ENG 329 2.2: Project One Rubric

Today’s Plan:

  • Rubric Activity
  • Rule of Thirds and Cropping

Rubric Exercise

Working with a partner, I would like you to generate a list of potential criteria for the first project. Go through either chapter 2 or chapter 3 and find 5 potential criteria.

I did this prior to class, and I started every sentence with either “is/are there X” or “do/does X Y.” For the first project I would like to be able to evaluate according to a quantitative “yes/no” approach, rather than attempt to qualitatively evaluate how well you achieved something (excellent, good, satisfactory, etc). Think of the rubric for project one as containing a checklist of things that have to be done–what 4 things you might have to do? (Note: for the Composition chapter I found 9 things, but that’s too many!).

Rule of Thirds

To Google Images! To Pinterest for rule of thirds!

I’ve emailed out a .zip file with images. To Photoshop!

Let’s talk about the ethics of cropping and photo manipulation. Maybe we have time for a video.

Homework

Obviously, the most pressing matter is to get to work on your projects. Because we’ve talked about visual rhetoric a bit in class today I’m going to make Friday a work day where you will be free to work on your project in class. Attendance Friday is optional–if you want to work in the lab and ask me questions, great. If you would prefer to work at another location, that’s fine too. Remember that we will be watching the project 1 videos in class on Monday.

I’ll also ask that you begin reading the Kalman in preparation for our second project. Have the first 50 pages read by Monday so we can discuss Kalman in class. Complete the book by Wednesday. Remember that our focus will be on how to make a Kalman–what are the elements of her process, how can we reverse engineer the book as product into a method? We will be using video rather than illustrations–but we should still be able to develop some kind of formula that captures the essence of her approach.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on ENG 329 2.2: Project One Rubric

ENG 123 2.2: Mueller’s Worknets

Today’s Plan:

  • Mueller exercise
  • Finding an article
  • Homework

Mueller Exercise

I’ve broken the Mueller article into X sections. I’ll ask you to break in groups. Each group will have 8 minutes to answer the question they have been given. We’ll then have a discussion (10 minutes max).

Finding an Article

We are a bit behind on the syllabus–but that’s ok. We will catch up today completing “Source Analysis Team Exercise (take 2).” We will spend 15 minutes finding some research articles connected to your SA article and posting links to them in on our Google Doc. I’ve included a sample one for the bees. We will do this in APA format because I imagine you are all familiar with MLA and it is time to branch out.

When posting a link, I want you to do your best and find a permalink (permanent link) to the article. For my example, I found this in the “information” section. While in a normal references list we would copy/paste the whole URL, we are working in a digital document. Thus, I just want you to hyperlink the link using the word “link.” See my example. If you don’t know how to make a link, today is a great day to learn.

I’d like each group to find at least 1.5 articles per group member.

GO.

Note that you do not need to submit anything to Canvas.

Homework

For homework I would like you to read and summarize one of the articles your group discovered. This will likely be a daunting task, given the complexity of the prose. I’d like to offer the following heuristic for how to prepare for the task:

  • Begin by reading the abstract and the conclusion. Have an overall sense of the argument before you start drilling down
  • Annotate as you go. Make marks in the margins and comments on the top of the page. Look for keywords that indicate findings. Try to identify what problem the article hopes to address
  • Pay attention what sources or previous research is especially important to the researcher. When working with scholarship, pay attention to the theorists or scholars the author uses to support her argument.
  • Especially when working with research, make note of the methodology. Was it a survey? An experiment? Was it qualitative research (textual analysis), or more quantitative (measurement)? How did they collect their data?
  • In or near the conclusion, look for where the writer(s) advocate(s) for us to do something differently; what does she perceive as the impact of this research?

After you’ve finished the article, I’d like you to start a new Google Doc and compose a summary of the article that answers the questions above. I imagine this should be in the 300-500 word range. Then, link the new Google Doc to the existing Team Formation Google Doc. To get the link to your google doc, hit “Share,” change the settings to edit, and then copy. Do not copy the URL straight out of the address bar–that won’t work.

