Tag Archives: engl757857

Pedagogical Intervention 2: Edmodo: The Academic Facebook

Posted on by under Mini Projects

Pedagogical Intervention 2: Edmodo: Educational Facebook

Edmodo is built for educators and students by educators and students. This digital sharing forum functions as more of a social Moodle/Blackboard-type site, but greater focus on qualities of those similar to microblogs and social networking sites. The biggest thing that caught my attention when exploring the site was its uncanny resemblance to the Facebook layout, which, I am sure, was no accident. Though I could find no philosophy statement rationalizing the layout of the site as rooted in the social aspect of academia, the proof is in the pudding. (I think I used that term correctly. I’m still never sure after Bernstein.)

This is the general view of Edmodo when opening a student home page, which is extremely similar to one’s Facebook home page:

Edmodo_StudentView

Additionally, when one posts a picture, the visual layout is also the same:

Edmodo_PicturePost

One can also comment on a photograph or post in the same fashion that a Facebook user is able to:

Edmodo_CommentFeature

After looking more deeply into the site’s constructs, its collection of mission statements refer to this site as K-12, availability for entire school districts, and emphasis on Common Core educational standards and a variety of networking between teachers and teams to share curriculum. However, I think that this would be a great tool for undergraduates, who are still in the transition between 12th grade and Freshman-level coursework. This site location provides a low-risk environment that capitalizes on an architecture that so many students are already familiar with (Facebook). However, the framework is redesigned and reimagined into an educational context, thus forcing the collaboration between social and academic. This makes the transition from social network to a sociable scholarly network—the point of college.

One way that this site endeavors to shift the sociable aspect of Facebook to the academic sense is the functions of posts. On Facebook, you are able to “Like” and “Comment.” With Edmodo, you have the ability to “React.” There is an option where you can “Reply,” “Share,” or “React,” with any of the following emoticons in a drop-down list: Awesome!; Like it!; Interesting!; Tough/Challenging; Not taught in class; Need more time; Bored; Need help; Lost interest

Edmodo_Reactions

Further similarities between Facebook and Edmodo can be visually noted throughout the other screenshots offered in this post.

For this intervention, I created a teacher account and a student account so that I could see how the site functions from both ends.

Edmodo is free, but does have options to upgrade for larger spaces. With the teacher account, you have the ability to create different groups (classes), where each page functions as a different class page. There is a library, similar to the “Content” section of d2l or Moodle, which provides a space for uploaded files. For students to join your page, all they need to do is sign up with a username and have your access code. Feel free to join my test page to try it out for yourself: Go to Edmodo.com, fill in the needed information and use the code: dfys3d (Post, take the quizzes, etc.—you are most welcome to anything. I suggest you take the expert quiz. Dr. Sherwood may make an appearance in one of the questions.)

Assignments

There is the option to create assignments, quizzes (matching, multiple choice, fill in the blank, short answer), and polls. (I have one of each created on my site if you’d like to check it out.)

Students can also upload their own documents to this site, similar to a Dropbox for assignments or an online submission. There is also a library for students to see what they have submitted, so that things can’t “magically disappear.”

Edmodo_SubmittingAssignment

Edmodo_turnedin

Grades:

Grades for the assignments are taken care of for you. All grades are calculated and made into a table on the site. There is also an option to export the grades to an Excel file. You can adjust the point value and the time permitted to take each test and assignment when creating the type of assignment, as well.

Edmodo_Grade_Export

Students also have the ability to view their progress throughout the course, as it is all tracked through Edmodo. There are two visualizations that are available when viewing their progress. The bar graph shows the completion of the assignments, while the line graph shows the quality/actual grade of those completed assignments.

Edmodo_StudentProgressBarGraph

Edmodo_StudentProgressLineGraph

The poll that I created was would this be an effective classroom tool for classrooms in higher education? My response: I’m not sure. As I stated earlier, I could certainly see something like Edmodo holding promise in a Freshman course. But, the tool is limited by its use for the classroom–just as Moodle, Blackboard, etc. I’m not sure how long this material is available online, or if students have forever access to this site. No information is available for that. I’m guessing with only so much space, with a teacher account, it is only a matter of time before I have to delete a group and all of its contents, including its pages and all student work, posts, pictures, files, etc. So, I’m not sure of the viability that this would have. But, I’m also not sure if it is the viability or the longevity that is the point of using DH in the classroom and beyond the classroom. And, we’ve talked about this before. With having DH in university standards, but no clear objectives to advocate those standards, it is difficult to understand what that means within the confines of our own classrooms, and even our own pedagogies. If using DH in the classroom means using a tool that get students genuinely involved, then I think Edmodo could do that for incoming Freshman. Beyond that, I’m not so sure.

