Unit 3 Assignments

Before you leave class, please send me a link to the following documents. Ensure that all documents are shared with my correct email address.

• All Unit 3 Feeder Assignments
• Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Script (11/27)
• Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Audio (11/29)

Posting Your VoiceThread to Your Blog

1. Go back to voicethread.unc.edu and click on the “My Voice” tab. Click on the VoiceThread you wish to post.

2. Click the menu icon at the top left of the screen then click “edit.” Click the button at the bottom of the screen that says “Playback Options” and enter 0 as the time to wait between slides and check the button that says “Start playing when opened.” Click the “Save” button.

3. Click the button at the bottom of the screen that says “Publishing Options.” Check the box that says “Allow Anyone at UNC to View.” Click “Save.” 

4. Click the button at the bottom of the screen that says “Embed.” Copy the code in the box labeled “Embed Code” (just clicking anywhere in the box will copy the code for you). Go to blogger.com, log in, and click the button to make a new post. Click the button on the top left that says “html,” then paste in the code you copied earlier. Give your post a title and hit “Publish.”

5. Ask a groupmate or friend to open the VoiceThread on their computer by going to your blog. If your friend can’t open it for some reason then I won’t be able to either and I won’t be able to grade your assignment! Please contact me if you have any technical difficulties posting to the blog.

Screencast: Assembling Your VoiceThread

Screencast: Splitting Your Audio into Multiple mp3s

Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Audio

11/29/12

Name: 

Compose a retrospective outline of the VoiceThread’s audio component. You may want to give you partner the images you plan to use so that s/he can follow along. Your outline should be fairly short... certainly not more than half a page long.

After you compose the outline, evaluate the draft’s organization. Is the draft appropriately weighted toward analysis of the image itself? Does the argument proceed in a logical manner? Does the author relate each section to the thesis statement clearly and directly? Note any sections that seem inconsistent, extraneous, or under-developed.

In addition to those questions, compose at least three questions that you would like your partner to answer about your draft:

1. 

2. 

3. 

Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Script

11/27/12

Name:

1. Does the author’s introduction follow one of the templates for effective introductions we discussed in class (refer to your notes if you have to)? If not, suggest specific strategies (such as an anecdote mentioned later in the draft or some other detail) the author might use to craft a more effective introduction.

2. The assignment notes that the VoiceThread should contain a sustained analysis of the artwork’s formal qualities. In other words, the largest part of the draft should be devoted to analyzing the piece of art directly, rather than the contextual information the author connects it to. Does the draft meet this requirement? 

3. Evaluate the author’s thesis statement. Does it do all three things that we noted a strong thesis statement should do? 

4. 

5. 

Turning in Unit 2 Work

As you did at the end of Unit 1, please send me a link to the following files:

All Unit 2 Feeder Assignments

Unit 2 Brainstorming / Pre-Writing (October 11)

Radiolab Homework Assignment (October 23)

Lucy Podcast Group Discussion (October 23)

Unit 2 Data Sheet Workshop (October 25)

Model Podcast Discussion (November 1)

Draft Workshop: Podcast Script (November 1)

Draft Workshop: Results & Discussion Script (November 6)

Draft Workshop: Podcast Audio (November 8)

Draft Workshop: Unit 2 Project (November 13)

PLEASE double check that all documents are shared with my correct email address and all assignments are clearly labeled with your name and the date of the assignment.

Posting Your Podcast to Your Blog

GarageBand

At the top of your screen, click “Share” and then “Export song to disk.” 

Make sure the box next to “Compress” is checked, and change “AAC Encoder” to “mp3 Encoder.” 

Change “High Quality” to “Good Quality.” Click Export and choose a location for your file.

Audacity (Windows)

Click this link for an explanation of how to install the MP3 codec: 

http://wiki.audacityteam.org/index.php?title=Lame_Installation#Windows_Instructions

Once you have the codec installed, open your podcast in Audacity and go to File > Export. Choose a location and a name for your file, then where it says “Format” choose “MP3 files” and click Save. The first time you export an mp3 you may need to locate the mp3 codec you installed above. 

This is a little more complicated! But if you run into problems you can rely on me and your group members.

Audacity (Mac)

Download this file and save it to your computer in a place you’ll remember (I suggest Applications / Audacity). Don’t actually open the file, just download it:

Codec

Next, open your podcast in Audacity and go to File > Export. Choose a location and a name for your file, then where it says “Format” choose “MP3 files” and click Save. The first time you export an mp3 you will need to locate the mp3 codec you installed above. 

This is a little more complicated! But if you run into problems you can rely on me and your group members.

Posting Your Podcast to the blog

Now you should have an mp3 file of your podcast somewhere on your computer. From here, follow the instructions in this screencast to post your podcast to your blog:

Example VoiceThread

http://uncquartet.blogspot.com/2010/12/bruegel-protest-through-death.html

Draft Workshop: Unit 2 Project

Make your own draft workshop

Since many of you are at different stages of the drafting process, today you will compose all of the questions for your workshop. You can either compose new questions entirely or you can copy and paste questions from previous workshops. Please include at least 3 questions.

11/13/12

Name: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Francis Bacon: Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion

Podcast Audio Workshop

Listen to your partner's podcast at least once without stopping, then answer the following questions in the Google Doc where that person kept his or her script.

11/8/12

Name: 

1. Describe the author's implementation of the middle style. Is it a higher or lower take on the middle style? Does the author come off as a credible scientist? What aspects of the podcast contribute most to the author's voice? Be as specific as possible.

