ENG 231 3.T: Reviewing Procedural Rhetoric (Again), [Academic] Paper Crash Course

Today’s Plan:

• Game Journals & Feedback
• Academic Paper Crash Course
• Any time remaining? Two Games
• Homework

Game Journals & Feedback

I’ve been checking in on the game journals–I think I got through about 1/2 of them yesterday. I tried to leave you with comments that can help your progress. I likely will not get to the rest of the journals until Thursday afternoon (since I teach until 9pm tonight and have a pretty busy Wednesday).

I wanted to share three comments I left in folks’ journals that I think are instructive:

To do procedural analysis, you have to know what a game is trying to do

Does this game have a rhetorical purpose? A message? A theme/meaning? And, if so, how does the games systems, mechanics, etc help amplify (or detract) from that goal?

Remember that this is essentially an interpretive, hermeneutic exercise. That requires that you oscillate between the concrete details of a text and the overarching purpose. I saw a number of journals that were working through the heuristic questions, but wasn’t sure if it was leading anywhere.

Agency is a potentially useful term

Freedom is a fine word here, but in video game scholarship folks often use the word “agency” to frame how much control it feels like you have; especially as regards whether you can change the game world (are you shaping a story or merely experiencing it?)

In the next unit, we are going to talk a lot about “player complicity,” the belief that what you do in a video game feels “real,” that you own the decisions you make and feel responsible for there consequences. Complicity is enmeshed with a sense of agency–that you feel you can change things, that you have actual power, that you are not merely the pawn of the designer. Of course, a procedural analysis highlights what developers allow you do, and perhaps helps you recognize what they do not allow you to do.

But How Do You Feel?

Based on the interview I posted above, I am a bit curious whether you felt as if the choices in the game became too predictable? Or whether you “checked out” emotionally? Were you playing a story or winning a game?

Along with agency, we can ask two things–if a game offers you choices, then do those options feel frustratingly satisfying? Are they restrictive enough that the choice is difficult without feeling overly manipulative?

And–at the same time–how do you feel making the choice? Does it feel easy? Do you feel anxious? (See Republica game below).

Academic Paper Crash Course (Hermeneutic Edition)

Okay, a few of my stock speeches.

• Writing cannot be taught, only learned
• “Teaching” Writing is not like “teaching” Math (student edition)
• “Teaching” Writing is not like “teaching” Math (teacher edition)
• New Procedurality Paper Choice. I wrote a thing once.

Now, despite all that, I am going to try and teach you how to write a paper (fully aware that this won’t “work” and that we’re all a bit annoyed).

Invention/Content: What Should This Paper Do?

Your task is to use theories of procedural rhetoric to analyze a game. This analysis should attempt to identify:

• what the designers are attempting to communicate
• what clear mechanical (procedural) choices they have made to amplify that message
• whether those choices worked on you
• additionally, it should be able to recommend how they might have better achieved their goals

Organization / Arrangement

Generally, this kind of analysis paper looks something like this:

• Introduction: with a concrete detailed “thesis statement” that condenses and summarizes all the fucking shit you will say in the paper. DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT WRITING THIS UNTIL YOU HAVE WRITTEN THE PAPER. Don’t do it. Ever. I’ll know. (See argument below)
• Theoretical Lens: Describe the ideas you are using to analyze the textual object. In this case, we are talking “procedural rhetoric,” so you need a section of the paper that cites Bogost and Custer (files section of Canvas) and focuses on what ideas you use in your paper. I call this building the meat grinder.
• Body sections with interesting subheadings: Then there’s any number of sections that put a particular part/scene/chapter/system of the textual object through the meat grinder
• Conclusion: These are tricky

This first assignment checks your handle on the fundamentals of academic writing. These include:

• Argument. Does the paper’s introduction lay out a CLAIM rather than ask a QUESTION? Does the introduction lay out what the paper will conclude? Does it include specifics? LIKE REAL CONCRETE DETAILS. I cannot stress the importance of crafting a sophisticated thesis paragraph (not necessarily a statement, do I have time to rant about the 5 paragraph essay?)
• Paragraph StructureDoes each paragraph open with a topic sentence that lays out the claim of that paragraph? Does it transition into and contextualize evidence? Does it supply evidence (quote, reason, anecdote, etc). Does it summarize and then analyze evidence? [Note summarize and analyze are two different things!] Does the closing sentence of the paragraph “end” the thought by referring the specific claim of the paragraph back to the overall argument of the paper?
• Handling of Evidence I’ll be paying closer attention to two of the elements above–how well do you transition into a quote? Do you know how to contextualize a quote [that is, briefly tell the reader where the quote falls in view of the original author’s argument]. What do you do after the quote? How deftly can you summarize the quote–putting it into your own words in a way that “opens” it up for the reader without sounding too repetitive. This is a skill, a real hard one. AND then, how well do you add something to that quote/evidence that does something with it? For instance, if you are talking about player complicity, what can you add to the quote(s) from Sicart to help me understand it more. Do you recognize what keywords in the quote require more explication? Do you have personal experience that can help illuminate the concept? Do you have something to add to the quote to amplify its argument? Extend? Examples?
• Note–writing about procedurality means you might be analyzing elements of a game, so can you describe that element concisely and meaningfully to someone who hasn’t played the game? If you use a screenshot, can your provide enough context for me to understand your argument/analysis?

