Archive for the ‘Reading Reviews’ Category

  • World View

    Date: 2009.10.09 | Category: Reading Reviews, Unit SSK12 | Response: 0

    Reading Review
    Unit: SSK12
    Week: 5 (in Week 6)
    Date: 09 October 2009

    Book title: Communication Between Cultures
    Chapter title: World View
    Author: Larry A. Samovar and Richard E. Porter
    Publication Date: 2004

    Thesis:
    Samovar and Porter immediately aim to acknowledge the importance of worldviews and to illustrate how worldviews are fundamental to way we perceive the world; how it is “colored, shaped, arranged according to personal cultural perceptions” (2004, 85).

    Main points:
    1. A definition of worldview
    2. The importance of worldviews in shaping our understanding and our perception of the world.
    3. A recognition that worldviews are so fundamental to our perception that people cannot see any other way of thinking when they are unaware of the concept of worldview.
    4. A series of examples illustrating how understanding the worldview of culture can help to understand the perceptions of the world for that culture why members of that culture think or act the way they do.

    Review:
    There are entire books dedicated to the concept of worldviews. In one chapter, Samovar and Porter are able to give a compact and concise treatise of the importance worldviews have on our perceptions of the world. They use examples of worldviews generally associated to different cultures in order to demonstrate how they affect the way members of that culture think and behave. Their work is easy to read and follow, with ample support from experts in the field of worldviews and sociology.

    Reference:
    Samovar, Larry A., and Richard E. Porter. 2004. World View. In Communication Between Cultures. 5th ed. 85-86. Belmont, California: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

  • Life on the screen

    Date: 2009.10.08 | Category: Reading Reviews, Unit SSK12 | Response: 0

    Reading Review
    Unit: SSK12
    Week: 1-5 (in Week 6)
    Date: 08 October 2009

    Book title: Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet
    Chapter title: Introduction: Identity in the Age of the Internet
    Author: Sherry Turkle
    Publication Date: 1995

    Thesis:
    Turkle details how the computer has changed our understanding of the self and how this understanding has shifted from the modern concept of computational calculation to the postmodern concept of simulation.

    Main points:
    1. The fragmented self illustrated in the MUD (multi-user domains)
    2. Lessons learned regarding the fragment self from the great French Postmodernist philosophers.
    3. Culture of change embodied in the shift from computational calculation to simulation

    Review:
    I enjoyed the analogy Turkle creates using the multiple windows of a computer to explain the postmodern understanding of self. The postmodern theory of self is that of a fragmented one. The computer, especially for Turkle in the concept of the MUD (multi-user domains) on the internet, embodies the postmodern theory of the fragmented self through its many windows and multiple live and identities one can have in these separate online windows. This book was written in 1995 and so, I did feel that computer and internet related content sounded dated, but nevertheless the concepts Turkle puts forward are still valid.

    Reference:
    Turkle, Sherry. 1995. Introduction: Identity in the Age of the Internet. In Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. 9-26. New York: Simon and Schuster.

  • Review Sample

    Date: 2009.08.31 | Category: Reading Reviews | Response: 0

    Reading Review
    Unit: <Unit Code>
    Week: <Week Number>
    Date: <Date>

    Book title: <Book or Reading Reviewed>
    Chapter title: <Chapter title>
    Author: <Author’s name>
    Publication Date: <Published date>

    Thesis:
    <Write thesis or argument here>

    Main points:
    <Write main points here>

    Review:
    <Write reflective and critical comment>

    Koral Ward (Tutor) says,

    For the Review section, follow the instructions – give full referencing details, then do the review in the 3 parts asked for: Thesis. Main Points. Critical Reflection. Make it clear which part of the review is which and try not to mix them.

    Reference: <Full referencing detail>