"Josue Orellana" Tue 3:00 huge improvement/elaboration "Taylor Pospisil" Tue 3:15 really pretty minor changes "Maria Cuellar" Tue 3:30 2 rnds of head trauma, mj; deltas small "Francesca Matano" Tue 3:45 did 2 sects. eps progress on data sect "Brendan McVeigh" Tue 4:00 2 sects; modest deltas; brief writer "Jining Qin" Tue 4:15 all over doc; decent progr on sect 3 "Purvasha Chakravarti" Thu 3:00 sects 2,3 and later sect 4; small deltas "Lee Richardson" Thu 3:15 cmty! much progr on sect 4! (more dtls?) "Amanda Luby" Thu 3:30 123, then 5... not much changes in 5... "Jisu Kim" Thu 3:45 big changes in text! much more readable! "Peter Elliot" Thu 4:00 lots of evolution in sect 3 "Shannon Gallagher" Thu 4:15 nice improvements, elabs, in sec 4 "Beau Dabbs" Fri 11:00 "Sam Adhikari" Tue 12:00 --- Josue working with valerie case study from raw analysis to methods section common writing exercises AS WELL AS common commenting exercises collab with 707 data analysis stuff to get common assignment interaction between paper, poster and talk comfort with revising! format of last review round was good! --- Taylor more practice writing than revising taking material from slime trail to paper - summarize papers or job talks - "write while you're doing stuff" -- research blog/dear diary for others? why do we write a paper? what do we start with? - must - cool - don't understand --- Maria Reading and forum stuff Once a week meetings? - not enough to say for two class meetings? - 4-6 weeks like we did it and then 4-6 weeks starting from scratch revise a paper for another jouirnal using same techniques as in class audience analysis - read papers from that journal etc 707/401/402 prep for ADA exam - big emphasis on that from Valerie with writing center person etc start last format of peer review earlier in the mini bulleted reminder of structural things to look for, for reviewers --- Francesca open discussion good change: - meeting times too long - 1 hr meeting times or once a week - useful to hit several different topics (graphs, proofs, ...) good topics: - proposals (nsf and thesis) - visualization - writing math! - start with gopen and swan!! (this really matters!) - gives non-native speaker confidence to deal with unclear writings stress , sibjet verb adjagency homogenous group would help skip: - in class review of a single person's paper (attention issues) - --- Brendan liked writing detailed reviews clarify why to cite reading materials in writing review comments revision - have at least one round be on one item that really needs intense attention stuff to bag: - editing single person's writing in class didn't work (attention) - have them edit for class and then discuss edits in class (more!) breadth vs depth tradeoffs - discussion posts where you're forced to respond to others is important!! --- Jining getting and doing peer review both useful! topics: - insider information! - editorial process & reviews - proposals - not worth doing: - looking at a single paragraph is sort of tedious but necessary - joint editing other people's writing was better than real-time teacher editing in class got tool box now need to practice it a lot --- Shannon thinking about stress in new writing also discussing the presentations of job cands longer times for longer sections to review more writing exercises - writing summaries of articles you're interseted in - practice skim reading and extracting info liked the thesis proposal discussion liked the peer review discussion --- Lee * Gopen Swan * thesis propsoal discussion * journal peer review no plan when I'm writing community - go all in on the writing - gopen swan was helpful -- need more practice and depth in this area - prefer this to other things like visualization etc - lebrun chapter was also really helpful - lots more practice implementing the pricniples needed! --- Purvasha writing structure - gopen/swan send her email on where to send the paper peer reviewing was really good - got external input on my writing - we know how peer reviewing goes, not be scared about it later on classes lost momentum; got a little boring; lost topics - shorter classes if there's nothing to talk about - just discuss what we did or if I or anyone in the class has comments meetings with me after 2nd round of reviews, if there are no more topics --- Jisu math writing - useful - some topics that were interesting - grants and proposals do better: - more advice on larger structures (paragraphs, sections, slides) - advice for writing slides (?) (get some in ADA and ML journal club...) getting another perspective would be helpful - do a discussion of thesis structure, similar to diuscussion of proposals - general discussion of structure of a journal or conference paper (maybe not suitable for second years yet) (go through a couple of different kinds of paper and talk about how their structures are similar or different) --- Peter writing from scratch - teaching to first years starting ADA's - add a mini in 2nd sem of ADA or 2nd mini of first semester of ADA (to help with writing that report) - the second semester of ADA is sort of under-utilized at this point revising work was useful differences between undergrad writing and tech writing learning about the review process graphics is too big a scope for this course add writing from scratch exercises --- Amanda peer review good good aobut submitting to a journal and the review process - evolution of paper - reviewer comments gopen/swan stuff stuck with her revising paragraphs for class and then talking about it was uyseful - seeing how other people rewrote paragraphs was useful more discussion of general document formats, and some exaples to refer to stuff to bag: - first couple weeks were a bit slow - she came from lib arts, has taken writing classes - readings were helpful; spend more class time discussing uin clas; onine only was helpful but not enough - responding to others' posts was helpful 2nd years finish up ada was a useful time to have the class for first years it would be too much repeating the course would be helpful workshopping: - groups of 5-6 doing peer reviews within the groups - facilitate small group discussions - hard to be helpul in peer reviews if you just don't underastand the paper - this would also stabilize the amoujnt of new material peopel have to consume build into stat curriculum: having other people read your work and having other people read your work! guest lectures or TA'ing by english grad students - maybe a before and after evaluation --- Beau didn't have time to focus on finer structural details - responded more on an intuitive level - shorten review portions so can spend time on every sentence - producing summary before review was really useful people gotta take credit for stuff!! what worked well in the class - reading different approaches to sentence and paper structure - g&s paper - bem paper dealines good! reviewing good! some examples good, others bad - sentence examples at beginning were helpful - reviewing other people's in class was useful - have class review it first, then review in class - if it's short you could do it as part of in-class work this would make it stick better bring to new class - all the articles that make it explicit instead of intuitive - active peer review really useful - working through (reviewing or writing) successive drafts of a paper is good - going over things in class is good class might go earlier - like that second years are taking it (they have writing that they care about but deadlines are not yet too demanding) - could be more useful to be concurrent with 2nd sem ADA (but they are busy then, might be better to wait 'till now) clarifying purpose of each chunk of writing shoudl realy help to improve writing ---