2.9 Reaction papers, and research using literature review and comparision

We did a lot of catching up and getting things in order in this class - and I think we are now "set" in terms of being in sync with the calendar.

Some things to catch up on:
If you have not sent your NIH certification, send it by 2/16.

Note your time for a conference on the concept writing for your thesis project.
The concept paper (see 451 in Mertens) the statement of your "idea" for your thesis research, plus some indication of the research that is out there that you plan to read, along with some discussion of your plan for how to conduct your research.  This should be about a page or two when it is finished.  The purpose of writing it is so that you have some language to talk about what you want to do with the person you want to recruit for your advisor.  During our conference we will talk about and "draft" writing that you bring,  spend some time on what you might want to read, and do a little talking about what methods you might want to use.  The idea of the conference is for you to get a chance to try out your ideas before writing them down.

Here is the conference schedule:

February 16 (President's day, at Rockin' Joes by the Union train station): Christina 4:00 pm; Melissa 4:30 pm; Maria 5:00 pm; Laura 5:30 pm
February 17:  André 1:00 pm
February 18: Matt 4:30 pm

Make sure you know when you are on the calendar for your reaction paper.
You each signed up for 2 reaction papers (here is the link).  We agreed that you would email your reaction paper to everyone in class, and me, on the Sunday night before the class when you do your presentation.  I have sent you an email which cc's everyone in class - so if you reply all to that email with your attached paper - we should be good.

How we will use Mertens.
As noted in class, we will use the reaction papers as examples of the research methods we are reading about in Mertens.  Reading Mertens will give you some detailed information about nuts and bolts of using the different methods; the reading are examples of those methods in action.  Generally, I will give a brief presentation on the methods reading (Mertens) and then we will talke about the research reading in light of Mertens.  If you have questions about Mertens - especially if this is a method you are considering using - bring it up in class. In general I will only talk to the overal points, and the questions you ask.  We are using Mertens like a manual of directions.  They are step by step.  I will not talk through the steps unless there is a problem or questions.

What should be included in a reaction paper?
We began by reviewing the assignment sheet (posted to the right) and then used our discussion of Berlin as a "model" for what to put in the written paper, and how to present the essay you are responsible for discussing.

You are not expected to use a powerpoint or and A/V -though for the DALN presentation you might want classmates to click through the site, and for any esssy you should expect that your classmates have a copy of the essay you are discussing availble/open.

Model presentation.  In my presentation of the reaction paper on Berlin, I wrote key terms on the board, and defined them. I referred to page numbers in the essay and read passages central to the author's supporting points/development, and I asked questions (to engage the class in supplying information from the reading) - though I didn't do this very successfully.  If your presentation is more interactive - that is great.  I was worried about time so I kind of rushed us through the points.

After discussing the content of the essay, I talked about the assumptions underlying both the essay's content, and its rhetorical moves (the logical/structural organization of the argument it makes) and questioned/considered which research paradigm this essay seems to draw from.

I then read from the section of the paper to present a "critique" of how Berlin makes his points, and to place the essay within the history of writing studies/composition research. I also related Berlin's paper to the method we were discussing.  At the end I attempted some discussion of the questions posed as part of the reaction paper (though in some sense we'd covered lots of those ideas).

So you may have noticed that this presentation used the board, reading sections from Berlin and from the reaction paper, and discussion.   You can use any or all of these approaches - focusing on what makes you comfortable.  I am hoping you do better at getting a conversation going than I  did.

I am not going to go over the main points in Berlin, as I feel the paper does a pretty good job of that, and we did pretty well covering the material in class.

Brodkey. The last part of class was devoted to mapping out a reaction to Brodkey.  We didn't get very far into that, but I think what we did talk about was important.  Her focus was on how discourses for class and gender structure the ways teachers interact with their students - and she suggests that sometimes these discourses can preserve "authority" in places where it is not constructive to do so.  I have posted a sample reaction paper for Brodkey which I strongly recommend reading.

If the concept of "discourse" is new to you, this link might be helpful.  Students who come up through Kean's writing major have spent some time defining + analyzing discourse, so that is why I haven't spent time on it here.

For next class (Feb 23)

Read: Mertens, Ch 6: Survey methods; Anderson et al (2006, pdf on Course Blog) - Melissa;  Royster (1996) Maria, 555; Elbow (1999), 641  Sally  in CT.

Write: Concept paper (and attend conference)

Have a good break, and see you at your conferences.