2. Do you zone out or become disoriented at any point in the podcast? At what point does the author lose your attention? Does s/he read too slowly or too quickly? Is the recording clear and easy to understand?

3. Describe how the author has implemented post-production techniques such as the addition of music, sound effects, etc. Do these help you to understand the content of the podcast or do they distract you from it?

4. Has the author done everything required for both the Introduction and Methods and Materials sections? Is this information clearly highlighted? Does the author do a good job of explaining the experiment without summarizing the results? Does the podcast sound too much or not enough like a proper scientific research report? What changes might the author make in order to enhance his or her credibility or come off as more approachable? 

Now, read these questions and then listen to the podcast again, thinking about how you will answer each question. If you need to listen again, rewind and listen to part of the podcast again. When you're done, answer these questions:

1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? Do you think the reader will be "hooked" within 10-15 seconds? Can the author's attention-getter be described as one of the more or less effective introductions we talked about? Explain your answer.

2. At what point does the author transition from the Introduction section to the Methods and Materials section? Describe how this transition takes place and how the author signals to the reader that s/he should be listening for a new idea. Identify any other transitions that are unclear or confusing. 

3. Is the hypothesis highlighted clearly? Can the author be absolutely sure that even a casual listener will understand the experiment's hypothesis? How does the author highlight this information? How might it be highlighted more clearly?

After you have answered all of these questions in the Google Doc, take 5 minutes to converse with your author, explaining both your answers to the questions as well as any more general or specific comments that didn't come up in your written feedback. Also, feel free to share any tips for using the recording software that the author might find helpful.

Draft Workshop: Results & Discussion Script

11/6/12

Name: 

1. How has the author summarized the data that she or he collected in the experiment? Does this summary feel like an onslaught of numbers? Is it disorienting, or do can you process them all as the author is explaining them? How might he or she deal with this material more clearly?

2. Does the author restate clearly the original hypothesis and how the data proved or disproved that hypothesis? How could this information be better highlighted so that the listener will be sure not to miss it?

3. How does the podcast end? Is the ending effective? Why or why not?

4. How might the author interject another voice in a way that would make the podcast both clearer and more interesting?

5. What parts of the podcast do you think will be essential to highlight with music, sound effects, etc.? In other words, what are the most important transitional moments in the podcast? Does the author indicate how s/he will deal with these effectively? Suggest ways in which the use of music and sound effects might be improved.

Podcast Script Workshop 1

1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? Does the author follow one of the strategies for effective introductions that we talked about in class? 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. The draft should 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? 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?" 

Model Podcast Discussion

Listen to the following podcast:

http://uncquartet.blogspot.com/2010/11/charlottes-feeder-22.html

As you listen, think about your answers to the following questions:

What signals the listener that the author is beginning a new section or introducing a new idea? 

How does the author deal with the problem of representing charts, graphs, etc. in the audio format? Do you think she is successful?

Evaluate the author’s introduction and hypothesis statement. Are they effective? Why or why not?

How has the author used music and sound effects to make the podcast clearer? Are there any sections that might have used these tools more effectively?

Does the author achieve an appropriate level of scientific credibility? Why or why not?

Sample Podcast Scripts

https://docs.google.com/document/d/125yiArwhNXUKzrpxt8vw4O9QeHrRGIAgW4g3dq_Tt90/edit

Unit 2 Data Sheet Workshop

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. Examine your partner’s outline closely and answer the following questions in the same Google Doc with the sheet:

Name:

10/25/12

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?

Intro to Podcasting Software

Go to http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ and download the latest version of Audacity (note: you’re welcome to use another program like GarageBand or Adobe Premiere with the caveat that I can only provide limited technical support for these programs).

Audacity comes equipped with tools to record your voice, but you will also need to add music and sound effects to your podcast. The best site to find free and legal sound clips for your podcast ishttp://www.freesound.org/ (note: registration is required, but they will not spam you).

Spend some time playing with the technology and getting comfortable with it. Before we finish this activity, I would like each of you to practice:

• recording your voice
• importing a sound file from FreeSound or some other source
• moving an audio clip to a different spot on the timeline
• editing audio (i.e. cutting, copying, or pasting something from one part of the timeline to another)
• applying filters or effects to an audio clip (i.e. fade in/out, reverb, etc.)

Feeder 2.4 Example Data Sheets

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wtFqAdeVDpFB6-Un6a3uZA6yGEOmhqPnOLuLf0RUnZw/edit?hl=en_US

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LhEdfvSMNl76jckOUPyheqcLnjF1sfSzI29MyRA0AgU/edit?hl=en_US 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z2i3A0CRM_6t74NvN9xX8PiR4150BArsjJFpl6BwfSo/edit?hl=en_US

Lucy Podcast: Group Discussion

Answer the following questions in your groups. Place your answers in a new Google Doc titled "Lucy Podcast: Group Discussion" and don't forget to share it with me. Each group should create one Google Doc.

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?

Fall Break: RadioLab Assignment

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

http://www.radiolab.org/2010/feb/19/lucy/

or you can download the mp3 directly here: 

http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/audio.wnyc.org/radiolab/radiolab040910a.mp3

As you are listening, compose a retrospective outline of the podcast. Post this outline in a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s RadioLab assignment." Share this Google Doc with me. Your outline is due by class time on Tuesday, October 23.

Unit 2 Pre-Writing Activity

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, create 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. Please make sure to share the document with me.

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? 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 begin researching for your Feeder 2.2 assignment. If any new items for your 3 columns occur to you during your research, please return to this assignment.

Unit 1 Assessment

Take a moment to look back at the earliest drafts of your Unit 1 Project. 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.

