betajames

These and, to a lesser degree, Pall Malls* got me through my dissertation and three subsequent publications. But this is not a plug as the mellow yellows have not helped my most immediate work. For the next 48 hours, I will rely on brief walks, Skittles, sleep, and unrelated print (not screen) reading.

File format issues have also prompted me to rethink my word-processor preferences. Bean, Google Docs, Ommwriter, Scrivener, and Word have all presented some measure of frustration. If only TextEdit had a word count feature...

 

*Yes, Vonnegut was the sole influence.

[amended from Steve Krause]

ENG 345 Technical Writing is a mixed-mode course I will be teaching this Winter 2011 semester. I want to inform/warn you about a few things having to do with the class. I offer up the following not to get folks to drop. Instead, I offer them in order to make sure you have a greater awareness of what kind of course you signed up for.

To succeed in this course, you must be comfortable with doing your work on a computer and online. If you aren't already comfortable with online work (email, web-browsing, etc.), if you don't like trying to do new things with your computer, and/or you might describe yourself as "not really liking computers," you should reconsider taking ENG 345 this Winter 2011 semester.

Only you can be responsible for your computer and your internet access. While you don't have to have your own computer to take this course, you will need to be able to access course materials on a near daily basis (which means easy access to an internet-ready computer). Ideally, the computer you have for regular use should be less than five years old and have internet access through a DSL or cable modem connection. If you don't have this sort of computer set-up, you will have to spend time elsewhere with a computer that does have this level of access (like the library).

This is a mixed-mode class. We will see each other face-to-face eight times. It is of the utmost importance that you have reliable internet access. Telling me that you were unable to complete some assignment because of a technical problem (e.g., "My computer crashed," "I don't have very good access to the internet" or "My roommate/boyfriend/girlfriend moved out and took the computer") is unacceptable and will not be tolerated as an excuse for late work or incomplete assignments.

Once the term gets underway, you will see that the syllabus has some sort of activity due almost every day. So, there is also some amount of flexibility here in terms of how you manage your time for the course. If you are not very good at time management, if you function better with more explicit boundaries and requirements, this course might not be for you. Again, I am not saying these things to get folks to drop the course; instead, I simply want those enrolled to know what you're in for.

If you have gotten to the end of this message and are still thinking of taking ENG 345 with me, great! Please do me a favor, though: send me an email or leave a comment on this entry and let me know that you've read through this. Be sure to ask any questions you have; I'll be sure to address them during our first face-to-face session! 

Thanks for your interest, 
Dr. James Schirmer

Twice this semester I provided individual progress reports. Such documents outlined in brief an instructor's perspective on students' class performance. In preparation for semester-end conferences about final grades, I'd like to gain an additional perspective: yours. 

Compose a self-reflective essay evaluating your own performance this semester. The guiding principle for your self evaluation should be the grading contract*. If your performance is in accordance with the contract, suggesting that you earn a "B" for the course should be easy. Based on your class performance, comments from peers and from me, are you at, above or below the contract? The majority of the self-evaluative essay should answer that very question. 

Be honest about what you think you deserve. Everyone wants to get an "A," but this is not what everyone earns. Be honest with yourself and be honest with me when evaluating and reflecting on your performance this semester. 

There is no min/max length requirement, but the more details you provide, the better of a foundation we'll have come conference time.  

Your self evaluation should be emailed** to me by 11:59PM Wednesday, December 8. 

 

*You are welcome to reference Achievements, too.
**Requiring your self evaluation to be posted to your blog may violate FERPA*.
***I'm checking on this. If you're comfortable posting your self evaluation to your blog, then so be it. 

But to play or read first?

Newsgames is a better, clearer, and more cohesive argument for why videogames matter than Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter. Newsgames lacks the experiential, personal perspective so prevalent in Extra Lives, a perspective that I think harms many discussions about the potential of videogames. Lacking this perspective, Newsgames executes a specific argument without falling into revelry, making for greater clarity. (I think Gee's What Video Games Have To Teach Us About Learning And Literacy is a rarity in that personal experience does not get in the way of the larger argument about the particular value(s) of gaming.) By using Wired's Cutthroat Capitalism as an introductory example of how videogames "can do good journalism, both as an independent medium for news and as a supplement to traditional forms of coverage" (5), the authors lay appropriate groundwork for a more in-depth discussion, one sustained through each subsequent chapter of the book. 

Other games discussed include September 12th, Budget Hero, JFK Reloaded, Crickler, and World Without Oil, and the authors describe each as a particular kind of newsgame with unique aims and goals. They also discuss the importance of literacy as well as platforms for designing and executing future games. In fact, the former may be an appropriate entry point for some as not only it offers up better-known videogames as examples but it also discusses "teaching the practice" (115) of journalism.  

