PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

Texts  in  Conversation  Essay  

LOGISTICS  

Assignment  overview   Assignment  Description:  For this assignment, you’ll build on the skills in writing and textual analysis you developed in your rhetorical analysis as you begin your work on your central research project for the class. Having chosen a topic related to gaming culture, for the TiC you’ll examine how the different sources, voices, and perspectives inform the larger conversation about the issue you are exploring. Your TiC will be accompanied by an annotated bibliography of 8 sources.   Due  dates:       • Preliminary  Blogpost:  Thursday,  October  15,  by  class  time  (see  p.  3)   • Preliminary  Annotated  Bibliography:  Friday,  October  16,  5pm  (see  p.  5)   • First  draft:  Tuesday,  October  20,  by  class  time  (see  p.  7)   • Revision:  Thursday,  October  29,  by  class  time  (see  p.  10)     Essay  Format:     • Preliminary blog post: at least 300 words in length • Preliminary annotated bibliography: Must contain at least 8 sources, one sentence summary, & must indicate how you found each source • Final revision as a whole must be 1800+ words (many TiCs end up being closer to 2400 words). Include separate title page, including name, title, and date; include page numbers. Note: Bibliography does not count toward word count. • Final annotated bibliography: must contain at least 8 sources in MLA form; must be annotated with a minimum of 3 sentences; must indicate how you found the sources.   Submission  Guidelines:       • Preliminary Blog post: Posted to the Rhetgaming blog under your own user account by class • Preliminary Bibliography: Uploaded to your “TiC” Box folder by 5pm • Full draft (revised blog post & drafted comments): Uploaded to your “TiC” Box folder; in addition, 2 printouts brought to class. • Revised draft, including revised blog post, comments, and an annotated bibliography of 8 sources in MLA format: Uploaded to “TiC” Box folder and printed out. Grading:  This  assignment  is  worth  25%  of  your  class  grade.  

  ASSIGNMENT  GOALS  

               

As the first step in your research project, the Texts in Conversation assignment helps you survey the discussion already going on about your topic to prepare you to develop your own position (which you’ll share in assignment #3, the Research-Based Argument). More specifically, this assignment has the following goals: 1. To encourage you to explore the conversation surrounding your chosen research topic, identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing multiple perspectives 1   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015   2. To motivate you to put into practice research skills developed in class and through the library workshop 3. To help you develop an organized method for researching that includes finding and evaluating the most important research sources for your topic 4. To give you practice with experimenting with voice and levels of style as well as the canon of arrangement For this assignment, you will create a faux Blog conversation between your sources about your research topic. The image below provides an visual overview of the process. See the rest of the assignment sheet below for more details.

2   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

Texts  in  Conversation:  Preliminary  Blogpost   The preliminary blogpost is due by class on Thursday, October 15. Post it to our class blog.

 

PRELIMINARY  BLOGPOST  WALKTHROUGH      

               

1. Select your research topic: you will use the same topic for your TiC and for your Research-Based Argument. By Wednesday, October 14, you should have identified a tentative topic for your research project (if you are still struggling with this, see the “Choosing your research topic” handout linked through the main “TiC” page, under the “Assignments” tab on the Rhetgaming website). In most cases, this is the topic you will use for writing both your TiC and your Research-Based Argument assignment. However, if you become dissatisfied with the topic as you start to explore it, you can switch topics as we move to the RBA if you’d like. The key is that you use for your TiC whatever topic you plan (at this point) to carry through into your final research paper. 2. Identify and read one source for this topic. It can be a primary or a secondary source; it can be a written text, visual text, interview, or even a documentary. It may reflect your stance on your topic or complicate the hypothesis that you intend to pursue. If you have questions about what source to use, please ask me. In addition, secondary sources generally work better than primary sources for this assignment. Be sure to put into practice your skills of rhetorical analysis as you analyze the text’s argument. 3. W rite a blog entry on the topic and post it to our class blog by class on Thursday, October 15. Be sure to reference the “How To Post on our Class Blog” handout (found under the “Class Handouts” tab on the Rhetgaming website) or email me if you need technical help. Please be sure to use a title that reflects your topic. Your post should be at least 300 words in length, composed of THREE paragraphs. •

Paragraph #1: At the beginning of the post, be sure to start out with a brief general description of your topic of at least 3 sentences in length. Be sure that somewhere in your first paragraph you state that this is the topic of a research project that you intend to pursue over the next few weeks.

