Interview Protocol

Here is my Interview Protocol. I did not label the different sections because I feel like my questions kind of build on one another gradually, although I do start with recollections of the past versus more recent experiences.

Interview Protocol

Lead:

The focus of this project is to uncover the things which make conversations about Christianity awkward.

So tell me a little bit of your background with Christianity or with religion in general. Were your parents involved in a church?

Did you attend Sunday School?

Any other exposure to Christian things? Music, movies, Summer vacation camps?

Did you have any friends as a kid who was Christian? Any other people in your life that you remember?

Do you remember talking with (family, childhood friend, etc.) about Christianity?

Where did conversations usually come up? Was there a certain time or place where it seemed more common? Can you describe that place to me?

How would you characterize those conversations?

Do you remember any awkward or uncomfortable moments when talking about Christianity with your family/friend?

So nowadays, if you talk about religion, who is it usually with?

What times do religious conversations usually come up for you? Is there a particular time of year or place where it’s common?

Is there a certain place where it usually happens? Can you describe that place?

Do you talk about Christianity often, as opposed to other religions?

What kind of conversations have you had with people from a Christian background?

How would you characterize those conversations? Are there certain types we can categorize them into?

Can you describe one conversation that was particularly memorable?

In a conversation about Christianity, how do you know that the conversation is about to get weird, what signs do you usually pick up on?

Can you remember particular phrases that the person used that made you uncomfortable?

Was there anything about the setting, their posture, the timeframe, the tools used (a tract) that added to the awkwardness of it?

What aspect of the conversation was disconcerting to you? Why do you think it made you uncomfortable?

What effect did it have that the topic was religion, as opposed to another dicey subject like politics or homosexuality?

It seems natural enough to talk about things like political affiliation or sexual orientation, what do you think makes a conversation about religion different?

What do you think would have helped the conversation to be more natural? What separates a good, natural conversation from an awkward, uncomfortable one?

Draft 1 -blog 14

In the Gaming Literacy Interview, the Professor questions Student B about his background as a video game player to see if there is any overlap between that and his computer literacy today. The interview is interesting because the student does not seem willing to admit to the correlation the professor is suggesting. By looking closely at the conversation, we can see identify signs which might show that he feels uncomfortable during the interview. At least, it is pretty clear that he is not acting sure of himself in discussing the topic, which could be because it is the first time he has been asked about it. For the purpose of this analysis, I decided to question whether the student feels comfortable discussing this topic, what signs there are in the interview for this, and what those signs might tell us about what he thinks of the topic. 

In order to identify if and where the student was feeling uncomfortable, I had to pick out particular clues to look at in the interview. The clues I found could be categorized into three general types: words and phrases, laughter, and phrasing/sentence structure. Phrasing/sentence structure can be further defined as particular grammatical moves the student makes including things like use of the present tense, use of the second person in narrative, and lack of direct active statements. The category of words/phrases can be coded further into “filler” words such as “uh” and “ah”, minimizing words like “just” and “only”, and hedging phrases like “you know” and “well like”. The category of laughter cannot be coded further in this analysis due to limited examples of its use. 

Words/Phrases

In the interview, the student uses several vague words and phrases which may indicate his discomfort. Several of his sentences begin with the phrases “you know”, “yeah, but”, “well, just”, “well like”. These hedgers have the effect of putting some mental distance between the speaker and his claims. Anything that follows in the sentence seems softened. It does not put the speaker directly in ownership of their claims, which can mean they are still thinking out their beliefs or do not really believe in what they’re saying. Furthermore, the speaker may be trying to indicate that they don’t want their listener to take what they say too seriously. In this case, the student is developing his thoughts on gaming literacy for possibly the first time. The professor is trying to pull out particular ideas from him, so as he goes through the process he is hedging. He is ‘giving an inch’ by saying there could be a connection between his gaming and his computer literacy, but he doesn’t want the professor to ‘take a mile’ so to speak.

Another way the student shows this hesitancy is by his frequent use of the words “just” and “only”. By using these types of phrases, the speaker is able to put verbal space between himself and the action of the sentence. By contrast, a phrase like “I’m going” brings the action very close to the agent, creating more immediacy, showing that the speaker associates themselves strongly with the action. A phrase with many filler words like “just” or “uh” creates a buffer of verbal space between the agent and the action. It shows us that the speaker is trying to put that action away from themselves.

The other, obvious, use of the word just is to minimize the strength of the point that follows it. By using them in the interview, the student downplays the significance of the experiences he’s relating. To him, these experiences are not a big deal, and he wants the professor to see them that way as well. A good example comes from his fifth line in the interview, where he uses “just” four times and “only” once:

“Well, just in learning how to learn a program, I just see buttons, tool tips and ah I make a go at it, the scissors mean I can cut in here, and I can just cut and drag and drop - these a simple things everyone knows, I guess the only reason I can pick up learning a program is that I just have that knack, no other way to explain it.”

