The joys of revision, and throwing me a curveball with the Talk-to method? Who would have thought they had such a thing? Let’s see how well this goes for me. I am very critical about my work and having to be the 3rd person was a bit awkward.
First off, I think using this method is somewhat bias because you are critiquing your work, to be best, to be the worst, and from the professor's point of view. This perspective could work, to improve on critical thinking and just plain outright metacognition. You would tend to get creative with the thought process and at times you question if you are right or wrong? It may be somewhat biased but it does get the mind engaged.
Second, when you pretend to be the professor, that is when the brain juice gets flowing. I mean, they use all sorts of rationale to give unbiased critique, which I have yet to master but all in due time. Despite this, I think this is a good learning process that gives you insight into different perspectives, even though if it may be vicariously looking through the eyes of the professor.
In regards, to my revision, I will give more detail and context to convey how this medium, shapes our daily lives. Also, when giving more context, I will need to include more multimodal to give history on my medium. So, I think giving detail and not so much elaboration, gives the context support to the main idea.
To summarize, using the Talk-to revision method is by far the most challenging for me personally. The creativity, the thought process I had to try to attain to view from many different perspectives but it was fun. But, this is my least favorite in regards to revision methods. On that note, thank you.
Comentários