UW20: The George Washington University: Fall 2004

ERIC DROWN
Home	Curriculum Vitae	Dissertation Abstract	Publications	Book Project	Teaching Philosophy	Course Syllabi	Student Comments	Student Writings	For Current Students

Think Tank: The Production of Public Knowledge

Dr. Eric Drown, Director

Introduction

University Writing 20 is designed to enhance first-year students’ skills in critical reading, writing, and thinking, as well as to equip them with university-level research and organization tools. This section of UW20 meets these goals by asking you to function as members of a think tank hired by a public agency to produce knowledge of interest and use to an identifiable constituent. As a result, our work processes will mimic those found in many public, professional, or academic settings. As you’ll soon see, this course uses your writing to make important decisions about the content and structure of the course. You’ll also write to discover, develop, and elaborate ideas as well as to report and defend them. Accordingly, you’ll be drafting, revising, and rewriting often. You can expect to keep a writer’s journal of notes, readings, drafts, and reflection. In addition you’ll submit a portfolio of finished writing for final assessment at the end of the course.

The first section of the course is dedicated to planning, forming ideas, assessing the findings of existing literature, and justifying the considerable time and money spent on this research project. Together we will decide on a broad topic of current interest on which to focus our efforts. Then, you, as an intellectual community, will formulate a set of research questions, assign research goals to individuals operating in work groups, develop a common reading list from academic, professional, and public sources. The writing assignments in this section—including abstracts, mission statements, question writing, research schedules, critical note taking, and an overview of the literature—stress the idea that writing, when used to learn and plan, is a key part of an extended work process, not just a way to report findings. In the middle section of the course you’ll work both as individuals and members of small teams. We’ll be practicing close reading skills and developing your ability to respond critically to academic and professional readings in short response essays. We’ll assess the readings you chose in the first part of the course for content, research and argumentation strategies, and relevance to the project. In so, doing you’ll learn to reflect on appropriate and inappropriate intellectual uses of rhetoric and style, to critique claims and evidence, and to investigate the epistemological paradigms that make knowledge-making possible. Finally, the last part of the course is dedicated to research and the formal presentation of working papers. This section of the course will help you formalize your ideas, present extended arguments regarding items of significant public interest, and practice effective rhetorical and organizational skills.

Since you, as an intellectual community, will take responsibility for many stages of the process, you will need to be self-directed, to be able to work within small and large groups, to get work done on time, to take and give constructive criticism, and to manage the freedom and responsibility of participation in this institute. If you feel uncomfortable with this structure, please talk to me immediately so that we can decide if this is the right learning opportunity for

Finally, the pace of this course is demanding. As Director of Research, I'll be asking you to make project decisions about topics well before you feel comfortable, to work in groups, and to keep up. If you need help at any stage, please contact me. Procrastination is your worst enemy. If you don’t believe me check out the daily schedule that follows.

Required Text: Annette T. Rottenberg, The Structure of Argument, 4^th ed.

Grade Distribution:

Portfolio of Finished Writing (25-35 pages): 85%

2 Abstracts—2.5% x 2 = 5%

1 Funding Proposal for Overall Project = 10%

1 Cover Letter and Individual Research Proposal (R) = 10%

3 Review Essays of Common Readings—3.3% x 3 = 10%

2 Formal Reviews of a Peer’s Draft—2.5% x 2 = 5%

1 Review of the Literature = 10%

1 Executive Summary of an Individual Research Project = 10%

1 Individual Research Project (R) = 25%

Participation: 15%

Instructor Assigned = 10%

Peer Assigned = 5%

Daily Schedule	Due at Beginning of Class:
Session 1: Discuss Think Tank Format	First Class. *NOTE: All assignments must be word-processed, feature correct grammar and spelling, and have polished style.*
Session 2: What is knowledge? How is it constituted differently in academic, professional, and public settings? Self-Analysis	Write an encyclopedia entry designed to answer the questions listed in Session 2. Your editor requires you to write no fewer than 250 words and no more than 275 words. Since this is a very short piece, you must spend your words wisely. Some research, prewriting, drafting, and much reflection are necessary to complete the task.
Session 3: Negotiating the Research Focus	Read handout entitled “A Research Process.” Prepare a list of 3 possible themes or topics for our focus. For each topic, provide persuasive reasons why we should spend our time and money studying it. You must say explicitly why the public (or rather, some fragment of the public) should be interested in our findings. This assignment can take the form of a bulleted list of talking points. You must be prepared to amplify your talking points.
Session 4: Indexes and Journals, Internet Sources, and Primary Sources	Read Rottenberg, Ch. 10 “Researching an Argumentative Paper.” Compile a list of 5 indexes that contain searchable bibliographic references to readings useful for study of our topic. Also, list 10 useful academic or professional journals, 3 sources of informed public commentary, and at least 5 sources of primary data. List 5 sources of useful information from the Internet (not ALADIN, also do not list such portals and search engines as GOOGLE or YAHOO). Finally, list at least 5 special archives or libraries in the metro area that may be of use.
Session 5: First Survey of the Literature; Writing Good Questions	Compile an annotated bibliography of 7 articles or book chapters relevant to our Research Focus. If an annotation or abstract is available from a citation index, use it. Otherwise scan enough of the reading so that you can describe its main questions, its scope, and its findings in a few sentences. These readings can come from academic or professional journals or books, from such intellectual journals of current events as The Nation or The National Review (but not Time, Newsweek, or US News and World Report), from government publications (such as Congressional Quarterly), or from publications of advocacy organizations. Your list should include readings from at least 3 of the categories listed above. Write 250 words explaining the results of your first survey of the literature. Try to describe the parameters of debate among informed participants. About what do writers agree? About what do they disagree? What questions are being asked? Are there any serious oversights?
Session 6: Refining the Research Focus; Setting Team Research Goals	Based on our first survey of the literature, do some prewriting (listing, clustering, nutshelling, etc.) to identify the subcomponents of the Research Focus. Choose two of these subcomponents on which you think you might want to conduct individual research, and, for each, write at least 7 questions (of fact, value, cause and effect, meaning, etc.) that, as a group, reveal the parameters of a research project. Begin to collect, read, and annotate readings for your individual research project. Continue to add bibliographic references to relevant readings for the overall course focus.
Session 7: Setting Individual Research Goals; Assessing Readings (Authority, Method, Claims, Evidence, Sources, Logic, Interpretation, Rhetoric)	In light of the results of Session 6, write 450-500 words proposing the refined Research Focus as if to a funding body. You’ll need to describe the Focus in significantly greater detail than you did in the bulleted list produced for Session 3. Identify clusters of the key questions being asked by participants in the debate, and the ones most in need of answers. Specify what aspects of the debate seem to have been neglected, or poorly considered in the existing literature.. Discuss your individual contribution to the overall research goals of the think tank. Explain why this is a significant topic of public interest. Your work must be authoritative and persuasive if you expect this body to fund our work.
Session 8: Setting the Reading List	Read handout entitled “Processing the Readings.” Choose 2 articles from your annotated bibliography that you think should be included on our common reading list, read them, and write an abstract of each. Then, make a bulleted list of talking points to defend your choices. Your list of talking points should address why the questions raised in the reading, the paradigms and methods used, and/or the evidence presented is especially pertinent to our discussion. of the topic. We’ll be culling 16 readings from near 100, so you must be specific and persuasive if you hope to you’re your reading discussed by the class. Please photocopy both of the articles that you choose in their entirety (including any footnotes and bibliography whether they appear at the bottom of the page or at the rear of the book). If the publication has not already done so for you, legibly write the complete bibliographic citation on the first page of the article. NOTE: Please make your copies carefully and keep them unmarked since I will be using them to make master copies to distribute the reading in the second part of the course. If your article is illegible it will not be added to our common reading list.