Once again, there is no need to submit anything to Canvas. Friday morning I will check the Team Formation doc and follow the links from there.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on ENG 123 2.2: Mueller’s Worknets

ENG 329 1.2: Remediation Project

Today’s Plan:

  • Watch some introductions
  • Introduce Project 1: Remediation
  • Play with Photoshop
  • Homework

What is Remediation?

In their now classic work on digital textuality, Remediation, Jay Bolter and Richard Grusin build on the work of canonical media theorist Marshall McLuhan. McLuhan famously wrote that “the medium is the message”–that the mode of communication used to shape a message has just as much effect on us the message itself. For instance, television is a passive medium, one that demands the user’s attention without offering her any means of response. Mediums help structure our social and political relations.

Bolter and Grusin work from McLuhan to distinguish 3 different “logics,” or relations, that we have toward media. The three tend to be at odds with each other. We either desire immediacy (in which we focus on content and want the form of mediation to disappear), hypermediacy (in which we are invested in the method/mode of presentation and what it affords us, what new possibilities it enables), or remediacy, remediation–which really only comes to the fore with the invention of digital composing technologies. Remediation. Allison Hilt offers a succinct explication of this third form or logic:

The final logic is remediation, and it appears to be the one that has been taken up most verbosely in scholarship and, arguably, has influenced recent focuses on remix. Remediation is an integral component of new media, and it manifests on a continuum of extremes. That is, remediation can be an older medium “that is highlighted and re-presented in digital form without apparent irony or critique”—eg. digital archives of photos and texts—and attempts to erase the digital medium itself (339).

Or, remediation can emphasize difference rather than erase it, which is pitched as an improvement of the old medium while still attempting to remain true to the original (340). I think of things like e-readers for this, which model the genre of a book but also highlight different features—increasing text size, changing font, offering tools for highlighting/underlining, allowing you to purchase new books through the e-reader itself.

Then again, remediation can be more aggressive, attempting to “refashion the older medium or media entirely, while still marking the presence of the older media and therefore maintaining a sense of multiplicity or, as we have called it, hypermediacy” (340). Bolter and Grusin talk about immersive virtual reality here, and I also think of work by scholars like Jody Shipka and Erin Anderson who use older media to create digital projects.

Finally, remediation can be the act of absorbing the original medium entirely, although remediation itself ensures that the new medium is always dependent on the older one, whether those similarities are minimized or not (341). An example here is the move from cinema to television to web, as these different media certainly influence and necessitate each other without acknowledging that dependence.

We might say that remediation is the most artistic of the three modes, and one that actually focuses on the message more than the medium. For our project I am interested in this third form of remediation. I think remediation calls attention to how transfering a “text” from one medium and genre introduces a number of inventional dynamics, opportunities to surprise, delight, amplify, the original text’s purpose and meaning. The value in remediating texts is that it gets us to pay attention to both particular genre conventions and technological affordances. That is, when you start to think of what a Victorian novel would look like as a Beyonce video, you ahve to start cataloguing the elements of a Victorian novel that have to be transformed and the dimensions of a Beyonce video that have to be enacted. You have to start making a series of complicated choices to make that work.

Project 1: Remediation

For your first project, I want you to remediate a print text into a short digital video. Because I want to provide you as much creative space as possible, it is difficult for me to provide you with more specific criteria.

I imagine one possibility for this could be to take an existing poem (whether historic, contemporary, or one you have written), and transform it into a music video. Another could be to take a movie or video game review you have written and turn that into a video. You might be more ambitious and act out a scene from a novel or a play. Perhaps you want to re-film a scene from a movie. If you are a musician, then you might make a music video for a song. I think you could also make a music video for an existing song.

