The assignment page for the Practice Wix Assignment has a lot of info on citing images–just scroll down to the bottom.
But sometimes it’s hard to find the title and author of the photo on Flickr, which you’ll need for your citations (whether you’re using MLA or APA style). That’s what this video is designed to do: to show you where to get that info on Flickr.
If you prefer, RA3 can be completed the same way that your first two rhetorical analyses were: as a traditional essay posted on your blog. But if you like, I’m giving you two alternative ways to complete the assignment: collaborate with one other person or create a video analysis.
Collaborate with One Other Person
Because we’re studying collaborative writing, you may fulfill the RA3 assignment by producing a single text written by two people. If you choose this path, the following guidelines apply:
- The assignment is the same: the essay still must analyze the rhetorical strategies used on a Wikipedia talk page. You’ll still need to study the original assignment sheet carefully.
- The essay’s length and detail should reflect the fact that two writers were working on it. If necessary, the authors may choose to write about more than one talk page to find enough things to write about; however, if they use more than one talk page, the pages should be on similar topics.
- The total time spent planning and writing the essay should be the same amount of time spent if each student planned and wrote an individual essay.
- Both students are equally responsible for the entire essay. It will receive a single grade that will be applied to each student’s grade.
- If you know another student taking another section of RHET 351 from me this semester, you may collaborate with that student (if you get my permission first).
- Each student will email me an individual statement about what the collaboration process was like. This is due the same day and time that the final draft of the essay is due. Though this statement can be informal, it should be a detailed, multi-paragraph narrative of what steps the team took. This is also the place to share private reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of your writing partner. (I won’t share these emails with anyone else.)
To successfully collaborate on this assignment, I have a few suggestions (which you can take or ignore as you wish):
- Communication is key. Get each other’s phone numbers and email addresses (and maybe Twitter accounts?) as soon as possible, and discuss right away how you want to meet. (In person? Over Skype or a Google Hangout? Over email? By adding comments to a document? How often?)
- Consider setting up a collaborative document that you can both edit whenever you like (like at Google Docs), as opposed to sending attached documents back and forth over email.
- I love this page on Group Writing from the writing center at UNC Chapel Hill (@UNCWritingCTR). It might be worth skimming over it with your partner to see if it raises any questions you’d like to address together.
Create a Video Analysis
Or, if you prefer, you may compose a video analysis of your Wikipedia talk page. If you choose this path, these guidelines apply:
- Your assignment is the same as in the original RA3: you’ll analyze the rhetorical strategies used on a Wikipedia talk page. You’ll prove your ideas in an organized, evidence-filled production. But instead of writing an essay, you’ll create a screencast: a video where the viewers see your screen and hear your voice talking about what you see. (Most of the videos I make are screencasts; for example, this introduction to the course is a screencast.)
- This video will be assessed in the same four areas described in the main RA3 assignment sheet, with the style grade assessing your speaking voice–its clarity, liveliness, and suitability of word choice for a video’s audience.
- If you choose to create a video, you must submit it the same way you submitted your audio version of RA1: you’ll create the video (see below for my software recommendations), upload it to YouTube, and then embed that YouTube video into a new post on your blog along with a detailed written Statement of Goals and Choices. (See my post on how to write an SOGC for reminders of what I expect.)
- The video analysis may not be done collaboratively.
If you choose this path, I have the following suggestions:
- While there are many options for screencasting software, I strongly recommend Camtasia, a popular and user-friendly program. The 30-day free trial is fully functional, so you can download it, use it for this project, and then decide later whether you want to buy it or uninstall it. (I use it a lot as well, so I would be able to help.)
- If you use Camtasia, you can easily edit out moments where you mess up while recording. So if you make a mistake, you don’t need to stop your recording and start over; you can simply continue recording and edit out the mistake later.
- There are lots of good tutorials on how to use Camtasia; if you’re confused, read the software’s official documentation or just search Google or YouTube. I bet someone else will have had the same problem.
- You’ll want to plan your video extensively, including the big picture of what you’ll show when (to keep your viewers from getting bored) and the detailed picture of what you want to say. You may feel most comfortable reading from a script, or you might rather simply talk casually from an outline. Do whichever will make you sound the best (to keep your style score from suffering).
- Obviously, much of what the viewer sees will be the Wikipedia talk page itself. But to keep the video visually interesting, consider what else you might show to help you make your point.
- I use a free browser plug-in called Diigo to highlight text on webpages in different colors. If you want to highlight the text of your page, this might be a strong option. Consider what other creative ways you might emphasize your points (perhaps by zooming in and out or using other techniques).
