193 W20 Ofili | English Language and Literature

Communication for (Life or Physical) Sciences

Lectures: 2 sessions / week, 80 minutes / session: Tue/Thurs @ 8:30-9:50

Location: STC Class: 3014

Instructor: Patricia Ofili

Email: p3ofili@uwaterloo.ca

Office Location: PAS1284

Office Hours: Tue & Thurs; 10:00-10:30am or by appointment

Course Overview

Course Description: ENG 193 Communications in the Life Sciences.

The sciences expand our understanding of the world by posing questions and by collecting evidence to address these questions. In order to have an impact, the information and insights generated by scientific research also need to be effectively communicated, whether to publics, policymakers, or to other scientists. This course will teach written and oral communication tailored to the life/physical sciences. The course will give you an opportunity to shape your oral, written, and visual communication skills through iterative design processes that emphasize student agency and confidence, individually and collaboratively. You will craft texts 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 papers, conference posters, public talks, blog post, podcasts, and/or town halls. Overall, this course will help to enhance your capacity to share research findings, communicate effectively and ethically, and thereby, bring about effective changes.

Course Overview and Objectives:

Communication is essential for scientists, and scientists communicate in many different ways for many different audiences. In this course we will introduce you to a variety of ways scientists communicate, giving you the basis to begin sharing the importance of science in more tailored, concise, and effective ways. By the end of the course, you should be able to:

Design and persuasively deliver scientific communications to expert and non-expert audiences;
Differentiate and justify the language, content, and manner of delivery when communicating scientific information;
Apply best practices in collaboration and peer review, including giving and receiving feedback in support of revision;
Practice research processes to find, assess, document, incorporate, and cite research resources and communicate research findings;
Reflect critically about science communication and its purposes and ethical dimensions.

Required Texts and Materials:

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

Carolyn R. Miller and Jeanne Fahnestock. “Genres in Scientific and Technical Rhetoric.” Inventing the Future: The Rhetorics of Science, Technology, and Medicine. Vol 9. Issue 1, 2013.

Stanley Fish: “Rhetoric” Communication for (Life or Physical) Sciences | Future Fall Term | 2

Course Assignments and Requirements

Assignment and Evaluation Overview

In this course a passing grade is 50%. You will need to complete the required assignments and activities. In addition, due to the importance of the revision process in writing and communication design, there is no exam:

Class Attendance/Participation/Contributions/Short critical papers (discussions and peer review) & Blogposts – 20%
Report: State of Science – 20%
Grant Proposal – 20%
Conference Paper – 20%
Public Communication or Engagement: Group Oral Assignment /Poster Presentation – 20%

Assignment Descriptions

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. We have provided a list of articles and topics that can be used, and we have developed this list in consultation with faculty members in science. If you’d like to choose other texts, you’ll have to have it approved.

Contribution Evaluation

Contribution isn’t just showing up. Think of this as an evaluation of some aspects of inter-personal communication. Generally, the expectation is that you treat the classroom as a professional space and your peers as your colleagues.

100 points–Exceptional: Frequent, substantive, formative, and original contributions to class discussions; consistently engaged and participatory demeanor; outstanding peer feedback

90-99 points–Excellent: Only minor exceptions to the criteria described above

80-89 points–Good: Regular contributor to discussions; consistent engagement; good peer feedback

60-79 points–Satisfactory: Occasional contributions and inconsistent engagement; good peer feedback

50 - 59points–Marginal: Minimal contributions and/or significant lack of engagement

50 points–Failure: Repeated disruptive, inappropriate, or unethical behaviors: behavior disrespectful to others; consistent lack of commitment and/or effort

Assignments Overview

It’s a little early for original research, so we’re going to begin with getting you up to speed on engaging with other scientific/non-scientific texts. You will choose an article from the approved list and you will work with this article for the entire term. You’re going to summarize it, present it to expert and public audiences, write about it, and tear apart this article. Imagine you’re a research assistant (RA), and these exercises will be the work you’re learning about for the term you are hired on to work as an RA.

Student Researcher Bio

Write yourself a biography. This should be no more than 120 words and should include your name, degree title, and areas of research interest. Remember, a biography helps people identify you as an expert so it should be tailored to your field. Your bio should be tailored to a job search.

State of Science Report

Communication for (Life or Physical) Sciences | Fall Term | 3

Your first major assignment will be a report on the state of science described in the article you have chosen. Your goal here is to understand what research is presented in the article you have chosen and how it is situated in a broader research effort. Who else is working on this topic? What are they saying? What is the significance of the article that you have chosen for this research topic?

