target audience lends itself naturally to a partially deficit model-y presentation. I am assuming my readers are interested in the subject, and have essentially been unloading what I know about the topics I've presented. I haven't seen too many comments asking questions or discussing the material, so this leads me to believe I've been taking too much of a deficit approach to my blog.
Q: How have I characterized (implicitly or explicitly) science, engineering, and/or technology in my blog?
A: I have characterized the subject as a fascinating subject. I want people to see what I see in quantum mechanics - that the universe is exceptionally strange and interesting. I think this is independent of practical applications, but I realize others may not care about the way things work if there are no applications.
Q: How have I characterized myself?
A: I am a student of physics, and employed as an applied mathematician. I enjoy my work and my studies in physics have naturally benefited my career. My choice of study, however, is because physics is what I find most fascinating. I believe I have characterized myself as someone passionate enough about physics to want to spread what I know to others.
Now for the self evaluation.
Now for the self evaluation.
- A (4). I have put a ton of effort into my posts. I have written more than the requirements for sure, and my posts have a lot of content in them. I'm constantly changing things and trying to get more feedback on things to do and change.
- A (4). I believe it has been written in a good way. My approach to discussing this topic hasn't been done in quite the way I'm attempting, at least, not that I have found. If I have any grammatical errors, I try to correct them quickly.
- A/B (3.5). I have very specific content in mind, and I've been mostly sticking to it. My perspectives aren't exactly new (I'm just discussing old research, but I believe my approach to the blog is fresh and original. I seek public engagement, but have not gotten too much input. I think my grade in this category is between an A and a B because I'm apparently not doing enough in for public engagement.
- B (3). I've been commenting frequently and getting comments back, but I don't think I'm going out of the way to get them or any other forms of inter-blog communication.
- B (3). I have linked to other blogs and websites, I haven't really been doing anything outside of the classroom and blogging community (aside from a random wikipedia link or two.), so I think B is fair.
- A(4) I definitely use a TON of multimedia content. I have had posts with relevant videos from you tube, and have made many images myself. I'm trying to show things in slightly different ways than usual and use analogies to explain complicated physics content. My future posts will have much more videos that I have created, it should be cool. I may be taking some risks with my content, because the topics I'm discussing are very challenging, and my images could just flop.
No comments:
Post a Comment