As you finish up your VoiceThreads for your Unit 3 Projects, I thought it might be helpful for you to see the rubric by which I'll evaluate your work. Note: since we won't meet again after these are graded I won't be able to hand these back to you, but if you're curious about your detailed grade feel free to email me after the close of the semester.
Unit 3 Evaluation Rubric
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Instructions for Putting Together Your VoiceThread
1. Once you have your soundtrack completed in Audacity, export your work as an mp3 just like you did in Unit 2.
2. Open a new Audacity project, go to File > Import > Audio and open up the mp3 you just exported.
3. In your browser, go to voicethread.unc.edu and log in.
4. Click on the "Create" tab and then click the button that says "Upload." Upload each image that will appear in your VoiceThread.
5. Go back to Audacity and highlight the section of your mp3 that goes with your first image. Once it is highlighted, go to File > Export Selection and save that chunk of your audio track as a separate mp3 (you may want to name it something like "section 1.").
6. Go back to VoiceThread and click the "Comment" button. Your first image should show up in a larger window to the right. Under the image, click the button that says "Comment," then click the up arrow that appears. Point VoiceThread to the file in which you exported the first section.
7. When you're ready to move to the next image / section, click the big arrow at the right of the VoiceThread or the thumbnail next to the arrow and repeat steps 5 and 6.
8. For the sections of your VoiceThread in which you annotate the image, you will need to record the audio live. In the VoiceThread window, click "comment" and then click "record." Give the program permission to access you microphone, and it will record what you say. As you are recording you can draw on the image; you can change the color with the palette on the VoiceThread.
2. Open a new Audacity project, go to File > Import > Audio and open up the mp3 you just exported.
3. In your browser, go to voicethread.unc.edu and log in.
4. Click on the "Create" tab and then click the button that says "Upload." Upload each image that will appear in your VoiceThread.
5. Go back to Audacity and highlight the section of your mp3 that goes with your first image. Once it is highlighted, go to File > Export Selection and save that chunk of your audio track as a separate mp3 (you may want to name it something like "section 1.").
6. Go back to VoiceThread and click the "Comment" button. Your first image should show up in a larger window to the right. Under the image, click the button that says "Comment," then click the up arrow that appears. Point VoiceThread to the file in which you exported the first section.
7. When you're ready to move to the next image / section, click the big arrow at the right of the VoiceThread or the thumbnail next to the arrow and repeat steps 5 and 6.
8. For the sections of your VoiceThread in which you annotate the image, you will need to record the audio live. In the VoiceThread window, click "comment" and then click "record." Give the program permission to access you microphone, and it will record what you say. As you are recording you can draw on the image; you can change the color with the palette on the VoiceThread.
Make Your Own Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project
At this point in the semester, each of you should be self-sufficient with your writing. You know best what issues you are struggling with in your current draft, so I would like you to compose your own draft workshop forms. You are welcome to copy and paste questions from forms earlier in the semester if you found a particular question helpful or if it focuses on an issue you're currently dealing with, but your draft workshop form should meet the following two criteria:
1. It should contain at least four questions
2. It should not include any open-ended questions (i.e. "please point out anything that can be improved"), but rather each question should focus on a particular issue in your draft. If you need help thinking of what these issues might be, refer to the assignments (remember, it's always good to make sure you do everything the assignments ask!) and/or your notes and my presentations from earlier this semester.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Feeder 3.2 Workshop
1. Last class we talked about the relationship between facts--or evidence--and more complex claims in the humanities. Do you think the author has done an adequate job of supporting his or her claims with objective facts about the piece(s) discussed? Point out at least two claims made about the piece(s) in the draft and explain how each of these claims is explicitly supported by reference to facts. If you think the claim could be better supported, suggest a fact about that painting that might help.
2. Does the draft adequately contextualize the piece under discussion? What kind of context (e.g. historical, aesthetic, etc.) does it provide? Does the contextual information seem more important than the discussion of the actual piece? If so, what might the author add or cut in order to put the focus back on the main piece?
3. Does the author explain how s/he will use VoiceThread's visual annotation tools in order to help guide the reader through the image? Suggest ways in which the author might better use visual annotations in order to help convince the reader of his or her claims about the piece.