•

Paragraph #2: Then, in the next paragraph, introduce your source and its relation to your topic. Be sure to include specific quotations or mention specific details as relevant and to identify its stance or the perspective. Your goal is to convey how this source fits in to the context of the conversation about your topic.

•

Paragraph #3: You should conclude this initial blog post by re-framing the discussion in terms of your research project, perhaps speculating on a focus, a research question, a methodology, and even a tentative thesis (if you’re ready for that). This conclusion does not have to be well-developed since you are just at the beginning stages of your research.

4. Post your blog entry on the class blog. When you post to the blog, please select the categories “Fall 2015” AND the category “Fall 2015 Student Research.” You can tag it with relevant keywords if you’d like.

3   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

FURTHER  RESOURCES  FOR  THE  PRELMINARY  BLOGPOST                         For examples of different blog posts (of differing quality) for this assignment, see: •

FOCUSED ON AN ARTICLE: o “The Motivation of the Griefing Subculture” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/texts-in-conversation-themotivation-of-the-griefing-subculture/ o “Online Social Games” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/a-fouryear-history-online-social-games/

•

FOCUSED ON A BOOK: “Easter Eggs, Glitches, and Cheats” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2010/10/13/easter-eggs-glitches-and-cheats-ftw/

•

FOCUSED ON AN EDITORIAL: “The Irreverent Face of Cultural Rhetoric” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/tic-blog-the-irreverent-face-of-culturalrhetoric/

•

FOCUSED ON AN INTERVIEW: “Second Life: Interview with Ayca Shan” at http://crossculturalrhetoric.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/second-life-interview-with-aycashan/#more-415

•

FOCUSED ON A GOVERNMENT REPORT: “R18+ Rating in Australia” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/tic-preliminary-blogpost/

•

FOCUSED ON SURVEY RESULTS: “The Many Faces of Glitches” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/tic-the-many-faces-of-glitches/

•

FOCUSED ON A DOCUMENTARY: “Professional Gaming” at http://rhetoricofgaming.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/professional-gaming-and-my-source-theking-of-kong-a-fistful-of-quarters/

•

FOR MORE SAMPLES: Select “Fall 2011 Student Research”, “Spring 2011 Student Research”, “Spring 2012 Student Research”, “Fall 2012 Student Research”, “Spring 2013 Student Research,” “Fall 2013 Student Research” or “Winter 2015 Student Research” from the “Categories” dropdown menu, mid-way down on our right side bar on the class website. This will take you to a list of blog posts written for this assignment by students in previous Rhetoric of Gaming classes.

  EVALUATION  CRITERIA  FOR  THE  PRELIMINARY  BLOGPOST  

               

The original blog entry that you post to the class blog is considered a draft and will not be graded, though your grade for this assignment as a whole will be reduced by ½ a grade (from A- to A-/B+) if the blog post • • • •

Is less than 300 words in length Just talks about the topic and doesn’t showcase a source Overall demonstrates little effort toward clarity, coherence, or correctness in grammar, punctuation, spelling or word usage Is late or missing

4   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

Texts  in  Conversation:  Preliminary  Annotated  Bib   The preliminary annotated bibliography is due by 5pm on Friday, October 16. Upload to your “TiC” folder in Stanford box.

  PRELIMINARY  BIBLIOGRAPHY    WALKTHROUGH  

               

Now that you have worked with one source for your preliminary blogpost, your next step is to put into play the research skills that you learned in the library workshop and locate 7 additional sources relevant to your research topic (for a total of 8 sources). Read them and then list them in a working annotated bibliography in proper MLA form, including the source that you used for your blog post. You should have a mixture of primary and secondary sources. 1. Search. Use the skills you develop in library workshop and class to find a series of sources that offer a variety of perspectives on your topic. You need to use at least TWO different academic databases in your search. That means you need to branch out from relying just on EBSCO to find all your materials. Keep track of your search terms and generate a preliminary list of texts related to your topic. 2. Select. Read through the materials you’ve found – some you might skim, for some you might read an abstract, for others you might read them in their entirety. Your goal for your annotated bibliography is to represent a variety of perspectives on your issue, so while you want to keep track of all the sources you find, on your preliminary annotated bibliography, you want to create a list of EIGHT sources that represent different viewpoints (for instance, in terms of stance, discipline or approach) on your topic. Try to identify major voices in the conversation and include them in your bibliography. 3. Assem ble. Format your bibliography in MLA form that includes those eight sources. You can have more if you want, but you must have at least eight and you must include the source from your preliminary blogpost among them. Feel free to use a citation management program like Refworks to help with your bibliography format. 4. Annotate. For this stage in annotation you should include two sentences after each citation.