Pedagogical Intervention 1: Microblogging: Being a Twitterdactyl in the 21st Century Classroom

Posted on by under Mini Projects, Responses, Uncategorized

Twitter is currently a staple of my 300-level Dramatic Imagination literature course. The following is extracted from my syllabus:

Breakdown of Grading Criteria

Weekly Responses (10 x 15 points each) 150 points

Each week will be dedicated to a single dramatic work. We will be constructing multi-media responses outside of class that will cushion our classroom discussions. Weekly responses will be evaluated in two ways:
1. Class Twitter Posts [5 points]
–For each act per play we read, you must post at least two class tweets per act. When we utilize Twitter as a classroom tool, please remember to always #UPJDRAMAGINE311 and what #Act (#scene and #line, when applicable) so that our class is able to easily locate posts and that I am able to document your participation.
–Please get into the habit of collaborating with your fellow students. Our learning community is one that extends beyond the boundaries of the classroom, itself. Note: If you have your Twitter account set to private, we will not be able to see your class tweets.

Twitter Value

It is already relevant to students’ lives. We talk about utilizing programs that are generic and temporary within the university system. While social media also occupies a temporal space, (i.e. MySpace) at least this space is always occupied. Twitter is something that students are currently (and constantly) using outside of the classroom. This is an easy and effective tool to bridge the gap between classroom-dorm-room contexts.

The 140-character blog value

Advantages:

  • There are definite pedagogical values to this micro-composition. Molds critical thinking + critical composition with form + content + creativity. Articulating our thoughts into meaningful communication: challenging, forces us out of passive voice, into direct modes of communication (think how difficult one-page teaching philosophy is; try fitting a DQ into a tweet. It is tough. Trust me.)

Disadvantages:

  • 140-characters is not an effective way to ensure comprehension of active engagement with the material

How to counter disadvantages:

  • Provide specific guidelines for the types of Tweets that you expect with a minimum quota. See my guidelines for the Dramaginator Twitter requirements:

Dramaginator Tweet Log
 _____/3 At least 1 general discussion question per Act
 _____/3 At least 1 discussion question per Act that includes theory or other elements of drama/dramatism
 _____/2 At least 2 discussion questions/comments that relate to the assigned secondary source for the play
 _____/2 At least 2 comments in relation to the course theme of struggle/conflict
 _____/1 Link to the secondary source of which you are presenting on (scholarly article, biographical piece/website, website of the author, history of the play’s production, or other source pertaining to the text that aids our collective understanding of the text and/or brings a new perspective of the events or histories that we are examining)
 _____/1 Link to YouTube (or other) video of either your favorite recorded performance or of your favorite/most important lines of the play. Must note which Act, scene, lines
 _____/1 Photograph, meme, illustration, painting, or other visualization that encompasses the crux of the struggle of the drama
 _____/3 Respond to at least 3-4 tweets of others

  • Implement a more cohesive response assignment. For me, weekly discussion board responses that are student-generated questions:

2. Discussion Board Summative Response [15 points]
 In addition to our class Twitter posts, we will also be constructing individual summative responses each week, due every Friday by 11AM. Some Friday exceptions apply, so be sure to note the “Reminders” throughout the syllabus where this is applicable. You will post your response in two ways:
i. Copy & paste into the Discussion Board forum assigned for that play.
ii. Attach a Word document with the same response.
 In these online posts, you will choose a question or focal point to address. You will have a variety of options, based on forums that the Dramaginator of the week creates for our class. You must identify which option you will be writing to in your response.
 These responses will be 250-500 words per post and must include applied and recognized terms and theories of drama/dramatism.