In terms of content, the project is open to you. I do have a few technical requirements:

  • Because the purpose of the first project is to get more experience with video, I want you to use video rather than still images. It is ok to integrate both, but at least 2/3’s of the project should be video
  • I’m *not* going to assess audio quality for this first project, although I do recommend using an external mic if possible.
  • I expect your first project will use multiple camera shots and follow Stockman’s guidelines
  • I expect your first project will adhere to Schroeppel’s guidelines for composition in Bare Bones
  • I would like your project to do something with text. In your reflection, I’ll ask you to tell me about something that you didn’t know how to do, how you tried to learn it, and how you might do something differently next time

The Fundamentals of Photoshop

Ok, today we’ll cover a few basics. How to:

  • Open a .zip file
  • Crop an image [Crop tool or Select box > Image > Crop]
  • Adjust the Color of an image [Image > Adjustments]
  • Clone Stamp tool
  • Use the Magic Healing Brush
  • Insert Text
  • Select/lasso part of an image and move it into another image
  • File types

Homework

Read Schroeppel, Bare Bones, chapter on “Composition.” Prepare a list of 3 things from the chapter than you can pay attention to as you shoot project one. For each, take a picture that serves as an example (and, if possible, take a still picture that is a good example and a still picture that is a bad example). Post the pictures to the Canvas discussion forum.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on ENG 329 1.2: Remediation Project

ENG 123 1.2: Locating a Research Article

Today’s Plan:

  • Quick Hits
  • Reviewing summaries
  • Team formation
  • Searching in Summon, Google Scholar
  • Homework

A Few Quick Hits

What’s wrong with this sentence and how do we fix it?

In the article “Stress Training for Cops’ Brains Could Reduce Suspect Shootings”, it discusses the reaction the brain often has in stressful situations

Ok, similar one:

While reading, “Stress Training for Cops’ Brains Could Reduce Suspect Shootings (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.”, we learn about how stress can aid or make certain situations deadly when cops are in active shooter or stressful situations. Rachel Nuwer, the author, begins with how stress is a survival instinct that has kept us alive for for centuries.

What’s wrong with the syntax of this sentence and how do we fix it?

Scientists have linked it to a specific type of pesticide, neonicotinoids. While agricultural businesses, such as DuPoint, say that the bees are being killed by mites.

Reviewing Summaries

Today we are going to start off with Cathy Davidson’s Think-Pair-Share method for generating discussion. Davidson describes:

In Think-Pair-Share, you hand out index cards and pencils (this is not necessary but it somehow sets the mood fast and fast is important in TPS). You set a timer for 90 seconds (really, 90). And you pose a question. For example, if this were a class on “Why Start With Pedagogy?” I would ask everyone to take 90 seconds to jot down three things (there are no right or wrong answers) they do in their classrooms to engage students. When the timer sounds, I then have students work in pairs for another 90 seconds in a very specific, ritualized way. Their objective in this 90 seconds is to, together, come up with one thing to share with the whole group, it can be a synthesis of various comments on both cards, but one agreed upon thing to share. BUT before that each person has to hear the other. One member of the pair reads their three things while the other is silent; then the second person reads to a silent listener. Hearing your own voice in a classroom—and witnessing being heard– is the beginning of taking responsibility for your own learning. It’s not only about meeting someone else’s criteria but setting the bar for yourself. There is also something about the ritual of writing down, then reading to someone else, that allows the introvert to speak up in a way that avoids the panic of being called on and having to speak extemp before a group. It is extremely egalitarian—it structures equality. The final 90 seconds involves going rapidly around the room and having one person in each pair read their contribution.

Here is your question: what is one thing that stood out in your article? Can you frame that thing in terms of a “Beef. It’s What’s for Dinner” meme (as in Noun. It’s what’s XYZ.)?

Team Formation

Ok, let’s see how this works out. To Google Docs!

