Tag Archives: #writing

Student Blogs

Discourse Analysis & Research Proposal Update

Update on Research Proposal Process:

Hey guys,

So, I decided taking on Tyler’s bullet-point approach to my own blog posts as the semester is ending and my focus and attention is now directed more toward refining my research question and writing my research proposal draft. As of right now, I have written a very “rough” draft of my thesis proposal, now skimming through my selected sources, noticing when and where my ideas can be supported and backed by prior research. My rough draft is kind of all over the place, which seems to be okay at this point of the research process. I have so many tabs open, constantly going back and forth, trying to remember which article I read and cited. Refining research is a frustrating process, but as I slowly get more work done, I feel my notes and ideas are aligning and making more sense.

For now, I paused on writing my proposal draft, as I was feeling hesitant about my sources, and worrying if my research process will come together. Now I’m diving deeper into my research sources to work on my literature review. This way, I can have a better understanding and overview of each source that will drive my research inquiry forward. As for Thursday’s class, I’ll have a terrible rough draft of my thesis proposal, and a quarter of my literature review done. ~~ Baby steps, people, baby steps ~~

Response on Discourse Analysis:

The research article, Discourse Analysis: Making Complex Methodology Simple by Bondarouk and Ruël talks about the emergence of information systems (IS), and how recent research studies have showed an interest in discourse analysis. Discourse analysis goes hand-in-hand in understanding the inner-workings behind IS and the behavior associated with handling information technologies as their purpose is to essentially collect, store, decode, process, and transmit digital information to make meaning and understanding.

  • The article is straightforward, stating the authors concerns in the “‘universal’ relationships between variables in the social reality” (Bandarouk & Ruël, 2004). The authors central focus of concern is behind the data collection and decoding process of interpretative studies, especially ones that utilize quantitative methods of data collection. The positive paradigm of research is referenced all throughout the article, which relies on measurement and reason from an observable activity, action, or reason to make generalizable inferences.
  • I guess my question here, would be is the predominance of positivism among IS studies a good or bad thing? Because, as a novice researcher, I truly don’t know. All I do know is that Bandarouk & Ruël illustrate the multidisciplinary origins of “what actually constitutes ‘discourse’ and elaborate on the main principles of conducing discourse analysis in IS studies” (2004). The authors also go as far as to demonstrate an eight-step mode or guide for conducting discourse analysis for interpretative IS studies. Which, I assume is the author’s attempt at making discourse analysis a more simplified research methodology.
  • Truly, I’m still confused on this whole discourse analysis approach to interpretive studies. So, I did some research outside of the assigned article. Of course, I looked up a working definition of discourse analysis, one in which I can understand and apply to this article. According to Emerald Publishing, the Oxford English Dictionary defines discourse analysis as: “Linguistics, a method of analyzing the structure of texts or utterances longer than one sentence, taking into account both their linguistic content and their sociolinguistic context; analysis performed using this method.” I would assume the ‘interpretive’ portion of this decoding approach would involve reading in between the lines for deeper meaning.
  • I was also confused on the term “positivism,” in which the authors reference a lot throughout the article. When I researched “positivism among IS studies,” what came up was the word naturalism. Or, the view that only factual knowledge is gained through observation (the senses), including measurement, is trustworthy. Therefore, it seems to be that the discourse analysis approach must consider the principles of both nature and science when trying to extract valid information by an observed phenomenon.
  • Obviously, research paradigms guide scientific discoveries through assumptions and principles based off how the world operates. Therefore, the eight-step mode of discourse analysis is practical in its application process for novice researchers trying to understand or attempt a discourse analysis method approach. Although I’m still confused on this whole discourse analysis method-approach (one in which sounds tedious and complex), I can leave knowing that the first theoretical implication, or step one is “identifying a theory” (2004). From that point onward, the researcher must transcribe the interviews, always checking whether the words (or collected data) are in line with the proposed theory.

  • One last thing I noticed while skimming through this article is the difference in traditional and discourse analysis interviews. If a researcher chooses to use discourse analysis as a means of data processing, then they must systematically prepare interview questions that align with the consistency of their proposed theory and allows for diversity in responses. This way, the researcher can later conduct an in-depth, meaningful transcription of the phonetic and intonational features behind each verbal response.   

