Unit 3 Draft Workshops

In order to avoid missing credit for any work you've done in Unit 3, I ask each of you to email a list of links to your Unit 3 draft workshops. Here are the workshops I'll be looking for:

4/9: Feeder 3.1
4/13: Feeder 3.2 Audio
4/18: Unit 3 Project Script
4/20: Unit 3 Project Audio

For each of these workshops, locate the Google Doc in which you gave feedback on your partner's paper. Ensure that the document is shared with my correct gmail address and email a link to each document to me (just copy and paste the URL from your browser). I will contact you directly via email if any of the links do not work.

Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Audio

4/20/12
Name:

Since many of you are at different stages of the drafting process, today you will compose all of the questions for your workshop. You can either compose new questions entirely or you can copy and paste questions from previous workshops. Please include at least 4 questions.

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Script

4/18/12
Name:

1. Does the script begin (i.e. in the first sentence) by telling the audience something they do not know? Is the author’s introduction one of the more effective or less effective introductions we talked about in class? If the script begins either with a rhetorical question or a broad declaratory statement (i.e. “Monet was one of the greatest artists of the 19th century,” “Abstract expressionists like Jackson Pollock sought to combine emotional intensity with non-figurative imagery”) work with the author to compose a more effective introduction and paste it below.

2. Does the thesis statement (as the assignment requires) make a strong and specific claim about the artwork’s relationship to a specific context? Does the thesis statement merely state that there isa relationship, or does it define that relationship specifically? If the thesis statement needs to be revised, work with the author to revise it and paste the new version here. In addition, does the thesis statement provide a road map for the rest of the essay and answer the “so what?” question? 

Compose two more questions addressing specific issues you are dealing with on this particular draft. You can copy and paste questions from previous draft workshops or compose new ones.

3. 

4. 

Posting Your VoiceThread to Your Blog

1. Go back to voicethread.unc.edu and click on the “My Voice” tab. Click on the VoiceThread you wish to post.

2. Click the menu icon at the top left of the screen then click “edit.” Click the button at the bottom of the screen that says “Playback Options” and enter 0 as the time to wait between slides and check the button that says “Start playing when opened.” Click the “Save” button.

3. Click the button at the bottom of the screen that says “Publishing Options.” Check the box that says “Allow Anyone at UNC to View.” Click “Save.” 

4. Click the button at the bottom of the screen that says “Embed.” Copy the code in the box labeled “Embed Code” (just clicking anywhere in the box will copy the code for you). Go to blogger.com, log in, and click the button to make a new post. Click the button on the top left that says “html,” then paste in the code you copied earlier. Give your post a title and hit “Publish.”

5. Ask a groupmate or friend to open the VoiceThread on their computer by going to your blog. If your friend can’t open it for some reason then I won’t be able to either and I won’t be able to grade your assignment! Please contact me if you have any technical difficulties posting to the blog.

Course Evaluations

We will do course evaluations in class on Wednesday, April 18.

Click here (https://www.digitalmeasures.com/login/unc/student) to access the online evaluation system. You will need to login with your ONYEN and password.

Screencast: Assembling Your VoiceThread

Screencast: Splitting Your Audio Track Into Multiple Mp3s

Draft Workshop: Feeder 3.2 Audio

Date: 4/12/12 
Name: 

The final two questions have been left blank in order for the author to ask specific questions about the concerns s/he is dealing with in the current draft.

1. The assignment states that the focus of your VoiceThread “should be the formal qualities of the work you are attempting to explain.” Has the author adequately retained this focus? Is there significant formal analysis of the artwork in question, or does the author focus too heavily on social, political, or cultural concerns? How might the author use formal analysis of the artwork to deepen his or her argument?

2. The assignment also asks you to contextualize the artwork “within a specific historical, artistic, or cultural context.” What is the context the author has chosen? Is the connection between the artwork’s formal qualities and this context made clear in the author’s thesis statement? What about within the body of the podcast? Suggest ways in which either of these aspects of the draft might be improved.

3.

4.

Workshop: Feeder 3.1

Date: 4/9
Name:

1. The assignment calls for you to explore the context of the article’s thesis statement, identifying the controversy into which the author is entering. Has the draft adequately fulfilled this requirement? Does the author give an indication of why the article is important to art historians? Could the author add any information to make this context richer?

2. The assignment also asks you to evaluate the author’s evidence. Does the draft adequately explain how the article’s author has supported his or her thesis statement? Do you feel as though you can adequately evaluate the article’s evidence with the information provided in your draft? Explain your answer.

3. Art history provides a perfect example to bring in images and other multimedia content to help aid the reader. Has the author taken advantage of this ability? Explain how the author might use additional images or multimedia content in order to make his or her argument clearer or more meaningful.

Add two of your own questions to this workshop that focus on issues on which you desire feedback. Feel free to copy and paste questions from previous draft workshops or compose your own.

4.

5. 

Example VoiceThread

http://unc.voicethread.com/?#q.b1546827.i8160362

Feeder 3.1 Pre-Writing

Find an article that fulfills the requirements for your Feeder 3.1 assignment. Once you have found an article, identify at least three claims that the author makes about a particular work of art and identify at least one reason that the author cites in support of that claim.

Francis Bacon: "Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion," 1944

Posting Your Podcast to Your Blog

Exporting Your Podcast as an mp3


Mac: GarageBand

At the top of your screen, click “Share” and then “Export song to disk.”

Make sure the box next to “Compress” is checked, and change “AAC Encoder” to “mp3 Encoder.”

Change “High Quality” to “Good Quality.” Click Export and choose a location for your file.


Windows: Audacity

Click this link for an explanation of how to install the MP3 codec:

http://wiki.audacityteam.org/index.php?title=Lame_Installation#Windows_Instructions

If the link to lame_enc.dll is not working you can download it here.


If you're on a mac, you'll need libmp3lame.dylib, which you can download here.

Once you have the codec installed, open your podcast in Audacity and go to File > Export. Choose a location and a name for your file, then where it says “Format” choose “MP3 files” and click Save. The first time you export an mp3 you may need to locate the mp3 codec you installed above.

This is a little more complicated! But if you run into problems you can rely on me and your group members.


Posting Your Podcast to the blog

Now you should have an mp3 file of your podcast somewhere on your computer. From here, follow the instructions in this screencast to post your podcast to your blog:

Unit 2 Project Podcast

4/2/12

Name: 

1. As you listen to your partner's podcast for the first time, compose a DETAILED retrospective outline of the draft. Your outline should be about half a page long.

2. How easy was it for you to compose the outline? Were the transition moments clearly signaled to the listener? How were the signaled? Were there any transitional moments that need additional clarification? In general, does the podcast feel organized? Explain your answer.

3. How has the author handled the results section? Does it feel like a barrage of numbers, or is the information easy to digest? Do you have a sense of which bits of information are the most important and which are less important? How might the author highlight the most pertinent info in the results section more clearly?

4. Does the author adequately address the strengths and weaknesses of his or her study? Does the author reformulate the hypothesis or propose how the experiment might be conducted differently next time? Do you have a sense of what the author learned from the study and why that information is valuable to the listener?

