English 193 (009): Communication in the Physical Sciences
English 193 (014): Communication in the Life Sciences
Fall 2021
Instructor: Jesse Hutchison
Office Hours: On Zoom, by appointment
Email: j6hutchi@uwaterloo.ca
About This Course:
The sciences expand our understanding of the world by posing questions and by collecting evidence to address these questions. To have an impact, the information and insights generated by scientific research also need to be effectively communicated, whether to policymakers, other scientists, or the public. This course will teach written and oral communication tailored to the sciences. It will focus on how current science communication uses specific structures to generate documents and presentations and how different audiences require different communication techniques in order for the science writer or speaker to be persuasive. You will learn a variety of genres such as research reports, literature reviews, and video podcasts. Moreover, we will engage in research work and learn the importance of using various research methods including the Waterloo library in strengthening our own work as well as building information literacy. We will also consider the importance of working with others to produce the best work possible. Overall, this course will help to enhance your capacity to share research findings, communicate ethically, and thereby, bring about effective changes.
Course Goals:
Specifically, by the end of the course, learners 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 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;
- describe and appraise the purposes and ethical concerns of science communication.
Required Texts and Materials:
Online readings. See course LEARN site.
Assignments and Grading:
Participation: 10%
Citation Assignment (September 13-September 19): 5%
Grammar Assignment (September 20-September 26): 5%
Peer Review for Article Breakdown (October 3): 2.5%
Article Breakdown (October 18-October 24): 15%
Peer Review for Science Literature Review (October 31): 2.5%
Science Literature Review (November 12-November 18): 20%
Twitter and Video Podcast Review (November 23-29): 20%
Video Presentation (December 7-December 11): 20%
Participation (10%): As part of the course emphasis on communication, I have created a forum on LEARN with several topics for you to have on-topic discussions with your fellow classmates. To find the forum, click the Connect tab and then click on Discussions. You will be graded in terms of your contributions to these topics. Feel free to write a paragraph or two (paragraphs should be between 100-250 words) where you address the issue in that week’s thread. Keep in mind that your contributions to a thread will only be marked if you contribute to the discussion the week that the thread has been made available. Apart from the first week, I will be putting up a new thread every Monday, so if you are contributing to that week’s thread, you will want to respond by Sunday evening before the next thread is due to go up. Remember to be kind, courteous, respectful and friendly even if disagreeing. You will therefore be graded in terms of number of posts, the timing of your posts, level of insight (within reason for an online discussion), clarity, tone, and how conversational you are with your classmates. I will be observing and may hop into the discussion at times to build and guide discussions and clarify information. That being said, this is not the space to direct questions or comments to me as I will be available for that over email and Zoom for office hours.
In addition to your five posts, 4 out of your ten participation marks will go towards your peer review of your fellow classmates’ essay (see my description under Peer Review below). One mark of your participation will go toward your completion of the EDGE worksheets and short quiz (see information on EDGE below).
Citation Assignment (5%): For this assignment, I will place a text on Learn that you will examine in order to determine what is cited properly and what is cited improperly, as per the Academic Integrity lecture videos. The citation assignment will be submitted to the LEARN dropbox by 11:59 between September 13-September 19.
Grammar Assignment (5%): This assignment asks you to point out the grammatical errors (sentence fragments, comma splices, misuse of semi-colons, etc.) in a text that I will place on Learn. The grammar assignment will be submitted to the LEARN dropbox by 11:59 between September 20-September 26.
Article Breakdown (15%): Your first major assignment will be a report of an article that I have posted to LEARN in the Content section under the tab, Articles for Article Breakdown assignment.
