What will we be doing?

This course has five major projects, each of which is a stage in a course-long project to document and analyze an aspect of the AIDS quilt:

  • Reading Responses (2)
  • Annotated Bibliographies (10 annotations)
  • Primary Source Description (2)
  • Analysis Essay (1)
  • General Participation

You will earn points for each major project. In addition, you will also earn points for general class participation. In general, this course is designed to reward the quality and quantity of work you do. The more you put into the course, the more you will get out of it, with regard to both your learning and your grade.

Remember to submit a link via Gradian for all work you for which you want me to provide points and feedback.

Reading Responses (100-500 points)

Reading Response | 50-250 points each (2)

For this project you will complete at least two reading responses, one for Unit 1 and one for Unit 2. At the beginning of each unit, you will read the primary course reading for that unit in conversation with a supplemental text you select from this supplemental reading list or choose in consultation with me. When you’ve completed the conversation in Hypothes.is, you will compose a paragraph or two of reflection as a page on your website and submit it.

This project asks you to go beyond summarizing the text, beyond simply agreeing or disagreeing with it. If it helps you to do so, you may create blog posts dedicated to summarizing the texts and articulating your opinions about the ideas developing within them for general participation points. Your reading responses will be assessed, however, on the extent to which you can think about one text in light of a different one. This requires you to have an understanding of both texts to begin with. Plan to read these works more than once.

Also, you are welcome to read and write about additional supplemental texts for general participation points.

Your reading responses will be created using Hypothes.is, using the hashtag #gsu1102s18 and the hashtag associated with the primary course reading you have annotated (#Haltman, #Ball). You will submit links to your reading responses and the reflection page using the Submission Form.

Reading Response Due Dates

Reading Response due dates per Unit:

  1. Haltman response, Unit 1: due by 11:59 pm Friday, 16 February
  2. Ball response, Unit 2: due by 11:59 pm, Friday, 30 March

Once a unit has ended, no more points will be awarded for reading responses of that unit’s readings. Late responses can be submitted for completion credit (but not for points, see late work policy below) until midnight on Friday, 20 April.

Readings

Unit 1 Readings

Primary: Kenneth Haltman, “Introduction” to _American Artifacts_, paying careful attention to his description and discussion of Prown’s object analysis assignment. (see Protected Course Readings)

Supplemental (choose one):

Unit 2 Readings

Primary: Arola, Sheppard, Ball, _Writer/Designer_, Ch. 1: “What Are Multimodal Projects?” (see Protected Course Readings)

Supplemental (choose one):

Extra Credit Readings:

Stephanie Fitzgerald, “The Cultural Work of a Mohegan Painted Basket”

Howard Rheingold, _Net Smart_, Ch. 1 (available on the Protected Course Readings page, group 2)

Reading Response Instructions

Project Purpose and Goals

Reading responses emerge in the process of a reader’s coming to understand a text, and in the case of this particular project, putting one text into conversation with another. Ultimately a strong reading response will reflect your understanding of main ideas from both texts, raise questions that arise from differences/convergences/comparisons between them, and explain difficult concepts/terms/passages.

This project is designed as an opportunity to practice gathering, summarizing, synthesizing, and explaining information from various sources.

Guidelines

  • Use Hypothes.is to annotate the primary course reading for this class
  • Your first annotation states what supplemental reading you are applying and offers a paraphrase of the text’s main ideas.
  • The rest of your annotations might: define terms and consider their significance, ask questions in light of the supplemental text, identify tensions between the primary and supplemental texts, notice where the supplemental text may help to explain the primary course reading, where the supplemental text and the primary course reading seem to be exploring and applying similar concepts, or suggest ways that your understanding of the supplemental text changes in light of the primary text, too. 
  • Your annotations might also bring in outside research via links and explanations of how those links, that information, helps shed light on one or both readings
  • Use the literary present tense (why do this?)
  • Cite paraphrased details and quotations from the supplemental text (choose one style of citation and be consistent) (why?)
  • Consider multiple modes when composing your annotations: spatial, visual, linguistic
  • After you’ve completed your annotations, walk away from the project for a bit. Finally, return to your Hypothes.is account. Read your annotations and compose a one or two paragraph reflection of your work. Your reflection might answer one or more of these questions: What was challenging about this activity? What did I learn doing it, about reading, writing, critical thinking, my own literacy practice? What did I learn about the texts? 
Reading Response Rubric

Evaluation Categories and Criteria

Below is the detailed rubric I will follow when evaluating this project. Use this rubric to guide you as you complete your reading responses, and to help you understand the score you receive for each reading response on the comparative evaluation rubric in your feedback document on Google drive.

