In this final installment of the Ethnogeography Weblog you are to render your individual impressions of the research project presentations of the Epistemic Field Teams. As well, you are to post any questions you might wish for the EFTs to address. Here are a few queries to inspire your evaluative commentary on the representations:
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not? What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before? How could the presentation have been improved? How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
I encourage you all to be thoughtful and constructive in your comments and, where appropriate, to explore areas of interpretive contiguity, as it were, with your own research. Write away!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
First of all, I would like to compliment the Gangstas on their pimpin’ glittery gun, very nice. Now down to business. The organization of the presentation was a little bit confusing – it jumped around from the actual factual events to the history of terrorism, back to more events, then to globalism, and it was a little bit confusing keeping track of how they all related. I think the information portrayed was valuable, but it could presented in a more cohesive manner and more as a narrative.
The slides were jam-packed with information, which is good because it shows you researched a lot and had a good handle on the information, but at the same time it was a little bit overwhelming and hard to discern the most important points. I think the most effective slides were those that had pictures and maps because then the audience could focus on that while listening to the group describe the events. The slides with the train routes were especially effective and gave me a good scope of the bombings. I also thought the video of the bombings was a great addition – it really portrayed the panic and fear.
I did not know that the bombs were set off using mobile phones, how exactly does that work? I also did not realize the huge effects of the bombings, over 2,000 people injured is very large. Also, I find it highly amusing that Bentham created an algorithm for determining the utilitarian calculation of happiness.
In regards to the public reaction to the events, it was kind of unclear about their response, I know that in general the reaction was extreme, but I do not really know the specifics. While researching the London bombings, I read that they had massive memorials, how else did the public respond to the event and how did the culture change as a result of the bombings? Has the Moroccan terrorist group committed any more acts of terrorism? Is there any political legacy from the bombings?
Overall, it was a very informative presentation, and the group did a good job compensating for the absence of one of their members. It was satisfactory and could have been improved with better organization and more emphasis on the major points instead of focusing on many smaller facts.
In the Mavericks’ presentation, I found the aesthetics of the slideshow very effective. The slides were clean and easy to read, without too many words but still providing enough of a visual stimulus to connect the screen with the speaker. I thought we could have done without a description of the history and definition of terrorism, since everyone in the audience had already been through the same information in class. I was also a little thrown off by the abrupt shift between objective facts and subjective judgments on the media. Maybe a little more of a transition would have helped here.
Overall, however, the presentation was very informative. Almost all of the information presented was new to me, so I learned a lot that I didn’t know before. I found out that the fourth bomb was actually in a bus above ground as opposed to on the underground trains. The description of the distinction between Sufi and non-Sufi Sunnis was also useful and informative. In addition, I appreciated the breakdown of the different perspectives that could be taken on the morality of the attacks. The commentary on the fact that Great Britain is more familiar historically with terrorism and how it affected the country’s reaction to the 7/7 attack was fascinating.
If I absolutely had to evaluate the presentation in terms of superior, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory, I would give this presentation a superior-minus (a three-tiered evaluation system is unsatisfactory-minus).
As for the presentation given by the Gangstas, I again found the visual uniformity of the slides effective in portraying the information given. It did seem like the oral aspect of the presentation could have been smoother with a little more practice. However, the cause and effect section in particular was well done. Again, I would say that the history of terrorism section was unnecessary, given our mutual experiences in class.
Given my relative ignorance of the Madrid bombings before this presentation, I learned far too much to write here. I found out that it was one of the most deadly attacks since 9/11, that there were 10 bombs on four trains, and that the terrorists used cell phones to set off the bombs. The attacks were attributed at first to the Basques but later an Islamic group was found to be responsible (GICM). What was particularly interesting to me was the politics behind the reaction to the attacks. It kind of reminded me of The Secret Agent in that it sounded like people investigating or reporting had motivations other than truth and justice, just like Chief Inspector Heat and the Assistant Commissioner. I would evaluate this presentation as a satisfactory-plus.
To both groups: Very nice presentations! Both were informative as well as interesting to listen to. Organization was great as was the general style of presentation. I learned a lot from each, and the discussions of larger issues of terrorism were well done.