Your Article Breakdown will contain the following sections:
Two Abstracts of the Research Article: Your job is to understand the two different kinds of abstracts (descriptive and informative) and write your own versions of these abstracts. The descriptive abstract should be between 50-120 words while the informative abstract should be between 150-250 words. (35 points)
Article Executive Summary: Using the IMRaD format, summarize the findings of the article. You don’t need to use particular jargon. You want to explain in a complete and understandable way the key points for each IMRaD section in one to four sentences. (35 points)
Student Researcher Bio: Write your biography. This should be no more than 120 words and should include your name, degree title, and areas of research interest. (30 points)
You will submit a draft of the Article Breakdown in the Discussion Forums for peer review on October 3 (see the Peer Review explanation below for more details). The draft should at least include one of your two abstracts, a version of your article executive summary, and a version of your bio. The final draft of your article breakdown will be submitted to the LEARN dropbox by 11:59 between October 18-October 24
Science Literature Review (20%): 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. Find and read a science research article on a topic of your choosing. The article you choose must follow the IMRaD format. In your article, the authors will have situated their work within that current research conversation. Identify from their citation list two key texts they either build on or challenge. Find those articles through the UWaterloo library system and download and read the articles (these do not have to follow the IMRaD format). Begin by writing a couple of introductory paragraphs (400-500 words total) where you identify your main article of study and its central topic. Then use the other two articles in order to demonstrate how this topic is part of a larger scholarly conversation. Some questions you may want to consider here: What do these papers mean to the main research article you have chosen to work with? What do they tell us about the problem or issues the authors of your research article are trying to solve? Overall, though, in this section, you want to use all three articles to give a good sense of the nature of the scholarly conversation – what do they reveal about “the current state of knowledge”? Then write a few paragraphs (400-500 words total) to provide a tentative assessment of the three articles. Some things to consider (though you don’t have to discuss all of these things) are their data quality, the arguments they make (are the arguments worth investigating or pursuing), the persuasiveness of the argument, the logic of the paper, the gaps that they leave, the questions to further consider, etc. Is one article more interesting than the other two? Or is one particular weak? Are they all strong or all weak? Why? Add a couple final sentences to sum up your discussion. At the end of your review, provide the APA citation for the three texts.
You will submit a draft of the Science Literature Review in the Discussion Forums for peer review on October 31 (see the Peer Review explanation below for more details). The draft should be at least 500 words long, include both the introductory and assessment sections, as well as provide the APA citation for all three texts. The final draft of your science literature review will be submitted to the LEARN dropbox by 11:59 between November 12-November 18
Twitter and Video Podcast Review (20%): Below I have added a collection of course-related Twitter accounts and Youtube video podcasts. Based on our lecture discussions from November 5th to November 19th, write a 900-1000 review with two roughly equal parts (450-500 words in both sections) where you assess, in the first section, one of the Twitter accounts (feel free to look at as many tweets as you want) and in the second section one of the Youtube videos from one of the Youtube accounts The main question you want to answer is how good are these accounts/podcasters at communicating science to a non-specialist audience? Do they help convince a broad public and/or get them engaged in science issues? Or do they do a poor job of communicating their information? NOTE: Not every tweet in a person’s Twitter account or every video in the Podcast is necessarily science related. Make sure you choose a topic-specific video and topic-specific tweets. Make sure the video is on-topic and not 3-minute “welcome to my channel” introduction video.
You will need to watch all three weeks of lecture videos in order to properly complete this assignment. For example, we have one lecture on the importance of storytelling for non-specialists; however, this is just one perspective on how to engage with non-specialists. It would be wrong, therefore, to say that a Twitter account fails because it doesn’t use storytelling methods. In fact, considering how difficult it is to “tell a story” in the limited space of Twitter, it could potentially be the wrong method for that medium, but more effective in a video podcast. In that case, then, while you don’t have to talk about all the methods discussed over the three lectures in this assignment, you want to look at all the methods discussed there to get a good sense of the variety of possibilities and then make reference to at least one of the methods in your review. The review will be submitted to the LEARN dropbox by 11:59 between November 24-30
Twitter Accounts (choose one):
Kurtis Baute: https://twitter.com/kurtisbaute
COVIDScienceOntario:
https://twitter.com/COVIDSciOntario
Brian
Cox:
https://twitter.com/ProfBrianCox
David Fisman: https://twitter.com/DFisman
Karen James: https://twitter.com/kejames
Katie Mack: https://twitter.com/AstroKatie
PZ Myers: https://twitter.com/pzmyers
Carolyn Porco: https://twitter.com/carolynporco
David K Smith: https://twitter.com/professor_dave
Tibees: https://twitter.com/TobyHendy
Siobhan Tobin: https://twitter.com/siobhan_tobin
Richard Wiseman: https://twitter.com/RichardWiseman
Video Podcast (choose one video from one podcast)
