You will write 10 posts (8 routine posts and 2 reflective posts) in the course of the semester (in the section POSTS of our website). Keep in mind that your audience include educated, general public, as well as your classmates and your professor. Use categories and tags. Keep in mind CUNY netiquette guide
Routine posts
Engage with the text or with a secondary source with analysis, questions, comparisons, and/or finding images available for use and comment on them in relation to the text. You can use Mark Sample‘s instructions, which I adapted for our schedule:
There are a number of ways to approach these open-ended posts: consider the reading in relation to its historical or theoretical context; write about an aspect of the day’s reading that you don’t understand, or something that jars you; formulate an insightful question or two about the reading and then attempt to answer your own questions; or respond to another student’s post, building upon it, disagreeing with it, or re-thinking it. In any case, strive for thoughtfulness and nuance. To ensure that everyone has a chance to read the blog before class, post your response by midnight two days before class.
In alternative or in addition to writing your entries you can respond (through the function “leave a reply”) to one of your classmates’ posts.
Reflective posts
Reread your posts as if they had been written by someone else (I suggest printing them out). Try to comment on their topics (is it a recurrent one, do the author focuses on the same aspect or on different themes?), on their originality (do they repeat ideas shared by other students) on the style (do they use a lot of images? Are they clear?), evolution. In the two reflective posts you will evaluate your previous posts and comment on them, quoting from them (that is, you are your primary source).
Assessment
Your blogging will make a good part of your final grade (40%). Your posts and you’re your reflective posts will be graded for both content and form/aspect (images, photos, links). I will use this rubric.
| Rating | Characteristics |
| 2 | Exceptional. The post is focused and coherently integrates examples with explanations or analysis. It moves beyond summary of the argument to engage the argument critically, articulating weak points or dubious assumptions. It makes useful connections to other thinkers and/or applies theoretical arguments to practical situations. |
| 1 | Underdeveloped. The post is restricted to summary, without consideration of alternative perspectives, and may contain misreadings of the argument at one or more points. The entry reflects passing engagement with the topic. |
| 0 | Limited. The journal entry is unfocused, or simply rehashes others’ comments; it fails to grasp fundamental aspects of the argument. |
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.