Gangstas-
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective?
-Outline of what to expect
-Timeline of events
-Maps
-Clip of attack
-Link to globalization and world politics
-Discussion of morality
Which were not?
-Insufficient/unclear list/analysis of motives→ improved in end but would have been nice to be earlier in the presentation
What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
-Terrorists attacks just before elections— political implications— shift to socialist party
-Qur’anic verses on tape, Basque separatists were originally suspected
-Reasons for suspecting the ETA (Basque separatists)
-Link in time (2.5 years exactly) to 9/11
-Ummah and Jihad— create key differences in morality
How could the presentation have been improved?
-Too much emphasis on who didn’t do it, who did? And why?
How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
-Superior
Mavericks-
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective?
-Initial outline makes it easy to follow
-Nice Diagram of map and locations of attacks, chart for divisions within Islam
-Good analysis of motives, terrorist backgrounds
-Interesting focus on media, this response determined the impact of the attack itself
-Good discussion or morality—the focus on the analysis rather than just descriptions is effective
Which were not?
-Began with description of terrorism in general—too much common knowledge
What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
-Details of the actual event—complete and interesting description
-Interesting fact—suicide bombing—but bombers may have been mislead
-Bios of the terrorists—unexpected
-Media relied on info from public because couldn’t be on site
-Helps see another moral side of terrorism
-Perspective on UK response v US response—and counterterrorism legislation—Blair’s 12 Points
How could the presentation have been improved?
-Add links to general themes of class throughout
-What was the intended effect of the terrorist act? -Muslim persecuted—more emphasis here would have been nice
How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
-Superior
Nice Job!
London bombers:
I thought the slides overall were very well done, specifically how you highlighted on the maps exactly what happened when. Your use of images was very extensive and helped your presentation not only convey information but stay interesting. The only complaint I had was that there was one point in the presentation (I don’t recall exactly which slides), where a lot of the material you presented to the audience wasn’t on the slides and I had a hard time following/recording what you were saying, but other than that, it was exceptionally well done. A few things I learned from your presentation were how there was a similar but unrelated and unsuccessful set of bombings two weeks later. I also did not realize the sheer number of people who were injured. I also thought the uncertainty regarding the intentions of the bombers seeing as they all bought return tickets was an interesting point. I also liked your critique of the media coverage surrounding the incident. Overall, I thought it was a superior effort on the part of the group.
Madrid bombers:
I thought your presentation was well done. The slides were put together well and your presentation flowed well especially considering that Jackie wasn’t there. The images you put into it were very effective; my only complaint was that you could have used a little less text on each slide as it was a little difficult to follow. There were some interesting things I learned from your slides. I didn’t realize the number of those killed or the number injured; I also thought it was interesting how the blame was initially placed on the ETA group for the incident. I didn’t realize the political aspect of the entire incident and I think that helped explain the incident. You also mentioned how a large part of the Spanish nation was against the Iraq war and that is reflected in the public’s reaction to this incident. Overall, a very good presentation that I’m sure would have been even better if Jackie was there, but above average nonetheless.
Mavericks,
Your presentation was very well done. Clearly a lot of time and effort went into preparing it. The presentation was well-rehearsed and went smoothly, and the slides had a good balance of information that effectively helped the audience to follow along without distracting them from the speaker. My only complaint is that, since I knew almost nothing about these attacks before your presentation, it took several minutes (while you were doing the history of terrorism section) before I learned what your presentation was really about. That being said, since I had almost no prior knowledge, I learned a lot from the presentation about the actual events and their political implications. I found the profiles of the bombers especially interesting. The discussion of morality at the end was also very interesting, although due to its nature it necessarily remained unresolved. Overall I would rate the presentation superior.
Gangstas
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not?
You did a really good job of covering the Basque threat and demonstrating the political fallout of the terror attacks. You insinuated in the presentation that the Spanish government intentionally insinuated that the Basques were responsible for the attack after it became clear that they could not have been involved. What evidence is there that this occured? Did the president publicly lie to the people, or was this just a rumor the government failed to dispel?