First, you will want to read and re-read your article. You will need to know the general field, the topic of the article, and why that topic is important. Your report will contain the following sections:

Literature Review

In your chosen article, the authors will have situated their work in a current research conversation. This is the review of literature or literature review. Identify from their literature review two key texts they either built on or intend to challenge. Find those articles through the UWaterloo library system and download the articles. Read those two articles. We will discuss reading strategies used by scientists (spoiler: they don’t always read every word to figure out if an article is helpful for their research). 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 paragraph about what those two papers mean to the research article you have chosen to work with this term. 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? Finally, provide your tentative assessment of those 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 and how you can begin learning about specific techniques for your field by reviewing how research articles critique previous studies.

Grant Proposal: Crowdfunding Your Research

You will complete this assignment on your own. For this assignment you will create a crowdfunding proposal. To do this, first choose an appropriate platform for the kind of work you’re doing. In most cases, if you want to fund a scientific project, you might use Experiment.com. But you can also use Kickstarter.com, or similar platforms. Just be sure you have a good rationale for why you’ve chosen a particular platform to try to fund your research.

What will you need to craft to complete your project? You will be required to develop a strong argument that justifies your research proposal and why you thing it worth pursuing and draw up a budget. You will also include a short paragraph identifying your audience and

outlining a dissemination plan. How will you get folks to fund you? Include this paragraph along with your name and any information you think I should have about why your chose the project or platform that you did (e.g., this is a project you’re actually hoping to crowdfund). You should be sure that your assignment is:

About 4-5 pages in length,
double-spaced,
12pt font, and

Criteria for Evaluation

Includes all relevant information indicated above.
Includes all relevant sections of the proposal for your platform of choice (e.g., proposal text, budget, rewards, etc.).
Clear statement of purpose, following CARS model, and supporting evidence is included.
The budget should be tailored to your project and audience.
Technical presentation (typed, well formatted, consistent fonts, etc).
Spelling and grammar (including complete sentences)

Conference Paper

Undertake a library research to validate your thesis statement, which is a research that aims to fill the gap you identified in your chosen article. Write a 4 – 5-page conference paper that you will present to the class using a power point. Your presentation should not exceed 5 minutes. Your presentation will be assessed based on how well you made use of the stage, eye contact, voice modulation, slides that employ visual rhetoric (that are not too busy as to take attention away from your performance), and the content of your presentation.

Your paper will be assessed on how clear your ideas are, how logical your arguments are, how clear and sharp your thesis statement is, how well you support your points with credible sources, how strong your introduction and conclusion are, and how well you have edited your work.

Public Communication Group Assignment

This will be a group assignment. 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 topic you think will appeal to your audience. What is particularly interesting about your work and what do you most want to share with others? Then you can begin the hard work of planning a talk. You will want to figure out how much you can cover in just 15 minutes! It isn’t a long time to talk so you’re going to need to be selective about what you cover. Prepare a slideshow/powerpoint or some other kind of multimedia to use during your talk. If you would rather not use media to support your talk, that is okay, but you’ll 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. You should be sure that your presentation is:

No more than 15/20 minutes long,
polished and practiced, and
aimed at a wide audience with different kinds of expertise

Criteria for Evaluation

Clear topic with a narrow focus.
Well-organized (arrangement!) presentation with clear narrative arc.
Clear statement of purpose, following CARS model, and supporting evidence is included.
Technical presentation (typed, well formatted, consistent fonts, etc).
Spelling and grammar (including complete sentences)

Poster Presentation

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 or on the bench 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 representing 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.

At North Carolina State University (in the USA), a handy introduction to poster presentations has been developed and I recommend you begin there: https://projects.ncsu.edu/project/posters/We will take up similar points in class, but what you will need to do is a little homework on your own

discipline. Are there posters in your field in the halls outside your labs? What is included (what seems to be excluded)? Are there great visual representations of data? Find some exemplars and be prepared to share them with the class (snap a photo!).

Prepare a poster based on the topic you have chosen in your group. You can imagine you are a research assistant tasked with presenting your PI’s research at an annual conference. In addition to the poster itself you will craft a presentation of the research. 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 State of 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.

Criteria for Evaluation

Clear topic with a narrow focus.
Well-organized poster that uses the IMRAD model.
Clear statement of purpose, following CARS model for the introductory paragraph.
Technical presentation (font a readable size, visuals well-placed and credited, tables and figures labeled, references formatted according to disciplinary citation style such as CSE, AIP, or ACS).
Spelling and grammar (including complete sentences)

Course Rules

I will not accept late assignments if you were not granted an extension. To be granted an extension

you must have a compelling reason (e.g., medically documented illness). If you know you will need an extension, speak with me at least 48 hours prior to the due date. 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. Finally, I will not grant an incomplete in the course; if you have concerns about completing your term please write to me as soon as possible.

