User:Daclausen/English 180-Rhetoric as Argument

"ENG 151 will help you meet the following general education outcome: 'Write texts, in various forms, with an identified purpose, that respond to particular audience needs, incorporate research or existing knowledge, and use applicable documentation and appropriate conventions of form and structure.' To help you achieve this outcome, English 151 will provide you opportunities to draft, receive feedback on, and revise three extended writing projects, composed for different purposes and audiences. You’ll have a chance to integrate outside sources into your texts, which you’ll document in conventions appropriate to the form employed. You’ll also be invited to draw and reflect on your existing knowledge, using the writing process to see your experiences in new ways."

Student work on Wikipedia forms the middle section of a three-part semester-long set of assignments. The first assignment requires close analysis of a published piece of strong writing aimed at a broad, well-educated audience. Students choose this "mentor text" from a list I compiled. After analyzing the text, students work to understand that text in the context of a larger, ongoing conversation. After more research on that conversation and exploring how it is represented on Wikipedia, they choose a page to either create or edit. This semester, student's "mentor texts" include: a book review essay on cognition by Oliver Sacks "Awkwardness" and "Why We Love Sociopaths" by Adam Kotsko a TEDtalk by Courtney Martin "Orthodoxy" by G.K. Chesterton "Ivory Tower" (2014 film) by Andrew Rossi.

First off, know that you are the first students to go through this assignment. It’s new to me, but I have high hopes for it. In the tech world, I suppose they would call this the beta version. There will be some glitches and bugs to work out--but let’s keep our goals in mind and adjust accordingly.

The basic premise of this unit is that you will create and/or edit a Wikipedia page. Let’s look at what that will take and what I hope we will learn from it:


 * Learning about and orienting ourselves to the Wikipedia community’s standards.
 * Creating content that is useful to that community--making knowledge. (It must answer that community’s needs, adhere to the principles, and meet professional standards. You must balance your own interests and the needs of the community)
 * Negotiating the editorial process on Wikipedia. (again standards this time enforced from outside, within the community’s values, a respect for other’s opinions and a simultaneous willingness to use and receive critical thinking).
 * Reflecting on this process in order to establish how it helps us as writers. (This includes a realistic view of our own strengths and weaknesses, much like an athlete or artist who wishes to excel).

Your topic will follow from your mentor text. What exactly this means will be up to you. It might mean you write on something that is directly mentioned in your text, or on your text itself. It might mean you take one specific question that the text raises and look into it’s history. You will have to do enough research both on Wikipedia and beyond Wikipedia to uncover what needs to be researched. My suggestion is to follow your own interest--trust yourself to uncover the conversation.

Keep in mind the amount of work that is doable, and expected. I don’t want you to rewrite the whole Wikipedia entry/series/portal on Feminism. I want you to stretch yourselves, and work as hard as you can, but not kill yourselves or drive yourselves to desperation. Part of that is fostering good work habits, and getting over the fear of failure that inspires procrastination (high achievers often procrastinate in order to give themselves an out--an excuse when they inevitably don’t live up to their own impossible expectations. Unfortunately, this is also a self fulfilling prophecy. I know, I’ve been there. I’m still fighting this myself).

Because I am asking you to produce work in a collaborative space, you are free to work in groups, if that makes sense to you. Deciding how to divide duties and responsibilities will be up to you. Also, even if you are working alone, you will be taking part in a larger conversation, and people with no relation to this class will form both an audience and an editorial presence in your work. I don’t really know what will happen, so lets find out together.

After "apprenticing" themselves to a mentor text, and familiarizing themselves with the conversation to the point that they can contribute to Wikipedia, students then complete a final argumentative essay which makes an original claim and contributes to the larger conversation.

Week 1 (2015-02-16):  Wikipedia essentials, Editing basics, Exploring the topic area

 * Overview of the course
 * Introduction to how Wikipedia will be used in the course
 * Understanding Wikipedia as a community, we'll discuss its expectations and etiquette
 * Handout: Editing Wikipedia (available in print or online from the Wiki Education Foundation)


 * Basics of editing
 * Anatomy of Wikipedia articles, what makes a good article, how to distinguish between good and bad articles
 * Collaborating and engaging with the Wiki editing community
 * Tips on finding the best articles to work on for class assignments
 * Handouts: Using Talk Pages handout and Evaluating Wikipedia brochure


 * Be prepared to discuss some of your observations about Wikipedia articles your topic area that are missing or could use improvement.
 * Handouts: Choosing an article


 * Create an account and then complete the online training for students. During this training, you will make edits in a sandbox and learn the basic rules of Wikipedia.