Format / Style
NOTE: The following is for those of you who want to practice academic writing.
This paper should be formatted in APA format, but it does not require an abstract. It does require a title page and a Running Head. The paper should include a References list. It is quite likely that Sicart will be the only reference on the list (I am just checking for global formatting). Information regarding APA formatting is in the Hackers and Sommers Pocket Manual or can be found at the Purdue University OWL.

Papers should include an APA Title page (just so you get some experience formatting one) and a running head (APA has really weird rules for the header/page number–I am testing whether you can find and execute these rules). Papers will need a reference list (even though I doubt there will be more than two sources).

Looking through past papers, expected length is 1200 to 1700 words.

Crafting a Thesis Paragraph

Below I articulate three important elements of writing that I will use to evaluate your first paper: developing a specific thesis, properly contextualizing and analyzing evidence, and maintaining logical development.

That said, every piece of academic writing should offer a “thesis” in the introduction. I tend to hate this word, because it comes with so much baggage. For me, a strong thesis lays out AS SPECIFICALLY AS POSSIBLE what information a paper will present. It is a kind of idea map. Let me show you a few potential thesis statements:

• I/this paper explain(s) Inoue’s theory of anti-racist writing assessment
• I/this paper explain(s) Inoue’s theory of anti-racist writing assessment, noting his key terms and summarizing his suggestions for new teachers
• I/this paper explain(s) how Inoue’s theory of anti-racist writing assessment might create problems for teachers who prioritize grammar as the central concern of writing. instruction

All those examples are bad. Though not equally bad. The first one is an F. The second one is also an F. They are equally devoid of specific thought. They are a placeholder for a thought that, at the time of writing, the writer did not yet have.

The third one is better. It is in the high C, low B range. It could potentially be higher based on what comes before or after it. If the next sentence detailed a list of problems, then it would be an “A.”

Okay, so what does an “A” look like? Examples:

• I explain how Inoue’s theory of anti-racist writing assessment emphasizes the importance of familiarizing students with assessment rubrics, often through practice norming sessions
• I explain how Inoue’s theory of anti-racist writing assessment calls for teachers to separate grading and assessment from the act of providing feedback. When students encounter feedback alongside grades, they often receive that feedback as a justification for a (bad) grade rather than as an attempt to guide and develop their abilities. Inoue makes clear that providing distance between grades and feedback increases the likelihood that students engage and implement feedback
• I explain how Inoue’s theory of anti-racist writing assessment challenges traditional enforcement of “standard” English on the grounds that it severely and unjustly punishes students from multilingual backgrounds. The evidence Inoue presents creates problems for teachers who prioritize “proper” grammar as the central concern of writing.

Here’s the deal y’all: WRITE YOUR THESIS LAST. Trust me, I’ll know if you write the introduction before you write the paper. I’m a fucking Jedi when it comes to this. And I will die on this hill (those of you who have taken 301 should know why). Pro-tip: when you are done with your rough draft compare the thesis in your intro to the conclusion. You won’t know what a paper is actually going to say until you write it!

Pro-tip #2: academic and professional writing are not mysteries. This isn’t Scooby-Doo. Don’t keep me in suspense. Make sure all the important things you find in the course of a paper appear in the first few sentences, paragraphs, or pages (depending on the length of the paper). Front load, front load, front load.

Remember that an actual, breathing human is grading your papers. Sometimes they are grading as many as 80 papers a week. I’m not supposed to say this, but very often they are formulating an attitude toward your paper from the first paragraph. If it is some lazy first-draft-think-aloud-stream-of-consciousness-bullshit, then it is highly unlikely that anything you do later in the paper is going to reverse that first impression.

Let’s talk about some examples.

Okay, on to point #2–working with sources. From the rubric:

• Is the evidence in each paragraph sufficient to support claims?
• Does the writer’s transitions provide enough context to help a reader? A description of the methods to understand the value of a statistic, for instance, or enough explication of a quote’s significance? Do I feel like I know where the evidence comes from or is it suddenly thrust at me?
• Connect the evidence to the claim of the paragraph? Put the evidence in conversation with other paragraphs?
• Is it clear where a source stops thinking and the writer’s own thoughts begin? Is there an “I” that differentiates the writer from her sources/”they”? Is the writer adding something to the quote, or just leaving it there?