Communication for (Life or Physical) Sciences |Fall Term | 6 Academic Integrity

In order to maintain a culture of academic integrity, members of the University of Waterloo community are expected to promote honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility. See the UWaterloo Academic Integrity webpage and the Arts Academic Integrity webpage for more information.

Discipline

A student is expected to know what constitutes academic integrity, to avoid committing academic offences, and to take responsibility for his/her actions. 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 professor, academic advisor, or the Undergraduate Associate Dean. When misconduct has been `found to have occurred, disciplinary penalties will be imposed under Policy 71 - Student Discipline. For information on categories of offenses and types of penalties, students should refer to Policy 71 - Student Discipline. For typical penalties check Guidelines for the Assessment of Penalties(https://uwaterloo.ca/secretariat-general-counsel/policiesprocedures-guidelines/guidelines/guidelines-assessment-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 (https://uwaterloo.ca/secretariat-general-counsel/policies-procedures-guidelines/policy-70). 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 (https://uwaterloo.ca/secretariatgeneral-counsel/policies-procedures-guidelines/policy-72). Note for Students with Disabilities, The AccessAbility Services office, located on the first floor of the Needles Hall extension (NH 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 the AS office at the beginning of each academic term.

Communication for (Life or Physical) Sciences |Fall Term | 7 Communication in the Sciences

It is your responsibility to email me in advance regarding any confusions you might have about due dates. Schedule subject to change.

