Photo credit: @LDMay
WRT 334, Science Writing
If you’ve turned on the television or glanced at any online forum in the last week, you know that a fierce debated has ignited about “alternative facts.” Late January also brought us deep cuts to funding programs from the US Environmental Protection Agency; temporary and ongoing blackouts of social media communication from the US Department of the Interior, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Department of Agriculture; and the elimination of mentions of climate change from the White House web site (as of the first day of this semester). In short, at few times has it been more important to consider the enmeshed roles of science, writing, communication, and public engagement in American life. As future scientists, it’s your responsibility to make sense of what your discipline is, what it values, how it persuades, how it peer reviews, and how it creates what we call “science,” through people working and writing together in daily practice.
My goal here is not for you to learn some writing tips and tricks so that you can more easily persuade “uninformed” audiences to “listen up!” to “Science.” Instead, I hope we can work together to consider how “science” develops over time, through people and practice, and is continually subject to revision. And that it’s also defensible.
In WRT 334, Science Writing, we’ll equip you to engage in these increasingly urgent conversations by working to improve both your academic and your public writing. Through rich conversations about the disciplines of writing and rhetoric, regular practice writing across a variety of genres, periodic opportunities to present in front of the class, multiple chances to collaborate with fellow classmates, and frequent revision with peers, you should become a stronger and more confident writer. This is not a class that focuses heavily on mechanics and grammar. Instead, it is a class about rhetoric and writing, meant to get us thinking and talking about what science writing—and science!—is all about: how it functions, brings groups together, has particular expectations, solves certain problems, and emerges out of certain exigencies. Once you learn those lessons, you can face any scientific writing challenge with more confidence, inside the classroom or out. You should also feel more equipped to become an active participant in American civic life.
Full syllabus here.
DAILY PLANS
WEEK ONE (1/23-1/27)
Tuesday, January 24
Introductions, syllabus review
Homework for Thursday, January 26:
Thursday, January 26
Review syllabus, create shared course goals, review Penrose and Katz
Shared course goals:
WEEK TWO (1/30-2/3)
Tuesday, January 31
Introduce WP1: Rhetorical Analysis
Introduction to rhetoric and its consequences for science writing
Homework for Thursday, February 2:
Thursday, February 2
NO CLASS MEETING! Keep up with reading!
WEEK THREE (2/6-2/10)
Tuesday, February 7
Review rhetorical analysis handout and practice on ads, speeches, and executive orders; sort through three typical articles from your field, conduct mini rhetorical analyses in small groups, finalize which article is the best choice for your WP1.
Homework for Thursday, February 9:
Thursday, February 9
SNOW DAY
Homework for Tuesday, February 14:
WEEK FOUR (2/13-2/17)
Tuesday, February 14
Review Peer Review Ground Rules; WP1 PEER WORKSHOP #1 - bring THREE PAPER COPIES of WP1 to class and save your drafts!
Homework for Thursday, February 16:
Thursday, February 16
WP1 PEER WORKSHOP #2 - bring THREE PAPER COPIES of WP1 to class and save your drafts!
Homework for Tuesday, February 21:
WEEK FIVE (2/20-2/24)
Tuesday, February 21
Post-write reflection:
Homework for Thursday, February 23:
Read Porter, "Intertextuality and the Discourse Community" (1986)
Thursday, February 23
Discuss Porter in small groups and then large group, freewriting about the prompting questions for WP2, discussion of what you currently know about your forum and what you need to know, review Purdue OWL information about the "memo" as a genre, practice WP2 memo writing about this class to to someone who would be joining us in the coming weeks
Homework for Tuesday, February 28:
WEEK SIX (2/27-3/2)
Tuesday, February 28
Finish off group memo writing exercise for hypothetical student, share with the group, use lessons for WP2, clarify WP2 questions, discuss journal syntheses for WP2 --> begin to turn into a memo for someone who wants to publish in this journal
Homework for Thursday, March 2:
Create draft of WP2, Forum Synthesis, for peer workshop Tuesday - bring 3 paper copies!
Thursday, March 2
WP2 PEER WORKSHOP #1
Homework for Tuesday, March 7:
WEEK SEVEN (3/6-3/10)
Tuesday, March 7
Return WP1, discuss shorthand in CGD's grading, draft revision plans for WP2 that incorporate feedback from WP1, discussion of the help students need to be able to incorporate that feedback in WP2. Discussion of topic sentences, student highlight all topic sentences from WP1, students gloss paragraphs, see if the gloss matches the topic sentence, revise. Practice in small groups coming up with a topic sentence for a paragraph about dams. Vote on the best one.
