English 250: Advanced Oral and Written CommunicationFall 2014

Policy Statement – 2 Schedule – 5 Assignments – 7

English 250: Advanced Oral and Written CommunicationFall 2014

Professor: Matt KingEmail: mrking@sbu.eduPhone: 716.375.2457Office Hours: MW 2:30-4:00, and by appointmentOffice Location: Plassmann D6

Class Website: http://mattrking.com/courses/e250

Program Outcomes for Composition CoursesOutcome 1:  Students will develop a composing process that focuses on the production of writing/presentations across multiple drafts and strategies for research, invention, revision, editing, peer review, and reflection.Outcome 2: Students will produce writing/presentations that address concerns of audience and purpose, both in terms of the conventions and standards of academic communication and in terms of framing speech and writing as social forces. Outcome 3: Students will compose writing/presentations in different genres and in multiple media that respond to a variety of academic, professional, and social situations.

Course DescriptionA semester course stressing the practical application of principles of effective speaking and writing to various types of rhetorical situations. (Prerequisite – Clare 111 or equivalent; 3 credit hours)

Through communication, we do more than transmit information and ideas. Communicating allows us to make connections with other people and the world around us, connections that foster different sorts of relations – creative, intellectual, and personal. As we work toward developing our oral and written communication skills, we will focus on our own academic fields and other communities relevant to us, how they communicate and circulate ideas, and how they engender creative, intellectual, and personal connections. We will also be interested in digital technologies, both in terms of how our academic fields have responded to them and how they might shape the nature of communication. Through the course, we will become more effective communicators and thus better prepared to engage with and respond to the world around us intellectually and creatively.

Course goals: Develop a productive and effective composing process that focuses on the

production of text and presentations across multiple drafts as well as strategies for research, invention, revision, editing, peer review, and reflection (1);

Produce writing and presentations that effectively address concerns of audience and purpose, both in terms of the conventions of academic and professional communication and in terms of framing writing as a force for social change and social action (2);

Attend to concerns of delivery so that you can effectively communicate in written, visual, oral, and digital texts and platforms (3);

Study and analyze significant events and debates in your academic field and the relationship between your field and technology (1, 3);

Reflect on your relationship to your academic field and your professional goals (1).

Coursework and GradingYou will be graded on the following assignments this term:• Paper 1 - 15%• Presentation 1 - 10%• Presentation 2 - 15%• Presentation 3 - 15%• Group Project - 15%• Group Project Reflection - 10%• Short Assignments - 10%• Reflection Paper - 10%

+/- Grades. Plus and minus grades will be used in awarding final grades for this course. The letter-to-percentage conversion is given below.

Paper Grades Semester AverageA+ = 98.5 A = 95 A- = 91.5 93-100 = A 90-93 = A- B+ = 88.5 B = 85 B- = 81.5 87-90 = B+ 83-87 = B 80-83 = B- C+ = 78.5 C = 75 C- = 71.5 77-80 = C+ 73-77 = C 70-73 = C-D+ = 68.5 D = 65 D- = 61.5 67-70 = D+ 63-67 = D 60-63 = D-F = 55 Less than 60 = F

Late Work.  I tend to be pretty flexible concerning late work as long as you let me know ahead of time. I would rather you spend the time you need to in order to succeed with your writing, and if you need an extra day or two beyond the deadline to achieve that, I would rather you take advantage of that time. That being said, excessive or unexcused late work will not be acceptable, and I reserve the right to penalize late work in such circumstances (generally, such penalties will be a letter grade for every day an assignment is late). If circumstances prevent you from being able to submit an assignment on time, you should discuss the situation with me ahead of time. The exception here is presentations; on presentation days, you need to be on time and ready to go.

Attendance/Tardiness.  You should arrive to class on time with all assigned readings and papers for the day completed. You are allowed seven absences throughout the semester without a grade penalty (although missing class can affect your participation grade and your ability to succeed in the class generally). An eighth absence will result in failure of the course. For every 3 instances of tardiness, you will incur 1 absence. If you arrive more than 10 minutes late to class, you will be marked as absent. Coming to class unprepared (forgetting textbooks, notebooks, workshop materials, etc.) can also result in an absence.

