Reading Response #5

Michael Chui’s transcript, The disruptive power of collaboration: An interview with Clay Shirky, provides insight into the author and professors’ view of how social media impacts traditions. Shirky’s wide-range discussion identifies the challenges of technological collaboration, which include, “sharing, supply and demand, and creating success from failure”.

Shirky offers a balance of both the benefits of collaborating while highlighting the downside or disruption in several examples. While elaborating on “sharing changes everything, two options are explored. The essence of the first example describes a group’s role or effort to create a product. Each person makes a contribution to the original design to solve the problem and “make it work”. The second example or suggestion describes a completed project or idea that has been created without restrictions, but made available to all-shared.

As most people know, sharing fosters fairness. What happens when ideas or projects become successful? Who owns them? Shirky, offers an explanation, in his topic, “upending supply and demand”. Suggesting that value is diminished when a product shared, he aptly states “abundance breaks more things than scarcity”. Where are the lines drawn? In Hollis Phelps’ essay on plagiarism, he proclaims, “real scholarship places a value on uniqueness and novelty”.

Zizek, plagiarism and the lowering of expectations, by Hollis Phelps states his opinion and support of scholar, Slavoj Zizek. In his essay, Phelps’ esteems a scholar who was accused of plagiarism. Throughout the essay, the defense of Zizek, echoes the claims of Shirky’s claims of disruptive power. This account implies that information is so abundant that there is no original source. As discussed in Big Data, authors Mayer-Schonberger &Cukier (2013) “to be sure, subject-area experts won’t die out,this transforms the way we value knowledge” (p.142).

Phelps’ excuse, “the collective production of knowledge, networks of information” and Shirky’s “sharing changes everything” introduces some of the challenges of the digital age. While it is obvious that we are in the digital age, plagiarism cannot be tolerated. There is opportunity to reference and cite works by others, after all, the digital age has created the platform to do so. Since being newly introduced to digital scholarship, my thoughts are, how could Zizek’s act of plagiarism have occurred?

I submit there are consequences and repercussions for breaking laws however there will undoubtedly be more interest in previous works written by Zizek or any author as a result of controversy. In recent years there have been other writers with works in the arts and sciences that have been accused of plagiarism. Now that digital scholars are also included in acts of plagiarism, I am somewhat convinced that such missteps may possibly be a way to gain attention to these works. Although unintentional, there can be an upside or secondary benefits. I have not done the research, and will do so at a later date, however, it would be interesting to find out the impact on sales, online views, etc. of Zizek’s previous works since being exposed of plagiarizing another’s works.

References

Chui, M. (2014). The disruptive power of collaboration: An interview with Clay Shirky. Insights & Publications. Retreived from: http://www.mckinsey.com/insight/

Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Phelps, H. (2014). Zizek, plagiarism and the lowering of expectations (essay). Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from : https://www.highered.com/

Book Review

Big Data authors Victor Mayer-Schonberger and Kenneth Cukier’s collaboration received great accolades such as National Bestseller, Financial Times Business Book of the Year Finalist, rave reviews from Wall Street Journal, Forbes.com and more. A software developer, teacher, lawyer and industry expert, Mayer-Schonberger is a professor of Internet Governance and Regulation at the Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University. Big Data is one of several books he has authored. Co-author, Kenneth Cukier, is data editor of The Economist, a magazine subscribed to by industry greats such as Dr. Eric E. Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Google and cofounder of Flickr, Stewart Butterfield. Cukier, a respected technology and business expert, has worked internationally for more than a decade. Together, both have a second collaboration, Learning with Big Data: The Future of Education.

Mayer-Schonberger and Cukier, compare and contrast the benefits and challenges of big data throughout the book. It is obvious that “big data” is here to stay, but when did the changes occur? Could we have seen it coming? How could this have happened so fast? Should we be concerned with the “what versus the why”? These are just a few questions the writers deal with in Big Data. The book is a manual or guide to inform the readers of the transformation and perhaps the psychological effects of big data in our society.