5. Last week we talked about how the Discussion section of a research report should gradually "zoom out" from the narrow conclusions drawn from the study itself. Summarize briefly how the author accomplishes this task of "zooming out." Is it clear what the reader should take away from the study and the report? How might the author highlight this information more clearly in order to leave the reader feeling more satisfied?

Unit 2 Project Script Workshop

1. How has the author summarized the data that she or he collected in the experiment? Does this summary feel like an onslaught of numbers? Is it disorienting, or do can you process them all as the author is explaining them? How might he or she deal with this material more clearly?

2. Does the author restate clearly the original hypothesis and how the data proved or disproved that hypothesis? How could this information be better highlighted so that the listener will be sure not to miss it?

3. How does the podcast end? Is the ending effective? Why or why not?

4. How might the author interject another voice in a way that would make the podcast both clearer and more interesting?

5. What parts of the podcast do you think will be essential to highlight with music, sound effects, etc.? In other words, what are the most important transitional moments in the podcast? Does the author indicate how s/he will deal with these effectively? Suggest ways in which the use of music and sound effects might be improved.

Make sure to spend 5 minutes at the end wrapping up, giving general feedback, etc.

Unit 2 Project Pre-Writing

Within your group, form smaller groups of two or three. Begin by explaining the results of your study to your partner and showing him or her the data that you collected. From there, return to your notes on today's PowerPoint presentation and work with your partner to begin figuring out what information will go in your results section and what you will say in the discussion portion of your podcast. After doing this, you should have a rough outline of your podcast. If you get this far, begin thinking about how you will frame this information and how you will present it to your listener clearly and succinctly. As you make decisions about these aspects of your podcast, begin transforming the rough outline of your podcast into a more detailed script.

Feeder 2.2 Podcast Workshop

Listen to your partner's podcast at least once without stopping, then answer the following questions in the Google Doc where that person kept his or her script.

1. Describe the author's implementation of the middle style. Is it a higher or lower take on the middle style? Does the author come off as a credible scientist? What aspects of the podcast contribute most to the author's voice? Be as specific as possible.

2. Do you zone out or become disoriented at any point in the podcast? At what point does the author lose your attention? Does s/he read too slowly or too quickly? Is the recording clear and easy to understand?

3. Describe how the author has implemented post-production techniques such as the addition of music, sound effects, etc. Do these help you to understand the content of the podcast or do they distract you from it?

4. Has the author done everything required for both the Introduction and Methods and Materials sections? Is this information clearly highlighted? Does the author do a good job of explaining the experiment without summarizing the results? Does the podcast sound too much or not enough like a proper scientific research report? What changes might the author make in order to enhance his or her credibility or come off as more approachable? 

Now, read these questions and then listen to the podcast again, thinking about how you will answer each question. If you need to listen again, rewind and listen to part of the podcast again. When you're done, answer these questions:

1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? Do you think the reader will be "hooked" within 10-15 seconds? Can the author's attention-getter be described as one of the more or less effective introductions we talked about? Explain your answer.

2. At what point does the author transition from the Introduction section to the Methods and Materials section? Describe how this transition takes place and how the author signals to the reader that s/he should be listening for a new idea. Identify any other transitions that are unclear or confusing. 

3. Is the hypothesis highlighted clearly? Can the author be absolutely sure that even a casual listener will understand the experiment's hypothesis? How does the author highlight this information? How might it be highlighted more clearly?

After you have answered all of these questions in the Google Doc, take 5 minutes to converse with your author, explaining both your answers to the questions as well as any more general or specific comments that didn't come up in your written feedback. Also, feel free to share any tips for using the recording software that the author might find helpful.

Example Feeder 2.2 Podcast

http://uncquartet.blogspot.com/2010/11/charlottes-feeder-22.html

Libraries of Sound Effects and Music

http://www.freesound.org/

http://www.freesfx.co.uk/

http://www.soundsnap.com/

http://incompetech.com/m/c/royalty-free/

http://www.musicalley.com/

Paramedic Method Workshop: Feeder 2.1 Introductions

Don't forget to write your name and date on your rewritten paragraph. Note: we're concentrating on having strong active verbs in the first sentence and thesis statement as well as steps 6 and 7.


1. Circle the prepositions (of, in, about, for, onto, into) 

2. Draw a box around the "is" verb forms 

3. Ask, "Where's the action?" 

4. Change the "action" into a simple verb 

5. Move the doer into the subject (Who's kicking whom?) 

6. Eliminate any unnecessary slow wind-ups 

7. Eliminate any redundancies.

Adding Music and Sound Effects to Your Podcast

Here's another video tutorial. As before, you'll want to make this full-screen to really see what's going on.

 

Recording Your Podcast with Audacity Part I

In case you weren't in class or you need a refresher course I've created some video tutorials to help you with the podcasting process.

The first thing you'll need to do is download the Audacity software and install it. This video will help you with what to do next. You may need to make the video full-screen to see exactly what's going on.

Feeder 2.2 Script Workshop

1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? It will be helpful to think not just about what the author is saying--i.e. the words s/he is using them--but HOW s/he says them. Will there be music? Sound effects? Will these methods work? If we assume that a potential listener is going to give us 10 seconds of devoted attention before making up his or her mind about whether to listen, do you think this author will have grabbed the listener by that time? Why or why not?

2. When we listened to the RadioLab podcast we talked a lot about the ratio of scripted vs. unscripted content. What do you think that ratio will be in your partner's podcast? Do you think that ratio is appropriate given the tenets of the middle style? How might the author work in more unscripted content? How might the author integrate different voices, sounds, and other effects that might add dynamism to the finished product?

3. How does the author explain the experiment in the Methods and Materials section? How does the author deal with the problem of representing quantitative data orally? Do you think the listener will be able to understand precisely how the experiment works? Do you think the listener could repeated the experiment precisely him or herself? Suggest ways in which the author might make this Methods and Materials section clearer.

4. Your finished podcast will contain at least two main sections: Introduction and Methods and Materials. How does the author signals the transition between those two sections (or any others the podcast might include)? Do you think these transitions will be effective? Why or why not?

5. How has the author attempted to establish and maintain his or her scientific credibility? There is a fine line between being accessible and losing one's credibility; where does the author's voice and content reside on this line? If the author were to shoot for a slightly "higher" take on the middle style, how might the script change? Conversely, how would it change if the author were to go "lower?" 

Example Podcast Scripts

https://docs.google.com/document/d/125yiArwhNXUKzrpxt8vw4O9QeHrRGIAgW4g3dq_Tt90/edit

Feeder 2.1 Workshop

Name: 

Date: 3/16/12

1. The assignment asks you to take a piece of scientific research and make it meaningful to your audience. This involves a unique answer to the "so what?" question. How does the original article answer the "so what?" question? In other words, why does this research matter to psychologists? (note: you might have to ask the author or look up the original article to find out.) Now, explain why this research matters to your blog's audience… has the author explained and supported this answer adequately? Do you think your readers will really value this research in the way the author has proposed?

2. Many of your summaries for Feeder 1.2 were too long, too detailed, and too closely mimicked the structure of the original article. Does it feel like the author has fully digested the research he or she is presenting? Are the key terms explained vividly, simply, and in ways that your audience can understand clearly? Go through the draft and strike out any information that you think is too detailed for the needs of your audience.

