English 495: Rhetoric of Science and Technology
Course Instructor:
Dr. Kristin Arola
Required Texts and Materials:
§ Ann M. Penrose and Steven B. Katz. Writing in the Sciences: Exploring Conventions of Scientific Discourse, Third Edition. Allyn & Bacon, 2010.
§ Nancy Duarte. slide:ology: The Art and Science of Creating Great Presentations. O’Reilly Media, 2008.
Course Overview:
This course will help you develop the skills necessary to communicate the complexities of scientific and technological work and research to specialized audiences in scientific and technological fields and also to diverse public audience. It will familiarize you with the conventions of technological and scientific discourse and also with translating that discourse into more publicly and globally accessible forms.
Goals:
§ Outline the development of disciplinary writing strategies and identify how those developments shape, and are shaped by, disciplinary structures;
§ Communicate effectively in a variety of contexts and genres, using a variety of communication skills and understanding the importance of editing at every phase of the communication process;
§ Communicate specialist knowledge and information to non-specialist audiences;
§ Recognize normative conventions governing science writing and their influence on the organization, use, and distribution of scientific and technical knowledge and information;
§ Understand social and ethical dimensions of science research and communication.
Instructor Interaction:
I will be on Angel a minimum of four times per week and will make every effort to check the discussion board and email as often as possible, but there may be days when I am unable to respond. My personal email () is only for emergencies; please try to use Angel for all correspondence.
Assignments and Grading
As is often the case in English courses, much of our work will involve a good deal of reading and reading responses. These responses will take the form of eleven interactive discussion board posts as well as six short papers. In addition to these assignments, you will be responsible for a presentation in which you integrate meaningful and rhetorically effective visuals. The course is broken down into five different modules, each of which includes at least one lecture or video. Listed below are the assignment components for each module:
§ Module 1 (120 pts): Principles and Purposes of Science Writing
o 1.1 Discussion Board, Post #1: Introduction/Describing your field to non-specialists
o 1.2 Short Paper #1: Compare/contrast analysis
o 1.3 Discussion Board & Responses, Post #2: Researching trends in how scientific knowledge reaches the public
o 1.4 Short Paper #2: Visual communication in the construction of scientific arguments
o 1.5 Discussion Board, Post #3: Ethical issues raised in policies or guidelines for your department, lab, or professional association
o 1.6 Discussion Board, Post #4 and Responses: The Ethics of Authorship
o 1.7 Short Paper #3: Handling Misconduct Case Studies (Department of Health and Human Services)
§ Module 2 (90 pts): Research Reports and Prior Research
o Discussion Board, Post #5 and Responses: Following Journal Guidelines
o Short Paper #4: Rhetorical Analysis of research journal in your field
o Discussion Board, Post #6: Examining how citations function in grant proposals
§ Module 3 (100 pts): Presentations
o Discussion Board, Post #7: Graphics in Oral Presentations
o Discussion Board, Post #8: Poster Analysis
o Presentation
§ Module 4 (60 pts): Proposals
o Discussion Board, Post #9: Analyzing RFP Audiences
o Discussion Board, Post #10: Analyzing RFP Values and Goals
o Short Paper #5: Responding to an RFP
§ Module 5 (60 pts): Communicating with Public Audiences
o Discussion Board, Post #10: Analyzing Public Audiences
o Discussion Board, Post #11: Public versus Specialized Audiences
o Short Paper #6: Adapting Technical Information for Public Audiences
Policies:
All course policies can be found on the syllabus posted in our WSU Online course space. For more information, contact Professor Kristin Arola at .
2