Derrick Robinson
Professor Chandler
Research Analysis
In socializing and conversation and interpersonal
qualities, everyone has their own personalized identity. Within each person,
there is certain qualities that can alter a way conversation is handled holding
Big C conversation. The different qualities- or for better words identities to
satisfy this research-between each person show the qualities that form their
personas.
Everybody has their own
identity. A good way to see the differentiating qualities in someone is by
interactions. When seeing conversation being held by two people, you can see
the different traits that set up their identity. The way they talk, their
personality, the subtle social cues all show the different characteristics that
shape the way that they are or what they stand for. Sometimes the conversation
can go well or sometimes it can pose a problem as the identities conflict with
each other. Inside the gaming literacies transcript, we see two people show
their personal identities through means of conversation. We see how each
interacts or makes statements. Different moves in the conversation show how
each assume. Everybody has their own identity.
When people with different identities have a conversation, the way they
talk will show their identity. Inside
the gaming literacies transcript, we see two people with different identities
and we see how their identities interact. This will be my main example of
conversation and how each identity will change the interview.
So the question that could be asked in this paper is-what
are the differences in identities between Dr. Chandler and Bryan who is being
interviewed? How do the different identities shape the conversation? What are
the subliminal influences that mold the conversation? What language moves
change the way others assume each others identity? To answer these questions,
we will have to break down the coding inside the gaming literacies interview
and build evidence on the assumed identities of both people. By analyzing the questions being asked and
how they are responded to follow by the reaction from Dr. Chandler and Bryan,
evidence can be conducted from these by dissecting the coding. After finding
the evidence throughout the interview, I can thus build support to aid my
answers.
The first question to be answered is what are the
differences? First, we shall break down Dr. Chandler’s identity through the
text. While also being an interviewer, what must be taken into account is that
Dr. Chandler is also a professor. As we can see every question that we can see
is to find out more about Bryan, but also trying to connect his
experience/identity to academic perspectives. She gives direct questions and
re-states the answer given by Bryan while also connecting her response to the
next question she is about to ask. One
move we can see her academic identity is in line 3 when she asks: “So it’s interesting, games aren’t really
considered software are they?” Dr. Chandler begins the interview with this
question to see where it will lead and ultimately set up for her next
question. Another move we can see where
her identity as a teacher shows substantially is when she connects Bryan’s
experience with games back to academic items. After hearing Bryan’s answer on
his experience on gaming and academic software, we see the move where she
responds to his answer by connecting his experience in games to academic
applications. “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 (Line 10).” Even when Bryan defends his views on gaming, Dr.
Chandler still kept connecting how his experience can carry over[l1]
.
We now go over to Bryan’s identity to figure him out.
What has been previously said in the dissection of Dr. Chandler’s identity, is
that Bryan is a gamer. Where Chandler stands in academics, he stands in
technology of the leisure kind. We can also see that he is very adept when it
comes to gaming and technology. “-I just have that knack, no other way to
explain it.” We can see that from this example that he does have the
confidence, however with his confidence he does not really claim it
significant, but rather common knowledge. When Chandler asks him about software
that he knows he downplays it, while also subtly showing cockiness. “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
example from the same excerpt in whole shows downplay that everyone should know
certain software, but also showing cockiness because he knows that not everyone
knows the certain software he deems as common knowledge. Since this interview
is about his experiences, one could see how he might show some confidence when
it comes to his mark of trade, which gives him space to boast about what he has
done. Given this, we also see how he assumes Dr. Chandler’s identity as not
knowing how gaming software is.
Since Dr. Chandler’s identity is known, we have to take
into consideration the values that are here as well. As a teacher, Dr. Chandler knows that video
games and respects his identity. What she is trying to display to Bryan is that
all his experience can be connected back to the academic field. The topic of
the interview is video games, but she wants to see how his experiences helped
him with academic applications. As Bryan still tends to keep away from her
connections of gaming software and academics, she still finds a way to bring
his experiences back to her values. An example of this would be is when Bryan
is talking about how you can customize the game your way just by fooling around
, she brings it back to the literacy standpoint of understanding and reading
and how this could be carried over as she did in her statement in line 10. “OK so all those things - same kinds of
processes, same kinds of moves - so navigating menus is something you learned
from games that can carry over - anything else?(line12)”
Bryan’s values that come along with his identity are that
he likes the gaming software for fun and wants it nothing to do with academics.
