Project 2 (30 points total)
1. Analytic Webtext — Information & Argument in Discipline
-
due 26-Oct; 20 points; 1000 words* (fewer if screencast has audio commentary)
- Post link to the webtext on your blog.
Objective: Analyze and synthesize ideas from critical observations: disciplinary conventions, of information and argument, communicated to academic readers (imagined audience).
Webtext: (20 points, text + media)
— first created individually, presenting rhetorical analysis; then linked and published as class collection for online readers.
- Content: Present insights in critical discussion using analytic perspective & key terms; examples drawn from sources selected (familiar and researched) for annotated bibliography, relevant and current for field considering academic readers (imagined audience).
Offers insights about forms of information and arguments in specialized discourse of your field/discipline in “Information Paradigm” —- Discourse community, communication conventions (rhetorical/written)
Information, Knowledge, Expertise, Research, Argument, Evidence/Proof - Format: Formal academic style; present analysis efficiently and effectively considering audience and purpose, supporting with both specific examples and multimedia (e.g. screencap images & screencast videos)
→ see Design Guide page
Webtexts: “screen-based scholarly articles that use digital media to enact the authors’ argument.” (Ball)
Digital Rhetoric
— thoughtful and reflective prose with advanced content knowledge & perspective; separate components from webtext. → Present on page(s) on your blog.
1. Summary (“Design Memo”)
- 300–400 words, 5 points, due 27-Oct
» Prompt: concisely and precisely, describe your Webtext design and rationale considering audience, purpose, and publication.
Rather than summarizing process, be sure to discuss thoughtfully your intent and the effects of the webtext, noting specific choices and elements — in terms of reader-focused design (particular audience imagined) and your rationale (most important).
2. Reflection
- 500 words, 5 points, due 27-Oct
» Objective: experiential insights from overall project, about your discipline/field and Web writing.
Discuss thoughtfully and specifically your insights about discipline, conventions, knowledge within “Information Paradigm” (as one worldview):
- - how information is used/privileged; argument/proof
– exclusions/omissions? (in what is thought or communicated?)
– knowledge invented, discovered, created, conveyed, “acquired,” circulated
– institutions, roles; forms, “structures”; languages, discourse community
– discourse and knowledge distinctly academic, professional, public, social/community, personal?
→ note: you need not address all these issues; however, be sure to include at least 2 of these topics when discussing the Information Paradigm as a particular (situated, relative) “worldview“
* also: no need to compare/contrast with other paradigms (for instance, Belief/Story of Unit 1); this will be focus of Blog Entry 3, separately.