Kurtis Baute: https://www.youtube.com/user/ScopeofScience/videos
Biologic Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/c/BioLogicPodcast/videos
Dr. John Campbell: https://www.youtube.com/user/Campbellteaching
Ray Cinti: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSyDfIfcO3zjmU7uUC2cHbQ/featured
Dr Brian Keating: https://www.youtube.com/c/DrBrianKeating/videos
Science Showoff: https://www.youtube.com/c/ScienceShowoff/videos
Sci Guys: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdGyXW0RSLoTpumJDF_CJcw
Star Talk with Neil DeGrasse Tyson: https://www.youtube.com/c/StarTalk/videos
Van Does Chemistry: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmaEo8VS0UGVhFkWZA7np4w
Video Podcast (20%): Above I have posted links to several Youtube video podcast accounts. Your task for this assignment is to create your own video podcast and discuss the research work that you explored for the Science Literature Review assignment but do so in a way that might convince and/or engage a non-specialist audience. The podcast video should be 5-7 minutes long and it should feature you on screen. That said, along with you appearing on screen, you can feel free to be as creative as you would like. Just make sure that you make SAFE creative choices. I will be assessing how well you have applied the strategies discussed in the lecture on podcast presentations on how to make an engaging video, as well as the methods discussed in the November 5-November 19 videos. Remember that this does not mean you have to apply ALL the methods. Rather, you want to apply the ones or one that helps you communicate your ideas in the most engaging way possible. I will also assess your understanding of audience, clarity, use of time, and enthusiasm for your subject. You can submit your video in a variety of ways: record it on your phone or your computer camera and upload it directly onto LEARN; record it on Zoom and upload it onto LEARN; upload a video onto Youtube and provide me with a link on LEARN, etc.
Another option is to record a group podcast. There are a couple of podcasts listed above that feature several people and it can be very entertaining to watch a conversation rather than simply one person talking. In that case, I would be happy to see a 10-minute video of two people, a 15-minute video of three people, or a 20-minute video with four or five people in discussion. With that in mind, these longer videos will probably have to definitely be uploaded to Youtube because the files will be too large for LEARN. Also, you will still need to discuss the research topic that at least one person in the group did for the Science Literature Review. One thing you could do here (though you don’t have to) is have the person who did the Science Literature Review explain the topic to the other person/persons and the rest of the video can be the other people talking about it. This will be considered as a group project and all group members will receive the same mark unless it appears in the video that one group member is participating substantially less than the others. I will provide a list during the term of the topic that each student chose to discuss for the Science Literature Review so that you can get in touch with a fellow student about making a group podcast if you want. Perhaps you will find that someone else researched into the same topic and will want to contact them about joining up for the final project. The expectation is not for you to be in the same room together but rather that you record from your own home location, as is the norm now in video podcasts. There are probably several different platforms out there that can record group discussions but Zoom is certainly equipped to do it. The video or link to the video should be uploaded to the LEARN dropbox by 11:59 between December 6-December 10
Peer Review (5%): Two assignments (Article Breakdown on October 3 and Science Literature Review on October 31) will undergo peer review. You will post your assignment into the discussion forums in its own thread to the specifications discussed in the assignment descriptions above. Your draft will be graded out of 5 (5 marks for submitting assignment on-time complete to specs, 4 marks for submitting that week but not on time complete to specs, 3 marks for submitting on-time but incomplete, 2 marks for submitting that week but incomplete, 1 mark for submitting after that week, 0 for not submitting). While graded out of five, each draft post will be worth 2.5% of your final mark. Keep in mind that if you post late, you may not have your essay reviewed. For both peer review weeks, you also comment (professionally and respectfully) on two of your fellow students’ drafts within five days (by October 8th and November 5th respectively), providing at least two suggestions per draft. Please aim to comment on posts with less than two comments. As suggested above, your comments will be that week’s contribution to your participation. You will be graded out of two each time. You will receive 2 marks if you fulfill the above specified requirements. You will receive 1 mark if you only comment on one draft, or don’t provide the required suggestions, or fulfill the specified requirements after the five days but before the assignment is due. You will receive a 0 if you comment after the assignment due date or don’t comment at all.
EDGE Workshop
Have you considered which skills you are developing inside and outside of the classroom during your studies? Would you like to improve how you communicate these skills in an interview to potential employers? This term as part of the course, you will complete the online skills identification and articulation workshop to address these exact questions.
On October 29th, you will be enrolled to participate in the workshop and will have access to the content for the entirety of the term. To receive credit for completing the workshop, you must complete and submit the two associated worksheets found throughout the workshop web page. Please submit your completed Written STAR Response | Part A and Written STAR Response | Part B worksheets by the due date to the workshop’s Dropbox under Submit > Dropbox.