Searching in Summon, Google Scholar

Once we have divided into teams of 3-4, I will ask each team to put together a list of 6 peer reviewed sources for their topic. If possible, each source should have a direct connection to the Scientific American article. How can you find sources? Try searching for any reports, researchers, articles, etc mentioned in the SA article. Let’s look at Summon and Google Scholar.

For instance, let’s say that I was working on Gillam’s Bees article. Scanning through it, I see a quote from Michele Simon, who Gillam describes as “a public health lawyer who specializes in food issues.” To Summon! To Google Scholar!

So what happens if I try Jeff Pettis? To the Google Doc!

Homework

For homework, I want you to dive into Mueller’s article “Mapping the Resourcefulness of Sources: A Worknet Pedagogy.” Remember to print out a copy.

Structurally, Mueller’s article is a typical humanities/pedagogy academic article (an article on teaching). It begins by laying out a problem and surveying previous research–focusing on research that is important for his “worknets” approach. In this case, the problem concerns student use of sources and the previous research is Marilyn Cooper’s work on writing ecologies (that writing is always connected to a network of cultural and social forces, it doesn’t exist in a vacuum). He also points to a few other theorists that follow or echo Cooper’s work: Sirc, Rice, Latour.

After the “Opening” section, the next few sections offer more theoretical support for his idea. That is, in order to teach sources in an “ecological way,” we have to have an idea of what ecology means both in general and as it pertains to writing. He begins by explicating Cooper a bit, then turns to Richard Lanham’ notion of “interfaces” to interrogate how current approach to source use are insufficient. His focus, as the section header suggests, is on prepositions.

Mueller writes:

[…]methodical approaches to source use are not so much lockstep processes of search, retrieval, selection, and integration, but rather routes across and beyond particular problems. Simply, methodical approaches to source use can become restrictive too early in an inquiry process if we understand source consultation and use as following too narrow or monolithic a set of procedures. When approaches to research writing tolerate stagnant or unquestioning operations, source integration risks turning into unchecked ritual–a flat but requisite gesture involving finding and slotting excerpts. In general, this is what I wish to avoid in my teaching of research-based writing. My intention is neither to abandon methodical approaches to source use nor to put too deeply in doubt rationalist sensibilities about the functions of sources in researched writing. Rather, worknets as an alternative framework may provide a complementary approach that supports writing conceived and carried out along “wiggyly paths or irregular courses.”

The remainder of the article articulates the four specific “wiggly paths” that comprise Mueller’s worknets: semantic, bibliographic, affinity-based, and choric.

I offer this layout to give you an inroad into understanding Mueller’s article. Before next Wednesday’s class, I’d like you to read Mueller’s article and post a 400 word summary to Canvas. The summary should:

  • What is Mueller’s issue with the way research is taught? What is his issue with Lunsford’s approach (since he points to her famous textbook as an example)?
  • Explain what theory grounds Mueller’s approach to worknets–what does he mean by ecology? What’s the deal with prepositions? Why call the four elements of the worknet “wiggly paths”?
  • Put the four elements of the worknet–semantic, bibliographic, affinity-based, and choric–into your own words.
  • Make sure you conclude by stressing how these four methods fix the problem that you/he articulates in the beginning! How is this different from Lunsford?
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on ENG 123 1.2: Locating a Research Article

ENG 329 1.1: Introduction (Assignment)

Today’s Plan:

  • Syllabus
  • Introduction Assignment
  • Google Form

Syllabus Review

Here is a link to the syllabus.

Introduction Assignment

For your first assignment, I’d like you to post a short video (30 seconds or less) that introduces you to the class. Perhaps you might begin by letting us know your major and career goals. But the focus of the video should be on sharing a part of your life that is important to you. It can be a place, a book, a food, an activity, anything you can film.

I don’t want anyone to worry about quality or freak out and drop the course! This is a way of me getting a sense of what you are capable of. In any course–but especially a course working with technology–it is a challenge to measure every student’s incoming abilities. This activity is meant to help me do just that.

