Project 1

 

Project 1:             Analytic Webtext:  Network Rhetoric & Identity                      

  • 25 points; due 27-Sept
  • Revised/finalized work only (unre­vised drafts will not be accepted)
  • 1000 words* plus visual media (orig­i­nal screen­cap images/videos)
                         *final word-count can be greater/fewer based on amount of orig­i­nal media incor­po­rated (see design guide)
  • MLA Style for Quo­ta­tions, Cita­tions, and Works Cited (see guide)

 

(from syl­labus)

 

Objec­tive:          Ana­lyze and syn­the­size ideas from crit­i­cal obser­va­tions: rela­tion of dig­i­tal iden­tity and social rhetoric online

  • Con­tent:  Present insights using per­spec­tive & key terms (3) from read­ings: beyond descrip­tion, present a new under­stand­ing of platform/interface and com­mu­ni­ca­tion for aca­d­e­mic read­ers (imag­ined audi­ence). 
  • For­mat:  For­mal aca­d­e­mic style, with­out any exter­nal research; sup­port with spe­cific exam­ples and mul­ti­me­dia (e.g. screen­cap images)

Web­texts: “screen-based schol­arly arti­cles that use dig­i­tal media to enact the authors’ argu­ment.” (Ball)

 

Overview & Goals


Overview:  An ana­lytic web­text essay dis­cussing thought­fully your ideas from crit­i­cal obser­va­tions of dig­i­tal iden­tity expe­ri­enced and expressed through net­work plat­form, multimedia/culture forms, and social rhetoric—propos­ing a new under­stand­ing (or per­spec­tive) from your analy­sis, for a spe­cial­ized audi­ence (dis­course community).

This for­mal project presents an analy­sis about tech­nol­ogy and dig­i­tal cul­ture, with the goal of (re)considering or re-defining net­work rhetoric by draw­ing upon your obser­va­tions and first-hand expe­ri­ence, apply­ing advanced con­tent knowledge.

Imag­in­ing an aca­d­e­mic read­er­ship, the main objec­tive is to pro­pose and sup­port an ana­lytic the­sis (insights) about net­work rhetoric con­cern­ing recent devel­op­ments in media and social prac­tices: most effec­tively, by sup­port­ing crit­i­cal obser­va­tions with effec­tive descrip­tions and con­crete exam­ples, extend­ing mas­tery of writ­ing conventions.

 

Objec­tives:

1) Sup­port an over­all ana­lytic the­sis with crit­i­cal dis­cus­sion arranged top­i­cally, using spe­cific exam­ples to sup­port your insights:

new ideas from obser­va­tions con­nect­ing iden­tity expe­ri­ence, tech­nol­ogy, and net­work rhetoric (social behav­iors, com­mu­ni­ca­tion, uses of media and culture).

Going beyond descrip­tion (avoid sum­mary!), pro­pose a new or alter­na­tive under­stand­ing achieved with this media stud­ies per­spec­tive (“ana­lytic lens”): offer­ing read­ers a thought­ful view, syn­the­sized and sup­ported from your analy­sis, about the rela­tion of iden­tity, tech­nol­ogy, and social rhetoric.

2) Chiefly, read­ers should be able to “see what you’re see­ing” from effec­tive com­po­si­tion; to this end, use com­pos­ing strategies—logical orga­ni­za­tion, effi­cient prose, key terms/concepts, effec­tive exam­ples (ref­er­enced and illus­trated visually)—to accom­plish this pur­pose, explic­itly dis­cussing through­out your ana­lytic insights about the con­nec­tion, impact, and/or effects of net­work tech­nol­ogy, dig­i­tal iden­tity, and social com­mu­ni­ca­tion (rhetor­i­cal con­ven­tions among dis­course com­mu­ni­ties, using media and cul­ture forms). While not an “argu­ment” in sense of “prov­ing” anything—let alone pre­sent­ing your opin­ion / crit­i­cism (avoid this!)—all points should be sup­ported ade­quately, con­sid­er­ing your audi­ence & pur­pose; an effec­tive com­pos­ing style for analy­sis is bal­anc­ing insight­ful ideas and sup­port, inte­grat­ing key terms/concepts (an imbal­ance ratio of any of these three com­po­nents will limit effectiveness)

 

 
→ see Out­line Guide & Exam­ple (Google Doc, CU sign-in required)

Instruc­tions & Para­me­ters (guide)

