BCM325 Digital Artefact Report: A Series of Essay Videos on Educational Holography for Lecture attendance improvement

As part of the Future Cultures (BCM325) subject, I have been developing a digital artefact (DA) addressing a future challenge throughout the Autumn semester. Initially inspired by the holographic counterpart singers performed in the opening ceremony of an e-sport event, my project has pivoted around holography’s potential usage in improving lecture attendance of regional campus students. Employing a 3-time scale development model, I divided my DA into 3 stages of construction, which refer to the short-term future (5-10 years), mid-term (20-30 years), and long-term (50 years)

(You can find my digital artefact presentation at the end of this post or click the embedded links if you would like to watch right away)

Continue reading BCM325 Digital Artefact Report: A Series of Essay Videos on Educational Holography for Lecture attendance improvement

BCM325 Reflection 2: Swimming in the Flood of tweets

As proposed in my previous reflection on live-tweeting, I began interacting (following, retweeting, liking) with more friends and paying more attention to online discussions on Twitter in this second phase of weekly screenings. However, it was not until week 9 that I could pre-write tweets based on background research of films.

Continue reading BCM325 Reflection 2: Swimming in the Flood of tweets

Peer-Review: A Vicarious (Mutual) Learning Process in the Role of a Feedback Provider

Throughout the Future Cultures (BCM325) subject, I have often questioned myself about the purpose of writing reflections on my role as a feedback producer of my peers’ presentations. While feedback receipt generates a critical self-reflection (Nicol et al. 2014: 102), which plays a cardinal role in the higher education independent learning environment (Nicol et al. 2014: 113), feedback provision appears to hold little reflective values. I used to ponder that feedback provision was a non-reciprocal process, which only benefited my peers’ (the receivers) performances and somehow, my tutor’s (the main feedback producer) workload share. Hence, I found commenting on my classmates’ projects time-consuming. 

However, my perspective changed in this second round of peer-commenting on Oliva’s, Jessica’s and Susie’s beta presentations of digital artefacts (DA). By employing dual roles as a reader and a researcher, I felt that I could suggest further research directions, enrich my friends’ justifications for method usage and concept development, and improve their DA’s utility in turn. Compared to the previous commenting round, this time, I eschew echoing already preexisting feedback by not reading the beta posts’ comment sections beforehand.  

Continue reading Peer-Review: A Vicarious (Mutual) Learning Process in the Role of a Feedback Provider

BCM325 Beta Presentation: Holographic Footages for the Digital Artefact?


In this video, I have included scenes of 3D holographic images I made to illustrate my imagined three-time scales development of educational holography. Prior to this presentation, I had collected feedback from a wide range of channels, including comments on my pitch, a survey, informal chats with friends and people at the MakerSpace and Unishop, as well as done a self-experiment to build my operational prototype. I would like to send my special thanks to all of the wonderful people who supported and helped me with the project.

Continue reading BCM325 Beta Presentation: Holographic Footages for the Digital Artefact?

BCM325 Reflection on My Feeback For Other Students’ Digital Artefact Pitches

As part of the BCM325 subject, I was assigned to comment on three digital artifacts (DA) amid the themes of futures cultures. Overall, I was impressed with my friends’ innovative thinking, and I tried my best to identify their strengths and weaknesses based on the criteria of the subject’s first assignment (please ignore my careless typos as I was in a rush for meeting deadlines), as well as suggested ways to improve their future DAs. During the process of giving feedback, I found myself spending much time considering how to comment constructively. Speaking an emotive mother tongue, I am aware that my careless word usage can result in offending people. Also, as I was the second commenter (2 out of 3 posts), I was concerned about repeating the first commenter’s ideas, which can prevent me from recognising unexplored qualities of the pitches.

Continue reading BCM325 Reflection on My Feeback For Other Students’ Digital Artefact Pitches

BCM325 Reflection 1: How I Have Waddled into the Uncharted Waters of Sci-fi Films and Live-Tweeting

Live-tweeting, in particular, and the whole BCM325 subject, in general, are the uncharted waters I have long avoided due to my quite low-tech self and aversion to sci-fi films. As multi-screens (film screen and Twitter screen) demand high levels of divided attention, I was afraid that these screens would distract me from either enjoying the films or engaging in online discussions with my fellows. Contrary to my initial thoughts, live-tweeting indeed compliments my watching experience. These are evident in the below curation of my comments and reactions during five in-class screenings of BCM325, which I regard as the milestones of my first phase in the subject.

Continue reading BCM325 Reflection 1: How I Have Waddled into the Uncharted Waters of Sci-fi Films and Live-Tweeting

BCM325 Pitch: Using Holography in improving lecture attendance of students studying on different UOW campuses

Thinking about technology as a university student, I often wonder how technology can maximise students’ learning experience to assist people’s studies while still complementing human communication. If the live LOL’s 2018 opening performance initiated my idea of enhancing different campuses students’ lecture attendance with holograms, my imaginary end is the Umbrella holographic meeting in Resident Evil.

Continue reading BCM325 Pitch: Using Holography in improving lecture attendance of students studying on different UOW campuses