The future of interactive literature

Interactive literature is a fresh form of literature that has not yet existed even for a hundred years, yet it has a wide history, jumping between continents and including a number of evolutionary steps. Its evolution is still ongoing and this thesis aims to map out where it might be headed next. The first part of the thesis focuses on unearthing the past of interactive literature in full, starting all the way from the first gamebook released in 1930 and making its way to the present. The second part builds on this by trying to see where it might be heading next. For this purpose a scenario-based questionnaire (focusing on technological advancements) was deployed on forums filled with both consumers and developers of interactive literature. Answers to the questionnaire ended up being quite few and biased towards developers so the results are analyzed with a grain of salt. Also past personal experience in writing interactive literature is discussed in order to provide a more writer-centric perspective into currently available tools and needs.Interaktiivinen kirjallisuus on tuore kirjallisuuden muoto, joka ei ole edes sata vuotta vielä, mutta sen historia on kattava, hyppien mantereelta toiselle lukuisien evoluution muotojen myötä. Tämä evoluutio on vieläkin menossa ja tämä tutkielma pyrkii selvittämään minkä muodon se ottaa seuraavaksi. Tutkielman ensimmäinen osa keskittyy interaktiivisen kirjallisuuden historian kokonaisvaltaiseen selvittämiseen. Tutkimus alkaa ensimmäisestä pelikirjasta, joka julkaistiin vuonna 1930 jatkaen siitä aina nykypäivään asti. Tutkielman toinen osa rakentaa edellisen päälle yrittäen selvittää mikä olisi seuraava askel historiassa. Tämän selvittämiseksi tutkielma käyttää skenaariopohjaista kyselyä, jota esitettiin erilaisilla foorumeilla, joiden käyttäjiin kuului niin interaktiivisen kirjallisuuden kuluttajia kuin kehittäjiäkin. Kyselyyn saatiin vain muutamia vastauksia jotka tulivat suurimmaksi osaksi kehittäjiltä, joten tulokset analysoidaan tämä huomioon ottaen. Kyselyn lisäksi myös kertynyttä henkilökohtaista kokemusta interaktiivisen kirjallisuuden kirjoittamisesta käydään läpi. Tämä tuo kirjoittaja läheisemmän näkökulman tarjolla oleviin työkaluihin ja tarpeisiin

An annotated bibliography of materials for the enrichment of a fifth grade social studies program dealing with the study of cities in the United States.

Thesis (Ed.M.)--Boston Universit

A descriptive and evaluative bibliography of films in secondary school literature

Thesis (Ed.M.)--Boston UniversitySTATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.-- This thesis was written to compile a descriptive and evaluative bibliography of films which might supplement instruction in literature from grades seven through twelve. JUSTIFICATION.-- Such a study, to the best of the writers' knowledge, is non-existent. In order to conserve unnecessary expenditure of time and effort by teachers in search of films appropriate to their units of instruction, such a listing must be devised. Commercial catalogs often list such important data as: title, running time, producer, and cost; but they rarely give an objective description of the content of the film as related to the objectives of teaching literature as stated in the publication of The National Council of Teachers of English. PROCEDURE.-- The writers considered themselves a basic evaluation committee formed to appraise a large number of educational films related to teaching literature. In order to substantiate their appraisals, they invited large numbers of teachers to attend the twice-weekly preview showings. A check-list comprised of thirteen items to analyze the films from a pedagogical point of view was devised and circulated among the evaluators attending. Forty-seven films were obtained from Boston University School of Public Relations, The Boston Public Library, The University of New Hampshire, and leading producers of such films who offered full cooperation to the writers throughout the nine-week period of the showings [TRUNCATED]

Spartan Daily, March 6, 2003

Volume 120, Issue 30https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/spartandaily/9826/thumbnail.jp

Review of Wittgenstein's Metaphilosophy by Paul Horwich 248p (2013) (review revised 2019)