For athletes, students who provide documentation for absences related to athletic competitions will be excused for all such absences. Student athletes can also miss two more class periods throughout the semester without a grade penalty. If you have three or more unexcused (non-athletic) absences throughout the semester, then all of your absences will be counted toward the attendance policy. For example, five athletic/excused absences and three non-athletic/unexcused absences would result in failure of the course.

Scholastic HonestyOne goal of this course is developing an understanding for the responsible use of other people’s words and ideas. Plagiarism, or the irresponsible use of these words or ideas, will result in anything from a failing grade for a particular paper to a failing grade for the course, or university discipline, which may mean more severe ramifications, up to and including expulsion. A list of unacceptable practices, penalties to be assigned, and procedures to be followed in prosecuting cases of alleged academic dishonesty may be found in the Student Handbook.

Plassmann Writing CenterRevising and responding to feedback will be an invaluable and necessary part of your development as a writer this semester. Toward this end, you are strongly encouraged to visit me during office hours, and you are also strongly encouraged to visit the Writing Center in the basement of Plassmann Hall (6A). There is a sign-up sheet on the door of the Center and, while occasional walk-in appointments may be available, you will likely want to sign up for an appointment ahead of time. You must drop off a copy of your essay in advance or bring it with you when you come to your appointment. You are welcome to attend the Writing Center more than once for any assignment.

EmailEmail will serve as an official means of communication for this class. You are therefore required to check the email account you have registered with the university regularly. Please feel free to email me with your questions and concerns. It may take me up to two days to respond, so please do not expect an immediate response. If your question is a lengthy one (about writing, etc.), I may ask you to visit me during office hours instead of responding to you on email.

Students with DisabilitiesStudents with disabilities who believe that they may need accommodations in this class are encouraged to contact the Disability Support Services Office, Doyle Room 26, at 375-2066 as soon as possible to better ensure that such accommodations are implemented in a timely fashion. Documentation from this office is required before accommodations can be made.

Schedule

Date Major Due Dates; Homework (due day listed); In class

   

M 8/25 Introduction to Course

W 8/27 Read Gee and Burke

F 8/29 Academic Reflection Paper due; Discuss research

M 9/1 Innovation Paper due

W 9/3Read sections of Pitt's "Introducing Public Speaking" (The Basics, How to Give a Public Speech: A Chart, Informative Speaking, Persuasive Speaking, and all of Writing the Speech); Presentation workshop

F 9/5 Read section on Delivering the Speech from Pitt; Peer reviews for Presentation 1

M 9/8 Presentation 1

W 9/10 Presentation 1

F 9/12 Presentation 1; Reflection Paper due by end of weekend

M 9/15 Debate Proposal due; discuss research

W 9/17 Read Tufte

F 9/19 RS 1 due; Discuss Johnson (also, RS sample for your reference)

M 9/22 RS 2 due; Discuss Madrigal

W 9/24 RS 3 due; Discuss RS samples, revision activities

F 9/26 Annotated Bibliography due; Invention exercises

M 9/29 Paper 1 Peer Review Draft due for peer reviews in class

W 10/1 Conferences (revised Paper 1 due in conferences)

F 10/3 Conferences (revised Paper 1 due in conferences)

M 10/6 Discuss Presentation 2

W 10/8 Paper 1 due (second submission)

F 10/10 Workshop Presentation 2

M 10/13 Midterm Break

W 10/15 Presentations

F 10/17 Presentations

M 10/20 Presentations

W 10/22Reflection Paper due; Read Shirky: Chapter 2 (skim to p. 39; read all from “Making the Trains Run on Time” to end of chapter) and all of Chapter 3

F 10/24 Reread Shirky; Discuss Johnson

M 10/27 Analysis Paper due

W 10/29 Presentation 3 Script/Outline due; Workshop Presentation 3

F 10/31 PowerPoint/Visual Aid due; Workshop Presentation 3

M 11/3 Peer Reviews for Presentation 3

W 11/5 Presentations

F 11/7 Presentations

M 11/10 Presentations

W 11/12Presentation Reflection due; Read article and listen to podcast on RadioLab; Discuss podcasts

F 11/14 Final Project Invention Paper due

M 11/17 Meet with groups to discuss final project

W 11/19 Continue group work

F 11/21 Continue group work

M 11/24 Continue group work

M 12/1 Continue group work

W 12/3 Group Project due; Present group work to class

F 12/5 Group Project Reflection due; Discuss Final Reflection

W 12/10 Final Reflection due

Academic Reflection Paper

In this short paper (one page, single-spaced, 1" margins, 12 pt font), you should reflect on the field you wish to enter and your relationship to it. Your thoughts here need not be fully developed, but you should be as thorough as possible. We will return to this paper throughout the semester as our understanding of our given fields develops. Your paper should address the following prompts and questions:

What questions and problems will you encounter as you move into the specific section of the world you set for yourself? What issues are important to your field? How has the field responded to these questions, problems, and issues?

