Faculty Review Reflection

For the initial capstone review with Matt and Tom, I felt ready. I was excited to go into the review and share my idea with a fresh set of ears. After going through my proposal, the two jumped into giving feedback. The greatest question centered around gameplay. What are the game rules? How will the scenarios be determined? Idioms have various scenarios and situations in which they would be applicable, so how will I accurately illustrate and explain this? How am I going to visualize/represent all possible situations- and well? For example, “butterflies in stomach” could be used in so many situations, such as being nervous about meeting someone, nerves before a big test, the first day of work, etc. This poses a challenge in terms of full representation of the idioms that I choose.

I want to focus on the idioms, their etymology, and proper context. I do not want to focus on gameplay. Based off of this, Matt and Tom suggested I may be better off making a tool or referential deliverable; opposed to a game where I would need to come up with stipulations. I would also need to focus around the design of the game, shying away from the content I am truly passionate about.

Another point of contention is my audience. Having non-native speakers as an audience is challenging because I will need to explain each idiom much more in depth; opposed to explaining new idioms to native speakers. I want to focus on native speakers (myself) so that the content can be greater and it can be more of a reference book for those already articulate in English.

I think now I need to revisit the idea of a book or volumes of a book, so that I can create a relic that I am proud of and motivated to make. Also need to think of audience and the problem I’m solving- as well as how big of an impact it needs to make.