ENG 101-108 - Composition and Reading Across the Disciplines: 2016

Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Videos for Creating an E-Portfolio

Monday, December 5, 2016

Survey

Folks, we're going to take two surveys this week -- one for me (so I can determine what "worked" in the course this F'16) and one for CCP (so they can determine whether I'm worth keeping around).

Here's the link to my survey which you can use, in part, in your metacognitive reflection essay. I strongly suggest typing your answers in a Google Doc and then transferring (copying/paring) them over to the survey. Why? So you can save your answers!

Friday, December 2, 2016

"Google Doc'athon" for Portfolio Week

Click the following links to access our Google Doc'athon! I'm expecting you to post your feedback/answers to everybody questions, but you only need to post your question/example/context in your ID#.

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Final Exam Schedule

Wednesday, 12/14, 12:30pm @ WINN, S2-11

Friday, 12/16, 1 pm @ WINN S2-11

Computer Lab During Week 10 (M + W)

We’re meeting in a computer lab on Monday and Wednesday next week, 12/5 and 12/7 -- CBI C2-17. I've got some sweet activities lined up, so get excited!

We're meeting in the "C" building, right along 18th street, one block south of Spring Garden. Check out this link for more details.

Portfolio Prompt

Zack De Piero
ENG 101-108 – Composition and Reading Across the Disciplines

Portfolio

· Two submission options:

o Hard copy due: Wednesday, December 14^th by 12:30pm (the start of our 1^st final exam meeting)

o E-portfolio option due: Friday, December 16^th by 1pm (the start of our 2^nd final exam meeting)

Part 1: Revised WPs

· Revise your WP1 and WP2 papers, and try to get them to the “next level.” Apply anything and everything that you’ve learned since submitting this piece that you can help you to improve them. Think about the feedback that you’ve gotten from your classmates’ in Peer/Reader Review workshops, and consider my comments on your papers. I realize that some of the questions that I’ve asked you are very difficult to answer, but trust me, they’re super-crucial for your writing development. Read them, re-read them, and spend a lot of time thinking about how you can address them in your new’n’improved papers.

Part 2: Reverse Outlines

· To facilitate your WP1 and WP2 revisions, I want you to “re-see” your papers. One way you can accomplish that is by creating a reverse outline for each of your WPs. Condense each paragraph into its main point and how/why it supports (or doesn’t!) your argument—one or two sentences is fine. I suggest creating a 3-column table to do this (see below), but I’m open to other arrangements.

· Make sure that you create reverse outlines of your current WPs (i.e., the drafts that I commented on) before you revise each WP. Why? That way, you can use reverse outlines as a tool for “re-seeing”—and thus, potentially improving—your work. This is a skill that you can, and should, carry over to other papers that you’ll be writing in your future courses.

· When you’re finished, I’d like you to write a paragraph or two about (1) any major structural changes you made from your initial submission and/or (2) how and why reverse outlining helped you to “re-see” your work. Note: for your introductory paragraph (listed as #1 in the table), please just list your thesis statement!

Paragraph #	Main Point of the Paragraph	How/Why It Supports My Argument
1 (Thesis Statement)
2
3

Part 3: Revision Matrix

· This component of the portfolio is your chance to explain the changes that you decided to make to each WP. I want you to create a “revision matrix” that clearly details some of the most important decisions that you’ve made. Consider these questions: (1) what changes did you make?, (2) why did you make those changes?, and (3) how have those changes impacted your new, revised paper? You can chip away at the revision matrix while you’re revising each WP, or you can create it after you’ve revised each WP (or you can utilize a combination).

· Feel free to display the revision matrix however you’d like, but please feel free to use this 4-column matrix, below, as a template. Please examine 12-20 total changes that you’ve made in substantial depth. For instance, explain 8 changes that you made for WP1 and 6 changes that you made for WP2.

Text from my initial WP submission: (a phrase, sentence, paragraph, idea, move, punctuation, piece of evidence, etc.)	An observation or question I received from De Piero or a classmate:	The change(s) I made to what I initially wrote: (ie, the change[s] I made to column 1)	How this change impacts my paper:
	“What’s the connection between these two sentences? How do these ideas connect?

Part 4: Metacognitive Reflection (5-6 pages)

· This is your chance to take me through your personal ENG 101-108 journey. What was the experience like for you—from lesson to lesson, article to article, WP to WP? How has your approach to writing, thinking, and/or researching evolved? What did studying this stuff mean to you? Has your stance towards “writing” shifted or changed, and if so, how? And why? A successful metacognitive reflection will draw upon your current thoughts, previous thlogs, in-class journal responses, miscellaneous freewrites, and/or conversations with classmates. As always, be specifc and use textual evidence for your claims whenever possible (i.e, quote sources whenever possible!).

