Category: ITF Posts

Eportfolio Posting Assignment

This page contains the following sections:

  • Assignment Description and Directions
  • FAQs
  • Posting Guidelines
  • Where can I find external sources?

Assignment Description and Directions

For students not submitting a critical review paper that week: starting the week of March 20, after reading the week’s assigned texts, find an outside source (work of art, newspaper article, video, podcast, website, peer-reviewed journal article, Instagram post, tweet, archival source, etc.) that you think relates to the week’s readings. Write a post for the eportfolio site that describes the source, explains your rationale for choosing it, and relate the source to the week’s topics, themes, or the course overall. Publish your post along with your source and explanation to the eportfolio by noon on Wednesday before class meets on Thursday.

This is a low-stakes writing assignment — your post should be more casual or informal than your critical review paper and still provide original insight or reflect your understanding of the course material. As you progress with your research for the final research project, you might find sources relevant to both the class as well as your individual research project and use these posts as a write-to-learn exercise.

Sample posts:

Benefits

  • Develop critical thinking and writing skills when selecting a source and explaining its connection to the course readings.
  • Be more prepared for class and ready to contribute with a richer understanding of the texts.
  • Gain in-depth understanding of the research for your research assignment by writing annotations of sources that relate to both your assignment and the class topics.
  • Increase digital literacy and research skills by researching and selecting sources.
  • Broaden writing skills by writing low-stakes posts intended for a public audience.
  • Enhance creativity and broaden your comfort zone by writing about something you don’t write about too often like a work of art or movie.
  • Contribute to creating a lively and supportive class environment (in class and digital).
  • Collaborate with classmates to a unique digital project that can be used as a resource for future Seminar 4 students.

FAQs

What counts as an outside source? What do I write about?

Literally, anything: videos, songs, works of art, photos, archival resources, tweets, Instagram posts, podcasts, academic articles, newspaper articles — whatever the internet has to offer. Be creative, find some interesting connections, and explain those connections to the audience.

You can compare this assignment to writing an annotation for an annotated bibliography: briefly describe the source, and explain the source’s key concepts or relevance to the topics covered in class. It should be clear to your reader why you chose this source: does it relate to the historical moment described in the readings? Does it remind of you of a particular quote from a text? Maybe it’s a song that captures the mood or tone of the readings. By the end of the semester the sources and posts will function as an digital and multimedia annotated bibliography that can be organized by category (video, song, article, etc.) or subject (zoning, history, and so forth).

Who will complete this assignment? When is it due?

Any student whose group is not submitting a critical review paper for the week’s reading must write a post about an external source with an explanation for their choice for the rest of the semester. Starting the week of March 20, external resource posts should be published by noon on Wednesday (the day before class) so everyone in the class as well as Prof. Alonso can read posts prior to class and Alexis (ITF) can troubleshoot any problems with the eportfolio. Your external resource post can also pose questions about the readings or course concepts that can be addressed during class on Thursday. 

Does this count towards my final grade?

Yes! Writing one post during the weeks when you’re not turning in a critical review paper counts as part of the participation component of your final grade. 

Posting comments on other people’s posts also counts as participation! There’s no set number of comments that you have to make but remember, more is more! Create what you want to see in the world by taking the time to write a few smart comments on stuff posted by your classmates, and you’re doing your part to create an awesome digital environment. Read the course guidelines for commenting on a post here.