3. Is the essay organized? Evaluate the author's paragraphing skills; does each paragraph have a clear topic sentence and stick to only one topic without wavering? Is each paragraph's idea fully developed? Identify any potential problem paragraphs and note how the author might revise them.

4. Evaluate the writer's introduction. Does s/he grab the reader's attention quickly? Does s/he transition quickly and effectively to the thesis statement? Does the author follow the pattern of one of the more or less effective introductions we talked about in class? Note any ways in which you think the introduction might be improved.

Reading Podcasts Critically

1. What kind of “hook” do they use to draw in the listener? (Note: ignore the plea for money that precedes the podcast.)

2. Estimate what proportion of the program is based on extempore speech and what seems to be read from a script. How can you tell?

3. Note any background music or sound effects that seem to have been added in post-production. Why were these things added? How do they make the podcast clearer or more interesting?

4. Note any terms or concepts that you learned about from listening to the podcast. How were these explained? How did the authors make these complex ideas and terms easy to understand? 

Intro Paragraph Example 6

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2008 childhood obesity report estimated seventeen percent of adolescents were overweight or obese; adult obesity was estimated between twenty and thirty percent.[1] The CDC also reports percentage increases, both adult and child, since 2008. Many researchers have addressed the growing concern, rooting out potential causes to enable future treatment and prevention. Since the investigation’s beginning, food quality, genetic predisposition, increasing portion sizes, and sedentary activities such as television and video gaming have each received blame regarding what is now termed the “epidemic’s” emergence. Many Americans do not get enough daily physical activity and thus, the calories they consume outweigh those they burn. Sedentary activities like watching television exacerbate the situation.[2] Katherine Jones, Jennifer Otten, Rachel Johnson, and Jean Harvey-Berino recently conducted a study to determine whether or not having a bedroom television set negatively affects the owner’s health. Their study furthers existing research concerning television’s contribution to poor health because they discovered bedroom televisions do not seem to augment the existing health risks of sedentary activities.

Intro Paragraph Example 5

Concussions are the most common injury in all of sports, both contact and non-contact, from intramural college teams to professional sports. Not only are athletes more likely to suffer from concussions than the average person, but they are also at a greater risk to develop future brain damage as a direct result. Athletes must decide when they are able to come back to play. If one returns too early to play, one risks developing another concussion or potentially dealing with Second Impact Syndrome (SIS). SIS does not need to stem from a large impact, but any impact following a concussion has the potential to trigger the condition, which has only a 25% survival rate. Several tests are used to decide whether or not an athlete is able to safely return to the playing field. However, these tests are measuring psychomotor speed (time to think of something and then perform a task) as opposed to visuomotor speed (time to see something and react) which is far more game relevant. This results in some athletes returning to play before they have fully recovered. Studies show that upper extremity and oculormotor functions deficiencies can still be present a year after a concussion, long after other symptoms have faded. This had led to a call for more intensive testing for athletes returning from concussion. An obvious way to do this would be to implement some sort of test to measure visuomotor speed. Along with being relevant to the environment, incorporating visuomotor tests may increase the sensitivity of current post-concussion testing methods.

Homework: Listening to Podcasts Critically

We'll be working with the RadioLab podcast titled “Lucy.” You can hear it here:

http://www.radiolab.org/2010/feb/19/lucy/

or you can download the mp3 directly here:

http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/audio.wnyc.org/radiolab/radiolab040910a.mp3

As you are listening, compose a retrospective outline of the podcast. Post this outline in a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s RadioLab assignment." Share this Google Doc with me.

Example Intro 4

Recently students of high school level education and above have experienced difficulty maintaining concentration in their classes. As students have easy access to numerous distractions through cell phones, laptops and tablet PC’s, it is no surprise that concentration is a growing problem among students nationwide. Students have even resorted to often dangerous methods including prescription drugs, like Vyvanse, Adderall and Strattera, to help remedy their lack of attention. The results of a recent study, however, may provide some relief to these struggling scholars. An experiment conducted by Japanese researchers found a positive correlation between correct posture and improved academic writing. According to this study sitting with good posture allows students to increase their academic performance and remain attentive. The study suggests, rather than relying on external influences to increase concentration, students should instead improve their academic performances through conscious alterations of their posture.

Example Intro #3

Despite obvious health risks numerous women have currently engaged in jeopardous activities, such as smoking, in order to maintain weight and body image. Associate professor at Temple University in the Departments of Kinesiology and Public Health, as well as a Research Scientist at the Center for Obesity Research and Education, Melissa A. Napolitano has provided extensive research into this behavior in her article entitled “ Targeting Body Image Schema for Smoking Cessation Among College Females: Rationale, Program Description, and Pilot Study Results.” According to her article, body image as well as weight concerns, often fuel smoking behaviors among females. Undeterred by negative heath consequences women continue to smoke, in order to achieve aesthetic approval, but Napolitano discusses possible smoking interventions, including body image and exercise interventions, that may help modify this behavior.

Example Intro 2

Imagine a situation in which your friend is bothering you with how much she hates her chemistry professor, who you will have next semester. Imagine you had not met this professor yet, however, based on the information you already have, would you like or dislike her? Naturally most people’s first inclination would be to have a sense of dread towards having this teacher next semester. Why does this happen? After all you don’t know anything about this professor. Researchers at the University of Trier in Germany recently published a psychological study titled “The Role of Evaluative Conditioning in Attitude Formation”. In this post, I will summarize the methods and conclusions of this study.

Example Intro 1

Eating disorders among college students is a very pertinent issue of debate seeing that it so frequently occurs throughout the world. The article “Cognitive Behavioral Theories of Eating Disorders” by Williamson et. al gives a broad spectrum of various eating disorders that people encounter and the reasons to why they are so detrimental. Presumably many college students have encountered individuals who are diagnosed with some kind of eating disorder, and it is not an issue that should be left unattended. It is important to understand why individuals resort to eating as a coping mechanism for various problems and Williamson et. addresses some of these reasons. Eating disorders are a very pertinent area of psychological research since those who have encountered them wish to maintain a certain image, which in turn causes detrimental health affects.

Procedures for Requesting a Grade Change

Begin by locating the work for which you did not receive credit in Google Docs. Double check 1. that the document is shared with my correct email address and 2. that your work is clearly labeled with your name and date. Once you have double-checked these requirements, email me a link to the Google Doc and I will grade the assignment and send you a corrected grade for the unit.

Workshop: Unit 2 Data Sheets

3/2/12
Name:

1. Your hypothesis should have identified a relationship between an independent and a dependent variable. How does the author measure changes in the independent variable? What about the dependent variable? Is the scale sensitive enough to measure subtle changes? Is it flexible enough to track unexpected changes?

2. We noted in class that the biggest danger to experiments of this nature is the confounding variable. What confounding variables do you anticipate might get in the way of proving the author's hypothesis? Are these variables accounted for in the data sheet? How might the author use the data sheet to keep track of these confounding variables and prove definitively that they have not shaped the relationship between the independent and dependent variables?

3. What other kinds of data might it be useful for the author to collect? Suggest at least two piece of data that the author might consider adding to his or her data sheet.