· Not satisfied with those questions that I listed above? No problem! Here are some additional questions that can guide your reflection essay:

o Think back to a previous time (last month, last quarter, high school, etc.): has your perspective on what writing is changed at all? If so, how? Do you now see anything differently? (Including yourself as a writer?) If so, what? Explain!

o What have you learned in ENG 101-108 about the study of and practice with genres? About rhetoric? About the writing process(es)? How, exactly, did you learn what you learned? What “worked” for you, and why?

o Did you have any “ah ha!” moments? If so, what were they? Explain!

o How might you be able to apply what you’ve learned in ENG 101-108 to future writing, thinking, and/or researching contexts? How do you foresee this course extending to other course contexts? How has this course extended to (your) other course contexts?

o What does “genre awareness” mean to you? What do you think about “moves”?

o Did your approach(es) to reading change at all over/throughout this course? If so, how? Why?

o What are some of your favorite strategies, tips, or tricks? Why?

o Did you have any difficulty processing any of our course concepts? If so, could you speculate on how or why?

o What questions are you left with? What didn’t quite “sit right” with you? What hasn’t processed?

· A note about integrating our course readings/resources: although this metacognitive reflection essay is ultimately about you, your writing, your learning, and your thinking, I’d also like you to integrate some of our course readings. Please weave in direct citations (“quotes”) from at least four different sources.

· Aaaaaand one more note: this metacognitive reflection essay is a significantly different genre than the thesis-driven, research-based arguments you wrote in WP1 and WP2 (i.e., “research papers”). Although, technically, you’re still making an argument—you’re making an argument about your learning development throughout ENG 101-108—how you make express that argument can be quite different. I encourage you to utilize your personal “writing voice” in this paper, especially if you feel like you weren’t able to do so in the WPs or PBs. Now, listen, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t proofread or revise your work—you should always proofread and revise your work before submitting it—but I want you to “be yourself” in these essays.

Submission

· You have two options to submit your portfolio: an “old school” hard copy portfolio in a folder or a digital e-portfolio. During class class, I’ll go explain the nuts’n’bolts of how to use Weebly, which is a great site for putting together e-portfolios. If you want to use another digital platform, go for it! (Blogger might be able to work. Wix too.)

· Note: whichever option you choose, I need to see my comments on your WPs. Sometimes, this requires converting downloading the Google Doc (that I commented on) into an MS Word doc and then converting that into a PDF. (Why? Most “inserted comments” appear in most PDF versions.) If this is a problem for any reason, let me know. Make sure, though, you don’t do this at he last minute (give yourself some time to “play around” with this!).

· I’d like a “digital archive” of all of your work, so if you give me an “old school” folder-portfolio, make sure to also send me an email with all of your work as attachments. (If you create an e-portfolio, I’ll have the “digital archive” of your work on the website.) Here’s what you should include:

o Each WP submission (use the document with my comments on them!)

o Each new, revised, final WP

o Your “Before/After Reverse Outlines”

o Your “Revision Matrix”

o Your metacognitive reflection essay

o and anything else that you feel like you should include!

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

WP2 Prep: 1-on-1 Conferences

We're going to be using this Google Doc to work through your WP2 papers during our 1-on-1 conferences!

Monday, November 7, 2016

Check Out Some of These Sources

Here's a list of possible pop culture-y (non-academic) publications. Please know that they don't all represent the same standards for "journalistic integrity" and/or objectivity -- these sites focus on a wide range of content and perspectives, tailored to different audiences.

Poke around and find something you like!

Sign-Ups for 1-on-1 Conferences During Week 7

Click here for the Google Doc!

Sign-Ups for 1-on-1 Conferences During Week 7

Wednesday, 11/16 and Friday, 11/18

We’re setting aside time for these 1-on-1 conferences so that I can help guide your WP2. To maximize your chances of “getting something” out of our conferences, you need to come prepared. Make sure you bring:

the 2 sources from different disciplines/professions that you’re planning on analyzing
a list of possible aspects to write about (conventions, moves, purposes, etc.)
a tentative outline for your whole paper

This could also be a great time to chat about your WP1 papers. If you want to do that -- if we have time to spare -- bring a printed copy of your WP1 with my comments. To do that, go to your Google Doc, then download it as a MS Word file. Once it’s been downloaded as an MS Word file, you should be able to print that file and my comments will appear.

PB2A, and PB2B, and WP#2

Writing Project #2:
Considering Different Disciplinary/Professional Perspectives About a Topic

How might people write texts, read texts, and perceive issues in different ways depending on their personal identities and their professional/disciplinary backgrounds?

PB2A: Spotting and Evaluating “Moves” (~600 words)

· Tracing a writer’s rhetorical “moves” is a crucial part of becoming a more conscious reader and writer (and it’s also a requirement for WP2!). I want you to pick a text written by someone from one of the four main disciplinary paradigms that we’ve been focusing on: the social sciences, the natural sciences, the humanities, and business fields.

