I organized the cluster into two main groups: people that supported the MFA and those that didn't. Under each there were different bullets affirming the core beliefs of each group and what media they used in order to convey these ideas. I used the cluster in order to capture the essence of the value of writing from each side.
 |
| Hubble Space Telescope. "Hubble Uncovering the Secrets of the Quintuplet Cluster." 07/13/2015 via Flickr. Creative Commons License. |
After reading Chelsea's and Laurence's blog posts I started to evaluate my own cluster. Chelsea's cluster was a lot more succinct in terms of detail compared to my own cluster. Laurence's was a lot simpler but conveyed information in a very easy, readable manner. I liked how Laurence deviated from a lot of the other blog posts and used his own software to make his cluster instead of Coggle. I was trying to think of how I could have organized my own cluster differently but I think I created it in a way that is the most suitable form in order to understand the information, as there are only really two sides to my controversy.
We used the same platform for our clusters! Anyways, I liked the simplicity of your cluster. It was easy to read and made the important feature prominent. I had absolutely no clue what your controversy was through reading the title. After perusing your cluster, I feel a good sense of awareness on your topic. My cluster was a little different, for I broke it down to 4 sub topics per side. Your topics are all interconnected; whereas, mine were assorted to just highlight main areas of the controversy. I really do like the organization of yours. Its easy to read and informative.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a great job with your cluster! I used Coggle too, and I liked the way you kept each line of text short. I feel like I made my cluster too complicated, with too much text to really keep track of what I was trying to say. I think your cluster was very clear, and straight-forward.
ReplyDeleteYour cluster was very well organized! The simplicity of the structure made a lot more sense than mine did. You managed to include a decent amount of facts while still implying some structure to how you planned to write your QRG. I chose to basically write tiny sections of my QRG in my map which is far from efficient.
ReplyDelete