THE POSTHUMAN

A Writing Seminar in the Princeton Writing Program / Spring 2017/WRI131/132

Professor: Marina Fedosik-Long e-mail: mfedosik@princeton.edu

Class Time: M/W 3:00-4:20 and 7:30-8:50 Office: Lauritzen D014
Classroom: G002 Office hours: the writing hour on
Mailbox: Baker S001 Mondays 12:30-1:30 and by appt.

THE POSTHUMAN

Eugene Goustman, an artificial intelligence program that passed the Turing test, and CRISPR-CAS-9,
a relatively simple bio-technology for gene-editing, are just two harbingers of our posthuman future.
Scientists and the public perceive these breakthroughs as simultaneously fascinating and alarming,
though often for different reasons. What is so unsettling about a machines ability to impersonate a
human, or our proficiency in manipulating genomes? In this Writing Seminar, we consider the ways
new technological possibilities both define and challenge our understanding of ourselves. We begin
reading science fiction by Charles Stross alongside symbiogenesis theory to question the idea of the
self-contained human subject. Next, we analyze the films Ex Machina, Blade Runner, and the TV
show Westworld to discover how ideas about body and mind in the sciences and the humanities
circumscribe the category of the human. For the research project, students analyze specific
posthuman phenomena to make an argument about the ways they are changing our notions of
identity and belonging. Examples might include the personhood of nonhuman entities, biohacking,
and the controversies surrounding AI. For the final project, students will invent potential posthuman
futures in the medium of their choice, drawing on the theories they will have studied in the course.

While this class has a particular subject matter, it is meant to serve primarily as a course in academic
argument, writing, and thinking. You will learn to develop ideas through reflection upon many
different kinds of evidence, expand and complicate your thinking through research, revision, and
peer collaboration, and become familiar with academic citation styles and other conventions. This
course is built on the premise that writing is thinking and that your development as a thinker and a
writer happens when you join academic conversations already in progress. Therefore, this course
nurtures your ability to engage in conversations that produce knowledge as well as help you
understand and change the way your mind works. To enhance your cognitive meta-awareness, which
is crucial to your becoming a college student and an intellectual living a reflective life, we will be
reflecting on the process of writing as much as the subject matter of the course. Part of this process
will be developing your sense of what you already do well. In addition, the course will challenge you
to figure out how you can grow as a writer, both this semester and beyond.
This task will feel difficult at times. College writing instruction has a tendency to take away your
confidence in old strategies before it replaces them with new abilities. Fortunately, we will also be
learning habits of work and mind that will support you in times of difficulty, and which will sustain a
community that also provides such support.
Overview of Assignments

Assignment 1: Symbiogenesis and the Limits of the Human: Analyze a Single Text Using a
Theoretical Lens.

Using Laurel Bollingers theory as a lens, develop your own claim about puzzling/problematic
portrayals of the human and/or the posthuman in the short story Rogue Farm. The best essays will
use evidence from the short story and/or an additional text to critique and refine Bollingers analysis
of the posthuman.

Assignment 2: Minds and Bodies: Analyze a Primary Source Responding to Other

Arguments.

Locate, critique, and refine an ongoing critical conversation (argument texts) about representations of
embodied artificial intelligence in Westworld, Ex Machina and/or Blade Runneri (exhibits). In your
critique, draw on textual evidence and one or more of the suggested/found method text(s).

Assignment 3: Posthumanity: Create a Researched Argument.

Locate an invention, a phenomenon, or a practice with posthuman connotations and, by drawing

on a variety of exhibits, arguments, background, and lens sources, theorize its implications for the
culture affected by it.

Assignment 4: The Posthuman Condition: Deans Date Assignment

Using any medium or a combination of media, create a representation of the posthuman condition.
In addition, in a 2-3 page cover letter, reflect on the ways our coursework motivated and informed
your creative process.

Portfolio with End-of-Semester Reflection

At the end of the semester you will submit a portfolio of all the written work you will have produced
in this course accompanied by a letter reflecting on your development as a writer in this semester.
Please, save all the drafts and pre-drafts in a designated folder.

Posthuman in the News (PIN)

On Wednesdays during the course of the semester (beginning in Week 2), a group of two class
members will make a five-minute presentation on some aspect of posthuman in the news. You can
do your research online, visit a lab or an event, and/or interview scholars. Keep an eye on current
news sources, from print and Internet sources to radio and television. I recommend looking over the
New York Times (nytimes.com) and listening to National Public Radio (90.9 FM). You can also
consult CNN, The Guardian, Wired, Scientific American, TED, edge.org or any other relevant source.
Feel free to engage our designated librarian in your research process.

Your presentation should describe some recent research project related to the subject matter of this
course. The bulk of your presentation (~3 or 4 minutes!) should simply relate your topic to the rest
of the class. In the final minute or two, you should raise one or more questions or ideas provoked
by your find. Your job is to inform us about it and help us to begin thinking about what issues about
the posthuman it raisesespecially if it resonates in any way with the readings we are doing for
class.
Important Due Dates

Assignment 1 Draft (D1): Friday, February 17, 11 pm, shared dropbox

Assignment 1 Revision (R1): Friday, March 3, 11 pm, shared dropbox

Assignment 2 Draft (D2): Friday, March 17, 11 pm, shared dropbox

Assignment 2 Revision (R2): Friday, April 7, 11 pm, shared dropbox

Assignment 3 Proposal and Annotated Bibliography

Draft (PD 3.1): Monday, April 10, due in class
Revision (PD 3.2): Thursday, April 20, 11 pm, shared dropbox
Assignment 3 Draft (D3): Tuesday, April 25, 11 pm, shared dropbox
Assignment 3 Revision (R3): Wednesday, May 10, 11 pm, shared dropbox

Assignment 4 Deans Date Assignment + End-of-Semester Reflection, Monday, May 15, 11 pm,
shared dropbox

Final portfolio due May 16.

Required Texts

A Pocket Style Manual (7th edition), by Diana Hacker and Nancy Sommers: available from Labyrinth
Books on Nassau Street

Films Blade Runner (Directors Cut) and Ex Machina: on Blackboard and/or from an online seller of your
choosing.

Access to HBOs Westworld.

A writers notebook.

Course Pack: available from Pequod (mezzanine of the University Store).

All other texts will be distributed in class, available on Course Reserves, online, or accessible through our Blackboard
site. You need to print out and bring paper copies of all downloaded materials to class.
Academic Resources:

The Writing Center

writing.princeton.edu/center

Located in Whitman College, The Writing Center offers student writers free one-on-one conferences
with experienced fellow writers trained to consult on assignments in any discipline. The Writing
Center is one of Princetons most popular academic resources, holding nearly 6,000 conferences each
year. I strongly urge you to sign up for an appointment. To do so, visit the Writing Centers online
scheduler at wriapps.princeton.edu/scheduler/appointments. Writing Center Fellows also hold
drop-in hours Sunday through Thursday evenings during the semester. Enter through Baker Hall.