What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
Before the presentation, I was vaguely aware of how the bombings influenced the Spanish elections, but I did not realize how significant an impact the attacks had or how unpopular the Iraq war was in Spain.
How could the presentation have been improved?
I would have liked to see more on the long term effects the decision has had on Spain: did pulling out prevent future terror attacks? How do the Spanish feel now that they are somewhat removed from the event?
How would you evaluate the presentation?
Borrowing one from Katherine, I'd give the Gangstas a satisfactory plus.
Skilz that Kilz- Nice job on giving concise and valuable information! Your presentation was well done and the powerpoint and pictures, etc helped make it more interesting.
Mumbai Attacks
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective?
-Good initial summary
-Helpful maps
-Good pictures of actual attacks
-Organization was clear
-Pulled in themes from course
Which were not?
-Structure/order
What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
-Training of terrorists- including steroids, bomb making, etc
-Good details of the attack itself
-LeT terrorist organization officially since 2001
-Deeni Masdrasas- educate for terrorist action in addition to normal schooling
-State-sponsored terrorism
-India’s response and demands
-Discussion of 4th India-Pakistan War
How could the presentation have been improved?
-Move the background of the attacks, the terrorists, and the region to somewhere earlier on
How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
-Superior
Mavericks:
Superior presentation. You did a great job informing the class in detail about the events of the London Bombings. I thought your presentation flowed very smoothly and effectively. One of the problems I had was that some of the presenters were talking too fast at times. I also wondered about some of the claims of the presentation. In particular, you repeatedly said the media “needs” to do certain things to avoid promoting the effects of the terrorist attack. I thought your presentation could be improved by making sure to cover more aspects of terrorist media coverage than just post-attack reporting in the event of bottom-up terrorism. However, I did think that your portion of the presentation on the media was interesting, especially how the BBC was commended for being impartial and responsible in trying to keep the nation calm. I thought the one slide on “A Culture of Suspicion” was both interesting and entertaining, and the presentation flowed smoothly thanks to a coherent layout and the maps used to describe the events of the attack.
Marlins:
Superior work. I thought many aspects of your presentation worked well. The inclusion of quotes as individual slides I thought really emphasized certain points you were trying to make. Your description of the Beslan Massacre was very detailed and complete. You also did a really good job of connecting different aspects of the event to themes we’ve discussed in class. One question that I have from your presentation is what, exactly, was the reason behind the Russian media’s lack of coverage and/or misrepresentation of the events? I didn’t really understand why the Russian media decided to misinform the people or not even cover the hostage situation. I also thought the “Discussion of Morality” slide needed supporting bullet-points of information just because the conflict of morality of the situation was so complex. Your presentation worked really well though. I thought you were very informative regarding Chechen/Russian relations and I thought Russia’s incompetence in handling the situation was well emphasized. Good job.
Skillz that Killz:
Another superior presentation. You presented us with a lot of interesting information and the presentation really worked out well. I thought the terrorist group profiles were really effective and it was interesting to find out how Twitter was involved during the Mumbai attacks. I thought it was really funny to learn that the Lashkar-e-Toiba was supplying its members with steroids. I had a couple questions though. Why did you see “nationalism” and “ummah” as contrasting ideas? It seems to me that they are much more similar than different especially in promoting the values of a common cause. I’m also curious as to how China responded to Pakistan’s request of mediation. I think it would’ve been effective for you to include that in the presentation. Overall, I could tell that you really did your research and put a lot into the presentation. I also thought you made really great connections to other events especially by comparing Pakistan-India relations to the Cold War. Nicely done.
Sorry - I messed up the post the first time.
I really learned a lot from these presentations. Admittedly, I had a pretty scant knowledge about these attacks before the presentations. Now, I feel like I have a decent understanding of the events, their contexts, and the moral complications behind them.
With all the groups (including our own), I thought the presentation in terms of speaking clarity and ability was pretty good, although there was still room for improvement. If we could learn more about speaking for an audience, then our presentations would probably be more engaging and allow for more control over which parts we wanted to emphasize.