•

FIRST, write a one sentence summary.

•

SECOND, include a notation of how you found each source (i.e. “through Google Search”; “used Academic Search Premiere”; “Used SearchWorks”; “Found in article bibliography”) as well as the URL for the source if applicable (you do not need a URL for a source found through an academic database; include a URL for any source that you get directly from the web).

For this assignment, you need to include sources from at least TWO databases. Do not list aggregators like xsearch or EBSCO as your databases; list instead the individual databases that the aggregators drew their articles from. I.e.: (Database: PubMed. Found through xsearch) Please keep in mind that you are welcome (and also encouraged) to use Searchworks to research your topic – however, Searchworks is an online CATALOGUE, not a DATABASE, and so you can’t use it to fulfill the database requirement for this assignment. 4. Submit. Upload the preliminary annotated bibliography to your “TiC” folder on Stanford Box by 5pm. No printout needed. 5   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

FURTHER  RESOURCES    FOR  THE  PRELIMINARY  ANNOTATED  BIBLIOGRAPHY    

               

For help with MLA form, refer to Envision chapter 7 or to our MLA Style handout under “Writing Resources” on our website. Refworks will also help you format citations in MLA style if you choose to use it. See a sample annotated bibliography on the TiC assignment page through our website.

EVALUATION  CRITERIA  FOR  THE  PRELIMINARY  ANNOTATED  BIBLIOGRAPHY  

               

The preliminary bibliography is also considered a draft and will not be graded, though your grade for this assignment as a whole will be reduced by ½ a grade (from A- to A-/B+) if the bibliography • • • • • •

Doesn’t contain 8 sources Doesn’t show SOME attempt at MLA form (it doesn’t need to be perfect – I just need to see that you are trying) Omits the reference to how you searched/found the sources Doesn’t include citations found through at least 2 different databases Doesn’t include URLs for the mainstream websites (you don’t need them for citations you found through academic databases) Is late or missing

6   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

Texts  in  Conversation:  Full  Draft   The full draft of your TiC is due on Tuesday, October 20 by class. Failure to submit a full draft will result in a grade deduction of ½ a grade on your overall TiC grade. Please upload to your Box “TiC” folder and also bring two printouts to class.

TIC  FULL  DRAFT  WALKTHROUGH  

               

This component of the TiC asks you to put your sources in conversation with one another to start to probe the complexity of the issue that you are researching. •

Read through the texts that you listed in your preliminary bibliography, using the skills of rhetorical analysis that you develop for your Rhetorical Analysis assignment to best understand the author’s argument and his/her stance related to your research topic.

•

Cut and paste your research blog post into a word document. You will create the rest of your TiC essay in this word document, NOT on our website.

•

Revise your original blog post to reflect the deeper understanding of your topic that you have gained through your preliminary research. Be sure to end with a statement about your project and any research questions you had at the beginning of your research. In addition, you should revise in a way so that it is structured to engage your reader: think about rhetorical strategies, not just about delivering information. Also revise to include brief reference to the CONTEXT/background of your topic. Use the Research Guide to help you. This will involve expanding your initial blog post from 300+ words to at least 400+ words.

•

Choose 3 sources from your preliminary bibliography that seem to you to represent intersecting but individual viewpoints in terms of the conversation about your topic. Do not choose ones that simply represent the same rhetorical or argumentative position; you are looking to represent multiple perspectives on the issue, not just voices that speak in unison. If possible, choose those sources that represent some of the most important voices or stances on your topic; use sources with a strong ethos for your argument. DO NOT use the same source again for your comments that you used in your original blog post: the comments should be based in new sources.

