Unit 3 Project Script Workshop #2

Unit 3 Script Workshop 2

1. Does the author’s thesis statement adequately answer the “so what?” question? In other words, does the author explain why their claim about the piece matters? Make sure the answer to the so what question isn’t unsurprising or generic.

2. Does the author’s analysis change or deepen your understanding or appreciation of the piece? Do you view the piece differently after you read the draft vs before? If not, suggest aspects of the piece the author might investigate further in order to deepen their analysis.

3. Estimate the proportion of the script that is devoted to direct analysis of the piece vs background information (including historical and background info, biographical information about the artist, etc.). At least 75% of the script should be devoted to analyzing the piece directly, so if this proportion is off suggest the ways in which the author might improve it.

Next, compose two additional questions that focus your reader's attention on issues that you have been dealing with as you composed this draft. You can copy/paste questions from previous workshops or compose your own.

4.

5.

When you have completed the workshop, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1B30Tgn0TCeZyYTDzmLheiR_7O7BbSxvCzjD6rvbrO2I/viewform

Draft Workshop: Unit 3 Project Script

1. Evaluate the author's introduction. Does it follow one of the strategies for effective introductions we talked about in class? Does it begin by telling the listener something s/he doesn't know?

2. Evaluate the author's thesis statement. Is it specific, i.e. does it focus on specific details of the artwork under analysis? Does it make a strong claim? Does it provide a road map for the rest of the script?

3. Does most of the author's script focus on the artwork at hand, or is too much time devoted to the contextual information?

Next, compose two additional questions that focus your reader's attention on issues that you have been dealing with as you composed this draft. You can copy/paste questions from previous workshops or compose your own.

4.

5.

When you have completed the workshop, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1VIUsuerl-KTO5MLZ11zNmQlYolufeP-w5iGafwf-MZA/viewform

Turn in Feeder 3.5

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1gcqg_7lBbl5DANGyf9TyS5Flt5WMtJEoVaS0-lNJIk4/viewform

Unit 3 Feeder Assignments

Turn in Feeder 3.1: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/13vcm4_9pSN8Tp7ZQFKp6A3fR_oRwh2tYKq7DFUNp9l0/viewform

Turn in Feeder 3.2: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1fxYg_4qejuRLP3x--6HW5liQf0eLe5Q_gk6e1I_ZsfQ/viewform

Turn in Feeder 3.3: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1onBO6IZc9RCCuLG-Uhf0I5pQDlen_d1rMfcL_ZX7EiU/viewform

Turn in Feeder 3.4: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1NCw3nwS8txz6_N0kCDpcT8hDip41leloaiG1Cf3kbR8/viewform

Collaborative Work on Unit 3

In your groups, each person should present their work on Unit 3 so far. Show the rest of the group an image of your piece from the Ackland as well as some of the contextual images you chose for Feeder 3.3. Tell them about your general impressions of the piece and listen to any feedback they might have about alternative ways to interpret the piece.

Once everyone has presented their feeder assignments, work collaboratively on your working thesis statements.

Posting Your Unit 2 Project

Once you have uploaded the final version of your podcast to SoundCloud, click the "Share" button underneath the wave form, and copy the code in the box labeled "widget code." Next, log in to blogger.com and click the orange button to create a new post. Click the button labeled "HTML" and paste the code into the large box. Then, click the "Compose" button and add a works cited list or any other pertinent into below your podcast. If you run into any problems, both I and your group members are here to help you.

Sample VoiceThread

http://uncquartet.blogspot.com/2010/12/bruegel-protest-through-death.html

Francis Bacon: Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion

Draft Workshop: Audio of Entire Podcast

1. Does the podcast meet the assignment's length requirements? If it is too long or too short, suggest what material the author might add or subtract.

2. Do you zone out or does your attention stray at any point in the podcast? If so, how might the author fix this problem?

Now add at least two more questions of your own. You can re-use questions from previous workshops or you can ask the author to evaluate a specific issue or section of the podcast that you've been focusing on.

3.

4.

When you have completed the workshop, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1wmGlCQ4jVKysb6lDl7Z4RcqDQomVWBRFWUx-thb1aWA/viewform

Draft Workshop: Results & Discussion Script

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. Does the Discussion section gradually “zoom out,” moving from the narrative focus of the study to broader issues that might connect to the listener’s life? Is this process done effectively? How might it be improved? 

4. How does the podcast end? Is the ending effective? Why or why not?

5. How might the author interject another voice in a way that would make the podcast both clearer and more interesting?

6. 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.

When you have completed the workshop, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1s3D8SjZK4odXE1TG1BHNYbnonzX4JlCqVwqYasS_oYs/viewform

Draft Workshop: Intro / Methods Audio

Listen to your partner's podcast at least once without stopping, then answer the following questions in the Google Doc where that person kept his or her script.

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?

When you have completed the workshop, turn it in here:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1WtwjS2L_LrVxjWTQeTS8v2DWUyw-bXCIRP31i5uh3no/viewform

Writing a Research Report Part II

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B11JiXOw1yx0cTNIdF9nRmw3QXM/edit?usp=sharing

Turn in Draft of Intro / Methods Audio

Once, your draft is completed, in Audacity go to File > Export. Choose a location for your file and choose WAV for the format. Click "OK" through any other options (the defaults should be fine), and you should have an audio file of your draft saved in the location you chose.

Go to soundcloud.com and sign up for a free account. Once you're logged in, click the "upload" button at the top of the page, then the "choose files" button and point it toward the file you saved in the step above.

Once your draft is uploaded, submit your link via the form below. Your link should look something like http://www.soundcloud.com/YOUR_SOUNDCLOUD_USERNAME/THE_NAME_OF_YOUR_PODCAST 


https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1NlHWTAvP0RfjW6sRI-aBhCcxT9z06V_L5zqpvseSSXs/viewform