  • Pri­mar­ily: present insights from your analy­sis—not using any mate­r­ial from research (sec­ondary sources)— about dig­i­tal tech­nol­ogy and iden­tity expe­ri­ence in con­tem­po­rary media ecology.
  • Dis­cuss crit­i­cal points, sup­ported with spe­cific exam­ples; arrange dis­cus­sion topically.
  • Pro­pose new under­stand­ing for read­ers about con­nec­tion of key top­ics, reflect­ing media-studies perspective.
  • Your the­sis should be the over­all idea pre­sented by your essay, an ana­lytic per­spec­tive about two or more of the key top­ics: dig­i­tal tech­nol­ogy, net­work plat­form, interfaces/apps; dig­i­tal iden­tity (expe­ri­enced, expressed, visible/invisible); net­work rhetoric & social activ­i­ties (com­mu­ni­ca­tion, behav­iors, con­ven­tions) using mul­ti­me­dia and cul­ture forms—perhaps dis­cuss (and updat­ing?) con­ven­tional rhetor­i­cal categories.
  • Use spe­cial­ized dis­course of topic, while engag­ing with mate­r­ial at sophis­ti­cated lev­els reflect­ing acquired con­tent knowledge.
  • Rel­e­vant terms/concepts (3 min­i­mum) from assigned read­ings (2 min­i­mum)
  • Beyond sim­ply using terms, incor­po­rate the con­cepts and the mate­r­ial stud­ied toward your pur­pose, imag­in­ing you are join­ing the “crit­i­cal con­ver­sa­tion” about this topic (aca­d­e­mic readers).
  • Key chal­lenge & goal, for genre & audi­ence: Pro­pose and use a new/innovative/updated term—for exam­ple, a label or cat­e­gory—for one of the key top­ics dis­cussed (con­tem­po­rary media situation).
  • Cre­ate com­pelling and effi­cient text for imag­ined read­ers by using a effec­tive aca­d­e­mic writ­ing styles
  • Com­bine mul­ti­ple modes, delib­er­ately used, such as crit­i­cal points, descrip­tive lan­guage, per­ti­nent exam­ples (lim­ited), and illus­tra­tive media
    Note: this is should not include descrip­tion of your analy­sis process (avoid/omit; rephrase this into crit­i­cal dis­cus­sion by gen­er­at­ing ideas before com­pos­ing project)
  • Apply dig­i­tal rhetoric under­stand­ing and skills, com­pos­ing for online audience:
                                pur­pose­ful and effec­tive use of visual media (see design guide)
  • Apply tech­niques of effec­tive com­po­si­tion, mod­eled specif­i­cally from exam­ple texts (schol­arly read­ings = dis­course community)
  • sup­port (illustrate/demonstrate) your crit­i­cal insights, with exam­ples and visual media;
  • use spe­cific exam­ples of tech­nol­ogy, iden­tity, media/culture within observed “net­work media ecol­ogy” (frame and con­nect for your audi­ence); avoid sum­mary, par­tic­u­larly assum­ing cer­tain fea­tures are “rec­og­niz­able” and famil­iar for readers
  • thor­oughly present your per­spec­tive (analysis/insights), through log­i­cal orga­ni­za­tion (paragraphs/sections) and effi­cient prose—keeping in mind (revis­ing) imag­ined audi­ence & pur­pose, at level of style (formal)
  • Con­clude (sec­tion/paragraph): avoid restat­ing points (redun­dant), in favor of empha­siz­ing the con­se­quence (what changes?) or sig­nif­i­cance (why mat­ters?) of perspective/understanding that essay presents.One way to do this, offer­ing read­ers fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion (and evi­dence of your thought­ful analy­sis), is by spec­u­lat­ing and con­nect­ing key top­ics;

    for instance—new under­stand­ing of “net­worked self” or “dig­i­tal iden­tity” evolving/emerging on broad scale; his­tor­i­cal con­text (per­haps predict/propose devel­op­ment?); impact of con­tin­ued tech­no­log­i­cal advance­ments and uses; cur­rent trends or emerg­ing aes­thetics of dig­i­tal cul­ture forms; devel­op­ments of cul­ture related to cur­rent social activ­i­ties and net­work behav­iors; poten­tial or impli­ca­tions for com­mu­ni­ca­tion (expres­sion?); social con­ven­tions of “net­work rhetoric,” in terms of roles, audi­ence (recep­tion, “con­sump­tion,” expe­ri­ence), par­tic­i­pa­tion, com­mu­nity, scholarly/popular dis­course; institution(s) related to media and culture.

 

Design Guide

» Cheryl E. Ball fur­ther notes that web­texts take advan­tage of the affor­dances of their medium: “Web­texts are not lin­ear arti­cles with a few mul­ti­me­dia ele­ments, such as video trail­ers, TED-like pre­sen­ta­tions or video sup­ple­ments; they are a spe­cific (and ever-changing) genre of peer-reviewed schol­ar­ship that uses the affor­dances of the Web (browser-based pre­sen­ta­tion, mul­ti­me­dia, hyper­links, etc.)”
and “Web­texts often need to be exper­i­men­tally mul­ti­modal, merg­ing modes and gen­res together in ways that are often new to readers.”
— Dig­i­tal Rhetoric Col­lab­o­ra­tive Wiki

 

Instruc­tions (inte­grat­ing & dis­play­ing visual media):

→ Design Guide page
 
 

Overview Video

    (note: will only appear if signed-in to Google Drive with CU account)