A brief aside on the significance of imperfection.

Before you shoot your project, let’s spend a little time with Steve Stockman, author of How to Shoot Video that Doesn’t Suck. Stockman provides us with five basic principles for shooting video:

  • shots should be 10 seconds or less
  • Whites of their eyes (faces)
  • Light behind the camera, not behind the subject
  • Keep the camera still, don’t shoot and move
  • Keep your video short

If you are unsure what Stockman means by shots, maybe this will help.

Also, if you can, include some background music.

You can use any editor you want to make these videos, even iOS apps.

You should create a YouTube account and use the YouTube button in the discussion tools to embed your video into a discussion post. (Note try the embed, if you are having trouble then use a link).

Homework

There’s a discussion post on Canvas where you can upload your video (or, if you are having problems, you can submit a link).

In Wednesday’s class, I was going to spend 20 minutes or so going over some simple image editing in Photoshop. Please take this survey ASAP so I know what to include in the workshop.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on ENG 329 1.1: Introduction (Assignment)

ENG 123 1.1: Introduction

Today’s Plan:

  • Syllabus
  • Article Overview
  • Homework

Syllabus

Let’s read the syllabus.

Choose Your Own Adventure

Here’s the list of articles:

Three sentences:

  • I read…
  • It was about…
  • One interesting, surprising, questionable thing was…

Quick Take: How to Read an (Academic) Article

When I assign a reading, I expect you to:

  1. Print out a copy of the article. Don’t try to read something on which you will write on screen
  2. As you read, have a pen at the ready. Don’t use a highlighter. Underline, mark the margin, or place a question mark as you go
  3. Every time you underline or mark the margin, write a comment at the top of the page. Studies show that writing things down helps us remember them. It also helps us start inventing the material we will need to write a summary or comparison. Don’t read passively, but actively

Homework

Read one of the articles above for Wednesday’s class. Post a 200 word summary of the article to Canvas. The summary should:

  • Identify the thesis of the article
  • Explain the methods the author used to support her claims and/or explain important methods used by others who the writer cites in support of her claims
  • Identify a debate, controversy, point of contention in the article
  • Not use the words “thesis” or “method(s)”

Bring a copy of your article to Wednesday’s class.

Note that we will meet in Ross Hall 1240 computer lab on Wednesday.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on ENG 123 1.1: Introduction

ENG 594 13: Proposals, Digital Video

Tonight’s plan:

  • 123 Materials, Book Orders
  • Keri’s Paper
  • Proposals? Conferences?
  • Statement of Teaching Philosophy
  • Digital Video

Statements of Teaching Philosophy

Last week I explained my interest in helping you develop a teaching portfolio that will serve you on the job market. Let’s look at this pretty thorough guide on teaching portfolios developed by The Center for Teaching at Vanderbilt University. As I said last week, I think the feedback portfolio we developed last week is an innovative way of documenting teaching effectiveness.

Your other final assignment is pretty straightforward: and that is to develop a Statement of Teaching Philosophy. Obviously, you have limited experience as instructors, but I think it is strategic to familiarize yourself with the genre now so that you can revise these statements as you get closer to the job market (or applying to PhD programs).

Ok, what are statements of teaching philosophy? Let’s check that Vanderbilt page. Let’s look at the top of the Google Rankings.. Let’s look at Cheryl Ball’s advice. Let’s look at one more guide. Let’s look at some examples.

Teaching with Digital Video

Here is a link to the workshop I gave last year. Let’s walk through some stuff and then go make some video.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on ENG 594 13: Proposals, Digital Video

ENG 122 12.2: Proposals, Conferences, Scholarship

Today’s plan:

  • Attendance
  • Index Card Questions
  • Conference Sign Up [Google Doc]
  • Proposal Assignment Review
  • MLA and APA Checklist
  • Survey and Interview Review
  • Booth exercise
  • Reading Scholarship
  • Homework

Conference Sign Up

Hi all. I’ve put up a Google Doc with meeting times. Sign up for one!