What are the main social practices that your field engages in? How do these social practices contribute to the greater society?

What are the values and commitments of this field/discipline/vocation/endeavor? How would you describe its orientation toward the world and the problems it addresses?

What are the "trained incapacities" of your field and its orientation? What are you less likely to be sensitive to, less likely to consider, more likely to be blind to based on your training in the field?

How do you hope to participate in and contribute to this field? What role do you want it to play in your life?

Innovation Paper

This short paper gives you an opportunity to start doing research and organizing your thoughts for your first presentation, which will focus on an important person/innovator in your field or discipline and their innovation/contribution to the field. For our purposes, we can understand the terms innovation and contribution broadly: your person might have developed and produced a particular tool or technology, or a particular text, concept, or theory; they might be the CEO of an influential company or an important scholar at an academic institution. We can also think of our fields and disciplines broadly, considering them from academic, professional, or cultural perspectives.

Both the Innovation Paper and the presentation should incorporate some research, but they should ultimately move beyond information to analysis. We want you to inform us about the innovator and innovation, but we also want deeper insight into the innovation and how it has contributed to your field. This aspect of your work might draw on research, but it should also draw on your own critical thinking. With this in mind, your Innovation Paper should address the following prompts and questions:

Tell us about the innovator and the innovation. We don’t need a complete biography, but we do want a sense for the innovator’s work generally and how it led them to the innovation. For the innovation, we want a clear sense for what it is, what it does, how it works, etc.

Why is this innovation significant? How has it shaped and contributed to your field? How might it continue to affect the field into the future?

How does the innovation embody your field’s orientation – its attitudes, values, beliefs, assumptions, and general ways of looking at the world? Does the innovation work against or expand this orientation in any way?

How does the innovation fit within the field’s design grammar – its principles for what sort of content and social practices and activities are important and acceptable for the field?

How does the innovation generate trained incapacities? How does/might the innovation downplay or blind us to particular perspectives, issues, concerns, or values? How does/might the innovation serve as a hindrance to developments within the field?

It might help to think of this as a rough draft of the presentation script (although it doesn’t need to read like a presentation or speech). For this paper, the most important aspect will be research and analysis. We’re less concerned about exactly what your presentation will sound like and more concerned with having the information and insights about the innovation.

The paper should be one page, single-spaced, 12 pt font, with 1″ margins. On a second page, include a bibliography (include any sources you might draw on for your presentation even if you don’t directly cite them in your paper) in MLA or APA format. You should email the paper to me before class the day it is due and bring a hard or electronic copy with you to class.

Presentation 1

For this presentation, you will focus on an important innovator and innovation in your field or discipline and how the innovation has shaped it. We can think of innovations like tools and technologies but also things like theories, concepts, articles or books, approaches to a particular problem, business models, etc. Although your presentation will certainly inform us about the innovator and innovation, the main goal is to analyze the innovation and to explain how it is significant. Toward this end, your presentation should work to address the following questions:

Why is this innovation significant? How has it shaped and contributed to your field? How might it continue to affect the field into the future?

How does the innovation embody your field’s orientation – its attitudes, values, beliefs, assumptions, and general ways of looking at the world? Does the innovation work against or expand this orientation in any way?

How does the innovation fit within the field’s design grammar – its principles for what sort of content and social practices and activities are important and acceptable for the field?

How does the innovation generate trained incapacities? How does/might the innovation downplay or blind us to particular perspectives, issues, concerns, or values? How does/might the innovation serve as a hindrance to developments within the field?