Each chapter offers historical examples of how data was processed, highlighting the limitations and restrictions, at the same time the progresses the reader to the current state of affairs. The anthology-like accounts of historical figures as well as technology trailblazers provide readers with a vantage point for comparison. For example, in chapter 2, the process of conducting the census of the citizens of Britain was “both costly and time consuming (page 21), King William I did not live to see the completion of the work he commissioned in 1086. Thus, the evolution of random sampling, by John Graunt, during the time of the London plague became an “alternative method to collecting and analyzing the full dataset” just over 300 years ago. Progression to big data, Google Flu Trends does not use random sampling, but rather Internet search queries in the US to predict the spread of the flu.

Beyond the technical audience, the information shared in this book offers insightful ways to understand the evolution, value, risks and implications of big data. In my view, the sequence of the work reflects the old yet preserves the human factor. Each topic suggests the advantages of big data and warns “our ‘fast thinking’ mode is in for an extensive and lasting reality check”, (page 64). While emphasizing the need to embrace the transformation, there is also acknowledgement that there is still a need for human intuition. The authors write, “there is an essential role for people”, (page 196). Data is in competition with itself and the amount of data is growing fast.

In conclusion, Mayer-Schonberger and Curiek have a clear understanding of the times, the impact of data or “datafication” on the sciences, education, business, society and the way we process information. This book is structured so that chapters and topics can be studied independently and as a whole. Although very comprehensive, the authors have created a reference book of sorts for the digital age. Big Data is relevant with straightforward examples of the progress of data and is not loaded with statistical jargon. Much like the views of their colleagues, these authors’ write, “the future must remain something we can shape to our own design. If it does not, big data will have perverted the very essence of humanity: rational thought and free choice” (page 193).

References

Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

Literary Review

In 2014, more than 7 million people signed up for coverage under the Affordable Care Act of 2010.  This implementation was an epic health as well as political reform.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) tout coverage for the uninsured. A subset of those uninsured is young adults, primarily between the ages of 18 and 29 (some reports range 18-34). Author, Toni P. Miles provides a comprehensive look at the Act and associated gaps as it relates to young adults before and after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. In Chapter 7, “Young Adults” (pg. 153-165), Health Care Reform and Disparities: History, Hype and Hope, Miles shares, “to develop an accurate picture of the health care system, we need to hear what they have to say”. In particular, to correct disparities and inequities, Miles writes “health care access inequities are a fact of life for adults aged 19-29”. The author focuses on the disparities and inequity faced by the uninsured prior to the Affordable Care Act. During the framing of the Affordable Care Act, the writer warns of the need for more advocacies for young adults in ‘the transition from dependent to independent” with regards to health care coverage.

While Miles’ 2012 book describes disparities and inequities of the uninsured young adults, in Media Versus Individual Frames and Horizontal Knowledge Gaps: A Study of the 2010 Health Care Reform Debate Online”, primarily highlights various types of media coverage of the Affordable Care Act with content to include partisan and non-partisan sources while evaluating the effects on the public opinion. Without a doubt, most everyone agrees, health care coverage is necessary, however in this survey takes a look at the media impact related to the Act. Since many people rely on media (social and television) for information, the opinions of the public are targets in political agendas. Much of the surveyed audience was considered the “young invincible”, ranging in age from 18-34, while the other age groups were also surveyed. Overwhelming the consumers with information does not ensure in depth knowledge and/or understanding of the overall message. The survey included the choice of news or media outlets, as well as social networks. The overarching finding is that information characterized by the media and how information is stored by an individual can lead to knowledge gaps. With the introduction of 24-hour television and social media, many of the myths and fears surrounding health care reform were perpetuated by these sources.

One might ask, “who cares?”. It is important to note, while many surveys were conducted to gain the public buy-in of the Affordable Care Act, there were still a large group-uninsured health “young invincible”-who needed to be reached. Selvam, (2013) writes in Modern Healthcare, “The Social Media Scene: Helping the Uninsured log on so they can sign up”, states with large populations of uninsured, like Texas and California, utilized social media as “virtual classrooms”. These virtual classrooms allowed citizens with questions, “have virtual town-hall style meetings” and provided easy ways for organizers to blast information about costs, eligibility and information required to sign up”. Online advertisements targeted women, young adults and families. Outreach is challenging and requires a lot of work and dedication to ensure everyone reached. In addition, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were used to reach the large population of young adults.

