Today’s main topics: Writing a self-evaluation; Discuss the WLLN drafting process; Peer Review of WLLN.
Agenda
- Writing an email to me with of a self-evaluation of your WLLN draft
- Writing a L&L Narrative and making larger connections
- Workshop drafts in our new forum on CUNY Academic Commons
Writing an email to me with of a self-evaluation of your WLLN draft
15 minutes: Write, and send, me an email telling me where you think you’re narrative is strong or successful. What do you like most about it? Also, and just as important, where would you fairly criticize it? Is there anything you still want to still work on? What is left out, or you did not have the time to develop? What type of feedback would you like: on grammar or word choice? Would you like structural or editorial suggestions? What I would rather not hear is “I know this is kind of bad, but tell me what you think.” If YOU think it needs work, tell me why, and where.
This is a practice run for the “cover letters” you will be doing for the major assignments this semester.
Writing a L&L Narrative and making larger connections
10 Minutes: One of the most challenging parts of writing a literacy narrative is (or can be) connecting your story to a larger context. I know I certainly encountered this when I was tasked with writing one. Did any of you, and is anyone still having trouble doing this? What strategies can we come up with in our writing to solve – or at least get around – this challenge? For example, can you raise the question of making a connection, but still not make a connection? How might you handle this in your writing – what might you DO?
Workshop drafts in our new forum on CUNY Academic Commons
We will be posting our drafts HERE: Peer-Review: WLLN Draft
30 minutes (or more): Yes, we are work-shopping our drafts today in an online forum. Peer review is meant to be a significant component of our class. We eased into this last week with an informal peer review where we looked at the “snapshot” assignment. This is a more formal peer-review session, and you are expected to participate fully.
What this means is you are to read and respond to at least one draft from your group. Make sure that each person has a reader/responder.
Read with respect and attention, and offer feedback that is sensitive to the text. Ask questions where things are unclear. Offer suggestions on where you would like to know more, or you think the text could benefit from something being added – or even taken away. If you make suggestions like this, try – as best you can – to offer a constructive reason.
Consider the writing context [and the rhetorical situation]. What is the purpose of the text — to inform? persuade? entertain? Who is the intended audience? If you’re not a member of that group, are there terms or concepts you’ll need to look up? What is the genre — a report? an analysis? some- thing else? What do you know about the writer, and what is his or her stance — critical? objective? something else?
Things we are NOT evaluating – unless the writer welcomes specific feedback on these things:
- Grammar
- Topic
- Use of language – meaning, if someone makes non-standard choices, they may be deliberate. You are invited to ask why the writer made their choices, and how they think it serves the text.