This workshop is also a milestone for the EDGE experiential education certificate, a free and flexible program open to all regular (non-co-op) students to develop key professional skills, explore career options, and market themselves to future employers. Completing the workshop through ENGL/SPCOM 193 will earn you one of the 6 milestones if you are a current EDGE student or will retroactively be awarded if you register for the program in the future. If you would like to learn more about the program, I recommend reaching out the EDGE team at edge@uwaterloo.ca and following them on Instagram @uwaterlooedge to learn more about upcoming events. I highly encourage all regular students to explore this as an option to give you an edge after graduation!
Course policies:
Missed classes and assignments
All
assignments
are
to
be
handed
in
on
LEARN
within
the
submission
window
listed
above.
If
you
are
handing
the
assignments
in
on
the
last
day
of
the
window,
you
will
have
until
11:59PM
that
day.
Microsoft
Word
documents
are
preferred
over
PDF
and
Pages
(the
latter
I
am
unable
to
open
on
my
computer).
Marks
will
be
returned
on
Learn.
While
the
due
dates
are
flexible
this
term,
late
papers
will
be
subject
to
a
late
penalty
of
2%
per
day.
A
doctor’s
note
is
required
to
avoid
a
late
penalty,
and
it
should
document
serious
illness
on
and
for
the
period
directly
preceding
the
due
date
for
assignments.
In
cases
of
personal
matters
such
as
mental
health
concerns,
I
am
very
sympathetic
but
I
am
also
unable
to
properly
evaluate
these
cases.
If
you
need
an
extension
on
work
for
such
issues,
it
is
crucial
to
connect
with
AccessAbility
Services,
who
are
still
available
by
phone
or
online
during
this
period
and
have
them
evaluate
your
case.
They
can
then
contact
me
if
they
believe
you
require
alternate
accommodations
for
assignments.
At
that
point,
I
am
always
happy
to
help
the
student
in
any
way
that
I
can.
Office Hours:
I will be available most weekdays for office hours from 10AM-3:00PM. Please feel free to email me if you wish to speak “in-person” via a Zoom call and I will send you a link so that we can have a chat.
Email:
I respond to my emails every weekday morning. I may not be able to respond right away, or I may be looking into the matter on your behalf, but I will get back to you as soon as possible. Remember though that if you send an email regarding an assignment the day that assignment is due, that I may not see it until the following morning. If you have not received a response after 24 hours, or roughly 48 hours on a weekend, please email me again. Please note that mail from some external email servers, such as Hotmail or Yahoo, may be bounced by the university server.
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. [Check the Office of Academic Integrity for more information.]
Grievance: A student who believes that a decision affecting some aspect of their 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.
Discipline: A student is expected to know what constitutes academic integrity to avoid committing an academic offence, and to take responsibility for their 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.
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 they have a ground for an appeal should refer to Policy 72, Student Appeals.
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.
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
Due to COVID-19 and campus closures, services are available only online or by phone.
- Counselling Services: counselling.services@uwaterloo.ca / 519-888-4567 ext. 32655
- MATES: one-to-one peer support program offered by the Waterloo Undergraduate Student Association (WUSA) and Counselling Services
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.
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
Schedule:
September 8: Introduction
September 10: Academic Integrity
Citation Assignment Due September 13-September 19
September 17: Grammar
Grammar Assignment due September 20 – September 26
September 22: “How to Read a Scientific Article” (on LEARN), “Collaborative Exams: Cheating? Or learning?” (on LEARN)
September 24: Abstracts Handout (on LEARN), Academic Bios (on LEARN)
October 1: Peer Review, Writing a Review article (on LEARN)
Article Breakdown draft due October 3
October 8: Library Research
October 9-17: Reading Week
Article Breakdown due October 18-October 24
October 22: How to Cite
October 29: EDGE Workshop
Science Literature Review draft due October 31
November 5: “Science Communication to the General Public: Why We Need To Teach Undergraduate and Graduate Students This Skill as Part of Their Formal Scientific Training,” "A user’s guide: How to talk to those hesitant about the Covid-19 vaccine,”
November 12: Rhetoric
Science Literature Review due November 12-November 18
November 19: Reading: “Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with non-specialist audiences”
Twitter and Video Podcast Review due November 23-29
November 26: Podcast Presentation Assessment
December 3: Wrap-Up
Video Presentation due December 6-December 10