Yet more innovative ways to attract 18-34 year olds dubbed “young invincibles” is discussed in Julia Brown’s special report for Managed Health Care Executive, her article “4 Ways to Attract Young Invincibles”. The overall goal of this special highlights many forms of social media, such as YouTube, SnapChat, hip-hop radio advertisements and text messaging. These are primarily focused on initiating young adult enrollment in healthcare plans and offering innovative products. Four (4) ways to engage uninsured or to attract plan members included creation of new web-based health care products, appealing to ethnic groups within the population, use of social media-(YouTube, videos, texting, etc.) and the benefits-coverage is financially sound. This article also offers a perspective that a lot of education was/is required to bring awareness of financial help available to comply with the Affordable Care Act. As with any new legislation, reform or change, there will be opposition. One advertisement encouraging young adults to opt out of health care enrollment reached an epic number of viewers due to the movie-like content. This author demonstrates the creativity involved to raise awareness and offers suggestions to think outside the box to attract the young to obtain health coverage.

 

Citations

Atkins, D.J., Lau, T.Y., & Wang, K. (2014). Media versus individual frames and horizontal knowledge gaps: A study of the 2010 health care reform debate online. Electronic News, volume 8 (1), 30-48. Retrieved from http://enx.sagepub.com/ doi: 10.1177/1931243114524419

 

Brown, J. (2014, February). Special Report. 4 Ways to attract young invincible. Managed Healthcare Executive

 

Miles, T.P. (2012). Health care reform and disparities: History, hype and hope. Retrieved from: http://newman.richmond.edu:2249/ehost/detail/detail?sid=f17fa325-be44-43e6-8120-73baf15bc969%40sessionmgr4005&vid=0&hid=4212&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=nlebk&AN=774491

 

Selvam, A. (2014). The social media scene: Helping the uninsured log on so they can sign up. Modern Healthcare 10/28/2013, Vol. 43(43), 26

Reading Response #4

“Big data: are we making a big mistake?” describes the adage, “garbage in, garbage out” of years gone by. The author warns of the unreliability of big data and urges the inclusion of traditional methods to produce insightful answers. In several examples, Tim Harford explains the woes of “big data” indicating they are cheap and yield a collage of datapoints collected for disparate purposes”. In other words, the mistake is made when data, mined from various sources does not provide accurate results.
“Big data: are we making a big mistake?” Offers a clear analysis of the impact and influence data has on society. Overwhelmingly, we tend to rely on information that can is quickly accessible versus data that has been thoroughly researched. Terminology such as verification and confirmation, are no longer relevant since the emergence or “obsession” with big data.
The influences of the internet, data and iconic companies like Google and Facebook are massive transformations in society. It is difficult for most users (Internet, Google, etc.) to discern when the changes occurred.
In “What is ‘Evil’ to Google?”, Google has self-righteously purported its own agenda as an “official public policy”. The author depicts the company as a trailblazer of sorts, creating its own standards for “good” while sublimely converting users into believers. Writer, Ian Bogost, expresses how Google has emerged as a leader in technology with a status that leaves little room for competition. Who is challenging Google?
Although Google has several definitions and/or interpretations of the term, there is no doubt we must or will accept whatever definition of “evil” is suggested by this technology giant at any time. Studies like these shed new light on just how much the digital age is/has transformed our moral compass.
“Are We Getting Privacy the Wrong Way Round?” suggests, since the advent of social media sites like Facebook, the definition of privacy has changed. Kieron O’Hara, quotes Mark Zuckerburg’s opinion of privacy which offers “society has moved on and people aren’t interested in it any more”. Much like the other writers, O’Hara too warns of big data and suggests privacy has become a “public good”. O’Hara offers a compromise to the arguments of both the individualists and the communitarians by urging all take responsibility to protect privacy. In other words, being accountable for one’s own privacy is beneficial to society.
Each article highlights the effects of the technological industry on our society. In reality, there are no boundaries to big data. The impact of the digital age has and still affects our morals, how we think and process information. The subtle changes are far reaching and have afforded companies to even manipulate our behaviors. Along the same lines, while the authors provide insight and warnings of big data, no total disregard of the changes is recommended. Bogust, Harford and O’Hara challenges the consumers to consider a balance by streamlining usage, being personally responsible and aware of the amount of personal data made available to and validating information received from the internet.
Works Cited
Bogust, I. (2013, October). What is ‘evil’ to google? The Atlantic, Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/what-is-evil-to-google/280573/
Harford, T. (2014, March). Big data: are we making a big mistake? Financial Times. Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/
O’hara, K. (2013). Are We Getting Privacy the Wrong Way Round? IEEE Internet Computing, 17(4), 89-92. doi: 10.1109/MIC.2013.62