Posting guidelines

  • Make sure you’re signed up as a site user. If not, please click here to sign up.
  • Write for a public audience. Write concisely, clearly, and assume your audience doesn’t know anything about what you’re writing about. I like to tell students to pretend as if you’re writing for your mom (or sister, or friend, etc.).
  • Embed the media source. Whether you’ve chosen an audio source, video, or photograph, please use the WP plugins to embed your media. For example, when I posted the sample post (here), the plugin WPAudio turns all .mp3 links into an embedded audio player. If you post a journal article, embed the document into the page. Note: if your chosen source is a movie and only available through a paid service like Netflix then find a trailer for the movie via Youtube/Vimeo and provide a link.
  • Cite your source and link to it. Give credit where credit is due: good research practice and good manners!
  • Include the class. If your post references a post previously published by a classmate, link back to it; if your explanation includes a comment that was said during class, paraphrase the comment, name the person who said it, and clearly explain the relationship between that comment and your chosen source. By including the class discussions and linking back to related posts, the eportfolio becomes a space that acts like an extension of our class.
  • Title your post. A simple title is a million times more helpful than a “catchy” (or “clickbait-y”) title. A good title will tell the reader what the post is about and your angle.
  • Categorize your post. Before you publish your post, click the “Student Post” category along with any other relevant categories.
  • Add tags to your post. Adding tags helps people navigate the site and find all content related to, for example, “videos.” Generally speaking, tag your posts with your name, student post, the title of the resource, the topic, what type of resource it is, etc.
  • If your post is long, use the “Read More” option. Above the space where you write a post, look for the icon (see figure below) that adds a break to the post with a “Read More” link that, when clicked, opens to the entire post. Check the sample posts as they appear on the Homepage for examples of the “Read More” option.
  • Comment on someone else’s post. Commenting on another person’s post (or several posts!) helps ground this assignment because it won’t feel like you’re writing and into the void. When you comment on a post, that reminds all of us that we’re writing for an audience and that audience cares. Don’t know how to comment? Check here.

Where can I find external sources?

Anywhere! Be creative! You might start at the Resources section of the website but don’t be afraid to go deep into Youtube, Ubuweb, or check out the following sites that offer tons of video, photo, text, and archival evidence.

 

DO read the comments! Or, how to write a great comment on the internet.

As a community, being supportive and respectful is the best way to help people overcome any shyness or self-consciousness about publishing something on the internet. However so many comments on posts are more like “This is great” or “this is not great” or “Very interesting.”

To contribute to a supportive and lively digital conversation, here are some guidelines for commenting on someone’s work at this site:

  1. Everyone loves a really specific compliment. “This resource’s focus on zoning clarifies some of the main issues that De Blasio is dealing with now. For example ….” is not only awesome to receive as a compliment but also reinforces good habits such as using specific examples!
  2. Don’t nitpick. Your/you’re, their/there — these are most likely typos or simple mistakes! However, if you see “Robert Carro” vs. “Robert Caro,” then an email to the author or even a comment the next time you see them more helpful than even a well-intentioned comment like “It’s spelled Feynman :)”
  3. Don’t play devil’s advocate. If you disagree with an opinion, remember that you’re disagreeing with a real person that you will see for the rest of the semester. Keep any comments short and to-the-point: “I tend to disagree with the perspective that historical districts raising rents offsets maintains a community’s character but this provides a really smart counter-argument.” 
  4. If you strongly disagree with some aspect of another post and find yourself writing a really long comment, then write your own post. Link back to the post that you disagree with and then write your perspective. Remember to be respectful and that you’re disagreeing with ideas rather than people.

More help here: Grammar Girl, “How to Write a Great Blog Comment: Nine Simple Rules for Writing Great Comments,” March 2009.

Critical review papers: some tips & strategies

Note: this post draws extensively from the book Writing Analytically (5th ed., 2009) by David Rosenwasser and Jill Stephen. Sections of the book have been included as PDFs for students to download. 

The term “critical review” or “critical response paper” sometimes causes confusion for students because, on the one hand, it seems to suggest that they only need to give their opinion, which is often expressed in terms of binaries such as like/dislike, helpful/not helpful, etc. As a result, students’ responses tend to offer a thesis like “This was a very helpful text because _____” followed by a summary of the argument. Too often, especially when written at last minute, response papers following a similar format don’t engage the reader, the material and probably the writer, too. Or, as the book Writing Analytically puts it:

Summaries that are just lists tend to dollop out the information monotonously. They omit the thinking that the piece is doing—the ways it is connecting the information, the contexts it establishes, and the implicit slant or point of view

Source: Writing Analytically 96.

In other words, the summary-as-response doesn’t demonstrate your engagement with the material, demonstrate critical thinking or the ability to make connections to other themes, ideas, and modes of thinking. The benefits of a strong response paper occur on a few different levels. First, writing a response paper allows you to process the material, assimilating new information with what you’ve already know. Second, a strong response paper reveals to your ability to think critically about the material. The processes required to critically read and write develop your overall abilities to connect new information to the themes, topics, and modes of thinking – a valuable skill both in class and outside of it. 

Perhaps most important about the process of writing a critical response is building the foundation for your own research and ideas for the research assignment or other long-term projects. Generally speaking, the learning process at the beginning of a semester is characterized by internalizing and assimilating the course materials, themes, and methods. By the mid-point of the semester, however, the learning process emphasizes generating your own ideas and arguments using the information, methods, and examples covered by the course material. 