The presentation will likely require some research – not the same as for an extended research paper, but more than just Wikipedia or a quick Google search. It could be particularly helpful to draw on materials from more academic sites such as JStor, Google Scholar, or Academic Search Premier to get a sense for what people in the field have to say about the innovation. It will likely be helpful to incorporate a specific example of the innovation in action or a specific source that gives us insight into the innovation. It will also be important to incorporate your own analysis of the innovation, your own thoughts in response to the above questions.

The presentation should be 4-5 minutes, and it should include a visual aid, likely a PowerPoint or Prezi file. Either way, you should have at least four slides, the last of which should be a works cited slide documenting your sources in MLA format.

Grading. Presentations will be given letter grades. The “A” range will indicate excellent work, “B” good work, and “C” passable work (a “D” or lower means little to no effort or preparation). To determine your grade, I will primarily focus on the content of the presentation (strength of research and analysis, organization, and style), visual aids, delivery (eye contact, engaging with the audience, etc.), and the presentation reflection you submit at the end of the week.

Presentation 1 Peer Review

As we peer review a classmate’s presentation today, we’ll refer to the canons of rhetoric to help us address various concerns with the composing process. As you look over your partner’s work, you should write out (or type up) your thoughts in response to the following questions and prompts. Afterwards, you should have a conversation with your partner about these thoughts and possibilities for revisions.

Invention. Does the presentation offer enough specifics about the innovation? We want more than just a general list of positives and negatives. Does the presentation incorporate specific examples, anecdotes, and/or sources that illuminate the innovation and give us a sense for what it looks like in action? Where would you like to see more specifics?Keep in mind the question of purpose here as well. If the presentation aims to be informative, are you really learning something new? If it aims to be persuasive, do you find it persuasive? If it aims to move the audience, do you find yourself moved? If not, what advice would you give to make the presentation more effective?

Arrangement. Does the introduction effectively grab your attention? If not, do you see anything in the presentation that could be used to introduce the innovation? Does the conclusion offer a general but exact statement of the innovation’s value for the field? Does the presentation effectively offer signposts for and transitions between examples, benefits, drawbacks, etc.? If you see any limitations here, what advice would you offer?

Style. Which three sentences do you find most effective in terms of making a point, getting at the significance of the innovation, or just sounding good? Which three sentences do you find least effective? How so? Are there any sentences that will be confusing to hear aloud?

Memory. This will largely be your partner’s concern to figure out, but the two of you might discuss various possible approaches to preparing the speech, from memorizing to preparing note cards to adding notes in PowerPoint.

Delivery. We don’t have an opportunity to see an actual performance of the presentation today, but we do have an opportunity to look at our partner’s slides or their plans for slides. Are the slides visually appealing and/or easy to read? If there is a lot of information on a slide, what seems most important – what needs to be kept, and what could be cut? Do the images effectively capture the innovation? Are there too many or too few slides?

Reflection Papers

We will complete these short papers (one page, single-spaced, 12 pt font, 1″ margins) after each round of presentations. The goal is to reflect on your own presentation and those of your classmates. Your paper should address the following prompts and questions.

In terms of preparing for your presentation, where were you most successful? Where were you least successful? Consider your research, your development of the ideas and argument for the presentation, your organization and writing of the presentation, your work on slides, and your preparation for the presentation itself (revising, practicing, making note cards, memorizing, etc.).

In terms of the presentation itself, where were you most successful? Where were you least successful? What felt particularly good about the presentation? What would you do differently in the future?

In terms of other presentations you saw this week, what did you find most effective? Least effective? Which slide presentation did you find most effective, and how so? Who was the most interesting and engaging, and how so? What do you want to try to achieve with or incorporate into future presentations based on what you saw this week?

Debate Proposal

For our second round of presentations, and also for our first major paper, we will study and analyze a controversy in our field and the debate surrounding it. Our understanding of “controversy” can go a few different directions here: it could be a disagreement between members of the field over what should be done in a given situation; it could be a new idea, theory, law, or innovation that changed the field in some way and gave rise to different perspectives; it could be a criminal case or some other incident that involved a breaking of the field’s norms and expectations. Just about any important incident, event, idea, or innovation that generated a debate or different perspectives within the field will work for our purposes (as long as we can find sources talking about the controversy and offering different perspectives on it).