Annotated Bibliographies

Atkins, D.J., Lau, T.Y., & Wang, K. (2014). Media versus individual frames and horizontal knowledge gaps: A study of the 2010 health care reform debate online. Retrieved from http://enx.sagepub.com/ Electronic News, doi: 10.1177/1931243114524419

This work primarily highlights various types of media coverage of the Affordable Care Act with content to include partisan and non-partisan sources while evaluating the effects on the public opinion. Since many people rely on media (social and television) for information, the opinions of the public are targets in political agendas. Overwhelming the consumers with information does not ensure in depth knowledge and/or understanding of the overall message. This report was selected to provide statistical information of media attempts for and/or against health care reform. Much of the surveyed audience was considered the “young invincible”, ranging in age from 18-34, while the other age groups were also surveyed. The survey included the choice of news or media outlets, as well as social networks. The overarching finding is that information characterized by the media and how information is stored by an individual can lead to knowledge gaps. With the introduction of 24-hour television and social media, many of the myths and fears surrounding health care reform were perpetuated by these sources.

Barry, C. L., Baum, L., Fowler, E. F., Gollust, S.E., & Niederdeeppe, J., (2014). Report on health reform implementation, first impressions: geographic variation in media messages during the first phase of ACA implementation. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 39. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2813756. 2014 by Duke University Press

This article describes the essence of media advertisement, whether in health insurance products, political and or news coverage in geographical regions. The data gathered during this research suggests if media sources are not considered when evaluating the outcomes-favorable or less than favorable results of enrollment, political climates/attitudes could be misleading. Researchers believe “perceptions of US health care options, costs and quality” could be adversely affected in regions that currently have geographic variations. The article offers a several aspects of media influences on the public by quantifying the amount of advertisements for example within regions of a single state. Opinions are formed not only by what you here, but may also be limited to information in your locality.

 

Brown, J. (2014, February). Special Report. 4 Ways to attract young invincible. Managed Healthcare Executive

This article describes the use social media outreach efforts to attract 18-34 year olds dubbed “young invincibles”. The overall goal of this special highlights many forms of social media, such as YouTube, SnapChat, hip-hop radio advertisements and text messaging. These are primarily focused on initiating young adult enrollment in healthcare plans and offering innovative products. Four (4) ways to engage uninsured or to attract plan members included creation of new web-based health care products, appealing to ethnic groups within the population, use of social media-(YouTube, videos, texting, etc.) and the benefits-coverage is financially sound. This article also offers a perspective that a lot of education was/is required to bring awareness of financial help available to comply with the Affordable Care Act. As with any new legislation, reform or change, there will be opposition. One advertisement encouraging young adults to opt out of health care enrollment reached an epic number of viewers due to the movie-like content. This article was selected to demonstrate the creativity involved to raise awareness of the need for health coverage.

Miles, T.P. (2012). Health care reform and disparities: History, hype and hope. Retrieved from: http://newman.richmond.edu:2249/ehost/detail/detail?sid=f17fa325-be44-43e6-8120-73baf15bc969%40sessionmgr4005&vid=0&hid=4212&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=nlebk&AN=774491

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) touts coverage for the uninsured. A subset of those uninsured is young adults, primarily between the ages of 18 and 29 (some reports range 18-34). Dr. Miles provides a comprehensive look at the Act and associated gaps. Chapter 7, “Young Adults” advises that young people must be included in the conversation at the planning phase. The information in the chapter and throughout the book offers real-life accounts of the challenges faced by uninsured young people that have not been included mainstream social media outlets. After closer inspection of the efforts for health care reform, there is the high cost and who will win, lose or draw. I must admit, my opinions about the Act was, that there would be healthcare for ALL. However, it is negligent to think that everyone has a clear understanding of the benefits that will be afforded to participants, and even more so if the groups are not in the conversation to frame the law.

Selvam, A. (2014). The social media scene: Helping the uninsured log on so they can sign up. Modern Healthcare 10/28/2013, Vol. 43(43), 26.