Laughter

Another way that we may guess that the student feels uncomfortable is by the laughter recorded in the interview. People often laugh in moments of tension to help dispel the discomfort, or in lack of something to say. In this case, student B laughs after admitting something (again, returning to the theme of perhaps trying to downplay what he admits to)

Example:

Ch           that's literacy - you have the basic tools, the right basic set of assumptions for how to read, understand, interpret a program.  And so what I'm looking for is the connection between all the gaming experience you have and your ability to do that with the applications - the academic applications

B             well like a lot of games, in the beginning, there's menus.  You don't just start playing.  There's menus, you get to customize your decal your spray, clothes,

laughing

It's not all playing the game it's a lot of process to prepare for it, there's like box, scripts, you practice it, and you're not playing with other people, you're just like fooling around.

The professor’s questions are leading him to recall the details which may make up part of the comparison between gaming and computer literacy. In this excerpt, the professor didn’t even really ask him for the example, so it’s clear that he’s beginning to come up with ideas on his own and relate them. He laughs after explaining how in the beginning of a video game there is a preparation period where you set everything up (which later set him up for knowing how to familiarize himself with computer software). He laughs after the phrase, “There’s menus, you get to customize your decal, your spray, cloths”.

Perhaps at this point he feels embarrassed about this cyber world, that he places value in unreal people with unreal cloths. Its not common to discuss hobbies like this in an academic setting, and certainly not to consider them as valuable to academics. Video games come with certain Cultural Stories attached, certain stereotypes go with them. So in bringing up more details about his background as a gamer, he is brushing closer to his identity as a gamer. That identity is distinct from his identity as a student. To him, they don’t really overlap, and may even clash. The idea that the professor is presenting brings those two identities into the same realm may make him uncomfortable.

Phrasing/Sentence Structure

Another thing that the speaker does is use the present tense when giving his examples. His examples are related from memory of past events, things he used to do with computer and gaming. His use of present tense in these examples may indicate that he is mentally thinking through the action while speaking of it. This builds the case that he is discussing these ideas for the first time. Also, by using the present tense, he brings these actions closer to himself. If they were in the past tense, it would demonstrate that he thinks of them as a firm exemplary experience of gaming literacy. Because they’re in the present tense, they seem more like everyday experiences to him, and less set apart.

thinking, analyzing, and writing - blog 13

For my analysis, I decided to look at the Gaming Literacy interview. Originally, I was going to do the teacher comments (data set 4) but I decided that looking at an interview would be more beneficial for my final research project. I’m hoping to conduct interviews for that project, so I thought this would be good practice. To draw a parallel between these two projects, I decided to try out looking for awkwardness/discomfort in this conversation. I want to see if I’m able to draw out clues about awkwardness, and see if I’m even able to make a judgment of how the student is feeling. 

The kind of questions I asked during my analysis included things like: Is the student uncomfortable? Why or why not? What does he think about the topic he’s discussing? Does he feel comfortable talking about this topic? If not, why? 

Some of the things I decided were that he doesn’t have a firm belief about the topic, and that is probably because it is the first time he’s considered the idea that his gaming might contribute to his computer literacy. Because he isn’t sure of his topic, the student is also uncomfortable. He does things to create a distance between himself and the things he is saying, which shows that he doesn’t want to take full ownership for these ideas yet. 

In this interview, the student is being questioned about his background as a video gamer. The professor is trying to show that his background as a gamer may have prepared him with the necessary ‘literacy’ in software to be able to learn computer programs. The student shows some hesitancy in answering the questions, not seeming sure of himself in giving his examples. Some signs of hesitancy/discomfort in the interview include: hedging phrases like “you know” and “well like”, minimizing terms like “just” and “only”, use of the present tense, fillers like “uh/ah”,  laughter, and use of the present tense. In general, we can note that he makes few if any direct statements during the interview.

Here’s the writing I have so far…

In the interview, the student uses several vague words and phrases which may indicate his discomfort. Several of his sentences begin with the phrases “you know”, “yeah, but”, “well, just”, “well like”. These hedgers have the effect of putting some mental distance between the speaker and his claims. Anything that follows in the sentence seems softened. It does not put the speaker directly in ownership of their claims, which can mean they are still thinking out their beliefs or do not really believe in what they’re saying. Furthermore, the speaker may be trying to indicate that they don’t want their listener to take what they say too seriously. In this case, the student is developing his thoughts on gaming literacy for possibly the first time. The professor is trying to pull out particular ideas from him, so as he goes through the process he is hedging. He is ‘giving an inch’ by saying there could be a connection between his gaming and his computer literacy, but he doesn’t want the professor to ‘take a mile’ so to speak. 

Another way the student shows this hesitancy is by his frequent use of the words “just” and “only”. By using these types of phrases, the speaker is able to put verbal space between himself and the action of the sentence. By contrast, a phrase like “I’m going” brings the action very close to the agent, creating more immediacy, showing that the speaker associates themselves strongly with the action. A phrase with many filler words like “just” or “uh” creates a buffer of verbal space between the agent and the action. It shows us that the speaker is trying to put that action away from themselves.