In order to receive minimum possible points, a project must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section. Generally, speaking, this means your submitted draft must be a good faith effort to respond to the prompt and follow the project guidelines.

For higher points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section and one or more of the criteria outlined in the “Skillful/Persuasive” section. The “Skillful/Persuasive” criteria focus on use of evidence, organization, conventions, and integration of rhetorical modes.

To receive highest points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria in “Competent, Credible, Complete” and “Skillful/Persuasive” and one or more of the criteria described in the “Distinctive” section. The “Distinctive” criteria focus on maturity of rhetorical awareness, persuasiveness and originality of argument, creative use of rhetorical modes, and polish in presentation and design.

Competent, Credible, Complete (50-125 points)

Complete?The reading response was submitted on time; it comprises at least 10 Hypothes.is annotations; and it is tagged with the appropriate course, reading, and individual hashtags. Reflection is present and submitted.
Rhetorically Aware?
The reading response offers a summary of the supplemental text; it offers substantive discussion of important points, questions, terms, or problems in  the primary course reading; and it attempts to bring the primary course reading and the supplemental text into conversation
Credible?It is apparent from the reading response that the student has read and considered both the primary course reading and the supplemental text.

Skillful, Persuasive (125-200 points)

Evidence?The reading response makes a clear connection between the highlighted passages being annotated and the student’s comments and explanation.
Organization?The reading response attempts or succeeds in connecting the annotations into a cohesive, coherent summary, interpretation, and explanation of the primary course reading and the supplemental text
Modes?The reading annotation makes use of multimodal evidence and uses links, images, and other multimodal content to connect resources or create more effective summary, interpretation, and explanation of the primary course reading and the supplemental text.
Text Conventions?While some errors in spelling, grammar, and usage may be present, they do not significantly detract from the student author’s credibility.
Revision?Drafts/reflection show evidence of revision to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal. Reflection is substantial.

Distinctive (200-250 points)

Mature?Student author uses the primary course reading and supplemental text to draw out claims, explanations, evidence, and counter-arguments regarding debated or complicated terms, theories, and questions important to both pieces; the reading response acknowledges multiple points of view, or demonstrates awareness of multiple stakeholders affected by the policies or issues under discussion in the primary course reading and supplemental text.
Persuasive or Original?Reading response offers a particularly cohesive and persuasive interpretation, explanation,  and summary of both the primary text and supplemental reading, drawing on particularly relevant and credible evidence from both pieces.
Creative/Well-designed?Author makes creative use of multiple modes; or layout and design are aesthetically pleasing, rhetorically effective, and well-executed.
Polished?Project drafts/reflection provide evidence of multiple revisions to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal, and text is virtually free of grammar/punctuation/usage errors. Reflection is focused and insightful.
Primary Source Descriptions (PSDs) (500-1000 points)

Primary Source Descriptions (2) | 250-500 Points Each

For this project, you will compose a detailed essay (500+ words) offering a description of a panel or section of the AIDS Quilt. You will be working with the AIDS Quilt as a primary source. The Princeton University Library offers the following definition of a primary source:

A primary source is a document or physical object which was written or created during the time under study. These sources were present during an experience or time period and offer an inside view of a particular event. Some types of primary sources include:

  • ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS (excerpts or translations acceptable): Diaries, speeches, manuscripts, letters, interviews, news film footage, autobiographies, official records
  • CREATIVE WORKS: Poetry, drama, novels, music, art
  • RELICS OR ARTIFACTS: Pottery, furniture, clothing, buildings

You will complete your primary source description as a post on your blog and submit the link via Gradian.

