Digital Remix Revision

DigitalRemix Revision

Question1: The materials and ideas to use in the project

Electronicgadgets, which demonstrate changes in technology, are the mainmaterials for the project. Sociological effects of these materials tothe family are the key ideas of the project. The main theme of theproject is the ‘The impact of technology of family values andculture` (Dolan, 2003). The invention of materials for the projectwas based on the assessment on the types of devices, machines,accessories, and many other means of production that defineadvancements in technology. The materials were collected on the basisof the frequency with which they are used within the familyinstitution (Hale, Shrestha, Gibson &amp Migliaccio, 2009).Technological devices are readily available in the households. What Isimply did is to visit different families that were sampled with theaim of identifying those that have different devices, such as mobilephones, smartphones, tablets, laptops, desktops, and 3-D printers. These included interviews with filled-in questionnaires that soughtto understand how those devices the values and traditions around thefamily.

Question2: New developments in the previous material

Thenew developments entail the sophistication of electronic materialsfor a diversity of use, as a result, of more innovation. The focus ishow the same developments continue to transform family relations.

Question3: Reasons for choosing the focus

Itis a wide area of discussion even though sociological theory has nothad more research about it. In a world where technologicaladvancements are continuously affecting social institutions, thetopic becomes of great concern. These technological materials affectthe way family members relate with each other. For instance, some ofthese materials are the link to information and social networkingthrough the internet hence, they are pivotal in determining thesocial trends that occur, as a result, of increased technologicaladvancements. I chose the materials very carefully because Iunderstood the magnitude with which each of them affects informationand literacy. I set a threshold that each of the materials had tomeet for it to be used in the project. The selection was verysuccessful because the materials made it possible for theinvestigation to go through. The findings clearly demonstrated theeffect of technology on family values. The discussion of the findingsis in the next schedule of the project.

Question4: Planned delivery method

Thedelivery of this project is through graphics. It is easier to presentstatistical information through graphics on Microsoft PowerPoint.Presentations of the project are through digital delivery methods.Specifically, Microsoft PowerPoint is the relevant application tomake these presentations. 3-D devices that are part of the materialsin the project require digital delivery methods hence influencing thechoice for this delivery method. The arrangement of the project wassystematic. The arrangement was appropriate in enabling the projectto ascertain the reliability, validity, accuracy, authority,timeliness, and the informational bias that the respondents couldgive during the interviews. The choice was partially influenced bythe need to have authentic information that represents the generalpopulation (Pakkala, 2002). Moreover, the arrangement of the projectconsidered a comparison with other existing literature about thesubject. The comparison allows the acceptance and rejection ofdiffering viewpoints depending on the authenticity of the source.Such arrangements allow the projecting to be flexible and allow ananalysis of the structure and logic of other supporting informationregarding the choice of project materials and arguments that agree ordiffer with findings within a sociology framework.

Question5: Purpose of the project

Theproject intends to highlight the effects of technologicaladvancements on social institutions such as families. It is a way ofsparking more research in the subject. The reasonableness of theconclusions I draw depends on the type of arrangement that theproject has (Burke, 2013). The arrangement is ideal in presenting theproject in a manner that does not depict any form of prejudice.Finally, the arrangement of the project incorporated and recognizedthe cultural, physical, or another context with which the informationthat constitutes the project was created, accessed, adopted (Pilnick,Clegg, Murphy &amp Almack, 2010). It also recognizes the impact ofthese factors on the manner in which the information will influencethe outcome of the project (Goguen &amp Harrell, 2004). Thearrangement I choice, for instance, ensures that before anyinformation is collected from the population under study, I havecomplete and reliable information from government sources. If thishad been impossible, I would make sure that I have access to thepopulation under study. It is also important that the project alsorecognizes censorship and cultural limitations in asking questions orgathering information that pinpoint the target population that issupposed to benefit from the project.

Question6: the audience

Thetarget audience for this project is students of sociology andresearch scholars who are keen to do more research on this subjectmatter. The project targets students studying family psychology,management experts, management students, and for general knowledge insociology. It also targets the general public who could be concernedwith the worrying trends that technology has brought in theinstitution of the family. The project found out that the technologyaffects the work of employees in different ways (Pilnick, Clegg,Murphy &amp Almack, 2010). It requires managers who are introducingnew strategies to respect and respect the basic individual rightsfirst before considering protecting the interests of groups. If themajority, who are shareholders, benefit from the new strategy at theexpense of individual rights, then, the organization will placeitself in an ethical suit. Although the moral approach is safe formanagers to use, it creates an unfavorable environment that hindersproductivity and efficiency. The third and last approach is thejustice approach which compels managers to effect change that willfairly and impartially distribute the benefits and costs of theorganization. This approach ensures that the interests of those whomay otherwise lack power (Dorf, &amp Byers, 2005).

Question7: Special considerations about the content

Consideringthat the project is about a very dynamic topic, the content willspecifically highlight its futuristic aspects. For instance, makingprediction about how the world will be like in the next one hundredyears in terms of technological advancements and how they will affectthe family and other social institutions.


Burke,R. (2013). Projectmanagement: planning and control techniques.

Dolan,T. G. (2003). Project Delivery Methods. SchoolPlanning &amp Management,42(5),33.

Dorf,R. C., &amp Byers, T. H. (2005). Technologyventures.McGraw Hill.

Goguen,J., &amp Harrell, D. F. (2004). Style as a choice of blendingprinciples. Styleand Meaning in Language, Art Music and Design,49-56

Hendrickson,C., &amp Au, T. (2009). Projectmanagement for construction: Fundamental concepts for owners,engineers, architects, and builders.Chris Hendrickson

Hale,D. R., Shrestha, P. P., Gibson Jr, G. E., &amp Migliaccio, G. C.(2009). Empirical comparison of design/build and design/bid/buildproject delivery methods. Journalof Construction Engineering and Management,135(7),579-587.

Projectdelivery systems and project change: Quantitative analysis. Journalof Construction Engineering and Management,129(4),382-387.

Lemonnier,P. (Ed.). (2013). Technologicalchoices: Transformation in material cultures since the Neolithic.Routledge.

Pakkala,P. (2002). Innovative project delivery methods for infrastructure.FinnishRoad Enterprise, Opastinsilta,12.

Pilnick,A., Clegg, J., Murphy, E., &amp Almack, K. (2010). Questioning theanswer: questioning style, choice and self‐determinationin interactions with young people with intellectual disabilities*.Sociologyof health &amp illness,32(3),415-436.