Plagiarism. It isn’t stealing words, it is stealing thoughts, ideas. Be sure to make a parenthetical reference when you use a idea from Sicart.

Also, think about what periods do. Example:

Sicart’s theory of ethical games centers around an idea of play as more than merely diversion or enjoyment. Sicart’s believes play is important because it allows us to explore ourselves and our beliefs. He refers to the ambiguity of moral rules as wiggle room, writing: “To play is to inhabit a wiggle space of possibility in which we can express ourselves–our values, beliefs, and politics” (p. 9). Play, as imaginative activity, makes possible explorations that we might never consider in our regular daily lives. Of course, not all play might meet Sicart’s notion of wiggle rooom. Playing Madden Football allows me to pretend I’m an NFL executive, but rarely does it call me to question my personal or political beliefs. But X game, however, does make me confront questions of Y and Z. When evaluating the ethical power of a game, Sicart’s notion of play asks us to think about how much wiggle space of possibility the game provides.

Next paragraph begins with some kind of transition. Then topic sentence. then context some evidence.

Even if I took the quote out, I need a reference:

Sicart’s theory of ethical games centers around an idea of play as more than merely diversion or enjoyment. Sicart’s believes play is important because it allows us to explore ourselves and our beliefs. He refers to the ambiguity of moral rules as wiggle room, noting how play, as imaginative activity, makes possible explorations that we might never consider in our regular daily lives (pp. 8-9). Of course, not all play might meet Sicart’s notion of wiggle room. Playing Madden Football allows me to pretend I’m an NFL executive, but rarely does it call me to question my personal or political beliefs. But X game, however, does make me confront questions of Y and Z. When evaluating the ethical power of a game, Sicart’s notion of play asks us to think about how much wiggle space of possibility the game provides.

Let’s work with a passage from Sicart:

Player complicity means surrendering to the fact that actions in a game have a moral dimension. Players use their morality to engage with and adapt to the context of the game. When playing, players become complicit with the game’s moral system and with their own set of values. That capacity of players to accept decision making in games and to make choices base on moral facts gives meaning to player complicity.

This complicity allows players to experience the kind of fringe themes that games often develop without necessarily risking their moral integrity. By becoming complicit with the kind of experience that the game wants players to enjoy, they are also critically open to whatever values they are going to enact. And the degree of their complicity, the weight that they give to their values and not to those of the game, will determine their moral behavior in the game. (p. 23)

So, to summarize the typical academic paragraph:

• Topic sentence [Claim, terms]
• Transition into evidence [provide the reader context, relevance, etc]
• Present evidence [quote, paraphrase, statistic, visual, whatever–maybe a detailed description of a mechanic]
• Summarize the evidence [if a direct quote, then make sure you put it in your own words–summarize that thing]
• Analyze the evidence [do not leave it to the reader to figure out how the evidence supports the claim. Make the sausage.]
• If necessary, anticipate and respond to criticism/other perspectives [this might be its own paragraph]
• Wrap it up [end the paragraph hammering home how this paragraph contributes to that overall thesis thing

Avoiding Plagiarism: Providing Contextual Information and Attributing Sources

Essentially, I consider handling sources a 4 part process. There’s the signal, the quote/evidence, the summary, and the analysis. While we’ll be using this specifically for direct quotes today and this weekend, this is essentially the underlying structure for most (academic) argumentative paragraphs: a claim, followed by evidence, and analysis. 

• Signal: who, what, where, when. Note that what/where can be a reference to a kind of media [article, book, poem, website, blog post], a genre [sonnet, dialogue, operational manual], or location/event [press conference, reporting from the steps of the White House]. The signal helps create ethos, establishing the credibility of your source, addressing their disposition toward the issue, and positioning them within the context of a particular conversation. 
• Quote/evidence: in-line citations use quotation marks and are generally three lines or less. Block citations do not use quotation marks and are indented from the rest of the text. Generally, quotes present logos of some kind–be it in the form of statistics or argumentation. Of course, quotes can also be used in an attempt to engender pathos, or a strong emotional reaction. 
• Summary: especially for block quotations, you need to reduce a block of text to a single-line. You need to put the quote in your own words. Because language is slippery, and your readers might not read the quote as you do. So, offering a summary after a quote– particularly a long one (which many readers simply do not read)–allows readers an opportunity to see if they are on the same page as you. 
• Analysis: Reaction, counter-argument, point to similar situation, offer further information, use the bridge, “in order to appreciate X’s argument, it helps to know about/explore/etc. This is where the thinking happens. 

Here’s an example; let’s say I was writing a blog on the struggles of newspapers to survive the digital transition, I might want to point to the October 15th, 2009 NYT’s article dealing with the Times Co. decision to hold on to the Boston Globe.

