Throughout the quarter, we will have several discussions which will compose a large part of our engagement with each other in this online learning space. For these discussions to be meaningful conversation spaces, we all need to take responsibility for consistent and substantial participation. Over the course of a conversation, substantial engagement means:

1. Extend the conversation - creatively and critically push the conversation forward, do not just regurgitate what has already been said. If 1 or 2 other students have already responded directly to a point raised in a student paper, do not simply write another response to that point unless it adds something new to the conversation. You need to extend the conversation by adding an additional or different insight from the course materials, by asking a new question that stems from one of the posts already offered, by offering a related and contextualized example of the issue being discussed from your own experience, or by creatively integrating your own perspective with what has already been posted. 
2. Ask contextualized questions - situate your questions within the discussion by referencing the course materials and other parts of the conversation thread that inform your inquiry. Give us a little background as to why this question matters to you and how it relates to the course.
3. Engage others in the course - thoughtful engagement with other students in the course and with the instructional team. 
4. Engage the course materials - thoughtful engagement with readings, lectures, student presentations, and any other materials related to the course. Referencing and citing course materials in your posts where appropriate is encouraged. 
5. Participate Respectfully - discussions in this course are likely to raise sensitive topics. Please strive for respect in all your comments, and charity in reading the comments of others.

Things to consider: While we learn from each other from our interactions it is important to remember you classmates are not here to teach you through the justification of their experience/existence. It is also helpful to keep in mind that we take each other's histories and backgrounds seriously--being mindful that humor around these issues can be easily misconstrued.

Each post need not do all of these things, but your overall participation in each conversation should demonstrate all of these components. You might have several short posts and a handful of longer posts in a week or you might have only a few strategic substantial posts (minimum of 2 posts per discussion). Either way, your overall participation in each conversation will be evaluated for substantial engagement. The goal of this discussion design is to encourage and reward interchange, so post often and engage each other with meaningful questions that open to other questions.

I am looking for posts that help us understand and analyze the text at hand. Application of our texts to new situations is of course the ultimate goal, but we can't do that responsibly without understanding what the author is doing first. And that can be hard!

If your first post (due Thursday) focuses on one of the assigned papers/readings, please focus your second post on a discussion about another paper/reading.

Each student will prepare 3 papers of 3 double-spaced pages each (no less than 1200 words).  You will choose two readings you will write about and one background paper in the Paper Sign up assignment.

 

Post Papers

On a week you have signed up to write, you will submit your paper on canvas for grading. Background papers and one of your reading papers will also be shared as discussion starters for that week. So, on the week you write a background paper and on the week you have indicated that you want to share you reading paper, you will post the paper both in the paper assignment area and as an attachment to a discussion post in our discussion for that week.

 

Discussing Papers

All students not writing in a week will read all of the posted papers and choose one to engage substantially with a robust response by the first discussion deadline for the week. See Discussion Guidelines for more details on discussion expectations. By the second discussion deadline each week, students will need to participate substantially in the discussion at least one additional time. Late postings will not be accepted.

 

Paper Types

 

• Reading Papers (2): These papers will critically engage the particular reading for which you signed up as a way of initiating rich conversation with your classmates.
• Background Papers (1): Based on the readings for the week, choose one core theological topic that you see emerging across the readings and provide some background on that topic that will foster substantial discussion.  How does this topic connect to other topics in the course? What key historical events or figures might be relevant to this topic? Are there current events that shed light on our engagement with this topic? Furthermore, what historical events took place around the topic itself which might help give greater context to the topic you’re discussing? And, is there anything else relevant about this topic that would be useful for us to know as we discuss?

 

Evaluating Papers:

Papers will be graded according to the following 4 criteria:

 

1. A clearly stated claim;
2. Textual evidence to support the claim;
3. Quality of writing (organization, proper use of sentences and paragraphs, grammar, spelling, and all other mechanics);
4. Depth and seriousness of analysis. 

 

In a short paper the claim typically appears as the last sentence of the introductory paragraph (if it is not there the writer needs clearly to mark where it is, since otherwise readers will assume that sentence is the claim).  A claim states the conclusion of the argument put forward in the paper.  You have a great deal of freedom here.  A claim might state what is the most important idea in the reading, or what the author must assume to make his or her argument, or what the logical extension of that argument might be, or how that argument relates to other readings on our syllabus, or what the author gets right or wrong, etc.   In a short paper you will likely not be able to summarize the all the points the author makes, nor should you try.  Part of your task of analysis is to prioritize what is most important to lift up for discussion for our class.  Your paper will likely not follow the same organization as the reading under analysis, since the logic of your argument will not be the same as the logic of the argument of the reading.  If your paragraphs tend to begin “And then . . .;  Next . . .” then it is probably time to go back and do at least one more draft and re-think what you are presenting and how.  Papers for this class are a little closer to the summary end of the spectrum than a term paper might be, since they are the basis for our discussion.  But they are still papers that make engage the text by making a point about the text.

The purpose of the papers is three-fold:

 

1. The first is to encourage deep engagement with the texts;
2. The second is to encourage a habit of discussion that is open, respectful, and rigorous.  This is best accomplished when the analytical essays take a charitable stance towards the readings.  Some of them will seem old-fashioned, and the writers may have different concerns than do we.  As in any good conversation, it is important first to try to see where the writer is coming from, rather than to be dismissive of his, her or their ideas.  There will be plenty of time later to decide what is useful to you and what is not.   We must begin with an accurate understanding of what is actually going on in the essay. 
3. Third, these section papers will help develop your skills as readers and writers.  A great number of studies show that “peer-review” is a very effective way to teach writing.  The feedback you get on these papers during discussion will be quite valuable.

 

Papers will be graded on the following scale:

Each student will write 3 papers this term: 1 on a background topic and 2 on course readings. Please choose 2 readings from the list below, without choosing more than 1 in any single week and without choosing the same author twice. Please choose 1 background paper slot below, preferably not in a week you are writing one of your reading papers. Ideally, each student will only write one paper in a given week. For more details on the requirements for these papers, see Paper Guidelines.

Your background papers and one of the two reading papers you choose to write will be used to initiate our discussion for the week. Please indicate the reading paper you wish to use as conversation starter by BOLDING your name in that slot. On this week you will post your reading paper BOTH as an assignment to be graded and as an attachment to a discussion post in our discussion for that week. Background papers will always be posted both as an assignment and in the discussion as an attachment. 

To make your selections, click Edit in the top right corner of the page and enter your name in the Sign up column for 2 readings and 1 Background.  Please choose readings that do not have anyone signed up before adding your name in the second slot for a reading. Only the number of students indicated by each slot can sign up for that reading, so if a reading or background already has all spots filled, you must choose another. Once you have entered your name in 3 spots and bolded the reading paper you want to share with the class, be sure to click Save at the bottom of the page and check to make sure the saved page has your name in the slots you selected. You can always come back to this page to see the papers you chose to write.