· For example, you can pick a text written by a teacher (social sciences), a chemist (natural sciences), a historian (the humanities), or an investment banker (business fields). (Note: you can also choose a text that is written about someone in different fields, but it might be more difficult to analyze writing for clues to their disciplinary/professional identities.)

· Within whatever text you choose, pinpoint three moves that are listed in the They Say, I Say Appendix and another three moves that you found on your own. Give each move a name, describe the reason(s) why the author may have chosen it (i.e., what the move does for the text), and evaluate the move’s effectiveness. If you have difficulty spotting “moves” from the They Say, I Say Appendix, then describe some moves that this writer could have made to make his/her piece more effective.

PB2B: Reading Texts and Considering Topics From Different Perspectives (800 words)

· Pick a text about a topic that you’re interested in. Identify the different “players” involved in this issue—the different people/organizations who are impacted by the underlying issue(s), either directly or indirectly.

· For example, if you picked a text about the Black Lives Matter movement, ask yourself: who are the major “players” involved in this issue? There are certainly many, but some of the predominant ones are (1) black Americans, (2) white/non-black Americans, (3) cops and law enforcement, and (4) political parties. (Of course, you don’t have to stop there: think about how we’ve broken down broad topics/ideas with our nesting dolls—do all black Americans have the same view on this topic? All white citizens? All cops? All politicians? Probably not, so it’s a good idea to separate the “players” based on their specific stances towards whatever issue is at hand.)

· Once you’ve identified the major players, take a look at Shelley Reid’s “Critical Reading Strategies” handout and then combine the “Doubting and Disagreeing” strategy with the “Taking Positions” strategy. Take the positions of the different “players” involved in this topic/issue and then, from their unique perspectives, brainstorm critical questions that they might ask about the text that you’ve read and about the topic that it’s about.

· Ultimately, I want you to be able to put yourself in other people’s shoes and see how they might perceive a topic in different ways based on their personal identity and professional background.

WP2: Analyzing and Evaluating Disciplinary and Professional Perspectives

· Our WP2 unit is designed to get us thinking about how people write texts, read texts, and perceive issues based on their personal identity and disciplinary background. In other words, whenever people engage with information, they bring their existing experiences, interests, biases, and perspectives about the world “to the table.” I’d like you to think about how people approach specific issues based on who they are and what they’re most concerned about. For the purposes of this assignment, I want you to compare and contrast at least two of the four main disciplinary paradigms we’ve been looking at—the social sciences, natural sciences, humanities, and business contexts—and tell me how they each think about an issue in different ways.

· Select at least two texts (about the same topic/issue) that have been written by people from different disciplinary perspectives. Make sure you purposefully choose texts that illuminate how these individuals perceive the topic/issue in unique ways, depending on their personal identity and/or disciplinary background. (In other words, don’t just settle on the first two texts you find; choose ones that will give you something to write about!)

· Your job is to make an argument about their arguments. Who has the most effective one(s), and why? I ultimately want you to make a case about how these different writers—who each represent different perspectives—help you understand this topic/issue in different and deeper ways. Some aspects you might want to base your argument on include:

o Who are the authors? What is each author’s purpose for writing each piece? Who is their likely audience?

o Which writer has the most confrontational or aggressive stance? Which writer seems to present the most-balanced “take” on an issue? Did one writer address multiple perspectives, whereas others only focused on one perspective? If so, why?

o What concepts are introduced in the texts, and by whom? What types of evidence does each writer use, and how do they use it?

o What “moves” does each author make in their writing? Whose “moves” are most effective, and why?

o What questions do these writers ask? Based on the questions that they pose, what issues seem to be the most important to them? Do certain writers/disciplines seem to be more “balanced” than others—that is, do they acknowledge other disciplinary perspectives?

o What genres have they chosen to write in, and why? How do the affordances and constraints of their genre help them get their message across?

o How could someone read or interpret each text in different ways? What questions do you have about these texts or these writers?

· You don’t need to answer every question—pick the question(s) that helps you create a focused argument that you can support based on textual evidence. This paper should be 5 pages long, double-spaced, MLA format, with 1-inch margins. Tailor your research-based, thesis statement-driven argument to an academic audience. Use direct evidence from the textual genres themselves to support your claims. Draw on ideas from our course readings using direct quotes and paraphrased passages to supplement your argument.

Friday, November 4, 2016

Thinking About WP2 Through the SEPTA Strike

During WP2, we're going to be considering people's different disciplinary/professional perspectives and evaluating their arguments/positions.

Since this SEPTA strike is impacting almost every one of us right now -- and screwing us up pretty badly(!) -- I thought I'd take it as an opportunity to have us think about how different people approach the strike based on their different disciplinary/professional perspectives.

