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? We noted on Tuesday that 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?" 

Draft Workshop: Feeder 2.1

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.

Draft Workshop: Unit 2 Data Sheets

What data you choose to collect and how you collect it is the backbone of your experiment; you won't be able to prove your hypothesis unless you collect your data in a way that is clear and consistent. Form yourselves into groups of 2 or 3, and after you have examined your partners' data sheets discuss the following questions aloud:

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.

Composing Your Hypotheses

Last week you began brainstorming the behavior you will modify for your Unit 2 Project. Now I would like you to work with your group members to compose a hypothesis statement for your project. As we noted last week, a hypothesis statement usually is formatted into an "if-then" statement that explains the relationship between an independent and dependent variables. In addition, a good hypothesis statement will be specific both in its identification of these variables and how it describes the relationship between them. Begin by composing a rough hypothesis statement, then work in pairs to critique one another's statements. Answer the following questions aloud:

Is each statement specific enough? 

Do you know exactly what the variables are and how they are being manipulated?

Do you know exactly what will happen to the dependent variable when the independent variable is manipulated? Is this relationship described fully and clearly?

Do you suspect that confounding variables may exist? Should the author revise the thesis statement in order to assuage readers' suspicions about these confounding variables?

Unit 2 Pre-Writing Exercise + Homework for 10/19

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, collaborate with your group members to build the following 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 either begin work on the homework assignment (please use headphones if you begin listening to the podcast) or begin research for your Feeder 2.1 assignment.

Homework: 

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

http://blogs.wnyc.org/radiolab/2010/02/19/lucy/ 

or you can download the mp3 directly here: 

http://feeds.wnyc.org/~r/radiolab/~5/m9kyh3Sq7mk/radiolab_podcast702lucy.mp3

Read through these questions before you listen to the podcast, but answer them after you listen. As you are listening, compose a retrospective outline of the podcast. Post this outline along with your answers to the following questions in a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s RadioLab assignment." Share this Google Doc with me.

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? 

Unit 1 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.

Perform the method on the model paragraph on Google Docs, then have students perform it on the first paragraphs of one another's essays.

Homework: No class on Tuesday; Post Unit 1 Project to blog by class time next Thursday; re-read Unit 2 assignment sequence and decide on the behavior you want to modify

Unit 1 Project Draft Workshop

Part 1

In this first part of the draft workshop we will ensure that the author has dealt appropriately with the parts of the draft associated with the conceptual and organization stages of revision. For your partner's draft, answer the following questions:

Conceptual Stage

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 it seem to you to be written in high, low, or middle style? 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.

Organizational Stage

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.

Assessment

If you did not identify any major conceptual or organization issues in your answers to the above questions, let the author know that s/he can move on to Part 2. If you did identify any issues, explain as clearly and specifically as possible what you think the author needs to do in order to get this draft to the "surface-level concerns" stage. Try to format these instructions as a plan, e.g. "Your road map doesn't match the organization of the essay as a whole. Once you make those match by revising your thesis statements or re-ordering your paragraphs, you should look at paragraphs 3 and 5 because they each seem to deal with several ideas rather than one." 

Part 2

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.

Homework: By Thursday your draft should be at the point where you're ready to deal with the real nitty-gritty of sentence-level concerns; not only should the conceptual and organizational aspects of your paper be in order but you should also feel fairly confident about the tone of your writing and how it functions on a sentence level.