4. Is the data collected on the sheet adequately quantified? While there might be some space devoted to more open-ended, narrative responses, is the data predominantly in the form of numbers that can be quickly and easily analyzed? If not, how might the author collect the data in a way that is more quantitative and less qualitative?

If you find weaknesses in your data sheet, go ahead and revise them. At the bottom of your document (which you should have posted to Google Docs), write a short paragraph explaining what changes you made as a result of the draft workshop.

Example Unit 2 Data Sheets

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wtFqAdeVDpFB6-Un6a3uZA6yGEOmhqPnOLuLf0RUnZw/edit?hl=en_US

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LhEdfvSMNl76jckOUPyheqcLnjF1sfSzI29MyRA0AgU/edit?hl=en_US

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z2i3A0CRM_6t74NvN9xX8PiR4150BArsjJFpl6BwfSo/edit?hl=en_US

Pre-Writing Activity for Unit 2

Hopefully all of you have had time to think about what behavior you will modify for your Unit 2 Project. Begin by sharing your behavior with your group members; let them know why you're choosing to change this behavior and why you think it will be appropriate for the assignment. (Note: you may want to look over the Unit 2 assignment sequence to make sure you've chosen a behavior that will work for this study.) Once everyone has talked about his or her behavior, create chart in a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s Unit 2 Pre-Writing." After you create the Google Doc, click on "Table" and then "Create Table" and make a table containing 3 columns and 1 row.

In column 1, spend at least two minutes listing everything you think you know about your behavior. These things don't have to be verifiable scientific fact; for instance, if you're trying to drink more water, you might write down that being properly hydrated gives you more energy, even though you'd probably want to do research to verify this fact. In listing everything you know about your behavior, you want to consider what kinds of things trigger your behavior, what happens after you do your behavior, how it makes the people around you feel, etc. There are no boundaries here… just get as much down on the page as you can.

In column 2, spend at least five minutes listing everything you are wondering about your behavior. This is the place for unanswered questions: you might question some of the things you assumed in the first column, you might wonder about previous research into your behavior, you might think about the consequences of changing your behavior… you chose to modify this particular behavior for a reason, so hopefully you are curious about many different aspects of it.

In column 3, spend at lest five minutes write down (as specifically as possible) how you will find out the answers to the questions you are curious about in column 2. Do you expect that some of your questions will be answered in previous research? How will you find this research (i.e. in popular sources, scholarly sources, etc.)? Will you be able to answer some of the questions with your own study? If so, how will you design your experiment so that it gives you a definitive answer to your question?

If you finish before the end of class you can begin research for your Feeder 2.1 assignment. If any new items for your 3 columns occur to you during your research, please return to this assignment.

Unit 1 Self-Assessment

Take a moment to look back at the earliest drafts of your Feeder 1.1 and 1.2 assignments. Think about how you have grown as a writer over the past 8 weeks. Next, answer each of the following questions with a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences.

1. Which class lessons have had the most impact on your writing? Which ones have had the least? Why?

2. Have you found the draft workshops helpful? Why or why not? Do you have any suggestions about how the peer review process can be more efficient or productive?

3. Do you feel like the in-class assignments and draft workshops helped to move your writing through the conceptual, organizational, and surface-level stages? Did you get stuck at any one of these stages during any of the assignments? If so, explain why.

4. Do you think any of the concepts or lessons covered in the course so far need additional clarification? How will this clarification help?

When you're done please email your responses to me. Please place your responses in the body of the message rather than as an attachment.

Editing: The Paramedic Method

1. Circle the prepositions (of, in, about, for, onto, into)

2. Draw a box around the "is" verb forms

3. Ask, "Where's the action?"

4. Change the "action" into a simple verb

5. Move the doer into the subject (Who's kicking whom?)

6. Eliminate any unnecessary slow wind-ups

7. Eliminate any redundancies.

Sample draft: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Suz0bWWwnJyP5MSnHc0QJVQxf2EzeTyOMzBsH26aN10/edit

Draft Workshop: Unit 1 Project

Name:
2/22/12

1. All of your drafts are probably aiming for a middle style. Go through your partner's draft and highlight any words, sentences, or passages in which you think the essay deviates from a middle style (either by being too formal or too informal). If you have time, suggest ways in which the author might revise these sections in order to achieve a more appropriate tone for the assignment.

2. Since writing in the middle style is targeted at a fairly wide audience, unfamiliar terms and concepts need to be defined. Examine the essay and point out any terms that aren't defined that probably should be. For the terms that are defined, are these definitions clear and concise? Does the reader understand everything s/he needs to in order to understand the author's point?

3. Another aspect of the middle style is that it employs concrete nouns (rather than abstract nouns) and action verbs (rather than "to be" verbs). In general, does this essay feel concrete (that is, grounded in things you can see and touch) or abstract (that is, in the world of ideas) to you? Do you think the essay's level of abstraction is appropriate given the audience and the topic? Point out any specific passages in which you think the paper gets too abstract. If you have trouble locating these passages, try searching for "to be" verbs; they often cluster around these types of passages.

4. Did you notice any examples of contentious terms or insensitive language in the draft? If so, point them out and suggest how the writer might replace this with more sensitive language.

Draft Workshop: Unit 1 Project

Begin by trading drafts with someone who did NOT read your draft last period. For your partner’s draft, write at least one substantial paragraph explaining whether you think the author’s priority, at this point in the composition process, should be conceptual concerns, organizational concerns, or surface-level concerns. Support your claim with evidence from the author’s draft, and point toward specific revisions that the author needs to make before moving on to the next level of concerns.

If you identified significant conceptual concerns with the draft, work together with the author to revise his or her thesis statement to begin moving toward a stronger conceptual foundation. You may want to call me over for help with these revisions.

If you did not identify significant conceptual concerns, complete the following organizational assessment:

Name:
2/20/12

1. In what order does the author present his or her supporting evidence (e.g. chronological, process order, cause-and-effect, etc.)? Is this the most appropriate order given the audience's level of understanding? Suggest at least one alternative way in which the essay might be organized.

2. Is there a sense of balance to my essay? Do I spend too long on any single point, or do I seem to rush through important parts? Does any section feel either redundant or underdeveloped?

3. Does each paragraph have a clear topic sentence? Does each topic sentence relate clearly back to the thesis? Does each paragraph deal with one idea and one idea only? Point out any points in the essay at which the paragraphing seems weak or confusing.

4. Does the essay have transitions that move the reader clearly from idea to the next? Does the writer make the relationship between the ideas clear with words that emphasize the essay's organization scheme (e.g. time-related words of the essay is organized chronologically, etc.)?

5. Does each paragraph fully explain its main idea? Do any paragraphs feel thin or under-developed? Point them out.

Draft Workshop: Unit 1 Project

Name: 

2/17/12

1. Does the thesis statement accomplish all three things that, according to our lessons, a thesis statement should accomplish? Briefly summarize how the thesis statement makes a substantial claim about the essay's topic, lays out a roadmap for the rest of the essay and explains why the audience should care about the topic.

2. What kinds of evidence does the author cite in support of his or her claim? Is this evidence compelling? Is it enough to make you believe the claim put forth in the thesis statement? Why or why not?

3. What kinds of appeals does the author make to his or her audience (e.g. logical, emotional, ethical)? Are these appeals appropriate or convincing for the blog / essay's audience? Why or why not? Could the author effectively employ any other types of appeals?

