Implementation - reflection

Involvement with intended users:
During the implementation phase I did not spend much time with the members of the women's group, asking them to try things out and give feedback. While I fully intended to ask for review and feedback during the evaluation phase, I feel this should have been an ongoing thing.
Feedback would have helped make decisions on how to present the information effectively.

Personal learning:
I found this project very effective for personal learning in the following ways:

• Having a purpose meant that I had to learn things better and more carefully consider shortcomings and consequences. I want people to nefit from what I've done so I made extra effort to be accurate and provide content that is easy to understand.
• Very effective. Creating something for others to learn from enabled me to learn very quickly.
• Use of different intelligences was a good way of maintaining enthusiasm. I also wanted a variety of ways to present information that was at a personal level.
  

Implementation issues - social, environmental, aesthethical

Consolidating the non-technical issues encountered and means taken to address them.

1. Accounts incl. passwords....
   
2. Computing and web 2.0 concepts for inexperienced users...
3. Copyright....
4. Personal security....
5. Data security....
   

Implementation - technical issues

Consolidating the technical issues encountered with the project implementation here:

1. The Quicktime add-on needs to be installed on browsers to play movies. This is not always easy or allowed, depending on restrictions or access. This is an advantage of embedding YouTube or TeacherTube videos but:
2. YouTube and TeacherTube are not playable in certain locations - for example my current place of work does not play YouTube. There are some YouTube videos included in the wiki
   
3. Trying to achieve a balance between quality and file size with screencast videos. They need to be watchable but if they are big they take a long time to upload to the wiki and to load when displaying the page. The quality of some of the screencasts is not as good as I would like and should be redone when time allows. For future reference, I found the YouTube HD option offered by iShowU HD to be a good balance between quality and size. Using the Stomp compression tool applying the Web 800x600 settings reduced the size to be more manageable.
4. Scanned images also can be quite large depending on the scanner software settings. I needed to be careful to reduce he image quality to around 40% - still good enough but also meaning a manageable file size.