The Rules of the Game

This section outlines the criteria I’ve considered important when writing, recording and editing the assignment.

1. That overall the experience of accessing the site and accessing the work should be interesting and enjoyable.
2. That the content should, at least in part, have some crumbs of originality about it.
3. That it should provide me with a chance to expand my somewhat limited web design skills.
4. That the work should have a number of formal and informal components that should be considered as complementary to the work completed in my web log.
5. That, where applicable, it should be rigorously academic but not stultifying.
6. That the author is indistinguishable from his work.

These points are guiding principles that may be difficult to be objective about (particularly point 1). So I’ve also added some criteria that will provide more structure to the assessment process.

I propose the following:

1. Does the text adequately tie the diverse themes raised in the work together within the restrictions of the chosen media?
2. Are the questions the piece raises important enough to devote the time given to them?
3. Does the work make the best use of current academic and other sources available to the author?
4. Could the work be the basis for further investigation and subsequent studies?

Having read the assessment criteria in the Programme Handbook it is clear that the audio sections fall outside the criteria for academic writing given the role I have assigned them. In addition the Alchemist’s Workshop is in essence a section devoted to the ‘what might have been’ parts of my assignment. I can only argue, that I have attempted to utilise the multi-modal framework to deliver the different layers of my assignment.