Also, I was impressed by the research that all the groups put in to the presentation. All the groups collected quite a bit of data about their respective events and responses to those events. At the same time, I thought the presentations were a little bit thin on social or cultural analysis. Knowing that each government’s response to the attacks has been somewhat off target, how should they have proceeded to deter the religious and national tensions that motivated these attacks? Overall, I would say we could have done better at creating the presentations to be based on the knowledge that we had acquired in this class.
The presentation last Thursday about the Madrid bombings, like the other presentations, included a lot of good detail. Also, their themed slides helped the presentation a lot aesthetically (our group’s slides were pretty aesthetically lame). I did think that there could be a little less text on some of the slides.
The presentation gave a thorough analysis of the political implications of the event, and of how Spanish subjects (not citizens, right?) disagreed so vehemently with the Iraq war in the first place.
It was interesting that the government originally thought the Basques were responsible, and I learned a lot about this particular group, but it seemed like the presentation covered the Basques in more detail than the group that actually carried out the attacks. Overall, I was impressed with the amount of research that the group evidenced in their presentation; also, good job picking up for Jackie’s part. I guess I'd also give it a “satisfactory plus.”
The presentation today about the Beslan Massacre, I though, did a great job with the details of how event; how the attacks unfolded, how government forces did or did not exercise due care in their counterstrike, and how the battle for the school played out. The group used very effective graphics, especially on the transition slides.
I thought it was good that the group tried to weave in class themes in the presentation, although I thought that the discussion of these terms seemed a little bit abrupt and did not flow as well as it could have. Still, I thought the presentation was engaging and overall quite effective. I give it a “superior minus.”
The second presentation today about the Mumbai attacks was also very well presented. Probably because the text on the slides was minimal and concise, I found myself reading it and paying attention to the slides.
I thought that the Mumbai group effectively weaved thematic ideas from the class into their presentation. Themes like nationalism and identity flowed with the rest of the presentation smoothly and definitely enhanced my understanding of the events.
During the presentation, I thought that the order of discussion could be changed: starting with the events themselves and then backtracking to an explanation of the conflict over Kashmir seemed backwards (although my group did this too). I realize now, though, that starting with the events does have the benefit of drawing people into the presentation from the beginning. Overall, I thought this presentation was very engaging and effective. I give the thumbs up with a “superior” rating.
Nice job everybody; I know we all put a truckload of work into these presentations.
Blue Marlins, good job with presenting on the Beslan Massacre. I had very limited knowledge of this event ahead of time, and it was interesting how the Russian government responded to the Chechen terrorists. The slide show was very well organized and included some really informative and provocative images. I found the maps especially effective – the layout of the school and where the Russians and hostages were located really helped me to visualize the event. There was also a general map of Chechnya at the beginning of the presentation, but it would have been helpful if that image were used again and referenced when you guys were talking about specific events/places, like where the Ossetic people are in relation to Chechnya . Also, sometimes the font was a little bit difficult to read due to the background.
It was interesting that there were women terrorists involved in this attack, women are not common in instances of terrorism that we have studied or are usually exposed too. Overall, the team did a great job making connections to the past readings and using the terminology we have learned in seminar. The presentation was superior and could have been improved by better presentation skills – speaking louder and making more eye contact, but overall it was very informative.
Skillz that Killz also did a great job researching the Mumbai attacks. Even though this event just recently happened, I did not know the details, and the group did an excellent job of detailing the entire attack. It was interesting that so many died and got wounded from such a small number of terrorists, and I did not know that the attacks were so widespread, I thougt they were contained to one area. To this end, the map of where the attacks occurred in the city was extermely effective and overall the pictures provided good background to the facts. The prevalence of Twitter in reporting on the events was interesting, as was the fact that much of the 2005 Earthquake relief fund in Kashmir went to funding terrorism.
The presentation could have been improved by more directly engaging the audience with eye contact and less reliance on notecards, but I still regarded it as a superior presentation that really got to the root of the terrorist problems and also viewed the attack in light of the material we have discussed in seminar. There could have been a little bit more on the morality of the attacks, but it was still very well done.
Mavericks
What aspects were effective?