Some might take Bogost, Ferrari and Schweizer to task for privileging example over theory in their discussion of "journalism at play." While mentioning Roger Caillois, Alexander Galloway, James Paul Gee, Johan Huizinga, Raph Koster, Jane McGonigal, Janet Murray, Miguel Sicart, and Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman as well as others whose work is important and/or influential to game studies, the authors do not allow theory to dominate. This is to Newsgames' benefit. Going lean on theory and heavy on examples is a smart move, making for a more effective argument. The authors show that there's much more out there being done than what a given audience, be it academic, general, or journalistic, might think. I thought I was up on a good amount of what's happening with such games, but Bogost, Ferrari, and Schweizer showed me otherwise. I appreciate that. 

 Others might express concern over the length of the book, but I'm all for digestible work. A close read of Newsgames will allow one to see potential areas of expansion, but it's worth mentioning that the Newsgames blog has done well so far in fulfilling those areas. 

The care, interest, and knowledge the authors have in both videogames and journalism is evident, even inspiring. Here's an early question they pose: "What if the dynamics of New York City racketeering laws could be operationalized in Grand Theft Auto?" If such a question doesn't hold immediate intrigue for you, it will the more you read Newsgames.

All the necessary information for this final assignment sequence of the semester should be available here: http://eng112.posterous.com/pages/assignments-4

 

Also: for completing it, the "Index of Templates" (found under "readings") may be of great assistance.

[inspired by "12 Reasons to Ditch the Pen"]

The death of the pen is not being replaced by digital writing tools. The pen might be, but that doesn't mean it should be forgotten and forsaken. Just because some new technology works for one person doesn't mean I should go all in on it, too.

I admit that I like the feel of writing by hand, but I'm more impressed with how cursive looks on the page, even with how I look while writing. I revel in those compliments about my handwriting. I smile at the shocked faces of colleagues, strangers and students when they see that I still write with a pen. How can someone who studies computers and writing, social media, or videogames still write like that? Well, this is how.

I write by hand because I lost everything due to a zip disk error while in undergrad. I lost the paper I was writing at the time. I lost all previous coursework. I lost every essay I wrote in high school. I lost every terrible poem, every awful short story. That loss taught me to never put complete trust in a computer again. Everything I write now is handwritten first. Everything. This includes blog entries, emails and even Twitter updates. And there's nothing for me to "get over," because this method, this outdated, time-wasting method of writing by hand, works. I make it work. 

Writing by hand doesn't mean you are irrelevant to yourself, your colleagues or your students. It means you understand what technology works for you and in what capacity. 

The computer keyboard is not the same as a pen and paper. I need a Pilot G2 .05 with blue ink and a blank page from a Moleskine notebook in order to write. This approach, this method focuses me and my thoughts to an indescribable degree. 

Taking notes is not an outdated skill; neither is taking notes with a pen an outdated skill. Ask my #eng112 students who just completed Pop Up Scholarship and the newfound value they have for writing in the margins of academic articles. 

Being fast isn't (and shouldn't be) everything. Writing by hand forces me to take the time to really develop my ideas first to myself before putting them anywhere else. 

Handwriting means that editing happens during transcription. One sentence handwritten often becomes a full paragraph typed. I fail to see any harm in recopying either as it's important to back up everything, whether analog or digital. 

I don't do much collaborative work (which is unfortunate, I know), so the ease-of-editing-by-others argument doesn't apply to me. I do think, though, that writing by hand can, in the end, better facilitate collaboration as it adds another layer of earlier editing. But how does writing by hand prevent the sharing of ideas and the making of meaning? This one extra step between having an original thought and sharing it is not a big deal. Writing by hand gives me an additional filter, perhaps making me think twice about something before posting it online.

With a pen in hand, I don't waste time figuring out spelling and grammar. I never have to worry about red, squiggly lines appearing under my words. I annotate when I can't think of a word (or how to spell it) and come back to them later. 

If you have any idea of how to organize anything, there's no reason for clutter if you write by hand. I've been using the same black Moleskine notebooks for years now. Sure, I can't tag or apply a Google search, but it wasn't very difficult to develop (and refine) my own unique system for finding particular entries.

Since I know my own writing and my searching system, it is much more satisfying in terms of results. 

My Moleskine notebook is a working file cabinet and it's with me wherever I go. A single notebook isn't burdensome, no matter the book bag, briefcase, etc. All the ideas and information I need fit in one notebook, which lasts about nine months before it's full and I need to start a new one. 

I don't need an Internet connection or even electricity when writing by hand. A pen and paper are all I need. These physical materials aren't the end in itself, of course, only the beginning. Together, they are a beginning I want to never lose.

 

Also: the idea that ditching the pen and paper and going digital is an environmentally friendly move is laughable.

Also, too: initial commentary on Google Buzz about "12 Reasons" and my response

Also, too, also: Jerrid Kruse's comment on "12 Reasons"