- Remember that you can check out USB headsets from the library for 1 day, to be used outside of the library. Using a microphone will help your voice quality sound much stronger and clearer (helping your style grade).
- UPDATE: A scholar named Dan Anderson gives a screencasting assignment to his students, and he has lots of good advice on that page. I especially like his bulleted list of things you can show in a Screencast, like video of yourself typing, and his list of sample screencasts at the bottom.
I’ve made a video that walks you through the main issues I saw in RA1. It describes a primary and secondary issue for each of the four areas of the rubric (ideas, organization, evidence, style).
(I also know I promised it would be 15-minutes tops, but I went a bit over. Still, compared to a 50-minute class, I think it’s a good deal. My apologies.)
Watch it at http://www.screencast.com/t/hjDYUzPXhD.
This post is a short-and-simple preview of the reading for Wednesday and a brief discussion-starter about our experiment with being distracted in class today.
Reading for Wednesday
Even though we didn’t talk about it in class, you (hopefully) have seen that I’ve asked you to read Shirky chapter 3 and a pdf from a writer named James Paul Gee for Wednesday. Your blog post assignment asks you to write about the connection you see between the two chapters. Feel free to be informal in this post, letting your ideas take you wherever they go, but please also demonstrate that you’ve put some effort into it. Write a lot, so we’ll have lots to talk about in class–but don’t worry about making it formal or beautifully proofread. (I’ll give everyone a grade for these posts, but I’ll only respond to a few each week.)
Gee is an interesting dude. One of his passions is reforming education so that it will be more like a videogame, full of meaningful tasks that make sense in the context of a community. Listen to him at 5:51 in this video where he tells the story of one of his earliest mistakes when playing videogames: his assumption that you should read the manual first:
His discussion of videogames will help us in two big ways:
- He’ll add to our conversation about communicating in different modalities, since videogames are inherently multimodal.
- He’ll give us a lot of helpful terminology about communities and audiences–which are clearly crucial parts of any rhetorical communication.
Distractions in Class
Thanks for being so excellently distracted today during our Twitter/Tweetdeck experiment. Clearly, we need to debrief it a bit, but I was intrigued by the tweets I saw later. Many of you pointed out that it was too much:
Of course, I stacked the deck: I asked you to be distracted on the day that we learned some new terms (modality and medium) and played with new technologies. Maybe distractions are better on days that are likely to be boring?
For me, the lingering question is still the one I started out with: when does live tweeting work? In what situations (if any) can it be helpful/useful/important for the event?
Sometimes you’ll hear the word backchannel used to describe this sort of thing. So I’m essentially wondering, “Do we even need a backchannel?” (Hint: I think we do. But it’s up to us all to figure out when and where.)
I’ve posted a quick video showing you two options for printing your RA1 draft tomorrow. I made it because I know that it’s sometimes hard to figure out how to print your draft when you’re writing online.
This isn’t required watching, but if you’re new to WordPress or uncomfortable with digital technology, please take two minutes and check it out:
And if you’d like to talk through a draft with me in person, I have lots of office hours today (Tuesday). (They’re in the sidebar if you forget when they are!) Please drop by Scarborough 117 any time during those hours and I’ll be here, even if you didn’t make an appointment. If they don’t work for you, you’ll need to check with me first to make sure I’ll be here.
Welcome to my sections of RHET 351, “Rhetoric of/in Digital Spaces.”
This site is the home base for all three sections, the place where you’ll find our detailed course schedule, the syllabus, and all the details for your assignments. It’s public, meaning that anything I post here could potentially be seen by anyone on Earth. And because this is a public site, we’ll also occasionally use our private Moodle site for things that should be kept private. (See the syllabus section “Understanding Our Course Websites” for more.)
One thing you’ll notice quickly as you explore this site is that this main column on the home page will include very different sorts of information at different times. This column is organized in reverse chronological order, with the newest stuff on top, regardless of whether it’s a blog post from me or a formal assignment.
But sometimes, getting information through other organizational schemes makes more sense. If you can’t find something here, try one of these:
- Go to the Schedule page by clicking Schedule at the top of any page on this blog. From there, you’ll see an ordered, chronological schedule of everything we’re doing in class (as opposed to the reverse chronological order of this home page). Think of the Schedule page as the table of contents for the course.
- You can also use the list of “Categories of Posts” in the right column to see only certain kinds of posts. For instance, this post is filed under the category “Instructor Blog,” but major assignments will use the “Major Assignment” category, and so on.
To help you understand what you’re getting into, I made a 5-minute video with a very quick introduction to the course:
I’m looking forward to the semester!