ENGL 2003: Introduction to Poetry

1. My process in trying to find material to add or edit, that was not taken already, or was of interest, was difficult. Most topics were already topics were already taken when I searched up and took a look on the OpenLab. One of my main topics was originally Anti-Poetry, but it was taken by other students. I wanted to focus on a topic not heard of or elaborated on. My second choice was to write about Rod Taylor, because of his poem: Dakota: October, 1822: Hunkpapa Warrior, which held dramatic irony, and had political and/or social message not widely heard or recognized. I could not find who was the different poems. So I decided to switch to another poet. The poet that I have decided to write the wikipedia post, was an unlikely and unrecognized poet. Bruce Lee was my choice, and had coincidently came to one of his poems online. The poems was read by Shannon Lee his daughter, it was what I was looking for. His poetry is untraditional or anti-poetic, which covered one of original topics, but now focused on Bruce Lee. The wikipedia page had almost everything but his poetry, so I decided to go for it.
2. When I tried posting something on his page, I had to create an account, then later I found out that I need to edit at least 10, and wait 4 days before I can contribute to the Lee’s legacy. This because the page is semi-secure.
3. Finding out more stuff about someone who inspires me, was a good experience. The wikipedia editing was certainly something new.
4. The frustrating thing was to edit 10 pages and what 4 days in order to post or edit  something on the page.
5. Paper assignments are more argumentative or just meant to be read by a less wider audience (probably professor only). Wikipedia is a more neutral point just general information for a world wide audience/viewers.

1) The process i went through when adding materials to the wikipedia assignment was very terrifying because i have never done anything like this before; therefore i wasnt quiet sure how it would all turn out. It was hard figuring out how to cite certain things it took me a while to put everything together.

2) I am not sure what has happened to my addition it is still there and i dont believe there has been any comments.

3) The part i enjoy about this experience is probably the fact that i got the chance to contribute to wikipedia which i would never have done on my own.

4) The research was somewhat difficult, finding reliable sources and posting onto the site itself. I can be very nervous about having other people judge my work.

5) I think i prefer my typical course paper because it is not out there for the whole world to see. I rather have my professor give me his/her opinion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-poetry

The Wikipedia assignment was very different and challenging. Writing and posting information on the web for millions to see was very troubling. I did not find a lot of information about my stub and writing a factual article with little information is not easy. I would of preferred a class-assignment that dealt with the chapter or topic from the book. Expressing my opinion or concerns about the stub was another challenge. I found it difficult to use the Wikipedia editing page; citing and format was very different.  Overall, I learned the different techniques used to navigate the library’s research data base and Wikipedia.

This assignment was quite unusual to me and definitely a step away from research reports. It was slightly difficult because information was hard to find on many of the presented topics. It also presented the challenge of what is appropriate to write and what is not. This was an interesting teaching method and I did learn something from it. Although as Ashley stated in class, it would have been interesting to hear about other student’s topics and what they learned as well.  I have never used Wikipedia to do papers but I am content with the fact that I was able to add information and potentially help someone else. I appreciate the creativity of this assignment, although I am unsure as to how well I accomplished its goals. My page is still currently standing but I am sure that with better hands on technical assistance I could have done better.

This is the link to my poetry stub:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymock_poets

I expanded the Wikipedia Monorhyme stub. The process I went through to add material to the Wikipedia page consisted of researching for a detailed definition of the poetic term. In addition, I also had to learn how to properly expand a Wikipedia page. The content added to my page remained untouched.

What I found difficult about this assignment was trying to find the material on the poetic term. There wasn’t much information available other than the definition and where the poetic tool was utilized. Also, it was difficult to understand how this assignment is relevant to the Introduction to Poetry course. Yes, each individual student was introduced to a poetic term or author, however, it was not discussed in class. I believe that this assignment may have been more interesting if we actually explored some of the topics in class rather than discussing how to complete the assignment for several weeks. I also think that the class may have been more receptive to this assignment if it were linked to the relevance of poetry (i.e. discuss the topics researched and refer it to some of the poems/material discussed in class).

This assignment is not very different from my other projects due to the fact that I had to research a topic and write a detailed, factual report. However, in other courses, students were given the opportunity to see what their fellow classmates researched by giving a brief summary (3-5min) in class.

Upon hearing about this project, I was excited and sure I’d do a great job. Well to be honest, I learned a lot through this assignment. I had completely over estimated what it takes to write an article on Wikipedia. I didn’t know take into account the knowledge, the articulation needed and the confidence those who write articles on Wikipedia need to write their articles.

Ultimately, I didn’t like this assignment for this particular English course. This assignment would be perfect for a general English Comp. 2 course where the students would write on a topic of their choice because it really helps a writer be objective and expand on a topic. I loved the idea of students teaching others. It helps students with building confidence in our knowledge. Often times a student will know material but feel unsure but this assignment helps with that aspect.

I was disappointed with how little information I found on my poem. It was frustrating because I wanted to given an adequate amount of information and I feel I didn’t that though I did add to the stub. I expanded on the poem Insensiblity by Wilfred Owens.

As much as I did not like the wikipedia assignment. I cannot say that I did not learn anything. I learned quite a bit on the Psalm 100. I also learned about wikipedia and how it functions. Although I was editting or expanding a wiki stub I feel like I did provide information for others to view. I thought that the assignment was challenging in that references had to be solid. I felt like when we had the opportunity to look at our classmates first draft and comment on it that the exercise was not really taken seriously. I probably would not have ever done this exercise if it was not required but I never back down from a challenge.

here is my link to Psalm 100 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_100