4. Briefly describe the general tone of the essay. Does the author's tone come off as credible given the topic and the paper's audience? Has the author established a solid, reliable persona? Explain your answer.

Activity: Paragraphing

Read the following model Unit 1 Project draft:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/18VsBIVHV_kcllVGg6w-unfA8QBVfciHL08tcZ4UYWrg/edit

Along with your group, begin by determining the essay’s thesis statement.

Next, we will examine individual paragraphs. Focus your attention as follows:

Group 1: Paragraphs 2-4 (beginning “before we can ask” and ending “change in carbon emissions”)

Group 2: Paragraphs 4-6 (beginning “Unfortunately, national and international policies” and ending “to cut down on their carbon emissions”)

Group 3: Paragraphs 7-9 (beginning “While Patenaude offers” and ending “attempts to reduce carbon emissions”)

Group 4: Paragraphs 10-12 (beginning “the truth is that while a business…” and ending “that would make cutting emissions more affordable”

Create a new Google Doc and name it “Paragraphing Activity.” Each group should have 1 Google Doc. For each of your assigned paragraphs, assess its:

• relationship to the thesis 
• unity 
• coherence 
• adequate development of the paragraph’s main idea 

In addition to assessing these individually, explain briefly how each paragraph might be improved. You can be as brief as possible, but more complex problems might require a bit more explanation.

Activity: Research for Unit 1 Project

Within your groups, form yourselves into smaller groups of two or three. Begin by summarizing for your group members what you did in the class's previous activity. Try to be brief (1 or 2 minutes at most), but do your best to get across the gist of the author's argument, the main evidence s/he relies on, and where you think your research might take you from here. Let each person explain his or her work before you move on to the next step.

1. Based on your reading so far, come up with a list of three key words or concepts that are central to your project. Write these three words in the middle of a sheet of paper and circle each one.

2. Working with your partner, for each term create a web around it by identifying as many related topics, concerns, or ideas as you can. Try to do this quickly and constantly… your pen should always be moving.

3. Once you have completed the initial brainstorming session for each member of your group, work on "deepening" your web by performing some preliminary research on the ideas that you brainstormed. For instance, if you are researching how the proposed highway through the Serengeti desert will affect the wildebeest, you might read more about wildebeests and their habitat or you might look for information about existing desert highways and their environmental impacts. As you skim these sources add new terms and concepts to your web to make it comprehensive. If you find a source that it might be helpful to return to later, be sure to bookmark it or make a note of how to find it again.

4. Hopefully by now you have an extremely messy sheet of paper in front of you. Working with your partner(s), compose a list of topics or ideas from your web that you want to research further. Order this list by priority, beginning with the ideas you think are most promising. At this point feel free to discard ideas that you're relatively sure are dead ends.

Activity: Reading Sources Critically

Begin by composing a retrospective outline of your article from Nature. Follow the procedures we talked about in class last week, beginning by identifying the author's thesis statement or central claim and identifying the central claim or idea in each paragraph. Put your retrospective outline on Google Docs, share it with me and your group members, and in the same document complete the following tasks:

1. Describe, in a few words, the article's organizational scheme. Is there an order or a logic to the way the article unfolds? Why do you think the author chose to present the information in the order s/he did?

2. Identify at least three or four SPECIFIC places in which the author makes an appeal to his or her audience. For each appeal, note whether the author relies on ethos, pathos, or logos, and briefly explain why this appeal would be convincing for Nature's audience.

3. Note any places in which the author addresses a counter-argument to his or her thesis. Summarize both the counter-argument and how your author responds to it. Does this counter-argument prompt your author to limit his or her claim in any way? If so, how?

4. In order to write authoritatively about the subject you have chosen you will probably have to do more research on the topic. Jot down some notes about where you think this research might take you. Are there any specific references in the article that you should track down? Will you be looking for scholarly sources or popular ones? What kinds of search terms might you use? How will the research you find help to shape your argument and make it convincing?

5. Finally (and this is a tough one!) ask yourself, "what is missing from the article?" Are their any ideas, opinions, arguments, or references that seem to be missing, left out, avoided, or not addressed? Is there any aspect of the topic that the author just doesn't want to deal with, at least not in depth? Speculate as to why the author made these omissions, and how exploring these areas might be useful to you as you develop your own counter-arguments.

Activity: Appeals

Read the following article from slate.com:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2010/09/the_privilege_of_prejudice.html

This article contains appeals of all three types: ethos, pathos, and logos. Work in your groups to identity at least one of each type of appeal in the article. Which of these appeals is most persuasive to you? Why do you think that is the case? In which order does the author present these appeals? Why do you think he chose that order?

Answer these questions in a new Google Doc titled "Appeals Activity." Each group should create only one document.

Feeder 1.2 Workshop #2

Begin by composing a retrospective outline of your partner's paper, using the outline we composed of the Huckleberry Finn paper as a model. Once you have completed the outline, examine it for coherence, repetition, orderly logic and transitions, and whether it fulfills the demands of the prompt. Suggest any changes that you believe would improve the paper's sense of organization.

After you're finished, answer the following questions at the bottom of the draft:

Name:

1. Briefly describe the current draft's organizing principle. Could the information be organized in another way? Suggest a different organizing principle that would change the draft radically while still making sense, and revise the thesis statement to reflect this new organizing principle.

Feeder 1.2 Workshop #1

Name:

1. We just finished talking about several different types of effective and ineffective introductions. What type of introduction does the current draft have? Is it one of the effective or ineffective introductions? Explain how you determined which category the introduction fits into.

2. How does the author answer the "so what?" question? In other words, why does the author's argument matter to his or her readers? At what point in the draft does the author establish this answer to the "so what?" question? Could it come earlier? Explain your answer.

More and Less Effective Introductions

Less Effective Introductions	More Effective Introductions
Place holder Restate the question Webster’s Dictionary Dawn of man Book Report Rhetorical Question	Intriguing example Provocative quotation Puzzling scenario Vivid Anecdote

Posting Feeder 1.1

Work together in your groups to post your Feeder 1.1 assignments to your blog. At this point your group may need to finalize some aesthetic choices such as font size and style, how you will include images and other multimedia content in your posts, etc. If you run into technical problems, work within your groups to resolve the issue.

After everyone has posted their assignment, partner with another person in your group and proofread one another’s posts. Check both for formatting errors and for errors in spelling, grammar, etc.

Thesis Statement Workshop: Feeder 1.1

Name: 

Identify your partner's thesis statement. Copy and paste it into the bottom of the Google Doc and then answer the following questions about the thesis statement. Please be as clear and as detailed as possible:

• Does the thesis statement answer the question posed by the assignment? 
• Has the author taken a position others might challenge or oppose? 
• Is the statement specific enough? 
• Does the statement pass the “so what?” test? Are you telling your audience something they don’t already know? 
• Does the thesis pass the “how and why” test? 

Once your partner finishes reviewing your thesis statement, work together to revise both of your thesis statements. Once you have finished revising both of your thesis statements, answer the following question about your own draft. Type your answer at the bottom of the document. 