4. Do you think the audio track will hold the reader's attention? Has the author explain how s/he will use music and other sound effects in order to break it up and make the information more digestible for the reader. Give any suggestions you might have for improving the audio track.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Feeder 3.1 Draft Workshop
1. Paraphrase the thesis statement of the scholarly article your partner wrote about. Has your partner made the scholar's argument clear in the paper? Is it clear where the scholar's argument ends and your partner's argument begins? How might your partner make this relationship between their and the scholar's ideas clearer?
2. When workshopping similar assignments earlier this semester we concentrated on how the author makes an argument intended for scholars accessible for your blog's wider audience. Has the author explained why this research matters? Do you think the author makes a substantive and powerful connection between audience and subject matter? Do you think your blog's audience REALLY wants to read this post? Explain your answer, pointing to specific details in the draft.
3. In today's discussion we talked about the relationship between facts (observations) and opinions (claims) in the humanities. Has the author drawn a clear relationship between the claims and the observations that support them in the original article? What kinds of evidence does the scholarly author cite in support of his or her claims? How might your partner make the relationship between the original author's claims and observations clearer in the draft.
4. What constitutes "original research" is a little more difficult to determine in the humanities than it was in the natural or social sciences. Are you confident that the article summarized is a scholarly article? How can you tell? How might the author make it clearer that s/he is summarizing scholarly research?
Homework: Bring a script for your Feeder 3.2 VoiceThread to class on Tuesday. Your script should explain not only what you will say in your VoiceThread, but what images you use and how you plan to annotate and explain them to your audience. Unit 2 Project podcasts are also due by class time on Tuesday.
VoiceThread
Put on your headphones and click the link below to watch a VoiceThread about what VoiceThreads are:
Once you understand the principles behind VoiceThread (listen at least to the part where the "happy mother" introduces herself), click here to check out a VoiceThread in which an art history teacher speculates about how students might use the tool in her class:
You might also want to play around with creating your first VoiceThread. To do so, go to http://voicethread.unc.edu/ and sign in with your ONYEN and Password. This will give you access to VoiceThread's web site where you can begin playing around with the software.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Unit 2 Project Workshop
1. As you listen to your partner's podcast for the first time, compose a DETAILED retrospective outline of the draft. Your outline should be about half a page long (single-spaced) and should contain at least three "levels" (I'll explain what this means in class).
2. How easy was it for you to compose the outline? Were the transition moments clearly signaled to the listener? How were the signaled? Were there any transitional moments that need additional clarification? In general, does the podcast feel organized? Explain your answer.
3. How has the author handled the results section? Does it feel like a barrage of numbers, or is the information easy to digest? Do you have a sense of which bits of information are the most important and which are less important? How might the author highlight the most pertinent info in the results section more clearly?
4. Does the author adequately address the strengths and weaknesses of his or her study? Does the author reformulate the hypothesis or propose how the experiment might be conducted differently next time? Do you have a sense of what the author learned from the study and why that information is valuable to the listener?
5. Last week we talked about how the Discussion section of a research report should gradually "zoom out" from the narrow conclusions drawn from the study itself. Summarize briefly how the author accomplishes this task of "zooming out." Is it clear what the reader should take away from the study and the report? How might the author highlight this information more clearly in order to leave the reader feeling more satisfied?
After you have answered the questions please leave around 5 minutes to chat with your partner about your podcasts. This is a good point at which to point out any other concerns you might have with the current draft and offer suggestions about how things might be improved for the final version.
2. How easy was it for you to compose the outline? Were the transition moments clearly signaled to the listener? How were the signaled? Were there any transitional moments that need additional clarification? In general, does the podcast feel organized? Explain your answer.
3. How has the author handled the results section? Does it feel like a barrage of numbers, or is the information easy to digest? Do you have a sense of which bits of information are the most important and which are less important? How might the author highlight the most pertinent info in the results section more clearly?
4. Does the author adequately address the strengths and weaknesses of his or her study? Does the author reformulate the hypothesis or propose how the experiment might be conducted differently next time? Do you have a sense of what the author learned from the study and why that information is valuable to the listener?
5. Last week we talked about how the Discussion section of a research report should gradually "zoom out" from the narrow conclusions drawn from the study itself. Summarize briefly how the author accomplishes this task of "zooming out." Is it clear what the reader should take away from the study and the report? How might the author highlight this information more clearly in order to leave the reader feeling more satisfied?
After you have answered the questions please leave around 5 minutes to chat with your partner about your podcasts. This is a good point at which to point out any other concerns you might have with the current draft and offer suggestions about how things might be improved for the final version.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Unit 2 Project Script Podcast
1. How has the author summarized the data that she or he collected in the experiment? Does this summary feel like an onslaught of numbers? Is it disorienting, or do can you process them all as the author is explaining them? How might he or she deal with this material more clearly?
