There are two papers posted on Blackboard for BPR--BPR #3 and BPR #4. (Find them under "course materials: BPRs: Fall 2011.")
Read these papers sometime in the next week (the authors would probably prefer by Friday since the final drafts are due Monday) and leave your own revision ideas/comments in a comment on this post. (They're short papers so it shouldn't take very long.)
Since this is the last full week of the semester, these are the last two BPR's I'm going to post.
Good luck to everyone!
Showing posts with label BPRs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BPRs. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Friday, October 28, 2011
Our First BPR papers! (BPR #1 and BPR #2)
I've posted two papers on Blackboard for all of us to peruse. Since these are our first BPR's let me remind y'all of the guidelines.
1) Read each paper, including the comments I made on them. They're under "Course Materials: BPR papers: Fall 2011." If you're having trouble accessing them, let me know in class and we'll see if we can figure out why.
2) Leave a comment on this post with some revision ideas for the authors, or general responses to the papers. The comment doesn't have to be long, you get credit for commenting no matter how short your response is. I mainly just want you to see some examples of papers in the revision-stage with my comments on them; hopefully this will help you as you write and revise your own papers and give you a sense of how I read/respond to papers.
3) The due date for your comments is technically the last day of class, but the sooner you read and comment, the more helpful you'll be to the authors of the papers. And also, you probably don't want to be stuck reading papers at the end of the semester when you'll be wanting to finish writing your own.
I've kept the authors of these anonymous, but don't use that as an excuse to be overly harsh in your comments. I know we've had some responses to the Critical Analysis papers that are less than productive. If you're going to offer advice for the papers, keep it constructive. That means that instead of saying, "I think you really messed this up," or "This just totally sux," you should say something like, "in your next draft, maybe consider adding..." Be Christlike, y'all. Imagine how you would feel if you were the author reading the comment.
And this is just a random point that came up. Remember, a Critical Analysis paper is a paper that 1)splits things into bits (tools) in order to make a 2) critical judgment. It is NOT a "deeper" look at a text. Nor does it necessarily deal with "what the author *really* meant." It simply looks at tools and how they're successfully or unsuccessfully used for a purpose. Make sense?
1) Read each paper, including the comments I made on them. They're under "Course Materials: BPR papers: Fall 2011." If you're having trouble accessing them, let me know in class and we'll see if we can figure out why.
2) Leave a comment on this post with some revision ideas for the authors, or general responses to the papers. The comment doesn't have to be long, you get credit for commenting no matter how short your response is. I mainly just want you to see some examples of papers in the revision-stage with my comments on them; hopefully this will help you as you write and revise your own papers and give you a sense of how I read/respond to papers.
3) The due date for your comments is technically the last day of class, but the sooner you read and comment, the more helpful you'll be to the authors of the papers. And also, you probably don't want to be stuck reading papers at the end of the semester when you'll be wanting to finish writing your own.
I've kept the authors of these anonymous, but don't use that as an excuse to be overly harsh in your comments. I know we've had some responses to the Critical Analysis papers that are less than productive. If you're going to offer advice for the papers, keep it constructive. That means that instead of saying, "I think you really messed this up," or "This just totally sux," you should say something like, "in your next draft, maybe consider adding..." Be Christlike, y'all. Imagine how you would feel if you were the author reading the comment.
And this is just a random point that came up. Remember, a Critical Analysis paper is a paper that 1)splits things into bits (tools) in order to make a 2) critical judgment. It is NOT a "deeper" look at a text. Nor does it necessarily deal with "what the author *really* meant." It simply looks at tools and how they're successfully or unsuccessfully used for a purpose. Make sense?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)