Hi everyone, and happy Monday! I hope you all have lovely, restorative weekends.
Thanks to all of you for your work last week: annotations in Perusall on “Annoying Ways People Use Sources” & your blogs in response as well as your Unit 3 Writing Workshop comments & proposals.
This week we’re working to clarify (with as much specificity as possible) the particular audience & genre of your Unit 3 piece, better under publication venues, and then make some real progress on planning & drafting that piece.
The first half of this week is focused on peer reviewing one another’s posts from last week, and using this discussion to further revise & focus your Unit 3 projects. There is also new content (and comments required) in the Unit 3 Writing Workshop.
I’ve enjoyed reading your Week 12 work, and I’m looking forward to continuing the conversations around integrating sources effectively and clarifying your Unit 3 audience & genre. The Week 13 Schedule offers detailed guidance on the Unit 3 Proposals Peer Review, but here I want to offer some additional thoughts on integrating sources to help guide you through your peer review of the Stedman response blogs (which included a paragraph integrating your quotable from Unit 2). I’ll also be pinging the Perusall discussion of the Stedman piece over the next few days, to further discuss it there.
In “Annoying Ways People Use Sources,” Stedman discusses readers’ “pickiness” (243) and, as a writer, your need to anticipate and accommodate that. He reminds us that “the conventions of writing have a fundamentally rhetorical nature. [. . .]. One of the fundamental ideas of rhetoric is that speakers/writers/composers shape what they say/write/create based on what they want it to do, where they’re publishing it, and what they know about their audience/readers” (244). In essence, he’s highlighting awareness of the rhetorical situation: your audience and the appropriateness of your delivery and message.
He offers a variety of common pitfalls and then “fixes” for how to address them. For example, he share useful strategies such as signaling the quote, identifying the author, and showing your reader how to interpret the quote (255). Throughout the piece, Stedman argues that we should be intentional about when/why/what/how we quote, and make those intentions clear in our writing.
Of course, this isn’t our first time thinking about quotations. We spent a lot of time already, especially in Unit 2, thinking about how to identify and then integrate quotations effectively into our research (remember the “quote sandwich” and the Perusall reading, “The Art of Quoting”?). We’ve discussed the importance of not doing a drive-by with your quote, throwing it in and then moving on. Again, the quote needs to have a reason for being in your writing, and it’s your responsibility as a writer to make clear what that reason is (throughout introducing, analyzing, explaining, and citing it).
It’s been wonderful to see you all level-up your quoting game these past few months, and to more seamlessly and skillfully weave together your ideas with those presented in other sources. Use this Peer Review to continue to hone your quoting skills!
Later in the week, there is another Writing Workshop on exploring publication venues for various genres, individual work on drafting you new genre piece, and a post due that shares your progress & plan for successfully completing the Unit 3 assignment over the next few weeks.
We’re in the home stretch of the semester (when things can start to feel really overwhelming!), so it’s going to be equally important to prioritize both time management and self-care going forward. We’ll be addressing the first of these (time management) in a Class Discussion later this week, and then next week more explicitly exploring self-care (though I’d argue that effectively managing your time is a form of self-care!). I’m looking forward to sharing and receiving advice in these spaces over the next few weeks, and to finding additional ways to support one another.
As always, all details about all the work are posted on the Schedule page.
If you have questions, drop a comment below, send me an email, &/or come to see me in my Office Hours.
I welcome all of you to come discuss your Unit 3 projects (& anything else!) with me individually. My next regular Office Hour is this Thursday, 11/17 11:30am-12:30pm, but you can always email me to set up an alternate time to meet if you have a conflict.
Last but not least … this week’s low-stakes class discussion!
In the spirit of stepping out of our comfort zones & composing in new genres, I’m mixing it up: this week we’ll all going to experiment with writing haikus (me too!).
A haiku is a (very short) Japanese poetry form that has strict formal requirements: three lines composed of 17 total syllabus (the syllable pattern is 5/7/5). [You can learn more about haikus & find examples at Poets.org]
Don’t be fooled! Haikus are deceptively simple but often intricate & profound. Just because they are short doesn’t mean they are easy to write … but they can be really fun & really beautiful.
Allow yourself to play around with words & immerse yourself in the loveliness of language! Poetry is not just about what is said (the content), but how it sounds, so as you compose / revise, read your haiku aloud to yourself.
Post a comment here by Tuesday (11/15) to share your haiku with the class. In the comment, make sure to include:
- the haiku (as written text)
- an audio file of yourself reading the haiku (no fancy A/V skills needed — you can use your phone to record the few-second clip)
I’m excited to see / hear your creations! Thanks all, and have a wonderful week 🙂