2. Does the author restate clearly the original hypothesis and how the data proved or disproved that hypothesis? How could this information be better highlighted so that the listener will be sure not to miss it?
3. How does the podcast end? Is the ending effective? Why or why not?
4. How might the author interject another voice in a way that would make the podcast both clearer and more interesting?
5. What parts of the podcast do you think will be essential to highlight with music, sound effects, etc.? In other words, what are the most important transitional moments in the podcast? Does the author indicate how s/he will deal with these effectively? Suggest ways in which the use of music and sound effects might be improved.
2. Does the author restate clearly the original hypothesis and how the data proved or disproved that hypothesis? How could this information be better highlighted so that the listener will be sure not to miss it?
3. How does the podcast end? Is the ending effective? Why or why not?
4. How might the author interject another voice in a way that would make the podcast both clearer and more interesting?
5. What parts of the podcast do you think will be essential to highlight with music, sound effects, etc.? In other words, what are the most important transitional moments in the podcast? Does the author indicate how s/he will deal with these effectively? Suggest ways in which the use of music and sound effects might be improved.
Posting Feeder 2.2 Podcasts
Exporting Your Podcast as an MP3
Mac: GarageBand
At the top of your screen, click “Share” and then “Export song to disk.”
Make sure the box next to “Compress” is checked, and change “AAC Encoder” to “mp3 Encoder.” Change “High Quality” to “Good Quality.” Click Export and choose a location for your file.
Windows: Audacity
Click this link for an explanation of how to install the MP3 codec:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/help/faq?s=install&i=lame-mp3
This is a little more complicated! But if you run into problems you can rely on me and your group members.
Getting Your MP3 on Your Blog
1. Go to www.divshare.com and sign up for an account.
2. Once you’re in your dashboard click the big green button that says “upload a new file.
3. Click the “Choose File” button, locate your mp3 on your computer, and upload it to divshare (note: you’ll have to click the green “upload” button once you’ve chosen your file)
4. Once your file is done uploading, click “Dashboard” at the top of the page, and your mp3 file should be listed near the bottom of the page. Click the link that says “embed” under your file name. Scroll down to the box labeled “embed code.” Copy this code and paste it into the “create post” window on your blog. Make sure you’ve clicked the tab that says “Edit html,” otherwise it won’t work.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Unit 2 Project Pre-Writing
Once you finish the draft workshop, you can use the remainder of the class period in one of two ways:
1. You can implement the feedback you received on your Feeder 2.2 podcast.
2. You can begin pre-writing for your Unit 2 Project podcast. If you choose this route, I suggest that you work in pairs. Begin by explaining the results of your study to your partner and showing him or her the data that you collected. From there, return to your notes on today's PowerPoint presentation and work with your partner to begin figuring out what information will go in your results section and what you will say in the discussion portion of your podcast. After doing this, you should have a rough outline of your podcast. If you get this far, begin thinking about how you will frame this information and how you will present it to your listener clearly and succinctly. As you make decisions about these aspects of your podcast, begin transforming the rough outline of your podcast into a more detailed script.
Homework: You should have a detailed script for your Unit 2 Project, which we will workshop on Thursday. Also, your Feeder 2.2 podcast should be ready to post by class time on Thursday. On Thursday we will talk about how to export your podcast as an mp3 file and upload it to the internet.
Feeder 2.2 Draft Workshop
Listen to your partner's podcast at least once without stopping, then answer the following questions on a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s feedback on [partner's name]'s podcast:"
1. Describe the author's implementation of the middle style. Is it a higher or lower take on the middle style? Does the author come off as a credible scientist? What aspects of the podcast contribute most to the author's voice? Be as specific as possible.
2. Do you zone out or become disoriented at any point in the podcast? At what point does the author lose your attention? Does s/he read too slowly or too quickly? Is the recording clear and easy to understand?
3. Describe how the author has implemented post-production techniques such as the addition of music, sound effects, etc. Do these help you to understand the content of the podcast or do they distract you from it?
4. Has the author done everything required for both the Introduction and Methods and Materials sections? Is this information clearly highlighted? Does the author do a good job of explaining the experiment without summarizing the results? Does the podcast sound too much or not enough like a proper scientific research report? What changes might the author make in order to enhance his or her credibility or come off as more approachable?
