193 W20 Woodford

ENGL 193

Section 14
Winter 2020
Tuesdays and Thursdays, 10:00am – 11:20am HH 150

Instructor: Dr. Benjamin Woodford
Office: PAS 1285
Email: bwoodfor@uwaterloo.ca
Office Hours: Thursday 11:30am to 12:30pm

Course Description:

Science expands our understanding of the world by questioning the world around us and seeking out answers. However, to have an impact, the information and insights generated by scientific research must be effectively communicated, whether to publics, policymakers, or other scientists. In this course you will learn effective written, oral, and visual communication in the life sciences. You will have the opportunity to shape these communication skills through iterative design processes that emphasize attention to your audience and the purpose of your communications. You will work individually and collaboratively to craft messages for internal and external audiences, including scientists, government stakeholders, affected communities, or broader publics. You will learn a variety of genres such as research reports, grant proposals, conference abstracts, conference posters, public talks, and blog posts. Overall, this course will help you enhance your capacity to conduct research and report research findings, communicate ethically, and thereby effect important change.

Course Outcomes:

Upon completion of this course, students should be able to:

• design, draft, and persuasively deliver scientific communications to expert and non-expert audiences;
• justify decisions about the language, content, and genre used when communicating scientific information;
• practice collaboration and peer review in support of iterative communication design processes, including revision;
• practice research processes to find, assess, document, incorporate, and cite research resources and communicate research findings; and
• describe and appraise the purposes and ethical concerns of science communication

Required Text

Nelson-McDermott, Catherine, Laura Buzzard, and Don LePan. Science and Society: An Anthology for Readers and Writers. Broadview, 2014.

Course Requirements and Assessment

In this course a passing grade is 50%. You will need to complete the following assignments and activities. Assignments will be submitted and feedback will be provided through LEARN.

Assignments and Grading

Assignment	Weight
Participation in class discussion and written activities (throughout the term)	15%
Peer Review Activity	5%
Reading Analysis Logs	10%
Science Literature Review	15%
Grant Proposal	15%
Public Communication (oral)	20%
Poster (Group)	15%
Poster Presentation (Group) (oral)	5%

Description of Assignments

Here is the interesting thing about this course: the assignments will draw upon a range of genres that are employed in scientific writing. You’re going to present your work to a bunch of different audiences. It might be to other scientists, it might be to non-scientists who are just interested in learning about your research, or it might be to people who will give you money to complete your research.

All written assignments should be double-spaced in 12pt. Times New Roman font (except the poster) and submitted to the appropriate dropbox on Learn. Assignments should be in Word or pdf format.

Participation (throughout the term) 15%

Building strong writing skills demands frequent practice. In this class, that practice will often take the form of in-class activities, and it will require discussion of assignment goals and the interpretation and analysis of different written documents. Therefore, class participation is a significant part of your grade. I measure participation in several ways. Participation requires you to be present in class, so I will begin each class by taking attendance. Attendance is MANDATORY. If you miss a class without documentation (doctor’s note or some other type of documentation), you will lose 2% from your final mark (that is, if you miss one class, the most you can get in participation is 13/15). I will also monitor your group work and your involvement in class discussions. Participation is both oral and aural. You must participate regularly in class and group discussions, you must listen and respond to your classmates’ contributions to those discussions, and you must contribute meaningfully to any group work in which you are engaged. When you are assigned group work in class, I will circulate among the groups to ensure that everyone is engaging in the task. I will also keep track of who is contributing to discussions with the whole class. You are expected to read all assigned articles BEFORE class and come prepared to discuss them in class.

You are also expected to present for and participate in the EDGE workshop. The Skills Identification and Articulation Workshop helps students identify the skills they are developing throughout their undergraduate career. Students who complete this workshop will become better able to recognize their skills and develop strategies for expressing these to target audiences (e.g. to potential employers in job interviews). The workshop was developed and will be facilitated by a Career Advisor from the Centre for Career Action. It has been tailored to the Communication in the Sciences course, so as to help students gain a deeper understanding of how class activities and concepts can be applied in a variety of employment and professional contexts. Students who are actively pursuing the EDGE certificate, or who wish to pursue the program in the future, will receive a milestone for participation in the workshop.