Session 9: Individual Research Plan	Revisit and assess the 7 questions you wrote about your individual research topic. Revise them as necessary, in light of your new knowledge or perspective. For each question, construct a possible answer and indicate how you intend to verify or disprove it. What kinds of evidence will be needed? If you can, cite specific articles, titles, data, or other sources of information or perspective. Indicate why these questions (and not others) are the right ones to ask. It is left to you to invent a functional and efficient means of representing all of this information without resorting to paragraphed prose. In consultation with the scheduled requirements of this course, make a schedule (with due dates) of the critical tasks you’ll need to perform in order to finish your individual research.
Session 10: Peer Review of Individual Research Proposal	Write a cover letter and proposal requesting funding for your individual research project.
Session 11: Argument and Responding to Arguments	*NOTE: You are required to write 3 of 8 Critical* *Reading* *Responses as Assigned by the Director.* Read Rottenberg, Chs. 1-2 Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 12: Critical Reading Practices	Read A & B—Write Response 1. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 13: Argument: Claims	Read Rottenberg, Ch. 3. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 14: Critical Reading Practices	Read C & D—Write Response 2. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 15: Team Meeting	Revise cover letter and individual research project proposal. Prepare for Team Meeting: Teams discuss results of research so far; identify questions unanswered, issues unresolved, evidence still needed.
Session 16: Critical Reading Practices	Read E & F—Write Response 3. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 17: Argument: Definition and Support	Read Rottenberg, Chs. 4-5. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 18: Critical Reading Practices	Read F& G—Write Response 4. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 19: Team Meeting: Revisit Research Focus in Light of Reading	Prepare for Team Meeting: Teams discuss results of research so far; identify questions unanswered, issues unresolved, evidence still needed.
Session 20: Argument: Warrants, Language and Thought	Read Rottenberg, Chs. 6 and 7. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 21: Peer Review of Nutshells	Prepare a Nutshell of the argument (Claims, Support, and Warrants) of your individual research project.
Session 22: Critical Reading Practices	Read H & I—Write Response 5 Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 23: Critical Reading Practices	Read J & K—Write Response 6. Ongoing individual and team research
Session 24: Logic and Logical Fallacies	Read Rottenberg, Ch. 8. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 25: Critical Reading Practices	Read L & M—Write Response 7. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 26: Critical Reading Practices	Read N & O—Write Response 8. Ongoing individual and team research.
Session 27: Critical tasks, style, rhetoric, and persuasion in research papers I.	Read Rottenberg, Ch. 9. Ongoing individual and team research..
Session 28: Critical tasks, style, rhetoric and persuasion in research papers II.	Write a 500-750 word review of the literature that we read in common.
Session 29: Team Meeting	Prepare a draft of your individual research project. Prepare for Team Meeting: Teams discuss results of research so far; identify questions unanswered, issues unresolved, evidence still needed.
Session 30: Peer Review	Write a 400-500 word formal review of a peer’s draft.
Session 31: Revising Workshop I	Revise one section of the body of your draft responding to the criticisms and suggestions of your peers.
Session 32: Team Meeting	Prepare for Team Meeting: Teams discuss results of research so far; identify questions unanswered, issues unresolved, evidence still needed. Begin to discuss
Session 33: Revising Workshop II.	Revise the introduction and conclusion of your draft responding to the criticisms and suggestions of your peers and the Director.
Session 34	Write a second draft of your individual research project taking into account your peers’ and Director’s comments.
Session 35: Peer Review	Write a 400-500 word formal review of a peer’s draft.
Session 36: Self-Analysis	Draft a 500-750 word executive summary of your individual research project and its contribution to the overall Research Focus.
Session 37: Team Meeting	Prepare for Final Team Meeting.
Session 38:	Conference
Session 39:	Conference
Session 40:	Conference
Session 41:	Conference
Session 42:	Conference
Final Exam Date	Submit a Portfolio of All Finished Writing including a revised Final Paper, a revised Executive Summary, and all other graded assignments.