As Dr. Chandler keeps making the connection between academics and his gaming
experience, he tries to push against it. In line 13 we can see this in his
reply after Chandler’s statement that all his experience can be carried over to
the literacy standpoint. “I think that is the main thing, I can't connect a
First person shooter with Microsoft word, that would be a real stretch.”
Another language move to try to separate gaming and academics is when they talk
about how Bryan messed around with his step-father’s computer and Chandler
brings up how it was trial and error. “I
wasn't being graded - there's no - all right man, let's pass this class you've
got to.(line 19)” With the different examples of language moves he makes
here, we see that he wants to keep Dr. Chandlers academic identity away from
his gamer identity because of the fact he does not want to feel like his gaming
is like going to class.
Within this interview we see the subliminal influences
between the identities and the values behind them. Many of the examples show
how the language moves create sort of a rift between the interviewer and the
one that is being interviewed. Considering that Bryan wants his experiences
away from education, we can see how he tries to shy away from it by using
downplay and his confidence. When Dr. Chandler tries to connect his software
usage to literacy or software that we use for academics, he uses downplay and
confidence to relate that it is common knowledge for anyone to know the
educational software or tools used for without having to connect it to games.
Another use for the
language moves used by Bryan is to use his experiences against the interviewer.
The assumed identity towards Dr. Chandler is that she does not know anything
about gaming or has less knowledge than he does. Basically, he knows Dr.
Chandler’s values for education by the questions she asked, and uses his
cockiness in his trade to try to talk down to Dr. Chandler. Yet again, as Dr.
Chandler in line 10 refer to his experience as a connection to literacy, he
uses common knowledge to combat what she said. “Well like a lot of games, in the beginning, there's menus. You don't just start playing. (Line 11)” We
can consider this a subliminal attack against him because of the statement. As
he tries to downplay this, it seems as though he is trying to teach the
interviewer about games. This statement could be assumed that he was trying to
say that gamming software is not just a turn on and play. There is more
complexity than to what may be seen in a video game.
Another subliminal look into the transcript is that even
though Bryan is trying to keep a distance his gaming from education, he is
actually agreeing without completely agreeing.
As Dr. Chandler asks questions about the video games and his background
with them, she always finds a way to connect it with education, as much as
Bryan wants to keep them in two different sectors. Line 10 through 13 is a great example-as it
has been throughout the analysis-of how even though Bryan doesn’t want their
two identities connect, he still agrees that just like with academic
applications, gaming applications still have the concept and similarities. It
is the language moves by Dr. Chandler in which whatever question she asks to
try to connect, she always adapts to the situation and subliminally pushes the
conversation to her favor.
Throughout the
transcript, it is understood that there is a little struggle between the two,
but as the transcript progresses we see how each other actually come to an
unspoken agreement. At this point, it feels as though both of them understood
each others identity. The constant rift between the two started to come
together and agree mostly in Dr. Chandler’s favor. Take for instance in line15
and 16 where before Bryan said you could not connect a shooter to Microsoft
Word. Chandler brings up the point about how games have file systems and
everything just like other applications.
“Ch -how about file systems and gaming spaces?” “B -you know, you're right, because the game, the games are still
software, and they're still files, so there are certain organization of a game
that is different from regular files.” As you can see, Bryan does
humble himself after the question to agree with Dr. Chandler. It took until end
of the transcript to finally have an agreement built between these two. Even
though the values between them did not change, there was a brief instant where
Bryan realized that Dr. Chandler had more knowledge than he thought she had in
the beginning.
To conclude this
analysis we have seen the different language moves such as downplay,
persistence, cockiness, and confidence that influenced how the conversation
would go. At a point where the interviewer and the subject seemed to can’t
relate, in the end they were able to agree but disagree all in the same
instance. Where Chandler’s teacher values conflicted with Bryan’s gamer values,
it was the subliminal influences that formed the conversation when they figured
where each other stood and their values. This transcript is a prime example of
how different identities and values can mold a conversation for better or for
worse. Sometimes people can connect and relate to each other and sometimes
there is no common ground at all. It is all about the different traits brought
into the conversation to determine how it will go.
