MbShea@PWP@English@UMCP

Next week office hours; drop by with your document for a check and review, for your revising pleasure:

TAWES ROOM 1230

MTW 11-1

Thursday, 1-3 (YOUR FOLDER, plus cover letter/resume, and final project due to me at 3; then I bike off with your work to a long grading session. BE ON TIME)

For those who have been coming to class, thank you.  I hope that details about the final project confer upon you the advantage of knowledge.

A few links for interest. Stay tuned to the ocean plastic problem. Read this aboutour clothes and micro-plastic. We need to think about life cycle analysis and supply chains.  

Good news!  Patient peer review on biomedical articles.  Those of you writing patient guides may want to close with this idea for your patients. Pay attention about the open access trend; Nature tries a middle-of-the-road version. (Note the italics on the journal title!)

Funny science journal news featuring Marge Simpson.  Not so funny news(naughty word alert) on automated journal peer review process.  You need to proofread! Retraction Watch's take here.

Hard news:  Mistakes were made (strategic use of third person).

Gorgeous set of Einstein papers described here....for wonder. 

Lots to do, including two final small assignments.  Most of you need to keep refining a thesis or problem statement.  To be specific, you will need two or three sentences to accomplish this goal. "Larding" one sentence with this information is usually awkward from a sentence point of view, as well as incomplete as a document guiding principle.  Also, I expect to see these sentences within the first three paragraphs of your final document, marked as such. Example:

Economic valuation of ecosystem services -- in effect, the pricing of what nature provides for "free" -- is increasingly important in environmental policy decisions.  In writing a science policy advisory document, teams of environmental experts can use stasis theory to organize content, as well as structure this policy document for decision making audiences.

In class we will talk about structures and shapes of your document.  Some patterns underway, first for the expert audience:

• focused literature review for graduate school
  • borrow the review format, with less attention to definitions because the audience is expert
  • consider brief first person paragraph setting out choices, limitations, and exclusions
• professional school literature review/seminar paper
  • borrows review format, with moderate attention to some definitions, as a teaching document
  • focuses on diagnosis or diagnosis and treatment; perhaps addresses emerging approach and if so, give status of technology with timeline and implications for clinical approaches
• workplace documentation/laboratory manual (consider digital and hard copy formats)
  • combination of prose and instructions
  • background definitions/descriptions
  • laboratory goals
  • summary of key papers (build from your annotated bibliography
  • biography/profile/research interests of lab principals
  • instructions/protocols/procedures
  • clarity on lab documentation procedures, including software, notebooks, whiteboards, etc.
• teaching materials (see workplace document pattern just above)
  • can also curate web resources that students may look at anyway, like Khan Academy, flashcard sites, etc.  Expand the annotated bibliography for these purposes
• research reports by students
  • IMRAD or variation that adviser suggests/patterned from target journal
  • IMRAD poster preparation (your document is the longer source document for this genre)
  • annotated bibliography provides you the background/introduction information
• research proposal for lab or senior thesis
  • follows IMRAD format PLUS award/competition/departmental guidelines

Lay or non expert audiences

• patient guide, must begin with the understanding that your audience WILL USE DOCTOR GOOGLE
  • definitions and descriptions to help with diagnosis understanding
  • deals with uncertainty, if needed (with sensitivity)
  • shifts to treatment and lifestyle plans
  • curates with web (can use a modified annotated bibliography), with attention to
    • Wikipedia entries
    • WebMD, MayoClinic, Harvard Health Letters
    • support groups
    • patient advocacy/foundation groups
    • other sites you may find, including rapacious branding of false hope
• application guide to professional school, Peace Corps, etc. (see above patient guide for approaches, but then tailor
  • Curate web sites (for professional associations/target schools/programs) and advice forums
• performance guide (sports, music, and other areas of expertise)

We also need to think about the combination of logos, pathos, and ethos in your context. The discussion of logos will really help you add some sources to round out your invention.  The pathos is often found in the audience.  However, for basic research in science, say in experimental physics or astronomy/cosmology, we have, simply, the pathos of wonder.

Ethos is both the sources you cite as well as the full effect your document has as being trustworthy for most readers.  You can also think of trustworthy as carrying the quality of clear excellence.

Post your structures/evidence (logos/pathos/ethos) here!  We will start the posting in class on WED., Dec. 3. See the examples, that I will take away on Tuesday or so.

Other questions for this week:

• Opening the document; use conventions in science for most expert audiences.  Consider the one paragraph "methods" approach for the lit review document types.  You may also consider a first person cover letter for workplace documentation and for teaching materials.  Guides, too, may benefit from this sort of opening.  Lay audiences may appreciate one of the seven strategies we used earlier. (Repost of link from a few weeks ago: opening strategies at this digital page. )
• Citation style; for expert audiences, APA is the default for science, yet you may have citation styles like CBE or footnote/endnote systems.  Most lay audiences will prefer natural language citation.

Ok! Let's go:  writing the papers all between now and the end of the class. Start collecting all your documents and drafts from earlier to turn in, as part of your final folder. More on that on Monday, when you return. Please, look at your writing tendencies, both strengths and weaknesses.  You will need to write a three paragraph note to me, during the first week of December, to be included in your final folder.

Last day of class in Friday, DEC. 12.  Finals are December 15-20 (Monday-Saturday).  You will need a draft of your final paper on that day, in class for a check of elements.

Final project and folder due to me on Thursday, December 18 by 3, in Tawes Rm: 1230.  I will hold office hours mid day M, T, and W, -- that week -- for consultation on your drafts.

Here is a link to a slide set about stasis theory and the literature review.  This presentation is by Linda Macri who directs the writing initiative for graduate students here at UMCP. Those of you writing a literature review type paper will appreciate these slides.  We will look at them briefly in class for two reasons:

• using stasis theory question to organize your thinking (GOOD FOR EVERYONE)
• metadiscouse -- in first person -- to communicate to your readers how you approached the task. You can use metadiscourase to "head off" those critical reviewers who expected a different approach (CHOOSING VOICE IS KEY TO EVERYONE)

Who should look at this?  Well, for thinking, all of you whateever audience you write for (more on that in a moment).  But those of you writing a tight literature review for graduate school really need to look at this slide set.

On to audience.  Let's look at these slides about saliva.  Truly. For Monday, we will work on audience details, including document attributes that these readers need.  One concerns citation, including natural language citation. Most lay audiences will prefer natural language citation.

Today's fun word ismummichog or mud minnow a kind of killifish in the C.B.