PSD Due Dates

The two required primary source descriptions are due by the following dates:

  • Unit 1: 11:59 pm on Friday 16 February
  • Unit 2: 11:59 pm on Friday 6 April

As long as you submit each of the required descriptions by the due date, you can submit extra PSDs at any time until April 20th (for 100+ points per extra description). Late work can be submitted for completion credit (but not for points, see late work policy below) until 11:59 pm on April 20th.

PSD Instructions

Project Purpose and Goals

Primary source description is the first step in creating a thorough and credible analysis. This project is intended to help focus or re-focus your attention, to help you notice and document details and make new associations that you might otherwise overlook. You might experiment with a couple of different approaches—documenting your experiences of the primary source in oral or written form—before settling on one. In your description, you might experiment with different perspectives (first person, second person, that of the object itself, etc.).

Guidelines

First, observe, deeply, your primary source (a section of the AIDS quilt). Record your observation in writing with the goal of documenting as much objective detail as possible. Use the “double sided notebook” approach. It goes like this:

  1. fold a piece of notebook paper in half vertically (you can keep it in your binder)
  2. on the left side of the page, record objective facts, observations about the artifact
  3. on the right side of the page, record other things that come to mind as you observe the artifact (ideas, memories, questions, etc.)
  4. continue on the front side paper #2, leaving the back of the page open to addressing your ideas, questions, etc.and making connections between your subjective experience of the artifact and your objective rendering of it

As you record your objective observation of the artifact, questions and associations will come to mind, ideas and memories, imagined scenarios or suggestions of possibilities. This subjective experience of the artifact is important and needs to be recorded, too. The goal, however, is to cultivate an awareness of the rendering of objective detail as differentiated from other phenomena, like the generating of memories or associations.

After you complete one or two sessions with your artifact, generating double-sided notebook renderings of it, take pictures of your work and upload them to your blog site. Submit a form for this work for participation points.

NEXT…

Review your notes. You will craft them into what is called a “thick description” of your artifact, accounting for objective detail. Someone who has never seen the quilt section and hasn’t the ability of sight should be able to see it in her mind by reading your thick description. It will likely comprise at least half of your written entry for this project.

The rest of your primary source description should provide information that would enable your audience, an audience new to the AIDS quilt, to answer the following questions:

  • What is this it?
  • When was it created?
  • Who created it?
  • Where was it created?
  • Why was it created?

NEXT…

Include in your primary source description post three (3) digital images. One (1) of those images must be a of your artifact. The remaining two (2) images can depict relevant detail from your artifact (explained in the post), or images of other objects or documents (such as advertisements, songs, etc.) associated with your primary source. Good and Excellent posts might integrate more, relevant images into the composition.

NEXT…

After the thick description of the artifact, and a brief accounting of its exigency, compose another paragraph or two reflecting on this question: What are the relevant physical and rhetorical features of this source? (e.g., what materials is it constructed from, what are its dimensions/colors/textures, what does it say, what is significant about the design or process for constructing it, who were the creators and what role did they play in the events of the time, etc.?)

  1. Note: you can achieve this work by completing a series of tasks in order, as this prompt suggests. Exceptional (“mature”) final products, however, will approach the description as an essay focused on purposefully accounting for specific details of the artifact. In this light, summarizing and reporting the basic historical background of  the artifact, describing the source as a physical object, and providing an overview of the specific historical moment or rhetorical context in which your source originated happen naturally in the writing in the service of the post’s purpose and focus. So although this prompt suggests a particular order of subtasks, this is just a suggestion and not intended as a replacement for focused and uniquely developed work.  
PSD Rubric

Evaluation Categories and Criteria

Below is the detailed rubric I will follow when evaluating this project. Use this rubric to guide you as you complete your Built Environment Descriptions, and to help you understand the score you receive for each pair of posts on the comparative evaluation rubric in your feedback document on Google drive.

In order to receive minimum possible points, a project must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section. Generally, speaking, this means your submitted draft must be a good faith effort to respond to the prompt and follow the project guidelines.