I selected this article to give you an idea about the impact of social media on the uninsured and the Affordable Care Act to illustrate the creativity of advocates in the campaign for healthcare reform. Many states with large populations of uninsured, like Texas and California, utilized social media as “virtual classrooms”. These virtual classrooms assist citizens with questions, “have virtual town-hall style meeting and to provide and easy way for organizers to blast information about costs, eligibility and information required to sign up”. Online advertisements target women, young adults and families. Outreach is challenging and requires a lot of work and dedication to ensure everyone reached.

Schwartz, M. & Young, K. (2014). Healthy, wealth and wise: How corporate power shaped affordable care act. New Labor Forum, 23(2), 30-40. doi: 10.1177/10095796014527828. Retrieved from http://nlf.sagepub.com

I selected this article as it demonstrates the two aspects of public opinion as it relates to health care reform. The writers suggest, “while paublic opinion may have played some role in getting healthcare reform on the policy agenda, it was marginal to the policymaking process itself”. Most would agree that everyone needs health care coverage nevertheless, this did not occur with Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Despite the fact that reform was intended for the public, reform was shaped by corporations and lobbyists (those with special interests). Missing the mark, though millions are eligible for did benefit from coverage, there are still gaps. A universal health plan would have undoubtedly provided healthcare for ALL.

Why Do Uninsured Hate Obamacare [Opinion]. (2004, January) Investor’s Business Daily, pA14.1p

An opposing view of the Act is outlined in this article from the “Investor’s Business Daily”. The article written in January 2014 is largely dependent upon data from the Kaiser Family Foundation, which does not have an optimistic view the impact that will be made by the Act. Citing expensive plans and the inability of the law to impose taxes, the data compiled is less than one month after the programs were launched and two months prior to the March 31st deadline is somewhat disparaging. I submit a rush to judgment is being made and the overall article underestimates the American people when it comes to taking advantage of opportunities to manage and/or improve their health. The other concern in this article is the term “hate” being used. I do not comprehend the rationale of the writers to take pride by encouraging people to remain uninsured.

DSL: Redlining Richmond

As a native of Richmond, this project was of particular interest to me.  The data gathered on and/or about Richmond neighborhoods in the 1930’s revealed trends that hold true today.  Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) compiled information to determine mortgage risks.  The data included type of land, buildings/structures, inhabitants (by ethnicity), sustainability of the neighborhoods over time, and more.  Having some familiarity with the areas, I was curious to find out the influence of the Detrimental Influences and Clarifying Remarks for Richmond neighborhoods of the 1930’s. Unfortunately, the areas described with detrimental influences, did indeed decline as predicted.

While it is true the lenders must do their due diligence to protect investments, consideration should be given to any adverse effects.  As documented throughout the project, data collected and decisions made to lend to certain groups of people living in certain sectors while overlooking  other communities, had a direct impact on the decline of neighborhoods.  Fair Lending could have sustained some areas if given an opportunity. Primarily, Negros living in neighborhoods that were less than desirable to the lenders were unfairly discriminated against.  Areas were described  negatively-flat land, stucco houses unfavorable for Richmond, etc.  Not only race, but merely having a home near an asylum or factory were factors in determining the worth of a home and/or lending options available.  Many of these practices, while not “mapped”, continue today. The issues with the housing market in 2008-2010 exposed lenders’ practices of discrimination at the other end of the spectrum. Home buyers were given funds, but overcharged forging federal investigations and overhauls in lending practices.

 

 

Reading Response #3

“Does Digital Scholarship Have a Future?” by Edward L. Ayers describes the culture of academic scholars and encourages “alignment with the core purpose of higher education of our time”. Ayers pleads with colleagues to recognize and embrace the digital age. As a scholar himself, he identifies with the educators and acknowledges there is no incentive or pressure to change since there has been no serious impact on publications since digital innovation. As Ripley, points out in the Introduction in “Knowledge Among Men: Introduction”, scholars are “…too attenuated and refined…”. However, Ayers expounds on the benefits and explains scholarly conversations can be enhanced by the digital age throughout his article. Ayers also urges colleagues to sustain relevance, compete for digital funding and argues there is no real threat to the original print format.