•

Re-read these 3 sources critically and keeping in mind strategies for rhetorical analysis that we discussed in class, keeping in mind that you will have to reproduce their stance/point of view in your TiC. Some hints:

•

o

If you are dealing with a primary source (a game or a website), you may opt to represent this perspective by writing as a person associated with that website (the author or even a representative of the company).

o

If you are writing about a source with multiple authors, choose ONE as the primary author of for your comment.

o

Your selection of sources is one way in which you are suggesting your own developing stance on the issue; it is how you will guide your reader’s understanding of the topic.

Now, maintaining the format of a blog post, but working in Microsoft Word, write a comment to the original blog post in the persona of the author of each of the 3 sources that you selected – this will be a total of 3 comments. Each one should be a MINIMUM of 250 words in length – you should expect each comment to talk up at least 3/4s of a page, 1 ½ spaced. In it, the “Author” should engage with the ideas of the original blog post in context of his/her own ideas and specifically to 7  

Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015   the text/source that you are looking at. The idea behind this is that you are writing as if that author happened upon the blog post and was responding based on his or her own work/thoughts on the topic. Notes:

•

o

Be sure to use your rhetorical analysis skills in preparation for writing the TiC to help you identify the persona, voice, rhetorical situation, and appeals that this author might be likely to use based on your knowledge of him/her from the source so that you can take those into account in terms of the style you use in the blogpost.

o

As needed, use Google or other search methods to find out background on the author to include (for instance, if the author is a Professor at Harvard, you might have “her” mention that in her comment as a way of establishing ethos).

A note about quoting: o

•

You should use some direct quotes in your TiC comments, enclosed in quotation marks … however, the author mention that s/he is deliberately quoting him or herself; do not simply quote the way you would in a research paper. For instance: §

RECOMMENDED QUOTING METHOD FOR TIC: As I said in my article, “Gaming is the devil’s work.” (Note the commenter draws attention to the fact she is quoting herself from her article)

§

DISCOURAGED QUOTING METHOD FOR TIC: I would like to emphasize that “gaming is the devil’s work.” (Note that while this more integrated method might be appropriate for a traditional research essay, it does not work when trying to maintain the pretense of the blog genre as we are for this assignment)

o

If you copy something verbatim from a source, you MUST enclose it in quotation marks! Never ever (not even in your notes) leave off the quotation marks because that's the way you start down that slippery slope toward plagiarism (intentional or otherwise – and the Honor Code doesn't really discriminate between the two)

o

Please cite the source of any direct quote (using a footnote, for this assignment)

o

Please cite the source of any material that you closely paraphrase (statistics, for instance, or enumerated lists of facts or definitions).

o

PLEASE NOTE – these are very different rules for using source material than you would use in writing a traditional research paper! We will be exploring the differences as we move into the RBA assignment

Having written these THREE comments based on THREE different sources, now write one final comment of at least 300 words. For this final comment, you are writing as yourself but still in the persona of a blogger who has received these comments on your post. You should assess the 3 different perspectives that have weighed in on your topic and original source and how they relate to the project that you have in mind. Your goal in responding to each source is to do the following: o

SUMMARIZE (give a pithy reminder of what the source/comment was about)

o

EVALUATE (assess the source, considering bias, kairos, or just evaluating the article for relevance or persuasiveness), and

o

CONNECT (consider how the article applies to your topic and line of inquiry).

Be sure at the end of this comment to include at least 2-3 sentences in which you offer a tentative thesis or research question that is governing your research at this point, including how it might have changed since you wrote your original blogpost.

8   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

FURTHER  RESOURCES  FOR  THE  TIC  FULL  DRAFT  

               

See sample TiCs linked through the “TiC” overview page, linked from the Assignments tab on the Rhetgaming website.

EVALUATION  CRITERIA  FOR  THE  TIC  FULL  DRAFT  

               

The first drafted TiC, since it is a draft, will not be graded, though your grade for this assignment as a whole will be reduced by ½ a grade (from A- to A-/B+) if it is not turned in. At a minimum, it needs to contain a revised original blogpost, three comments, and a final blogpost and show some attention to showcasing source material and engaging the sources in conversation.

9   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015  

Texts  in  Conversation:  Revised  TiC  &  Revised  Annotated  Bib   The final revision of the TiC and annotated bibliography is due by Thursday, October 29 at class. Upload to your “TiC” folder on Stanford Box and bring a printout to class, ideally in your blue class folder.