Peer Review Activity (Feb. 4 and Feb. 25) 5%

For both the Science Literature Review and the Grant Proposal, you will be required to bring a draft of the assignment (as a paper copy) with you to class before it is due and exchange your assignment with several classmates. You will provide feedback on your classmates’ work and they will provide feedback on yours. You will receive guidelines on how to provide this feedback. In order to receive the marks for this assignment, you must come to class with a completed draft (that is, the appropriate length) and actively participate in peer-reviewing your colleagues’ work.

Reading Analysis Log (Feb. 13 and April 8) 10%

Over the course of the term, you will produce several reading log. You will turn in the reading log twice during the semester: once at midterm to receive feedback and once at the end of the term. Your first submission (Feb. 13) will include three logs of approximately one page (double- spaced) each (three pages in total) and be worth 5% of your final mark. Each log should analyze one of the assigned readings. You can discuss any of the readings that have been assigned before the due date (except “From Extraterrestrial Cause for the Cretaceous-Tertiary Extinction”). Your second submission (April 3) will be one log of two pages (double-spaced) and will be worth 5% of your final mark. This second submission will address one reading that was assigned on February 13 or after.

In each log entry, you need to comment on various aspects of the text. These may include the form, function, aim, audience, diction, type of reasoning, and implication of each article. You do not have to address each of these issues in every log entry. You are also free to address other aspects of the article that you think are interesting. Remember to provide evidence from the article for each point that you make (for example, provide evidence to show how you know who the audience is). On the second class, we will use the assigned article as an example of the type of material you could include in your Reading Analysis Log.

The following three assignments (Science Literature Review, Grant Proposal, and Public Communication) build on each other. You are going to identify an area that interests you, discuss previous work on the topic, apply for funding for additional research on the topic, and share your thoughts on this topic publicly.

Science Literature Review (Feb. 9), 3-4 pages 15%

Time to dive into your interests! Find and read a science research article on a topic of your choosing. It must follow the IMRaD format. At the top of your review, provide a short summary of your article.

Science literature reviews are written BEFORE the research takes place. They assess: 1) what research is needed in the field – the gaps in research, 2) what methods and strategies are currently used with this topic and 3) what particular articles or ideas this work is in conversation with.

In your article, the authors will have situated their work within that current research conversation. Identify from their citation list two key texts that they either build on or challenge. Find those articles through the UWaterloo library system and download and read the articles.

Once you have identified two articles that you think are interesting and you can summarize in plain language, read through them and write short summaries about the research. Then, and this is the important part, write a few paragraphs about what those two papers mean to the research article you have chosen to work with. Why did your authors cite those articles? What does it tell us about the problem or issues the authors of your research article are trying to solve?

Make sure you write this report in plain language. Your review needs to be written in a formal tone, but without any industry jargon or specific terminology. Rather, you’re trying to provide a general understanding of what material currently exists in this research area. Remember also that your readers won’t have read or reviewed these articles, so you need to make sure that your references to them can be understood without accessing the original text.

Finally, you need to provide a tentative assessment of those two articles in terms of their data quality, the arguments they make, etc. While I realize you’re just starting out and may not be fully capable of this kind of assessment, the goal here is to begin thinking about these problems. It’s okay to be wrong because we’re just beginning to learn how to do this work. We’ll talk about ways to evaluate research generally.

Grant Proposal (March 3), 3-4 pages 15%

Increasingly research doesn’t happen without securing external funds. This assignment requires you to craft a grant proposal requesting funds to pursue your research connected to the science literature review you have just written. Your science literature review accessed the previous work on a topic; now you will request funding to do additional research on this topic.

For this assignment you will create a grant proposal. To do this, first choose an appropriate organization/platform for the kind of work you’re doing. You might use a crowd-funding platform like Experiment.com, or you might want to apply to a formal organization that funds scientific research. Just be sure you have a good rationale for why you’ve chosen a particular platform to try to fund your research. Once you’ve chosen a platform/organization you should look at all the different components involved, including the proposal, images in the proposal, rewards, etc. What will you need to craft to complete your project? You will also include a paragraph justifying your choice of organization/platform, identifying your audience, and explaining the different requirements for your proposal. Include this paragraph on a separate page in your submission.