For higher points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section and one or more of the criteria outlined in the “Skillful/Persuasive” section. The “Skillful/Persuasive” criteria focus on use of evidence, organization, conventions, and integration of rhetorical modes.

To receive highest points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria in “Competent, Credible, Complete” and “Skillful/Persuasive” and one or more of the criteria described in the “Distinctive” section. The “Distinctive” criteria focus on maturity of rhetorical awareness, persuasiveness and originality of argument, creative use of rhetorical modes, and polish in presentation and design.

Competent, Credible, Complete 250-325 points (Key: Needs Work, Good, Superior) 500 words

Complete?The PSD post was submitted on time; it includes substantial, cogent writing focused on one panel or section of the AIDS Quilt
Rhetorically Aware?The PSD post reflects an attempt to integrate visuals or sound and take into account readability (is the post one long paragraph?);
Credible?It is apparent from the post that the student has spent some substantial time observing the panel or section from the AIDS Quilt and has done some preliminary research about the context in which it originated and its creators

Skillful, Persuasive 325-450 points (Key: Needs Work, Good, Superior) at least 750 words

Evidence?The post includes specific, appropriate details from the panel or section of the quilt with which the student is working
Organization?The post is organized around clear focus points, developed via multiple paragraphs.
Modes?The post makes use of multimodal evidence and uses links, images, and other multimodal content to connect resources or create more effective communication of a sense of the primary source for the reader.
Text Conventions?While some errors in spelling, grammar, and usage may be present, they do not significantly detract from the student author’s credibility. Metadata is effectively employed.
Revision?Drafts/reflection show evidence of revision to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal.

Distinctive 450-500 points (Key: Needs Work, Good, Superior) at least 1000 words

Mature?The level of detail and the appropriateness of the details chosen are impressive.
Persuasive or Original?The descriptions and narratives reflect particularly observant researchers and contribute to the archive project in unique ways.
Creative/Well-designed?Author makes creative use of multiple modes; or layout and design are aesthetically pleasing, rhetorically effective, and well-executed. Metadata is particularly effectively employed.
Polished?Project drafts/reflection provide evidence of multiple revisions to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal, and text is virtually free of grammar/punctuation/usage errors.

 

Annotated Bibliographies (ABs) (300-1500 points)

Annotated Bibliography (2) | First 5 Entries (Unit 1) =100-500 points,

All ten Entries (Unit 2) = 200-1000 points 

For this project, you will conduct secondary research and compose annotated bibliographies for 10 sources you encounter during that research. At least 2 of those sources need to be “scholarly sources.” For Unit 1, you will revise the first five entries, and include annotations for five new sources, two of which are “scholarly.”

An annotated bibliography is a list of sources. It provides a complete bibliographic entry for each source (we will discuss citation practices, genre and audience so that you can choose which citation formatting to practice this semester). Unlike a general list of references or “works cited,” an annotated bibliography gives accounts for specific information that can be found in the text and serves as an evaluation of the source. Our ABs will be two paragraphs long (not including the citation), about 150-200 words, and follow a specific template (see Instructions).

Compose more bibliography annotations for more points (up to 50 points each).

Once you have completed your first five ABs, composed them on your “Annotated Bibliography” page, submit a Submission Form for the work. You may add subsequent ABs to the initial five at any time, submitting a form for the work when you are ready to receive points and feedback. All additional ABs during Unit one, above and beyond the initial five, will be counted as participation points until the start of Unit 2, 23 March.

AB Due dates

Due dates

The ten required bibliography annotations are due by the following dates:

  • Unit 1, first five ABs, due 11:59 pm, 16 February
  • Unit 2, all ten ABs 11:59 pm, 23 April

As long as you submit each of the required bibliography annotations by the due date, you can submit extra bibliography annotations at any time until 16 February (for up to 50 points per extra annotation). Late ABs can be submitted for completion credit (but not for points, see late work policy), until 20 April.

AB Instructions

How to compose an annotated bibliography:

Project Purpose and Goals: This project is designed to continue to develop your skills of summary and description. It will also help you to develop academic research skills, and learn how to evaluate the credibility and relevance of different sources. Each entry will include a bibliographic citation, but the particular type of citation formatting (MLA, APA, Chicago Manual, etc.,) will be up to you. We will discuss how and when to make those choices and what it means for your practice.