Classroom Applications of Twitter

—Discussion Tool
—Collaborative Resource (don’t know a classmate’s e-mail? That’s okay, we’re all on Twitter. Makes group work and group projects much easier.)
—Publication (University acknowledgement: starts a buzz)

Visualization Tools

Customization Analysis Legend:
Minimal: 1-3 items        Moderate: 4-10 items        High: 11+ items

1. Visible Tweets: http://visibletweets.com/home.htm

Directions: Type in the hashtag of tweets that you want to visualize (you do not need a Twitter account to do so)
Visualization options/customization: Yes; Minimal
Free version: Tweets fetched every 5 minutes
$ version: can e-mail visibletweets@themainblue.com for a quote that offers a more customizable version of Visible Tweets that features your own logo, colors, fonts, Tweets fetched in real-time, and the option to moderate and filter tweets
Best features: Relatively decent selection of tweets, can customize visualization via tag cloud
Thumbs down features: Often slow-loading on university-wide systems, repetitive of most recent tweet visualizations (if large class as I have, this is negative)

#UPJDramagine311 Visible Tweets

 2. Tweet Wally: http://www.tweetwally.com/

Directions: Sign in with your Twitter account

Visualization options/customization: Yes; High

Free version: Recent tweets; seems within 24 hours of posting

$ version: —

Best features: Publishable pages, filtered tweets, named pages, multiple viewing options, ability to include description, multiple display options, embed features, “Help” features for keyword search; useful for my grading system (which my grading system may not be so useful, suggestions are welcome!)

Thumbs down features: Problems searching into past tweets; seems to be useful for current tweets only

3. Twub: http://twubs.com/

Directions: Type in the hashtag of tweets that you want to visualize or in with your Twitter account

Visualization options/customization: No

Free version: Use to embed and share a feed, host and schedule a chat based on your registered hashtag

$ version: It’s free, unless using for an event (corporate), then lowest cost is $99/month

Best features: Can embed the feed, choose the speed of feed, schedule/host a live chat (promotes conversational engagement), register your hashtag (publish), invite others, opportunities for inter-university relations, control the feed

Thumbs down features: Seems more like a corporate chat room; the embedded feed is the single best feature

4. Twitter Fontana: http://twitterfontana.com/

Directions: Type in the hashtag of tweets that you want to visualize or sign in with your Twitter account

Visualization options/customization: Yes; High

Free version: Visual display of tweets

$ version: —

Best features: Variety of visualization and aesthetic customization: one or many tweets on the screen, opens avenues for different types of discussion activities, ability to control the feed (pause for discussion purposes)

Thumbs down features: Cannot embed or share specific tweets/hashtags; it always goes to homepage

twitterfontana

5. Tweet Archivist: https://www.tweetarchivist.com/

Directions: Type in the hashtag of tweets that you want to visualize or in with your Twitter account

Visualization options/customization: No

Free version: Can view analysis, one time

$ version: Need to pay for valuable results other than just one time

Best features: Can view multiple analyses and patterns of tweets: “top influencer” index, hashtags, images, user mentions, volume of tweets over time, sources of tweets, top words, top contributors, if paid for, can download data in PDF or Excel file.

Thumbs down features: Similar to our discussions with how/why to use Voyant, how/why to catalog and log the frequencies of topics other than tracing and themes and intersections of academic conversation, I’m not sure what else this could be used for; also, $

twitterarchivist1

twitterarchivist2

twitterarchivist3

6. Hastagify: http://hashtagify.me/

Directions: Type in the hashtag of tweets that you want to visualize or in with your Twitter account

Visualization options/customization: Yes; High

Free version: Can view multiple and various forms of analyses

$ version: Can pay for “Hashtags Lab,” an even more in-depth analysis of how your hashtag basically influences lives.

Best features: #1 Feature=Hashtag Wall: Great and aesthetic way to view multiple tweets at one time, effective way for discussion activities; Can view multiple analyses and patterns of tweets: usage patterns, basic, modern, and table-style of analyses, related hashtags, popularity trends, spelling variants of the selected hashtag,

Thumbs down features: Similar to our discussions with how/why to use Voyant, how/why to catalog and log the frequencies of topics other than tracing and themes and intersections of academic conversation, I’m not sure what else this could be used for;

“UPJDramagine311 Hashtag Wall”

Omeka Reflection

Posted on by under Mini Projects, Responses

Link to Omeka exhibits:

Omeka Exhibits: U.S.-Mexico War

My explorations with Omeka consist of two exhibits.