To help you write your response papers, here are three general guidelines: 

  1. Reframe your approach to the topic: analyze rather than merely summarize or offer a personal opinion.
  2. Understand the argument: identify its main components and put the argument into context.
  3. Make connections: briefly summarize the author’s argument then focus on a few key ideas/topics of the article or text and connect the article to the broader themes, aims, or topics of the course.

Guideline #1: Before you begin anything, reframe your approach.

Writing Analytically asserts that the first step to writing a strong response paper is to reframe the task as a form of analysis (page 4):

In analytical writing, your reasoning may derive from your personal experience, but it is your reasoning and not you or your experiences that matter. Analysis asks not just “What do I think?” but “How good is my thinking? How well does it fit the subject I am trying to explain?”

The authors go on to relate analysis to perception, the way that a person makes sense of the world (12):

More than just a set of skills, analysis is a frame of mind, an attitude toward experience. It is a form of detective work that typically pursues something puzzling, something you are seeking to understand rather than something you are already sure you have the answers to. Analysis finds questions where there seemed not to be any, and it makes connections that might not have been evident at first.

“Reframing your approach” as a guideline means that, from reading the text(s) to writing the critical review, your goal is to engage with the main ideas of the text(s) while connecting those ideas to other themes and topics of the course. It’s easy to get deeply invested in a specific set of texts so it’s always a good idea to take a moment to review class notes and/or the syllabus to discover connections between a given topic and a broader theme of the course. A weekly topic might be “the urban village” while a broader theme might be “the ability to live and shape a city is a matter of rights.”

Download: Chapter 1, “Analysis: What it Is and What It Does,” and Chapter 5, “Analyzing Arguments” in Writing Analytically. 

Guideline #2: Understand the argument to move from summary to paraphrasing to analysis.

As you read the text, note any section headings, graphics or images, bolded words, or repeated phrases. After reading the text, the next step is to identify the key components of the argument and starting putting the argument into context:

  • Identify the thesis statement. What does the author want you to believe and why? What’s at stake if you do or don’t believe the author?
  • Locate the evidence the author uses to support the thesis statement. What types of evidence does the author use and how was it collected?
  • What reasons are given to connect the evidence to the thesis statement? Example: If the article is about reproduction habits of mammals and the evidence used are gestation rates of animals, then any logic that relies on reproductive habits of reptiles probably isn’t helpful!
  • What is the author’s conclusion? Does the evidence support the conclusion?
  • Does the author seem to be responding to a specific idea, person, or book? Or is the author responding more generally to a set of behaviors or practices standard to the field? Are they questioning accepted protocol or knowledge within the community?
  • What are the article’s weaknesses? Is it organization, lack of evidence, unconvincing rationale, methodology, etc.?
  • Does the author include any kind of historical context for their subject or research question? Why is this history important to the overall argument?
  • Who is the audience for this text? Was this written for a specialized or general audience? How can you tell?
  • How was the text or article organized? Describe the progression of ideas, evidence, and when applicable, visual or graphic components.
  • Check the sources: are any journals or people quoted repeatedly? What kinds of sources are listed in the bibliography? Are these sources essential to the author’s argument?

The above questions don’t just ask you for facts or info from the text itself (essentially, asking you to repeat the argument). Instead these questions offer you a starting point to put the author’s argument into context – the context of the course, in relation to previous readings, to the Planning the Future of New York curriculum at Macaulay, or even more broadly, to the history of urban policy and planning in New York. This type of thinking does require you to make judgment calls such as determining what information is or isn’t essential to the main argument. However you are ultimately relying on your understanding of the text to arrive at your conclusion. If you can do this, then you’re well on your way to writing a stronger response paper.

One essential strategy: paraphrasing. Paraphrasing means replacing the author’s original words with different ones: think about the Nike motto, “Just do it.” Of the top of my head, three paraphrases of “just do it” might be “go now,” “get it done, and “stop thinking and start doing” (that last one belongs to Home Depot!). This is a version of the exercise Paraphrase x3 that I learned from the book Writing Analytically, and I think it’s an invaluable exercise for students at any stage of their education. Paraphrase x3 deepens your understanding of a text to uncover implicit or associated meanings; furthermore, paraphrasing helps you avoid plagiarism. (You should always credit the source that you paraphrased, however!)