Public Communication (March 17 and 19) 20%

Congratulations! You’ve completed the initial research and now you’re ready to report the results. You’ve been invited to give a talk at your local library about your work. Your audience could be anyone: other scientists, people interested in your topic, students, families looking for an educational opportunity, etc. Demographics include a range of learners and you’re going to have to figure out how to communicate your complex subject to a wide audience.
You will first need to decide what aspect of your paper you think will appeal to your audience. What is particularly interesting about your work and what do you most want to share with others? You will want to figure out how much you can cover in just 5 minutes! It isn’t a long time to talk so you’re going to need to be selective. Prepare a slideshow or some other kind of multimedia to use during your talk. You’ll also want to think about performative aspects of how you’ll tell your story. Are you able to modulate your voice, do you have vivid metaphors to describe abstract concepts, and does your story follow an arc with a powerful conclusion? All these aspects should be included in everyone’s talks, but it is a challenge to do well without any supporting materials.

Your presentation should be 5 minutes long, polished and practiced, and aimed at a wide audience with different kinds of expertise.

For this assignment, you will have to sign up to present. Please let me know on which date you would like to present as soon as you can, as I can only allow so many presentations on each day.

Poster (Group) (15% poster, 5% poster presentation) (April 2)

Did you know there are often prizes for the best poster presentation by students at academic conferences? Fame, fortune, a CV line, posters are prized among many scientific disciplines to communicate your research at annual conferences in your field. The prizes signal something important: we care about how well you’re able to present your findings. Work in the lab doesn’t mean a whole lot until you can share it with others, and it is that sharing of findings that propels science forward. Posters, however, are a real challenge because they bring together almost every model of communication you need to master: written communication, visual communication (particularly data), oral communication in your short explanation of your research, and even interpersonal communication as you answer questions and possibly develop collaborations. All term you’ve been working on different aspects of these forms of communication. It’s time to bring it all together.

You will be placed in small groups of 4-5 students. In your group, choose one scientific article (a different article than you choose for the science literature review) that can be represented both orally and visually and, together, create a poster based on that research article. You will also need to communicate outside of class to complete this project. In addition to the poster itself you will write a short summary script of the research you will memorize and present to the class on April 2. Each group member should be able to speak for at least 2 minutes about an element of the project. As a group, you will also write a one-page design rationale that includes a justification for your focus, your design decisions, and that explains the importance and visual significance of any graphics you include.

You should be sure that your poster is: written for a poster format and not a direct quote from your Research Report, focused on a particular issue in the research you’re summarizing, includes graphics such as related images or visual representations of data, and polished and free of errors. Your poster will be presented in class on April 2 and your one-page design rationale must be submitted to the dropbox on Learn by April 2, 11:59pm.

Note: There is no final exam in this course.

Course Policies

Late assignments will incur a 5% late penalty per day, including weekends. Permission to turn in a late assignment without penalty will be given rarely, will require documentation (a doctor’s note or other type of documentation) and only based on a conference with me, and never on the day the assignment is due. If you are having trouble completing an assignment, please come speak with me.

Should your grades concern you, then you must speak with me within the first 3/4 of the term; the last quarter of the term will not provide sufficient time to markedly improve your final grade.

Cell phones must be switched off and put away during class. Students can choose to do the in- class writing activities with either pen and paper or on a laptop. If you choose to use a laptop, please refrain from using any program other than a writing program.

The best way to contact me is through email. I will usually respond to all emails within 24 hours (it may take longer on weekends).

Email policy: Show professionalism in your emails to me. A professional email has these components: a “subject line,” an professional greeting, opening lines that clarify for what purpose you are emailing me, clear expression of your request (or providing me with sufficient information about things that you would like to bring to my attention), clarity about dates or other details that you want me to know, and a closing of the email with your name.

