Tag Archives: teaching

Student Blogs

Mixed Methods – When Students Want to Stand Out

Hey guys,

~~ Whatever thoughts came to mind while reading, I recorded ~~

MIXED METHODS ARTICLE REACTION:

After skimming through this week’s assigned research article, “When students want to stand out: Discourse moves in online classroom discussion that reflect students’ needs for distinctiveness” by Li-Tang Yu, et al., I definitely felt a personal connection to the objective of the study, exploring how students with different needs for uniqueness participated in online classrooms, or virtual learning experience. My first question before delving into the introduction section was, “What constitutes a student to have ‘different needs for uniqueness?’”

At first guess, I assumed this specified group of students to each have either a learning disability, mental illness, or some form of cognitive impairment. Perhaps, students with physical-limitations due to chronic disease or sudden injury, or maybe those who have neurodivergent qualities found on the autism spectrum disorder. Harnessing the motivation to participate in an online class is a challenging task, especially for the students who lack the confidence in themselves to speak up and ask for help. As I continued on reading this study, I was continually bombarded with zoom university flashbacks. What a wild and eerie time ~~

 I remember, although I struggled to adjust at first, I enjoyed the time spent learning in online classroom platforms. In the comfort of my own home. Bathroom break on my command. Time felt slower, and I felt more in control of my learning and weekly time-planning. My difficulties adjudging (or “assimilating”) to and back from the online learning world to the physical classroom, in a way, supports what Brewer (1991) had said about Synder and Fromkin’s (1980) Uniqueness Theory, which is that social identity is derived from two opposing forces, assimilation, and differentiation form others. This makes total sense – humans carry with them an embedded biological need or want to belong, to be a part of a safe community with like-minded individuals. Yet, humans also want an occasional ego-boost so that they feel different, noticed, and perhaps, appreciated.

I will end this blog post with this quote, “Because individuals are said to vacillate between wanting to belong and wanting to stand out and be recognized for their unique contribution to a group, Kreiner, Hollensbe, and Sheep (2006) suggested that one’s need to be unique is likely to affect identity work, which in turn seems essential to the internalization of academic discourse (Duff, 2010)” (by Li-Tang Yu, et al., 1). This quote emphasizes the unfolding connection between the need and want to belong, and yet to also feel uniquely different is a defining identity characteristic, which will inevitably influence or impact the internalization of academic discourse. By the way, I don’t know, if what I’m saying or trying to articulate here in this blog post, even makes sense ~~

UPDATE ON RESEARCH PROPOSAL DRAFT:

Okay, so now I’ll try and sum up what’s going on with my research proposal drafting process, in which I obviously plan to work on more so later today. I have a lot of words and ideas on pages right now, which is good yet overwhelming me with how easily I can lose track of my own thought-writing-planning process. As for the sources for my literature review, I have accumulated 14 solid research articles so far, and have annotated seven of them [in which are still considered in the drafting citation phase]. The seven annotated articles were thoroughly skimmed through several of times and chosen to be cited within my introduction section because of their closer relevance to my inquiry question, similar participant demographic, or thoughtful discussion on the different thinking styles and states of human consciousness.

My introduction is still a mess; paragraphs with great detail and quality content sporadically placed throughout my document. I’m a messy writer, and often write what comes to mind or feels write, then go back to read some of the research articles in hopes to revisit my messy draft for refinement, deleting paragraph-ideas that no longer serve the direction of where my research inquiry question is intending to go. I have refined my research question multiple times, and now feel satisfied with it. I feel fine in terms of finding research article sources, annotating, and finding connections within and between them.

However, I am struggling with the construction and organization of my methodology section. I’ve planned out some draft ideas of data collection methods based on the phenomenological approach to research design. I’m definitely researching a phenomenon – the emergence of cognitive creative functioning and influence on self-identity amongst Kean University students.

I’m choosing to do a small focus group sampling size of ten students, who each leisurely practice a form of artistic-creative expression. The ten students can be from either an undergraduate or graduate program at Kean. I would like to plan for only two students to engage in the same form of artistic-creative expression. This means 10 different students but only 5 different forms of creative expression will be analyzed in my study. This way I can conduct deep cross-comparative analysis between the creative processes of students engaging in the same form of creativity (e.g., two students painting or drawing as a form of creative expression) and between those engaging in different forms of creative expression (e.g., dancing as a form of creative expression vs. writing).

