I’ll go out in sonic style, I suppose:

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The e-portfolio groceries list is still available for your eyes.  Give it a gander before you email me your portfolio’s URL.  Otherwise, I look forward to hearing from you before Thursday at 5 p.m.

It’s been a pleasure, everyone.

Best,

Jentery

It’s now live!

Check it out!

Questions at the last second? Drop by Art 347 on Tuesday the 18th. Here’s the schedule, with some slots still open:

10 — Jenna

10:20 — Ashley

10:40 — Sohroosh

11 — Jillian

11:20 — Summer

11:40 — Aitza

12 — Juhi

12:20 –Ryan

12:40 –  Nathan

1 — Miriam

1:20 — Scott

1:40 — Sam

People! It’s almost over. The balance of the haul appears as follows:

Response Paper 2.1 due Tuesday, March 4th (but no class)

Response Paper 2.2 due Thursday, March 6th (in the Allen Auditorium)

Major Paper 2 due Tuesday, March 11th (the last day of class)

No class on Thursday, March 13th

E-Portolios due on Thursday, March 20th

If you have questions about any of the above, then send them my way ASAP. I’ll do my best to access my e-mail while in D.C.; however, I cannot guarantee a response until Wednesday, ok?

Your campaigns all sound brilliant, and I’m looking forward to seeing what emerges. We’ve got campaigns on music culture and music education, sustaining public work with communities, working with youth with special needs, encouraging teen participation at the Club, and augmenting volunteer-staff-youth relationships. Lots in the works and plenty to be excited about.

Finally, here’s the schedule for Conference Three:

Thursday, March 13th

9:30 >>> Aly

9:50 >>> Jenna

10:30 >>> Kenyon

10:50 >>> Aitza

11:10 >>> Sam

12 >>> Summer

12:20 >>> Juhi

12:40 >>> Ashley

1 >>> Nathan

1:30 >>> Scott

1:50 >>> Seth

Friday, March 14th

10:10 >>> Ryan

10:30 >>> Ainsley

10:50 >>> Krysta

11:10 >>> Sohroosh

11:50 >>> Casey

12:15 >>> Francis

12:35 >>> Colleen

12:55 >>> Miriam

1:20 >>> Jillian

Be in touch.

From last quarter’s course, here are some examples for you:

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The challenge: How might you augment or build upon this pre-existing archive?

Be in touch with questions!

This prompt is rather open-ended. In your second sequence groups, please take thirty minutes to collaboratively compose what you learned this quarter about “service” — as a word, as a concept, as a set of practices, as a form of learning, as an experience — the choice is yours.

Here are some possible approaches to help you focus:

1. Look at the definitions we were working with. Do you think a new definition is necessary? If so, compose one and provide some example usages.

2. Return to the course texts. How did some of them, or one of them in particular, help you better understand “service”?

3. Check out the UW rhetoric for “service-learning.” Given your experiences, how would you revise this language? Give examples.

4 . Consider Tuesday’s panel. What did you learn from it and how does it map onto “service”?

I will be taking your responses, editing them, and posting them — together with your work on Alcoff, Cruz, and Illich — on the collaboratory soon. That said, make your entry engaging, concise, and quality. And categorize it under “service.”

Ideally, you could use this entry in your MP2, right? Indeed…

Good to see each of you today. I particularly enjoyed our panel conversations, and I encourage you to continue them here (on the blog), in class, in your groups, or elsewhere. How did the panel influence your projects? What questions do you have about public work or community-based research? What are your concerns? Be in touch!

In this blog entry, I provide (1) a response to the panel conversations, (2) links and notes relevant to your second sequence writing, (3) the plan for Thursday, and (4) the schedule for the second conference. Before I begin, please note that Response Paper 2.1 is now due on Tuesday, March 4th. Cool?

Part I: The Panel Conversations

Thank you for your wonderful engagement with the panelists. After the panel, each of them asked me to send you their appreciation. They were quite impressed and glad to see that you were asking the questions you asked. Those questions were productive and certainly relevant to your second sequence work, in particular, and public work, in general.

That said, I want to follow-up on a few points. Through comments on this entry or in your own blog entry, I welcome your responses. I will also give extra credit to any of you who type up your notes and e-mail them to me. I’ll upload them to the blog. Help each other out!

