Category: Prompts

Reflecting on the course (~500 words)

For this final blog post, I would like you to reflect back on your writing throughout the semester. If possible, look back at the first assignment you completed for this class, and think about the ways your writing has changed, or the ways your writing process has changed.

• Do you think about writing differently than you did at the beginning of the semester?
• Do you think more about your “process” and work habits now as you complete a writing assignment? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Do you find genre to be a useful concept for you in thinking about your writing in and out of academic settings?
• Even if you still think of writing as a chore and absolutely despise it, do you consider yourself a little bit more informed about writing in your field?

Thinking about the unique approach to writing that we undertook in this class, I’d also like you to reflect on using XML, GitHub, Worpress, etc.

• Did you find developing the schema to be a worthwhile activity in project 2? Why or why not?
• Did writing in XML change the way you think about composing texts outside of this class (or do you anticipate it doing so)?
• Did any of the mix of software and applications we used in this class stand out as especially difficult or as a hindrance to your thinking or writing?

I would also like you to reflect back on the three projects, the readings, and the other work we have completed throughout the term:

• Is there one that stands out as your favorite?
• What about least favorite?
• Are there any particular readings, in-class exercises, videos, or design entries we completed that you especially enjoyed / found helpful?
• Are there any that stand out as being unhelpful?

Finally, I would like you to talk about something you can take away from this class into your future career and academic endeavors. Perhaps it is something as simple as “I’m going to try to recreate peer review with future writing assignments” or “I’m going to think about the rhetorical situation when I write.” Explain why this particular activity, reading, or writing strategy is something you can use in other courses or other work environments.

Reflecting on changes to your genre model (300-500 words)

Before completing this entry, look at the changes that were made to the genre model that you designed for WP2 (look at the updated template file, the team design entry, the documentation, etc.). Below are some generative questions:

• What changes did they make to your schema?
• What is your reaction to these changes? Do you agree or disagree with them? Do you see potential issues with the changes? Do the changes seem worthwhile?
• Are they changes that your group discussed or thought about in some way?
• Do the changes to the schema at all affect the way you see the genre? Or the way you imagine yourself writing the genre?

For Project 3 I used the schema as a step by step guide in developing my cover letter. I found that the simple structure of the schema was very intuitive and gave me an understanding of how I should proceed in my writing process.  From what I have done so far I find that the schema is very much appropriate to the rhetorical situation that I am responding to because I am trying to put out application for job in which I hope to receive an interview for and this schema for cover letter fills the necessary needs for apply for a position. I can only really find one issue where I felt constrained by the schema. This was when I was working on the intro paragraph and I wanted to write something outside of the intent and reason elements. But because of how the schema is designed I was unable to write outside of those two elements. Outside of that I found the schema very helpful as it gave me a sense of what element each section needed and how I can transition from one part to another.

Going through the peer review was a very helpful experience for me as I was able to see how my partner took up genre and I was able to get pointers on what I needed to improve on my own project. I think that from the experience I was able to garner more ideas on I how I can add more to my cover letter. Going back to the schema I did not find any of the definitions or structure to the schema to be confusing to me. Compared to project 2 I found this experience to be smoother so far because I feel in project 2 it was about recognizing a genre and developing it along the way and working out the kinks. Whereas in this project I found that I was using a schema that was extremely polished and very straightforward to use so there really was not much of a learning curve. With regards to changes and improvements, I find that the ability to write outside of the two elements in the intro section to be one of the things I would like to be improved. And during the peer review from talking with my partner I found that the there maybe should be a general element that could be put into place when you have something that does not belong to the work, personal or school experience.

Design Entry 10: Reflecting on your first draft (300-500 words)

Use this entry to reflect upon your initial draft for WP2 and brainstorm potential changes to the schema. Make sure you read your peer review report before completing this entry. Below are listed some generative questions:

• How did you use the schema (i.e. what was your writing process, where did the schema figure into your writing process)?
• Did you find the schema to be appropriate for your rhetorical situation? Why or why not?
• Were there moments of tension where the schema felt constraining?
• Were there particular moments where an aspect of the schema helped you write your composition?
• Did looking at your peer’s work or receiving feedback from your peer reviewer prompt you to think differently about the schema or way you are using markup?
• Are there aspects of the schema that could be made more specific?
• Are there documentation definitions that could be changed?
• Was using a schema you did not design different than using the schema your group designed for P2? If so, how?
• List out some potential areas you might want to discuss revising your genre model/schema.