Unit 1 Wrap-Up

Read the following article:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2012/10/shinya_yamanaka_s_nobel_prize_he_saved_embryos_not_just_stem_cell_research_.html 

For each of the following items, work together in your groups to rate the author’s performance as weak, proficient, or strong. For each item, explain your answer by noting, for instance, how the thesis statement provides a roadmap and makes the topic meaningful, which style of introduction the author chooses, or how the author cites sources. Each group should create one Google Doc. 

• Post has a strong thesis statement that makes a substantial claim about the topic, lays out a roadmap for the essay, and makes the topic meaningful for the blog’s audience 
• Post is logically organized with a strong paragraph structure 
• Post has a strong introduction that grabs the reader’s attention, introduces the topic, and transitions quickly to the main argument. 
• Post successfully employs outside research to support the main claim 
• Post successfully achieves a middle style tone appropriate for the blog’s audience 
• Post achieves a strong, active voice by avoiding the over-use of “to be” verbs and prepositions 
• Post cites sources appropriately 
• Post is well-formatted and free of obvious errors in grammar, punctuation, etc.

Posting Your Unit 1 Project

It’s finally time to post your unit project to your blog! Before you post, exchange your draft with someone in your group and have them proofread it (i.e. checking for mistakes in spelling, grammar, etc.). Feel free to ask me if you have any grammar questions. Once your post is proofed and ready to go, log in to blogger.com and post it! Don’t forget to:

• begin by pasting in your text, selecting all of it, then clicking the remove formatting button (the T with the X over it). If you don’t complete this step you will almost certainly run into trouble formatting your post. 
• give your post a substantive title (i.e. not “Unit 1 Project” or something similar) 
• include your works cited list (formatted according to the style sheet your group created earlier this semester) 
• credit any pictures or other multimedia content if their creative commons license requires attribution 

After your post is live, have another member of your group look it over, making one more check for spelling and grammatical mistakes and also checking for formatting problems and inconsistencies. Your post will be considered submitted at the end of the class period.

Turning in Your Other Assignments 

Just to make sure that I have all of the work that you have completed for this unit, I want you to email me a list of links to the assignments you have completed on Google Docs. Here are the assignments I’m expecting:

• Feeder 1.1 
• Feeder 1.2 
• Feeder 1.3 
• Feeder 1.4 
• Activity: Argument (analysis of 9/11 memorial article) 
• Introduction to Draft Workshops (your group’s comments on the sample draft) 
• Draft Workshop #1: Introduction (completed using the sample workshop questions above) 
• Draft Workshop #2: Organization (retrospective outline) 
• Draft Workshop #3: (these questions: http://lupton105032.blogspot.com/2012/09/draft-workshop-2-unit-1-project.html) 
• Draft Workshop #4: Style (these questions:http://lupton105032.blogspot.com/2012/09/draft-workshop-style.html) 
• Draft Workshop #5: Editing (rewriting the intro paragraph using the Paramedic Method) 

First, make sure that each of your Google Docs is shared with my correct email address. Next, email me (at my gmail address) links to each of the documents where you completed the assignments. Since multiple assignments will be in some Google Docs, your list might be formatted like this:

http://www.google.com/drive/link#1

• Feeder 1.1 
• Feeder 1.2 
• Feeder 1.3 
• Feeder 1.4 

http://www.google.com/drive/link#2 

• Draft Workshop #1: Introduction (completed using the sample workshop questions above) 
• Draft Workshop #2: Organization (retrospective outline) 

etc.

Editing Workshop: 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.

Sample draft: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Suz0bWWwnJyP5MSnHc0QJVQxf2EzeTyOMzBsH26aN10/edit

Draft Workshop: Style

Name:
9/27/12 

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.

Draft Workshop #2: Unit 1 Project

Name:
9/25/12

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.

Draft Workshop: Organization

Compose a retrospective outline of your partner's paper. Examine the outline for coherence, repetition, overall logic and transitions, and whether you answered the prompt. Write your notes and/or suggestions below the outline.

Second, assess whether the author's primary focus at this point should be conceptual concerns, organizational concerns, or surface-level concerns. Explain your answer with evidence from the draft.

Intro to Draft Workshops

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IWWW1IZcjfHSAIKnodo1FGaNmlANp2oj-GydgpryrV0/edit

Sample workshop form questions. Discuss your answers in your groups:

Name:
9/20/12

1. Summarize, as briefly as possible, the author's main claim. Is it substantive? Could another person reasonably challenge or oppose it? 

2. Which of the categories we talked about on Tuesday does the author's introduction fit into? Is it one of the more effective or less effective introductions? If it is one of the less effective introductions, suggest ways that the author might use one of the more effective introduction strategies. 

3. A strong introduction should be concise; it should use one of the effective introduction strategies, then transition as quickly as possible to the thesis statement. Are there any sentences in the draft that are extraneous? Could the line between the introduction and the thesis statement be any straighter? If necessary, copy and paste the introduction paragraph below, deleting any sentences you find extraneous. 

4. Scan the draft for any sentences that seem wordy or difficult to understand, as well as forms of the verb "to be." Paste these sentences below and attempt to revise them, trying your best to use simple sentence forms in which a subject, strong action verb, and direct object come in that order. 

5. Compose a list of TWO things that the author should do to improve his or her draft. 

Post this list and your answers to the workshop questions in a Google Doc and be sure to share it with me. Each group should have only one Google Doc.

