Syllabus

Showing posts with label rubrics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rubrics. Show all posts

Saturday, March 11, 2017

weak verbs

Remember, there is a verb component in the rubric for your result section. I'm asking that your usage of verbs approximate published literature reviews in the field of public health. This approximation will require you to write a first draft before revising out weak and passive verbs and revising in more active verbs. Also remember the exception to this rule, which is the baby intro/road map/research question part and, for now, the discussion section. This contradiction refers us to the ideology of social sciences and does not concern us. Again, an attention to verbs and organization is an activity that is only realistically possible in a paper's revision stage; and in that way, "a" papers will certainly evidence a going-back-through and revising of the paper at the level of verb usage, sure, but also organization, which encompasses the emphasis on transitions, topoi, themes, and subsections. 

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

these are the student literature reviews we looked at in class on Wednesday

Here is the literature review we actually looked at in class on 3/8

And here is the one I intended to look at on 3/8, which resulted from  categorization error on my part. Always helpfully label your stuff, and put it in the same place consistently.   This latter one is significantly more helpful. If you look at the colors, you'll notice how I break paragraphs into ideas, checking to see not only if a paragraph could be broken into two, but also whether a section could be rearranged according to a self-conscious application of the topoi. Remember, all organizational decisions ought to have taken place consciously. On the rubric, I say you must at least be able to discern an implicit strategy in your results section's prose, and the job of the "baby intro," as I'll call it, is to make what implicit strategy you do in fact write explicit and available for critique.

You're not writing an intro or a conclusion, but...

This was a great question after class that I did not make it to in the discussion today. The question was, "So, you were working with an intro in class, but you also said that we're not required to write one--what's up with that?" I could see how this would be confusing. I do not want you to write a formal introduction or conclusion. What is different about the rubric, though, is I say you need to, that is, prior to the writing of the results section, insert your research question and lay out what your strategy is (look to the middle of this document to see what I mean; look for the "RQ"; whenever I write "RQ," that's short for "research question"). This only need be a paragraph, and, as I say in this picture (below), it can be informal. Also conclude like this as well. In the rubric, I say something like, you need an 11th result, and then also a strategy to begin with. The 11th result should be in the discussion section. But you weren't required to write the discussion section, obviously, which is why I just want to you make the section title and then informally write what you think it all means, i.e., whether, to what extent, and how your research question was answered, plus a brief contextualization. Thus, while you do need an intro and a conclusion, they can be informal/colloquial and shouldn't be in the results section. 

If you go to the the bottom most picture, you'll see how research questions are actually embedded into a published, AJPH literature review, and then even how there's a little paragraph after that. I just want you to make what I called in a former post the "baby intro": i.e., just write a brief paragraph wherein you strategize and wherein you make your strategy available for critique. You don't have to commit to this strategy. But I want you to discuss what you intend for your results section to do, and the way in which you intend for that section to do it (= strategy). Informal, low stakes. 

Do the same thing for the conclusion. Just unwind for a little bit (see second to last picture) and talk about what you think it all means. But I'd like for you to think about what the 11th result would be: that is, what conclusion you yourself come to after having worked with the other 10 sources--but more importantly, whether, to what extent, and how your research question was answered. Do that in a section entitled "discussion" (see second to last picture). You can be informal here. Unwind. But do conclude. Wrap up. Just think for a second, but, while your doing that, try to draw an inference as to the meaning of all 10 results taken as a whole.