Linking Assignment
Item 1
My link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/markfawdry/2026/01/10/task-1-whats-in-your-bag/
Samuel’s link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/themusicallyinclined/task-1-whats-in-your-bag/
Summary and Reflection
I chose to link my “What’s in your Bag” task to Samuel’s due to the initial similarities I noticed. Both Samuel and I present textual items that reveal the importance we place on staying organized. I also noticed that our bags contained digital and analog texts, prioritizing communication in multiple ways. As I looked closer at our items, I noticed some key differences in our stories. Despite feeling like my bag had too many items, the contents seem minimalist compared to the larger assortment of things in Samuel’s bag. Samuel’s written entry also focused on the bigger picture of how the typical contents of a bag have changed historically. My focus was primarily on my personal story and how the items connected. Even though Samuel and I are both using WordPress, I found it interesting that our blog posts had such different appearances. My post highlighted the written text with straightforward staging, while Samuel’s staging felt more integrated with his written text and cohesively designed.
Both of our written entries prioritize both digital and practical literacies, however Samuel also has an emphasis on musical literacy. I found this interesting because I was originally drawn to Samuel’s entry as I am also a musician, despite the lack of items in my bag as meaningful musical texts. Our posts both demonstrate an importance on the multiliteracies theory, due to our consideration of these items having meaning without any actual written words.
The course being entirely online places constraints on how our tasks can be presented. Providing our theories orally would likely produce a very different communication when compared with our organized and direct written descriptions. Samuel and I both interpreted the instructions in task 1 differently as well. I focused on how different texts told my personal story, whereas Samuel used a more multimodal approach with an emphasis on the historical significance of his items.
Item 2
My link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/markfawdry/2026/01/18/task-3-voice-to-text-task/
Megan’s link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/meganmeshietec540/2026/01/13/task-3-voice-to-text/
Summary and Reflection
When linking my task 3 to Megan’s task 3, I immediately noticed the different tools we used to achieve a similar result. While I used the notes app on my iphone, Megan used a voice-to-text tool called Speechnotes. Her tool was able to capture less punctuation than what I had used, though Speechnotes caught some other conventions more accurately (upper case letters, as an example). Megan and I had vastly different approaches to our storytelling, mine being a personal story from my childhood and hers being a professional story involving teaching students. I found Megan’s story about her lesson idea interesting to read, though it was challenging to follow as it was recorded with voice-to-text. I also found it fascinating that she told a story that had not occurred yet. I would be curious to hear her tell a story about the actual experience compared to the plan she outlined in this assignment.
Megan and I noticed similar things in our reflections, noting the frequent occurrence of run-on sentences and the use of oral storytelling words like “and” and “so”. Megan and I both noticed how deliberately conventions are used when sharing stories in a written form, whereas storytelling orally is more spontaneous and lacks the more coherent organization. Despite both of our blog entries using the same platform (UBC Blogs), our presentations are quite different in terms of visuals. My blog post’s background and text were meant to be effectively read on a mobile device, while her blog post would likely be easier to read on a PC.
Megan and I both compared the different ways in which oral literacies and written literacies can capture the interest of the listener/reader. Megan explains how meaning is still achieved through oral literacy, but in a more natural way that could occur in a conversation. Megan and I both began our posts with an explanation of the assignment, and chose to have our stories appear before the written reflection. This helps further demonstrate the juxtaposition between oral literacies and written literacies.
Item 3
My link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/markfawdry/2026/02/08/task-6-an-emoji-story/
Emily’s link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540edouglass/2026/02/14/task-6-an-emoji-story/
Summary and Reflection
I chose to link my emoji story to Emily’s due to both our similarities in approach and the differences that I wish I had thought of. I noticed that both of us chose emojis based on themes and ideas, rather than literal translations of words. Several words had no matching emojis, so both Emily and I had to broaden our thinking to universal ideas that connected to our stories.
A difference that intrigued me was Emily’s decision to test her emoji story on a real audience. She chose viewers who had watched and not watched the show, and noted the differences in their interpretations. While writing my emoji story, I had an audience in mind, but the idea of that specific audience was abstract rather than actual people I know personally. Emily noticed that viewers who had previously watched the show she translated understood some of the references, whereas I tried to simplify my plot devices so the general public could figure out which movie I was referring to. Emily’s work is more focused on the audience’s ability to interpret her translation, however my work is heavily focused on the actual process of translating written text to emoji.
Despite both of us using UBC Blogs, Emily’s inclusion of references from course materials (specifically Kress, 2005) creates a blog entry that cohesively ties readings to tasks. My blog focused on my experiences translating into emojis, keeping the course themes about meaning making in mind while reflecting. I enjoyed Emily’s emphasis on visual and interpretive literacies, though do worry her work could be inaccessible and confusing to an audience who had not watched her show. Both of our blog entries demonstrate the big ideas from multiliteracies theory, reflecting on the process of using multimodal forms of communicating. Both Emily and I took complex plot elements and simplified them, allowing them to be interpreted in a different mode. My targeted audience was more general than Emily’s, but both tasks serve as meaningful translations.