Horwich gives a fine analysis of Wittgenstein (W) and is a leading W scholar, but in my view, they all fall short of a full appreciation, as I explain at length in this review and many others. If one does not understand W (and preferably Searle also) then I don't see how one could have more than a superficial understanding of philosophy and of higher order thought and thus of all complex behavior (psychology, sociology, anthropology, history, literature, society). In a nutshell, W demonstrated that when you have shown how a sentence is used in the context of interest, there is nothing more to say. I will start with a few notable quotes and then give what I think are the minimum considerations necessary to understand Wittgenstein, philosophy and human behavior. First one might note that putting “meta” in front of any word should be suspect. W remarked e.g., that metamathematics is mathematics like any other. The notion that we can step outside philosophy (i.e., the descriptive psychology of higher order thought) is itself a profound confusion. Another irritation here (and throughout academic writing for the last 4 decades) is the constant reverse linguistic sexism of “her” and “hers” and “she” or “he/she” etc., where “they” and “theirs” and “them” would do nicely. Likewise, the use of the French word 'repertoire' where the English 'repertory' will do quite well. The major deficiency is the complete failure (though very common) to employ what I see as the hugely powerful and intuitive two systems view of HOT and Searle’s framework which I have outlined above. This is especially poignant in the chapter on meaning p111 et seq. (especially in footnotes 2-7), where we swim in very muddy water without the framework of automated true only S1, propositional dispositional S2, COS etc. One can also get a better view of the inner and the outer by reading e.g., Johnston or Budd (see my reviews). Horwich however makes many incisive comments. I especially liked his summary of the import of W’s anti-theoretical stance on p65. He needs to give more emphasis to ‘On Certainty’, recently the subject of much effort by Daniele Moyal- Sharrock, Coliva and others and summarized in my recent articles. Horwich is first rate and his work well worth the effort. One hopes that he (and everyone) will study Searle and some modern psychology as well as Hutto, Read, Hutchinson, Stern, Moyal-Sharrock, Stroll, Hacker and Baker etc. to attain a broad modern view of behavior. Most of their papers are on academia dot edu and philpapers dot org , but for PMS Hacker see his papers on his Oxford page. He gives one of the most beautiful summaries of where an understanding of Wittgenstein leaves us that I have ever seen. “There must be no attempt to explain our linguistic/conceptual activity (PI 126) as in Frege’s reduction of arithmetic to logic; no attempt to give it epistemological foundations (PI 124) as in meaning based accounts of a priori knowledge; no attempt to characterize idealized forms of it (PI 130) as in sense logics; no attempt to reform it (PI 124, 132) as in Mackie’s error theory or Dummett’s intuitionism; no attempt to streamline it (PI 133) as in Quine’s account of existence; no attempt to make it more consistent (PI 132) as in Tarski’s response to the liar paradoxes; and no attempt to make it more complete (PI 133) as in the settling of questions of personal identity for bizarre hypothetical ‘teleportation’ scenarios.” Finally, let me suggest that with the perspective I have encouraged here, W is at the center of contemporary philosophy and psychology and is not obscure, difficult or irrelevant, but scintillating, profound and crystal clear and that to miss him is to miss one of the greatest intellectual adventures possible. Those wishing a comprehensive up to date framework for human behavior from the modern two systems view may consult my book ‘The Logical Structure of Philosophy, Psychology, Mind and Language in Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Searle’ 2nd ed (2019). Those interested in more of my writings may see ‘Talking Monkeys--Philosophy, Psychology, Science, Religion and Politics on a Doomed Planet--Articles and Reviews 2006-2019 3rd ed (2019), The Logical Structure of Human Behavior (2019), and Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st Century 4th ed (2019

Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books 48 (10) 1995

published or submitted for publicatio

Spartan Daily, February 5, 1943

Volume 31, Issue 77https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/spartandaily/10737/thumbnail.jp