The McGraw Center

The McGraw Center for Teaching and Learning provides academic support to Princeton
Undergraduates to help them get the most out of their coursework. Their one-on-one learning
consultations can be particularly useful for developing active reading strategies, project management
skills, and note-taking tactics. You can make an appointment for an individual consultation by
visiting http://www.princeton.edu/mcgraw/.

The Community of Scholars in our Writing Seminarand me!

The good news is that you now have a community of other promising scholars with whom you can
discuss course material, debate a point we only briefly touched on in class, and form writing support
groups.

Our designated librarian will be glad to assist you with research for essays and PIN presentations.

If you have a question about the material or about course policy, please ask me sooner, rather than
later. Successful writing means grappling with some tough thought-knots and pragmatic time-
management issuesif you plan ahead and contact me with these issues ahead of time, I can likely
help you come up with a solution.
 WRITING SEMINAR POLICIES

Communication

Conferences

We will have four conferences during the semester to discuss your writing and ideas. The first will be
a 45-minute individual draft conference with me on your first draft. The second will be a 60-minute
group conference, where you will meet with one other student and me to discuss each others drafts
for essay #2. This group conference is intended to give you expanded feedback on your draft by
having an additional set of eyes read and comment upon your work. It also will familiarize you with
reading other student writing and giving constructive feedback on it, which is a crucial component of
Writing Seminar. We will build on this experience in the third unit, where we will hold a 15-minute
individual conference on your research proposal and a 90-minute group draft conference with two
other students and me.

I expect you to be prepared for these conferences. This means you should review your writing and
my comments before coming in, and you should try to have specific ideas or questions about how
you hope to address the appropriate revisions. In addition, for the group conferences, it means you
should read your group mates drafts and come ready to give detailed feedback on the strengths,
weaknesses, and most promising ideas in the papers.

Office Hours

Im also happy to meet with you by appointment to discuss writing, reading, or any other issues
pertaining to this seminar. Just ask or e-mail me, and we can arrange a time to meet.

E-mail

In an effort to hold in-class announcements to a minimum, I will be using e-mail to relay most of the
nuts and bolts of the course, which, logistically, is quite complex. I ask that you check your e-mail
every day. You are responsible for any information that I pass along via this medium.

Your Writing

Cover Letters
Each time you turn in a rough or final draft of an essay, you must provide a cover letter (about one
single-spaced page, addressed to your readers and signed by you), in which you name your motive
and thesis, briefly summarize your argument, let us know what you value about what youve done in
this draft (using specific examples), tell us what you think you still need to work on, and let us know
what you would like us to help you with.

Pre-draft Writing
In addition to the rough and final drafts of the four essays, youll do preliminary writing that helps
you to develop your ideas. Called pre-drafts and abbreviated PD, these exercises are designed to
help you draft your essay well in advance of the due date, so you should write them as well as you
can, knowing you may draw on them as you put your final essay together. These assignments will
not be graded, so they are your chance to try out a daring idea, to go out on a limb without the fear
of failure. I will provide feedback on them, so you will know if you are moving towards a quality
draft. Please type, double-space, and use MLA (ed. 7) format. These exercises will be turned in to
me on the date due; often, they will be read by your classmates or aloud in class.

Paper Format

Writing assignments must be word-processed. For drafts and revisions, please follow the format of the
sample paper included in this syllabus. Drafts and revisions that deviate from this format will not be
accepted. Also, always:

Use Times 12 or its close equivalent.

Set your margins at 1 and dont justify your right-hand margin.

Use your word-processing programs automatic pagination function to number your pages. Tip:
Your first page will be a cover letter, so set this page number to 0 (in Word, select Page
Numbers from the Insert menu, and click on Format).

Proofread your writing for typographical, grammatical, and punctuation errors. If you
consistently make these kinds of errors, your grade will drop.

Avoid computer disaster by regularly saving your work. Get in the habit of emailing drafts to
yourself, printing hard copies, or saving your work to a file hosting service like Google Drive,
which stores your files. Technical difficulty is not a legitimate reason for late work.

Submission Method

You will be submitting all writing for this course, unless otherwise specified, via our course
Blackboard site at http://blackboard.princeton.edu. Simply log on and select our Writing Seminar.
Blackboard is relatively intuitive to use, but feel free to contact the Blackboard help desk if you need
assistance: 609 258-0737 or blackboard@princeton.edu.

You are responsible for submitting by the deadlines outlined on this syllabus and the individual essay
schedules, so give yourself time to deal with any technical difficulties you may encounter.

On Blackboard, youll submit your work to the Shared Dropbox folder on the menu, where
everyone in our class can access it. Please name your documents by combining your Net ID with the
assignment abbreviation (e.g. R1 for Revision of Paper #1). Thus, Tiger Princetons draft of
Paper #3 would be named tigerpD3.doc.

I will let you know when you will need to bring hard copies of your work to class. Please do not
show up to class asking if you can email me a pre-draft, draft, or revision because youve had
printing problems. This will constitute a missed assignment.
Course Portfolio

At the end of the semester, you will turn in a portfolio of all the writing you did in the courseso
please save the copies with my comments and all the letters.

Extensions and Late Assignments

All deadlines in this Writing Seminar are firm. Except in the case of medical or family emergency or
religious observance, I give no individual extensions. If, due to such an emergency, you cannot meet
a deadline, please contact me as soon as possible so that we may work out an alternative schedule of
due dates and times. In the event of a medical emergency, you must bring a note from the University
Health Service. In the event of a family emergency, please ask your residential college Dean or
Director of Studies to contact me by e-mail.

There are serious consequences to missing deadlines. A late pre-draft assignment or a late draft will
receive no written feedback. A late revision will be graded down by a third of a grade for every 24
hours that its late, up until the final extended deadline, at which point you may not complete the
course (see the Completion of Work policy below).

These policies have two concrete benefits for everyone in the class: (1) you may be less likely to fall
behind if you know that your actions (and inactions) have real consequences, and (2) you can count
on being treated the same as your classmates, which is another way of saying that no one will receive
preferential treatment (by, for example, having immunity to overrun a deadline in order to work
longer on a piece of writing).

Missed Conferences.