Download: “Paraphrase x3” in Writing Analytically, p. 33-35.

Guideline #3: Make connections between the text(s) and the class topics and themes.

Even though you’re responding to the author’s ideas, your response paper will also put forth your ideas, too. In other words: what and how you analyze or respond to a text (or work of art, set of data, etc.) will convey what and how you think. Subsequently, when writing the analytical response paper, you’re demonstrating the following: your understanding of the information and ideas, your ability to discern or highlight significant points, and your ability to explain not just what the points are but how and why. As you might have noticed, analysis demands more than simply relaying “what” to your audience; analysis demands that you explain the how and why as well.

All of this will be evident to your professor based on the quality of your summary, your ability to distinguish the author’s ideas from your own, and the connections you make between the text and broader themes of the class. In general, an analytical response paper contains some kind of thesis-like sentence that indicates the subject of your response, a brief and accurate summary of the argument, and then elaborate on some significant points; depending on the specific requirements for the assignment, a response paper is usually 2-4 pages.

Download: “How to Read a Book” by Paul N. Edwards

Writing in the Sciences: Some Resources

When a subject intimidates a student, the student may rely on sources to say ideas for them (the block quote!), or rely on jargon in order to “conform” to the expectations of the subject, or even neglect to explain abstract ideas using concrete examples. Think of our discussions early n the semester like “what is science?”; how could we have discussed the abstract idea of “science” without the writings (serving as concrete examples) provided by Prof. Wilson?

Therefore, this page builds on the concepts and resources found on the Annotated Bibliography Resources page by focusing specifically on writing in the sciences. While writing an annotated bibliography ultimately depends on your ability to read and understand a source, writing in the sciences generally cleaves to the same principles of good writing in general. I believe in the relationship between being a strong reader and being a strong writer; most importantly, these skills can be improved upon no matter the age of the person or the phase of your education or career.

How to use this page

This page is not a “guide to writing for the sciences.” it is a carefully chosen set of sources aimed towards writing in the sciences. Because good writing “shows” rather than “tells,” I’ve embedded PDFs into these pages rather than summarize the sources for you; moreover, I encourage you to determine whether or not these sources will help you and if so, whether or not to find them yourself.

After looking over these sources (and the ones at the Annotated Bibliography page – there is some overlap), a very productive activity for students is to make an appointment with me during office hours and bring examples or a source that you’re reading or something that you’re writing. Together, we can discuss some of the concepts or suggestions from the sources below, or I can guide you through the activities suggested in any of the sources from this page or the Annotated Bibliography Resources page. Because of my lack of famliarity with the methods of scientific research or conventions of the discipline, I’m hesitant to edit or “look over” any work to offer constructive feedback. Working together on how to read a source or coaching you through an exercise would be more useful for both of us – I inevitably learn from students and studetns become empowered as self-learners.

Videos

  • Kristin Sainani’s online course “Writing in the Sciences” contains over 50 videos dedicated to writing in the sciences: Website | Youtube

Joshua Schimel, Writing Science

Embedded below are two PDFs with excerpts from Joshua Schimel’s book, Writing Science. The first PDF includes exercises that you can apply to your own writing and the second PDF contains his personal recommendations for writing resources. I personally can vouch for his recommendation of Style: Towards Clarity and Grace by Joseph Williams, which is applicable to any discipline and, with practice, will improve your writing no matter if a cover letter, informal email, or a formal academic paper.

[gview file=”http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/wilson2016/files/2016/10/Schimel-J_Writing-in-Science_Ch-2-exercises.pdf”]

[gview file=”http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/wilson2016/files/2016/10/Schimel-J_Appendix-B-Writing-Resources.pdf”]

 

Helen Sword, Stylish Academic Writing

Prof. Helen Sword at the University of Auckland wrote Stylish Academic Writing with the intention to give scholars tips on how to improve their writing rather than focus on why so much academic writing is … well, bad. In her introduction, she explains the various parts of her process: first, she surveyed seventy colleagues about the writers in their field who they considered “stylish.” In her second phase, she analyzed books and articles by more than 100 authors recommended to her by colleagues. Her third stage included assembling data:

I assembled a data set of one thousand academic articles from across the sciences, social sciences, and humanities; one hundred articles each from international journals in the fields of medicine, evolutionary biology, computer science, higher education, psychology, anthropology, law, philosophy, history and literary studies … I used them not only to locate real-life examples of both engaging and appalling academic prose but also to drill down into specific questions about style and the status quo. For example, how many articles in each discipline contain personal pronouns (I or we)? (Sword, Stylish Academic Writing, 9)

 

The usefulness of Sword’s explanation of method and the above quote is two-fold: first, it explains her research process; second, I like the way she explains the relationship between her data and the results – namely, the tips, exercises, recommendations, and examples – for scholars to learn how to improve. In other words, Sword’s introduction performs precisely what you’re being asked to do in Science Forward: begin with a tentative research topic, gather original data, and then use the data to provide insight into her original topic.

Her chapter about her method, “On Being Disciplined” demonstrates how her data upended or confirmed her original hypothesis, academic writing is shaped by convention rather than the discipline itself (Sword 20). As an evolutionary biologist, Prof. Wilson might be interested in this part of the chapter:

 

For example, I had anticipated that the science journals in my sample would all be highly prescriptive tolerating very little variance in structure, titling, or other points of style. This expectation proved true for medicine, a field in which researchers tend to work in large teams publish their findings in a standardized template. In evolutionary biology and computer science, however, I found considerable more expressive diversity. Ten percent of the evolutionary biologists in y sample opted for a unique or hybrid structure in a field where the standard Introduction, Method, Results, and Discussion (IMRAD) structure predominates … at least eleven percent of of the evolutionary biologists include one “engaging” element in their titles, such as a quote, a pun, or a question (Sword 18).

 

Her book includes “Spotlight” pages that highlight the accomplishments and writing of scholars in various fields in order to dispel the myth that there’s a mutually exclusionary relationship between being an engaging writer and being a strong scholar. Below is her spotlight on the physicist Nathaniel David Mermin:

[gview file=”http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/wilson2016/files/2016/10/Sword-Helen_Spotlight.pdf”]

The turning point and the importance of context

A few weeks in class, Prof. Natov shared an anecdote from her childhood. “I was ten years old and I realized my cousins were seven years old,” she said. “And I thought to myself, ‘they’re getting so old! And I was only ten!” This anecdote set up the classroom discussion about turning points. For Prof. Natov, viewing her cousins in a different light due to their age sets up “before” and “after” moments in her anecdote, the “before” implying that she had seen her cousins as much younger and the “after” in the realization that she, too, was getting older, and maybe even realizing that she was saying something that adults had to said to her at one point! Everyone in the class named three turning points in their life, and then Prof. Natov asked us two important questions: why were some moments turning points? Which moments did you want to know more about?

Ultimately her questions pointed to a larger lesson: the importance of creating context for your audience through the use of specific examples and details. These details and examples create a richer experience for your audience and, when a turning point occurs, creates the impact of such a moment. 

Read more

Resource: The Annotated Bibliography

What is an annotated bibliography?

Annotated bibliographies provide basic bibliographic information in a standard style of documentation, as in a traditional bibliography or “works cited” page; the only difference is that each source is “annotated” with a statement about the text. This statement can range in length from 150-250 words and should provide insight into your primary source(s).

What are the benefits of an annotated bibliography? 

There are several benefits to creating an annotated bibliography: for one, an annotated bibliography essentially functions as a “go-to” sheet of sources that you’ve used, the info that each source contains, and a ready-made bibliographic citation. Moreover, writing an annotated bibliography helps develop critical thinking and writing skills because you are distilling the source’s key points. In other words, writing an annotated bibliography requires more than just receiving information but actively analyzing the source’s argument and how the information is presented to you. Key skills such as paraphrasing are essential when writing an annotated bibliography!

What information should an annotation contain?

A basic annotation will include a bibliographic citation and an overview of the source’s contents. Provide the author’s thesis statement, main points, evidence supporting main points, and conclusion, and how this information is organized and presented to the reader. Report if the author uses any visual evidence (charts, graphs, photographs, etc.) and if those are relevant to the overall argument. When writing your annotation, avoid including direct quotes from the source; the annotation should be written in your own words and demonstrate your own understanding of the source’s information.

Some annotations are evaluative, meaning that the annotation will offer an assessment of the source’s information, argument, targeted audience, or relevance to certain topics. An evaluative annotation helps you decide which sources you will eventually include in your final project, aids in developing your own argument rather than repeating someone else’s argument, and helps prevent plagiarism.