 

REVISION  WALKTHROUGH:  TIC  

               

The revision of your TiC full draft – based on instructor feedback as well as comments from your peer review partners – is due on Thursday, October 29 by class. This version is the one that you submit for a grade. Please check the “TiC Checklist” included below and re-read this assignment sheet to make sure you fulfill all the requirements for this assignment. Be sure to take into account Design (the canons of Delivery and Style) as you complete your revision. While you are not graded on the intricacies of your execution of design elements, the formatting and general “look” of the assignment should reflect attention to the genre of a blog. This can be done through very simple –or, alternately, very elaborate – attention to stylistic detail. See the TiC Assignment sheet for some models of different, equally appropriate, ways of bringing blog design into your TiC. In addition, be sure to have your sources engage in a conversation about your topic. Although the TiC uses a block structure (one source per comment), your challenge is to make sure that you are integrating a dialogue throughout the entire TiC. Some ways to do so include: •

Having the sources deliberately respond to different facets of the other source’s ideas

•

Using your concluding post (that is in your own voice) as a way to draw connections between the courses and point to any differences in perspectives and approach.

•

Perhaps even being innovative with comments and having the sources do a brief follow up reply to one another beyond the mandated three comments

REVISION  WALKTHROUGH:  ANNOTATED  BIBLIOGRAPHY  

               

To complement your revision of the full TiC, please revise your preliminary annotated bibliography. As with the preliminary bibliography, the annotated bibliography should list a minimum of 8 sources (4 of which will be featured in the TiC itself). The citations should be in correct MLA bibliographic form; you should include after each of the 8 citations •

At least 3 sentences that summarize the content/argument of the source and how you intend to use it in developing your argument. Please use complete sentences, not sentence fragments. (Include no more than 5 sentences, please.)

•

A notation about how you found/searched for this source (the same as in the preliminary bibliography). This does not count as one of your 3-5 sentences mentioned in the bullet point above. It is additional.

•

As for your preliminary bibliography, at least 2 of your sources must be drawn from 2 different academic databases. 10  

Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015   •

For each source you actually wrote about in your TiC (there will be 4 of them, including the original blogpost), please indicate in your annotation that it was (as relevant) “used for preliminary blogpost”; “used for comment #1”; “used for comment #2”; “used for comment #3.

•

Read Envision, chapter 5, for a discussion of writing annotations (p. 169-172).

•

Please include under your annotated bibliography an “Image Sources” section if you include images in your TiC. You can list these by comment # rather than by Figure #. Please use MLA form for your citations here.

FORMATTING NOTE: Please be sure that the titles of all books, journals, newspapers, films, and magazines are italicized; also check to be sure that the titles of articles or any other short texts (i.e. individual blog posts, commercials, TV episodes) are enclosed in quotation marks. For help on MLA Style, see the “MLA Style” handout linked through the Writing Resources tab on the Rhetgaming website.

FURTHER  RESOURCES  FOR  YOUR  REVISIONS  

               

Conference. We will be having mandatory one-to-one meetings about your TiC draft, through which you can get detailed feedback on your essay. Peer Review: You’ll be participating in peer review for this assignment, and, as always, should consider the feedback of your peer review partners during revision. Samples. You’ll find several samples on the TiC assignment overview page on our class website, including full TiCs and examples of TiC design. Contact. As always, feel free to email me with any further questions about the assignment.

EVALUATION  CRITERIA  FOR  THE  REVISED  TIC  AND  ANNOTATED  BIBLIOGRAPHY  

               

An exemplary full draft of the Texts in Conversation assignment would contain the following: •

Thoughtful revision of original blog post into a well-written exploration of a single source that starts with a clear, focused articulation of your topic, including reference to the context of your topic; then engages effectively with a single source through a summary of its argument and the use of specific example/evidence to demonstrate its position in relation to the conversation on your topic; finally conclude with a clear articulation of your project and any relevant research questions. This portion should be 400+ words in length.

•

Strategic selection of 3 additional sources that complement and intersect with each other, demonstrating the differing viewpoints in the position and that seem to represent legitimate participants in the conversation about your topic. That is, your sources should not be selected by convenience (i.e., the first 3 sources you find) or just because they are controversial/extremist. Try if possible to identify key figures in the conversation on your topic and use them as sources.