The first exhibit is dedicated to uncovering the palimpsests layering the U.S.-Mexican minstrel-turned-war song, “Lucy Neal.” I liked and disliked this medium for showcasing my research on the evolutionary process of this song. Visually representing these items is an important aspect of this study of “Lucy Neal,” because of the access to archived material and sheet music versions of the song that is available online. Having items organized in this way is much more effective than having a pile of these items in an appendix for reference. This format forces the reader to look at the items in a specific sequence, which would not be guaranteed if the exhibit were in codex form.

This topic is extraordinarily narrow and specific, which does not allow the opportunity of having hundreds of items to showcase in an exhibit. I stretched it a little by adding Acts of Congress pdfs to triangulate history with my application, though I really don’t delve into them or need to for the purpose of this exhibit. Additionally, there wasn’t much narrative to go along with the items in the collection, so I ended up giving more historical context behind the items than explanation of the items. I also could not configure the layout to be as aesthetically pleasing as I would like it to be. I don’t think we had found a solution for how to see the full image of sheet music, which decreases some of the visual quality of the exhibit. Also, the ways that I organized the material, through trial-and-error of left, right, and center alignments still looks unorganized on one of my pages. I’m not sure how to fix this so that the visuals speak more clearly to the effect I was trying to render.

The second exhibit is an experiment for how to use Omeka as a tool for the writing process. I like that Omeka awards users the opportunity to organize and triangulate items and intersect them within a collection. I wanted to try this out as a pre-writing tool because of the emphasis on the user’s own categorization. I think it’s important to be able to visualize data, items, and collections much like it is to organize ideas and information for writing. I thought that Omeka could prove to be a useful tool for more visual learners, or learners who are otherly-abled in terms of how to triangulate data into a cohesive composition. Additionally, the option to re-organize the sequence of pages and blocks within those pages, I thought would be a more tangible way of learning organizational form of an essay, vs. copy and pasting throughout a word document.

It sounds like a great idea, but I don’t think it worked out. Overall, it seemed redundant to include items and information only to reformulate them into an essay format. Additionally, the organization of the blocks, even with multiple layout configurations, look hap-hazard to me.

Since I was toying around with ideas within the U.S.-Mexican War context, as in my first exhibit, the items that I could include are few and far between. My topics present narrow fields that aren’t well-treated. If more items were available, then I think an exhibit would be a much more effective tool for the presentation of such information.

If used in an educational context, I think the best way that I could find application for this is similar to that of a Webquest. An Omeka exhibit reminds me of the format and function of a Webquest, with style. Instead of using this as a tool for the writing process, I think that I would use this as a tool for interactive learning, where information and data is provided and a specific set of assignments are to be completed using the items within the exhibit.

Audiences and Purposes

Posted on by under Uncategorized

#18: Electronic Sources: Audiences and Purposes (Schreibman, Siemens, and Unsworth) provides to us the argument and complications surrounding the purpose and function of electronic texts.

Birkerts and Baker seem to share some of the same anxieties that we have been discussing all semester: the threat of codex extinction. They both “mourn the changes wrought by the development of electronic media, and fear that books, once decoupled from their physical presence, will lose their meaning and historical importance.” While I don’t think we are close to a Fahrenheit 451 post-codex-apocalypse, I understand and share some of their anxious notions. In conversation with procuring electronic texts, however, the rebuttal to this possibility and fear is that electronic texts may actually do the opposite, as this chapter indicates that Birkerts, specifically, “does not consider other possible outcomes, such as one in which general readers and scholars alike have a better sense of the concerns and ideas of peoples and historical periods with increased access to works otherwise available in only a few libraries.” While I agree that the increase of access provides a larger space and opportunity to interact with rare texts, I don’t think that it directly responds to the possible extinction of the codex. Even the authors’ response to this does not clearly answer that: “The development of digital collections does not require the destruction of books; instead, it may provoke more interest in their existence and provide different opportunities for their study through keyword and structured reading.” To me, this doesn’t answer the concern of Birkets and Baker. Even though this process “does not require the destruction of books,” the possibility of the extinction of the codex is not ruled out.

