Optional Exercise: Cross Paradigm
- extra credit — assignment points
- 500 words (minimum; 700 max); 1 instance of media (any form)
→ suggested 300 words part 1, 200 words part 2
(just estimated guidelines, not requirements) - post on your blog as entry or page (by S 01-Nov)
» objective/experiment Transformation:
Belief-Story into Information Paradigm (Proof : Literacy)
–or– Info/Argument into Story Paradigm (Belief : Orality)
» Instructions & Objectives
Part 1: this is a “thought experiment,” needing critical and creative thinking to explore the implications of “crossing” paradigms; consider thoroughly before composing, as the form/output is less important than the inquiry. However, important to note: the entire discussion is the result of your imagining either transformation — no need to describe your process/sequence, nor to speculate broadly.
→ The response is the cross-paradigm transformation, demonstrating advanced awareness of rhetorical conventions and forms of knowledge respective to each mode.
- For efficiency, you might likely use content/ideas from projects/units 1 and 2; or, certainly use other ideas and examples from experience, learning, observations, reflections.
- The key aim is to explore the prominent mode of the paradigm, whether Belief or Proof, by applying your understanding of rhetorical/discursive conventions to demonstrate your insights about distinct forms of knowledge and communication.
- reminder: be sure to only choose 1 “transformation” —
converting Belief/Story into Information/Proof (analytic/argument discourse : Literacy)
–or–
composing Information/Argument idea in form of Narrative (Belief : Orality)
What happens when individuals or groups try to transform Belief into Information for Arguments, or convert Proof into Narrative?
Part 2: after composing, read your transformation and consider the distinct modes/conventions of paradigms from the perspective of “apparatus theory.”
Write a short reflection (200 words), discussing any insights —
further understanding “paradigm rhetoric,” two “worldviews” and discursive conventions we’ve examined;
perhaps any new perspective from this experiment, considering your prior projects (and experience generally) — especially in terms of Institutions, Identity, Technology, Social/Cultural Forms;
or, potential lessons for Electracy as a distinct apparatus (neither Orality nor Literacy, but potentially a hybrid of both and beyond…).
In any case, these insights can be speculative — while being concise and precise, thoughtfully considered and composed (avoiding overly-broad phrasing and general points).
Assessment Criteria (from syllabus):
Posted to personal blog (or D2L), these informal compositions illustrate attentive reading of assigned materials, progress toward project, and engagement with class topics relative to schedule.
Credit is assigned for (1) submitting on-time, with required length and media (if assigned);
(2) demonstrating attention to class topics, content knowledge, and critical thinking, particularly by describing insights and connections;
(3) providing thoughtful and relevant responses to prompts, through specialized discourse;
(4) with specific examples from personal knowledge and/or respective readings,
(5) while extending rhetorical knowledge and mastery of writing conventions, practicing efficient prose (i.e. minimizing /avoiding summary, repetition, digression, and unnecessary discussion).