We will practice a very specific template for generating Annotated Bibliographies, but there are many ways you can do it beyond this class. (see: Instructional readings and models for the annotated bibliography: Guide to Writing: pp 221-222.)

For the purposes of our class, however, I ask that you stick to this template. We will discuss why in class, but if you have any questions or concerns about this, please come see me in office hours.

Guidelines:

When complete, your multimedia annotated bibliography should contain annotations of 150-250 words each for at least 10 sources. At least 4 of your sources should be academic pieces by scholars reporting on their work relevant to your understanding of your artifact.

The other sources may be popular or news sources, though they need to be carefully considered in terms of their rhetoricity, their particular position in historical and political context.

An annotated bibliography is more than just a summary of the source. As described on the University of Cornell Library website on “How to Prepare an Annotated Bibliography,” “the purpose of the annotation is to inform the reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited.” In addition to citations and annotations, your multimedia annotated bibliography can include links to your sources or to web references that identify where your sources can be located (e.g., in the library, on Amazon.com, on Netflix, etc.).

THE TEMPLATE

Usually I will irritate you by asking you to make your own choices in terms of how you go about composing a text. For this project, however, I am asking you to stick as closely to a prescribed formula as possible. This structure is an invention heuristic, a tool for generating a specific kind of thinking. Unless you stick to the template, however, it isn’t likely you will experience the kind of thinking I hope for you. So… for each AB, do this:

  1. Compose a bibliographic entry for the source 
  2. Skip a line
  3. Compose FIVE sentences (and ONLY four) that complete the following (and ONLY the following) tasks:
    1. Sentence one: names the author/s and gives their qualifications and quotes or paraphrases the thesis, offering in-text citation when appropriate.
    2. Sentence two: describes the kinds of evidence (if any) offered in the source (i.e. surveys, interviews, image analyses, economic data, etc.). What kind of evidence? Where does it come from? 
    3. Sentence three: articulates the purpose of the source; what does the author want to have happen in the world because of this text? (maybe… further research, shift attention or discussion, inspire change) (GET SPECIFIC)
    4. Sentence four: identifies the specific, intended audience for the text. This is NEVER “anyone” or “everyone.” Who reads the specific journal or magazine in which the article is published? Who reads the particular blog or watches the particular station?
    5. Sentence five: answers the question: who (other than yourself) might find the particular information useful and for what kind of work? (use your imagination)
  4. Skip a line
  5. Compose a brief paragraph answering this question: How does this source connect with my artifact? Perhaps it doesn’t, though you’d thought it would initially (or else why would you read it?). If this is the case, describe your initial reasons for pursuing the source and then what you actually found that makes you think it’s not such a useful source for you.

DONE!

I recommend that you compose these directly in you “Annotated Bibliography” page on your website. This will help you consider space, images, and other multimodal aspects of your work. When you compose in digital spaces, some conventions (like indenting second lines of bibliographic entries, for instance) don’t work in traditional ways and require you to consider what the original feature intended to accomplish and what you can do differently to make it work in your digital space.

Remember: Your AB page should be a multimodal experience.

Submit a form for your work by the due date.

AB Rubric

Evaluation Categories and Criteria

Below is the detailed rubric I will follow when evaluating this project. Use this rubric to guide you as you complete your annotated bibliographies, and to help you understand the score you receive for each annotated bibliography on the comparative evaluation rubric in your feedback document on Google drive.

In order to receive minimum possible points, a project must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section. Generally, speaking, this means your submitted draft must be a good faith effort to respond to the prompt and follow the project guidelines.

For higher points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section and one or more of the criteria outlined in the “Skillful/Persuasive” section. The “Skillful/Persuasive” criteria focus on use of evidence, organization, conventions, and integration of rhetorical modes.

To receive highest points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria in “Competent, Credible, Complete” and “Skillful/Persuasive” and one or more of the criteria described in the “Distinctive” section. The “Distinctive” criteria focus on maturity of rhetorical awareness, persuasiveness and originality of argument, creative use of rhetorical modes, and polish in presentation and design.