Activity on Appeals

Read the following article from slate.com: 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2010/09/the_privilege_of_prejudice.single.html 

This article contains appeals of all three types: ethos, pathos, and logos. Work in your groups to identity at least one of each type of appeal in the article. Which of these appeals is most persuasive to you? Why do you think that is the case? In which order does the author present these appeals? Why do you think he chose that order?

Activity: Your Blog's Citation Conventions

Good citations accomplish the following goals: 

• They allow you to show how your argument is built upon the ideas of others. 
• They allow you to indicate which ideas are taken from others, and from whom those ideas were taken; in other words, to give credit where it's due. 
• They allow the interested reader to follow your argument and confirm its logic by investigating the ideas on which the argument is built, or to further explore those ideas on their own. 

Activity: Your Blog’s Citation Conventions 

Using the formal APA, MLA, and Chicago styles (refer to the relevant sections on the Library's Citation Tutorial (http://www.lib.unc.edu/instruct/citations/) for details), work with your group members to draft a rationale for how and why you will cite your sources on your blog. Compose a short, 2-3 paragraph essay that explains:

1. Why your group thinks that citing sources is important.

2. How citations will be implemented on your blog. This should take the form of a rough style guide like this one for MLA format: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/06/. You need only explain the format for the types of references you anticipate using most on your blog.

3. A short rationale for how and why you chose the citation style you agreed upon.

Post this essay to your blog by class time on Thursday, September 13.

Tutorial: Citations

Go to the library's tutorial on citations and read the "Introduction" and "Why We Cite" sections:

http://www.lib.unc.edu/instruct/citations/

STOP WHEN YOU GET TO SECTION ON APA

Grading Rubrics

Rubric for in-class assignments
0: The assignment was not completed or barely attempted.

1: The assignment was only partially completed; OR, the assignment was completed with only minimal effort and attention.

2: The assignment was completed satisfactorily. All tasks have been completed with thought, care, and attention to detail.

3: The assignment was completed in an exemplary fashion. The student has gone above and beyond the teacher’s expectations by devoting extraordinary time and effort to the assignment and/or producing innovative and thought-provoking work.

Rubric for workshops and feeders

0: The workshop was not completed.

1: The workshop was only partially completed; OR, the workshop was completed with only minimal effort and attention. The workshop partner has not received substantial information that will help him or her to improve the essay.

2: The workshop was completed with less than satisfactory effort. Answers to one or more draft workshop form questions are minimal or dismissive, and there is little evidence that the author has engaged seriously with the draft. The feedback provided will allow the workshop partner to make only surface-level or localized revisions.

3: The workshop was completed satisfactorily. The author has provided thoughtful answers to all draft workshop questions, and these questions should allow his or her workshop partner to make substantive and helpful revisions.

4: The workshop was completed with particular care and diligence. All answers to workshop questions are thoughtful, detailed, and well developed. Inline comments may also appear, pointing out issues not highlighted by the draft workshop form. The workshop partner can use this information to significantly improve his or her essay.

5: The workshop was completed in an exemplary fashion. All draft workshop questions have comprehensive, detailed answers that show not only attention to detail, but also a creative and innovative engagement with the workshop. Inline comments may also provide helpful feedback not related to the workshop questions. The workshop partner can use this information to drastically improve his or her essay.

Superbug Blog

Take a few minutes to check out the Superbug blog here:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/superbug

Think about how this blog presents itself differently than ScienceBlog.com, which we looked at last week. With your group, discuss any difference in how the author presents herself, the author’s target audience, and the main features and conventions of the text. We’ll discuss your findings as a class.

Accessing Nature

Click here for instruction on how to access Nature through UNC’s Library web site:

http://lupton105032.blogspot.com/2012/09/accessing-nature-revised.html

Take a few minutes to browse the editorials in recent issues. If you find an article you might consider using for your Feeder 1.1 assignment, write down the title, author, and issue number so that you can find it again later. Feel free to discuss articles with your group members as you find them.

Activity: Argument

http://www.slate.com/id/2302983/

Work together in groups of 4 or 5 to answer the following questions about this article:

• What is the article's main claim?
• What are the author's most important reasons presented in support of that claim? Identify at least 3.
• Does the author offer any qualifications of his claim?
• Can you identify any assumptions that a reader might disagree with?
• Is the author's argument convincing? Why or why not?

Write your answers collaboratively in a Google Doc and share it with my gmail address.

Link to Slate Article

http://www.slate.com/id/2263787

Drafting Your General Introduction

In addition to your personal introductions, your blog should also include a general introduction in which you explain the overall goals of your blog, its target audience, and its subject matter. This blog should orient your readers, much like the introduction page of a book. Work together to brainstorm what your introduction should include and start working on the first draft in the Google Doc so everyone can see and edit it.

Draft Workshop: Intro Post

After everyone has pasted their intros successfully, read each of them and then re-read your own introduction. Ask yourself the following questions:

1. Do all of the posts follow the same format? Are they of comparable lengths? Do they employ a similar authorial voice?

2. Are all of the posts consistent with the blog identity you talked about on Tuesday? Why or why not?

3. Did you notice any grammatical, spelling, or formatting errors in your or any of your groupmates' drafts?

Based on your answers to these questions, take 5 minutes or so to revise your introduction on the Google Doc.

Pre-Writing: Introductory Post Assignment

In your groups, start the conversation about what you want your blogs to look like. Please brainstorm on a new Google Doc… it helps get ideas out without judging them. Here are some places you might start:

Who are you as authors? What do you and your group-mates have in common that might give the blog a coherent identity?

Who do you want to write to? What is this population like? What background information do they have? What assumptions or biases will they have?

How will you establish your credibility? Why should your audience trust you as authors? How will you convey this to your audience?