My notes:

• How might we think through a rhetoric that doesn’t focus on “problem solving” in the community? This tendency to “solve” or “change” clubs might emerge from the institutionalization of service-learning and our position as students “going into” communities. While the prompts for this sequence don’t mention “problems,” they do attend to “issues” and “needs.” How do we learn — from the clubs themselves — what the clubs’ needs and issues are? How might these issues and needs be more about how we conduct and understand “service”? Per Sooja, remember: You need their help for your work.
• How might we treat the clubs as the experts for the second sequence campaigns? Perhaps this approach intersects with effective interviewing and asking “how” rather than “yes or no” questions.
• Clearly, race, ethnicity, and gender were key for the panelists, especially the awareness of how each functions in specific contexts. How are they functioning in your campaign? To what effect?
• Per Kate: Activism and public work can be fun and creative! How might your campaign be fun and creative, too?
• How might our awareness of our own privilege inform how we engage communities? Per Heather, any public work is steeped in a complex history, which often includes oppression, racism, and sexism, among others. Here, how does academic knowledge intersect with experience in public work?
• I found that the panelists certainly engaged our conversations about defining “expertise,” speaking “with” communities, and the genealogy of “service.” What we might add to this list is collaboration, which, for the panelists, appeared to serve as an alternative to “change,” “problem-solving,” and “helping.” What do you think?
• Time. Time. Time. Looks like we need more of it to create sustained, meaningful relationships. Since we won’t get it, how might instead think through productive collaborations with the clubs? (Read: Make the most of what time remains.) What are the futures of your campaigns? For example, how might you inform and educate future service-learners?
• Listen. Listen. Listen. How might our panelists’ emphasis on listening more and speaking less map onto our conversations about sonic culture?

Have more to add? Then do it! Don’t let the conversations end here.

Part II: Links and Notes for Sequence Two

To keep it short and sweet, here are some bullet points:

• Response Paper 2.1: Keep in mind that you are writing for listening, that you are writing for a public, and that you needn’t force an issue. This prompt is not about academic writing, people. Given your and your peer’s podcasts, what do you think the public should know? How would you communicate that knowledge in a podcast?
• Questions about writing Major Paper 2? See this entry.
• Who is your 2.1 peer? Find out here.
• What is a part of the portfolio? Find out here.
• Looking for MP2 examples? Find them here.
• Looking for evidence for your MP2? Aside from interviews and the media you are composing, check out the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse!

Be in touch with questions about any of the above.

Part III: Thursday’s Class

• Final look at the Keyword Collaboratory
• Final review of the e-portfolio (with a check-list!)
• Prepping for Your Group Presentation and Major Paper 2
• Final questions about Sequence Two, Service-Learning, and the Class

Part IV: Schedule for Conference 2 (in Art 347)

Thursday, February 28th

1 p.m.: Francis, Nate, Sam & Scott (tentative)

2 p.m.: Ashley, Seth, Jillian and Ainsley

Wednesday, March 5th

12:30 p.m.: Kenyon, Casey, Ryan, Miriam, and Colleen

3 p.m.: Juhi, Jenna, Sohroosh & Aly

4 p.m.: Krysta, Summer & Aitza

If your group wants to meet with me again, then my office hours are Thursday, 12-2 p.m. Roll by.

That should cover everything for now. If not, then please let me know what questions you have!

Yours,

Jentery

Howdy. Below are the pairings for Response Paper 2.1.

Ryan & Miriam

Colleen listen to Kenyon

Kenyon listen to Casey

Casey listen to Colleen

Ainsley & Seth

Jillian & Ashley

Aitza listen to Summer

Summer listen to Krysta

Krysta listen to Aitza

Nathan & Francis

Scott & Sam

Sohroosh & Aly

Juhi & Jenna

Of note, 2.1 is now due by Tuesday, March 4th (although I suggest finishing it this week).

Be in touch with questions!

For your second major paper, I recommend — first of all — that you start writing it soon, if you have not already.  Your 2.2 group presentations should be a good start.I also recommend that you collaboratively write your introduction and then parse out writing responsibilities for the balance of the paper.  An example scenario could be:

(1) Get together to write the intro and construct and agree upon a clear and complex claim.