These will not be rescheduled except in cases of documented illness or family emergency. When
signing up, please be aware of any reason that might prevent your attendance in a given time slot, and
please notify me in advance should an excused conflict arise.
Grades

Final Grade

15% Paper #1
25% Paper #2
35% Paper #3
15% Deans Date Assignment
10% Good citizenship (mutual respect, class participation, cover letters and draft
responses, pre-drafts, and participation in writing groups)

Citizenship Grade

Your good citizenship grade will be determined based on your fulfillment in our class of the
following aspects of citizenship: honesty, compassion, respect, and responsibility. This means you
should be honest with your classmates, respectful toward their thoughts and opinions, and
compassionate toward your subject matter and the views of your peers. It also means you have a
responsibility to prepare properly for class and to participate regularly. The good citizenship grade,
therefore, includes not only your participation in class, but also your response to other student
writing, your preparation for individual and group conferences, and the attitude of respect you
display toward your classmates and me.

Around midterms week, Ill ask you to write a reflection in class on your citizenship so far. Ill collect
your reflection and provide you with written feedback so youll know what to do to improve or
sustain your participation in class.

The Citizenship portion of your final grade will be evaluated using the following criteria and the
accompanying grading scale.

Citizenship Criteria
The student is always on time and prepared.
The student participates actively in class, consistently contributing thoughtful and thought-
provoking comments and questions; speaks not only to the professor but to other students; works
energetically in small group or pair activities; overall, improves the day-to-day quality of the seminar
for everyone.
The student writes cover letters that reflect thoughtfully and critically on their own writing.
The student submits thoughtful and complete pre-draft assignments.
The student writes draft response letters that offer fellow students substantive criticism and
suggestions for revision while demonstrating constructive engagement with the paper at hand.
The student participates actively in group draft conferences, joining in the conversation about
their fellow group members essays.

Grading Scale:

A student who earns an A-range grade for citizenship meets or surpasses all of the above criteria
in a striking way.
A student who earns a B-range grade for citizenship commendably satisfies most or all of the
above criteria.
A student who earns a C-range grade for citizenship meets few of the above criteria.
Midterm Grade

To calculate your midterm grade, Ill average your grade on the revision of essay #1 and your current
citizenship grade. Please note that for your final course grade, essay #1 will count as 15 % and
citizenship 10 %.

Grading Standards on Revisions

When grading, I evaluate the words on the page. Although neither effort nor improvement is
factored into the essay grade, writing does tend to improve through revision. Effort and engagement
are accounted for in the course citizenship grade. Below are the common standards to which papers
are held in the Writing Seminars. Pluses and minuses represent shades of difference.

A paper in the A range demonstrates a high degree of command in the fundamentals of academic
writing: it advances an interesting, arguable thesis; establishes a compelling motive to suggest why the
thesis is original or worthwhile; employs a logical and progressive structure; analyzes evidence
insightfully and in depth; and draws from well-chosen sources.

A B-range paper resembles an A-range paper in some ways, but may exhibit a vague or inconsistently
argued thesis; establish a functional but unsubstantial motive; employ a generally logical but somewhat
disorganized or underdeveloped structure; include well-chosen but sometimes unanalyzed and undigested
evidence; or use sources in a limited fashion; confusing prose may at times obscure the argument.

A C-range paper resembles a B-range paper in some ways, but may also feature a confusing or
descriptive thesis; provide a simplistic motive or none at all; lack a coherent structure or rely on an overly
rigid structure like the five paragraph essay; fail to present enough evidence, or present evidence that is
insufficiently analyzed; and drop in sources without properly contextualizing or citing them.

A D paper (there is no D+ or D- at Princeton) resembles a C-range paper but lacks a thesis or

motive. It may have an undeveloped structure and draw on little analyzed evidence and sources. A D
paper has trouble engaging with the assignment and may not show awareness of the conventions of
academic discourse. It does, however, show signs of beginning to engage with the issues, topics, and
sources of the assignment.

An F paper is similar to a D paper but is half the assigned length and addresses the assignment
superficially.

A 0 paper is less than half the assigned length and does not fulfill the basic expectations of the
assignment (for example, in a research paper, there is evidence of little or no research). Unlike an F
paper, a 0 does not count as successful completion of the assignment and puts the student in
jeopardy of failing the course.
Attendance

Your active engagement in writing workshops and other in-class activities is integral to the Writing
Seminar experience, which is grounded in a strong community of readers and writers. For this
reason, you are normally expected to attend every class, with two absences considered cause for
concern, and more than four absences grounds for not being permitted to complete the course. The
program does not distinguish between excused and unexcused absences; all of them count towards
the limit.
Please note that a late arrival to class of more than 15 minutes will count as an absence.

Completion of Work

Writing Seminars are organized as a planned sequence of assignments, with each piece of writing
building on previous writing. For this reason, you must complete all four of the major assignments
to pass the course, and you must complete them within the schedule of the course, not in the last few
days of the semester. If you fail to submit the final version of a major assignment by the final due
date in that unit, you will receive an e-mail from your professor specifying (1) the new date by which
you must submit the late work and (2) any late penalties that will apply (these will be waived in the
case of documented medical problems and family emergencies). The e-mail will be copied to your
Dean and Director of Studies, as well as the Writing Program Director. If you fail to meet the new
deadline, you may not complete the course.

Acknowledgment of Original Work

This course follows Princeton University policies on plagiarism, stated in Rights, Rules, Responsibilities
and discussed at greater length in Academic Integrity at Princeton. According to these policies, you must
properly cite your sources to distinguish your ideas from others. You must also write the following
pledge at the end of all drafts and revisions and then sign your name: This paper represents my
own work in accordance with University regulations. Suspicions of plagiarism will be reported to
the Committee on Discipline and may have serious consequences.

Acknowledgment of Feedback and Support

In keeping with common scholarly practice, you should express your indebtedness in an
Acknowledgments section or footnote to anyone who gave you feedback on drafts or contributed
informally to your thinking on your topicfor example, your classmates, roommates, and family
members. Exceptions are the professor of this course and Writing Center Fellows.

Syllabus Follow-Up
When you get to this point in the Course Information, please feel free to email me with any
questions that you may have about the seminar.
 Sample MLA-format Paper

[Students Name]
WRI [Number]
Professor [Name]
[Date]
Twenty Years of Fear, Twenty Years of Laughs:
Americas Changing Attitude Toward the Soviet Union

Few events infected the consciousness of Americans in the twentieth century as did the Cold

War. The rivalry between the Soviets and the Americans, indeed, had the potential to become one of

the most significant clashes the world had seen between superpowers since the time of the ancient

Greeks. Justifiably, people were frightened at the prospect of what could happen. World War II had

ended with uncertainty as to the entitlements of the victorious parties, setting the stage for this 42-

year-long Cold War. Compounding this situation was the perfection of the thermonuclear bomb.

This new technology unlocked the potential for man-made destruction on a scale never witnessed

before. It was a period of angst that captured the publics attention for nearly a half century.