•

A skillful evaluation of persona of the different source authors and execution of that persona through attention to style, detail, and use of appropriate strategies of development and rhetorical appeals.

•

Am ple reference to evidence or detail from sources through quotation, paraphrase, and specific example in both your own post and the comments from your sources. 11  

Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015   •

Consistent and meticulous use of footnotes to document use of direct quotations, close paraphrases, or material drawn from other outside sources (for instance, biographical information).

•

Clear and insightful final concluding comment that evaluates the usefulness of the different sources/arguments to your own research topic and posits a focused research question or hypothesis that you intend to explore.

•

Attention to design and the conventions of the blog format.

Features of an exemplary annotated bibliography component of the Texts in Conversation assignment include: • • •

•

• • •

It is in impeccable MLA form. It contains 8 sources (including the 1 from the preliminary blog post, and the 3 from the comments). It uses 2-3 complete sentences to clearly and concisely summarize each source’s main argument and to articulately situate that source’s argument/function in relation to the development of your own research project. It clearly notes how the source was located or found. This can be a sentence fragment (ie. Found using Google Scholar; Found using Expanded Academic Database; Found in the bibliography of Jones, Catherine. “Gaming for Fun.” The Games We Play. Ed. Tom Harris. NY: Penguin Books, 2007). This note should not be counted as one of the 3-5 sentences in the annotation – it is additional. It includes URLs (unless the URL is from a database search) It shows attention to design and ethos in overall correctness of punctuation, spelling, word usage, and grammar. It notes which sources were featured as either the original blogpost, or comment #1, #2 or #3.

If your annotated bibliography does not contain 8 sources, annotated, in MLA form as specified above, and reflecting use of at least 2 databases, your TiC grade will be reduced by ½ a grade (from A- to A-/B+) Lateness: Your overall TiC grade will be reduced by ½ a grade for each day that your TiC revision is late beyond the established deadline.

TIC  FINAL  SUBMISSION  CHECKLIST    

               

ü Assignm ent sheet. Did you re-read the assignment sheet to make sure that you fulfilled all the requirements of the assignment completely and correctly? Did you re-check the evaluation criteria to match your work with the assessment measures? ü Page num bers. Do you have page numbers on each page? (It’s okay to omit page numbers on the title page and/or the first page) ü Date. Did you change the date on your title page to reflect the REVISION date, not the DRAFT date?

12   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]  

PWR  1  |  The  Rhetoric  of  Gaming  |  Fall  2015   ü Correctness. Did you correct all typos and punctuation, grammar, and usage mistakes? See the “Writing Resources” tab on our website if you need grammar or punctuation help, or contact Christine or Hume (sututor.stanford.edu) to set up an appointment to review specific concerns). ü Design. Did you polish the design/delivery of your document? ü Style. Does the style of each blog comment match the ethos and persona of the source that it represents? ü Documentation. Did you use footnotes to indicate where you paraphrase or directly quote from sources? ü Structure. Does your final TiC include all the component parts? These include: 1. Revision of your original blog entry 2. 3 comments by your sources 3. A final comment by you, reflecting on sources and suggesting your current thesis or research question 4. Annotated bibliography in correct MLA form of at least 8 sources, including the 4 you use in your TiC. Annotation includes at least 3 sentences about the source PLUS a note about where you found it and which comment you used it for (as appropriate – only 4 sources will have this final type of notation). URLs are needed for web-based sources, though NOT for sources found academic databases linked through databases.stanford.edu. Keep in mind: bibliographic citations should be in alphabetical order by author’s last name and annotations should be full sentences, not fragments. ü Print out. Did you print out a copy (including title page and works cited) to turn in during class on the 29th? ü Peer review m aterials. Did you collect any paper (non-electronic) peer review materials that you received from your partners to turn in with your essay? Did you put the peer reviewers’ names on the top of the appropriate materials so they receive credit for their work? Did you also upload to your Coursework TiC folder any materials from your peer reviewers that you might have received electronically? ü Stanford Box. Did you upload your final version (including title page and works cited) to your Texts in Conversation folder on Coursework? ü Staple. Is your print out stapled? Even better, did you hand it in using your PWR folder you got with your rhetorical analysis?

13   Questions?  Email  me  at  [email protected]