In contrast to Ayers’ analysis of the “monographic culture”, Ripley also pleads for a reformation of sorts. He explains the “talent to be illiterate” and suggests returning to a more primitive style of learning. Ripley observed scholar’s description of man’s knowledge reduced to “objects of thought”.  An advocate for change, he proposes interests in learning can be achieved when all options are considered. Ripley proclaims touching and feeling objects inspire learning, “not reading about them” (objects). He is critical of scholars and suggests they do not “give of themselves or search out and grasp the nettle of truth”-inflexible. Obtaining knowledge should take the form of anything that appeals to the senses.

Both writers suggests to their audiences to engage in the arts and sciences, have scholarly conversations, pursue all options to “increase and diffuse knowledge”. In other words, there is still a large (student) audience that can benefit from all learning experiences.  To the scholars and layman alike, come out and play-show flexibility, embrace change or become outsourced/out-funded and irrelevant.

 

Ayers, E., 2013. Does the digital scholarship have a future?.

                EDUCAUSE Review, 48, no.4

Ripley, S. (1966). Introduction. In Knowledge Among Men: Eleven essays on science, culture and society commemorating the 200th anniversary of the birth of James Smithson

(pp. 7-11). Washington, DC: Simon and Schuster

Reading Response #2

Both writers of “Why the Smart Reading Device of the Future May Be Paper” by Keim and “Why The Brain Prefers Paper” by Jabr, echo paper is not extinct and why the brain indeed prefers paper. The key components identified in research on paper versus electronic text cited by the writers is the level of comprehension and attention, knowing versus memorizing what has been read. A self-described digital native, Keim, explains “…my brain better absorbs what’s presented on paper”. Studies have also revealed cognitive, emotional as well as “personal preference” factors by readers who use paper versus e-readers or computers.

These articles depict much of the same studies however both writers present the information in a different manner. Jabr overwhelms with scientific research and rationales while Keim offers a balance, research and personal experiences. Keim both agrees with and cites much of the research that Jabr has included in his work, “when I need to read deeply…I still turn to paper”. At the same time Keim admits “…I have the same feeling when I am reading a screen that’s not connected to the internet… “. Additional sources Keim produces include the advantages of electronic texts for readers with disabilities and suggests interfacing paper and screen.

As mentioned earlier, each writer proclaims, paper will be sustained and presented arguments based on available research or studies. Each author writes paper has its advantages, but also acknowledges the technological advances and enhancements for readers.

 

References

Keim, B. (n.d.). Why The Smart Reading Device May Be Paper. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2014/05/reading-on-screen-versus-paper/

Jabr, F. (2013). Why the Brain Prefers Paper. Scientific American, 309(5), 48-53. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican1113-48

 

 