• Discussion of events was just enough to get information of attacks across without getting bogged down in details
• Points on the development of terrorism were tied in effectively
• Good discussion of morality behind issue
• Outline of where we were in the native of attack
What aspects were not effective?
• Outline was very effective but the overall transitions between these were not as smooth as could have been hoped for
What did I learn?
• Differences in the sects of Islam
• The development of citizen journalism through camera phone shots sent to media
• Britain’s calm and thorough response into this attack
What could have been improved?
• Only the transitions between group members could have been better but other than that it was a great presentation full of information
Overall rating: Superior
Gangsters
What aspects were effective?
• Great use of youtube video in the presentation demonstrating the ease of information
• Good discussion of morality like the Mavericks before them
• Effective presentation on the timing of the event in regards to elections
• Images in the presentation were also very effective and went well with the presentation
What aspects were not effective?
• A little too much time spent in the actual aspects of the attack but it didn’t detract from the overall presentation
What did I learn?
• 90% of the people in Spain were against the war in Iraq even though they were already in it
• The government tried to place the blame somewhere else as to stay in power
• The correlation between terrorism and mass transit as an effective weapon of terror is true in most attacks
What could have been improved?
• The only thing that could have been improved would have to be trying to tie in more readings from the year into the presentation, but it did not detract from the presentation
Overall Rating: Superior
Blue Marlins
What aspects were effective?
• Very good use of images in the presentation
• Great discussion of BOTH sides of the morality question
• Good discussion of not only the acts of the terrorists but also the Russian government
• Tied in many readings into the presentation effectively
What aspects were not effective?
• Transitions between each group member could have been better but it did not detract from the information in the presentation
What did I learn?
• The history of the differences between Russia and Chechnya
• Did not know that Russia suppressed its media so much
• Did not know that the Russians used such advanced weaponry when dealing with terrorists
What could have been improved?
• Maybe a little less detail on the actual timeline of the events but this didn’t detract from the presentation
Overall Rating: Superior
mumbai bombers:
An exceptional presentation. Your slides were very effective and informative and they kept close the information you were presenting, making it easy to follow what you were saying. I liked your use of full screen images near the start. The titles were also informative, giving good overviews of what you were covering. The only way I thought you could have improved your slides was to add a few more pictures to some of the drier parts, just to help visualize what you were trying to say. There were some interesting things I learned from your presentation, namely, I did not realize to the extent Pakistan sponsored terrorism, nor the extent to which these attacks are organized, planned and trained for. It is a scary thought when you here that they have goals like the elimination of hinduism and judaism. I also liked Alan's point about the rise of citizen journalism, that was well thought out. An excellent presentation on par with the others.
Mavericks:
What parts were effective:
-Good organization
-Large amount of info in short amount of time, but not overwhelming
-Good pictures and maps
Not effective / improvements:
-Have a more uniform slide format; they seemed like they were split into parts in terms of slide themes
What I learned:
-Largest terrorist attack in UK since 1988
-Bombs intended to form “cross of fire”
-Bombers seemed relatively normal; sports enthusiasts
-Sufi / non-Sufi distinction
-Calm British reaction
Overall: Superior
Blue Marlins
What parts were effective:
-Well-rehearsed; clear, logical flow
-Very effective pictures
-In-depth account of what happened
Not effective / improvements:
-Some of the colors chosen for backgrounds like the brick wall made the text somewhat difficult to read
What I learned:
-The Russian government attempted to cover up a lot of went on at the school
-Putin used the attack to increase some of his political power
-The Russian reaction to the massacre was very violent
Overall: Superior
Skillz
What parts were effective:
-Good maps
-Great breakdown of the different sites of these attacks
-Logical flow
Not effective / improvements:
-Split up time a little more evenly
What I learned:
-These attacks occurred at a variety of locations and in different manners
-Lashkar-e-Taiba had extreme training for these individuals
-Attackers worked in pairs
-More recently, the Taliban has attacked Islamabad
Overall: Superior
The Blue Marlins:
The Beslan Massacres
THe slide show flowed chronologically through the attack. It was easy to follow, provided sufficient explanations, and linked the attack back to our class readings and discussions. The quotes and pictures really enhanced this. I learned a lot about the history of tension between Russia and Chechnya that I did not know previously. The only thing that could be improved would be the section on Russian response. It was a little disjointed, but the final section did a good job of wrapping up the loose ends. Overall, it was a superior presentation.