In his recent article, Richard Perez-Pena explains that the Times Co. has decided to hold onto the Boston Globe, at least for now. Perez-Pena explains that the Times Co. has been trying to sell the newspaper for the past month, but, since it hasn’t received what it deems a credible offer, it has decided to pull the paper off the market. He writes:

Dan Kennedy, a journalism professor at Northeastern University who has closely followed The Globe’s troubles, said it might be better for The Globe to remain with the Times Company than to go to a new owner that might do more cutting or replace top executives. “But the company has its work cut out for it in terms of rebuilding credibility with the employees and the community,” he said.

Perez-Pena explains that the Times Co. has been involved in bitter labor disputes over the past year, as advertising revenues continue to fall: this move, as Kennedy notes above, could be a solid first move in rebuilding an important relationship with one of America’s oldest, and most significant, newspapers. However, I think we still need to be a bit skeptical here: the fact that no one even proposed a reasonable offer for a newspaper that only 15 years ago commanded 1 billion dollars, the highest price ever for a single newspaper (Perez-Pena), does not bode well for the future of the industry. Like many newspapers, the Globe was slow to adapt to the digitalization of America’s infosphere. Time will tell if recent efforts are too little too late.

If you look above, I first contextualize the quote–not only supplying where/when/who it came from, but also providing some sense of what the whole article discusses. Then I focus attention toward a particular point and supply the quote. After the quote, I first reiterate what the quote said (providing a bit of new information). This is an important step that a lot of writers skip. Always make sure you summarize a quote, so a reader knows precisely what you think it says. Then, in the final part of the paragraph above, I analyze the material. I respond to it. In this particular case, I am somewhat critical of the optimism that underlies Perez-Pena’s piece.

A few other small points:

• Notice the first time I reference an author, I use there first and last name. After that, it is sufficient to only use the last name.
• Notice that I don’t have a citation after the direct quotation: the reason here is that it is obvious where the quote came from thanks to my signal. This is an electronic source, so there is no page number citation, were it a print source I would have to include that. NEVER USE A PAGE NUMBER IN THE SIGNAL TEXT, page numbers only belong in the parenthetical reference.
• Notice in my analysis that I make a parenthetical to the author–its because I pulled the price of the Globe purchase in 1993 from his article. I don’t directly quote it, so no quotation marks.
• Finally, there’s two kinds of quotations, in-line quotations and block quotations. Each have there own rules for academic papers (the dreaded MLA and APA guidelines). We will deal with those later in the course. In terms of blogging: quotes longer than 4 lines need to be blockquoted. Blogger has a button to help you do this. Blockquotes don’t receive quotation marks.

The First (Best?) Step Toward Avoiding Plagiarism: Crafting Quality Signals

Today I want to focus a bit on the first part of what I introduce above, crafting a quality signal that introduces a reader to a source (be it a quote or statistical evidence). Here it is:

Shakespeare’s Renaissance tragedy Romeo and Juliet documents the titular characters’ intense love and foolhardy demise. Shakespeare’s play leads us to question both the sincerity of young love. 

I came up with this sentence while prepping high school students to take placement exams, hence the literary material. But the semantics of the sentence make it useful for virtually every kind of writing. I especially want to highlight the importance of the verbs in this sentence, because choosing the proper verb often reveals both our appraisal of the source and our thinking on the questions it raises. 

[Author]’s [time period] [genre] [title] [verb] [plot summary]. [Author] [verb] [theme/purpose]. 

Ok, so in reality I have two sentences here. But, when dealing with non-fiction works, they can often be combined into one:

[Author’s] [time period] [genre] [title] [verb] [purpose]. 

As I indicated above, it is the verb that is the silent star of the show here. Consider for a minute the following example:

Malcom Gladwell’s 2005 book Blink exposes how subconscious part of our brain think in ways we are not consciously aware. 

Exposes. How does the meaning of the sentence change if I use the verb:

• suggests
• argues
• questions whether
• supposes 
• explicates
• details
• offers a theory of
• explores

Each of these verb choices subtly alters the way I approach the work discussed. Exposes suggests something secret and perhaps mysterious is being uncovered. Suggests suggests that an amount of doubt surrounds the issue. Supposes implies that I am hostile or at least quite skeptical toward the idea. This subtle indicator allows my an opportunity to softly align or distance myself from the source I am using. Good authors do this all the time to subconsciously prepare readers for their arguments. 

Let’s Play a Few Games

Two Games:

• Cards Against Calamity
• The Republica Times

Homework

Continue to play/work/draft in your Gaming Journal. I plan on checking in and evaluating your progress on Friday afternoon. Remember that you should have passed in the paper by Monday, January 31st at midnight.

The first paper assignment is posted here.