Make sure to share your Google Doc with me so that I can give you credit for the assignment

Facebook Activity

Get into groups of 2 or 3 within your regular workshop groups. Help one other person in your group find your Facebook profile. You can either friend the person so they can see all of your information, or you can leave them with only the information that non-friends can see. Once you have looked at one of your group members’ profiles, answer the following questions

Write at least four adjectives that describe this person based solely on their Facebook profile.

For each adjective, explain which parts of the profile led you to use the adjective you did.

Consider you are the administrator for a Study Abroad program trying to determine whether to admit the student. How would viewing their Facebook profile affect your decision? In this professional / academic context, do you view the student more or less favorably?

Post the answers to your questions in a new Google Doc and share it with me and the person whose profile you looked at. Title this document “Facebook Activity: [your name]”

Activity: Online Self-Presentation

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/author/brandon9keim/

Though you have only begun thinking about what your blogs will look like this semester, it’s never too early to begin thinking about self-presentation. Take 3-4 minutes to jot down thoughts about how you want to come across on your author page. Try to use the same kind of adjectives we used to describe the author of the blog we just talked about. If you get stuck, consider the communication triangle. What kind of text are you writing? Who are your readers? Your answers to these questions (even if they change in the coming weeks) will help determine how you want to present yourself as an author. 

Once you come up with at least 4 or 5 adjectives, begin brainstorming ways in which you can create this impression in your readers. Post your work in a comment on this post.

Activity: Science Blog Conventions

http://scienceblog.com/

1. What were your first impressions when you clicked on the blog? Were you drawn in? Were you pushed away? Explain your answers.

2. What is the ratio of text to images and multimedia content on the blog’s front page? Do you think the blog has too much of one or the other? Why or why not?

3. What kind of audience is this blog for? Give me a quick character sketch of the blog’s prototypical reader… what are his or her other interests? What kind of background, etc.? Would you be friends with this person? How do you know this blog is for that person?

4. What do you think of the blog’s layout? Does it look up-to-date or does it look old? What do you think the web designer’s goals were? Do you think the site achieves these goals?

5. How would you characterize the tone of the writing on the site? Is it easy or difficult to understand? What age group or education level does the author seem to be writing for?

Activity: Finding Blog

Go to google.com/blogsearch and find a blog post that you like. Try to search for specific things to find recent posts… so instead of searching for “Carolina Basketball” maybe search for “Carolina Clemson” to find analysis of last night’s game. To find a more recent post click “last day” or “last week” on the left hand side of the page.

Look at a bunch of different posts and blogs and try to find one that you would consider returning to regularly. Once you have decided on a post, copy and paste the following questions into the comment window on this post and answer them with a sentence or two each:

Name:

Link to your blog post:

1. What did you search for to find this post?
2. What made you choose this post rather than others you looked at?
3. What kind of introduction does the post have? How does the writer try to hook his or her reader?
4. What do you think of the blog’s layout? Is it inviting or intimidating?
5. How does the blogger conceive of his or her audience? Is it for insiders or outsiders? What kinds of knowledge does the author assume of his or her reader? Are these assumptions true of you?

Diagnostic Writing Assignment

For your first assignment for this course, I would like you to write a short, impromptu essay about your personal history as a writer and your goals for this course. 

Begin by reading the following questions and thinking about them for at least a minute or two. Take your time both thinking about the questions and composing your response. You have until the end of the class period to finish your essay, but this should only take most of you around 10 minutes or so.  

• What role does writing play in your life? Do you write daily? Just for school? 

• Do you consider yourself a strong writer? What are your personal strengths and weaknesses? 

• How do you think writing is important to your long-term academic goals? 

• What writing courses have you taken? What did they teach you? What do you wish they taught you?

I will use these essays to place you into workgroups. You will remain in these workgroups for the entire semester and work with the other students to build and complete your blogs and workshop one another's writings. I do my best to create groups whose members share common interests, backgrounds, and goals, so the more you can tell me about your personal history and goals as a writer the more likely that you will be placed in a group that will help you to achieve these goals.

Introductory Post Assignment

For your first writing assignment this semester, your group will collaborate on an introductory post for your blog. Your post should accomplish 3 main goals:

1. Introduce each group member (including a photo of each person).

2. Establish the subject of your blog, i.e. give your readers a sense of what you will be writing about this semester.

3. Establish the tone and rhetorical style of your blog.

We will spend the first few days of class discussing a number of different blogs and what does and does not work about each. You will also engage in discussions amongst your group members, during which you will negotiate a coherent and appropriate rhetorical approach for your blog based on a target audience that you work together to identify. You should take into account each group member's interests as well as their strengths as writers, since you will be expected to adhere to this plan throughout the semester.

A successful post will (in order of importance):

1. Establish a rhetorical tone that is appropriate to the blog's subject matter and target audience. Not only will the post address this topic explicitly (i.e. a section of the post that will explain the authors' rhetorical approach), but also implicitly through the tone and style of the post itself.

2. Inform your readers about what they can expect from the blog's content over the course of the semester. In addition to explaining the blog's main subject areas (i.e. natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities), an outstanding post will will give a sense of the authors' unique approach to these subjects.


3. Introduce each of the blog's authors in a manner that emphasizes their credibility as authors as well as the common ground they share with their audience.

4. Be free of errors in spelling and grammar.

5. Be formatted in an appealing and consistent manner.

Length: at least 3-4 paragraphs

Course Calendar

Unit 1 Assignments

The natural sciences are often viewed as disciplines based on cold, hard fact, in contrast to the humanities which appear to be based on subjective opinion. In this unit we will challenge this view by examining controversy in the scientific community. What is up for debate in the natural sciences? Are these disciplines really as factual and as rational as popular perception would have them to be?