Skillz that Killz:
The Mumbai Attacks
The entire group did a wonderful job explaining the attacks, including much information on the group responsible, which was unknown to me previously. The visuals and explanations that accoompanied them were very helpful in understanding the attacks themselves and the background information. Some parts were a bit lengthy, but overall it was a superior presentation.
Job well done for both groups!
Marlins:
Overall, your presentation was very good. The slides were generally effective with a good balance of pictures and facts. I especially liked seeing the diagram of the school to get a better understanding of how things took place with the location of the gym and the escape down the back alley, etc. Generally, you had an appropriate level of detail on the slides. However, a couple times I found myself reading the slides rather than listening to the presenter because there was perhaps too much detail on a few slides.
From your presentation, I learned a lot about the background of Chechnya and the motivation for the terrorist actions. I also learned a lot that I did not know about Russia’s handling/mishandling of the crisis. The presentation could have been improved in a couple ways. First, you mentioned that many of the terrorists were Ingush, but seemed to be operating under the assumption that we would be familiar with this group and never really told us anything about the Ingush. Also, although you mentioned that people were buried in mass graves indicating a large number of casualties, it would have been helpful if you had given an estimate of the total number of fatalities in order to give us a better understanding of the scope of the crisis. Overall, I would rate your presentation satisfactory.
Skillz that Killz:
The slide show was very effective, especially the map of Mumbai to show us the different locations of the attacks, as well as the map showing the region of Kashmir. From the presentation, I learned a lot about the background of Kashmir, and the tensions involved. I also learned that there were only ten terrorists, when I originally assumed that there would be a lot more to carry out such a devastating attack. The presentation was very informative; however, (unless I missed it) adding an estimate of the total number of casualties would have been helpful to help us understand the attacks and their effects. Overall, I would rate the presentation somewhere between satisfactory and superior.
Mavericks:
Your presentation was very well done. I like that you began with an overview of terrorism; however, I think this part was a bit lengthy. I also thought that the maps that were provided were very helpful in understanding where the attacks occurred and how they targeted the underground system. The presentation presented a lot of information about the attacks that I had not known prior, including Blair’s twelve points that were presented and the fact that the BBC News Channel resorted to regular programming before the end of the night in order to return to normalcy. I also found it interesting that the BBC channel attempted not to use the word terrorism. I think this group did a superior job presenting all the information.
Gangstas:
This presentation was very well done and allowed me learn a lot about this attack. In particular, I liked the maps that were provided and the video clip that was shown. These elements really added to the slides and made your presentation more interesting. I think the one thing you could have done differently would be to focus less on the concept of terrorism. Since we had studied terrorism in depth as a class we knew much of the information presented here. I think the group focused too much on the initial blaming of the Basques, since this group was ultimately found not to be the terrorist organization behind the attacks. Prior to hearing this presentation, I did not know that the bombs were set off by mobile phone or that Qur’anic verses were found in the van. Overall, I would give this presentation a superior grade.
Blue Marlins:
I particularly liked how this group began their presentation with a quote, as it was different than the rest of the groups. I thought they did a good job connecting the Beslan massacre to Imagined Communities and also the outlay of events was well done as each day was described separately. I thought the section on the Russian response could have been a little clearer, but overall the presentation was superior. I learned that as many as eighty percent of the casualties may be attributable to the Russians and that the school building was quickly destroyed immediately following the act of terrorism.
Blue Marlins
One thing I found particularly effective was your use of pictures and the fact that you explained each of these in context of the information you were presenting. I also liked the thought questions tacked on near the end of the presentation. I think they really helped to engage your audience. I also thought the explanation of why terrorism was chosen as a tactic was particularly effective and informative.