There is also the issue of access. Electronic digitizations of texts simply for access seems to miss the point, according to Hockey, where “access is the least interesting aspect of electronic texts, for it leaves largely unexploited their real power: the ability for texts to be searched and manipulated by computer programs.” For me, and perhaps for the electronic text collections available, Hockey’s stance on what should be the focus of electronic texts seems to be a bit ahead of the game, at this point. It seems that gaining access to a wide range of texts is the fundamental first step toward anything more complex, such as Hockey’s suggestion for electronic text possibilities.

While there is an array of electronic texts available, it is also very limiting: “The initial hindrances to reading works by lesser-known writers, perhaps insurmountable in the past, can be much more easily overcome in this new medium.” While this is true, those texts also need to be made available. Progressing through the chapter, it is clear that finding out what exactly is available is an “immediate problem” since there is no institutionalized cataloging order of what electronic collections are available. It seems to me, that perhaps before dedicating the studies in this field to all that it can be, there needs to be some rational organization of material, increased standards for electronic collections (publisher and edition choices, for example), and an e-Dewey-type system for categorization before the shift to digital humanities can be curbed to anticipate and refute the foundational concerns of skeptics.

Voyant Visualization as Revision Tool

Posted on by under Mini Projects, Responses

While exploring applications for Voyant, I wanted to try out how visualization could function as a composition revision tool.

For this series of visualizations, I worked with three versions of my teaching philosophy in preparation for my GI application documents. The goal for this visualization was to map how much I am using the terms that ground my teaching philosophy: Literature, Writing/Composition, Experience, and Pedagogy.

For each version, I have provided the visualization maps of Literature + Writing (+ later Composition) + Pedagogy + Experience.

Version 1 of Teaching Philosophy
Frequency of Literature, Writing, and Pedagogy

Analysis:

This compiled visualization shows us that while there are inter-weaving waves, there are “flat” spots where word frequencies drop completely or remain stagnant. My goal for this text is to showcase my pedagogy and knowledge in a form that reflects its complete connectivity and fluidity. I want “literature” and “writing” to show up together both in frequency, which shows my balanced dedication to both, and also in location with one another, as I am a firm advocate of the reading-writing connection.)

The goal for this correlation is to have each term applied in the same relative frequency as well as have waves intersect and overlap in order to showcase how the three of these terms function within my pedagogy.

Here, we see that my discussion of writing has a greater space in my philosophy. Literature does not reach the same frequency, but increases near the end of the essay, apart from writing.

Pedagogy also flatlines between 5 and 8, when I am discussing writing and literature within the essay.

Based on my goals for this philosophy, the waves between 3-6 should therefore be the target pattern for the entire essay. Each term is interconnected, balanced in frequency, and overlapping.

Teaching Philosophy Version 2
Frequency of Literature, Writing, Composition, Pedagogy, and Experience

Analysis:

Composition + Experience have been added to the frequency mapping. A major part of my pedagogy is the learning experience as a whole, and I wanted to showcase that visually in this chart as well as in my statement. Composition is used interchangeably with Writing. I did not use “Composition” in my first version and have added it to this frequency map, instead.

While areas 2-4 have points of intersection between writing/composition and literature, it still does not reflect their connection within my pedagogy.

Instead of inter-weaving waves with relatively equal frequencies, I have three large and separated waves: Composition, Experience, Literature. With this revision, I have improved their frequency and fluidity between one another, but there is obvious space that needs connected.

From 1-2, pedagogy and experience overlap. This is the goal that I would like to accomplish with each of these key terms throughout the essay. Additionally, from 5-6 before pedagogy stabilizes, there is a positive and similar correlation between pedagogy and experience–one builds the other. This is what I am looking for the graph to more fully represent with the next version.

Teaching Philosophy Version 3
Frequency of Literature, Composition, Writing, Pedagogy, and Experience

Analysis:
Voila! I did it.

This visualization displays how fluid each of these key terms of my philosophy have been integrated with statement content. Since the crux of my personal pedagogy is balanced and recursive (as in reflective-reactive), it only makes sense that the visualization reflects that in terms of frequency patterns (the waves) and intersections of the key terms of my philosophy. This visualization of those terms is visibly more balanced, as terms weave between each other, repeat correlations, continually layer on top of one another, and create a variety of frequency waves with multiple term pairings.