Competent, Credible, Complete 100-250 points (AB1) or 200-500 points (AB2) (Key: Needs WorkGoodSuperior)

Complete?The annotated bibliography was submitted on time; it comprises at least five (AB1) or ten (AB2) citations with annotations. IT FOLLOWS THE PROVIDED TEMPLATE, though perhaps not to a “T”.
Rhetorically Aware?The annotated bibliography is generally organized around the chosen artifact from the AIDS quilt. 
Credible?It is apparent from the annotated bibliography that the student has read and understood the cited sources.

Skillful, Persuasive 250-400 points (AB1) or 500-800 points (AB2) (Key: Needs WorkGoodSuperior)

Evidence?The annotations go beyond describing at a general level the kind of information provided in each source. Each annotation describes in specific detail the evidence, claims, findings, and conclusions offered in the source, using quotations and paraphrase with in text parenthetical documentation where appropriate.
Organization?Individual annotations are organized along the lines of the given template, though sometimes the articulation seems awkward.
Modes?The annotations use links, images, and other multimodal content to connect resources and build stronger ethos.
Text Conventions?While some errors in spelling, grammar, and usage may be present, they do not significantly detract from the student author’s credibility.
Revision?Drafts/reflection show evidence of revision to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal.

Distinctive 400-500 points (AB1) or 800-1000 points (AB2) (Key: Needs WorkGoodSuperior)

Mature?Annotated bibliography as a whole demonstrates student took care to select particularly relevant and credible sources from among those available in the library or online. Annotations collectively represent multiple points of view, help to identify important questions on which experts disagree, or provide an overview of the field or research area covered in the AB.
Persuasive or Original?Annotations offer particularly detailed and useful aspects of the cited sources. The annotated bibliography “connections” paragraph demonstrates the student author’s emerging familiarity with the important issues, methods, and theories in their chose area of research.
Creative/Well-designed?Author makes creative use of multiple modes; or layout and design are aesthetically pleasing, rhetorically effective, and well-executed.
Polished?Project drafts/reflection provide evidence of multiple revisions to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal, and text is virtually free of grammar/punctuation/usage errors.
Final Analysis Essay (AE) 1000--3500 points

Primary Source Analysis | Complete Draft=500-1500 points, Poster Presentation=250-1000 points, Revision=250-1000 points 

For this project, you will compose an analysis of your artifact. The essay will explore a deeply considered answer to this question: How does my chosen section of the AIDS quilt speak to a larger issue connected to the ongoing HIV/AIDS epidemic (in Atlanta, the US, or the world)? Ultimately you seek an understanding of what we can learn from your particular section of the quilt.

In addition to a revised version of your primary source description, your analysis will include an interpretation of artifact that offers an argument about its credibility, its relevance as historical evidence, its relationship to other primary sources being studied by your peers, and ultimately, what we can learn from your source about the complex social, scientific, political, and cultural history of AIDS in Atlanta, the US, or the world.

In your analysis, you will draw upon all of the work you have done on the previous four projects. The interpretation you offer of your artifact will be an argument, grounded in evidence you’ve discovered in your research. You will compose your analysis multimodally, using WordPress. It will most likely, therefore, make use of images, video, sound, and careful layout and design in addition to text.

Substantively, the analysis essay should be equivalent to a 1350-1750 word paper, conveying a carefully researched and supported argument that takes into account multiple points of view.

  • This writing will take the final month of the semester and will be required in 3 deliverables:
    • A formal, complete, excellent draft due Friday, 6 April, 11:59 pm
    • A poster presentation due Thursday, 19 April
    • A revised final, complete draft due Friday, 20 April, 11:59 pm

Notice that the “formal, complete, excellent draft” is worth more points than the final draft. This means that you’ll need to do most of your research and writing for the final project before the end of the semester. This will take some planning, but having an excellent draft will enable you to dedicate time and attention to revising for clarity and rhetorical effectiveness.