Given that I didn’t know anything about the Beslan massacres to start with, I learned a lot from this presentation. I learned that Chechnya had a history of human rights violations even before this event and that Armenians, Jews, and Russians in the area were persecuted and forced to flee the region. I thought it was interesting that in this case the media were repressed, rather than getting out of hand and reporting excess incorrect information. It was also interesting to note that the terrorists were definitely not the only “bad guys” in this situation, given the poor tactics used by the Russians and their disregard for the safety of hostages in the school.
The presentation could have been improved if there was more information provided on the reactions of other countries. Was there any international outrage over this event, the Russian use of force against its civilians, and the subsequent cover-up?
I thought the Blue Marlins did an excellent job highlighting only what was important and interesting in their event, and presenting it in an engaging manner. I would rate this presentation as somewhere in the superior range.
Mumbai Bombings
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not?
You did a very good job of conveying the effects of the attack geographically; the maps were excellent. Also, a great narrative presentation of the attackers experience. Possibly a little more about the media's effects?
What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
I didn't know about the scale of the Indian attacks or that they were carried out by so few people.
How could the presentation have been improved?
As before, maybe a little more about the media? But a very good job throughout.
How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
Superior. Great job.
Chechen attacks
What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not?
You did a very good job of presenting the events chronlogically; you conveyed the emotional struggle of the attacks well. Possibly more information about the Chechen situation now?
How could the presentation have been improved?
Possibly more information about current developments with the Chechen situation.
What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
I hadn't realized how poorly the Russian government handled the attacks. I knew about the event as it happened and thought it was a terrible situation, but I didn't realize how much Russian ineptitude made the attacks worse than they had to be.
How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
Superior.
• The Gangstas
- What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not?
The portion of the presentation showing the short video clip added an element of the event's realism that was lacking in other presentations. I also thought that a history of terrorism was repetitive and ineffective, given the content discussed in class as a group. The actual meat of the presentation, in regards to the events of the terrorist act in Madrid and the aftermath, however, was given in a superior manner.
- What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
I had heard of the Madrid bombings and their relationship to 9/11 passingly, but the detail and depth of the presentation added a great deal to my knowledge, in that I had previously thought that there was a single bomb on one train.
-How could the presentation have been improved?
A demonstration of this magnitude requires stronger oral presentation than was present. More formal attire also helps visually. By improving such and removing the history of terrorism, the Gangstas could have had a perfect presentation.
-How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
Superior. If only they had dressed up a little more, I could give them the magical "superior-plus" my peers have been throwing around.
• The Mavericks
- What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not?
Again, the elements of the presentation concerning the history of terrorism is unnecessary and ineffective. Similarly, while interesting, the history of morality seemed too general, whereas a more specific view of the consequences and morality involved in the London bombings may have been more effective.
- What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
I never actually had heard of the London bombings, so the entire chain of events was new to me. Also, the media's stoic portrayal of the bombings, in contrast to typical fear-fixated form, was of interest to me.
-How could the presentation have been improved?
The presentation was solid in all respects. The attire worn was sharp, the oral delivery was on target, and, minus the slides on terrorism and morality history, the content was just as desired.
-How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
Absolutely superior.
• Skillz that Killz
- What dimensions of the slideshow were effective and which were not?
Given the simultaneous nature of the attacks in the Mumbai Bombings, the organization of the slides had me confused as to what was going on when. The maps and pictures shown were phenomenal, especially the explosion coming out of the Taj Mahal Hotel. The integration of class themes into the presentation was also well-done. The slides on Kashmir and India-Pakistani politics really stole the show.
- What did you learn from the presentation that you did not know before?
The use of Twitter to inform the media is something that I had not heard or thought of before. The subtleties of the Kashmir dispute and how they relate to the Pakistani government's policies was new to me, as well.
-How could the presentation have been improved?
A timeline structure for the slides in regards to the attacks themselves might have been more effective than addressing each of the two-man teams individually. Putting the origins of the Kashmir conflict after an initial introduction but before the details of the actual attack might have made more sense.
-How would you evaluate the presentation: superior, satisfactory, unsatisfactory?
Superior.
Overall, I don't have anything serious to critique in any of the presentations; each presented a clear description of the terrorist event at hand, followed by a unique and incisive application of the theories of ethnogeography.
Terror in London - The Mavericks.