Date	Topic, Material and Readings.	Assignments and Description of assignments
Week One Tue - Jan 7	Communication/Introduction In the first week of classes we will discuss the idea of genre in rhetorical studies. Students will be introduced to this concept through a series of examples of genres in science communication, from popular genres such as TED talks about science to professional genres such as the research article. Home work: Read- Carolyn R. Miller and Jeanne Fahnestock. “Genres in Scientific and Technical Rhetoric.” Inventing the Future: The Rhetorics of Science, Technology, and Medicine. Write a short bio to be submitted in the next class.	What are the hallmarks of a good TED talk?
Thur=Jan 9	Due: Bio & Resume Discuss Miller & Fahnstock Putting the idea of genre into practice, we will have students look at their own resumes as an example of a genre, and then explore how genres actually function together (e.g., the resume responds to the job call, and, hopefully, connects to an interview. Activity: Discuss Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in various genres of texts. Homework: Read Stanley Fish: “Rhetoric” Analyze Fish in one page	What are employers looking for in your resume?
Week 2: Tues-Jan 14	Due: Submit One-page analysis of Fish Discuss your analysis of Fish Argumentation–Getting your evidence in order. Arrangement is one of the core concepts in rhetoric, and builds on our discussion of genre. Homework: Read – Fred Pearce. “Battle over Climate Data Turned into War between Scientists and Sceptics” pp 83 -90 Analyze this article in one page.	Your peers will evaluate how creative and compelling your bio is.
Thur - Jan 16	Due: Submit the one-page analysis of Pearce Discuss Pearce Arrangement of an argument helps students understand how to stage their ideas. Arrange the arguments in the article of your choice. Using Pearce, we will discuss how to anticipate the information your audience will need, what information they will already have, and how you can build the argument you need to make with respect to your anticipated audience. Homework: Draft your report and bring it to class for peer review. Write a blogpost about the implication of Pearce’s arguments and post on the discussion board on Learn by Jan 26, 2020. Each person should comment on at least 3 blogposts. Choose posts that do not already have comments to comment on. This blogpost counts towards you class participation grade.	Find an article from the provided list and breakdown the steps used to make the arguments (to be reused in the state of science report). What makes a good blogpost?
Week 3 – Tue-Jan 21	Report for Peer Review Review your colleague’s report, build on the previous week’s discussion of arrangement and argument, and we will further explore how to situate an argument in a particular genre. Specifically, we will investigate how to 1) situate one’s argument in a current research conversation, and 2) how to frame evidence, such as data.
Thur – Jan 23	A visit from library staff - to demonstrate how research databases will ideally be included in this week’s activities. Demonstration of citation management tools, discussions of different kinds of databases, and what counts as evidence in different fields of science will also be discussed. Homework: Read - Stanley Milgram. “Issues in the Study of Obedience: A Reply to Baumrind” pp 139 – 149 in Science & Society Analyze this article in one page.
Week 4- Tue- Jan 28	Continue the peer review of Reports. Submit the one-page analysis of Milgram	What counts as evidence.
Thur – Jan 30	Present your report to the class for feedback.
Week 5 : Tue – Feb 4	Present your report to the class. Next assignment: Grant Proposal- Pick an idea (by identifying a gap you want to fill) from your chosen article for your next assignment. Use the feedback to revise your report.
Thur – Feb 6	Submit your report. Start your next major assignment: Grant Proposal. With the conceptual frameworks established to understand there are different kinds of writing in the sciences (i.e., genres), particular strategies to make an effective and logical argument (i.e. arrangement), and particular forms of evidence expected to support a situated argument (i.e., evidence), we will now focus on putting this together in a particular genre of science communication: the research report. To do this, we will explore linguist John Swales’ work on the Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion (IMRaD) model, and his Create a Research Space (CARS) model. These two models give us a way to map the typical form of a research report or a research article in the sciences, and it applies to both physical and life sciences. IMRaD describes the form of an overall report or article, and CARS is a set of moves found in introductory sections. Homework: Read- Brian Deer: “How the Case against the MMR Vaccine Was Fixed”. pp 201 – 217 in Science and Society. Analyze this article in one page.
Week6: Tue -Feb 11	Discuss Deer & Submit the one-page analysis Using -Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion (IMRaD) model and Create a Research Space (CARS) models, establish a territory for your research, a gap in the research, and then explain how you’re going to address the gap. Homework: Prepare your grant proposal for peer review
Thur- Feb - 13	Peer review of grant proposal. Increasingly research doesn’t happen without securing external funds. This week explores the complex task of writing a grant application. Introducing the concept of a grant, how different kinds of grants function in the Canadian academy, and what grants students can actually apply for (e.g., NSERC Undergraduate Student Research Awards), this week is a crash course in grant writing. Crowdfunding proposals will serve as an exciting and accessible example. Experiment.com is a rich resource for students to find examples tailored to science, and all the basic elements one might find in a traditional proposal are included in crowdfunding proposals, such as budgets, biographies, and, of course, the proposal itself. Using crowdfunding also allows, and demands, we talk about the kind of audience one might have for a proposal (it is an academic multidisciplinary panel, as in traditional grants, or a complex ground of academic and publics giving us their own money, as in crowdfunding. Do we have to write differently for those audiences (spoiler: yes, we do)?	What’s the hook for the research article you’ve chosen? How could you accommodate that to a broader audience to persuade them to fund your research? Think of creative ways through which you can get funding for your brainchild.
Week 7 - Tues- Feb 18 = Reading Week	Reading Week	Identify a gap in your article and conduct the research for your grant proposal.
Thur-Feb 20	Reading Week
Week 8: Tue – Feb 25	Peer review of grant proposal. Visuals and visualization are another mode of communication that is crucial to scientific research. We will explore the different ways that visuals can operate across genres of science communication. As well, we will explore issues of data visualization and ``anticipate questions of ethical concerns in addition to readability and clarity.	Grant Proposal Presentations - Prepare a power point for presenting your grant proposal to the class.
Thur - Feb 27	Present your grant proposal.
