3.31 Research proposals

We started class by reading through the description for the research proposal assignment, and talking about how the focus and purpose for your individual projects with shape the particular format of your proposal.  The assignment (linked on the right under course documents) lists the "moves" you will want to make in your proposal, but this "list" is not meant to be a formula.  Rather, you should organize and develop your proposal in a way that will make the most comprehensible + compelling presentation for your subject material.

You then wrote into your plans for your project and we did some group brainstorming in response to your informal presentations.  

The rest of the class was devoted to discussing and applying the expectations for the project proposal assignment in more specific ways.

We negotiated the valuation (weighting) of features for a rubric to assess (in terms of what aspects of a given proposal would need more work) and evaluate (assign a grade).  We talked through several different point systems, all of which made clear to us (once again) the organic nature of writing => where its different accomplishments (use of appropriate discourse,  clear focus, logical organization, in-depth development) are in many was so interconnected as to be difficult to separate in terms of both evaluation and assessment.  For example, discursive choices (which voice/style you choose, what/how you establish authority, the depth and kind of critical examination => writing issues identified by Bartholomae) in some sense DEFINE how to establish/inntroduce a focus, possibilities for organization, and demands for development. For example, to meet the discursive expectations of writing studies research, an essay must authorize its focus and points through references to the research "conversation" and evidence created through a critical the project's data. In a very real sense, the newest and most difficult aspect of this assignment  will be to write within "writing studies research" discourse, and as we talked about valuing the different features of the rubric, I made my claim that the points should reflect this = both so that student put their efforts there, and so that the rubric carries a clear message about what is important (the central learning task).

The rubric we "tried out" in class is listed below (thank you Mary Ellen).

1. Audience: writing studies discourse = voice/style, authority drawn from other researchers = joining the conversation (CARS article—finding a niche and occupying it)       20 points

 2. Focus/purpose:  stated on assignment sheet, frame a study appropriate to writing studies research (includes resources, methods, problem statement—deals with the same issues and be coherent), significance, all parts of proposal are within the focus.                   30 points 

3. Organization:  establish the context or place yourself within it, elaborating, define terms before discussing, purpose and focus have to be early on in the organization,      
15 points 

4.  Development:  appropriate development (relevant to the focus), sufficient development, position the focus within the research, raise questions, include elaborations on methods, literature review, connections to writing studies research and focus             
30 points

5. Correctness:  bibliography, consistent format, consistent citation, spelling, punctuation, grammar, sentence structure. 
5 points              

In our discussion of how to grade & coach the sample research essay, we found that we had slightly different perspectives on what needed work in this essay = though overall there was close enough agreement to provide a basis for talking about how to make use of the rubric as a tool to develop/work on your proposals.

Good class!

For next week:

Assess the 2nd sample research project using the rubric.  Come to class prepared to evaluate both the essay - and the rubric.

Read: Bruffee, 395;   Breuch, 97

I have not assigned the chapters in Mertens on quantitative analysis (although they are there for your reference).  Rather, during the second half of class you will apply some of the analytic approaches described in Chapter 13 to several data sets under the direction of Dr. Sutton.  

During the first part of class I will return the exams and we will have a brief discussion to consolidate learning fromt he first half of class,  we will revisit the rubric in terms of Sample Project 2, and we will take a quick look at Bruffee & Breuch.  Obviously, we will not be able to all these things and an hour and 15 minutes, but we will at least set you up so you can continue your contemplation of these materials on your own as they apply to your work.

Dr. Sutton will provide some work with quantitative analytic methods during the second half of class.

Have a great week (looks like it might finally be spring!) and see you soon.