Or did it? Most general histories have the Cold War lasting roughly from 1949 to 1991 when

the Soviet Union crumbled; a well-regarded history of the conflict by Martin McCauley is titled

Russia, America and the Cold War, 1949-1991. As late as June of 1982, Ronald Reagan said in a speech,

We see around us today the marks of our terrible dilemma--predictions of doomsday, antinuclear

demonstrations, an arms race in which the West must, for its own protection, be an unwilling

participant (Ronald Reagan Heritage). And in the late 1980s, historian John Gaddis recalled going to

an official government meeting to discuss the Soviet threat and hearing others say, It hadnt

occurred to any of us that it [the Cold War] would ever end (Gaddis vi). But despite the rhetoric of

the era, the battle cries from Reagan, and the history books that declare the Cold War as extending

into the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Cold War that existed after the late 1960s was a wholly

different entity than it was in the years preceding.

Works Cited

Brodie, Bernard. Strategy in the Missile Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 1959.
Day, Robert J. Shelter Manor. Cartoon. The New Yorker 5 Aug. 1961. Rpt. in Mankoff, ed. Disk
One (1961): 509.

Dunn, Alan. Fifth Orbit. Cartoon. The New Yorker 25 Apr. 1966. Rpt. in Mankoff, ed. Disk Two
(1966): 254.

---. Suspicion. Cartoon. The New Yorker 13 Sept. 1947. Rpt. in Mankoff, ed. Disk One (1947): 525.

Friend, Tad. Whats So Funny? The New Yorker Magazine. 11 Nov. 2002. pg. 78

Gaddis, John L. The United States and the End of the Cold War: Implications, reconsiderations, provocations.
Oxford, GB: Oxford University, 1992.

Gillon, Steven M. and Diane B. Kunz, eds. America During the Cold War. New York: Harcourt, 1993.

Higgs, Robert. U.S. Military Spending in the Cold War Era: Opportunity Costs, Foreign Crises, and
Domestic Constraints. Cato Institute. 30 Nov. 1988. Retrieved 30 Apr. 2005.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa114.html

Hodgson, Godfrey. America in Our Time. America During the Cold War. Gillon, Steven M. and
Diane B. Kunz, eds. New York: Harcourt, 1993. 74-86.

Mankoff, Robert, ed. The Complete Cartoons of The New Yorker. CD-ROM. New York: Black Dog &
Levanthal Publishers, Inc., 2004.

McCauley, Martin. Russia, America and the Cold War, 1949-1991. London and New York: Longman,
1998.

Medhurst, Martin J., Robert L. Ivie, Philip Wander, and Robert L. Scott, eds. Cold War Rhetoric:
Strategy, Metaphor, and Ideology. New York: Greenwood, 1990.

Mirachi, Joseph. Just for Kicks. Cartoon. The New Yorker 24 Aug. 1963. Rpt in Mankoff, ed. Disk
One (1963): 492.

Preble, Christopher A. John F. Kennedy and the Missile Gap. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University,
2004.

Ronald Reagan Heritage Foundation. Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National
Association of Evangelicals in Orlando Florida. Ronald Reagan Heritage. 30 Apr. 2005.
http://65.126.3.86/reagan/html/reagan03_08_83.shtml
 COURSE SCHEDULE

Unit 1

Goals of Unit 1:

--Understand what keywords, definitions, concepts are and what thinking work is involved in
coining, understanding, and questioning them
--Learn to select, close read, and further analyze evidence
--Understand how a motive emerges from evidence
--Learn to pose a compelling problem/question and transform an answer to it into an arguable thesis
--Learn to develop your argument by using evidence to think through a problem
--Understand how staged conversations between a lens text and a primary text illuminate and revise
ideas in both
--Understand evidence representation (quote, paraphrase, summary) and citation

Shared Texts:

A Writing Lexicon.
Bollinger, Laurel. Symbiogenesis, Selfhood, and Science Fiction. Science Fiction Studies 37(1): 34-53.
Harris Joseph. How to Do Things with Texts. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 2006.
Margulis, Lynn and Dorion Sagan. Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origins of Species. Basic Books,
2003.
Shildrick, Margrit. Embodying the Monster. London: Sage, 2002.
Stross, Charles. Rogue Farm. Best SF 6 Sep. 2015. http://bestsf.net/charles-stross-rogue-farm/

Week 1

Mon Feb. 6 In-class: Introductions. The Course in a Nutshell. Keywords. Definitions.

Wed Feb. 8 Reading Assignment: Rogue Farm by Stross.

Writing Assignment: PD 1.1
In-class: Evidence. Close reading.

Week 2

Mon Feb. 13 Reading Assignment: A Writing Lexicon + Symbiogenesis by Bollinger +

Assessing Uses and Limits by Harris.
Writing Assignment: Annotate one section of Bollingers article (see the guidelines
below).
In-class: Margulis. Lexicon. Project, Thesis, Motive.

Written Assignment: Annotating Bollingers article. Please, underline relevant sentences and write down your
comments in the margins or your notebook.

1. What is Bollinger analyzing? What is Bollinger trying to figure out about the object of
her analysis? What question/puzzle/problem is driving her analysis?
2. How does she answer this question? What has she noticed that no one noticed before?
3. Find and mark concepts central to Bollingers answer/idea/thesis. Which concepts does
she borrow from someone else?
 4. Underline each source she uses in her introduction. Why is she bringing in the work by
other scholars? What does she need their texts and ideas for? In the margins, write down
some thoughts about what each source helps her do or say.

Wed Feb. 15 Reading Assignment: In light of Assignment 1, re-read Rogue Farm, Bollinger,
and Margulis + your notes on them. Add more notes.
Writing Assignment: notes. BRING LAPTOPS TO CLASS
In-class: Evidence Analysis. Using a Lens. Sign up for Conferences.

Fri. Feb. 17 D1 is due by 11:00 pm, shared dropbox. Please include your cover letter as the first
page of this document, not a separate file.

Week 3 Conferencing and Workshops

Mon Feb. 20 Reading Assignment: 1 Student Paper + Academic Integrity at Princeton at

http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pub/integrity/pages/intro/index.htm

Writing Assignment: Response Letter. Bring two hard copies.

In-class: Thesis/Motive Workshop. Draft Workshop. BRING LAPTOPS TO
CLASS

Wed Feb. 22 Reading Assignment: 1 Student Paper

Writing Assignment: Response Letter. Bring two hard copies.
In-class: Sloppy Joe. Draft Workshop. BRING LAPTOPS TO CLASS

R1 will be due on Fri. March 3 at 11:00 pm.

Assignment Guidelines:

Essay 1. Symbiogenesis and the Limits of the Human: Analyze a Single Text Using a
Theoretical Lens.