We have noted several times that the thesis statement provides a roadmap for the rest of your essay. Thus, revising your thesis statement often entails revising the rest of your essay as well. Think about the model Feeder 1.1 essay we looked at; how would the body of that author's essay change in light of the revisions we made to his thesis statement? As you revised your own thesis statement, did your roadmap change? If so, explain in 3 or 4 sentences how you will need to revise your essay in order to make it consistent with your new thesis statement.

Researching Feeder 1.2

Practice: Read the Feeder 1.2 assignment. Go to the library’s web site and try to find an article you might want to write your Feeder 1.2 assignment about. Once everyone in your group has found an article, exchange with one another. Determine whether your groupmate's article is a scholarly, professional, or popular source. Discuss your answer with the person who found the article.

Activity: Citations on Your Blog

Using the formal APA, MLA, and Chicago styles (refer to the relevant sections on the Library's Citation Tutorial (http://www.lib.unc.edu/instruct/citations/) for details), work with your group members to draft a rationale for how and why you will cite your sources on your blog. Compose a short, 2-3 paragraph essay that explains:

1. Why your group thinks that citing sources is important.

2. How citations will be implemented on your blog. This should take the form of a rough style guide like this one for MLA format: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/06/. You need only explain the format for the types of references you anticipate using most on your blog.

3. A short rationale for how and why you chose the citation style you agreed upon.

Post this essay to your blog by class time on Friday, Feb 3.

Citation Conventions

Go to the library's tutorial on citations and complete the section "Why We Cite:"

http://www.lib.unc.edu/instruct/citations/index.html?page=why

Good citations accomplish the following goals:

• They allow you to show how your argument is built upon the ideas of others. 
• They allow you to indicate which ideas are taken from others, and from whom those ideas were taken; in other words, to give credit where it's due. 
• They allow the interested reader to follow your argument and confirm its logic by investigating the ideas on which the argument is built, or to further explore those ideas on their own.

Draft Workshop: Feeder 1.1

Name: 

1. Summarize, as briefly as possible, how the two articles summarized in the draft fit together. How are they in conversation? Is this connection clear in the draft, or could it be clearer? 

2. Glance at the original articles on which the draft is based. Does s/he summarize these authors' arguments adequately? Does the draft highlight each article's central claim? After reading the draft, were you surprised by anything in the two articles? Why? 

3. Does the draft seem to approve of one of the articles, or does it take one of the articles more seriously than the other? Is this preference justified? Does the author make this justification clear in the draft? 

4. How has the author attempted to grab the reader's attention? Do you think this strategy is effective? Think back to your reaction when you read the first few sentences of the draft… did you groan or were you pulled in? Explain your answer in as much detail as possible. 

5. Compose a list of THREE things that the author should do to improve his or her draft. 

Introduction to Draft Workshops

https://docs.google.com/document/edit?id=1P_8taEIo-SLtF9Nqdw1AzC4hT-0oPzOJgmsj30ihRXM&hl=en

Sample workshop form questions. Discuss your answers in your groups:

1. Summarize, as briefly as possible, how the two articles summarized in the draft fit together. How are they in conversation? Is this connection clear in the draft, or could it be clearer?

2. Glance at the original articles on which the draft is based. Does s/he summarize these authors' arguments adequately? Does the draft highlight each article's central claim? After reading the draft, were you surprised by anything in the two articles? Why?

3. Does the draft seem to approve of one of the articles, or does it take one of the articles more seriously than the other? Is this preference justified? Does the author make this justification clear in the draft?

4. How has the author attempted to grab the reader's attention? Do you think this strategy is effective? Think back to your reaction when you read the first few sentences of the draft… did you groan or were you pulled in? Explain your answer in as much detail as possible.

5. Compose a list of THREE things that the author should do to improve his or her draft.

Post this list and your answers to the workshop questions in a Google Doc and be sure to share it with me. Each group should have only one Google Doc.

Grading Rubric for In-Class Assignments and Workshops

Rubric for in-class assignments

0: The assignment was not completed or barely attempted.

1: The assignment was only partially completed; OR, the assignment was completed with only minimal effort and attention.

2: The assignment was completed satisfactorily. All tasks have been completed with thought, care, and attention to detail.

3: The assignment was completed in an exemplary fashion. The student has gone above and beyond the teacher’s expectations by devoting extraordinary time and effort to the assignment and/or producing innovative and thought-provoking work.

Rubric for workshops

0: The workshop was not completed.

1: The workshop was only partially completed; OR, the workshop was completed with only minimal effort and attention. The workshop partner has not received substantial information that will help him or her to improve the essay.

2: The workshop was completed with less than satisfactory effort. Answers to one or more draft workshop form questions are minimal or dismissive, and there is little evidence that the author has engaged seriously with the draft. The feedback provided will allow the workshop partner to make only surface-level or localized revisions.

3: The workshop was completed satisfactorily. The author has provided thoughtful answers to all draft workshop questions, and these questions should allow his or her workshop partner to make substantive and helpful revisions.

4: The workshop was completed with particular care and diligence. All answers to workshop questions are thoughtful, detailed, and well developed. Inline comments may also appear, pointing out issues not highlighted by the draft workshop form. The workshop partner can use this information to significantly improve his or her essay.

5: The workshop was completed in an exemplary fashion. All draft workshop questions have comprehensive, detailed answers that show not only attention to detail, but also a creative and innovative engagement with the workshop. Inline comments may also provide helpful feedback not related to the workshop questions. The workshop partner can use this information to drastically improve his or her essay.

Analysis: Another Science Blog

Take a few minutes to check out the Superbug blog here:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/superbug

Think about how this blog presents itself differently than ScienceBlog.com, which we looked at last week. With your group, discuss any difference in how the author presents herself, the author’s target audience, and the main features and conventions of the text. We’ll discuss your findings as a class.

Tutorial: Accessing Nature

Click here for instructions on how to access Nature through UNC’s Library web site:

http://engl1022010.blogspot.com/2010/01/instructions-for-accessing-nature.html

Take a few minutes to browse the editorials in recent issues. If you find an article you might consider using for your Feeder 1.1 assignment, write down the title, author, and issue number so that you can find it again later. Feel free to discuss articles with your group members as you find them.

Activity: Argument

http://www.slate.com/id/2302983/ 

Work together in your to answer the following questions about this article: 

• What is the article's main claim? 
• What are the author's most important reasons presented in support of that claim? Identify at least 3. 
• Does the author offer any qualifications of his claim? 
• Can you identify any unstated assumptions that a reader might disagree with? 
• is the author's argument convincing? Why or why not? 

Write your answers collaboratively in a Google Doc and share it with my gmail address. Make sure to write your names somewhere in the Google Doc.

Link to Kindle Article

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2010/08/the_99_kindle.html

Facebook Activity

Get into groups of 2 or 3 within your regular workshop groups. Help one other person in your group find your Facebook profile. You can either friend the person so they can see all of your information, or you can leave them with only the information that non-friends can see. Once you have looked at one of your group members’ profiles, answer the following questions

Write at least four adjectives that describe this person based solely on their Facebook profile.

For each adjective, explain which parts of the profile led you to use the adjective you did.

Consider you are the administrator for a Study Abroad program trying to determine whether to admit the student. How would viewing their Facebook profile affect your decision? In this professional / academic context, do you view the student more or less favorably?