When looking at the other three genres that my classmates worked on, what popped out to me was cover letters. I found it interesting that after all of the resumes that I’ve had to create for job interviews and co-ops I had never once made a cover letter. I find that this genre can be extremely useful in the job word because it can be an effective way of separating yourself for other applicants. This genre allows implores to see how some of your personality traits and come up with a more vivid description of what kind of person you are compared to just a resume. Obviously this genre would be an appropriate response to a situation where I am looking or applying to a job. In this situation the audience would be an employer or hiring committee and the desired uptake would be an interview or even a job offer.

I found that from the schema the overall structure was pretty simple and very straight forward. I found that the schema for this cover letter had many of same qualities that you would find in a normal letter with a more guided approach on how you would structure it towards the intended audience which would be an employer. From looking at the schema there really are no parts that I find to be confusing at this moment. Looking forward at the research portion of this project, I think that I will spend time looking over my classmates cover letters as well as looking at cover letters that would reflect my field.

Design Entry 8: Thinking about WP3 (in-class; no word count)

Use this design entry to begin looking forward to Writing Project 3. First, read the prompt for the third writing project. Next, take a look at some of your classmates’ projects for Writing Project 2. Finally, look at the template file/documentation for one of the genres you might be interested in. Then, think about some (or all) of the questions below:

• Is there a particular genre that jumps out as interesting to you? What about this genre is useful for you?
• Can you think of a rhetorical situation you might find yourself in your life or your future professional or academic career where one of the genres presented by your classmates might be an appropriate response?
  • What is the situation?
  • Who is the audience?
  • What is the action you want to enact (your desired uptake)?

• What can you learn about the genre from the schema/template file?
• Are there aspects of the genre or the schema that are unclear to you?
• What do you notice about the style, tone, and content of the examples of the genre completed by your classmates?
• What other research will you need to do to compose your own version of the genre?

From the initial draft of project 2 I found that there were a lot of takeaways that I could use moving forward. Firstly I found that schema was appropriate for the rhetorical situation that I was responding to. I found that in the situation I made, it was necessary to create a proposal in order to get the proper course of action to correct or improve upon the situation. I found that working within a smaller group compared to a whole class there was a much more beneficial experience because there was a more specific direction that each one of us wanted to go in the group compared to the whole class. By that I mean that instead of having a schema developed by twenty something students with vaguer elements we were able to incorporate much more defined elements into our schema where we each develop a strong understanding of where, when and how to incorporate those elements into our work. Looking back at our schema I think that we did a very good job at defining the elements and the overall structure of a public initiative proposal, and gave ourselves a lot space to really develop our own unique form of that genre. Where I found some constrains within the schema was mostly trying have multiple elements of same kind or the same element with multiple attributes in the same section. For example if I wanted to put in a citation I could easily do so, but if I wanted to add a second citation element so that I could put in another citation on its own line, XML would not let me do so. For the multiple attributes part, I found that there may have been moments where I wanted to have more than one attribute within an element, for instance feasibility. But due to the design of the schema, I would have to add another feasibility element to select a different attribute instead of making it under one feasibility element. Another thing I would like to note is occasionally I found the definitions to some of our defined elements were similar to one and another which would sometimes confuse me. I found this to be the case when I was trying to develop my objective and goals for my first draft.

For the proposal model that my group is doing we are developing, specifically a proposal for the purposes of improving things found in the community. Usually there are not a lot of genres that will precede these proposals as these proposals are usually one of the first steps in developing/building this project. But genres like notes or emails can transpire from conversations or meetings that a few individuals to a group of people within  the community that can eventually lead to these people to develop this proposal. The uptake that can be found from these preceding genres don’t necessarily lead to the creation of these proposals. These notes and emails could lead to other things like articles found on the internet or local newspaper or phone calls to city board offices or fliers that lead to group meetings. As a result there could be many different routes in which uptake can go from one genre to another and how these paths lead to different approaches.

While we were building our genre model for project 2, our team looked at examples of proposals as well as looked into the background of why and how these proposals came to be. First we looked at more specific proposal examples that we used to know what all of the necessary elements and sections were needed in order to come up with the most complete model. After that we looked into a larger variety of proposals and tried to find commonalities between these different proposals to make sure that our model met the standards of a basic proposal.

The genres that typically follow this sort of proposal could be an RFP or bid or a more laid out plan that goes over the details of the execution of the proposal. Typically these are the more formal forms genre that will appear after a proposal is put out there. But there could be other genres that may come up directly or indirectly like emails, text messages, memos, etc. between the party taking the proposal or the party that put in the proposal.

The ways uptake can influence the way the genre is construed is by understanding what results you would prefer to see once you put the genre into play. What that means is that if you want a proposal that you would like to be received by a more general or crowd that is neither on one side or the other than maybe you would want to orient your proposal to give a very moderate input.

