So, to http://dr501.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/my-suggestion-for-a-heuristic/, I respond as such:
Good job, you did my work for me. I know we switched this around in class, but I liked your ideas for the most part. I would argue that, above all, the issue I have with your heuristic is its focus on authorial intent rather than audience experience. I think your heuristic works well to identify a person’s ability to create a focused project, but I don’t know if it succeeds in truly evaluating a work on its actual merit versus its intended purpose.
That being said, I liked that we used your heuristic, because it captures the three components of media projects that I also emphasized, which are content, aesthetic, and audience. The conceptual core I’d relate to my idea of content, while form and content I’d relate to my idea of aesthetic. I know that content is actually in the title, but I think it works better if I view it as an evaluation of the aesthetic presentation of the conceptual core, which I’d argue is the content of the project.
The one lacking area in your evaluation heuristic, I’d argue, is your conception of audience. I think an evaluation heuristic of this type would do well to incorporate an evaluation of a media project’s ability to engage the audience, and whether or not audience participation is encouraged or required in some way. That’s a huge part of any person’s evaluation of media, in my opinion. It’s probably because I play video games.
Anyways, good work, nice job, way to go, you’re on your way, one day you’ll make the major leagues, and we’ll all cheer you on.