That’s all I got to say for this week folks ~~

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

Autoethnography: Round 2, Baby ~

Hey, again, guys, ~~

I wasn’t sure if I had to write a blog post for this week considering it was my presentation week; however, there were two readings on Autoethnography. So, here we go ~~

In light of Val’s assigned autoethnography reading, “An Autoethnography on Learning About Autoethnography” by Sarah Walls, I happened to notice a phrase, or specific words in particular, that struck me differently from my first read over. I read this reading again after reading the many insightful, in-depth class blog posts.

Specifically, I’d like to draw attention toward Rachel & Ricki’s blog posts as they did so well explaining, in their own words, the criticism or opposing force against autoethnography as a valid research method of inquiry. So, there I was, reading Wall’s viewpoint again, and found myself, once again nodding in agreement to everything she had said and stopped when I happened to skim over this phrase, in which I cut from its full-length quote, “[. . .] researcher’s rhetoric, prejudice, and experience in interpretation of observations [. . .]” (Wall, 147). I’ve read over those words before regarding autoethnography and was confused to why I had stopped reading further for a moment.

The irony is that this phrase I pulled and cut came from a quote in support of autoethnography as a valid method of research inquiry and academic writing (in which, I do still agree with BTW). However, after reading how Ricki and Rachel felt toward autoethnography, I perceived it differently than before. Or better said, I came to really understand the so-called dangers of just using autoethnography as a research method of inquiry by its lonesome. Ricki said it best – I quote, “I am still not the biggest fan because I just don’t trust other’s judgement,” and he continues by then saying, “[. . .] I cannot imagine an autoethnography being the sole method. It would have to be paired with something else.” I completely understand the mistrust in others and found the mixed-methods type of approach toward autoethnography a brilliant way to liven the data that comes from biographical narratives.

I had first sided only with the rise of postmodernism and the freedom autoethnography brings into the research community, particularly academic writing. We are studying a Humanities discipline, after all (Writing Studies), I thought to myself. I then thought, wouldn’t it be wrong of me to agree with all the insightful criticism of a newly developed research that’s essentially in favor of a more humanistic approach to academic writing?

But the truth is, is that we are all human, and with that comes many flaws and thick layers of deception (Rachel used this word in her blog post, and it struck me). The mind is so complex that we even deceive ourselves – more so than not, until the delusions must be dimmed and managed by medication. In NO WAY or manner am I implying that to be mentally ill equates to unreliability. Everyone has a story, in which some parts can be trusted and some not. If I were claiming so, then everything I say or write could be considered a misguided delusional thought. But I’d be lying if not to admit how jaded memories can really be, and to the very danger in solely believing what it is your mind tells you.

So, my eyes have now been mindfully opened to appreciate each critical remark opposing the validity of autoethnographic research because I see them now as kind warnings, that would speak: Yes, we are indeed products of our uniquely lived experiences that hold concrete value and meaning in this world, some powerful enough to exact change. Although please be aware of the mind and all the deceiving creases it entails.

With all being said, I’m very impressed by this week blog postings. I feel like I needed to rehear (or reread) the opposing remarks from a fellow classmate – rather than a researcher, philosopher, or autoethnographer – to be reminded about the dangers of fully and whole-heartedly trusting the subjectivity of memories.

Thank you, guys !! ❤ lol

Xoxo,

Francesca Di Fabio 

Student Blogs

Who Am I? & What is My Research Identity?

PART 1:

Well, hello my fellow classmates ~~ I am using my introduction blog from my last class with Dr. Zamora (ENG 5020) because it does the job well. Of course, I added some stuff on research and changed some things around 

Francesca Di Fabio, here – I come from a hard-working, Italian American household, raised by both of my lovely grandmothers, mother, father, and older brother. I was blessed enough to have one grandma – my Nonna – live down the street, and my other grandma – who we called Morning – live in the bottom half of our mother-daughter house. Both of my Italian grandmas have passed but our lovely memories of drawing, painting, gardening, cooking home-made pasta and sauce together will live on forever.

I sleep in the very room my mother did too, when she was a young girl, following the motions toward womanhood. Now a grown woman myself, I take pleasure in waking up late on Sunday’s to the smell of Morning’s marinara sauce recipe boiling on the stove top – cooked by my mother and passed down from her own. Ready and served no later than 3 PM every Sunday. I learned quickly how to make room for two dinner servings on Sundays, because if not, my mother will take it as an insult to her cooking. It’s very simple: If we don’t eat, my mother is not pleased. My mother – a Jersey City Italian who’s a mix between Judge Judy and The Long Island Medium. Trust me, you want to please the woman!