Points of Reflection:

1. It is important to know the writing that is being revised. For example, my rationale for why I did not pair pedagogy with my student + classroom mapping would have altered the frequency patterns in a way that does not complement the content of the statement.

2. With this revision process, I would correlate the word frequency with content. It is important to recognize that just because there is a high frequency doesn’t mean the writing is really “saying” anything. It is necessary to work recursively with the visualization, the numbers, and the work, itself. (i.e., if students were to use this tool, a general “find and replace” would change the frequencies, but not the pattern of ideas/narrative.)

3. For this analysis, the frequency count between the three versions does not hold value for this revision. An additional revision goal was to truncate this essay into one page. As a result, the word counts for each of the versions will decrease, which does not reflect a loss of focus, as it possibly would if I were to have kept the same page limit as version 1.

Scaffolding Our Way toward a DH Project: Pedagogical Foundations of Looking for Whitman

Posted on by under Responses

While checking out the “Finding Whitman” DH project, I kept connecting the multiple projects and assignments with the basic foundations of literature circles.

In no way am I trying to unethically reduce the pedagogy behind this DH project, or similar ones. Rather, I am trying to build a schema from what pedagogy with existing tools makes DH projects so transformative.

I think the roots are in literature circles, at base level–a group with different roles and expectations (different DH projects and assignments) to create a well-rounded discussion and co-exploration of a text. After all, isn’t the point of meaningful pedagogical assignments and lessons supposed to start a conversation?

    Frontispiece Project mirrors the Connector Role
    Image Gloss and Material Culture Projects mirrors the Illustrator Role
    Annotations Project mirrors the Passage Master/Literary Luminary Role

I also think that DH projects have the ability to take the basis of creating conversation and co-constructed understanding to the next level beyond the discussion that literature circles offer. DH projects, like this Whitman one for today, is also a resource, a platform for publishing, and is an easily adaptable, “live” space because it is open source.

Though this idea is innovative and breaks the classroom confinements and boundaries, there were mixed reviews from participants. I feel that maybe scaffolding toward such a DH project requires attention to the basics, pedagogically working from the ground-up to the WWW. Would modeling the co-constructivity in the classroom before dedicating to such a project (or similar project) help students appreciate and rely on interacting in a more meaningful way? In my mind, here’s the scaffold: Lit Circles (with modifications + additional activities)–>Class wiki/blog–>Class DH Project–>Inter-campus/location related DH Project. Would mastering these DH projects in the spaces and locations we are most comfortable in be a possible way of integrating a larger-scale project? Or, are the larger-scale and multiple locations just “too big” for “us” right now? What is the best approach? While we all have to operate on our own pedagogical praxis and comfortability levels, it would help to have some model based in theory to apply to praxis. I’m open for opinions on this. I think this is an important point to address, if we are ever to implement a DH project or tool that reaches each student in the most meaningful ways possible.

Classroom Applications for Voyant

Posted on by under Responses

In efforts to incorporate digital literacies and technologies into the classroom, I began brainstorming a list of classroom applications. Since much of our discussion focuses on how to use these tools in meaningful ways, I thought we could all participate in offering our own practical suggestions. I am not sure where to go with this in a Lit course, as we have discussed the various ways that these tools were utilized in our readings from last week, but I’m thinking we should be focusing on extensions of those activities–the “so what?”

Dear community of scholars, please add on to this meager list of mine!

    Voyant

–Composition Classes–

Application: Writer’s Notebook
Pedagogical Value: Allows for inclusion of multi-genre applications, mapping of word frequencies, which may lead to general themes of writing, can be used for brainstorming entries, etc.

Application: Revision Processes
Pedagogical Value: Maps word frequencies, could help with word choice, repetitive phrases, parallelism, etc.

