Let’s get (re-)thinking about the first major paper!

Recall that your major paper is engaging the research question you’ve been formulating since Response Paper 1.2. During your first conference, which is approximately twenty minutes in duration, you and I will chat about that question, how you are exploring it (through your paper and new sound-script), and why your research question and line of inquiry matter in the first place.
To prepare for the conference, please prepare a brief blog entry that:

Briefly explains your new sound-script (e.g., its purpose, audience, and narrative style).

States your research question (from Response Paper 1.4). (Of course, you may have revised your question since 1.4).

Expresses the main claim of your first major paper and why you believe the claim is reasonable and risky.

Explains the stakes of your argument and why your claim and new sound-script are both important.

Articulates how your new sound-script serves to augment, critique, or complicate your chosen film or TV show.

Provides one artifact (e.g., a journal article, academic text, or selection from the course material) that you will be using in support of your new sound-script.

Raises any specific questions you have about your claim, your analysis, or your research. Of course, your questions can be about any nervousness or frustration you are having. Remember: both nervousness and frustration are a part of the writing process.

Be prepared to discuss your thought piece at the conference. In fact, I suggest that you print it and bring it with you. I will! (Please note that not having your thought piece for your conference seriously cramps your participation grade.)

Your thought piece can be written in a fragmented, bulleted manner, though your complex claim should be well-articulated and grammatically correct.

Please post your thought piece by Thursday, February 7th at 9:30 a.m. and categorize it under “#4 – Conference Thought Piece.”

Also, please read and comment on at least two thought pieces posted by your peers. What do you like about their ideas? What is missing? What needs explaining?

Thanks! Looking forward to reading your arguments and hearing your new sound-scripts,
Jentery