Click here for a copy of the syllabus, rest of documents on CourseWeb.
Check this out for some digital writing resources.
Schedule
Each date shows the course reading due that day, the writing due that day, and the theme of that day. Click on the date to see a more detailed lesson plan. If the date is not hyperlinked, then the lesson plan has yet to be added. BB = reading accessible on Blackboard; readings available on the web will have their titles hyperlinked.
Reading Due: None
Writing Due: None
Theme: What’s public? How do you want to be part of that?
Reading Due: Booth (1963), “The Rhetorical Stance” (BB)
Writing Due:
Blog Post, 500-750 words (Due M, January 15 by 10am). This semester, you will spend a great deal of time researching and creating compositions in service of an issue that is in the public interest–that is, what John Dewey might see as a problem or topic of some kind that helps loosely bind a collection of citizens together to share a common interest.
You should pick something that is meaningful to you, and to help you start thinking about what you might pick, spend some time writing about your interests in things that concern the larger public and/or smaller segments of that public. Writing is not just about communication. Writing can aid thinking and it can create knowledge, because writing allows us to bring our thoughts into articulation in order to reflect back on this visible articulation. In this blog post, I want you to write a brief history of what sorts of topics that have grabbed your attention in the past and into your current moment. What do you care about? Why? What are some moments in your life where you thought, “Knowing more about this topic would help me do something about it.” As you get closer to the end of the post, start to focus in on one issue above others, and start an attempt to work through these questions in relation to that topic: What exists? How do you know? What is good? How do you know? What is possible? How do you know?
Comment on a Blog Post, at least 200 words (Due T, January 16 by 4pm). Engage with one of the blog posts that was written for Monday. You should use the writer’s own words to extend their thinking further. You might agree or disagree with the writer, but you must use sound reasoning from the reading to either extend or refute something at play in the writer’s post. In both blog posts and comments, these are spaces to try things out, and worry less about having The Right Answer.
Theme: Rhetoric and publics; forming your own “public” for your campaign
Reading Due: Bowdon and Scott (2003), “A Rhetorical Toolbox for Technical and Professional Communication” (BB)
Writing Due:
Blog Post, 500-750 words (Due M, January 22 by 10am). What makes professional writing different from other kinds of writing? In what ways does the study of rhetoric help you think about this question? Discuss several (at least two) of the concepts that Bowdon and Scott (2003) use to work through these questions (NOTE: I am counting logos/pathos/ethos as one under the overarching “rhetorical triangle” of appeals). Finally, attempt to bring together professional writing, rhetoric, and the sorts of ideas you wrestled with in your public interest blog post from last week. For example, how can you produce “professional writing” surrounding an issue that you wrote about in your public interest blog post? How does thinking about “rhetoric” assist in such work (or not)?
Comment on a Blog Post, at least 200 words (Due T, January 23 by 4pm). Engage with one of the blog posts that was written for Monday. You should use the writer’s own words to extend their thinking further. You might agree or disagree with the writer, but you must use sound reasoning from the reading to either extend or refute something at play in the writer’s post. In both blog posts and comments, these are spaces to try things out, and worry less about having The Right Answer.
Collaborative Campaign Proposal, 300-500 words (Due T, January 23 by 4pm).
Theme: Rhetoric and Professional Writing; interview plan
Reading Due: Thompson (2017), “The Four-Letter Code to Selling Just About Anything: What Makes Things Cool?”
Writing Due:
Blog Post, 500-750 words (Due by M, January 29 by 10am). Thompson claimed that Lowey believed in two opposing forces that consumers weigh: neophilia (curiosity about new things) and neophobia (a fear of anything too new). The MAYA acronym describes the framework to join these opposing forces in order to make commodities most desirable—but Thompson branches out from pure consumerism to art/entertainment, academic knowledge, identity, and songwriting. In your blog post, try to use some of the objects described in the article (e.g., industrial products, apps, naming children) and work out how they are or are not like pieces of writing–writing that benefits both from the familiar and the new. For instance: How can we think about various kinds of writing as “familiar and new” in the same way of some FX television shows as described in the article? Or, is writing more like the Marvel movie franchise? Further, to get more specific, how might MAYA apply (or not) to public and professional writing? Use a quote or passage from the article to either support or complicate your claims.
Comment on a Blog Post, at least 200 words (Due T, January 30 by 4pm). Engage with one of the blog posts that was written for Monday. You should use the writer’s own words to extend their thinking further. You might agree or disagree with the writer, but you must use sound reasoning from the reading to either extend or refute something at play in the writer’s post. In both blog posts and comments, these are spaces to try things out, and worry less about having The Right Answer.
Theme: Genre
Reading Due: None
Writing Due:
Letter to Classmate on Public Interest, 1000-1250 words (Due W, February 7 by 11:59pm).
*BRING IN-PROGRESS DRAFT TO CLASS FOR PEER RESPONSE*
Theme: Visual rhetoric and modes
Reading Due: None
Writing Due:
First Draft of Collaborative Campaign Plan (500-750 words (Due W, February 14 by 11:59pm).
*BRING IN-PROGRESS DRAFT TO CLASS FOR PEER RESPONSE*
Theme: Quantitative rhetoric
Reading Due: Park (2006), “Redesign” (BB); NCDAE (2007), “Principles of Accessible Design”; and Color Matters, “Basic Color Theory.” Click on article titles for latter two.