–L & C Classes–
Thinking of ways that Voyant can be used in the context of the classroom, I’d like to add this to our running list from class discussion yesterday (3/3) with Dr. Sherwood’s Thoreau Voyant:
Application:Index for Comparison/Contrast or Mapping of Rhetoric.
Pedagogical Value:
With a work like Walden, Thoreau makes an argument for his anti-social lifestyle. Based on the mapping, there is a wave intersection between “solitary” and “social” when the diagram is enlarged between 31 and 35.
Looking at the diagram, it looks as though these two opposing terms represent a dialectic: solitary (thesis) and social (antithesis). The dialectic takes this map: thesis–>antithesis–>thesis–>antithesis–>thesis, which then conclusively rises above the rhetoric (frequency increases) and is correlated with a rise in the word frequency of “solitude.”
The application of compare/contrast already provides a visual Venn diagram with the purple and green lines, which can help students in locating the trends and points of intersection between these terms. Additionally, this visualization can offer to students a visualization of the rhetoric and dialectic mentioned above, which can be used in a lit or comp class.

*Screen shot of magnification of this frequency section borrowed from Dr. Sherwood’s blog: *thoreauvoyant

Clash of Clans “Story of the [Unattainable] Quest”: A Promising New Model for IFs?

Posted on by under Responses

Viewing the nearly antiquated experiences associated with hypertextual narratives in comparison to FPS-esque games and MMOs suggests a point of further inquisition and study that I think is worthy of attention. (I am bridging connections between some of the characteristics of FPSs with MMOs, as the quotations directed from this chapter apply to both, simultaneously.)

As we have learned, narrative scripts can be relayed in either diagetic, mimetic, or an enacted mode. The third, concerning digital literacies, according to Marie-Laure Ryan, is “enacted not for the benefit of an audience, as is the case in drama, but as a self-rewarding activity.” Throughout Chapter 28 (A Companion to Digital Humanities), this “reward” is mentioned and questioned, but never fully answered. Perhaps the answer to what this reward (or motivation) is can influence a reconfiguration of digital texts/IFs/hypertexts in a way that will engage the user to replay the narrative.

One game narrative that seems to withstand the test of time is the game narrative that never ends. The chapter includes commentary on The Sims, which is an example of this game narrative. Though somewhat outdated in comparison to the game culture of 2015, The Sims is still popularly played. However, the analysis of the game in coordination with its narrativity is similarly applicable to Clash of Clans. This is one of the most highly rated and most played MMO strategy video games since its release in 2012, which may prove to be more helpful in the search for what makes this particular game narrative popular and sustainable.

As Ryan brings to our attention, IFs “can develop very imaginative scripts that spice up the solving of problems with narrative interest [but] offer very little incentive to re-enter their world once the game has been beaten.” Well, what if the IF can’t be beat?

Is it possible to create an IF with “the story of the quest” that is ultimately unattainable? This speaks to Hayden White (1987) and his critique of a narrative’s “blindness…to the complexity of the problem of truth.” Ryan’s summary of White’s argument is simply that “narrative is not a reliable way to gain knowledge about the past, because it always involves a fabrication. Reality, he claims, does not offer itself to perception in the shape of a story.”

Like The Sims, Clash of Clans is one of the “God” games, where the player is in control of their clan base. There is no “beating the game” with either of these games, which could provide the point of motivation for continuing to play in comparison to IFs. Instead of “beating the game,” these narratives consist of overcoming various challenges, completing achievements, and, in Clash of Clans, winning/losing battles/wars. There is no end to the game. As players progress their clans and bases, the program continues to build the narrative as the players advance.

Why, if these games are never able to beat, are they so popular? I think that White’s argument plays into the possible answer for this. If we are making the analogy of game narratives (or classical narrative) to truths of reality (i.e. life), then IFs and classical narratives are unrealistic. Reality can’t be beat and life can’t be beat. Perhaps the motivation for playing “the story of the quest” presents more of a connection to the reality and truths of the narrative of our own lives: overcoming challenges, achievements, winning and losing. What if IFs were able to create this same narrative or mirror these basic constituents of them?