Post the answers to your questions in a new Google Doc and share it with me and the person whose profile you looked at. Title this document “Facebook Activity: [your name]”

Beginning Work on Intro Post Assignment

In your groups, start the conversation about what you want your blogs to look like. Please brainstorm on a new Google Doc… it helps get ideas out without judging them. Here are some places you might start:

Who are you as authors? What do you and your group-mates have in common that might give the blog a coherent identity?

Who do you want to write to? What is this population like? What background information do they have? What assumptions or biases will they have?

How will you establish your credibility? Why should your audience trust you as authors? How will you convey this to your audience?

Make sure to share your Google Doc with me so that I can give you credit for the assignment

Writer Page on Science Blog

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/author/brandon9keim/

Science Blog Conventions

http://scienceblog.com/

1. What were your first impressions when you clicked on the blog? Were you drawn in? Were you pushed away? Explain your answers.

2. What is the ratio of text to images and multimedia content on the blog’s front page? Do you think the blog has too much of one or the other? Why or why not?

3. What kind of audience is this blog for? Give me a quick character sketch of the blog’s prototypical reader… what are his or her other interests? What kind of background, etc.? Would you be friends with this person? How do you know this blog is for that person?

4. What do you think of the blog’s layout? Does it look up-to-date or does it look old? What do you think the web designer’s goals were? Do you think the site achieves these goals?

5. How would you characterize the tone of the writing on the site? Is it easy or difficult to understand? What age group or education level does the author seem to be writing for?

Activity: Finding a Blog

Go to google.com/blogsearch and find a blog post that you like. Try to search for specific things to find recent posts… so instead of searching for “Carolina Basketball” maybe search for “Carolina Clemson” to find analysis of last night’s game. To find a more recent post click “last day” or “last week” on the left hand side of the page.

Look at a bunch of different posts and blogs and try to find one that you would consider returning to regularly. Once you have decided on a post, copy and paste the following questions into the comment window on this post and answer them with a sentence or two each:

Name:

1. What did you search for to find this post?
2. What made you choose this post rather than others you looked at?
3. What kind of introduction does the post have? How does the writer try to hook his or her reader?
4. What do you think of the blog’s layout? Is it inviting or intimidating?
5. How does the blogger conceive of his or her audience? Is it for insiders or outsiders? What kinds of knowledge does the author assume of his or her reader? Are these assumptions true of you?

Diagnostic Writing Assignment

For your first assignment for this course, I would like you to write a short, impromptu essay about your personal history as a writer and your goals for this course. 

Begin by reading the following questions and thinking about them for at least a minute or two. Take your time both thinking about the questions and composing your response. You have until the end of the class period to finish your essay.  

• What role does writing play in your life? Do you write daily? Just for school?
• Do you consider yourself a strong writer? What are your personal strengths and weaknesses?
• How do you think writing is important to your long-term academic goals?
• What writing courses have you taken? What did they teach you? What do you wish they taught you?

I will use these essays to place you into workgroups. You will remain in these workgroups for the entire semester and work with the other students to build and complete your blogs and workshop one another's writings. I do my best to create groups whose members share common interests, backgrounds, and goals, so the more you can tell me about your personal history and goals as a writer the more likely that you will be placed in a group that will help you to achieve these goals.

Unit 3: Humanities

As I mentioned in the Unit 1 assignment sequence, the humanities are often viewed as a set of disciplines based on personal opinion rather than fact. In this unit we will test this assumption, using the argumentative strategies we developed in units 1 and 2 to determine if there are such things as "proof" and "facts" in the humanities. You will present these arguments using software called VoiceThread, which will allow you to build on your podcasting skills by adding images to the mix.

Feeder 3.1

Do you have a favorite visual artist? If so, search for his or her work on the internet and check out some images. If not, try searching sites like the-artists.org for an artist that you would like to write about.

Much like Feeder 2.1, for this post you will identify and summarize a scholarly article about the artist you chose. There are numerous electronic databases of academic art history articles listed on the library's web site, but you may want to start with Art Full Text, the first database on the list.

Once you find an article about your artist (make sure it's from a scholarly art history journal!), you can begin by determining the author's thesis statement. What is the controversy or debate into which s/he is entering? What is his or her position? How do other art historians differ in their opinions?

Once you have determined the author's thesis statement, compose a post (length: equivalent to 2-3 typed pages) summarizing the article's argument for your blog's audience, noting the main theses of each article and what kinds of evidence and arguments the author employs. Is any piece of evidence particularly convincing or unconvincing? Why or why not? Feel free to express your own opinion if you deem it appropriate.

Feeder 3.2

Now that you've gotten your feet wet in art history, it's time to do a little criticism of your own. Choose a different image by the artist you wrote about for Feeder 3.1 and compose a VoiceThread that contextualizes that image within a specific historical, artistic, or cultural context. Think about what supplemental information could help your audience understand and appreciate the piece more fully. For example, you might explore the connections between your piece and works of art from similar movements and/or time periods or you might give your audience information about the historical or political circumstances in which the piece was created. Though your VoiceThread will probably include other images, sounds, etc., your focus should be the formal qualities of the work you are attempting to explain. In other words, try to make clear, specific, and detailed connections between the formal choices the artist makes (colors, framing, medium, etc.) and the contextual material that you present. The audio track for your VoiceThread should total 3-5 minutes.

Unit 3 Project

For your Unit Project each of you will visit the Ackland Museum on campus and compose a VoiceThread (length of audio track: 4-7 minutes) that contextualizes one of the pieces currently on display in the museum. (Note: the museum has strange hours and is closed on Mondays and Tuesdays, so don't wait until the last minute! You can see their hours here). You will want to include a digital image of the piece from the Ackland's web page in your VoiceThread.

As for the content of your VoiceThread, I would like you to argue that, through the piece you selected, the artist has attempted to achieve a particular social or aesthetic goal (examples: documenting the plight of slaves across the Middle Passage; illustrating how our perceptive faculties impact the way we see the world; exploring how 3-dimensional objects are represented in 2-dimensional space) and assess whether the artist achieves that goal. While you might include some historical, biographical, or other contextual information, your VoiceThread should consist mostly of a sustained analysis of the piece's formal qualities.

A successful VoiceThread will (in order of importance):

1. Be focused around a sophisticated, surprising thesis about the author's political, social or aesthetic motivations.

2. Include thoughtful, sustained analysis of the chosen piece of art.

3. Include and address potential counter-claims to the author's argument.

4. Cite all sources in a manner appropriate for the blog and its audience.

5. Be delivered in a lively, engaging and authoritative style.

6. Be free of errors in spelling and grammar as well as visual formatting.

Unit 2: Social Sciences

In unit 2 you will be using the research methods of behavioral psychology to perform a case study with yourself as the subject. After performing this experiment on yourself, you will shape your findings into a series of podcasts that track your progress and assess your original hypothesis.

Feeder 2.1

For your Feeder 2.1 assignment you will begin to shift the focus of your blog from the natural sciences to the social sciences. Go to Davis Library and scan some recent issues of the journal Behavior Modification (call number: BF637.B4 B43; also available online here). Find an article that interests you and write a post (length: equivalent to 2-3 typed pages) summarizing the article for your blog's audience. It is up to you how much background information you include about the article's subject or behavioral psychology in general. However, I encourage you to examine the author's references (listed at the end of the article) and give some contextual information about the debate or controversy into which the author is entering.