Using Laurel Bollingers theory as a lens, develop your own claim about puzzling/problematic
portrayals of the human and/or the posthuman in the short story Rogue Farm. The best essays will
use evidence from the short story and/or an additional text to critique and refine Bollingers analysis
of the posthuman.

The best essays will have both of the following moves: 1) use Bollinger to understand the logic of
representation in Rogue Farm and 2) critique and refine Bollingers ideas based on close reading of
specific evidence from the story that exceeds Bollingers explanation. To substantiate your critique,
feel free to use any other readings from Unit 1 in addition to the evidence from the short story and
Bollingers article.

Length: (5 double-spaced pages+ Works Cited + Cover Letter)

PD 1.1 (500 words)

Select a puzzling element of Charles Strosss story Rogue Farm. It could be a specific scene, a
detail, a character, or a peculiar sequence of events. In your written piece grapple with the meaning of
your chosen specific element of the story both within the context of the story and within the context
of our discussions about the (post) human. As part of your analysis, reflect on what questions,
fears, convictions, and uncertainties around the concepts of the human and the posthuman may
have prompted this puzzling/weird representation in Rogue Farm.

Quote key phrases. MLA Style.

Draft of Essay #1

While Im not expecting a polished paper, your draft should not be a dump-your-evidence draft.
Drafts that represent sustained thinking are easier to read, and they are also easier to revise, because
you will get far better commentary on an essay that your readers can understand without too much of
a struggle. Please, keep this in mind even though you understand that your draft may significantly
change in the process of revision.

This draft should clearly explain the puzzle/problem/question you are trying to understandthe
motive. The question your draft is thinking through should be text-based i.e. arise from a puzzle in
the evidence (our readings). As you grapple with a possible answer to your question, engage (quote
and analyze) others ideas that can help you think through the problem.

This thinking through the problem may test a tentative thesis (answer) that will remain open to
revision. Still, the draft should explain your line of thinking in response to your question/problems as
clearly as possible (tell us how and why you move from point to point, from one piece of evidence to
another) and reveal how your evidence is testing, complicating, and refining your tentative answer to
the questionyour potential thesis. It is ok to discover a thesis at the end of the first draft. You write
it, mostly, to figure things out for yourself.

Essay #1 Draft Cover Letter (1 single-spaced page)

Each time you hand in a draft, youll hand in a cover letter along with it. Think of the letter as an
opportunity to ask for the kind of feedback you think you particularly need. For the draft of Essay
#1, please write a letter, addressed to your readersthat is, to the class at largein which you
answer the following questions and present any other concerns that you have.

1. What question/puzzle is your essay trying to figure out? What is your motive?
2. What do you see as your main idea? In addition to your explanation copy and paste here the
sentence(s) from your draft that articulates your tentative thesis. Note: It may be an idea you
arrive at towards the end of the draft, something that you have figured out on the page as
you were thinking through the evidence.
3. Does your essay revise the lens text? How? What is your main struggle with making this
thought move?
4. What layer of thinking do you feel youve developed most successfully?
5. What can we help you with? Please, use A Writing Lexicon vocabulary to explain specific
challenges you would like to discuss with the classmates and the professor.

Essay #1 Draft Response (400 words min.)

Each time you read other students drafts in this course, youll write a letter in response, which youll
bring two copies of to class on workshop days (one for the writer, one for me). Please take some
time to draft these letters and try to make comments that you think will help the writer revise.

Please, avoid picayune commentary (changing a word here, a phrase there) and think in larger terms
about what this writing really needs. No draft submitted in this course will be in such good shape
that it requires just minor tinkering. Do not feel obligated to be nice to your fellow writers. The
great English poet William Blake wrote that opposition is true friendshipbe a friend, and offer
helpful and thoughtful commentary. Having said that, please also recognize that your comments
should be kind and constructive, not harsh and critical in tone. Dont forget to name what works well
in the draft.

Directions:
As you read and re-read each essay, draw a squiggly line under awkwardly expressed sentence and
phrases whose meanings are unclear. Write marginal notes to the writer on anything that puzzles you.
Likewise, draw straight lines under words, phrases, or passages that seem especially important or
successful. Straight lines indicate something positive and important is happening in this writing. Tell
the writer what delights you in the margins. Avoid it and this when referring to something in the
text; name the objects of praise or critique specifically.

After re-reading the essay, write a short letter to the writer in which you address these questions:

1. In your own words, what question/problem is the writer trying to figure out? What is the
writers motive? Is the problem compelling? Is it something you have not thought about
before?
2. In your own words, what is the essays idea at this stage? Do not assume that the writer
knows what his or her essay is saying! You might even doubt the stated thesis (if there is
one) and find the real meaning of the writing elsewhere. Is the idea compelling (not
something everyone already knows)?
3. Does the essay avoid 5-par. heuristic (proof; reiteration) and use more complex thought
moves we expect from the lens essay? Can you point to a specific place and name at least
one of those complex thought moves?
4. Describe one significant strength of this draft using the Lexicon language.
5. Name one global revision without which this draft cannot move forward. Use the Lexicon
language. If you can, suggest how your peer might revise this.

Essay #1 Revision Cover Letter (about 1 single-spaced page)

Each time you hand in a revision (three times) youll hand in a cover letter along with it. This time
around, please answer the following questions and address any other concerns you have:

1. What is your motive?

2. What is your thesis? How has it changed from draft to revision?
3. What aspects of writing/thinking/reading have you learned in the process of drafting and
revising? Refer to the Lexicon when appropriate.
4. What was and remains a challenge in your drafting and revision process? What would you
continue to work on in further revision (both specifically in this draft and meta)?
 Unit 2
Goals of Unit 2:

--Refine the skills of Unit 1: close reading, locating and understanding central concepts and lines of
argument in texts, finding a motive and crafting a thesis
--Learn how to do basic research and distinguish more clearly the functions of sources at different
stages of writing
--Learn how to describe explicitly an implicit conversation between sources as a way of finding a
motive and developing own argument
--Learn to select and use evidence to avoid conceptual redundancy and move thinking forward
--Understand the significance of revising the thesis in the process of research and argument
development

Shared Texts:

Hayles, Katherine. Prologue. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and
Informatics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999. xi-xiv.
Knobe, Joshua. Finding the Mind in the Body. Future Science: Essays from the Cutting Edge. New York:
Vintage Books, 2011. 185-196.
Mori, Masahiro. The Uncanny Valley. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine 19(2): 98-100.
Mulvey, Laura. Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. Film Theory: Critical Concepts in Media and
Cultural Studies. Eds. Philip Simpson et al. New York: Rutledge, 2004. (selections)
Redmond, Sean. Narrative: Film Language. and Textual Analysis. Studying Blade Runner.
Bedfordshire, UK: Auter Publishing, 2003. 12-14 and 34-38.
Turing, Alan. Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind 59(236): 433-460.

