1. What focus is set up in the introduction? Does this focus accurately forecast the "findings" with some specificity?
2. Where /how does the essay meet each criteiron on the assignment sheet?
3. What makes the findings non-trivial? (richness contributed by the personal experience; specific observations coupled with logical explanations/interpretations for what those specific observations mean)
4. How/where does the essay use detailed particular expereinces? Where would it benefit from more development?
5. What do the experiences illustrate with respect to the focus?
In your groups, you took turns reading your essays to each other. Then you discussed the above to ensure that the draft essay met the requirements for the assignment.
Discussion of Rose:
Introduction is a model for an academic research essay! introduces the problem, states (clearly and with some particularity) what his essay adds to the discussion.
Focus of essay: Stated at the end of the third paragraph.
Terms to define:
Rules, algorithms, heuristics, plans, set
Overview of findings:
Algorithms rather than heuristics
Questionable heuristics made algorithmic
Set
The plan that is not a plan
Feedback
Too many rules resulting in conceptual conflict
Write: do you have any - conscious or not so conscious- rules or plans in your writing process? How do they work for you?
For next week:
Read: Selections from Arola, Sheppard and Ball: Writer/Designer: A Guide to Making Multimodal Projects
Write: Post the revised (final) Process Narrative, your summary of the peer review from your group for your essay (the comments from your group); and all assignments for the unit to your portfolio
What is due for the process narrative:
writing on invention 1,28
writing on drafting 2.11
writing on revision 2.25
draft process narrative 3.24
peer comments 4.8
due with final draft 4.8
No comments:
Post a Comment