MbShea@PWP@English@UMCP

Recall, peer review is on Friday; directions due for a grade on Monday. NO REWRITES.

One extra credit option for directions to be discussed in class: share with real audience, provide evidence to me.  Worth half a grade.

Preview of next week:  Class time will be devoted to this rewrite of your two-article review.  You will earn a separate grade.  In other words, two grades for this assignment, of equal weight.  Recall that we are now performing the UMCP-mandated assessment of your work.  Here is the (in process, by me) document you will use to 

1. rewrite your review, basedly largely on my comments; and, then
2. evaluate your review for me, as a preview to my evaluation.

THEN, I will assess your work in a CANVAS space. When I am done, I will open the assesment to you.  The assessment DOES NOT ENTER INTO YOUR FINAL GRADE.  However, your work in revising and self-evaluating will earn you an additional grade for the two-article review. Fair?  I think so.  This is a huge undertaking for me and a moderate one for you.  I want to link this effort into an opportunity for you to rewrite an existing assignment and learn about the primacy of revision for any document.

On Friday, we talk about finishing up the semester:

• Final project
• Cover letter/resume

Due to this new mandated assessment and the winter snows, we are throwing out some assignments.  

Lesson on misplaced or dangling modifiers that I tried to do last week. Think piano.  Yes. Piano.

Piano. from Paul Rayment on Vimeo.

Next week we write a short but pithy document: directions.  We will do this during classtimes, largely, with peer review on Friday.  Assignment due for a grade on Monday, April 6.  Then, we turn quickly to the final project that we work on through April into May.  Last week or so, we spend time on cover letters and resumes.

We will have an opportunity to earn a second grade for the review. TBD in class.

Directions!  Two documents will help us:

1. Assignment sheet
2. Examples
   1. Avoiding a Cougar Attack
   2. Baking Bones of the Dead

Now, a way to remember modifier problems between an opening clause and the subject of the sentence modified by that clause.  (dangling modifier, misplaced modifier).  I wish to thank former student H.S. for this very fun video to help you remember "walking pianos":

More Friday fun:

This one, about citation:

And, one from a commerical company about PCR. The seller's ethos of fun, perhaps?

Will be in Tawes, either in my office (Rm. 1230) or in the glass conference room near my office.  I was not able to arrange a room in McKeldin.

10-1.  See you then.

due on Friday, hard copy.  Peer review today and Wednesday.  Checklist here, with some notes at the end of the document for in-class discussion.

How are your opening paragraphs?  What strategy did you choose?  Now, on to the author conventions.

What will you use for the author name in your discussion?  First author?  Co-authors (for two)? Corresponding author?  Other?  Note, you may end up using a sentence on this choice in your ethos paragraph.

I have a few comments on keeping the ethos paragraphs tight and controlled.  These paragraphs have two functions:

1. to introduce the article CONTENT and lead author; and
2. serve as a transition element to the points you wish to me.

We will talk about some conventions of science style:

• use first and last name in the first mention, then,
• shift to land name only (NO DOCTORAL TITLES);
• DO NOT USE THE ARTICLE TITLE, as this is often too long and even visually awkward, instead,
• use a phrase or two aboout the content in your ethos paragraphs;
• give ethos of
  • discipline
  • current institution
  • PhD granting institution
• name the journal (USE ITALICS); and, finally,
• give the year of publication.

Now, some discussion and examples of two important "binding" or cohesion strategies: metadiscourse and counting out.