Analysis essay examples from previous semesters:

Analysis Essay Due Dates

Complete first draft: 6 April, 11:59 pm

Complete Poster Presentation: TBA April 16-20 (week 15)

Complete revised final draft: 20 April, 11:59 pm

Analysis Essay Instructions

Project Purpose and Goals

This project builds on skills practiced early in the semester. Skills in observation, close reading, note taking, summarizing and drawing conclusions come into play now as you seek information from additional primary and secondary sources to support a particular idea you have (or develop) about how AIDS/HIV affected/is affecting particular communities, cultures, or individuals. We will turn our attention to invention, coming up with ideas and research questions, forming lists of research terms, and finding, assessing, and using secondary sources in convincing ways within an academic setting.

Guidelines

Your analysis essay, like most of the other work you’ve completed so far, will be posted on your blog as a series of blog pages organized via menus and links.

You should draw on your research for the annotated bibliography in making your argument about the social, cultural, or political effects of AIDS/HIV. Cite and document all sources using consistent documentation style and a works cited or reference list. If you draw on the work of your peers, you should cite and document those sources as well. In addition to formal citation, you can also link to sources of information that are available digitally, including the work of your peers.

Your analysis essay will be composed in stages. We will aid each other via workshops in class, but I encourage you to organize extra peer review groups outside of class for extra points.

While you will compose your primary source analysis individually, you should keep in mind that it will be part of a larger digital exhibit comprising the work of your peers as well. Consequently, the best primary source analyses will make connections among the different sources with which the class as a whole has been working this semester. You may even decide to link to or otherwise integrate some of the items/item descriptions created by your peers.

AE Rubric

Below is the detailed rubric I will follow when evaluating all three deliverables. Use this rubric to guide you as you complete all aspects of this assignment, and to help you understand the score you receive for each part on the comparative evaluation rubric in your feedback document on Google drive.

In order to receive minimum possible points, a project must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section. Generally, speaking, this means your submitted draft must be a good faith effort to respond to the prompt and follow the project guidelines.

For higher points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria outlined in the “Competent, Credible, Complete” section and one or more of the criteria outlined in the “Skillful/Persuasive” section. The “Skillful/Persuasive” criteria focus on use of evidence, organization, conventions, and integration of rhetorical modes.

To receive highest points, the draft must must be “Good” or “Superior” on all of the criteria in “Competent, Credible, Complete” and “Skillful/Persuasive” and one or more of the criteria described in the “Distinctive” section. The “Distinctive” criteria focus on maturity of rhetorical awareness, persuasiveness and originality of argument, creative use of rhetorical modes, and polish in presentation and design.

Competent, Credible, Complete (Key: Needs WorkGoodSuperior)

Complete?The project was submitted on time; it comprises 1350 words at least; it includes a bibliographic list of sources.
Rhetorically Aware?The project demonstrates an awareness of the rhetorical situation, particularly an academic audience, and adheres to basic conventions of the blog genre.
Credible?The text offers evidence to support claims; most of the evidence comes from quality, scholarly sources and the artifact itself, and is cited.

Skillful, Persuasive (Key: Needs WorkGoodSuperior)

Evidence?The evidence stems from credible, scholarly sources and reflects a variety of perspectives; the evidence is explained within the context of the author’s argument and the artifact.
Organization?The project is organized in a clear and compelling way; navigation is clear and easy
Modes?The project makes use of multimodal evidence and uses links, images, and other multimodal content to connect resources or create a more effective argument.
Text Conventions?While some errors in spelling, grammar, and usage may be present, they do not significantly detract from the student author’s credibility.
Revision?Drafts/reflection show evidence of revision to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal.

Distinctive (Key: Needs WorkGoodSuperior)

Mature?Student author uses quotations and paraphrases strategically, particularly visualizing data and explicating evidence; the author acknowledges and addresses other viewpoints.
Persuasive or Original?Project offers a particularly cohesive and persuasive argument that goes beyond the obvious or expected, perhaps employing both primary and secondary research to achieve persuasiveness.
Creative/Well-designed?Author makes creative use of multiple modes; or layout and design are aesthetically pleasing, rhetorically effective, and well-executed.
Polished?Project drafts/reflection provide evidence of multiple revisions to improve clarity and rhetorical appeal, and text is virtually free of grammar/punctuation/usage errors
General Participation (kind of like limitless extra credit opportunities) (300-????)