In this unit you will enter into a current scientific controversy, researching and evaluating evidence and learning how to shape that evidence into a focused and powerful argument. Each student will choose an editorial from a current issue of the scientific journal Nature, working to understand that author’s argument and develop your own counter-argument. You can find a tutorial for accessing Nature here (http://lupton105032.blogspot.com/2012/09/accessing-nature-revised.html), though we will also spend time in class going over this information and working together to choose an appropriate article.

When an assignment asks you to summarize, explicate, or respond to another author’s work, the first step is to understand that work thoroughly and completely. The first few feeder assignments will guide you through that process, while the latter feeder assignments will help you to perform your own research, collate and evaluate this information, and use it to construct a powerful counter-argument to your original author’s claim.

Feeder 1.1: Background Research

After choosing a recent editorial from Nature, you may be at a loss as to how you will construct a powerful counter-argument; after all, these editorials are written by professional, accomplished authors who know how to make their position seem valid and logical. The first thing we want to do is try to move past the author’s tight, focused argument and begin to see the larger constellation of information and opinions on the topic at hand.

For your first feeder assignment, identify a list of at least 4 key terms from your editorial. These terms might include: unfamiliar scientific concepts; the names of people, organizations, or legislation pertinent to the topic; dates or key events relating to the topic. Most of these terms will probably be mentioned in your Nature editorial, but if you find key terms that the author has overlooked or excluded you can include these as well. For each term, write a concise, one-paragraph explanation of the term and its significance in clear, straightforward language and include a list of at least two links to reliable sources that explain the topic further, along with a short, 1-2 sentence explanation of the source and its significance. An example entry might look like this:

BP Deepwater Horizon

Deepwater Horizon was an offshore oil rig owned by BP (British Petroleum) and designed to extract oil from the ocean floor, operating at depths of up to 8,000 feet. The rig was stationed in the Gulf of Mexico, about 41 miles off the Louisiana coast. On April 20, 2010, the well exploded, killing 11 men working on the rig’s platform, and sent oil spilling directly into the Gulf. The spill continued for three months, sending 4.9 million barrels of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, constituting the largest accidental marine spill in the history of the petroleum industry. The spill caused extensive damage to marine and wildlife habitats throughout the Gulf Coast as well as a significant disruption in fishing and tourism industries throughout the region. 

http://www.boemre.gov/ooc/press/2011/press0914.htm

Final investigative report on the Deepwater Horizon spill by The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement /U.S. Coast Guard Joint Investigation Team. The report attributes the accident to defective cement used in the well’s construction, laying most of the blame for the accident on BP (the well’s owner), Transocean (the contractor who operated the well), and Halliburton (the company who made the faulty cement mixture).

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=lasting-menace

An article from the magazine Scientific American explaining that the effects of the Deepwater Horizon spill may be felt for decades. These effects include the displacement of native species,  the promotion of toxins that can cause cancer and inhibit reproduction in wildlife, and the dispersal of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that can sicken plants, fish, and even humans.

Place your final document in a Google Doc titled [your name]’s Unit 1 Feeder Assignments and ensure that it is shared with my correct email address.

Feeder 1.2: Annotated Bibliography

The research you performed for your Feeder 1.1 assignment constituted general background research on your topic, but for this feeder assignment we will move toward analyzing the arguments that people have put forth about your issue. For Feeder 1.2, you will compose an annotated bibliography of at least five sources relating to your topic. While the sources you cited in Feeder 1.1 might have included general reference works, the works you cite for Feeder 1.2 should not only be reliable, but they should also be argumentative, i.e. they should make a substantive claim about your topic. The first source on your annotated bibliography should be the article from Nature that you chose before we started Feeder 1.1.

For each entry in your annotated bibliography, begin by constructing an MLA citation of the source. Underneath this citation, write a short (4-5 sentence) analysis of the source, including its main claim, its most important evidence, and its relevance to your topic. The source’s main claim should be summarized in the first sentence of your entry, so each entry will probably begin with a phrase such as “[the author] argues...” or “[the author] claims...” For more information on annotated bibliographies (including example entries), click here: http://olinuris.library.cornell.edu/ref/research/skill28.htm.

Place the final version of your annotated bibliography in the same Google Doc that contains your Feeder 1.1 assignment.

Feeder 1.3: Retrospective Outline / Analysis

The next step in formulating your counter-argument is to revisit your original source, the Nature editorial you chose before we started Feeder 1.1, and compose a detailed retrospective outline of the article. We will talk about retrospective outlines in detail in class, but if you need a refresher you can click here (http://www.georgetowncollege.edu/eng/resources/editing-and-the-retrospective-outline/). Your retrospective outline must contain:

• The author’s thesis statement (or a paraphrase/summary of it) at the top of the document)
• The central claim or purpose of each body paragraph

In addition to composing the retrospective outline itself, each of you will also write a short, 1-2-paragraph analysis of how the author has chosen to construct his or her argument. This analysis should not concentrate on the issue itself, but rather how the author has employed the argumentative strategies we have discussed in class. In order to get started thinking about these issues, you might ask yourself:

• what type of introduction does the author employ, and why has he or she chosen this type?
• in what order does the author present his or her key evidence? why?
• has the author excluded or ignored any key information or evidence that you uncovered in your research? why did the author make this choice?
• how does the author conclude his or her essay? what impression does he or she attempt to leave the reader with?