Now, read these questions and then listen to the podcast again, thinking about how you will answer each question. If you need to listen again, rewind and listen to part of the podcast again. When you're done, answer these questions:
1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? Do you think the reader will be "hooked" within 10-15 seconds? Can the author's attention-getter be described as one of the more or less effective introductions we talked about? Explain your answer.
2. At what point does the author transition from the Introduction section to the Methods and Materials section? Describe how this transition takes place and how the author signals to the reader that s/he should be listening for a new idea. Identify any other transitions that are unclear or confusing.
3. Is the hypothesis highlighted clearly? Can the author be absolutely sure that even a casual listener will understand the experiment's hypothesis? How does the author highlight this information? How might it be highlighted more clearly?
After you have answered all of these questions in the Google Doc, take 5 minutes to converse with your author, explaining both your answers to the questions as well as any more general or specific comments that didn't come up in your written feedback. Also, feel free to share any tips for using the recording software that the author might find helpful.
1. Describe the author's implementation of the middle style. Is it a higher or lower take on the middle style? Does the author come off as a credible scientist? What aspects of the podcast contribute most to the author's voice? Be as specific as possible.
2. Do you zone out or become disoriented at any point in the podcast? At what point does the author lose your attention? Does s/he read too slowly or too quickly? Is the recording clear and easy to understand?
3. Describe how the author has implemented post-production techniques such as the addition of music, sound effects, etc. Do these help you to understand the content of the podcast or do they distract you from it?
4. Has the author done everything required for both the Introduction and Methods and Materials sections? Is this information clearly highlighted? Does the author do a good job of explaining the experiment without summarizing the results? Does the podcast sound too much or not enough like a proper scientific research report? What changes might the author make in order to enhance his or her credibility or come off as more approachable?
Now, read these questions and then listen to the podcast again, thinking about how you will answer each question. If you need to listen again, rewind and listen to part of the podcast again. When you're done, answer these questions:
1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? Do you think the reader will be "hooked" within 10-15 seconds? Can the author's attention-getter be described as one of the more or less effective introductions we talked about? Explain your answer.
2. At what point does the author transition from the Introduction section to the Methods and Materials section? Describe how this transition takes place and how the author signals to the reader that s/he should be listening for a new idea. Identify any other transitions that are unclear or confusing.
3. Is the hypothesis highlighted clearly? Can the author be absolutely sure that even a casual listener will understand the experiment's hypothesis? How does the author highlight this information? How might it be highlighted more clearly?
After you have answered all of these questions in the Google Doc, take 5 minutes to converse with your author, explaining both your answers to the questions as well as any more general or specific comments that didn't come up in your written feedback. Also, feel free to share any tips for using the recording software that the author might find helpful.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Example Podcasts
I know some of you were having trouble getting started, so it might be helpful to listen to what past students have done. Here are a few links:
These podcasts aren't perfect by any means, but they might help you get started and realize what's possible with the tools you have at your disposal. One thing I will say is that I think most of these could have been more ambitious in the ways the authors used effects to signal transitions; so these aren't the target, they're a jumping off point. I want you to wow me!
Feeder 2.2 Podcast Workshop
Today we will begin recording the Feeder 2.2 podcasts that you scripted last week. PC users will want to begin by downloading and installing the Audacity recording software:
Mac users will have an easier time with GarageBand, which is probably already installed on your computer. If you don't have GarageBand, there is a version of Audacity available for Mac as well.
Once you have the software up and running, you may want to begin by recording your own voice and using some of the program's effects to manipulate the sound wave by cutting and pasting, overdubbing, or transforming it through effects. As we talked about during our discussion of the RadioLab podcast, these bells and whistles can be useful tools for orienting your listener, but remember that you want your listeners to pay attention to WHAT is being said, not HOW you're saying it.
As you get going, you may find yourself in need of sound effects and/or background music. As we discussed in class, you should be sure to obey the rules about intellectual property that we talked about. The following web sites provide free, legal samples that you can use in your podcast (note: some may require registration in order for you to download):
Once you download these sound files to your computer, you can drag them directly into GarageBand or add them into your Audacity project by going to File > Import > Audio. Once the sound is in your project you can use the program's tools to move it around and manipulate it just like you did with your voice.
We'll spend the entirety of today's class working on your podcasts, and you can rely on me and your group members for help realizing the ideas you spelled out in your scripts. In addition, during Thursday's optional class I will be available to help you troubleshoot any problems you run into. You can also search the web for general tutorials on podcasting or specific tutorials about making a particular sound or effect.