FPS, and, arguably, MMO “stories…remain in a virtual state until they are mentally replayed” (Ryan). Even though these games “are played over and over again, players rarely ‘replay’ in their minds the story of a game, because these stories only differ from each other” in trivial details (Ryan). While “the stories they generate are worth experiencing in the first person but rarely worth telling to a third party” (Ryan). Clash of Clans refutes this by forcing collaboration between its players and introducing the collective first person. Collaboration between players is forced by individual users having to attack other clan bases and by other users attacking one’s own base. There is no control over who attacks your base. As a result, you have to attack other clan bases in order to sustain your own clan. It isn’t possible to advance the game narrative if the collaboration between players is non-existent. Additionally, as clan bases advance and upgrade, it becomes difficult to stand alone in the Clash world. One must join a clan. Once in the clan, all members can look at each other’s bases, donate troops, go to war, share replays of attacks, and participate in the clan chat. It is constantly collaborative. It is so much so that I know of clans that choose to also meet outside of the clan chat in person and discuss the game narrative, their own experiences, the collective clan experience, layout strategies, attack styles, and troop fulfillment. The greater a clan works together, the more successful the clan will be. This also goes directly back to White’s argument of narrative reality. While the game is fictitious, collaborating with others, learning to ask for donations, sending help to others, problem-solving, dealing with victories as well as losses, and more, are all experiences of the multiple truths of reality (i.e. working together as a community for a purpose). This collaboration is certainly a motivation for continuing to participate and co-create the game narrative as it exists in real time. What if IFs were able to extend this same type of collaboration that seems to be so popular?

If, as Ryan argues, “the motivation of…players is much more narrative than that which drives the players of FPS’s [and MMOs],” then I think that there are two important elements of a successful narrative that seems to foreground the base of player motivation: “the story of the quest” and player/narrative collaboration. If the IF world were to reconfigure the way that game narratives are constructed and tailored the narrative to player’s motivations (as those above), perhaps IFs would have a greater presence in the gaming world. However, this brings into play an entirely different argument of whether or not it is possible, considering the limitations of IFs (recognized vocabulary, number of rooms, actions, etc.). Is it even possible to suggest this reconfiguration with the given platform of IFs? What will happen to IFs if they do not adapt to the motivations of its players? While I have no answers, I think that these points are ones that shouldn’t be dismissed.

Tech-Impaired Anonymous

Posted on by under Uncategorized

Hi. My name is Michaela (audience members: “Hi, Michaela”) and I am technologically handicapped. My support groups consists of online forums with equally technologically-retracted human beings who also do not know the answers to my questions. My personal readings outside of our assigned readings have been PDF excerpts of HTML for Dummies that are scattered online. This is the 5th attempt at posting this blog post from two weeks ago, which has somehow led to “failure: internal data corruption” or similar variant pop-ups between clicking on the “Publish” button on my computer screen and what should ideally happen. Thankfully, my tech-handicap has taught me (the hard way) to save and re-save multiple back-ups of things.

This is where I’ve been.

I have been trying to pull both sides of my brain into working together with this stuff, but it is difficult. I am sharing my difficulty with technology in this blog not only to excuse my lack of blogging, but because I feel that even though our students are, most likely, more tech-savvy than we are, there are moments such as the ones that I am having, that address our students daily within our classrooms–either with or without technology.

I think one of the most important things that I have realized from my experiences thus far with all of the programs, code, intricate readings saturated with tech terms, and IF frustrations, that turning on to
technology doesn’t have to be such a turn off for the tech-impaired.

In some ways, I think that I have been focusing on the wrong aspect of these tools.  I shouldn’t drown myself in code or alien data language or (insert techy jargon quip here) to locate a deeper understanding of the Digital Humanities Web Experience. It is much more than the foundations that lead the way to an entirely different hierarchical level of critical thinking.

In other ways, I am finding some different perspectives on digital humanization. When attempting to blog and comment on others’ sites after the first few blogs (which were magically problem-free), I noticed that though I had been participating by reading other blogs and formulating my own responses, I feel like I had been missing out because my work or coordinating responses were not “published.” I’m not sure how to put my finger on it, but the act of engaging through this interface requires the Lacanian “Big Other” to make it count.

While I still grapple with meaningful ways to incorporate the discussion board (as I am doing in my classes right now) and genuinely participate in them (such as this blog), I’m OK with the fact that I’m still not quite sure where these things land for me or how to articulate them within the larger theme of this class.
However, I do know that picking up a bunch of tools because they are on sale and expanding the toolbox
isn’t going to make me a better educator. But, I also realize that these tools must fit a purpose.

Skip to toolbar