 * Create a User page, and then click the "enroll" button on the top left of this course page.


 * To practice editing and communicating on Wikipedia, introduce yourself on the user talk page of one of your classmates, who should also be enrolled in the table at the bottom of the page.
 * Explore topics related to your topic area to get a feel for how Wikipedia is organized. What areas seem to be missing? As you explore, make a mental note of articles that seem like good candidates for improvement.


 * Review pages 4-7 of the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure. This will give you a good, brief overview of what to look for in other articles, and what other people will look for in your own.


 * Evaluate an existing Wikipedia article related to the class, and leave suggestions for improving it on the article's talk page.
 * A few questions to consider (don't feel limited to these):
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?


 * All students have Wikipedia user accounts and are listed on the course page.

Week 2 (2015-02-23):  Using sources and choosing articles

 * Handouts: Citing sources on Wikipedia and Avoiding plagiarism on Wikipedia.
 * Be prepared to explain close paraphrasing, plagiarism, and copyright violations on Wikipedia.


 * Add 1–2 sentences of new information, backed up with a citation to an appropriate source, to a Wikipedia article related to the class.


 * Your instructor has created a list of potential topics for your main project. Choose the one you will work on.


 * For next week
 * Instructor evaluates student's article selections, by next week.

Week 3 (2015-03-02):  Finalizing topics and starting research, Drafting starter articles

 * Discuss the topics students will be working on, and determine strategies for researching and writing about them.


 * Talk about Wikipedia culture and etiquette, and (optionally) revisit the concept of sandboxes and how to use them.
 * Q&A session with instructor about interacting on Wikipedia and getting started with writing.


 * By the start of our next class, find an article you want to work on and mark the article's talk page with a banner to let other editors know you're working on it. To add the banner, add this code in the top section of the talk page:


 * Add a link to your selected article to the table at the bottom of this course page.
 * Compile a bibliography of relevant, reliable sources and post it to the talk page of the article you are working on. Begin reading the sources. Make sure to check in on the talk page (or watchlist) to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.


 * If you are starting a new article, write a 3–4 paragraph summary version of your article—with citations—in your Wikipedia sandbox. If you are improving an existing article, create a detailed outline reflecting your proposed changes, and post this for community feedback, along with a brief description of your plans, on the article’s talk page. Make sure to check back on the talk page often and engage with any responses.
 * Begin working with classmates and other editors to polish your short starter article and fix any major issues.
 * Continue research in preparation for expanding your article.


 * All students have started editing articles or drafts on Wikipedia.

Week 4 (2015-03-09):  Moving articles to the main space

 * We'll discuss moving your article out of your sandboxes and into Wikipedia's main space.
 * Handout: Moving out of your sandbox
 * A general reminder: Don't panic if your contribution disappears, and don't try to force it back in.
 * Check to see if there is an explanation of the edit on the article's talk page. If not, (politely) ask why it was removed.
 * Contact your instructor or Wikipedia Content Expert and let them know.


 * Move your sandbox articles into main space.
 * If you are expanding an existing article, copy your edit into the article. If you are making many small edits, save after each edit before you make the next one. Do NOT paste over the entire existing article, or large sections of the existing article.
 * If you are creating a new article, do NOT copy and paste your text, or there will be no record of your work history. Follow these instructions on how to move your work.


 * Optional: For new articles or qualifying expansions of stubs, compose a one-sentence “hook,” nominate it for “Did you know,” (see detailed instructions) and monitor the nomination for any issues identified by other editors. Wiki Education Foundation staff can provide support for this process.


 * Begin expanding your article into a comprehensive treatment of the topic.

Week 5 (2015-03-16):  Building articles, Creating first draft, Getting and giving feedback

 * Demo uploading images and adding images to articles.
 * Share experiences and discuss problems.
 * Handouts: "Illustrating Wikipedia" (pgs 4-7) and "Evaluating Wikipedia article quality" (handed out originally earlier in the course)


 * As a group, offer suggestions for improving one or two other students' articles, based on your ideas of what makes a solid encyclopedia article.


 * Select two classmates’ articles that you will peer review and copyedit. On the table at the bottom of this course page, add your username next to the articles you will peer review. (You don’t need to start reviewing yet.)


 * Expand your article into an initial draft of a comprehensive treatment of the topic.


 * Peer review two of your classmates’ articles. Leave suggestions on the article talk pages.
 * Copy-edit the two reviewed articles.


 * Every student has finished reviewing their assigned articles, making sure that every article has been reviewed.

Week 6 (2015-03-30):  Due date

 * Students have finished all their work on Wikipedia that will be considered for grading.