Download
1 / 6
60 likes | 159 Vues
Workshopping !. Give CONSTRUCTIVE feedback! This means privileging the importance of ideas and how they’re communicated over mechanics and surface errors—i.e. worry about how clearly someone expresses him or herself rather than whether s/he misplaced a comma or misspelled a word.
E N D
Workshopping! • Give CONSTRUCTIVE feedback! This means privileging the importance of ideas and how they’re communicated over mechanics and surface errors—i.e. worry about how clearly someone expresses him or herself rather than whether s/he misplaced a comma or misspelled a word. • Always critique ideas, not people. • Leslie reminded us on Tuesday that many people hate to give constructive feedback. But that won’t be us. We want to help our classmates write the best argumentative essays they can
How to Workshop • You will take turns reading and responding to one another’s work. Choose an order. • If you are the author under consideration, ask your readers to focus on things you’d like help on, i.e. • -‘I would love your feedback on organization. Please tell me how it flowed?’ or • -‘I have trouble summarizing, it’d be great if you could give me some ideas as to how to better sum up my background section.’ • -'I'm not sure how to conclude it -- do you have any ideas?' • Watch your time (3 in group 25 min. or so ea. to read and respond; 4 in group, 20 min. each); I will help with this.
1.) I suggest that the person whose paper is being read, also read his/her paper so that it is fresh in your mind. 2,) I also suggest that readers use the “track changes” function in Word or “comment” function in Google docs to share comments with the author. 3.) Do correct spelling issues and other surface errors using track changes; that way you don’t really need to talk about that stuff and the author can choose to accept or reject your changes. 4.) Leave your constructive comments, too, so the author has them to work from. These are more important. 5.) If you want to work from a hardcopy, we can try the classroom printer; you can also bring your own (enough for the group) if that's how you prefer to receive comments
Groups • 1.) Wilson, Alex, Zach (mech engineers) • 2.) Greg, Leslie, Chris, Max (computer scientists/engineers) • 3.) Mike, Joey, Patrick (MCDB + chem/bio engineers) • 4.) Austin, Cody, Joe (civil& metallurgical engineers + physics scientist)
Readers, be sure to make sure you give feedback on the following items: • -I understood your argument to be “x” and your call to action to be “x.” Is this right? • -Is your audience “x”? If so, I think your argument worked (or needs improvement) because … • -For me as a reader, I kept reading because (or I needed more reason to keep reading because …) • -There was just enough, too much or too little background information … • And always tell the author what worked! This was great. I really liked this example, etc. SAVE your edited copy and email it back to the author when you're done with the new name: original name_your name edited copy
For Friday … and beyond • Read Richard Lantham’s, “Who’s Kicking Who?” and revise two sentences from the reading; (This will make sense when you read it) • Read Chapter 9, MIT Guide and identify 5 important points. *** • Next draft due to your groups by end of Sunday, early Monday – so they may read them by TUESDAY … you should have my comments by end of day Saturday. • Papers due the following Monday, June 25.