Genres that precede our topic of educational blogging are of two realms: academic texts and entertainment pieces. The academic category includes any reliable works of information, such as textbooks, scientific articles, instruction manuals, lecture notes, and historical documentation. The latter category includes any method of entertainment, such as narratives, comics, and games.

The academic sources serve as the key subject of our genre while the entertainment sources serve as the format of our genre. However, we see throughout various pieces that the academic sources also play an important role in the structure of the text. For example, typically in an educational blog, the author introduces basic relative scientific concepts, such as laws or formulas, first before deeply examining the main subject. This is structured like a course in which students need to fulfill prerequisites before they can fully grasp what is being taught.

Our genre’s desire is to be commonly dispersed. Thus, other works that follow it may be similar works that give a unique spin on teaching different subjects. They also may be responsive genres, such as scientific studies on its use and effectiveness, student essays on their novelty, or social shares (Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, etc.). Emails are another genre that it may prompt. For example, Ben and Oliver emailed a couple of educational bloggers to question them on their writing methods. Oliver received a brief response, which itself was another prompted genre (informal instructive reply to a response to his blog), still centering on the original topic.

We account for the uptakes of the genres in our schema by including two main sections, background and answer, along with additional free-floating categories of headings, visuals, and analogies. The background covers the base area to be taught, misconceptions, and other important ideas needed to introduce the topic. The answer section is where we place the bulk of our response to the question with supports. The two main sections have similarities content-wise to account for the diversity in the presentation of blogs. Our image and analogy categories serve as “break-ins” where we can insert pictures or side comics that clarify concepts and entertain. At the end, we have a conclusion in which we review and sum up the main points of the post. Our schema also includes a sources section reflecting the academic parent genre by mirroring scholarly formats (APA, MLA, etc.) rather than informal ones (linking).

Initially, we included a community-interact section, representing user comments or an ask box, following the sources. The community-interact section is another genre integrated with and directly caused by our own. We decided to take this portion out to focus on the content of a post, but it’s still important to note since it prompts further questions and answers that are integral in the responsive community educational blogging promotes.

Uptake and schema writing (300-500 words)

In this entry, try to apply the concept of uptake to the development of your genre model. Think about uptake in two directions—both your genre as the uptake of a previous genre or genres and your genre as the basis for future uptake genres. Below are some generative questions:

• What genre(s) precede your genre, typically? How does your genre uptake preceding genre(s)?
• Are previous genre(s) reflected in your genre model?
• What genre(s) typically follow your genre? What is the ‘desired’ uptake of your genre?
• How is the desired uptake of your genre reflected in your genre model?
• Are there other ways that uptakes influenced the development of your genre model?

I worked in a workplace in a manufacturing background that was very technical based and involved a variety of genres and works that may have overlapped or coincided with one and another. I think that I would characterize the works undertaken in the work place to be monodisciplinary. I felt like that there were a slew of things that people worked on from generally the same discipline, sometimes varying, and from there the works may have sometimes collaborated and integrated with others. For instance you may have a quality report which may lead to a reflection a weekly report and from there the report could be sent out through an email chain. Some of these forms of work that you will see in this environment could be things like reports and research presentations to emails and notes. From a standpoint of my peers that I worked with I saw that there was good mix of people who were in my specific discipline and others who were still within the engineering discipline but not necessarily in my specific discipline. Most of my direct co-workers were of the same discipline, but other people who I did not interact with like people on the floor, HR, people working in a different division than the one I worked at can from different disciplines. I feel like in this environment though there were some variation of disciplines I experienced, overall I was surrounded by mainly one discipline based working environment. After graduating I see myself doing similar work to what I have done in my previous co-ops like reports, emails, and presentations. Hopefully I’ll also have the opportunity to also do some research journals/reports that I can work on. I see myself working with this genres because they are all necessary to this line of work and will enable me to the type of work that I would like to do. So far I’ve experienced a monodisciplinary work environment, but I hope to have experience working within places where multiple disciplines overlap and in some cases integrate with each other. I find that there are certain values in experiencing something like that.

For this entry I took a look at Sam Wagner’s project where she went into addressing how in America we do not take care of older buildings and how we can find ways to take better care of them.  I saw that from a discipline standpoint there were variation to how she approached and I approached project 1. For one since her discipline is civil engineering she was bring up more building oriented setting whereas I was going in depth with mechanical based approach.  For her problem statement there was a lot more first person and a good deal of background that she brought to the issue where I approached it from third person and went more technically into the issue.