MLA and APA Checklist

So my feeling is that you have likely had exposure to MLA or APA paper formatting at some time. After the Thanksgiving Break, we will spend Tuesday working with the format. But I wanted you to format your proposals and drafts in MLA and APA format. To help with that, and to see what you already know, I’ve put together a checklist of primary concerns with MLA and APA. After you are done writing your proposal and your draft, please consult this and look up the formatting specifics (again, try Googling OWL MLA or APA).

Proposal Assignment

I was a bit off my game in the library Tuesday, so let me go over the proposal assignment one more time.

Proposal Project

The proposal for the final paper is a more focused than the proposal you wrote at the beginning of the semester. This time around I will ask you to hone in on a research question and provide me with an annotated list of sources that you will use in the final paper. On Thursday, I stipulated two requirements for the proposal:

  • That the paper pose a question that you do not already know the answer to (and you shouldn’t have a deep emotional investment in knowing the answer to–ask a question that might surprise you)
  • That the paper uses at least 8 sources. 2 of these sources should be academic, 3 of these sources must be academic if you want to qualify for an A

I have created a template for the proposal that I would like you all to use.

But before I share that with you, I want to explain something. I mentioned last week that you might conduct primary research: a questionnaire/survey, an interview, and experiment or observation, in place of some sources. You’ll notice an area in the template marked “primary research.” If you want to do primary research, then here is where you describe to me what you think you want to do. Essentially, I would like you to write up a methodology. If you want to do an interview, then find an interview on a similar subject, cite it, and use it to help develop the interview questions. I want to see those questions up front. Same thing with a survey–there’s readings for next class regarding surveys listed below.

If you develop and conduct a survey, then I will count it as two to three non-academic sources in your final paper (and I will specify the amount after I’ve read the proposal and during our conference).

Finally, you will notice that the proposal calls for an annotated bibliography of at least 5 sources. This means that by the time you turn in your annotated bibliography on Monday, I expect you to have read, summarized, and analyzed 5 sources. This might sound like a lot, but you should have already most of this work: you are drawing on an article you have already written that should have contained three sources (you should re-read those, but they are hopefully fresh), you read one source for homework in preparation for today’s class, and you are reading another source for homework tonight in preparation for Tuesday’s class.

Since I am asking you for an annotated bibliography, I want to clarify what I consider an annotation. I consider an annotation as a 150-250 word, two paragraph, thing. The first paragraph of an annotation provides the reader a summary of the piece. This summary should clarify when the piece was written, why the piece was written (what is its purpose, its thesis), the method or evidence the author of the piece uses to prove her point, and (possibly) what the author hopes the point will lead us to do differently (sometimes this is different than the thesis, sometimes it is the same thing).

The second paragraph of an annotation is more of a reflection on the significance of the piece to your project. Why is this source important to you? Does it help show that there is a problem? Does it critique a popular solution to the problem that you don’t think will work? Does it provide some meaningful statistics regarding what people think about the problem, or what people think about a proposed solution? Does it offer a unique perspective on why something is good? Or bad? Does it lay out survey questions that you would like to ask (maybe to see if you get the same answers, or different answers?)? In other words, the second paragraph is where you start thinking about the source and telling me how it fits into your project.

Survey and Interview Questions

Quick quiz on Canvas.

Booth Exercise

Quicker quiz on Canvas

Reading Scholarship

Let’s watch a quick video.

I’ve put together a handout that goes with the video. You are welcome to print more copies to use for your research or in other classes!