Also, our understanding of the relationship between our controversy and the field can be flexible here as well. For example, the economic crisis of 2008, caused to a large extent by the housing bubble and derivatives trading, was not mainly about accountants, but it involved larger concerns with finance, business ethics, etc., and could be a relevant controversy for accounting majors. Concern over concussions in the NFL isn’t only coming from psychologists, but this controversy could be relevant for psychology majors. Of course, if you want to explore a controversy that is firmly within the confines of your field, that will work fine too.

Again, you will have an opportunity to explore this controversy and the debate around it through the second presentation and the first major paper. For the Debate Proposal, your challenge is to identify a controversy and to begin thinking about the debate surrounding it. Your paper should be one page (single-spaced, 12 pt font, 1″ margins), and it should respond to the following prompts and questions:

What is the controversy? How did it arise? What are some of the key terms in the debate? Who are some of the main people in

the debate? How is the controversy significant for your field? How has the controversy affected

your field? Generally speaking, what are some of the ways people have responded to the

controversy? What are some of the main positions in the debate?

Research Summaries

These short assignments each focus on a single article that you discover through your research. The article should make an argument or offer a perspective in response to your controversy. The main goal of the Research Summary is to summarize the various components of the author’s argument and to show how these pieces fit together. This paper can also serve as an opportunity to begin reflecting on the debate overall and its influence on the field.

Overview and Formatting: Write a one-page paper summarizing a specific source you discovered in your research. Put your name and the name of the assignment at the top of the page. Just below this, give a full MLA citation of the article you’re summarizing. After the citation, skip a line and begin your summary. For the paper overall, set the margins at 1 inch, spacing at single, and font at 12 pt. Do not exceed a page in length. You should submit these papers to me via email as .doc or .rtf attachments. You should also bring either a hard copy or an electronic copy of these with you to class the day they are due.

Specifics: The first section of your summary (probably one or two or three paragraphs) should focus on the main argument(s) made in the article. You should identify the main claim(s) and the reasons and evidence supporting these claims, showing how these various pieces fit together. If the author addresses any counterarguments, identify these as well. Your summary should include quotes from the article to help clarify and support your account of the argument. Do not offer your own comments, opinions, or arguments about what the text says, and do not offer a rhetorical analysis of the writing. Stick to content: what is the author saying in this text? What position is s/he advocating?

The second section should situate this argument within the larger conversation around your controversy. What is the author’s relationship to the field? How does this perspective compare to others in response to the controversy? Is this perspective a commonplace one or an unusual one in the debate? How can we classify the argument drawing on stasis theory? Ultimately, we’ll want to be able to reflect on the points of intersection and divergence of different perspectives in the debate.

Like all short assignments for this class, Research Summaries will only be given a completion grade. If your submission does not meet the assignment requirements, I will ask you to revise it and submit it again. Otherwise, you will receive full credit for completing the assignment.

Annotated Bibliography

This assignment is designed to help you organize your research as you prepare for Paper 1. As you are researching your controversy, you will likely find some articles and sources that are mainly informative and others that make an argument and advocate for a particular position. While your Research Summaries should focus on articles that make arguments, you are welcome to include sources that are primarily informative in your annotated bibliography, as both informative and argumentative sources will ultimately help you write Paper 1. Your bibliography should include at least four sources that make an argument in response to your controversy. Also, our understanding of “sources” here can be quite broad. Our main emphasis will be on articles, but you can also examine other kinds of texts – anything that can help you gain insight about your controversy (books, documentaries, pamphlets, websites, etc.).

Overview and Formatting: There is not a specific page length requirement for this assignment, but your bibliography should include at least six entries (you are welcome to include as many sources as you want and as you expect will help you in writing Paper 1). Each entry should begin with a citation of the source in MLA format. After the citation, skip a line before including your annotations. You should arrange your entries either in alphabetical order or in the order of their importance for your project (whichever is most helpful for you). You should put your name and the title of the assignment at the top of the first page. You should email the assignment to me as a .doc or .rtf attachment before class starts on October 8, and you should also bring a hard copy or an electronic copy with you to class that day.