I plan on implementing structured and unstructured interviews with participants before, during, and after their engaged experience of creative production. For this to happen, there will need to be three separate phases or stages of the interview process. The first stage will be a structured individual interview, with some open-ended questions with each participant. The second stage will involve unstructured, conversational questions while directly observing and note taking the engagement and production of creativity at hand (individually, not as a group). And the third stage will be the reflective focus group gathering, where I pose questions as a frame of guidance but will ultimately let the participants lead the discuss on their creative experience, associated feelings or attitudes all throughout, setbacks or unforeseen challenges, insights, or revelations of any kind. My observational notes on the creative productions and the reflective focus group discussion will count as data for this study, and I will use thematic analysis to identify common themes, or patterns of meaning that come up repeatedly.

That’s all I got for this week ~~ my brain feels heavy, and my eyes now hurt but hey, we are almost to the finish line ~~

Xoxo,

Francesca Di Fabio 🙂

Student Blogs

Writing & Video Game Design – Phenomenology

Hey, hey, peoples ~~~

While reading, “A Research-Based Approach to Game Writing Pedagogy” by Seth Andrew Hudson, I instantly thought about how I know very little about game writing, and what kind of sub-features that writing genre entails. I would assume, essentially, that game writing involves writing detailed narration or prose with dialogue as to liven up the setting and the characters within the game. I would also assume that game writing entails a great deal of conflict within the game narrative, in which players level up once they have conquered or solved the assigned challenge (or conflict). My knowledge of the video game culture is solely based off watching my older brother and his friends play video games, each one of them connected to a headset so that I can’t miss my brother’s triumphant screams into his computer screen, which vibrate through the thin walls of our home (lol). From my direct observations, I’ve concluded that whatever kind of video game is being played – singular, multiplayer, or a free-roaming-role-playing game (open world games like GTA), that involves some form of fighting, battling, adventuring on quests, playing sports, or racing – all often call for setting up missions and changing levels.

So, inevitably, the game writer and narration designers are pushed to think outside the lines of the stereotypical plot arc of “good story telling.” The characters are essentially faced with a consistent inability (through failed quests or challenges) to achieve a noteworthy success, multiple times over. And if the players happen to be skilled in mastering challenges, the following levels must be more complex in design, like maybe including multi-step conflict challenges within one level, adding more characters into the video game storyline, or altering or inserting more pathways, rewards, consequences, or obstacles for each video game character, (depending on the player’s already-mastered levels or challenges, of course). I feel like writing a video game would feel similar to writing a ginormous, never-ending, action-packed, book series. I can imagine video game writing being very competitive in nature and extremely anxiety-inducing, as the writer must continuously write new creative plot ideas or paths or levels for characters to choose from, especially when there really are no successful teaching frameworks offered within this genre of writing.

The main problem in question for Hudson’s study seems to be that there are no effective pedagogies or theoretical frameworks to teach effective game design writing in higher education. (Hudson, 92). It also doesn’t help that there is little to no support and guidance in this inquiry-problem question from those in this writing genre community, like successful narrative designers, comic book writers, scene editors, and other game writers alike. Professional game writers within the field offer “limited attempts” on how to plan, establish, and execute a deliberate framework of game writing teaching methods that outline effective course design and instruction, probably because they were never taught themselves (Hudson, 93). I imagine these “professional game writers” used their unique writing talents and combined them with their passion for indulging in video games, and basically just taught themselves how to write effective video game designs through colleague collaboration or trial and error. I assume such because Hudson even explained how “the distance between understandings in these two spheres does not indicate a lack of sophistication on the part of the industry or of game writers. Rather, it is indictive of an opportunity for educator-researchers to engage with the field directly” (94). Therefore, there is a high demand for “research-enhanced pedagogy of game writing,” which is something new to my knowledge within the fields of writing studies and interactive digital media (Hudson, 92).

            Without delay, Hudson admits that “it can be difficult to develop pedagogies in creative fields” (92). Video game writing is a creative field of study or practice that not only embraces traditional writing features like composition and poetry, but also requires knowledge on technological design and computer skills. Therefore, teaching methods within video game writing as a genre must reinforce, discuss, and practice the importance of both of these skills for productive results. After reading through the “Conceptual Framework and Research Design” section, I’ve noticed that effective pedagogy of this writing genre really boils down to encouraging those studying the craft of writing (especially creative writing) and supporting them through analyzing rhetorical situations. Future instructors of this writing genre should also encourage them to think strategically when confronting new contexts, challenges, or situations (Hudson, 95-96).  