Course Schedule

All assigned readings can be found in Science and Society: An Anthology for Readers and Writers. Broadview, 2014

Week	Topic	Dates	Readings and Assignments
1	Introduction to the Course How to read scientific articles; audience and purpose	Jan. 7
		Jan. 9	Luis W. Alvarez et al., “From Extraterrestrial Cause for the Cretaceous- Tertiary Extinction,” pp. 36-51
2	Scientific genres; IMRaD; principles of science literature review Scientific Journals; Abstracts and summarizing	Jan. 14	Keith Baverstock and Mauno Ronkko, “From Epigenetic Regulation of the Mammalian Cell,” pp. 308-330
		Jan. 16	Ethan Kross, et al., “From Facebook Use Predicts Declines in Subjective Well-Being in Young Adults,” pp. 406-418
3	Gathering Research; using library resources Ethics in Scientific Communication; Citation and documentation of sources;	Jan. 21 Jan. 23	Stanley Milgram, “Behavioral Study of Obedience,” pp. 115-130 Ian Nicholson, “From ‘Torture at Yale’: Experimental Subjects, Laboratory Torment and the ‘Rehabilitation’ of Milgram’s ‘Obedience to Authority,’” pp. 150-17.
4.	Evidence in scientific writing      Style in scientific writing	Jan. 28 Jan. 30	A. J. Wakefield et al., “Redacted: Ileal-Lymphoid-Nodular Hyperplasia, Non- Specific Colitis, and Pervasive Developmental Disorder in Children,” pp. 183- 200 Brian Deer, “How the Case against the MMR Vaccine was Fixed,” pp. 201- 216
5	Principles of revision and editing Good Writing and Good Scientific Writing	Feb. 4 Feb. 6	Nancy F. Olivieri et al. “Long-Term Safety and Effectiveness of Iron- Chelation Therapy with Deferiprone for Thalassemia Major,” pp. 217-233 Peer Review for Science Literature Review David G. Nathan and David J. Weatherall, “Academic Freedom in Clinical Research,” pp. 234-242
6	Principles of Grant Writing	Feb. 11	Fred Pearce, “Battle over Climate Data Turned into War between Scientists and Sceptics,” pp. 83-90
	The use of visual aids and graphics in scientific communication	Feb. 13	“The Hockey Stick Graph,” p. 74, Michael Mann, “Myth vs. Fact Regarding the ‘Hockey Stick,’” pp. 76-82 First Reading Logs Due
	Reading Week	Feb. 17-21	No Class
7	Presentation Skills Science and the public	Feb. 25	Jared Diamond, “Easter’s End,” pp. 25-35 Peer Review for Grant Proposal Please let me know on which date you would like to do your public communication presentation by this date (earlier if possible, as I can only allow so many presentations on one day).
		Feb. 27	Elizabeth Kolbert, “The Sixth Extinction?,” pp. 52-73
8	Science and public policy The Science Poster	March. 3	EFSA, “From Scientific Opinion on the Science behind the Development of a Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products on Bees,” 365-372 Grant Proposal due
		March 5	Tim Fox and Ceng Fimeche, “Executive Summary of Global Food: Waste Not, Want Not,” pp. 377-383
9	Scientific writing, ethics, and business	March 10	Ben Goldacre, “From Bad Pharma,” pp. 266-269
	EDGE Workship	March 12	F. E. Vera-Badillo, “From Bias in Reporting of End Points of Efficacy and Toxicity in Randomized, Clinical Trials for Women with Breast Cancer,” pp. 250-262 Let me know your groups for poster project by this date
10	Presentations	March 17	No Readings Public Communication Presentations
		March 19	No Readings Public Communication Presentations
11	Self- Representation and Cultural issues in scientific writing Time to work with group on poster	March 24	Alexis de Greiff and Mauricio Nieto, “From What We Still Do Not Know about the South-North Technoscientific Exchange: North-Centrism, Scientific Diffusion, and the Social Studies of Science,” pp. 100-112
		March 26	Malcolm Gladwell, “None of the Above: What IQ doesn’t tell you about Race,” pp. 285-293
12	Gender issues in scientific writing	March 31	Emily Martin, “The Egg and the Sperm: How Science has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles,” pp. 421-337 Corrine A. Moss-Racusin et al. “From Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students,” pp. 438-452
	Group Presentations Reflection on the Course	April 2	Group Poster Presentations
		April 8	Second Reading Analysis Log Due

University Policies and Information

Cross-listed course

Please note that a cross-listed course will count in all respective averages no matter under which rubric it has been taken. For example, a PHIL/PSCI cross-list will count in a Philosophy major average, even if the course was taken under the Political Science rubric.

Academic Integrity

In order to maintain a culture of academic integrity, members of the University of Waterloo are expected to promote honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility. Check the Office of Academic Integrity website for more information.

