Tonight we all participated in a “TinyChat” initiated by Carrie to discuss final edits and minor changes. All members had made revisions, edits, and changes during the day. I just read over the whole report and it is ready to go. It has been a great collaborative experience. I will email Steve our report is ready.
Great Semester Everyone! – Pam
Sierra, Carrie, and I had a gmail chat this evening. I’ve never done that before, just another aspect of Writing on the World Wide Web. Sierra placed her chart this morning and I worked on the methodology, charter, and summary. I also moved the methodology up. Sierra made changes, edits, and adjustments this evening. Carrie also read and made some edits and moved the chart. We all agreed that the rest of the team needs to read and make edits, changes, and/or contributions. We will meet on line tomorrow evening at 8:00. Pam
UPDATE:
I missed the chat, but have made edits to the executive summary, methodology, and solutions/recommendations. I will be going over the essay again tomorrow to proofread and make minor edits if necessary.
Aimee
Sierra & Aimee converted their note cards into pages. Dave and Carrie added links and drop down menus.
Carrie, Dave & I had a “Tinychat” this evening and agreed all is ready for students to test and comment on. Then the report will be written utilizing google.docs.
Next meeting this Wed. Aug. 11 on the patio of the Corner for a quieter space.
See You There
Pam
Aimee and Sierra presented their proto-type wireframe with two different colored note cards that represent the Writing at EMU site and Writing@emu.english. org blog. We discussed the pros and cons of the two types of pages.
Carrie gave a report of her interview with Professor Dunn. She has posted to this site.
We discussed writing the report on google docs. All participants will write up their part and I will compile.
We will meet next week same time, same place.
Notes from meeting with John Dunn, Jr.
August 2, 2010
Major in Written Communication
Three tracks: professional writing, technical communication (more practically oriented with less actual technology), and NEW writing studies.
It’s basically the study of written rhetoric if it were to break off from literature.
Writing Studies is an emerging trend within Rhet/Comp, and our new emphasis reflects that.
It’s a rhetoric major, teaching how rhetoric help students grapple with the public sphere.
For Americans today, it’s a paradox: we’re less conscious of the public sphere but also its role in our lives is more prominent. Young people can learn how to gngage in the public sphere very directly. Question the status quo. The world is the way it is because of rhetoric, persuasion; that’s how to bring about change. ENGL310 and the Writing Studies emphasis provides a place to help students to grapple with that. Today there is a lot of messiness of the public sphere and the cynicism, “I can’t change anything.” The strategies that would allow young people to make change: rhetoric!
ENGL310 and Writing Studies are curricular spaces to allow for this reflection and action. Not available in other configurations, like Poli Sci or Communications. Hybrid curricular space, invent your own audience, based on your interests.
The course is for folks who are curious, who want to read texts outside of the literary canon, who have a range of academic interests, who are interested in studying culture, intellectual background, writing for change, interested in paying attention to practice and the theoretical basis in which it takes place in society, and who want to examine things in society that we take for granted…
The course is somewhat advanced because 300-level. In the course, students discuss: where is the public sphere, what does it look like, what do writing in public sphere do? This helps lead into ENGL417 (argument). Oscillation between reading and studying theory and case studies.
Text: Tamera Draught: Strapped, issues that affect young people, maps out the playing field, looks at what were the public policy decisions that influenced peoples lives. http://www.strappedthebook.com/
Work on ways by which students can participate in the public sphere.
The course has three parts: Engagement, Analysis, and Advocacy.
1. Engagement
Assignment #1: writing a personal essay, your life right now, what are you into, what’s your life about, a paper that’s peer reviewed.
What does it say about the writer’s life, helping students fill in a matrix on the board, looking at your life as part of the sphere, “the personal is political” and VICE VERSA. Young people are often disconnected, don’t realize how public decisions affect their lives. What parts of life are constructed through political decisions, unit pulls out a set of issues students engage with. Collecting is the first thing, students pick a particular issue.
2. Analysis. Analyzing the public sphere.
3. Advocacy: how can we make a difference in our lives. Range of issues, whatever is meaningful to the student.
Beyond a traditional rhetoric course. Making rhetoric relevant in a different way. Push on/complicate current rhet theory. Public sphere is when our decision making affects others, gets things going. A lot of citizens feel disempowered, so we do a lot of detective work in the course, it’s also an important aspect, study complicated issues with no easy answers, exciting! Generate connection between things that matter, not something we can fix tomorrow. Writing to make a difference! Not about crisis rhetoric, stuff can’t be fixed immediately, fixing is the wrong metaphor, anyway. What is the rhetoric of crisis, conventions as a genre, what effect on the audience? It’s about getting attention, actively prevents long-term mind set, in a pretty limited way. ENGL310 is a place where you can talk about these issues. And students can practice advocacy themselves.
A portfolio at the end.
Steve joined us tonight and imparted this advice, “You need to create some content: more than nothing, but less than a shitload.”
The most important part of this project is to write up a brief report in which we introduce everyone and their role, describe the usability process, and include a brief plan regarding how to maintain the site in the future. Much of this will include a project charter like the one described in chapter one of Lynch (p. 38-39) including: the goal of the site (imparting info about the major and its recent changes, and getting people to sign up for the major), the intended audience, how many pages the site will include, what the audience should think after having visited the site, who will be responsible for maintaining the site once it’s complete, etc. We should also preliminarily measure the success of the site of the project.
This report should be collectively written, highlighting the problems we’re addressing and our proposed solutions. It should be roughly dozen pages. Carrie will make a Google Doc on which we can all write collaboratively.
Carrie is also meeting with Prof. John Dunn on Monday to talk about the Writ Comm major, the courses, etc.
Thinking about the context of the content: there are two sites: one on the english server where things are more static, and another on the www.writing.emuenglish.org that is more dynamic and where things can change more often because it’s easier to update.
We don’t have to worry about what the pages look like–just the content and how it is organized. It will serve as a tool for the faculty to start thinking about updating the content of the web site, including: discussions with faculty, q & a, FAQ, video testimonials, sample student work, alumni news, social media, what graduates do with the degree, and any other quirky ideas we might have.
Carrie and Dave will write up a blurb for Krause’s 328 students to invite them to participate in usability testing. We will also ask the UG students in 444.
Next meeting: Wednesday, August 4, 7:30pm at Corner Brewery.
Here’s the Doodle poll for our meeting next week!
And here are the interview questions we came up with:
Professors:
1. what are the goals and objectives of your course?
2. what should students expect from the course? What will they gain from taking it? why would they want to take it?
3. describe the major projects of the course? what is the workload like?
4. what did you consider in developing this course?
5. what should students know before they take the course? prerequisite knowledge?
6. what differentiates the emphases from one another? esp. writing studies.
7. can you recommend any students whom we could talk with about the course? any sample work we could include on the site?
Students:
1. why did you decide to take the course?
2. what did you expect from the course? what do you think you gained from taking it?
3. what did you think of the major projects in the course?
4. would you recommend this course to another student and why?
5. why did you decide to emphasize in X?