Homework for Thursday, March 9:
Revise WP2, Forum Synthesis, for peer workshop #2
Thursday, March 9
WP2 PEER WORKSHOP #2
Homework for Tuesday, March 21:
Revise WP2, Forum Synthesis, for final submission - please submit all drafts and peer reviews!
WEEK EIGHT (3/13-3/17)
SPRING BREAK! No classes.
WEEK NINE (3/20-3/24)
Tuesday, March 21
Post-write activity:
Homework for Thursday, March 23
Review your work in WP1 and WP2 and write up a 2-pg. synthesis: What Counts as Science in Your Discipline. For the non-scientists in the class, write about your own discipline and its relationship (or not) to the the scientific articles you reviewed.
Thursday, March 23
CGD reviews what she means by "What Counts as Science?":
Students add their responses to some of these themes on their homework synthesis documents. Students share findings in working groups. Then students share findings in small groups unrelated to their discipline. Then students return to their groups to share these contrasts. Goals: start brainstorming about disciplinary clusters, what do they have in common, what don't they.
SPECIAL NOTE re. ROUNDTABLE: You don't have to summarize! You're under no obligation to cover the full spectrum of possible discussion topics! There's no penalty for leaving anything out! You just need to speak to the broad topic and let everyone contribute! Just think about advancing a conversation, discussing what it would take to collaborate across your disciplines, debate rigor, highlight some comparisons and contrasts, attack methods or techniques as they're employed across disciplines, etc.
Homework for Tuesday, March 28
View at least three examples of "Roundtable Discussions" or "Panel Discussion" or "Forums" online. Here's a YouTube example: Deadbeat Dam Panel Discussion. Here's another. Here's a third. You get the idea! Write down the titles and urls and write up a one page response about things you noticed that worked well and things that didn't to discuss Tuesday.
WEEK TEN (3/27-3/31)
Tuesday, March 28
Midterm reflection:
Examples of panel discussions: 1) In Defense of Academic Freedom, University of Chicago; 2) Round Table Discussion on the Problem of Evil, University of Notre Dame; 3) Secular Societies and its Enemies, New York Academy of Sciences
Homework for Thursday, March 30:
Each group should prepare a draft of your panel discussion outline
Thursday, March 30
Groups spend time working together to plan for the presentation. Groups pair up to offer feedback.
Homework for Tuesday, April 4:
Prep for group panel discussions!
WEEK ELEVEN (4/3-4/7)
Tuesday, April 4
WP3 GROUP PRESENTATIONS (4 group discussions @ 15m. each)
Homework for Thursday, April 6:
Begin to synthesize group presentations
Thursday, April 6
Student groups work independently using class time to recap group discussions and prep for synthesis document (CGD at CONFERENCE)
WEEK TWELVE (4/10-4/14)
Tuesday, April 11
WP3 SYNTHESIS DUE!
Post write questions:
Homework for Thursday, April 13:
Decide who you're going to work with. Read eight of the College of the Environment and Life Sciences Big Thinker profiles here. Take notes about what features the profiles have in common.
Thursday, April 13
Review the features of the Big Thinker profiles. What makes them compelling? How do they work? What can we emulate?
Read eight more of the College of the Environment and Life Sciences Big Thinker profiles here. Brainstorm and start drafting the interview questions that might elicit the info you need. Read about the SciWrite@URI program here and here.
***CONTACT A SciWrite@URI FELLOW TO SCHEDULE AN INTERVIEW!***
WEEK THIRTEEN (4/17-4/21)
Tuesday, April 18
Guest instructor: Jamie Remillard. Consider what sorts of questions would have elicited the content and quotes in the Big Thinker profiles, co-produce interview questions, practice interviewing, finalize interview questions.
Homework for Thursday, April 20:
Interview SciWrite@URI fellow, start thinking about how to turn interviews into text
Thursday, April 20
Guest instructor: Emma Lundberg. Guest panelists: Amy Dunkle and Gloria Kostadinova. Work on turning interviews into text.