Reflections

The Real:
I have an assignment to prepare a 2-3 page essay to “reflect my thinking process, puzzling out my question on a TED Talk or topic of my choice” for Knowledge Management course. The instructors have given us various tools, citation websites, places to store work in cyberspace to recoup now and for perhaps, years to come, text books, websites and links, tips and tidbits, all to aid us (students) in determining a single research question to write a final paper.
Talk about information overload, I not only will need to write a paper, but am being advised to explore websites other than Google, Ask.com, Mapquest, bing, etc. I must dig a little deeper and explore things that really don’t interest me and somehow relate them to something that probably should! What a challenge!
Prior to starting this cohort, I was forced to find another storage application for files and pictures because I used all the free space on my Google Drive and iCloud accounts. I did not want to buy more storage as the apps suggested-each time I would log onto a phone or tablet, I would be forced to go to settings or prevented from taking pictures, recording videos or uploading a file due to the lack of storage! Well, I created a DropBox account, started the class and received confirmation that this (DropBox) was indeed a good choice.
Before I move along, I have got to figure out which additional websites I quickly signed up for during class may in fact have the same functionality as other sites. Are Dropbox, Refworks and OneDrive all the same? (Maybe not-I can’t imagine storing photos on Refworks but further investigation is required.) How many places should I store my assignments? Will I somehow maximize storage on one site before the other? How will I remember where I put what? Should all documents be placed in each location? I have got to somehow manage this digital debacle before getting to my research question and all the criteria related to it! Whew!
The Real, continues:
As I try to determine a research topic, it has become increasingly challenging to simply follow instructions. I consider my achievements-I am an administrator of several hospital programs and own a small business, worked closely with a relative assisting him through the process of becoming a professional athlete, etc. Oh, and I can walk and chew gum! Am I just not comprehending-did I wait too long to return to school? I have picked the minds of the instructors and classmates alike or apart? What am I missing?
A thought or two went through my mind, then I discovered, these were fleeting thoughts, because I know longer remembered them when I returned to my seat or discussed other possible options! These thoughts could have perhaps been good research questions, but how could I expound on them to meet the criteria for this assignment? Leadership: good idea? Not if I can’t associate it with information! Ms. Ludovico really gave me some good information. Thank you! Classmates suggested “write about what you know”, “maybe you are just like me…”, and so on. Thank you! My response was, “I think I am in need of a Pepsi or a nap!” Here it is, Sunday afternoon! I am a bit overwhelmed and still wondering what I should do, what research question(s) to ask (myself). How can I start broad then focus on a single question, idea or theme and later develop a research proposal.
Now that my lamenting is out of the way (a full page), I am able to move along! Here goes!
What Is the (Research) Question?
Health Care and the Affordable Care Act: Gain or Loss? Politics aside, was this historical healthcare reformation a win, lose or draw?
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , now the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also dubbed Obama Care, enacted in 2010 included ten (10) titles. Two of which are most notable, Title I and Title II, were considered key provisions, and were challenged to the U.S. Supreme Court level. Titles I, Quality, Affordable Health Care for All Americans also known as individual mandate and Title II, The Role of Public Programs, known as Medicaid expansion. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled to uphold individual mandate while Medicaid expansion is voluntary with states.
How were opinions of the ACA or Obama Care shaped by the media-social and television? Did we receive all of the facts? What was all the controversy really about? Was it worth a government shutdown? After the computer glitches, deadlines and lawsuits, what is the status of health care coverage today? What is the future of healthcare?
The ACA sparked public debates by all and everyone seemed to become subject matter experts on health care, tax penalties and Medicaid laws and expansion. I will offer a comprehensive assessment of the impact on the insured, health care providers and facilities and public attitude eight (8) months later. As public opinion was focused on the first two titles, however, to offer a fair review of the Act, the other titles must be considered and are listed for reference. These are Title III, Improving the Quality and Efficiency of Health Care; Title IV, Prevention of Chronic Disease and Improving Public Health; Title V, Health Care Workforce; Title VI, Transparency and Program Integrity; Title VII, Improving Access to Innovative Medical Therapies; Title VIII, Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act (CLASS Act); Title IX, Revenue Provisions and Title X, Reauthorization of Indian Health Care Improvement Act.
No doubt, access, deliver and cost of health care in America needed to be reformed. The ACA created both social and political controversy on all fronts. Ordinary citizens, became engaged in politics, screaming “give me back my country”, “what about the children”, expressing fears of Obamacare but liking the Affordable Care Act”. Has he reform been a success or failure? Is it too early to determine?

KM 2014

Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants; The Digital Native: A Profitable Myth

“Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” by Marc Prensky overwhelmingly suggests Digital Immigrants, primarily educators, set aside traditional methods to accommodate the perceived learning styles of the Digital Natives. The all-or-nothing push for change indeed offers little research in support of a paradigm shift. As Jathen Sadowski implies in his article, “The Digital Native: A Profitable Myth”, Prensky offers no evidence-based research supporting claims of such a transformation or that there is really a “great divide”. Sadowski continues, “they assume a natural, generational baseline when one really doesn’t necessarily exist”.
While Prensky’s argument brings an awareness that both groups Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants perhaps exist, he does not give much credence to each group learning from the other. Rather, he preaches conformity to the Digital Immigrants and screams, “Just Do It”.
The profitability of change is inevitable, however, Prensky’s challenges to his audience who reject his concepts yields to that of a tyrant. Prensky personally takes on educators who are undoubtedly trailblazers, but are dismissed as “dumb and lazy”. He does not, however present any “thought experiments” or rants to the Digital Natives to embrace the traditional methods.
I certainly fall into Prensky’s category of Digital Immigrant, but would prefer to enjoy the benefits of “the old and the new” as I (without scientific research) am confident would be the sentiments of Digital Natives if given the opportunity to participate in the discussions.

References
http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf