Engl507

Assessment

Below is a list of the assignments for this seminar, together with a description of what is expected for each and how they will be assessed. Please note that the requirements are subject to minor changes as the seminar progresses. If I do make a change to any of the assignments, then I will notify you in writing and well in advance.

The final project and the final presentation are essential for passing the course. Failure to complete these two requirements will result in a failing N grade (calculated as a 0 for your GPA). Please also note: I do not post marks outside my office, and I do not use plagiarism detection software.

Research Log (40%)
Throughout the semester, you will keep a log documenting the iterative development of your learning, research, and experimentation. Consisting of several relatively short contributions written in Markdown (using Git for revision control), your log will be visible to everyone in the seminar (but not to the public), and you will be expected to comment on contributions published by your peers. I will openly comment on your logs, but marks will never be publicly posted. Your log will be assessed holistically, meaning your work will be given one grade (at the semester’s end) based on its: (1) consistency; (2) development over time; (3) self-reflexive character; (4) integration of seminar discussions, lectures, and workshops; (5) quality; (6) attention to change; and (7) ultimate relation to your final essay. There will be a prompt for each entry in your log, and it will be related to a particular workshop and/or lecture. It will be circulated at least one week prior to its due date. Log entries should be submitted before seminar on the day they are due.

Near our sixth meeting of the semester, I will circulate an interim mark for your log. My intention for holistically assessing your log is not to keep you in the dark about your academic progress. It is to treat a log as it should be treated: as a genre that develops and increases in complexity over time. Please note that the tone and style of your logs can be less formal than, say, a seminar essay intended for an academic audience. Where applicable, logs should also be self-aware and self-reflexive. In your research log, feel free to reference work being conducted by your peers or to spark dialogue with them. In fact, I encourage you to link to entries by your peers and to quote/paraphrase what other people have said during seminar.

For the research log, grades will be assigned based on the following scale:

90-100 = A+: Research logs in this range are incredibly detailed, rife with documentation, and demonstrate new or innovative uses of specific methods or techniques. They respond to seminar discussions, are self-reflexive, and exhibit a combination of critical thinking, creativity, and awareness of computational mechanisms.
85-89 = A: Research logs in this range are incredibly detailed and rife with documentation. They respond to seminar discussions, are self-reflexive, and exhibit a combination of critical thinking, creativity, and awareness of computational mechanisms.
80-84 = A-: Research logs in this range are incredibly detailed and rife with documentation. They respond to seminar discussions and are self-reflexive.
77-79 = B+: Research logs in this range are rife with documentation. They respond to seminar discussions and are self-reflexive.
73-76 = B: Research logs in this range are rife with documentation and respond to seminar discussions.

Final Essay (30%)
Your final essay (due after our last seminar meeting) should follow the conventions of a scholarly, academic essay written for a specific audience in literary or cultural studies. I will also ask you to identify an intended journal for the essay. The essay should rely (at least in part) on a computational approach, and it should be web-ready and published online, using one of the following: 1) hand-coded HTML5 and CSS3, 2) GitHub Pages, 3) WordPress, 4) Scalar, 5) Bootstrap, 6) ScrollKit, or 7) another option not listed here but approved by me in writing.

During the second half of the semester, I will circulate a prompt for the essay, detailing the requirements and expectations. For now, you should know that the essay should be well-researched (making use of sources that are additional to any research bibliography I have provided), carefully proofread and encoded, follow MLA conventions, include media (images, audio, or video), have a clear and well-supported argument, reference (if applicable) any data collected/modelled, emerge from work detailed in your research log, and consist of 3000-5000 words. Where appropriate, the essay should use endnotes.

Of note, you can co-author your final essay with up to two other people in the seminar. If you select this option, then you’ll need to make special arrangements with me. For one, I’ll likely need to modify the requirements (including the word count) listed above. Before your proposals are due (on March 3rd), please let me know whether you will, in fact, be co-authoring.

For the final essay, grades will be assigned based on the following scale:

90-100 = A+: Essays in this range are especially sophisticated and perceptive pieces of work that make an original contribution to scholarship. They could be published in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal.
85-89 = A: Essays in this range are perceptive and original, but may require substantial revision for publication in a scholarly journal. They would normally be accepted as conference presentations.
80-84 = A-: Essays in this range are adequate on the graduate level both with regard to the quality of content and writing and to research and presentation.
77-79 = B+: Essays in this range have significant flaws in some areas, but they still meet graduate standards.
73-76 = B: Essays in this range are marginally acceptable at the graduate level.

Final Presentation (15%)
Your final presentation will assume the form of a collaborative roundtable, consisting of at least three people in the seminar and conducted during our last meeting of the semester. People from outside the seminar will be invited, and I will ask you to identify an upcoming conference at which (at least hypothetically) your roundtable could be conducted. Roundtables of three will last thirty minutes, and (if necessary) roundtables of four will last forty minutes. Each will have a question-and-answer period. By “collaborative” roundtable, I mean its design and implementation should be collaborative in character. How you present (including content, style, and technologies used) is up to you. However, please keep in mind two things: (1) you should reflect on and assess what you learned during the entire seminar (meaning the roundtable is not solely about your final essay), and (2) everyone participating in your roundtable will be given the same grade (meaning collaboration is key). Please do not use the roundtable as an opportunity to read draft essays. During the second half of the semester, I will review the purpose and expectations of the roundtable with you.

For the final presentation, grades will be assigned based on the following scale:

90-100 = A+: Presentations in this range would be noteworthy at a conference on digital humanities, media studies, literary studies, cultural studies, or an allied field. They are clearly collaborative in their composition and delivery, and they keep the audience engaged throughout the presentation period. They perform or demonstrate what was learned during the semester and provide clear evidence of that learning. They prompt the audience to ask questions, and they spark conversation about a concrete topic emerging from the seminar. They do not visibly rely much (if at all) on reading a prepared text, such as a draft final essay. Their structure is clear, memorable, and easy to follow.
85-89 = A: Presentations in this range are clearly collaborative in their composition and delivery, and they keep the audience engaged throughout the presentation period. They perform or demonstrate what was learned during the semester and provide clear evidence of that learning. They prompt the audience to ask questions, and they spark conversation about a concrete topic emerging from the seminar. They do not visibly rely much (if at all) on reading a prepared text, such as a draft final essay. Their structure is clear, memorable, and easy to follow.
80-84 = A-: Presentations in this range are clearly collaborative in their composition, and they keep the audience engaged throughout the presentation period. They perform or demonstrate what was learned during the semester. They prompt the audience to ask questions. They do not visibly rely much (if at all) on reading a prepared text, such as a draft final essay. Their structure is clear, memorable, and easy to follow.
77-79 = B+: Presentations in this range are clearly collaborative in their composition, and they keep the audience engaged throughout the presentation period. They perform or demonstrate what was learned during the semester. They do not visibly rely much (if at all) on reading a prepared text, such as a draft final essay.
73-76 = B: Presentations in this range keep the audience engaged throughout the presentation period. They perform or demonstrate what was learned during the semester. They do not visibly rely much (if at all) on reading a prepared text, such as a draft final essay.

Participation (15%)
Discussion and invested participation are central to the graduate seminar format. That said, I will assess your contributions to the seminar this semester, including questions you ask, your involvement in workshops, your investment and role in dialogue, and your familiarity with the readings at hand. Near our sixth meeting, I will circulate interim participation grades.

For your participation mark, grades will be assigned based on the following scale:

90-100 = A+: Participation in this range demonstrates an incredibly high level of engagement with the course material. You are clearly familiar with the reading(s) at hand, actively engaged in workshops, sparking dialogue with your peers and me, listening attentively to others, and asking compelling questions, which have not occurred to me or your peers.
85-89 = A: Participation in this range demonstrates a high level of engagement with the course material. You are clearly familiar with the reading(s) at hand, actively engaged in workshops, sparking dialogue with your peers and me, listening attentively to others, and asking important questions.
80-84 = A-: Participation in this range demonstrates a high level of engagement with the course material. You are clearly familiar with the reading(s) at hand, actively engaged in workshops, sparking dialogue with your peers and me, and listening attentively to others.
77-79 = B+: Participation in this range demonstrates an acceptable level of engagement with the course material. You are clearly familiar with the reading(s) at hand and actively engaged in workshops.
73-76 = B: Participation in this range demonstrates suggests you are likely familiar with the reading(s) at hand and engaged in workshops.