Feeder 2.2

For Feeder 2.2 and your Unit 2 project you will design and implement a behavior modification experiment with yourself as the subject. Using the articles you read in Behavior Modification and our other class readings as a model (though I encourage you to adapt this model to the needs and expectation of your blog's audience), compose a 4-6 minute podcast outlining your study.

First, you will identify a regular aspect of your behavior that you wish to modify. You should choose an aspect of your behavior that recurs several times daily, giving you ample data to compile and reflect upon each day. If you perform the experiment over break, a school-related goal such as getting to class on time will not be appropriate. Good examples of behaviors to modify might be trying to address people by name, trying to curse less, or trying to wash your hands more often.

Next you will design an experiment in which you will attempt to modify this behavior. Your study must identify an independent variable that you will consciously change in your experiment and a dependent variable that will change as a result of the change in the independent variable (we will discuss these terms and concepts in detail in class). You are free to design your experiment however you wish, but you must collect data over a period of at least six days and you must fill out some type of form in which you record and reflect upon your behavior during each of the 6+ days. Please submit this form to me via email for my approval before you begin your experiment. Students who do not submit a form before conducting their study will be penalized.

After you have worked out the details of your experiment, compile your ideas into a script for a podcast, including a section that introduces the topic of your study and your specific hypothesis as well as a section outlining the research methods you will use in your experiment. Optionally, you might also include other sections that are pertinent to your topic, such as a section in which you review the recent literature on your topic.

A successful podcast will (in order of importance):

1. Contain a clear, original and interesting hypothesis.

2. Outline, in detail, an experiment that will test that hypothesis while accounting for confounding variables and other potential pitfalls of scientific study.

3. Clearly and correctly identify the experiment's independent and dependent variables.

4. Be organized in an engaging, easy-to-understand way.

5. Be delivered in a clear speaking manner that is appropriate to the blog's target audience.


Unit 2 Project

After you have completed your experiment, use the information you gathered to compose a follow-up podcast (length: 3-5 minutes). You should give a detailed description and analysis of your behavior during the experiment, as well as a substantial section in which you evaluate the results of your experiment. If your hypothesis was proven false, you should reformulate it based on the results of your experiment, explaining how you would conduct the experiment were you to try again.

A successful podcast will:

1. Honestly assess the strengths and weaknesses of the study as outlined in Feeder 2.2.

2. Offer a thoughtful and compelling analysis of the data gathered during the experiment.

3. Offer a sophisticated reevaluation of the original hypothesis based on the results of the experiment.

4. Be organized in an engaging, easy-to-understand way.

5. Be delivered in a clear speaking manner that is appropriate to the blog's target audience.

Unit 1: Natural Sciences

The natural sciences are often viewed as disciplines based on cold, hard fact, in contrast to the humanities which appear to be based on subjective opinion. In this unit we will challenge this view by examining controversy in the scientific community. What is up for debate in the natural sciences? Are these disciplines really as factual and as rational as popular perception would have them to be?

Feeder 1.1

Note: You can find instructions for accessing Nature online here.

For this unit's first feeder assignment you will be studying the editorial section of the journal Nature, a publication known for bringing academic work in the natural sciences to a wider audience.

For your first feeder assignment, select an editorial from a recent issue of Nature (click "Archive" on the left-hand menu to access older issues, then when you click on the contents of an individual issue you can choose from the sections labeled "Editorial" or "Opinion."). Begin by determining the author's thesis statement. What is the controversy or debate into which s/he is entering? What is his or her position? How do other scientists or writers differ in their opinions?

Once you have determined the author's thesis statement, do research using the library and the web to find an author who expresses a contrary opinion. Write a post (length: equivalent to 1-2 typed pages) summarizing this controversy for your blog's audience, noting the main theses of each article and what kinds of evidence and arguments are employed by each. Is one more convincing than the other? Feel free to express your opinion if you deem it appropriate.

Feeder 1.2

While Nature lies in the fuzzy space between a professional and popular journal, for your second feeder assignment you will need to repackage information from a current academic journal in the natural sciences for your blog's audience.

You might begin your research by searching the Academic Search Premier Database (the first item on the list here) for topics that interest you and are relevant to your group's blog. If you find an article that interests you, determine whether it is from a scholarly journal. Also, please choose an article that has been published within the last year.

Once you are certain that it is a scholarly journal, begin thinking about how you will translate this article for your audience. What are the differences in rhetoric between the two media? What information will you include and exclude? Will you need any information not contained in the academic journal article? (Hint: you probably will!) After you have thought about these questions write a post (length: equivalent 2-3 typed pages) summarizing this research for your blog's audience, doing your best to make the information interesting and relevant to them.

Since I will evaluate whether your source is truly an academic journal, please cite your original article in a manner that allows me to find it quickly and efficiently. Failure to do so will negatively affect your grade.

Unit 1 Project

For your Unit 1 Project, rather than summarizing an academic controversy, you will enter into a controversy yourself. Select another piece from the Editorial or Opinion sections of Nature, preferably one with which you disagree, and write a post (length: equivalent to 3-5 typed pages) arguing against the author's thesis. Do you whatever you may need to make your argument convincing, whether it is attacking the logic of the original editorial, gathering contrary evidence or making some other type of appeal to your audience.

A successful post will (in order of importance):

1. Fully and adequately summarize the thesis of the original editorial while developing a sophisticated thesis in response to it.

2. Contain a wealth of evidence from authoritative sources in support of its thesis while explaining away the counter-arguments of the original author's thesis.

3. Cite all sources in a manner appropriate for the blog and its audience.

4. Be written in a lively, engaging and authoritative style.

5. Be free of errors in spelling and grammar as well as visual formatting.

Introductory Post Assignment

For your first writing assignment this semester, your group will collaborate on an introductory post for your blog. Your post should accomplish 3 main goals:

1. Introduce each group member (including a photo of each person).

2. Establish the subject of your blog, i.e. give your readers a sense of what you will be writing about this semester.

3. Establish the tone and rhetorical style of your blog.

We will spend the first few days of class discussing a number of different blogs and what does and does not work about each. You will also engage in discussions amongst your group members, during which you will negotiate a coherent and appropriate rhetorical approach for your blog based on a target audience that you work together to identify. You should take into account each group member's interests as well as their strengths as writers, since you will be expected to adhere to this plan throughout the semester.

A successful post will (in order of importance):

1. Establish a rhetorical tone that is appropriate to the blog's subject matter and target audience. Not only will the post address this topic explicitly (i.e. a section of the post that will explain the authors' rhetorical approach), but also implicitly through the tone and style of the post itself.

2. Inform your readers about what they can expect from the blog's content over the course of the semester. In addition to explaining the blog's main subject areas (i.e. natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities), an outstanding post will will give a sense of the authors' unique approach to these subjects.

3. Introduce each of the blog's authors in a manner that emphasizes their credibility as authors as well as the common ground they share with their audience.

4. Be free of errors in spelling and grammar.

5. Be formatted in an appealing and consistent manner.

Length: at least 3-4 paragraphs