Item 4
My link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/markfawdry/2026/02/22/task-7-mode-bending/
Jason’s link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/lehuquet540/2026/02/25/task-7-mode-bending/
Summary and Reflection
Jason’s multimodal approach to our mode bending assignment demonstrates incredible creativity and effective meaning communication. Jason took his original “What’s in my Bag?” assignment and used AI to generate a catchy song and animation to go with it. The use of music is an engaging way to communicate meaning with his audience, with the added use of visuals allowing for multiple literacies that can potentially give his communication greater reach and appeal.
Despite both Jason and I leaning on aural modes for this mode bending task, our redesigns differ greatly. My redesign only used an aural mode while Jason’s was multimodal. My redesign was unscripted and cherished the spontaneous nature of communicating meaning through audio, Jason’s redesign was polished and deliberately thought out. His thoughtful prompting and organized presentation starkly contrasts mine. My reflection benefits from my off-the-cuff approach, the messier presentation being authentic and without the use of AI. Jason’s reflection demonstrates his strong understanding of the course readings, standing as a complimentary piece to his thoughtful and creative mode bending.
Using the UBC Blogs authoring tool, Jason and I both embedded media into our blog posts. Jason’s post would likely attract a larger audience with his multimodal presentation. The same platform is being used to make meaning in different ways, showing the versatility of the authoring space. Jason’s post demonstrates the use of several literacies: musical, aural, digital and multimodal. My post uses aural literacy and reflective literacy. Jason’s post is an excellent example of the multiliteracies theory in action. My mode bending task demonstrates how much meaning can be lost when focusing on a singular mode. All in all, our approaches were vastly different from one another but both tasks and reflections serve as excellent examples of the many options we have available to effectively communicate meaning.
Item 5
My link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/markfawdry/2026/03/01/task-8-golden-record-curation-assignment/
Debbie’s link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540debbie/2026/03/12/task-8-golden-record-curation/
Summary and Reflection
I found mine and Debbie’s curated list of 10 songs that best represent humanity to be closely tied in that we both struggled to best represent the vast variety of cultures that showcase our planet. While my bias of familiarity from both North American and European music slipped through more frequently, Debbie curated a more balanced list that represents more cultures. Debbie was able to create a well-rounded list, despite saying she struggled with the same challenge that I did. It is of course likely that Debbie and I come from very different backgrounds, and her perspective on representing a variety of cultures would look different from mine. Her inclusion of Peru, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and China show the wide range represented in her curated list.
Both blog posts were presented with UBC Blogs, but Debbie’s post appears to be more reader friendly than mine. Her bold headings of “Introduction,” “My Selected 10 Pieces,” and “Selection Criteria” create an organized structure that demonstrates her thoughts in an accessible way. My post is slightly different in appearance, preferring a narrative style that offers thoughtful reflection regarding my curated list. The lack of bold headings make the post less accessible for quick navigation and skim reading. This demonstrates the freedom within the UBC Blogs platform to communicate ideas in a variety of ways. Despite our font, background and spacing being the exact same, our posts present very differently from another.
Debbie’s emphasis on both cultural and critical literacies are demonstrated through her belief in representing many cultures and preserving historical events. The literacies I decided to use, personal and experiential, contrast with Debbie’s as they speak more to my personal bias and struggle to properly represent our planet. When curating my list, I felt strongly that I would not be a good representative of our planet for the list, even considering my strong love of music. Her globally aware post versus my introspective one better aligns with the multiliteracies theory. This is due to her post’s ability to reach different backgrounds in terms of meaning making, whereas my post is too individualized. Both posts had the same goals in mind, but our approaches in design and intention lead to many differences within the same assignment and platform.
Item 6
My link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/markfawdry/2026/03/16/task-10-attention-economy/
Bryce’s link: https://blogs.ubc.ca/bryceglendenning/2026/03/15/task-10-attention-economies/
Both mine and Bryce’s reflections on “User Inyerface” are similar in that we immediately noticed misleading design decisions and purposeful use of stressful elements. Bryce and I also noted the deceitful wording, distracting visuals and the multiple methods used to manipulate the user. While we noticed the same techniques from the developer, our reflection varies in our interpretation of those techniques employed. My reflection focuses on my personal frustrations as a user, despite being prepared to be manipulated in the description of the task. Bryce’s reflection focuses on how the design compares to real-world examples, specifically an incident he had with Outlook storage notifications. After deleting multiple emails, Outlook’s storage notification remained unchanged, prompting Bryce to pay for more storage on a different page. We both mention an example of dark pattern use, though mine was specifically about the task’s experience and Bryce connected it to another experience.
With both Bryce and I using UBC Blogs as an authoring tool, Bryce’s work is more structured academically. I certainly use the course readings and theories in my own thoughts, but Bryce specifically quotes and references them. My post, similarly to my other posts in this course, is more personally reflective and concise than the posts of my peers. UBC Blogs has a diverse ability to represent different academic styles, mine being an experience based reflection and Bryce’s following a more essay style structure.
Bryce’s focus on critical and digital literacy is demonstrated by his ability to analyze the game’s deceptive strategies and connect them to other examples of user manipulation. My focus on experiential literacy makes the reading both accessible and relatable for readers. Combining both elements of our writing style would likely make for a very well balanced reflection, favouring both introspection (my post) and the bigger picture (Bryce’s post). Overall, the similarities and differences in our posts show how varied approaches of communication can create meaning in different ways despite being given the same instructions.