Week 4

Mon Feb.27 Reading Assignment:

Watch: Blade Runner, read Redmond (pp.12-14 and 34-38 to understand what to pay
attention to when watching a film), re-watch Blade Runner taking notes (in that
order);

Writing Assignment: Note Taking

As you watch the film the second time, take notes of the scenes that have some
connections to the ideas we are grappling with in the course and the scenes that
puzzle and, perhaps, unsettle you even if you do not yet know why. Notice details
that stand out somehow (an unusual transition, an element of the shot, a suggestive
camera angle, music, a way of showing something that seems at odds with what is
being shown, etc.) In your notebook, reflect on the meaning and significance of
these scenes and elements. Draw some connections to the texts that we have been
reading and questions/ideas we have been talking about. Bring these notes to class.

In-class: Close Reading a Film.

Wed Mar. 1 Reading Assignment: Clusters of argument sources for Blade Runner. + BEAM
by Bizup (course pack)
In-class: Engaging in a conversation. Functions of sources.
Fri. Mar. 3 R1 is due by 11:00 pm. Please include your cover letter as the first page of this
document, not a separate file.

Week 5

Mon Mar. 6 Reading Assignment: Watch ExMachina the same way you watched Blade Runner.
Take notes. Read: Knobe, Mori, Ferrando (in the coursepack)
Writing Assignment: PD 2.1
In-class: Motive in conversation. Looking for sources.

Wed Mar. 8 Reading Assignment: Clusters of arguments about Ex Machina on Blackboard (and
the ones you have found). Then do PD 2.2.

Writing Assignment: PD 2.2

In-class: BRING LAPTOPS TO CLASS. Sources in Conversation. Finding a

motive. Sign up for Conferences.

Week 6 (Midterm Week)

Mon Mar. 13 Reading Assignment: Turing, Sterrett. Re-read Knobe, Mori, Ferrando.

Writing Assignment: Review your PD 2.2, before you skim/re-read suggested lens
texts. Then focus on the text that seems to speak the most to the questions you
would like to figure out about the primary text (film) of your choice. Read this
chosen text more closely. Annotate the chosen lens text. Specifically, find passages
in it that can enter the conversation among your other sources that discuss the
exhibit (your chosen film). How could this text become your ally when you respond
to the ongoing conversation about the film? What would this conversation challenge
in the lens texts line of thinking? Write down possible lines of conversation in the
margins.

In-class: Sources in conversation. Intro to Gaipa.

Wed Mar. 15 Reading Assignment: Remaining lens texts

Writing Assignment: same
In-class: Library Discovery Session. Using sources to move the argument forward.

Fri. Mar. 17 D2 due by 11:00 pm, shared dropbox. Please include your cover letter as the first page
of this document, not a separate file.

R2 will be due on Apr. 7 at 11:00 pm.

SPRING BREAK Sat Mar. 18Sun. Mar. 26

Week 7 Workshops and Paired Conferencing

Mon Mar. 27 Reading Assignment: Student Drafts (2)
Writing Assignment: Response Letters (2)
In-class: Draft Workshop Reading Assignment:

Wed Mar. 29 Reading Assignment: Student Drafts (2)

Writing Assignment: Response Letters (2)
In-class: Draft Workshop

Assignment Guidelines

Essay 2: Minds and Bodies: Analyze a Primary Source Responding to Other Arguments.

Locate, critique, and refine an ongoing critical conversation about representations of embodied
artificial intelligence in Blade Runner and/or ExMachina. In your critique, draw on textual evidence and
one or more of the suggested lens text(s).

An excellent essay will develop a thesis focused on what representations of embodied artificial intelligence reveal about
our anxieties around the concept of the human. It will employ your own close readings of select scenes from the film(s)
to grapple with the conversation among film critics and the ideas of lens texts.

Length (8 double-spaced pages+ Works Cited+ Cover Letter)

PD 2.1 (400 words)

Select a scene from either Blade Runner or ExMachina thatin your viewproblematizes in an
unconventional, puzzling way a specific aspect of the human/machine relationship and/or our
imagining of such relationship. Read the scene with the grain (here is what it may mean obviously)
and against the grain (here is what does not add up and here are the puzzles/questions about this
representation that I find worth considering). Explain your line of thinking to someone who has not
seen the film and is unaware of the debates around AI.

Another way to approach this assignment: compare representations of the same/similar thing in
Blade Runner and ExMachina (based on specific scenes/shots); notice differences in these
representations and ask questions/try to account for these differences drawing on ideas we have
been reading and talking about. Explain your line of thinking to someone who has not seen the film
and is unaware of the debates around AI.

PD 2.2 (350 words+200 words)

Locate critics reviews/scholarly articles relevant to the film you choose to focus on. Choose reviews
that make an argument, not just summarize the plot. Then consider how these thinkers could talk to
each other about the film if they happened to be in the same room
o What would be the keywords in their conversation?
o What are the most common scenes/elements in the film that reviewers focus on?
o How do they respond to each other (directly and implicitly)? What are the most common
angles/ideas/interpretations of the film?
o How would they challenge, extend, refine each others thinking about the film?
Based on your answers to the questions above, in your written 350-word piece outline the state of the
conversation to a reader unfamiliar with your sources (name the sources explicitly). You can focus
on a particular direction of the conversation that seems open to critique, which you will develop in a
separate 200-word paragraph. In this paragraph, reflect on the blind spots in the critics conversation.
What are they avoiding/missing? What other explanations can be given to the questions they grapple
with? How can their ideas be complicated, refined, extended given what we have talked and read
about so far and questions that you have for them? Quote key phrases. Add MLA Works Cited.

Draft of Essay #2

Again, your draft should not be a dump-your-evidence draft. In fact, with all the predrafting work
we have done, this draft should be more advanced in comparison to D1. This draft needs to clearly
delineate a conversation between argument sources that you are attempting to enter and state the
lack/problem/insufficiency in it that you will attempt to rectify. Ideally, you will also be able to
articulate the importance/significance of your contribution to the conversation (if we do not rectify
the lackwhat might we lose? If we dowhat might we gain?). In other words, the draft should
explain your motive as clearly as possible.
Also, I will assume that you mostly have done the work central to D1thinking through a
question/problem in order to arrive at a tentative thesis in your predrafting work. It means, your
thesis, however tentative, needs to be stated early. The goal of this draft is to test this tentative thesis
with evidence as you develop your argument a.k.a. your response to the gap in the ongoing
conversation. As you do this testing, you will see how your thesis needs to be further revised and
complicated if it does not account for the new questions posed by your analysis of the evidence. So
dont resist new ideas that arise as you analyze evidence in relation to your thesis; keep a record of
them (in-text/comments/footnotes) even if they do not fit your current thesis just yet. Feel free to
go back and revise the thesis as you move on in your analysis.
Please, make your thinking process as explicit as possible. Your explanation and reflection should
make clear how your texts/specific evidence are talking to each other: responding, questioning,
refining, extending each other.