Place the final version of your retrospective outline and analysis in the same Google Doc that contains your Feeder 1.1 and 1.2 assignments.

Feeder 1.4: Constructing a Working Thesis Statement

For your final feeder assignment for Unit 1 you will compose a working thesis statement. Review all of the background research you have collected so far as well as your retrospective outline from Feeder 1.3 and decide on the central claim that you will make in your essay as well as the key evidence that you will use to support this claim. Next, compose your working thesis statement. We will talk about thesis statements extensively in class, but your working thesis should do each of these three things:

• Introduce your essay’s central claim
• Provide a road map for how your argument will unfold.
• Describe the stakes of your argument, i.e. why it matters to your readers.

As we noted in class, your thesis statement may be composed of more than one sentence, but it should be as concise as possible. 

Place the final version of your working thesis statement in the same Google Doc that contains your other feeder assignments.

Unit 1 Project

After completing each of the feeder assignments you will have a sophisticated understanding of your topic, an appreciation for how the author from Nature has approached this issue, and a working thesis statement of your own. Now it’s time to formulate your own counter-argument.

There are several ways you can begin formulating your essay. You might begin by composing a prospective outline, you might free-write about your topic, you might begin composing the body paragraph about which you feel the most confident, or you might just jump right in and start crafting your introduction. If you have devoted yourself to the feeder assignments, though, composing your final essay should mostly be a matter of arranging and presenting the material you have already collected, though you should not underestimate the time and effort that this process will take.

Your final product should be an argumentative blog post (length: equivalent to 3-5 typed pages) that poses a credible counterargument to the original article you chose from Nature and presents compelling evidence in support of this claim. Some authors will find it helpful to mention the original Nature article and refute it directly; other authors might choose present their claim directly rather than as a reaction to the Nature editorial. 

A successful post will (in order of importance):

1. Contain a strong thesis statement that meets all of the qualifications we outlined in class

2. Support the thesis with a wealth of credible, engaging evidence from authoritative sources

3. Be organized, presenting the evidence in a clear, logical order

4. Have a strong introduction that grabs the reader’s attention, introduces the topic, and transitions quickly to the main argument.

5. Have organized paragraphs with a clear topic sentence and adequate supporting evidence

6. Cite all sources in a manner appropriate for the blog and its audience.

7. Be written in a lively, engaging and authoritative middle style appropriate to the blog’s target audience, avoiding “to be” verbs in favor of a strong, active style

8. Be visually interesting, with pictures and/or links to other multimedia content

9. Be free of errors in spelling and grammar as well as visual formatting.

Unit 2 Assignments

In unit 2 you will be using the research methods of behavioral psychology to perform a case study with yourself as the subject. After performing this experiment on yourself, you will shape your findings into a podcast that tracks your progress and tests your original hypothesis.

Feeder 2.1: Establishing a baseline

For your first feeder assignment, you will choose a behavior that you would like to modify and begin thinking critically about what role this behavior plays in your life. First, choose a behavior that you would like to increase or decrease in frequency or duration. Though many people choose to modify a behavior that will improve their health or productivity, you can modify your behavior in any way that is not harmful to yourself or others. 

Next, you will begin thinking critically about your behavior by keeping a journal documenting that behavior and establishing a rough baseline. Choose a three-day period in which you will begin tracking your behavior, and each evening at roughly the same time answer the following questions:

• Roughly how many times or for how long did you do the behavior?
• When were you likely (or not likely) to display the behavior?
• What benefits (socially, psychologically, etc.) did you get from displaying the behavior?

You should answer each of the three questions three times, once for each day. At the end of the three-day period, you should begin thinking about how you will change your behavior. In order to start this process, answer the following questions:

• What activities, people, or treats might motivate you to change your behavior?
• What kinds of rewards are you able to offer yourself for changing your behavior? (brainstorm at least of at least 4)
• What kinds of rewards are you able to deny yourself? (brainstorm a list of at least 4)

Place your answers to all of these questions in a new Google Doc titled “[your name]’s Unit 2 Feeder Assignments” and make sure that the document is shared with my correct email address.

Feeder 2.2: Researching Your Behavior

For your next feeder assignment, you will compose an annotated bibliography of at least four credible sources related to your behavior. Since the behaviors each of you will modify will be very different, your sources will be as well. If you choose to modify a conventional behavior such as dieting, exercise, or studying you will find a wealth of material that relate to these topics directly; if you choose a different kind of behavior, your sources may be more unconventional. Unlike your annotated bibliography from Unit 1, all of your sources do not have to be argumentative, but all of them must be credible and they must relate to your topic in some way (such as the topic of behavior modification in general, background sources about your behavior and its effects, etc.).

For each entry in your annotated bibliography, begin by constructing an MLA citation of the source. Underneath this citation, write a short (4-5 sentence) analysis of the source, including its main claim (if it has one), its most important evidence, and its relevance to your topic.

Place your finished annotated annotated bibliography in the same Google Doc as your Feeder 2.1 assignment.

Feeder 2.3: Formulating a Hypothesis

After you have completed the first two feeder assignments it’s time to begin thinking about your experiment. The first step is to come up with a working hypothesis statement. Much like a thesis statement, a hypothesis statement will introduce the topic of your study, provide a roadmap for how it will unfold, and explain the significance of your experiment to your target audience. However, whereas a thesis statement introduces a central claim about your topic, your hypothesis statement will include a prediction about what will happen in your study. More specifically, this prediction will posit a relationship between your independent and dependent variables. We will talk more about what this means in class.