Specifics: Your annotations should be 1-2 paragraphs, and they should focus on concisely summarizing the main point(s) of the source and reflecting on its use for your understanding of the controversy. If the source is argumentative, you should briefly outline the main argument of the article. If the source is informative, you should outline the main information provided by the article. In addition to this overview of the source’s main point(s), you can also use the annotations as a place to remind yourself about other helpful information from the article. For example, if the article offers helpful background information or quotes, you can make a note of this. If the article helps you map the conversation around your controversy using stasis theory or kairos, you might make a note of this as well. The goal of the annotated bibliography is to help you prepare for Paper 1 and to demonstrate that your understanding of your controversy is broad and thorough. (See the Purdue OWL for more information on annotated bibliographies.)

The Annotated Bibliography will only be given a completion grade. If your submission does not meet the assignment requirements, I will ask you to revise it and submit it again. Otherwise, you will receive full credit for completing the assignment.

Paper 1

This 6-8 page paper (double-spaced, 1″ margins, 12 pt font) asks you to map the conversation surrounding a specific controversy. Through your paper, we should get a sense for the main positions that people take in response to this issue and how they fit together to form a larger conversation. You should substantially incorporate at least three sources (although you will likely include more).

SpecificsYou should begin by introducing the issue and offering an overview that articulates how you will frame the conversation. (Remember our discussion of introduction strategies here: you might begin with a focusing incident, an exemplary source, a historical overview, or a conceptual overview.) The rest of your paper should include three main components: conceptual summaries of specific arguments (think of our Research Summaries here), an analysis of the conversation, and your argument in response to it. You could summarize different arguments and parts of the conversation first and then move on to a section of analysis, or you could offer analysis along the way. Either way, it will help to have an organizational strategy, most likely based around stasis theory, kairos (events and contexts), or stakeholders.

When you summarize specific arguments and sources, you should aim to note the main claim, supporting reasons and evidence, and any counter-arguments addressed. For the analysis of the conversation, we want a sense for the similarities and differences between arguments, points of intersection and divergence, core dividing issues, gaps or impasses, etc. The main question here is, what do we learn by looking at the conversation overall?

Further questions for analysis: Drawing on stasis theory, do these articles make the same or different types of

arguments? For those people making the same type of argument, how are their arguments similar or different?

Are there certain things that everyone agrees on? Are there certain things that people tend to disagree about?

What assumptions or beliefs are leading people to make different sorts of arguments? How would you characterize the reasons and evidence that people draw on? Is there a

correlation between the reasons and evidence offered and the arguments made? How does context shape the arguments that people make? Do people seem to be talking to one another or talking past one another?

Finally, your paper should make two different sorts of arguments. First, you should offer an argument as to how we can best make sense of the conversation (i.e., “This issue really comes down to how people define X, as this shapes what policies they work toward;” “The debate mainly occurs between stakeholder X and stakeholder Y and their disagreement over the question of Z”). You should also make a further argument about how to resolve the conversation, about which position is most reasonable or helpful, or something else along these lines. Stasis theory can be helpful here as well: you can make a causal argument, a definition argument, an evaluation argument, or a policy argument.

Paper 1 Peer Review

In class today, we will conduct peer reviews of Paper 1. As you review a classmate’s paper, write your responses to the following questions and prompts on the paper itself, on a separate sheet of paper, or in an email to your partner (you and your partner should decide which is best for you). Read over the following prompts before reading your partner’s paper so that you have a clear sense for what you will be addressing. Afterwards, discuss your comments.

1. Before reading your partner’s paper, let each other know if you have any particular questions or concerns about your papers. If your partner has any specific questions or concerns, be sure to address these in your written comments.

2. Recently, we discussed strategies for introducing and organizing the paper. As you read your partner’s paper, make an outline that charts the organization. Does the introduction effectively set up the paper overall? How does your partner divide their paper into different sections and subsections? How does your partner transition between and guide you through these sections and subsections? Do you have any suggestions for how your partner could improve the overall arrangement itself or the way they guide you through it?

3. In terms of content, keep in mind that our goal is not simply to report our research and list the important information related to our controversies but rather to analyze the positions taken in response to them and the broader conversation around them. So, the main question here is, are there opportunities for your partner to incorporate the main terms and concepts we’ve discussed in class? When your partner discusses arguments, do they show how different pieces of the argument (claims, reasons and evidence, etc.) fit together? Do they use stasis theory to help identify types of arguments and to show the relationships between various arguments, where people agree and disagree? Do they use the notion of kairos to show how arguments respond to specific contexts or events, or showing how the conversation has shifted over time? Do they clarify how different stakeholders hold different positions based on their larger orientations? Again, what advice would you offer to your partner for them to more thoroughly, accurately, or effectively incorporate these concepts in their paper?

