Below is a mobile phone (mock-up) application of my first assignment (What’s in my bag):
Background and Redesign Process:
In my original version of the “what’s in my bag assignment”, I utilized genially, a program that allows the user to explore and take agency in the content that I was delivering. The learner could click on strategically based hotspots to allow them to choose which of the items they would like to start with, rather than having the traditional way of reading with text on a digital page (Bolter, 2001). Upon reflection of the assignment, I was utilizing an unintentional form of hypertext, allowing the user to jump from different layers of information (Bolter, 2001) and explore at their discretion.
In my transmediation, I’ve thought about going further in this interaction by creating a mock space of what this would look like on a mobile device. Toffler (2007), notes that there is a tidal wave of information each day in the World Wide Web and all we can do is to find ways to organize that data. In this organization, I’ve opted to use the artifact of a mobile application that allows the learner to experience the data visually, through different aural means and to navigate it in a way that utilizes a device that they’re more familiar with. The mobile application follows in line with Bush (1945) summation of utilizing a device that can hold all the information that one would need. In this particular case, the limitless scrolling function and the capability to add more objects as needed make my “what’s in my box” the capability to have different added versions.
The process I have chosen to convert follows the convention that was suggested by the New London Group (1996) in that working lives and private lives are being changed with things being private now being made public and that these life worlds are now a shared experience. In my case, by making it a mobile app with different touch points not just for reading but to also have abilities to purchase objects on my bags through links on sections about my bags and as well as the ability to comment or make suggestions or questions on my padlet page located in my contact page.
Benefits
The benefits of the redesign take into account features learned from Week 1 to Week 7. The mobile application “What’s in My Bag” shows an evolution of the recognition of hypertext in its importance in shaping the way that text flows on a digital screen (Bolter, 2001). The mobile application allows the user to “jump” to sections they feel or would like to go to rather than follow a flow. The application utilizes more hypertext functionalities compared to my previous post on a genially slide. The mobile application also honours teaching to the Net-Generation learners described by Mabrito and Medley (2008), as non-traditional ways to shape the content are included in this application such as being able to communicate your “liking” of this post or the ability to add comments about certain sections. The benefits are to allow the learner not just to read the text, but to be part of the content themselves. 
Challenges:
Just as Mabrito & Medley (2008) pointed out in their thesis, I am not sure I am meeting the challenge of meeting these students. I am still grounded in the more traditional style of education and text and so I’m still looking for ways to make sense of linearity rather than in incorporating a web-based approached in hypertext (Bolter, 2001). I can see this in the way I am still approaching the mobile application with a hierarchy that makes sense to me but unsure if it meets the standard of the Net-Generation learner. I am also requiring a bit more knowledge and incorporation of civic pluralism into the content as suggested by the New London Group (1996). In this sense, the learners can interact with me but not with others. The engagement is limited between the teacher and the learner where there is opportunity to engage other learns within the one field and to be able to learn from each other.
References
Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101-108.
Mabrito, M., & Medley, R. (2008). Why Professor Johnny can’t read: Understanding the net generation’s texts. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(6).
The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review 66(1), 60-92.
Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. Random House.