Writing the annotation: some prompts to get you started. 

It can seem intimidating to boil down a complex article or an entire book to 250 words so here are some questions that might help you organize your thoughts. As with any research project or paper, an annotated bibliography may undergo several drafts so the best place to start is just getting started! 

Analyzing the argument

  1. What does the author want you to believe? What (or who) does the author seem to be responding to?
  2. What is the author’s main claim? What reasons and evidence support that claim? Can you determine the author’s methodology? Is there a theoretical approach underpinning their argument?
  3. What type of evidence is used in the article (statistics, field research, quotes)? What kind of visual information is used — charts, graphs, photographs, etc.
  4. Does the visual evidence add or detract to the argument?
  5. Does the author’s evidence support the claim? Does the conclusion make sense given the progression of the argument?
  6. Glance at the bibliography: what kinds of sources does your source use? (This is an excellent way to get an introduction/layout of a topic and its research history!)

Analyzing the source’s source: the author and the publisher

  1. Who is the author? Are they well-known in their field? Have they published on this topic before?
  2. If this is an article: it should be clear to your reader if the article comes from a newspaper or magazine or peer-reviewed journal; if necessary, look up the editorial guidelines for the newspaper/magazine/journal — usually found at the publisher’s website. This all helps you determine the context of your source and how the article’s argument and information fits in with the overall editorial philosophy of the source. For example, note the difference in descriptions for these two peer-reviewed journals: HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory and Journal of Contemporary Ethnography.
  3. Similarly, If the source is a book you may want to indicate if this book is a mainstream or academic publisher, any editorial guidelines or philosophy, or if the book is part of an ongoing series.

Determining the source’s relevance to your topic

  1. Who will benefit the most from this source: people looking for an introduction to the topic or specialists in the field, or somewhere in between?
  2. How will the information in this source relate to your own research project? Does it provide additional evidence to support your idea(s), offer a counter-argument, point you towards additional sources, or something else?

Resources

Research methods & primary sources

Brooklyn College Library

Annotated Bibliography Sources

Reading and Analyzing Sources

 

Link round-up: how does science & scientific thinking intersect with other disciplines?

This post aggregates links around some of the ideas and issues that have been discussed in class the past few weeks as well as some articles the intersections between science and other disciplines.

Art and Science

Art21 "Ecology" episode with a view of Mark Dion's installation titled Neukom Vivarium
Art21 “Ecology” episode with a view of Mark Dion’s installation Neukom Vivarium (2006)

Science & other industries and disciplines

Critical Thinking, Intelligence, and the Nature of Knowledge

 

Part II: Writing About Dance – Developing Your Skills of Observation

Note: Before proceeding, it’s strongly suggested that students read the posts “Memory Makes the Best Artist” and “Part I: Writing About Dance – General Guidelines.” 

This activity combines several short exercises: two that were introduced in the previous post “Memory Makes the Best Artist” called “Notice and Focus” and “10 on 1,” and a parts of a new exercise called “The Method,” all of which were adapted from the book Writing Analytically (5th ed.) by David Rosenwasser and Jill Stephen. These activities develop the tools of observation and analysis that are critical to analyzing works of art. With practice, students benefit by expanding the tools (strategies) in their tool box (range of skills) that will help them in any course, subject, or discipline.

Keep reading for instructions and the relevant pages from Writing Analytically. 

Read more

Part I: Writing About Dance – Some General Guidelines

This post aims to give students a starting point for writing about dance and other forms of art by offering guidelines and practical tips to help students when beginning a project or when finding themselves “stuck.” Accompanying the guidelines are excerpts of writings by dance critics and historians to help students “see” the guidelines in action and therefore better understand the benefits of the information in the post. Most importantly, with practice, students will become comfortable enough to modify the guidelines, tips, and activities to use when writing regardless of the assignment, subject, or discipline.

  1. Be a generous and objective observer in addition to being a good audience member.
  2. Describe what you see using specific examples so that your reader understands what you saw.
  3. Explain cause and effect to your reader.

Keep reading for more information about these guidelines as well as practical examples and tips to help you in the course. Part II contains a specific activity to help you practice putting these guidelines into action.

Read more

science & science fiction

Science in the news

Science in entertainment

Science satire