You will need to bring a draft of your Feeder 2.2 podcast (i.e. something for your workshop partner to listen to) to class on Tuesday, November 9. NOTE: Please bring a set of headphones to EVERY class meeting from now on; you will need these in order to workshop your podcasts.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Feeder 2.2 Script Workshop
1. How does the author attempt to grab the reader's attention? It will be helpful to think not just about what the author is saying--i.e. the words s/he is using them--but HOW s/he says them. Will there be music? Sound effects? Will these methods work? If we assume that a potential listener is going to give us 10 seconds of devoted attention before making up his or her mind about whether to listen, do you think this author will have grabbed the listener by that time? Why or why not?
2. When we listened to the RadioLab podcast we talked a lot about the ratio of scripted vs. unscripted content. What do you think that ratio will be in your partner's podcast? Do you think that ratio is appropriate given the tenets of the middle style? How might the author work in more unscripted content? How might the author integrate different voices, sounds, and other effects that might add dynamism to the finished product?
3. How does the author explain the experiment in the Methods and Materials section? How does the author deal with the problem of representing quantitative data orally? Do you think the listener will be able to understand precisely how the experiment works? Do you think the listener could repeated the experiment precisely him or herself? Suggest ways in which the author might make this Methods and Materials section clearer.
4. Your finished podcast will contain at least two main sections: Introduction and Methods and Materials. How does the author signals the transition between those two sections (or any others the podcast might include)? Do you think these transitions will be effective? Why or why not?
5. How has the author attempted to establish and maintain his or her scientific credibility? We noted on Tuesday that there is a fine line between being accessible and losing one's credibility; where does the author's voice and content reside on this line? If the author were to shoot for a slightly "higher" take on the middle style, how might the script change? Conversely, how would it change if the author were to go "lower?"
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Draft Workshop: Feeder 2.1
1. The assignment asks you to take a piece of scientific research and make it meaningful to your audience. This involves a unique answer to the "so what?" question. How does the original article answer the "so what?" question? In other words, why does this research matter to psychologists? (note: you might have to ask the author or look up the original article to find out.) Now, explain why this research matters to your blog's audience… has the author explained and supported this answer adequately? Do you think your readers will really value this research in the way the author has proposed?
2. Many of your summaries for Feeder 1.2 were too long, too detailed, and too closely mimicked the structure of the original article. Does it feel like the author has fully digested the research he or she is presenting? Are the key terms explained vividly, simply, and in ways that your audience can understand clearly? Go through the draft and strike out any information that you think is too detailed for the needs of your audience.
3. Is the essay organized? Evaluate the author's paragraphing skills; does each paragraph have a clear topic sentence and stick to only one topic without wavering? Is each paragraph's idea fully developed? Identify any potential problem paragraphs and note how the author might revise them.
4. Evaluate the writer's introduction. Does s/he grab the reader's attention quickly? Does s/he transition quickly and effectively to the thesis statement? Does the author follow the pattern of one of the more or less effective introductions we talked about in class? Note any ways in which you think the introduction might be improved.
Workshop on Unit 2 Data Sheets
What data you choose to collect and how you collect it is the backbone of your experiment; you won't be able to prove your hypothesis unless you collect your data in a way that is clear and consistent. Form yourselves into groups of 2 or 3, and after you have examined your partners' data sheets discuss the following questions aloud:
1. Your hypothesis should have identified a relationship between an independent and a dependent variable. How does the author measure changes in the independent variable? What about the dependent variable? Is the scale sensitive enough to measure subtle changes? Is it flexible enough to track unexpected changes?
2. We noted in class that the biggest danger to experiments of this nature is the confounding variable. What confounding variables do you anticipate might get in the way of proving the author's hypothesis? Are these variables accounted for in the data sheet? How might the author use the data sheet to keep track of these confounding variables and prove definitively that they have not shaped the relationship between the independent and dependent variables?
3. What other kinds of data might it be useful for the author to collect? Suggest at least two piece of data that the author might consider adding to his or her data sheet.
4. Is the data collected on the sheet adequately quantified? While there might be some space devoted to more open-ended, narrative responses, is the data predominantly in the form of numbers that can be quickly and easily analyzed? If not, how might the author collect the data in a way that is more quantitative and less qualitative?
