This Web site is under construction!
Summary: Working in teams of three, write a
seven-to-ten-page paper about a technology not discussed significantly
in class. Present your findings.
Contents:
You have now studied a number of technologies and, as importantly,
a variety of perspectives on the role and purposes of technology.
It is time to apply your knowledge to a new technology. You will apply
this knowledge in two ways: You will write a paper about the technology
and you will present the technology to your class.
Your paper will have at least three parts: A historical overview of the
technology, a discussion of the positive aspects of the technology that
draws upon the perspectives of at least two primary authors we have read
this semester, and a discussion of the negative aspects of the technology
that also draws upon the perspectives of at least two primary authors
we have read this semester. Note that by primary authors
, I mean
Norman, Petroski, and anyone who appears in Teich.
You should begin by selecting a team of three (no more, no less)
students to work together on the project. You may not work with people
you worked with on subject stewardship. If you have trouble finding a
team, let me know by Wednesday, 7 April 2004, and I will do my best to
assign you to a team.
The team should then work together to identify a topic of interest.
Your initial topics can be fairly broad. You might study recent
technologies (e.g., the Internet, PCR), 50's technologies (e.g., silly
putty), industrial-age technologies (e.g., the railroad), or even older
technologies (e.g., the development of writing). If you found Petroski
interesting, you might look at his other books for ideas (for example,
he has written a whole book on the evolution of the Pencil).
If you are in Professor Case's Bridges, Towers, and Skyscrapers
class, you may not write about topics from that class. If you are
in Professor Robertson's Biotechnology class, you may not write
about topics from that class. If you have a technology you use regularly
with in your major (if you have a major), you may certainly write about
that technology.
By Friday, 9 April 2004, you should inform me of the members of your team
and the topic you have selected.
Once you have selected a topic, you should gather sources that will help
you study the topic. I recommend that you make an appointment with a
reference librarian for help identifying sources.
At least three of your sources should describe the history or evolution of
the technology: What problem did the technology solve? What approaches did
people take, etc. Think about Petroski's reflections on the paper clip as
an example of the kind of information you might gather.
At least three of your sources should be more critical papers that reflect
carefully on the benefits or drawbacks of the technology.
Compile your sources into an annotated
bibliography. This bibliography is due Friday, 23 April 2004.
As you read and reflect upon your sources, think carefully about
claims you can make about the technology. Your claims will likely
synthesize the positive and negative aspects of the technology.
If you have trouble writing theses, you may want to reflect on
Erik Simpson's Developing a Thesis
, available on the Web at
http://www.math.grinnell.edu/~simpsone/Connections/Writing/Thesis/index.html.
Turn in a draft thesis to me by Friday, 23 April 2004. You need only
turn in the thesis, but you may find it more helpful to situate the thesis
in an introductory paragraph or section.
As you have probably heard many times at Grinnell, experience shows
that papers are significantly better when they are written in multiple
phases, with at least one draft before the final version. To remind
you of the importance of drafting, I require a smooth draft
for this paper.
By smooth draft
, I mean a draft that has most of the problems
worked out. Smooth drafts are spelled correctly and employ the rules
of English grammar. Smooth drafts include most or all of the expected
content of the paper, although perhaps not stated as perfectly as you
might like. Smooth drafts can also include a few gaps (e.g.,
I need to fill in more detail here
) or metacomments (e.g.,
I need to refine this argument
). Except for a few gaps
and metacomments, a smooth draft should be something you would hope
to get at least a C on.
I will distribute copies of your drafts to the class.
Turn in your smooth draft by Friday, 30 April 2004.
Your team will present its findings in class during the final week of
the semester. I will assign the day and order of presentations. You
should plan to present for ten minutes on your subject and allow five
minutes for questions and answers. As we near the time of presentations,
I will distribute suggestions on preparing presentations.
Each team will be responsible for preparing brief comments on one
other team's draft paper. Those comments are due Wednesday, 5 May 2004.
Each team will have a number of resources to prepare the final paper:
The smooth draft, comments on the smooth draft from another team and from
Professor Rebelsky, notes on the presentation, and comments on the presentation.
Using that vast array of resources, the team will produce
a final paper.
Your final papers are due Friday, 14 May 2004.
- Friday, 9 April 2004: Teams and Topics Selected
- Friday, 23 April 2004: Annotated Bibliographies
- Friday, 23 April 2004: Theses
- Friday, 30 April 2004: Drafts
- Monday, 3 May 2004 and Wednesday, 5 May 2004: Presentations
- Wednesday, 5 May 2004: Comments Due
- Friday, 14 May 2004: Final Papers Due
Your paper should be between seven and ten pages long, double spaced,
twelve point font, one inch margins.
Friday, 2 April 2004 [Samuel A. Rebelsky]
;
Check with Bobby