English 714 Ed Nagelhout 13 October 2010 Research and Writing Q & A w/Priscilla Finley Mid-Semester Evaluation Peer Review – Teaching Philosophy Peer Review – Teaching Statement Peer Review – Teaching Section Next Week

Q & A with Priscilla Finley

Mid-Semester Evaluation Since any classroom is a combination of the things that I do, the things that you do, and the things that we do together as a group, I would like us to take a little time to reflect together on the semester so far. Please take (no more than) 8 minutes to respond to the following :

1. What's one thing I'm doing that has made the class successful so far? 2. What's one thing you've been doing that has made your class experience successful so far? 3. What's one thing we've been doing collectively that has made your/our class experience successful so far? 4. What's one thing I can change in coming weeks to make the class a better experience for you? 5. What's one thing you can change in coming weeks to make the class a better experience? 6. What's one thing we can change, collectively, in coming weeks to make the class a better experience? Mid-Semester Evaluation

Group 1 Boyles Altman Hansen Teaching Philosophy Peer Review Groups Group 2 Wilgar Hunter Noel Group 3 Anzalone Seibels Dizon

Teaching Philosophy Peer Review Process 1.Read/Comment each draft (5 min ea.) 2.Discuss each draft (5 min ea.) 3.Whole Class General Comments (8 min.)

General Criteria 1.Format/Length 2.Clarity/Conciseness 3.Engagement 4.Support 5.Consistency 6.Grammar/Punctuation Teaching Philosophy Evaluation Criteria Specific Criteria 1.Clearly defined philosophy 2.Philosophy exemplified by practical examples

Group 1 Boyles Wilgar Anzalone Teaching Statement Peer Review Groups Group 2 Altman Hunter Seibels Group 3 Hansen Noel Dizon

Peer Review Process 1.Read/Comment each draft (1 min ea.) 2.Discuss each draft (3 min ea.) 3.Whole Class General Comments (8 min.) Teaching Statement

General Criteria 1.Format/Length 2.Clarity/Conciseness 3.Engagement 4.Support 5.Consistency 6.Grammar/Punctuation Evaluation Criteria Specific Criteria 1.Clear, concrete language written for students 2.Tangible Teaching Statement

Group 1 Boyles Hunter Dizon Teaching Section Peer Review Groups Group 2 Altman Noel Anzalone Group 3 Hansen Wilgar Seibels

Peer Review Process 1.Read/Comment each draft (3 min ea.) 2.Discuss each draft (4 min ea.) 3.Whole Class General Comments (8 min.) Teaching Section

General Criteria 1.Format/Length 2.Clarity/Conciseness 3.Engagement 4.Support 5.Consistency 6.Grammar/Punctuation Evaluation Criteria Specific Criteria 1.Reflection of expertise and strengths Teaching Section

For Next Week: Submit Topic #4 Sources by October 14 Read Topic #4 Sources (available October 15) Begin Research for Topic #5 (due October 28) Begin Writing #1 Revisions (due October 29) Draft Writing #2 First Draft (due November 10)