4. Identify three non-consecutive sentences from your partner’s paper that confused you in some way, and note where they appear in the paper.  Try to explain what confused you, and offer suggestions for clarifying the points made in these sentences.

5. What is the most effective part of the paper? What do you like most about it? What is most in need of improvement?

Presentation 2

This presentation develops out of our work on Paper 1. Your goal here is to introduce us to a controversy that is relevant to your field (or another controversy relevant to you) and to highlight what makes the controversy interesting and relevant. A few different approaches could work. You can follow the format of the paper and offer an overview of the main positions taken in the debate around the controversy. For this approach, your main emphasis would be on mapping the positions within the debate and capturing its larger structure in terms of stasis theory, the chronological development of the debate, and/or the stakeholders participating in it. Another approach would involve focusing on a specific aspect of the controversy. Rather than mapping the whole conversation, you could focus on one position, one stakeholder, one main event, etc. A third option would be to present your own argument, your own position in the debate, while drawing on outside sources for support. Deciding between these approaches will largely be a question of time management. If you choose the first route and address a range of positions in the debate, you won’t have time to go into them in great detail. The second approach allows you to focus on one aspect of the debate if you feel that it is more interesting or relevant. The third approach lets you focus on your ideas while only drawing on other sources as points of reference.

In concluding your presentation, try either to point to the future of the controversy (where is the conversation headed? what events or changes might occur that will shape this controversy?), to describe how/where the debate breaks down (if the controversy is unlikely to be resolved, why is that the case? what are the differing assumptions or perspectives that will keep different stakeholders from achieving stasis?), or to offer your own argument or position as you did at the end of Paper 1.

The presentation should be 4.5 to 6 minutes, and it should include visual aids as you see fit to help you develop your analysis and conclusions.

Analysis Paper

This short paper (one page, single-spaced, 12 pt font, 1″ margins) aims to help you develop your thinking for the third presentation. Our thinking here is based on the reading from Clay Shirky and what we might call “organizational analysis.” For the analysis, you should focus on a particular community. Our understanding of community can be broad. We want to focus on a collection of people with shared interests, perspectives, social practices, etc. You are welcome to focus on your field or discipline (e.g., journalists as a community, accountants as a community), a particular organization (e.g., the SPCA, the Republican party, the Catholic Church or a particular congregation, etc.), or an informal community organized in some other way (e.g., the community of people who read The New Yorker, fans of a particular sports team or band, etc.). The main goal is to work toward a larger insight or argument about your community. Here, we can keep in mind concerns from earlier in the semester: does your analysis give us any insight into the community’s orientation and trained incapacities? Does your analysis give us any insight into the community’s position in response to a particular debate or issue?

Toward this notion of organizational analysis, Shirky helps us consider how digital technologies radically reframe our understanding of communication, organizational structure, and professions. This approach to the analysis paper and the presentation will involve exploring Shirky’s thinking with reference to your community and its organization and relationship to technology. Your analysis should address these sorts of questions: in what ways is your community hierarchical, and in what ways does it work according to a non-hierarchical, distributed, network model? Is it shifting in one direction or another? In what ways does your community involve sharing, cooperation, and/or collective action? How does this community use technology? Has it been shaped in any way by digital technologies and environments? If you are focusing on your academic field, what aspects of the field have been or can be technologized and made available to amateurs? How will this shift the nature of your profession over time? Will it still be a “profession” 100 years from now, or will it go the way of scribes? Why?

We can also draw on Steven Johnson’s understanding of creativity and innovation here. In what ways does your community foster the sort of innovation that Johnson describes? What does innovation in this community look like?