But who exactly am I? I wish I could tell you – I’m still figuring that one out. One thing about me is that I’m super passionate about kindness and sharing it with those around us, which is why I teach kids yoga at Lifetime Athletic in Berkeley Heights, NJ. I have been teaching kids yoga for over 2 years now and have an army of kids and families that come weekly. One future goal of mine is to open my own KIDS YOGA STUDIO, only for kiddos aged 13 years and below, with adult yoga transitioning classes for preteens (13 – 15 years old) and Mommy & Me classes during the day.

Some other things I can tell ya is that I obtained my bachelor’s degree in English, Writing, and Education from Kean University, and graduated in the Spring of 2022. Sometimes, I still can’t believe that I have a degree in English and am getting my M.A. in Writing Studies. Growing up, I often became embarrassed, frustrated, and overwhelmed that school was hard for me compared to the “average” person. I questioned my dyslexia every day and how it impacted my ability to read. And the worst part of it all was that I loved to learn but I just could not understand the information. 

Instead of hating school, I decided to challenge academia. I became obsessed with teaching myself how to read and write. I would spend hours glossing over pages until I understood what the text was trying to tell me. Endless nights were spent worrying if I looked dumb to my peers or wondering why a simple assignment took me twice as long. Somehow, I graduated undergrad with a flawless 4.0 GPA average, not allowing myself to receive anything less. 

It took time to be proud of myself about graduating college with a 4.0 GPA: apparently, that’s a huge accomplishment. I’ve always had difficulty congratulating or celebrating myself. Because, what if it all doesn’t go as planned? How could I celebrate such an accomplishment when there are endless possibilities for failure in the future? Unfortunately, that’s how an anxiety-induced, perfectionist mind thinks. I know it’s a problem; hence why I spent three months in a partial, hospitalization center – famously known for being referred to as ~ rehab ~. I have no shame talking about my struggles with mental health and the many times I’ve been hospitalized and undergone severe psychosis. . . because it’s my reality. The random panic attacks paired with the spiraling thoughts, throw-up fits, and rheumatoid arthritis flare-ups come with being a perfectionist. There is a cost for always wanting to be perfect.

So, I write to understand my thoughts because it turns out I got a whole lot of them. I write for my therapist. I write for myself. I write my kids yoga lessons. I write short stories that mirror my very, deep feelings and emotions. I write because I never thought I could. I read to teach myself how to write, so that I can turn around and tell the next person, “ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!”

PART 2:

Alright, let’s talk about my research identity – ugh! Imma be real, I like creative nonfiction, creative fiction, writing short stories – honestly, literally anything but research! Research, in my opinion, is so tedious and monotonous. I always undergo several mini-panic attacks while collecting my sources, organizing my sources, skimming through my sources, and AHHHHH! No!! Help!! There is so much research in front of my very eyes!! And then, I swear, everything goes blurry, and I can’t see. Maybe, I’m allergic to research.

Okay, maybe, I’m being dramatic. There is something about research that gets me excited – the loyal search for truth and discovery. Listen, as someone who loves watching alien documentaries with her father and questions everything and believes nothing, I definitely do have a soft spot for research and appreciate the scholars within their academic fields, doing the dirty work that many rather avoid or ignore. I also gained an entirely new perspective on research after reading, “Where Research Begins” by Thomas S. Mullaney and Christopher Rae, specifically the notion of self-centered research and what that does and does not entail.

As a yogi who has been teaching kids yoga for 2 and a half years and practicing for 8 years, the ego is something I internally study and battle with daily. It is important to know when your ego is speaking versus when your internal truthful light is speaking, or your intuition. And the idea behind dismantling your ego and securely knowing who it is you are and the problem(s) you carry inside and why that may be, is literally the essence of yoga practice, and apparently the same with the self-centered research process. I am now pulled to tackle research and sit with my thoughts during the “before” stage – before I know what I’m even researching. The craft of introspection is challenging yet intriguing, and I think it is an essential part of research because who the heck wants to write a hefty research paper on some topic that sparks no internal reaction whatsoever – boring! I think my current research identity is unknown but hopeful.

XOXO,

Francesca D 