Participation | 300-??? Points

Check your points in your doc on Google Drive (or email me).

~Ask not what you can do to earn credit for this course; ask what you will do to earn as many points as you possibly can.

This course is designed to give you as many choices as possible for achieving the progress, learning, and final grade you feel is possible and desirable given your current situation (in terms of resources, time, attention, and motivation) and the learning outcomes for the course.

Some students enter 1102 having experienced much practice writing and researching for academic audiences. Some even have much experience working with digital media. These students might be able to achieve high quality work without investing much time and attention in the required assignments. This course is designed to reward high quality work with high grades.

Other students, however, enter 1102 with little experience engaging concepts related to rhetoric, research, and composing with digital media. The quality of the work they produce might not achieve the highest standards, even at the end of the semester, even though they make substantial progress and acquire knowledge and skills that will be useful when the course is over. It’s not possible to become an expert in academic research and writing in one semester. This course is designed to encourage students to do as much work as they feel they need to or can do in order to see progress. The course is designed to reward quality and purposeful extra work with extra points so that high grades can be achieved by everyone.

Each week, you will earn points for required class preparation (minimum 300). Class preparation work (aka “homework) will also ensure you stay on track with reading and the research and composition process, and that everyone is prepared for class discussions, workshops, and peer review. Further, at any time during the course of the semester, you are invited to complete and submit work for extra participation points. What kind of extra work? Use your imagination!!!

Remember to submit a link via Gradian for all work you for which you want me to provide points and feedback.

Participation Due Dates

All extra submissions for Unit 1 work due Friday, 16 February, 11:59 pm. This might include:

  • Extra reading responses
  • Extra primary source descriptions
  • Extra annotated bibliographies

All extra submissions along these lines for Unit 2 work due Friday, March 23, 11:59 pm.

All other general participation points will be due on a rolling basis until Friday, April 20, 11:59. No participation points will be counted after that date/time.

 

 

Instructions/Suggestions

If you complete and earn the minimum points for all of the major projects, complete all of the class prep, and attend every class, you will earn at least 2,200 points and a grade of “C.”

If you complete all of the major projects and class prep, and accrue at least 5,355 points you will automatically receive a “B.” Once you complete all of the major projects and class prep, and accrue 5,985 points, you will automatically receive an A in the course!!!

Your points will be recorded on a Google doc, which will be shared with you and available for you to view at any time. Some times it takes me a while to do the accounting. You are always welcome to email me and ask for your points status. I will let you know!

Your instructor may give you ideas each week about extra credit opportunities that might be useful to you that week. You can also choose ideas from this list, which comprises ideas for extra work you may complete at any time during the course of the semester and submit for points:

  • Compose a blog post in response to an Activity in the First Year Guide to Writing
  • Visit the Writing Studio to work on specific writing or research skills and write a reflection post about the experience
  • Compose blog posts relating other course work or interests to the issues we discuss in class
  • Come in for an office hour visit to work on something specific with your instructor
  • Set up a study group and write a post contributing your notes from the session
  • Complete extra readings, primary source descriptions, ABs
  • Suggest something….

Each submission will receive anywhere from 10 points to 100 or more, depending on the quality of the work. Uploading an image to your image library, for instance, might earn you 10 points. Thoughtfully filling out the caption, giving attribution to the image, embedding it into a post containing a “thick description” of the image, linking to relevant information about the image, might earn you 100 points.  (instructors reserve the right to assign more points for impressively substantial, quality entries). Remember to submit a link via Gradian for all work you for which you want me to provide points and feedback.

There is no limit to the number of extra points you can earn. The work must involve the course concepts in some demonstrable way.

**Be sure to let me know when you have completed points-potential work that doesn’t automatically get counted. Generally, you will do this by writing up your work as a blog post and submitting the link to your post via the submission form. This gives me opportunity to discuss the work with you and give you general feedback you can take to your work as a whole.

css.php