Video Links NEEDED for answer:
As you may have noticed, Turkle and McGonigal have different perspectives about technology. For this assignment, you will draft a short research supported argumentative or persuasive paper, using the provided articles and videos featuring McGonigal and Turkle.
- Do not use any outside research.
- You must use all four of the provided sources in your Short Research Paper.
- Your final paper will be 1500 words, that is about 3-5 pages, double spaced, 12pt font.
- You must follow APA guidelines, including a works cited page and a title page (do not count towards word count).
- For the works cited: cite the videos as Websites and cite the articles as pdfs. Use an online reference guide for the correct format.
In your paper, address the following: McGonigal strongly feels that video games are not only positive but can be used to better situations. Turkle has many concerns about technology and its impact on our lives, identities, and emotional well being, but she has a complex relationship with it and has studied its impact for many years. Put these two authors/speakers in conversation with each other by using their research as support in your argumentative paper. Draw upon the similarities and differences in their articles/TED Talks. Make sure to pay attention to nuances in their arguments. This is not a compare and contrast paper. Although you may compare and contrast at times, your argument should seek to more complex than simply comparing and contrasting. Compose a paper that addresses the intersection of technology, identity, and emotions by inviting a complex discussion of an issue or area that you identify in the provided material. Do not seek to take one side over the other, but rather create an argument which addresses multiple sides and your own concerns.
Questions you may consider: Do their ideas coincide with each other? Do their ideas conflict with each other? How do their personalities and experiences affect their ideas and how they present them? Do their beliefs raise concerns? Is there middle ground in their approaches? Is one person’s viewpoint or argument more compelling than the others? Be aware of your own bias too. Are you generalizing based on stereotypes? Are you considering everything the speaker/author is saying or are you only choosing parts to make them fit your argument? It is okay to raise an issue and not solve it. Noting that something is an issue and needs further research is acceptable in research writing
(Caution: If relevant, you may draw on your own personal experience, but if adding personal experience, always make sure that it is relevant and compelling; otherwise, it can detract from the argument. Also, realize that your experience may not compare to expert, peer reviewed, material. So think about this first.)