Homework for Tuesday, April 25:
Draft SciWrite@URI profile for peer workshop
WEEK FOURTEEN (4/24-4/28)
Tuesday, April 25
Focused workshopping about Big Thinker profile, evaluations
Homework for Thursday, April 28:
Revise SciWrite@URI profile based on feedback - bring 2 copies per person of a complete draft
Thursday, April 27
WP4 PEER WORKSHOP - bring COMPLETE draft (2 copies per person)
***SUBMIT FINAL DRAFT OF WP4 VIA GOOGLE DOCS TO [email protected] by 5PM on THURSDAY, MAY 4***
WRT 334, Science Writing
If you’ve turned on the television or glanced at any online forum in the last week, you know that a fierce debated has ignited about “alternative facts.” Late January also brought us deep cuts to funding programs from the US Environmental Protection Agency; temporary and ongoing blackouts of social media communication from the US Department of the Interior, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the United States Department of Agriculture; and the elimination of mentions of climate change from the White House web site (as of the first day of this semester). In short, at few times has it been more important to consider the enmeshed roles of science, writing, communication, and public engagement in American life. As future scientists, it’s your responsibility to make sense of what your discipline is, what it values, how it persuades, how it peer reviews, and how it creates what we call “science,” through people working and writing together in daily practice.
My goal here is not for you to learn some writing tips and tricks so that you can more easily persuade “uninformed” audiences to “listen up!” to “Science.” Instead, I hope we can work together to consider how “science” develops over time, through people and practice, and is continually subject to revision. And that it’s also defensible.
In WRT 334, Science Writing, we’ll equip you to engage in these increasingly urgent conversations by working to improve both your academic and your public writing. Through rich conversations about the disciplines of writing and rhetoric, regular practice writing across a variety of genres, periodic opportunities to present in front of the class, multiple chances to collaborate with fellow classmates, and frequent revision with peers, you should become a stronger and more confident writer. This is not a class that focuses heavily on mechanics and grammar. Instead, it is a class about rhetoric and writing, meant to get us thinking and talking about what science writing—and science!—is all about: how it functions, brings groups together, has particular expectations, solves certain problems, and emerges out of certain exigencies. Once you learn those lessons, you can face any scientific writing challenge with more confidence, inside the classroom or out. You should also feel more equipped to become an active participant in American civic life.
Full syllabus here.
DAILY PLANS
WEEK ONE (1/23-1/27)
Tuesday, January 24
Introductions, syllabus review
Homework for Thursday, January 26:
- Reread syllabus
- Take notes: What do you want/need/expect from this class? What is your relationship to writing? What kinds of writing do you do? What do you need writing for? Who are you as a writer?
- Read and journal about: Penrose and Katz, ch. 1 "Science as Social Enterprise"
Thursday, January 26
Review syllabus, create shared course goals, review Penrose and Katz
Shared course goals:
- Improve ability to express complicated ideas to disciplinary and non-disciplinary audiences, using creativity when appropriate.
- Improve writing to move from student to scientist.
- Gain factual knowledge
- Improve writing generally
- Convince people to care
- Practice collaboration
- Understand and bend paradigms
- Learn from others in related disciplines
- Bazerman, "Writing Well, Scientifically and Rhetorically Practical Consequences for Writers of Science and Their Teachers"
- Selzer, "Rhetorical Analysis: Understanding How Texts Persuade Readers"
WEEK TWO (1/30-2/3)
Tuesday, January 31
Introduce WP1: Rhetorical Analysis
Introduction to rhetoric and its consequences for science writing
Homework for Thursday, February 2:
- Cooper, "The Ecology of Writing"
- Find and bring to class: three typical scholarly articles from your field/sub-discipline - take readings from classes, ask a professor about a typical journal, etc. (Do you know what a scholarly article is?) These articles should be three prime candidates for you to use for your rhetorical analysis WP1. Remember, you'll want to choose a paper from a journal that you'd like to continue working with for WP2!
Thursday, February 2
NO CLASS MEETING! Keep up with reading!
WEEK THREE (2/6-2/10)
Tuesday, February 7
Review rhetorical analysis handout and practice on ads, speeches, and executive orders; sort through three typical articles from your field, conduct mini rhetorical analyses in small groups, finalize which article is the best choice for your WP1.
Homework for Thursday, February 9:
- Read Anne Lamott, Shitty First Drafts
- Create your first draft of WP1, the rhetorical analysis, for a peer workshop Thursday 2/9
Thursday, February 9
SNOW DAY
Homework for Tuesday, February 14:
- Keep working on WP1!
WEEK FOUR (2/13-2/17)
Tuesday, February 14
Review Peer Review Ground Rules; WP1 PEER WORKSHOP #1 - bring THREE PAPER COPIES of WP1 to class and save your drafts!
Homework for Thursday, February 16:
- Revise WP1, rhetorical analysis, for second peer workshop Thursday 2/16
Thursday, February 16
WP1 PEER WORKSHOP #2 - bring THREE PAPER COPIES of WP1 to class and save your drafts!