Homework

The next time we are going to meet as a group is on November 28th! Holy crap! There’s a lot to do between now and then, when we will work on MLA and APA format and do our course evaluations (the university requires you do them online, the English department provides paper forms). Let’s review:

  • November 13th, Proposal due
  • November 21st, Drafts of papers due for Peer Review (I will ask you to sumbit a link to a Google Doc, then I will email people and tell them which Google Doc to review–I will send out more information about this after conferences next week)
  • November 22nd, Drafts of papers due for Santos comments
  • November 28th, Meet in computer lab (Ross Hall) for MLA and APA workshop [DON’T MISS THIS CLASS]
  • November 30th, Meet in computer lab for MLA / APA and second peer review
  • December 3rd, Final papers due to be eligible for resubmission [note: resubmission is only possible if a draft was turned in on Nov 22nd]
  • December 8th, Absolute final day to turn in a paper
Posted in teaching | Tagged , | Comments Off on ENG 122 12.2: Proposals, Conferences, Scholarship

ENG 594 12: Proposals, Feedback Portfolios, Paper Day #2

Today’s Plan:

  • ENG 123 update
  • Syllabus Review
  • Feedback Portfolios / Homework
  • Paper Day #2

ENG 123 Update

I’ve forwarded all of you the email I got from Sonja Scullion regarding English 123. It contains the syllabus and the supporting materials.

Syllabus Review

Here’s what I am doing for the next week or so.

First, in today’s class, I gave them a proposal project. I think of this as a pre-writing exercise, getting them to read, think, and write about their topic. My *hope* is that they really do ask a question that they don’t know the answer to, although many of them will overlook this requirement and seek a path of less resistance.

Thursday’s class will be busy for me. I’m in the computer lab that day. I will start off with the Booth activity (I am studying…). I will also pass around a sign-up sheet for 10 minute conferences next week; I’ll be cancelling class on Tuesday and Thursday. I wish I had one more class with them, because they will be essentially on their own with MLA and APA format until after Thanksgiving Break. Since you are all on the M/W/F format, I would cancel two days but use the third day productively.

Then, I have a quick quiz on those readings dealing with surveys and questionnaires (basically a reading check). I’ll probably get a bit political about what not to do. Then we are going to read an academic article together. Hey look, a worksheet to use in class. Hey look, an article to read together.

Well I remember: teaching MLA and APA. I have two activities I do. The first, as I’ve described, is to give them a horribly broken paper and tell them to fix it. I’ll provide a checklist of things so they know what to fix. That’s pretty much the same checklist I use to evaluate final papers. I don’t let them leave the computer lab until they are done.

A second exercise I’ve used is to bring in a pile of 10 sources–a mix of books, magazine articles, wikipedia entries (printed out), JSTOR pdfs (again, printed out but we pretend they are digital), etc. I break them into teams of two and have them create a Works Cited or Reference List from that material. I like this activity because it is tactile–they have the sources in their hand–and because I don’t necessarily do this one in a computer lab, they can’t rely on an attribution generator like EasyBib.

Feedback Portfolios / Homework

We have two remaining projects to complete this semester: the first is a Feedback Portfolio and the second is a Statement of Teaching Philosophy. I’m going to talk about the former today, and the later next week.

I’m going to be honest–I’ve never seen a “Feedback Portfolio” before. It was something I thought of this summer as I was putting together the readings for our course. I knew a number of readings would deal with assessment. I know from personal experience that it is easy to provide students with too much feedback (overwhelming them and reducing the chance that they follow up on our most important feedback). I know I sincerely believe that providing concise, actionable feedback in a timely manner is one of the best ways to helps students develop their abilities. So, I knew I wanted a project to focus intellectual energy on feedback. And I knew/know that I wanted you to end the course with materials that could help develop a teaching portfolio and help you with a future job search.

But I don’t know exactly what the feedback portfolio should include. I have a few ideas. But I am interested in hearing what you think. So, group time.

Let’s start here.