If you find weaknesses in your data sheet, go ahead and revise them. At the bottom of your document (which you should have posted to Google Docs), write a short paragraph explaining what changes you made as a result of the draft workshop.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Composing a Hypothesis Statement
Last week you began brainstorming the behavior you will modify for your Unit 2 Project. Now I would like you to work with your group members to compose a hypothesis statement for your project. As we noted last week, a hypothesis statement usually is formatted into an "if-then" statement that explains the relationship between an independent and dependent variables. In addition, a good hypothesis statement will be specific both in its identification of these variables and how it describes the relationship between them. Begin by composing a rough hypothesis statement, then work in pairs to critique one another's statements. Answer the following questions aloud:
Is each statement specific enough?
Do you know exactly what the variables are and how they are being manipulated?
Do you know exactly what will happen to the dependent variable when the independent variable is manipulated? Is this relationship described fully and clearly?
Do you suspect that confounding variables may exist? Should the author revise the thesis statement in order to assuage readers' suspicions about these confounding variables?
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Unit 2 Pre-Writing Exercise + Homework for 10/19
Hopefully all of you have had time to think about what behavior you will modify for your Unit 2 Project. Begin by sharing your behavior with your group members; let them know why you're choosing to change this behavior and why you think it will be appropriate for the assignment. (Note: you may want to look over the Unit 2 assignment sequence to make sure you've chosen a behavior that will work for this study.) Once everyone has talked about his or her behavior, collaborate with your group members to build the following chart in a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s Unit 2 Pre-Writing." After you create the Google Doc, click on "Table" and then "Create Table" and make a table containing 3 columns and 1 row.
In column 1, spend at least two minutes listing everything you think you know about your behavior. These things don't have to be verifiable scientific fact; for instance, if you're trying to drink more water, you might write down that being properly hydrated gives you more energy, even though you'd probably want to do research to verify this fact. In listing everything you know about your behavior, you want to consider what kinds of things trigger your behavior, what happens after you do your behavior, how it makes the people around you feel, etc. There are no boundaries here… just get as much down on the page as you can.
In column 2, spend at least five minutes listing everything you are wondering about your behavior. This is the place for unanswered questions: you might question some of the things you assumed in the first column, you might wonder about previous research into your behavior, you might think about the consequences of changing your behavior… you chose to modify this particular behavior for a reason, so hopefully you are curious about many different aspects of it.
In column 3, spend at lest five minutes write down (as specifically as possible) how you will find out the answers to the questions you are curious about in column 2. Do you expect that some of your questions will be answered in previous research? How will you find this research (i.e. in popular sources, scholarly sources, etc.)? Will you be able to answer some of the questions with your own study? If so, how will you design your experiment so that it gives you a definitive answer to your question?
If you finish before the end of class you can either begin work on the homework assignment (please use headphones if you begin listening to the podcast) or begin research for your Feeder 2.1 assignment.
Homework:
We'll be working with the RadioLab podcast titled “Lucy.” You can hear it here:
or you can download the mp3 directly here:
Read through these questions before you listen to the podcast, but answer them after you listen. As you are listening, compose a retrospective outline of the podcast. Post this outline along with your answers to the following questions in a new Google Doc titled "[your name]'s RadioLab assignment." Share this Google Doc with me.
1. What kind of “hook” do they use to draw in the listener? (Note: ignore the plea for money that precedes the podcast.)
2. Estimate what proportion of the program is based on extempore speech and what seems to be read from a script. How can you tell?
3. Note any background music or sound effects that seem to have been added in post-production. Why were these things added? How do they make the podcast clearer or more interesting?
4. Note any terms or concepts that you learned about from listening to the podcast. How were these explained? How did the authors make these complex ideas and terms easy to understand?
Unit 1 Assessment
Take a moment to look back at the earliest drafts of your Feeder 1.1 and 1.2 assignments. Think about how you have grown as a writer over the past 8 weeks. Next, answer each of the following questions with a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences.
1. Which class lessons have had the most impact on your writing? Which ones have had the least? Why?
2. Have you found the draft workshops helpful? Why or why not? Do you have any suggestions about how the peer review process can be more efficient or productive?
3. Do you feel like the in-class assignments and draft workshops helped to move your writing through the conceptual, organizational, and surface-level stages? Did you get stuck at any one of these stages during any of the assignments? If so, explain why.
4. Do you think any of the concepts or lessons covered in the course so far need additional clarification? How will this clarification help?
When you're done please email your responses to me. Please place your responses in the body of the message rather than as an attachment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)