Homework for Tuesday, February 21:
- Finalize your WP1, rhetorical analysis, to submit on Tuesday 2/21 (bring final draft plus all drafts and peer reviews!)
WEEK FIVE (2/20-2/24)
Tuesday, February 21
Post-write reflection:
- What works especially well in this project? What are you proud of?
- What still needs work? What are you less satisfied with? What would you change if you had more time or different resources?
- What was the most challenging aspect of this project? How did you overcome that challenge (or try to)?
- What did you learn about your discipline that you didn't realize? What surprised you?
- How will this project change your writing in your discipline?
- What else do you want me to know?
Homework for Thursday, February 23:
Read Porter, "Intertextuality and the Discourse Community" (1986)
Thursday, February 23
Discuss Porter in small groups and then large group, freewriting about the prompting questions for WP2, discussion of what you currently know about your forum and what you need to know, review Purdue OWL information about the "memo" as a genre, practice WP2 memo writing about this class to to someone who would be joining us in the coming weeks
Homework for Tuesday, February 28:
- Read five additional articles from your selected journal from the last two years.
- Create a one-paragraph rhetorical analysis of each, then create a 2-pg. typed double-spaced synthesis of the pieces. What do they have in common? What's distinct? How do they look similar in structure, organization, content, method, use of visuals, etc.?
- Start thinking about how you would explain these similarities and differences to a potential journal author!
WEEK SIX (2/27-3/2)
Tuesday, February 28
Finish off group memo writing exercise for hypothetical student, share with the group, use lessons for WP2, clarify WP2 questions, discuss journal syntheses for WP2 --> begin to turn into a memo for someone who wants to publish in this journal
Homework for Thursday, March 2:
Create draft of WP2, Forum Synthesis, for peer workshop Tuesday - bring 3 paper copies!
Thursday, March 2
WP2 PEER WORKSHOP #1
Homework for Tuesday, March 7:
- Skim and analyze at least five more articles from your journal from the last two years. How do they support or confound some of what you offered during the peer workshop?
- Continue revising your WP2
WEEK SEVEN (3/6-3/10)
Tuesday, March 7
Return WP1, discuss shorthand in CGD's grading, draft revision plans for WP2 that incorporate feedback from WP1, discussion of the help students need to be able to incorporate that feedback in WP2. Discussion of topic sentences, student highlight all topic sentences from WP1, students gloss paragraphs, see if the gloss matches the topic sentence, revise. Practice in small groups coming up with a topic sentence for a paragraph about dams. Vote on the best one.
Homework for Thursday, March 9:
Revise WP2, Forum Synthesis, for peer workshop #2
Thursday, March 9
WP2 PEER WORKSHOP #2
Homework for Tuesday, March 21:
Revise WP2, Forum Synthesis, for final submission - please submit all drafts and peer reviews!
WEEK EIGHT (3/13-3/17)
SPRING BREAK! No classes.
WEEK NINE (3/20-3/24)
Tuesday, March 21
Post-write activity:
- What is the greatest thing about this draft?
- How did this draft change through the review process?
- How did WP1 impact WP2? How did WP2 change your thinking from WP1?
- What still needs work? What aspects of the draft are you least satisfied with?
- What aspect of your writing do you think you improved on from WP1?
- What else do you want me to know?
Homework for Thursday, March 23
Review your work in WP1 and WP2 and write up a 2-pg. synthesis: What Counts as Science in Your Discipline. For the non-scientists in the class, write about your own discipline and its relationship (or not) to the the scientific articles you reviewed.
Thursday, March 23
CGD reviews what she means by "What Counts as Science?":
- methodologies
- research questions (content and framing)
- experimental design
- hypothesis driven
- guiding theories and paradigms
- what goes unsaid?
- what does RIGOR look like in your field?
Students add their responses to some of these themes on their homework synthesis documents. Students share findings in working groups. Then students share findings in small groups unrelated to their discipline. Then students return to their groups to share these contrasts. Goals: start brainstorming about disciplinary clusters, what do they have in common, what don't they.
SPECIAL NOTE re. ROUNDTABLE: You don't have to summarize! You're under no obligation to cover the full spectrum of possible discussion topics! There's no penalty for leaving anything out! You just need to speak to the broad topic and let everyone contribute! Just think about advancing a conversation, discussing what it would take to collaborate across your disciplines, debate rigor, highlight some comparisons and contrasts, attack methods or techniques as they're employed across disciplines, etc.