Looking at the XML  source I found that there were a lot of commonalities between mine and Sam’s writing. I found that we both used general summary in each of our annotated bibliographies. I also found that our  summary and relevance sections were usually larger than the background. Some of differences were that she used MLA for citations where I used APA. She used multiple different summaries more than I did.

Looking at Sam’s project now I would probably have included more application/relevance material into my annotated bibliographies. What I mean by that is that I would have included more examples and applications that I could have given the reader on how to improve the problem. Obviously from viewing this project I have different way of viewing this project and developing an annotated bibliography, what I noticed is that schema is more of a guideline than a principal because looking back I feel like my annotations may have been a bit constrained and may seem a little rigid and clunky.

Ben Gincley’s annotated bibliography researches technologies and techniques associated with the ever-developing field of neural engineering. I liked his bibliography in that it drew on different areas to solve neural engineering problems (machine recalibration, neural signal propagation through closed eyelids, use of dura mater for neural devices, etc.) while mine was more general in scope.

In each of his annotations, he gave the procedure of the study and also the actual application, which helped tie the subject together. On at least one of my annotations, I separated the application from the research. I noticed he had a source with research associated with Northeastern too. That was good to place the subject in perspective, and I feel that I should have looked into more local sources for my topic. I referenced the ReGame VR Lab, but I didn’t take a source from studies they’ve already conducted. Additionally, how he briefly explained technical jargon made the read understandable for those unfamiliar with the field. He also provided better backgrounds for the authors of the articles by citing their relevance to the problem. Our subjects were similar in that it covered concepts for rehabilitation and drew from different disciplines to solve the problem.

We followed the same markup schema. Our sources were scientific articles and were cited with APA. All of his “relevance” sections were tagged with “application.” Unlike me, he updated the version tag as he wrote. Overall, the formatting made it easier to follow.

Overall I found that my experience with project was very refreshing and interesting to me. I wrote in a way that was not familiar to me and was able to understand the schema to writing a annotated bibliography. At first it was somewhat confusing for me to use Oxygen and type up my project in XML, but as continued to do it I became more comfortable with the idea of XML. One of the things that I worried about as I writing up these annotated bibliographies was that the transition from element to element would be somewhat bumpy and would not flow compared to a typed up version in a normal word document. But when I started looking at the formatted file, I was surprised to see that the overall flow and  composition of my work was very similar to what I would see on something similar written up on a word document.

At first I viewed having to use elements to my writing as a constraint because I had to think about how I was going to write something into a certain element or think about how that part fits there. But from continual use of the schema I was able to see that I was more efficiently organizing my thoughts and structuring my points in ways that made a lot sense. The markup schema that we devised in class help up very well as I was working on my project, though I feel there were moments where I wanted put in something but did not have a good feel for with element it belonged to or if any of the elements we came up with actually fit to that idea.

Moving forward I am actually looking forward to using Oxygen and writing in XML. I think that learning how to work within new genres and formats using this technology will be a great opportunity for me develop my writing ability and understand the ideas of genre.

Genres and assemblages of texts (300-500 words)

In this entry, I’d like you to think try to think through the Spinuzzi reading and try to use some of his definitional work to trace out the complexities of your own genre(s). No genre, as it were, exists in complete isolation.

Remember that the frameworks he outlines are merely that: frameworks. They exist to help researchers think more complexly about how discourse works. No one is right or wrong, but they do illuminate different things (as he details in the essay). When thinking about the genre(s) you are interested in researching and producing for writing project 2:

• What “assemblages” of texts does that genre typically interact with or become a part of? Are they all internal to an organization or field, or are they meant for wider consumption?
• What groups of people compose, read, critique, or use the genre?
• Is your genre (typically) a direct response to some other text or group of texts? That is, what causes one to enact the genre you are interested in?
• Do any of the frameworks he lists here help you think about how you might go about researching the genre?

Thinking about disciplinarity (mono-, multi-, inter-, and trans-) (300-500 words)

Use the Leavy reading to think about your co-op; apply the concepts we’ve discussed with regard to diciplinarity-multi-inter-transdisciplinarity to characterize the work you and others undertook at this workplace. Listed below are a few questions to spur your thinking, feel free to address them directly or not.

• What kind of workplace were you involved in? What kinds of ‘problems’ did you (or the wider organzation) undertake?
• What other disciplines were represented by your peers? Your coworkers? What level of interaction and integration were present between and amongst different disciplines?
• Is this the kind of work you see yourself doing when you graduate and enter the workforce? Why or why not?