Writing Due:
Blog Post, 500-750 words (Due M, February 19 by 10am). Park (2006) is writing with print texts rather than digital texts, while the accessibility factsheet is mostly focused on digital texts. So, I am asking you to do three things in this blog post: 1) What commonalities are there between print and digital texts when it comes to “good” design principles? 2) What commonalities are there between accessible texts and “good” design, no matter if the medium is print or digital? 3) What about color? How might good use of color coordinate well with accessible design, or, conversely, clash with it? When done thinking through these three questions, try (your best!) to tie these thoughts together: how does one balance being accessible and incorporating good design? Or, does such a question overstate how much accessibility and “good” design might clash?
Comment on a Blog Post, at least 200 words (Due T, February 20 by 4pm). Engage with one of the blog posts that was written for Monday. You should use the writer’s own words to extend their thinking further. You might agree or disagree with the writer, but you must use sound reasoning from the reading to either extend or refute something at play in the writer’s post. In both blog posts and comments, these are spaces to try things out, and worry less about having The Right Answer.
By 11:59pm on Feb 19, please email me what kind of campaign piece you are composing for 2/28.
*Make sure you have your interviews done by this date!!*
Theme: Design and Accessibility
Reading Due: None
Writing Due:
Campaign Piece One, about 1000 words of “work” (i.e., some of you may be using images, web design, sound, and moving through modes that require few or no printed words). (Due W, February 28 by 11:59pm)
*BRING IN-PROGRESS DRAFT TO CLASS FOR PEER RESPONSE*
Theme: Working with sound
Week 9: Tuesday, March 6 (no class)
Reading Due: None
Writing Due: None
Theme: Taking stock of where you are
**WE ARE MEETING IN CL G27 (GROUND FLOOR COMPUTER LAB). BRING HEADPHONES.**
Reading Due: None
Writing Due: None
Theme: Working with video
*NOTE: By 3/14 at the end of the day, send me what you are doing for Campaign Piece 2!!*
Reading Due: Ridolfo and DeVoss (2009), “Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery”
Writing Due:
Blog Post, 500-750 words (Due M, March 19 by 10am). Writing for a public often means that you want your worldview and argument to circulate very widely; thus, rhetorical velocity can become an important concept to keep in mind when writing and revising. How can you “compose for strategic recomposition”? How can you compose your documents in such a way that readers can use them to make something else? What rhetorical choices can you make to encourage others to use your documents in such a way that it will contribute positively to the goals of your campaign? As Ridolfo and DeVoss ask, “what does it mean to compose with recomposition in mind?” In this blog post, use a passage from Ridolfo and DeVoss (2009) that most closely aligns with the sort of problem your own campaign might encounter when it comes to delivery. How might rhetorical velocity, as a concept, help you plan delivery for your campaign documents? What about this passage helps you to think through this question?
Comment on a Blog Post, at least 200 words (Due T, March 20 by 4pm). Engage with one of the blog posts that was written for Monday. You should use the writer’s own words to extend their thinking further. You might agree or disagree with the writer, but you must use sound reasoning from the reading to either extend or refute something at play in the writer’s post. In both blog posts and comments, these are spaces to try things out, and worry less about having The Right Answer.
Theme: Delivery and circulation
Reading Due: Tufekci (2015), “Algorithmic Harms Beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent Challenges of Computational Agency”
Writing Due:
Blog Post, 500-750 words (Due M, March 26 by 10am). What do you think Tufekci means by “algorithmic gatekeeping”? Or, for that matter, the word “agency” in the context of this article? As public writers, what is valuable about thinking of algorithms in such a way? Use passages from Tufekci’s article to help support your points. Finally, see if you can use one or more of Tufekci’s examples or anecdotes as a way to think about how one of your campaign pieces might be aided or restricted by “algorithmic gatekeeping.”
Comment on a Blog Post, at least 200 words (Due T, March 27 by 4pm). Engage with one of the blog posts that was written for Monday. You should use the writer’s own words to extend their thinking further. You might agree or disagree with the writer, but you must use sound reasoning from the reading to either extend or refute something at play in the writer’s post. In both blog posts and comments, these are spaces to try things out, and worry less about having The Right Answer
Campaign Piece Two, about 1000 words of “work” (i.e., some of you may be using images, web design, sound, and moving through modes that require few or no printed words). (Due W, March 28 by 11:59pm)
*BRING IN-PROGRESS DRAFT TO CLASS FOR PEER RESPONSE*
Theme: Agency and technology
Reading Due: None
Writing Due:
Pedagogical Object Proposal, 250 words, (Due T, April 3 by 4pm). See syllabus for prompt.
Collaborative Campaign Plan Presentation (about 5-7 minutes) (Due at the time of presentation during class). See syllabus for prompt.
Theme: Collaborative writing; Feedback on plans for rhetorical delivery and circulation across media
Reading Due: None
Writing Due:
Collaboratively written final campaign plan (1250-1500 words) (Due W, April 11 by 11:59pm)
Work on revisions, have one revision-in-progress ready for a peer to read for in-class peer response.
Theme: Reflecting, revising, teaching
Reading Due: None
Writing Due:
Be prepared to discuss pedagogical objects and writing to a public activity.
Work on revisions, have one revision-in-progress ready for a peer to read for in-class peer response.
Theme: Reflecting, revising, teaching; What do you think? What comes next? How do you keep this going?
Tuesday, April 24
Turn in final projects by 4pm to BB (see syllabus for prompts):
- Revision of Letter on Public Interest (about 1250 words)
- Revision of Campaign Piece One or Campaign Piece Two
- Reflection on Work and Self-Assessment on Collaborative work (about 500 words)
- Pedagogical Object