Week 9 – Tue - Mar 3	Present your grant proposal. Evaluate what you have learned so far in this course this term. Synergize Pearce’s, Milgram’s, and Deer’s articles. What are the common threads running through them? Examine the EDGE worksheets and handout emailed to you in order to prepare for the Workshop.	Scientific Visuals and Visualization – Continue your grant proposal presentation.
Thur- Mar 5	Submit your grant Proposal. Bring a draft of your conference to class for peer review. You need at least 3 feedbacks for your revision. Homework: Read- F.E. Vera-Badillo, R. Shapiro, A. Ocana, E. Amir, and I.F. Tannock: “From Bias in Reporting of End Points of Efficacy and Toxicity in Randomized, Clinical Trials for Women with Breast Cancer” pp 250 – 262 in Science and Society. Analyze this article in one page. Homework: While there are a lot of opinions on how we communicate science to publics, we’re going to throw a lot of them out. What we’re throwing out are models of science communication that rely on the so-called deficit model. As you might guess, this model assumes a deficit of knowledge on behalf of your audience (the public). If you could just fill them up with the correct knowledge—presto! —they think right, just like you. No longer do antivaccine proponents debate you, no longer is there a push to “teach the controversy,” and who would even dream of suggesting the Earth is flat? The problem with the deficit model of science communication, particularly in controversial cases such as I’ve outlined, is that the point of contention isn’t agreed upon. Throwing data at the controversy just won’t work. What will? It depends, and we’ll talk about tools to help you better engage in communication of both controversial and non-controversial science with broad publics. And, if you’re wondering just what the heck "publics" means, this is lesson #1: you have a lot of different public groups with different views, needs, etc., so understanding their complexity lets you understand your actual audience. We’ll take up Jeanne Fahnestock’s important work on “accommodating” science for different publics, and look at some other strategies for thinking about science in public discourse and debate. Draft your conference paper based on the gap you identified in your article.
Week 10 - Tue -Mar 10	EDGE Workshop
Thur - Mar 12	Peer review of your conference paper. Submit your one-page analysis Vera-Badillo et al. analysis. What public policy do you think it aims to influence – using the Vera-Badillo article? Science communication is changing, and these changes have generated enormous critical discussion around the ethics of science communication. Often, we talk about how to communicate research ethically and seriously engage broader publics in science. An increasingly popular way to do this is through citizen science. Unlike traditional consultation models (town halls, public forums, etc.; see, for examples, India’s Bt brinjal debate or British Columbia’s Site C controversy), citizen science brings every-day people into science not only to advance research, but to ensure research aids in civic discussion. This is a highly important turn and scientists in every discipline, from ecology to physics, are leading the charge with projects such as Galaxy Zoo to the protein-folding game Foldit to the, remarkably longitudinal (over 100 years!), Christmas Bird Count. Homework: Revise your draft using feedbacks received from your peers.	Public Communication of Science – Continue your presentations.
Week 11: Tue- Mar 17	Present your conference paper using a power point in your groups. Group Talk - Identify a unique problem that you all agree is pertinent in the society. Craft a talk, following the idea of the TED talk that you will present in class Start the preparation for the group poster. This is your final assignment	How do your findings fill the gap you have identified? Identify a controversial problem you will like to research on, and it should be based on the gaps you identified in your article for presentation to the public.
Thur- Mar 19	Submit your conference paper. Start working on your group assignment. How we communicate to participants in research, how we communicate research findings, and how we choose (or choose not to) involve ourselves as experts in public debate all involve ethical decisions. Researchers at every level take most seriously the way we inform participants about their involvement in our work: we often talk about informed consent—the obvious communication challenge here being certain we are, indeed, informing our participants accurately. How we communicate research findings is also an ethical matter in that we must do so accurately, transparently, and within the norms of our discipline. WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, And Democratic) in human-focused sciences, replication problems across disciplines, and the rise of registered reports (a kind of proposal you write for a research journal before you have even run your study, let alone wrote the article) are all marks of ongoing ethical engagements by scientists at the level of our research design and, importantly for your communication practices, reporting. And, perhaps most obviously, when do scientists weigh in and on what topics? Senior scientists often taken on civic debate; e.g., Carl Sagan to Neil deGrasse Tyson to our own Chris Hadfield and Governor General, Her Excellency the Right Honourable—and, don’t forget, astronaut, engineer, and scientific communicator who has made numerous radio spots—Julie Payette. And, let’s not forget, sometimes the engagement is about a specific science-based civic matter, such as the Flint Water crisis where Virginia Tech’s Professor Marc Edwards, an expert in water supply safety and “whistleblowers” (how’s that title for starting an ethical debate?), stepped in to aid citizens in their battle for clean water.
Week 13: Tue - Mar 24	Work on your group assignment. Intercultural communications and cross-cultural communications are important considerations in an increasingly globalized world of science. Since 1990, research articles with collaborators from more than one county have doubled, according to a report presented by Caroline Wagner at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in 2017. Although it is often said English is the language of science, just what we call English, and what counts as “good” English isn’t so simple. Also, issues such as regionalisms can create barriers to understanding. Beyond the written word, how we interact with each other everyday shapes how we are able to understand and collaborator with one another. Consider your body language and the complex set of social cues we learn to understand the meaning of your gestures and general comportment in the world.	.
Thur – Mar 26	Presentation of your posters. Encourage friends and faculty to attend! You’ll be presenting the research you have learned about over the course of the term. The point here isn’t, of course, to present your own research, but to present the research of the paper you’ve studied all term. Think of it as practice for that first time you present research for a Professor you’ve had a research assistantship with and want to show off how knowledgeable, articulate, and expert you are at even such a junior level. You’ll have prepared your posters and now is your chance to explain complex research findings in a short elevator pitch.
Week 14: Tue-Mar 31	Presentation of Your Posters
Thur – April 2 Last Class	General Discussions – Last day of class