Homework for Tuesday, March 28
View at least three examples of "Roundtable Discussions" or "Panel Discussion" or "Forums" online. Here's a YouTube example: Deadbeat Dam Panel Discussion. Here's another. Here's a third. You get the idea! Write down the titles and urls and write up a one page response about things you noticed that worked well and things that didn't to discuss Tuesday.
WEEK TEN (3/27-3/31)
Tuesday, March 28
Midterm reflection:
- What have been some of the most important things you've learned/done so far?
- What are some of your goals/hopes for the rest of the semester? What do you want to do/learn/improve?
- What's NOT working in class so far? Suggestions for changing content or approach?
- How would you change the class in future semesters?
- How do you think you're doing in class? What are you most proud of and what do you need to work on?
- TO DO: be prepared, know what you're talking about, offer smooth transitions, offer evidence-based opinions, demonstrate respect for each other and each other's disciplines, keep focused on your major points and on the task at hand
- TO DON'T: don't be too aggressive or too personal, don't interrupt, don't get off topic, don't use jargon your audience won't know without explaining it, don't launch a contentious debate
Examples of panel discussions: 1) In Defense of Academic Freedom, University of Chicago; 2) Round Table Discussion on the Problem of Evil, University of Notre Dame; 3) Secular Societies and its Enemies, New York Academy of Sciences
Homework for Thursday, March 30:
Each group should prepare a draft of your panel discussion outline
Thursday, March 30
Groups spend time working together to plan for the presentation. Groups pair up to offer feedback.
Homework for Tuesday, April 4:
Prep for group panel discussions!
WEEK ELEVEN (4/3-4/7)
Tuesday, April 4
WP3 GROUP PRESENTATIONS (4 group discussions @ 15m. each)
Homework for Thursday, April 6:
Begin to synthesize group presentations
Thursday, April 6
Student groups work independently using class time to recap group discussions and prep for synthesis document (CGD at CONFERENCE)
WEEK TWELVE (4/10-4/14)
Tuesday, April 11
WP3 SYNTHESIS DUE!
Post write questions:
- what's the main idea of your synthesis?
- what was most challenging re. synthesis?
- what was most challenging re. the project?
- how did you deal with those challenges?
- what did you learn?
Homework for Thursday, April 13:
Decide who you're going to work with. Read eight of the College of the Environment and Life Sciences Big Thinker profiles here. Take notes about what features the profiles have in common.
Thursday, April 13
Review the features of the Big Thinker profiles. What makes them compelling? How do they work? What can we emulate?
- 2-3 quotes (from the subject and their advisor)
- photos
- bio and look to the future
- why does this matter?
- advice for readers
- present tense
- opening paragraph with a catchy and provocative hook
- simple enough language to connect with audience
- using the person as a tour guide into the program
- loaded titles - informative but cliffhangers to catch attention
- 1-3 sentences of hook
- 3-5 sentences of background detail with some big picture of what they're doing now
- How they wound up in their lab / focused on this research - possibly with an advisor quote
- What they're trying to accomplish
- Some additional (but related) interests
- Future plans / quotes / advice
Read eight more of the College of the Environment and Life Sciences Big Thinker profiles here. Brainstorm and start drafting the interview questions that might elicit the info you need. Read about the SciWrite@URI program here and here.
***CONTACT A SciWrite@URI FELLOW TO SCHEDULE AN INTERVIEW!***
WEEK THIRTEEN (4/17-4/21)
Tuesday, April 18
Guest instructor: Jamie Remillard. Consider what sorts of questions would have elicited the content and quotes in the Big Thinker profiles, co-produce interview questions, practice interviewing, finalize interview questions.
Homework for Thursday, April 20:
Interview SciWrite@URI fellow, start thinking about how to turn interviews into text
Thursday, April 20
Guest instructor: Emma Lundberg. Guest panelists: Amy Dunkle and Gloria Kostadinova. Work on turning interviews into text.
Homework for Tuesday, April 25:
Draft SciWrite@URI profile for peer workshop
WEEK FOURTEEN (4/24-4/28)
Tuesday, April 25
Focused workshopping about Big Thinker profile, evaluations
Homework for Thursday, April 28:
Revise SciWrite@URI profile based on feedback - bring 2 copies per person of a complete draft
Thursday, April 27
WP4 PEER WORKSHOP - bring COMPLETE draft (2 copies per person)
***SUBMIT FINAL DRAFT OF WP4 VIA GOOGLE DOCS TO [email protected] by 5PM on THURSDAY, MAY 4***