Essay #2 Draft Cover Letter (1 single-spaced page)

Think of this letter as an opportunity to ask for the kind of feedback you think you particularly need.
For the draft of Essay #2, please write a letter, addressed to your readersthat is, to the class at
largein which you answer the following questions and present any other concerns that you have.

1. What question/puzzle is your essay trying to figure out? What is your motive and how does
it arise from both the evidence in the film and the existing conversation about it? Which
gap/blind spot in this conversation are you trying to address?
2. What do you see as your argument that responds to the motive? What is your unique
contribution to the existing conversation about your subject? In addition to your explanation
copy and paste here the sentence(s) from your draft that articulate(s) your tentative thesis.
3. Where have you successfully staged a conversation between two or more texts? Which text
conversations/analysis/layers of thinking do you need help with?
4. What are the biggest problems youre having at this point in the writing process?

Essay #2 Draft Response (400 words min.)

Each time you read other students drafts in this course, youll write a letter in response, which youll
bring two copies of to class on workshop days (one for the writer, one for me). Please take some
time to draft these letters and try to make comments that you think will help the writer revise.
Please also avoid picayune commentary (changing a word here, a phrase there) and think in larger
terms about what this writing really needs. No draft submitted in this course will be in such good
shape that it requires just minor tinkering. Do not feel obligated to be nice to your fellow writers.
The great English poet William Blake wrote that opposition is true friendshipbe a friend, and
offer helpful and thoughtful commentary. Having said that, please also recognize that your
comments should be kind and constructive, not harsh and critical in tone.

Directions:
As you read and re-read each essay, draw a squiggly line under awkwardly expressed sentences and
phrases whose meanings are unclear. Write marginal notes to the writer on anything that puzzles you.
Likewise, draw straight lines under words, phrases, or passages that seem especially important or
successful. Straight lines indicate something positive and important is happening in this writing. Tell
the writer what delights you in the margins. Avoid it and this when referring to something in the
text; name the objects of praise or critique specifically.

After re-reading the essay, write a short letter to the writer in which you address these questions:

1. Is there a compelling question/puzzle at the heart of this essay? What existing conversation
about the film does the paper attempt to revise? Is there a clear they sayI say thought
move? What does the paper promise to figure out?
2. In your own words, what insight is this paper offering to you? Is it something you have
never thought of before? Do not assume that the writer knows what his or her own essay is
about! You might even doubt the stated thesis (if there is one) and find the real meaning
of the writing elsewhere.
3. How easily can you follow the line of thinking? Where do you need more explanation of
what sources say, what they are about, and how they are connected to each other?
4. Describe this drafts strengths and name one strength-in-the-making that needs to be
addressed first. Try to point to specific sentences and paragraphs and use Lexicon language
when possible.

Essay #2 Revision Cover Letter (about 1 single-spaced page)

This time around, please answer the following questions and address any other concerns you have:

1. What is your motive?

2. What is your thesis? How has it changed from draft to revision?
3. What are you happiest with in this revision?
4. What was most challenging in your drafting and revision process? How did you approach
those challenges?
5. What elements of the Lexicon would you continue to work on in further revision and in
essay 3?

Unit 3

Goals of Unit 3:

--Conduct original research

--Distinguish types and functions of sources
--Deliberately engage sources to make identifiable thought-moves in the process of posing a
research question and developing ones own argument
--Distinguish your voice from the voice of your sources
--Understand discipline-specific conventions, documentation formats, and the kind of engagement
with sources they effect
--Understand the heuristic value of discipline-specific writing forms
--Understand deeper the ways of creating coherence and thought movement in a piece of writing

Shared Texts

Bizup, Joseph. BEAM: A Rhetorical Vocabulary for Teaching Research-Based Writing. Rhetoric
Review 27(1): 72-86.
Gaipa, Mark. Breaking into the Conversation: How Students Can Acquire Authority for Their
Writing. Pedagogy 4 (3): 419-37.
George, Mary. From Research Assignment to Research Plan. The Elements of Library Research: What
Every Student Needs to Know. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008. 14-63.
(available online; access through our library website to download .pdf)

Week 8

Mon Apr. 3 Reading Assignment: Gopen and Swan.

In-class Writing Assignment: Brainstorming for Research Ideas.

In 350 words consider at least 3 subjects/issues that might become the focus of your research
project. Reflect on what specifically you would like to figure out about them and why you are
interested in that (who cares).

In-class: Finding and Evaluating Sources.

Wed Apr. 5 Reading Assignment: Re-read Bizup +Your found sources. Print, read, and bring
to class.
Writing Assignment: Compile your initial bibliography. MLA style. Finish the
description of the possible research project + your question (taking into account
what sources are saying)
In-class: Annotate your Bibliography. Research Question Workshop. Sign up for
Proposal Conferences.

Fri. Apr. 7 R2 due by 11:00 pm, shared dropbox. Please include your cover letter as the first page of
this document, not a separate file.

Week 9 Research Proposal Conferences (15 min. individual)

Mon Apr. 10 Reading Assignment: Gaipa+your sources

Writing Assignment: PD 3.1 Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography Draft DUE
IN CLASS
In-class: Motive and Research plan. PD 3.1 Workshop.

Wed Apr. 12 No class.

Week 10 Research Proposal Conferences (ctd.)

Mon Apr. 17 Reading Assignment: Re-read Gaipa.

 Writing Assignment: keep working on your PD 3.1
In-class: Library Research Clinic

Wed Apr. 19 Reading Assignment: Latour, Barad

Writing Assignment: BRING LAPTOPS TO CLASS
In-class: Voice. Using Evidence to Develop Argument. Sign up for conferences

Thur. Apr. 20 Research Proposal and Annotated Bibliography Revision due by 11 pm,
shared dropbox.

Week 11 Workshops and Conferencing

Mon Apr. 24 Reading Assignment: Sample student papers.

Writing Assignment: Draft Intro (motive)
In-class: Smarty Jones+ Motive workshop.

Tue. Apr. 25 D3 is due at 11:00 pm, shared dropbox. Please include your cover letter as the
first page of this document, not a separate file

Wed. Apr. 26 Reading Assignment: Sample student papers.

Writing Assignment: Draft up to 5 pars of the body of your paper.
In-class: draft workshop.