Place your working hypothesis in the same Google Doc as your other feeder assignments for Unit 2.

Feeder 2.4: Designing Your Experiment

Now that you have a working hypothesis and a deeper understanding of your behavior (both through primary observation and consultation of secondary sources), it’s time to begin designing your experiment. We will talk extensively in class about how to conduct a valid scientific experiment, and it is expected that you will follow all of these guidelines in your own study.

The first step will be to decide on the rewards and/or punishments that you will use to reinforce your behavior. You began thinking about this in Feeder 2.1, and now it’s time to decide which rewards and/or punishments are most likely to motivate a change in behavior. Finalize your system of rewards and punishments and decide how they will be implemented. Write a paragraph describing your system and place it in the Google Doc with your other Unit 2 feeder assignments.

Next, you will design the form that you will use to collect your data during your experiment. A few things to consider here:

• your data sheet must contain a significant quantitative component; we will talk about the differences between quantitative and qualitative data in class. You will probably also want to include a qualitative component as well, though this is not required
• you must fill out your data sheet at least once per day during the experiment; for frequently recurring behaviors, you may design a data sheet that requires you to fill it out more than once per day
• the data you collect must be targeted toward directly proving or disproving your hypothesis; there are likely many interesting aspects of your behavior that you may wish to track, but you must ensure that you collect data that directly relates to your hypothesis
• your data sheet must also include information about your rewards and/or punishments, including if and how they were administered; you may also want to collect data about whether and how these incentives motivated you
• 
  
• We will workshop your data sheets extensively in class, but each data sheet must be approved by me before you begin your experiment. I can approve data sheets either during class time or via email. Failure to get approval for your data sheet will negatively affect your Unit 2 grade.
• 
  
• Upload your data sheet to Google Docs and title your document “[your name]’s Unit 2 data sheet.” Make sure that the document is shared with my correct email address.
• 
  
• After your data sheet is approved and you have completed Feeder 2.1-2.4 you may conduct your experiment. You must collect data for at least 6 consecutive days.

Feeder 2.5: Beginning to Construct Your Podcast

As we will discuss in detail in class, a standard scientific research report has four parts:

• Introduction
• Methods & Materials
• Results
• Conclusion

Your Unit 2 Project podcast will contain all four of these sections as well, though they may be formatted somewhat differently given the different medium (i.e. podcasting) and the specific target audience you have identified for your blog. As you are conducting your experiment you can get get started on the first two sections of the podcast. After your experiment has been completed you can begin work on the other two sections.

For your Feeder 2.5 assignment, you will compose an outline / script for your Unit 2 Project podcast. For guidelines on what should be included in each section, consult your notes from my two presentations on writing a scientific research report. Some things to consider as you compose:

• Your introduction should follow all of the guidelines for strong introductions that we have already discussed in class
• Some parts of your podcast will be strictly scripted, while others will require you to speak extemporaneously; in your outline/script, you should work toward writing out exactly what you will say for the scripted sections (important / detailed information such as the explanation of your hypothesis, your introduction, and your results section), while impromptu sections will only be a rough outline
• You should be careful how you explain / relate the quantitative information in your podcasts; long lists of numbers are difficult to process without visual aids, so consider carefully how you will convey this information in a way that the reader can understand
• In your conclusion section, you should confirm or deny whether your hypothesis was supported (avoid overly strong language such as stating that your hypothesis was “proven”), as well as a re-evaluation / re-formulation of your hypothesis if necessary
• You will want to include markers / descriptions for transitional music, sound effects, and other audio effects that will make your podcast easier to understand and more exciting to listen to

Place your finished outline / script in the Google Doc containing your other feeder assignments for Unit 2. Since your Podcast will be 4-6 minutes long, your outline should be about 3-4 pages in length.

Feeder 2.6: Adding Other Voices

As we noted at several points in class, listening to the same voice for several minutes in a row can be quite boring. Brainstorm ways that you might include other voices besides your own. Some ideas include giving your podcast a co-host, interviewing a friend who is directly affected by your behavior, or interviewing an expert on your behavior or on behavior modification in general. Your podcast must contain at least one voice that is not your own.

After deciding how you will introduce other voices into your podcast, revise your outline/script to indicate where these other voices will appear and, if necessary, conduct the interviews themselves and record the audio using your computer or smartphone. You do not need to submit anything for this assignment, but you will be assigned a grade for Feeder 2.6 based on how well you integrated others’ voices into your podcast.

Unit 2 Project: Behavior Modification Study Podcast

After you have completed the feeder assignments it’s time to begin constructing your podcast. The final version should be 4-6 minutes long and should contain each of the four standard sections for a scientific research report (all clearly demarcated), at least one voice other than your own, and transitional music and/or sound effects to help orient your listener. 

A successful podcast will (in order of importance):

1. contain a clear, original and interesting hypothesis that posits a clear relationship between the independent and dependent variables

2. contain each of the four sections of a standard scientific research report, each of them clearly demarcated; each section will contain the proper information as discussed in class

3. be designed in a manner that adequately confirms or denies the study’s hypothesis

4. contain a strong introduction that adheres to one of the strategies for effective introductions that we outlined in class

5. include background information / research about the topic that helps the listener understand the topic better and establishes the author’s credibility

6. convey the experiment’s results in a clear, digestible manner

7. honestly assess the strengths and weaknesses of the study and re-evaluate the hypothesis if necessary

8. make use of at least two different voices in a way that makes the podcast both more exciting and easier to understand

9. make effective use of sound effects and transitional music to orient the listener

10. be delivered in a clear speaking manner that is appropriate to the blog's target audience.