Afternoon, everyone. Thanks for a great class today. I especially appreciated your collaborative claims, which were well-written and nicely articulated.

Now for a list of what’s up for Thursday and then — from today’s class — a quick review of producing productive claims and research questions.

Please let me know ASAP if you have ANY questions about what follows, ok? As I mentioned in my e-mail today, I realize that today’s class included a lot of information. Rather than getting overwhelmed, consider that information a map of the next few weeks.

For Thursday, please:

• If you have not already, complete Podcast 1 and upload your sound file to the course drop box. (The podcasts will be considered late after today.)
• Read the 1.2 prompt carefully, respond to it (three paragraphs, three three-step analyses, three research questions), and upload your response to the course drop box (by Friday the 25th at the latest).
• Highly Recommended: Review the workshop on masking and Murray Schafer’s terms (e.g., keynote, signal, and soundmark) and consider using them in the “service” of your 1.2 writing.
• Bring a copy of your film or TV show clip (or a URL for that clip) to class for your sequence one peer.
• Be prepared to discuss and collaboratively write about Illich and Cruz, as well as your definition of service.

Otherwise, here’s a quick blog reflection on 9:30-11:20, Tuesday, January 22nd, SMI 309:

Complex claims:

• Acknowledge counterarguments (e.g., “while some may argue…”),
• Answer “so what?” or the stakes at hand (in a risky, although relevant and persuasive, fashion),
• Provide detail and context (e.g., relevant evidence and examples), and
• Are future-oriented or forward-looking (e.g., suggest where the argument is going and what it’s doing).

Productive research questions in 121:

• Inquire about an identifiable (though somewhat general) subject,
• Focus on a particular time (e.g., the 1960s) and space (e.g., Mexico City),
• Stress how the subject at hand relates to a particular person or group,
• Target a specific social issue, and
• Ask “how” rather than “what” or “why.”

That sounds about right. Again, don’t hesitate to ask questions, and I’ll see you on Thursday.

Best,

Jentery

Are as follows:

Team North Seattle (two teams to emerge) >>>

• Scott (scottwc3@u.washington.edu)
• Samuel (samuel3@u.washington.edu)
• Francis (canasn@u.washington.edu)
• Nathan (peadon@u.washington.edu)
• Summer (sjs05@u.washington.edu)
• Ashley (wakea@u.washington.edu)
• Krysta (krystay@u.washington.edu)

Team Wallingford (two teams to emerge) >>>

• Ainsley (ains@u.washington.edu)
• Jillian (jkd909@u.washington.edu)
• Aitza (aitzae@u.washington.edu)
• Sohroosh (sohroosh@u.washington.edu)
• Juhi (jainj@u.washington.edu)
• Aly (aomori07@u.washington.edu)
• Jenna (jshio@u.washington.edu)
• Seth (sethtai@u.washington.edu)

Team Rotary (two teams to emerge) >>>

• Miriam (meh7@u.washington.edu)
• Lynn Leigh (llhall@u.washington.edu)
• Alexandra (alkenyon@u.washington.edu)
• Casey (kcmin123@u.washington.edu)
• Nick (linfengx@u.washington.edu)
• Colleen (ccross59@u.washington.edu)

Here’s the list, together with e-mail addresses, people!

• Ainsley (ains@u.washington.edu) & Scott (scottwc3@u.washington.edu)

• Jillian (jkd909@u.washington.edu) & Aitza (aitzae@u.washington.edu)

• Miriam (meh7@u.washington.edu) & Lynn Leigh (llhall@u.washington.edu)

• Sohroosh (sohroosh@u.washington.edu) & Juhi (jainj@u.washington.edu)

• Alexandra (alkenyon@u.washington.edu) & Samuel (samuel3@u.washington.edu)

• Francis (canasn@u.washington.edu) & Casey (kcmin123@u.washington.edu)

• Aly (aomori07@u.washington.edu) & Nathan (peadon@u.washington.edu)

• Colleen (ccross59@u.washington.edu) & Jenna (jshio@u.washington.edu)

• Summer (sjs05@u.washington.edu) & Seth (sethtai@u.washington.edu)

• Ryan (taylor42@u.washington.edu) & Ashley (wakea@u.washington.edu)

• Nick (linfengx@u.washington.edu) & Krysta (krystay@u.washington.edu)