Presentation 3

This presentation develops out of our work on the Analysis Paper. The goal of the presentation is to offer insights about a particular community that is relevant to you through an analysis of the organizational structure of the community and its relationship to technology. This community can be your field, academic discipline, or expected profession, but you are also welcome to change your focus for this presentation. The presentation draws on our readings from Clay Shirky and the video from Steven Johnson. Shirky and Johnson help us consider how digital technologies radically reframe our understanding of communication, organizational structure, professions, and innovation and creativity. In your presentation, you should achieve the following (not necessarily in this order):

Look at your community from a more distant perspective, thinking about its organizational structure and its use of technology (this might involve research, or it might involve your own understanding of the community). From this perspective, address these sorts of questions: is the organizational structure of the community hierarchical or non-hierarchical? How so? Is it shifting in any ways? In what ways does your community involve sharing, cooperation, and/or collective action? In what ways does your community foster the sort of innovation that Johnson describes? What does innovation in this community look like? To what extent is this community “professional”? Are there professional standards and gatekeepers of those standards? How does this community use technology? Has it been shaped in any way by digital technologies and environments? What aspects of the community have been or can be technologized and made available to amateurs? How will this shift the nature of your profession over time?

Define and describe your community, noting its main attitudes, values, beliefs, orientation, and trained incapacities. What distinguishes this community and its members in terms of what is important to them and how they see the world? Also, make direct connections between the community and your analysis of its organizational structure and use of technology. Do these things work to promote a sense of identification between members of the community, or do they create divisions and tensions? Do the orientation and trained incapacities of the community make it more or less likely to adapt to changes in organizational structure and use of technology? What do we learn about the community through your analysis of its organizational structure and use of technology?

Your presentation should be 4.5-6 minutes long, and it should include visual aids as you see fit to help you develop your analysis and conclusions.

Final Project Invention Paper

For the last few weeks of the semester, we will complete collaborative projects that result in a website, a podcast, or a video. Each group should address two main questions: what is one way that oral and written communication is significant for you as a student and a citizen of the world, and what is one way that oral and written communication is significant for your discipline or future profession? Each group should offer a collective answer to the first question, and each member of each group should offer an individual answer to the second question. The answers to these questions should involve some generalization (how would you describe the significance of oral and written communication more generally?) and some specifics (what specific examples or instances can you point to that show us the significance of oral and written communication in action?).

For this short paper (1 page, single spaced, 1″ margins, 12 pt font), write out your thoughts in response to both of the questions above. This will give you a foundation to build on when you start working with your group. Email the short paper to me before class and bring a hard or electronic copy with you to class.

Group Project

Our final project of the semester asks you to take our thinking on oral and written communication and the skills and strategies we’ve developed and apply them in a digital writing environment – a podcast, an animated video, or a website. In terms of the content of the project, your group should work to address broader thoughts on oral and written communication (how it shapes your life generally and how it shapes your discipline), offer considerations of different aspects of the Bonaventure community, and/or work toward remediating previous work that you’ve completed this semester. In terms of delivery, you should make a podcast using Audacity or GarageBand, an animated video using Powtoon, or a website using WordPress. Specific length requirements will be worked out with me as your project develops in order to work toward balancing content creation and editing concerns.

As part of the group project, each individual member of the group should write up a one page reflection paper that discusses the goal/purpose of the project, analyzes its effectiveness (think about content and editing concerns here), and describes your specific contributions.

The grading criteria across our assignments will be as follows:

A – Very good to excellent work that effectively explores one of our given topics and that incorporates satisfactory editing work. Evidence of substantial efforts made toward the assignment.

B – Good work that effectively explores one of our given topics and that incorporates satisfactory editing work. Evidence of satisfactory efforts made toward the assignment.

C – Work that embodies a good faith effort but that falls short in terms of exploring one of our given topics or in terms of editing.

D or below – Unsatisfactory work in terms of quality. Little evidence of effort. Incomplete work.

Final Reflection

This assignment asks you to reflect on a few different aspects of your experience and work from throughout the semester. The paper should be 3-4 pages (double-spaced, 12 pt font, 1″ margins), and it should address the following prompts and questions.

Revisiting our Academic Reflection Papers from the beginning of the semester, how has your understanding of your field or discipline changed this semester as you have looked at relevant innovations, controversies, texts, etc.? How has your understanding of your field’s attitudes, values, orientation, and trained incapacities shifted?

Between the papers, the presentations, and podcast, what were your most effective and successful efforts this semester? Least effective and successful? How so? Which type of composition and communication did you enjoy most?

How has your understanding of writing and presenting changed this semester? What similarities and differences do you see between writing papers, giving presentations, and making podcasts?

What are the three main insights you want to take from this class regarding your writing? What are the three main insights you want to take regarding presentations?