I found the most effective dimension of the slide show by far to be Jeff Pawlick's discussion of Islam; not only was this segment the Maverick's most aesthetically sound, but much more importantly it offered a nuanced, comprehensive dissection of the religious and cultural motivations for modern terror that outstripped anything the remaining field teams had to offer.
By contrast, I found the least effective dimension to be Hannah's study of the media. Especially at first, this discussion tended towards weak admonishment rather than solid analysis and criticism
; more sources or instances of sensationalism in the media would have served well. When kept specific to the London bombings (e.g. in the great breakdown of BBC and other British networks' coverage) her presentation was at its best and most insightful.
I learned much through the slide show - a good deal of facts, of course, but it would be selling the Mavericks short to pretend their analysis of the London bombings was limited to the details of the event itself. Their introduction of consequentialism and deontological logic was quite valuable. So too was the tie-in to Irish terror, and the British government's legal response to 7/7 in the light of their previous engagements with terrorist threat.
I can't offer many tips on how to have improved this PowerPoint, as the way the Mavericks delivered it was definitely effective.
Superior.
Terror in Madrid - The Gangstas.
The most effective aspects of the Gangstas' presentation dealt with the sensationalism of the Spanish media's response to the bombings, and the relation of the Islamic scapegoats (a definite other) to the ETA-linked terrorists (more familiar, thus less comfortable an adversary). This was an incisive realization. Additionally, the use of the YouTube video was definitely the most gripping part of any of the presentations - seeing that bomb go off in the subway really drove home the gravity of the events being discussed.
At many times, it appeared to me that the Gangstas read directly off their slides; overall, they didn't seem very confident while presenting - this may have been partly due to the fact that Jacqueline couldn't be there. Certainly, all the information the Gangstas needed was in their PowerPoint, their presentation just wasn't as compelling as it might have been.
I did learn a good deal from the Gangstas', however. They covered some of the same theoretical ground that the Mavericks did, and managed to build upon that foundation in a fairly effective manner. Additionally, they offered a superior commentary on the media, and a good discussion of the Basque and the GICM versus the ETA.
This presentation had aspects of both the superior and the satisfactory - but the group was inadvertently short a member, a handicap no other group had to deal with. I feel that they would likely have been superior on any other day.
Terror in Beslan - The Blue Marlins.
The Blue Marlins' presentation had excellent use of photographs and images. Hughes' discussion of the Russian response to the takeover was extremely thorough and well-presented, especially when it dealt with the question of why such aggressive weaponry was used against a school packed with children. The analysis of morality was the most clear of any groups - dividing that section evenly between the Chechens and Russians highlighted the moral ambiguity of terror.
I did have some issues with the way the Marlins chose to order their presentation - especially at first, they were prone to abrupt changes of topic. Discussions of events would suddenly give way to class themes, most of which related well and some of which seemed stretched. Separating the events from the themes would have proven less disorienting to the viewer, however. Also, Carl's human-interest section was a nice touch in that it put a face on the victims, but I think that section might have been cut in favor of more informative material. Although it was somewhat disjointed, it bears repeating that the Marlins' presentation was extremely thorough and professional, not to mention aesthetically sound.
I regret to admit that I didn't know anything at all about Beslan before the presentation, so the Marlins have taught me just about everything I now know on that front. They did a good job, too.
Other than what I mentioned above, I wouldn't change anything about the Marlins slide show.
Superior.
For the 7/7 Bombings group
Effective:
-didn't have too much on the slides
-good order of presentation, I especially liked the section on the media's response.
Not Effective:
-never really answered why they did the attack.
improvements:
-Perhaps a bit more on the governments long term response, increase/decrease efforts in war on terror?
rating:
-awesome
For the Madrid Bombings group
Effective:
-great summary of the attack, their preperation, and background
Not Effective:
-good to talk about the ETA but you spent a little too long on it.
improvements:
N/A
rating:
awesome
For the Mumbai group
Effective:
-excellent summary of the leadup to the attack and discussion of who the terrorists were.
Not Effective:
-having the attack before the explanations was a little confusing.
improvements:
-more pictures in the slides.
rating:
-awesome
Post a Comment