Discipline

A student is expected to know what constitutes academic integrity to avoid committing an academic offence, and to take responsibility for his/her actions. [Check the Office of Academic Integrity for more information.] A student who is unsure whether an action constitutes an offence, or who needs help in learning how to avoid offences (e.g., plagiarism, cheating) or about “rules” for group work/collaboration should seek guidance from the course instructor, academic advisor, or the undergraduate associate dean. For information on categories of offences and types of penalties, students should refer to Policy 71, Student Discipline. For typical penalties, check Guidelines for the Assessment of Penalties.

Grievance

A student who believes that a decision affecting some aspect of his/her university life has been unfair or unreasonable may have grounds for initiating a grievance. Read Policy 70, Student Petitions and Grievances, Section 4. When in doubt, please be certain to contact the department’s administrative assistant who will provide further assistance.

Appeals

A decision made or penalty imposed under Policy 70, Student Petitions and Grievances (other than a petition) or Policy 71, Student Discipline may be appealed if there is a ground. A student who believes he/she has a ground for an appeal should refer to Policy 72, Student Appeals.

Accommodation for Students with Disabilities

Note for students with disabilities: AccessAbility Services, located in Needles Hall, Room 1401, collaborates with all academic departments to arrange appropriate accommodations for students with disabilities without compromising the academic integrity of the curriculum. If you require academic accommodations to lessen the impact of your disability, please register with AccessAbility Services at the beginning of each academic term.

Turnitin®

Turnitin.com and alternatives: Text matching software (Turnitin®) may be used to screen assignments in this course. Turnitin® is used to verify that all materials and sources in assignments are documented.

Students' submissions are stored on a U.S. server, therefore students must be given an alternative (e.g., scaffolded assignment or annotated bibliography), if they are concerned about their privacy and/or security. Students will be given due notice, in the first week of the term and/or at the time assignment details are provided, about arrangements and alternatives for the use of Turnitin in this course.

It is the responsibility of the student to notify the instructor if they, in the first week of term or at the time assignment details are provided, wish to submit the alternate assignment.

Mental Health Support

All of us need a support system. The faculty and staff in Arts encourage students to seek out mental health support if they are needed.

On Campus

• Counselling Services: counselling.services@uwaterloo.ca / 519-888-4567 ext. 32655

• MATES: one-to-one peer support program offered by Federation of Students (FEDS) and Counselling Services

• Health Services Emergency service: located across the creek form Student Life Centre Off campus, 24/7

• Good2Talk: Free confidential help line for post-secondary students. Phone: 1-866-925-5454

• Grand River Hospital: Emergency care for mental health crisis. Phone: 519-749-4300 ext. 6880

• Here 24/7: Mental Health and Crisis Service Team. Phone: 1-844-437-3247

• OK2BME: set of support services for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning teens in Waterloo. Phone: 519-884-0000 extension 213

Full details can be found online on the Faculty of Arts website
Download UWaterloo and regional mental health resources (PDF)
Download the WatSafe app to your phone to quickly access mental health support information

Territorial Acknowledgement

We acknowledge that we are living and working on the traditional territory of the Attawandaron (also known as Neutral), Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee peoples. The University of Waterloo is situated on the Haldimand Tract, the land promised to the Six Nations that includes ten kilometres on each side of the Grand River.

For more information about the purpose of territorial acknowledgements, please see the CAUT Guide to Acknowledging Traditional Territory (PDF).

Academic freedom at the University of Waterloo

Policy 33, Ethical Behaviour states, as one of its general principles (Section 1), “The University supports academic freedom for all members of the University community. Academic freedom carries with it the duty to use that freedom in a manner consistent with the scholarly obligation to base teaching and research on an honest and ethical quest for knowledge. In the context of this policy, 'academic freedom' refers to academic activities, including teaching and scholarship, as is articulated in the principles set out in the Memorandum of Agreement between the FAUW and the University of Waterloo, 1998 (Article 6). The academic environment which fosters free debate may from time to time include the presentation or discussion of unpopular opinions or controversial material. Such material shall be dealt with as openly, respectfully and sensitively as possible.” This definition is repeated in Policies 70 and 71, and in the Memorandum of Agreement, Section 6.