Comparing annotated bibliographies (200-400 words)

Read someone else’s annotated bib and compare it with your own. Below are questions to generate comparison:

• How are they thinking about their discipline differently than you? How is this reflected in the problem statement?
• Looking specifically at the markup—compare the two documents. What is the same? Are there certain tags you each use differently?
• Does this comparison make you view your own bibliography differently? Are there things you would change if you had the opportunity?

One of my biggest passions growing up was architecture. I would travel as far as my parents would take me to see some of the oldest, craziest, and widely proclaimed buildings the world had to offer. For that reason Boston seemed like an obvious location to attend college. However, it was during my initial college visits that I realized what I really wanted to do. It wasn’t architecture. It was engineering.

I have come to Northeastern University to major in Civil Engineering. The reason for that is all because of a rickety set of stairs and a sagging floor. As I am sure you have learned from living in the Boston area or going to school at Northeastern, Boston is a city of beautiful old buildings. Brown stones and oaks line our streets and ornate works of art such as the YMCA stand on our campus. But unfortunately these structures are failing, as all old buildings do and what they need is just a little bit of attention. Moving from the stetson residence halls to a leased property on saint stephen street after my freshman year I realized that the one thing people don’t like to do is invest in a fixer upper. Institutions like Northeastern and property management companies such as Alpha Realty would rather use a building till it’s condemned and then knock it down to put in a utilitarian cinderblock box than invest in a piece of history.

One of my biggest inspirations in the structural engineering community is a man named Santiago Calatrava. Although better known as the architect of such buildings as the new world trade center train station in New York City and the Milwaukee art museum, he is in fact a world renowned engineer as well. I think that his work is a stunning example of how structural systems and the bones of a building can truly shine and compliment the aesthetic of the building overall. So much of our architectural history here in America is underappreciated and forgotten simply due to convenience and lack of understanding. When we look to countries like Germany, Switzerland, and France we see numerous examples of old buildings that were preserved and modernized while still maintaining the historical significance of the structure. It is my hope to one day work in an industry that is not simply about demolition and new construction, but one that can take the essence of a beautiful old thing and make it safe and great again.

As Northeastern students, we all have the privilege to experience co-op. While every student has a different co-op experience, almost all of us begin in one place: myNEU COOL. This dreadful web portal can be found under the “Experiential Learning/Co-op” tab in myNEU, and it serves as the cornerstone of the co-op application process.

As an aspiring software engineer, I see the web app as reliable, but in need of serious improvements. It is worth noting that it is not fair to criticize a reliable service and claim it needs (emphasis on needs) fixing, rather we the idea is the service can be improved. The areas for potential improvement are many, but it may be wise to start with the obvious: the web app is boring to look at and the interface is antiquated. They are made by separate peoples presumably, but one might argue that the myNEU user interface is nicer, and that is not something written lightly. Now beyond the drab colors, the next item is the basic search options. When an aspiring co-op looks for jobs, you are presented with a number of ways to filter all of the available jobs. This includes application status, your previously prescribed level of interest, and the levels of experience needed. The real issue arises when you want to sort the entire list. For some reason, the only relevant sorting option on this list is Company name, date posted, and job level. While there are other sorting metrics, none create a reliably sorted list. The rest of the options are simple true or false flags that create a pseudo alphabetical list that should simply be a filter to begin with! Sorting schema are one of the fundamentals of creating a database, and the ability may very well be available on the backend. Why can’t I sort by distance from the university, wage, or review score?

Now the flaws above of the sorting ability of myNEU Cool are apparent, and just the beginning of the issue, but the web app also suffers from lack of data entry. Plenty of the job entrees are incompletely filled out, and some are misleading. It would be worth investing whether these are entered directly by employers or by Northeastern faculty, but it certainly hurts the usefulness of the app. Improvements in this facet are not software related, instead it is related to standard enforcement. Again it is worth noting that one can certainly understand if the University prefers having more entries to having perfectly reliable entries.

Reflecting on the process, genre, and XML-based writing (300-500 words)

In this entry, please take some time to reflect on the first writing project of the course. In particular, I’d like you to reflect on the process of composing in XML markup (as opposed to a normal word processor).

Here are some questions to generate reflection: Did it affect you writing process? If so, how? Did the markup schema we devised in class help you or hinder you? In what ways (did you feel guided, constrained, normal, etc.)? Are there specific aspects of writing in XML that are difficult for you? Were there particular technical issues that arose over the course of this project? Now that you’ve completed your annotated bibliography, are there aspects of the schema that you would want to change? What is your understanding of the “social action” of the genre of the annotated bibliography? As you move to projects 2 and 3, how do you feel about using Oxygen to compose your writing assignments?