Paper Day #2

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on ENG 594 12: Proposals, Feedback Portfolios, Paper Day #2

12.1: Research and Proposals

Today’s Plan:

  • Library Research Presentation
  • Proposal Project
  • Homework

Proposal Project

In Thursday’s class you will sign up for meeting times with me next week. Before we meet, I will ask you to submit a final paper proposal. I would like these proposals to be completed by Monday, November 13th at 11:59pm. This is a bit of a change from the time line I laid out last Thursday while introducing the final papers:

  • November 14th, Proposal due
  • November 21st, Drafts of papers due for Peer Review
  • November 22nd, Drafts of papers due for Santos comments
  • December 3rd, Final papers due to be eligible for resubmission [note: resubmission is only possible if a draft was turned in on Nov 22nd]
  • December 8th, Absolute final day to turn in a paper

The proposal for the final paper is a more focused than the proposal you wrote at the beginning of the semester. This time around I will ask you to hone in on a research question and provide me with an annotated list of sources that you will use in the final paper. On Thursday, I stipulated two requirements for the proposal:

  • That the proposal pose a question that you do not already know the answer to (and you shouldn’t have a deep emotional investment in knowing the answer to–ask a question that might surprise you)
  • That the proposal uses at least 8 sources. 2 of these sources should be academic, 3 of these sources must be academic if you want to qualify for an A

I have created a template for the proposal that I would like you all to use.

But before I share that with you, I want to explain something. I mentioned last week that you might conduct primary research: a questionnaire/survey, an interview, and experiment or observation, in place of some sources. You’ll notice an area in the template marked “primary research.” If you want to do primary research, then here is where you describe to me what you think you want to do. Essentially, I would like you to write up a methodology. If you want to do an interview, then find an interview on a similar subject, cite it, and use it to help develop the interview questions. I want to see those questions up front. Same thing with a survey–there’s readings for next class regarding surveys listed below.

If you develop and conduct a survey, then I will count it as two to three non-academic sources in your final paper (and I will specify the amount after I’ve read the proposal and during our conference).

Finally, you will notice that the proposal calls for an annotated bibliography of at least 5 sources. This means that by the time you turn in your annotated bibliography on Monday, I expect you to have read, summarized, and analyzed 5 sources. This might sound like a lot, but you should have already most of this work: you are drawing on an article you have already written that should have contained three sources (you should re-read those, but they are hopefully fresh), you read one source for homework in preparation for today’s class, and you are reading another source for homework tonight in preparation for Tuesday’s class.

Since I am asking you for an annotated bibliography, I want to clarify what I consider an annotation. I consider an annotation as a 150-250 word, two paragraph, thing. The first paragraph of an annotation provides the reader a summary of the piece. This summary should clarify when the piece was written, why the piece was written (what is its purpose, its thesis), the method or evidence the author of the piece uses to prove her point, and (possibly) what the author hopes the point will lead us to do differently (sometimes this is different than the thesis, sometimes it is the same thing).

The second paragraph of an annotation is more of a reflection on the significance of the piece to your project. Why is this source important to you? Does it help show that there is a problem? Does it critique a popular solution to the problem that you don’t think will work? Does it provide some meaningful statistics regarding what people think about the problem, or what people think about a proposed solution? Does it offer a unique perspective on why something is good? Or bad? Does it lay out survey questions that you would like to ask (maybe to see if you get the same answers, or different answers?)? In other words, the second paragraph is where you start thinking about the source and telling me how it fits into your project.

Homework

There’s two (or maybe 3) things for homework:

  1. As a follow up to our library activity, find and annotate a peer-reviewed, academic source that you might use in your paper
  2. Read the following guides on constructing surveys (they are short): Harvard Guide, Purdue OWL question types to avoid. Also, be ready to tell me what a Likert scale is
  3. If you haven’t, read the Booth .pdf I shared on Thursday. Please read the text and come prepared to discuss it in Tuesday’s class. By “prepared,” I mean that you should have two points in the text that you think are significant and you are prepared to tell us why they are significant (obviously, significant can mean any number of things here). Furthermore, you should prepare one question to ask about the reading.
Posted in teaching | Tagged , , | Comments Off on 12.1: Research and Proposals