The other, obvious, use of the word just is to minimize the strength of the point that follows it. By using them in the interview, the student downplays the significance of the experiences he’s relating. To him, these experiences are not a big deal, and he wants the professor to see them that way as well. A good example comes from his fifth line in the interview, where he uses “just” four times and “only” once:

“Well, just in learning how to learn a program, I just see buttons, tool tips and ah I make a go at it, the scissors mean I can cut in here, and I can just cut and drag and drop - these a simple things everyone knows, I guess the only reason I can pick up learning a program is that I just have that knack, no other way to explain it.”

Another way that we may guess that the student feels uncomfortable is by the laughter recorded in the interview. People often laugh in moments of tension to help dispel the discomfort, or in lack of something to say. In this case, student B laughs after admitting something (again, returning to the theme of perhaps trying to downplay what he admits to)

Example:

Ch           that's literacy - you have the basic tools, the right basic set of assumptions for how to read, understand, interpret a program.  And so what I'm looking for is the connection between all the gaming experience you have and your ability to do that with the applications - the academic applications

B             well like a lot of games, in the beginning, there's menus.  You don't just start playing.  There's menus, you get to customize your decal your spray, clothes,

laughing

It's not all playing the game it's a lot of process to prepare for it, there's like box, scripts, you practice it, and you're not playing with other people, you're just like fooling around.

The professor’s questions are leading him to recall the details which may make up part of the comparison between gaming and computer literacy. In this excerpt, the professor didn’t even really ask him for the example, so it’s clear that he’s beginning to come up with ideas on his own and relate them. He laughs after explaining how in the beginning of a video game there is a preparation period where you set everything up (which later set him up for knowing how to familiarize himself with computer software). He laughs after the phrase, “There’s menus, you get to customize your decal, your spray, cloths”.

Perhaps at this point he feels embarrassed about this cyber world, that he places value in unreal people with unreal cloths. Its not common to discuss hobbies like this in an academic setting, and certainly not to consider them as valuable to academics. Video games come with certain Cultural Stories attached, certain stereotypes go with them. So in bringing up more details about his background as a gamer, he is brushing closer to his identity as a gamer. That identity is distinct from his identity as a student. To him, they don’t really overlap, and may even clash. The idea that the professor is presenting brings those two identities into the same realm may make him uncomfortable.

Another thing that the speaker does is use the present tense when giving his examples. His examples are related from memory of past events, things he used to do with computer and gaming. His use of present tense in these examples may indicate that he is mentally thinking through the action while speaking of it. This builds the case that he is discussing these ideas for the first time. Also, by using the present tense, he brings these actions closer to himself. If they were in the past tense, it would demonstrate that he thinks of them as a firm exemplary experience of gaming literacy. Because they’re in the present tense, they seem more like everyday experiences to him, and less set apart.

So far, I have lots of examples for why the student may be unsure of what he's talking about. I'm not sure that I can use this to prove that he felt any embarrassment though. I've also pulled in Gee a little bit with my mentions of stereotypes and identities, but I'll need to expand these more in my coming drafts.

Considering the Short Analysis project - Blog 12

I think I would like to analyze Data Set 4, the teacher comments. I think it will be interesting to take this topic in a different direction than has already been done, and it also seems best given that there’s more variety of material to go off of. (Shaggy dog stories were fun, but may start to feel like beating a dead horse)

The question our group considered was what teacher comments can show us about their grading style as well as their personal style as a professor. We wanted to see what the professor considers most important in a paper as shown through their comments.

To expand on this further, I might as more about the professor’s personality.  Is it possible to draw inferences on things like how important they consider praise to be, how clear-spoken they are, and what their goals are for their students?  Can I get an idea of what they think of writing and writers and education in general?

Blog 11 - Group question about comments

For our question our group decided to look at what teacher comments can show us about the teacher’s grading style. We think that by looking at the teacher comments, we can get an idea of what that teacher’s personal style is, specifically what their most important considerations are in a student’s paper.

In order to begin answering this question, we would first need to classify the different kinds of comments. After this, we can look at how frequently and with what intensity the different kinds of comments appear. Finally, we can consider what the frequency, intensity, and typology might indicate about the professor’s style and preferences.

An example of different Categories of teacher comments include:

comments referring to Grammar & Mechanics

comments referring to Organization

comments referring to Development                                                        

comments referring to Clarity

We could then analyze the comments to see how frequently these different types appear. If a large percentage of comments refer to the paper’s Development, for example, we could draw the conclusion that Development is of primary importance to the teacher.

As far as intensity, I think it is possible to compare different teacher comments for differing levels of passion. Certain comments may be simple suggestions, while others may indicate a higher level of interest from the teacher. For example, a comment like “This is vague” contrasted with a comment like “This section seems incomplete. What else might your reader need to know? Try giving a specific example”. Since the latter is more detailed, we might conclude that the professor who wrote it has a greater level of interest in the student’s ability to be clear and detailed.