Week 12 Workshops and Conferencing

Mon May 1 Reading Assignment: 3 Student Drafts

Writing Assignment: 3 Response Letters
In-class: Writing Group Draft Workshop

Wed May 3 Reading Assignment: 3 Student Drafts

Writing Assignment: 3 Response Letters
In-class: Writing Group Draft Workshop

Wed May 10 R3 is due by 11:00 pm, shared dropbox. Please include your cover letter as the first
page of this document, not a separate file.

Assignment Guidelines

Essay 3. Posthumanity: Create a Researched Argument.

Locate an invention, a phenomenon, or a practice with posthuman connotations (feel free to use
our PIN presentations) and, by drawing on a variety of primary and secondary sources, theorize its
implications for the culture affected by it.

An excellent essay will engage with current conversations about the subject of your essay (solid research) and will
demonstrate an awareness of the sources disciplinary contexts. I.e. it will not treat a novel in the same way as a
scholarly article (awareness of representations!) or an interview with a scientist as their published peer-reviewed research.

Length (10-12 double-spaced pages+ Works Cited+ Cover Letter)

PD 3.1 and 3.2: Research Proposal

PD 3.1: Draft a preliminary research proposal and annotated bibliography.

Your Research Proposal should

o Name your exhibit and present clearly the problem/question/puzzle about it that you would
like to investigate
o Explain the layer of your motive that emerges from your research (how have others
argument sourcesthought about your problem/question and what is insufficient in their
thinking). Name the sources specifically and explain how their ideas lock in a conversation.
o Name your hypothesis and what work needs to be done to test it.

Your Annotated Bibliography should include:

o sources you have used to discover your motive, problem/puzzle/question
o sources that you plan to use for further investigation
o one-paragraph descriptions of the main idea/argument of each source and your reflection on
how this source is moving/has moved your thinking forward
o a reflection on what other sources you may need to find.

PD 3.2: Revise research proposal and annotated bibliography.

Research Proposal Conferences (15 mins.)

Before you revise your proposal and the annotated bibliography, we will meet briefly to discuss your
ideas about your project. Come to this conference with specific questions and challenges that you
would like to discuss.

Draft of Essay #3
Your draft should not be a dump-your-evidence draft. It should give the reader an idea of the
problem/question you are exploring, the motive, and a tentative thesis that might still be open to
revision. The draft should explain text conversations and your line of thinking as clearly as possible
(tell us how and why you move from one layer of thinking to another, from one piece of evidence to
another) and reveal how your evidence is testing, complicating, and refining your thesis, you main
idea.

Essay #3 Draft Cover Letter (1 single-spaced page)

Think of this letter as an opportunity to ask for the kind of feedback you think you particularly need.
For the draft of Essay #3, please write a letter, addressed to your readersthat is, to the class at
largein which you answer the following questions and present any other concerns that you have.

1. What question/puzzle is your essay trying to figure out? Which conversation are you
entering? What is your motive?
2. What do you see as your main idea at this stage? What is your unique contribution to an
ongoing conversation about your subject? In addition to your explanation copy and paste
here the sentence(s) from your draft that articulates your tentative thesis. What counter-
arguments could challenge what you claim?
3. What Gaipa-type strategy do you use in this essay to create a conversation between sources?
Attach a drawing (no worries about the way it looks as long as it gives an idea of what is
happening in the essayJ).
4. What are the biggest problems youre having at this point in the writing process? What can
we help you with?

Essay #3 Draft Response (400 words min.)

Each time you read other students drafts in this course, youll write a letter in response, of which
youll bring two copies to class on workshop days (one for the writer, one for me). Please take some
time to draft these letters and try to make comments that you think will help the writer revise.

Please also avoid picayune commentary (changing a word here, a phrase there) and think in larger
terms about what this writing really needs. No draft submitted in this course will be in such good
shape that it requires just minor tinkering. Do not feel obligated to be nice to your fellow writers.
The great English poet William Blake wrote that opposition is true friendshipbe a friend, and
offer helpful and thoughtful commentary. Having said that, please also recognize that your
comments should be kind and constructive, not harsh and critical in tone.

Directions:
As you read and re-read each essay, draw a squiggly line under awkwardly expressed sentence and
phrases whose meanings are unclear. Write marginal notes to the writer on anything that puzzles you.
Likewise, draw straight lines under words, phrases, or passages that seem especially important or
successful. Straight lines indicate something positive and important is happening in this writing. Tell
the writer what delights you in the margins.

After re-reading the essay, write a short letter to the writer in which you address these questions:

1. What is the writers motive? Is the essay posing a question/problem you have not thought
about before? Does this question matter?
2. In your own words, what insight is this paper revealing to you? What is its idea/thesis at this
point? Do not assume that the writer knows what his or her own essay is about! You might
even doubt the stated thesis (if there is one) and find the real meaning of the writing
elsewhere.
3. Are the sources used by this writer credible and appropriate for the task? Do you need more
explanation of what sources say, what they are about, and how they are connected to each
other?
4. Is the structure coherent? Can you follow easily the line of thinking? Whats one awesome
thought move this writer makes?
5. Name this drafts strengths and two major necessary revisions. Try to point to specific
paragraphs and use Lexicon language when possible.

Essay #3 Revision Cover Letter (about 1 single-spaced page)

This time around, please answer the following questions and address any other concerns you have:

1. What is your motive?

2. What is your thesis? How has it changed from draft to revision?
3. What are you happiest with in this revision?
4. What was most challenging in your drafting and revision process? How did you approach
those challenges?
5. What would you continue to work on in further revision?

Reading Period (May 8-16)

Mon May 15 Deans Date Eve. Deans Date Assignment and End-of-term Reflection due by
11:00 pm. Shared dropbox.
Tue. May 16 Deans Date. Final Portfolio due. (bring to my office between 2 pm and 4 pm)
Assignment Guidelines

Deans Date Assignment The Posthuman Condition

Using any medium or a combination of media, create a representation of the posthuman condition.
In addition, in a 2-3 page cover letter, reflect on the ways our coursework motivated and informed
your creative process.

End-of Term Reflection (1-2 single-spaced pages)

Assignment: please read through all of the drafts and revisions that you wrote for this class and then
write a cover letter in which you reflect on your development as a writer this term.

Here are some questions to consider:

What skills/beliefs/ideas about writing acquired in high school have you found useful in this
class? Which did you build on? Which of them have you revised? How?
Comparing your first papers of the semester with your last, where do you see the most
progress with regard to such aspects of academic writing as discovering a motive,
formulating an arguable thesis, structuring your ideas coherently, and researching/using
sources strategically?
How have you used the writing/thinking skills we learned in this class in your other classes?

What do you know that you dont know? What skills of academic writing do you still need to
work on? How do you plan on going about improving and refining these skills?

Please feel free to address any other aspect of your development as a writer in this seminar.