There’s much more to say about the ways in which institutions or departments heads can turn the sub-writing features and computer skills of video game design into effective, curriculum instruction manuals for teaching in higher education. With that being said, I think that’s all I’ve got to say for this week’s research reading ~~~

**The link to where I found the above photo is linked to the image**

Xoxo,

Francesca Di Fabio 🙂

Student Blogs

HOW TO BE A “GOOD” ACADEMIC RESEARCHER

I had flashbacks of being back in my undergraduate program at Kean, awaiting and consciously avoiding the infamous Research & Technology course while reading Purdy and Walker’s scholarly research, Liminal Spaces and Research Identity: The Construction of Introductory Composition Students as Researchers. Ask any Kean undergraduate student about the required Research and Technology course, and I doubt they will smile and jump gleefully as they tell you all about the course requirements. If anything, they may cry while telling you all about the course (lol).

Honestly, I’m being dramatic. The course really wasn’t all that bad as we took the adequate time in the beginning to develop research questions that had meaning and value to us, and we wrote through and conducted each step of the research process together (we all had our own inquiry question and topic, of course). I conducted research on the prevalence and purpose of visible tattoos on college students at Kean in certain academic majors. I had a newly found liking toward tattoos as a form of self-expression and wanted to know if the stigma associated with professionalism stopped students in getting visible tattoos on their body in hopes to acquire a job related to their major of study.

My Research & Tech class certainly had the feel or vibe of no soldier left behind – if ya know what I mean. We followed the “linear, print-based model of research” through sequential steps and deadlines, so that by the time you blinked you were done with one section and moving forward and on to the next (Purdy and Walker 10). The process was so fast in such little time that there was no time to be anxious about it (which, I guess was nice? lol). Instead, all there was time for was to just go – go – go and do – do – do and get it done- done – done! My professor made the sequential steps seem manageable for an anxious, introductory student and she had warned us to not fall behind – several of times. I was lucky enough to have friends in that class, along with a really cool and dope professor who wanted us to not only like but to feel connected to our chosen research topic.

Purdy and Walker’s scholarly research really had me reflecting back on my experience as a dyslexic and anxious introductory student who knew little of herself, so how in the heckedy-heck would I know how to cultivate my own research identity? (lol) I know now what a research identity is, and the crucial steps taken toward cultivation (Thanks to Purdy & Walker <3). The central claim behind their research is that English Studies teachers should promote a better understanding of the research identities students must cultivate to pass university classes and beyond. Such known and newly developed student-research identities could “help to prepare future, educated civil participants” and provide students with a sense of who they are and why that might be in relation to inquiry research (Purdy and Walker 9).

There was no shock in reading about how the composition handbooks and texts given to introductory students to help learn about scholarly research only emphasize the very things that intimidate us or the very things we don’t know how to do. And, ugh – still no surprise to read about the straightforward, linear assumption of conducting meaningful research and collecting data.

It is absurd to assume that students coming from all over would be willing enough to leave behind their already-formed, pre-determined, complex identities of online researchers to find a new identity in pursuit of writing a hefty research paper. HAHAH – it’s laughable, honestly. Anyway, I felt Purdy and Walker’s research heading toward the direction of opposition against the infamous prescribed pathways of research. Especially after learning how recursive and circular in nature qualitative methods can be when conducting research, as the data usually takes the lead for itself. So, I decided to comment my authentic reaction before reading past page 10.

~~~ Here it goes ~~~

Regarding Susan Miller’s (1991; 51) call for attention on the problematic teaching attitudes and tools that frame introductory students’ as researchers, I instantly thought of and about the lack of scholarly and academic writing and research preparation or proper exposure in and throughout the secondary or high school years. This lack of preparation creates a major disconnect for newly, incoming college students. Especially, considering the many different and unique places – states, county, school districts – the newly accepted students come from. University students come from all over and bring with them differing degrees of knowledge and academic skillsets that are culturally connected to wherever it is they come from. This diversity of multiple distinct academic identities adds an additional layer of complexity onto the professor’s job of building adaptive, flexible research identities from students’ already existing knowledge-identity.

I thought of this issue before reading on because I personally felt the disconnect in the process of reading and conducting scholarly research during the beginning years of my undergraduate experience. However, I was also not the student to take academic risks nor challenge myself in high school like I can do now. I was down deep in the belief that dyslexia had made me forever dumb. So, I brought with me to Kean this unproven, fictional narrative that I’m incapable of anything scholarly, or incapable of anything academically challenging.

So, please – imagine my fright when I heard about the required Research and Technology course that every academic major had to take at some point. I’m no longer scared of reading or writing academic research papers, but the idea of having to re-conduct, re-engage with, and re-organize research to fit the very ‘identity’ I still know very little about seems . . . well. . . not cute. Lastly, I’d like to pay my respects to Purdy & Walker for firmly believing in instructional methods that act as a threshold for introductory students “to unite oneself with a new world” because I sure as h*ll didn’t feel united.

Xoxo,

Francesca Di Fabio 