Here are some different texts written by and written about people in multiple careers, with various purposes, and with different claims -- they're all trying to convince us of something. My questions to YOU (my beloved ENG 101-108 students) include:

what IS that something? (that they're arguing!)
what are they basing in it on?
whose argument/positions do you think is the most effective?
and, most importantly, why?

Check out these articles that are written by folks from different perspectives and/or include people's diverse perspectives on the same topic/issue.

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Class Canceled on Wednesday, November 2nd

(I emailed this information to you, but the CCP email system is a bit "wonky," so I thought I'd post it on this blog to be safe.)

ENG 101-108rs,

I need to cancel class on Wednesday, November 2nd. After class last Friday, I began having intense back spasms and I had to go to the hospital. I was admitted into the emergency room, and I've been trying to recover since. Although I'm hanging in there, I'm still in a lot of pain, and I need to cancel class because I can't quite move/walk just yet.

We can't afford to miss more class time, so we will definitely be having class on Friday, November 4th, even if SEPTA is still on strike. I understand that it's probably very difficult for you to get around with the buses and subways out of operation -- it's going to be tough for me too -- but it's super-important that you make it to class on Friday. We'll be starting our WP2 unit, and it's essential that you're there to understand what we're doing from the get-go. Please be there on Friday and don't be late.

While I have your "ear," I want to lay out a couple more thoughts:

If you've submitted your WP1 on time, you should have received my feedback/comments, along with your grade. Please know that my comments are intended to guide your WP1 for the "final final" portfolio submission. In other words, you'll be submitting this ONE LAST TIME at the very end of the semester. Although I ask you a lot of tough questions in my feedback, these are the crucial questions that will help you help yourself to find ways of improving your writing.
Some of you haven't still submitted your WP1s. Aaaaaaaaaaaaand... that's not good -- not at all. You absolutely POSITIVELY have to submit your WP1 ASAP if you want to be eligible to earn credit for this course. There's no excuse to NOT turn this assignment in -- you've had plenty of time.
Take some time to work on your thlogs. As I've mentioned many times, almost all of you are way behind on your thlog posts. Folks, this should be an easy 5 points. All you've got to do is set aside some time, think hard about what you're learning and what you're struggling with, be specific, and make some tie-ins to our course readings. Boo, bam! Done! If you don't have at least 2 thorough thlogs posted by Sunday afternoon, you will begin losing points that you can't get back.
All told, what I'm getting at is this: get on the ball, folks. I need everybody to step it up. This is college, and you're here because you WANT to be here. Stay on top of your work. This 10-week semester schedule moves super-fast, but I need you to stay on top of all of your work. If you feel lost, please do your part and re-read/revisit the lesson plans, the course readings, and the blog posts. You can always, always, always come to me for extra help, but I need you to do all of the work that I've laid out first.

See you on Friday.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

WP1 Checklist

WP1 Checklist

Here’s a list of features for a solid research-based "academic argument" that I’ll be looking for in your WP1:

· Introduction captures the reader’s interest, sets the stage for the paper, addresses the “so what?” question, and includes a specific thesis statement of what you intend to argue in the paper.

· Thesis statement is clear, “arguable,” and drives the analysis of your evidence

· The topic, itself, is addressed but it is not the major focus of the paper!

o Remember: this is paper about examining writing, writers’ various choices, and, the impact that this has on readers. We're studying how writers construct texts and how readers interpret writers' texts. This paper is not about beauty products, sports, video games, the election, or racism. It’s about what writers choose to include in their writing when they explore these issues—what conventions they adhere to, what rhetorical strategies they use, what evidence they include, etc — and why.

· Multiple forms of evidence are included:

o Extensive use of textual data (of the different genre examples) that support your claims

o At least 2 different course readings are integrated in your paper

· Both direct citations (word-for-word, verbatim) and indirect citations (paraphrased) are included

o Brackets used to modify at least one direct citation

· The paper unfolds in a logical/reader-friendly manner

· Attention is paid to who wrote each piece, their ethos, their purpose for writing, etc.

· Attention is paid to some of the different reading strategies/approaches that we’ve been studying.

· Standard MLA citation practices

o Works Cited page

o Your name, course, and date are listed at the top of the first page

o Paper is double-spaced and page numbers are listed at the bottom of the page

o 12-point Times New Roman font

· “Little things” (re: our weekly “writing tips”)

o Use of more descriptive action verbs instead of “says” (ie, the author says that, “…”)

o Dashes (at least 1x)

o Hyphens (at least 1x)

o Oxford commas (used in all series of 3 or more, please! Ie, x, y, and z…)

o Italics: used for emphasis—but sparingly!) and for technical Writing/Composition terms

· At least 4 (full) pages and no more than 5.

· Paper must be submitted to me via the “Sharing” option on Google Docs.