Asynchronous PWR 2 Draft Workshop

Activity details: Prep for this activity by assigning student groups in advance and having students upload their drafts to a folder with their name on it that every student has access to in a big class Google Drive folder.

 

Student-facing instructions:

1. Before beginning, double-check the names of your group mates. If you're in a group of 4, double-check who you are writing for and who you are skipping. You should comment on 2 projects by doing the following for each. Each response should take around 1 hour, x 2 = class plus homework. There is no extra homework for Thursday.
2. Go to the author's folder in our Google Drive or Box (via Links to Student Work Google Drives and Box Folders ). Identify their draft and open it. In their Drive file, create a new document that will be your Workshop Letter to the author. Name it with both your names, eg. TessatoTree (if I was writing to the Stanford Tree).
3. If you are reading a paper or a script: Read the document. Leave comments to indicate your reading experience as you read: are you interested, confused, informed at various points? Do some areas have great citations, or need more citations? Is a summary too fast, or too long? Comment as you read. If you are the 2nd commenter, feel free to reply to the 1st commenter's comments.
   1. If you are watching a video, take timestamped notes as you watch in your Workshop letter document. Note the same issues as above. Pause as you watch to mark what you notice about slides or any other issues (eg., 3:25 I like this slide but it feels overfull, I can't read it in time)
   2. Do not comment on issues of style or grammar unless you are having problems understanding, and then you can put a comment in that area indicating as much.
4. Write your classmate a letter. If you watched a video, include your timestamped notes at the end of your letter. Your letter should be 1 single spaced page long. Use signal verbs to describe the author’s claims and moves (i.e., You claimed, you showed, you argued…) and spend time re-describing what you got from the piece before offering critique. The most central goal of this letter is to help the author clarify their argument and root it to their research methods. Your letter should be close to 1 single spaced page long and start with a salutation ("Dear Tree") and end with a sign-off ("Best, Tessa"). Then, address these questions
   1. What is working well in this document? Use specific quoted or paraphrased examples.
   2. What claims does the author make over the course of the piece, and do they change or develop? If an earlier draft, what claims do you see emerging or lurking within the paper?
   3. If the document is really short, you could look at their final Research Proposal to see more details of their research. Use a full hour to help your workshop mates as much as you can. 
   4. How does the author set up their theoretical framework? What scholars are they relying on and are concepts discussed, explained, and cited
   5. What are the methods and to what evidence are they applied? Is this analyzed evidence then connected to overall claims?
   6. How is the piece organized? Is this structure effective? Does the reader receive information as it is needed, that is, organically? How are paragraphs, slides, or clips structured—internally, and with regard to one another?
   7. How would you characterize the style? Is it cleanly edited yet, are the citations formatted correctly, how is the vocal tone and delivery (if there is audio)?
   8. How does your own identity shape how you responded to the draft? How might your experiences and values shape what you brought as a reader? 
5. Repeat for the other group-mate! If you are the 2nd commenter on a document, feel free to read what the 1st person wrote and say if you agree or disagree about certain points, but still do all of the steps thoroughly as outlined above.