(2) Distribute subsequent paragraphs based upon the intro, with Student A writing a paragraph or two on the context of your Club and your issue, Student B writing two paragraphs on “Media Approach 1″ and Student C writing two paragraphs on “Media Approach 2.”

(3) Get back together to collaboratively revise for flow and clarity.

(4) Collaboratively add additional paragraph(s) if need be.

(5) Collaboratively compose a conclusion.

As you collaboratively write, please be in touch with your questions.  Don’t hesitate to ask!  I’m here to help!

This is the final push, people.  Only four classes left!

All the best,
Jentery

Before we hit the list, first consider some examples:

• English 121 E-Portfolio by Megan Nordstrom
• English 121 E-Portfolio by Nick Johnson
• Sarah Wang’s 131 Portfolio with a “tags” theme (passcode is “sarah”)
• Zachary Brown’s 131 Portfolio with a robot theme
• Gareth Snow’s 131 Portfolio with an “algorithm” and “atlas” theme
• Jessica Vu’s 131 Portfolio with a “movement” theme
• Kendell Tylee’s 131 Portfolio with a diversity theme

What’s more, also consider the things that I read for in your revised papers and portfolio:

• Understanding of the course outcomes (showing them, not just telling them)
• Awareness of your genre, audience, context, and situation
• Diversity of “voice” or that you know how to write, when to write, and for whom to write
• Complex, risky, persuasive and sustained claims-making
• The three-step analysis (introduce, explain, and implicate)
• Productive conclusions that answer the questions, “So what?” and “What’s next?” (rather than repeating your introduction)
• Detail and specificity instead of generalizations and vague references
• Developed paragraphs, especially in academic arguments
• Awareness of your own writing choices and strategies (especially in the “meta-text” of your portfolio)
• Multiple forms of evidence (e.g., interviews, academic texts, video, sound, and even personal experience)
• Rhetorical flow, transitions, and rhythm
• Substantive, structural revision when necessary (as opposed to grammatical or syntactical changes)
• MLA documentation and formatting (for your Major Paper only), and
• Creativity! Wit! Brilliancy!

Ok, on to the list, then:

The Portfolio as a Whole

• Is published?
• Does NOT include “empty pages” for the papers that you did not revise? (Note: Click “delete page” when necessary.)
• Is creative, clever, honest, and engaging?
• OPTIONAL: Has a theme (e.g., personal/experiential, humorous/witty, conceptual, or service-related)?
• OPTIONAL: Is stylized (e.g., font, color, page body width, and layout)?

The Introduction

• Explains the purpose of the portfolio?
• Includes the outcomes (in your own words or verbatim)?
• Is appropriate as your e-portfolio’s “home page” (that is, as the first page your reader will see)?
• Lists each paper (3-5 RPs and 1 MP) that you’ve chosen to revise?
• Has a title?

Each Revised Paper Page (both Response and Major Papers)

• Includes the revised, final draft of the paper as an attachment?
• Includes an introduction to the paper (e.g., what the paper is about, how it functioned in the class, and how it represents your writing and portfolio)?
• Addresses at least two outcomes? (Note: You do NOT need to address every outcome targeted in the paper prompt. That’s too much work, friend, and quite redundant.)
• Does NOT include sections for outcomes that you didn’t address? (Note: Click “delete section” when necessary.)
• Includes the paper prompt (either a link to or attached as a .pdf from the course website)?
• Includes quotes from your own work?
• Includes evidence, evidence, evidence (e.g., blog entries, paper drafts, e-mails, blog comments, G-talk chats, letters, PowerPoint presentations, and captures)?
• Has a title?

Conclusion

• Summarizes what you’ve learned in English 121?
• Discusses your writing (and you?) as a process in revision?
• Discusses your participation in the class?
• Includes the balance of your 121 papers that you did not revise?
• Has a title?

Did you…

• View your portfolio as an end-user would in an internet browser? (Note: Click on the portfolio URL at the bottom of your “portfolio summary.”)
• Read your portfolio and revised papers aloud?
• Include a works cited page for each paper (when necessary)?
• E-mail me your portfolio URL before Thursday, March 20th at 5 p.m.?

Done? Then commence getting rad for the break and, heck, be in touch during the spring. I’ll be around, and I’d love to hear from you.

All the best to each of you!