Project 1: Cultural Artifact Analysis Essay

DUE DATES Rough Draft due by 11:59 PM EST on 30 May 2012 Final Draft due by 11:59 PM EST on 6 June 2012 SUBMITTING YOUR WORK You will be submitting all of your major projectsboth rough drafts and final draftsvia Eli. As stated on the syllabus, if you dont submit your work properly, I will have to drop your grade. (I am not kidding. I really will do this.) Please! For your own sake, follow directions. Name your file LastnameFirstnameProject1.doc (or ".docx") Submit your project to Eli in the appropriate folder LENGTH AND FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS 12-point font (please use Times New Roman, Helvetica, or some other such typeface). 1250 - 1500 words. Correct MLA formatting style. The MLA conventions I expect to see in this project are: correct margin sizes; correct headings; correct spacing between paragraphs; correct format of page numbers; inclusion of source materials as necessary; correct in-text citations of those sources; and a correct Works Cited page listing those sources. THE PROJECT Artifact (n): 1. An object made or modified by human workmanship, as opposed to one formed by natural processes. 2. Archaeol. An excavated object that shows characteristic signs of human workmanship or use. (Oxford English Dictionary Online, 18 May 2010, Michigan State University) When an archeologist excavates a site, one of the things he or she looks for are artifacts, physical human-made remnants of a culture long past. Your first task will be selecting a contemporary cultural artifact, a human-made object that when studied reveals various insights about the particular culture it emerged from. This means that you should begin to look at whatever youve chosen as a thing produced by particular people, in a particular place, at a particular point in history, for particular reasons, to do a particular task(s). In keeping with the theme of our course, you should choose an artifact that is related to digital technology or science in some way. Your assignment will be to write a thesis-driven, argumentative paper analyzing the artifact youve chosen, and discussing the relationship between that artifact and the particular culture it emerged from and/or the culture it is most often used in. In other words, I want you to make some kind of argument about how the values, principles, and assumptions of some particular culture or segment of culture are reflected in the design or the use of the technology youve chosen. Choosing an Artifact: Your goal is to give your audience a worthwhile reading experience. Can you offer them a compelling, insightful, richly detailed and complete analysis of cell phones in culture in four double-spaced pages? This project requires that you narrow your scope down considerably to create a thesis statement that you can support and a paper that is worthwhile reading. That means youll have to deeply analyze one relatively small thing about a particular cell phone (and come up with some interesting/unusual theories) rather than just superficially analyze cell phones in general and conclude that cell phones help people communicate. The same goes for other ubiquitous artifacts like computers, laptops, digital cameras, video games, etc.

wra 110.730: writing science & technology

j.platt * msu * summer 2012

BACKGROUND AND RESEARCH COMPONENT You will have to engage in some research for this project since you do need to write about the history or background of your artifact in addition to your analysis. You will need to find out about its history, its popularity, how it is used, and the kind of people who use this object in your culture. Use these requirements for your research: 1. There is no set number of sources you have to use. You must judge for yourself and choose how much information and research is necessary for this writing purpose, audience, and context. This is an extremely important writing skill to develop. 2. Do not use Wikipedia as a source. You can, however, use Wikipedia as an invention tool or to find other resources pertaining to your artifact. 3. You can use scholarly books and journals. 4. You can also use non-scholarly books, journals, and websites provided that they are credible. (In other words, stay away from private blogs and message boards. Stick with the websites created by reputable sources.) ANALYSIS COMPONENT Successful essays discuss the history of the chosen artifact, show how the artifact has changed over time, and/or discuss how these changes parallel cultural changes. You will be doing the same in this paper. It needs to be MORE than just a history of the artifact itself. Rather, you will use the history to help unlock its significance in culture. You might start by brainstorming/prewriting/listing/mapping/etc. As you do, consider these questions: What cultures are you a part of? What cultures are you not part of? What kinds of digital technology-related artifacts are used in the cultures you are part of? Which are NOT used? Why? (After youve chosen an artifact to investigate) How would you describe your chosen artifact to someone who is completely unfamiliar with it or with anything like it? Who are the creators of the artifact? What are their lives like? What are their characteristics, political principles, moral values, etc.? Who uses the artifact? What are their lives like? What are their characteristics, political principles, moral values, etc.? Does your chosen artifact and its corresponding culture have anything to do with issues of difference? (Think about race, ethnicity, gender, economic class, sexual orientation, national origin, age, dis/ability, etc.) (more that you think up) UNDERSTANDING AUDIENCE Your audience for this project is an outsider to the particular culture you are talking about. While they are intelligent and informed on current events, they do not belong to the culture that is being discussed and are not familiar with the nuances of the artifact youve chosen. You must keep this in mind while you write. GRADING Rubric is below.

wra 110.730: writing science & technology

j.platt * msu * summer 2012

4.0 Focus Original, sophisticated focus on a particular assertion about an artifact and culture; takes a productive risk by attempting a complex argument/approach. Writer argues points and connects them to his/her thesis statement extremely effectively. Sophisticated and nuanced arrangement. Well organized with thoughts in a compelling and logical order. The writer makes a significant effort to deeply analyze the artifact and the culture. The writer provides a researched background, the description of the artifact is thick and richly detailed, and the writers discussion of the culture is nuanced and insightful. Shows high level of awareness of audience of cultural outsiders. Writer is clearly aware of context. Level of formality is clearly appropriate. Varied language structures engage the reader; few to no sentence-structure problems. Minimal (less than 3) errors in spelling and grammar. The document is proofread well. All citations & format are within MLA guidelines. Meets length requirements.

3.0 Clear and well maintained focus on a particular assertion about an artifact and culture. Writer argues points and connects them to his/her thesis statement effectively.

2.0 Appropriate focus on a particular assertion about an artifact and culture throughout most of the paper. Writer argues points and connects them to his/her thesis statement competently.

1.0 Lack of focus on a particular assertion about an artifact and culture; seems more like a rough draft than a final version. Writer does not argue points or connect them to his/her thesis statement effectively.

Failing Project Project does not meet any of the required criteria.

Arrangement

Very well arranged and easy to read. Thoughts are organized in a logical order.

Average arrangement style. Thoughts are organized competently.

Organization is simplistic. Hard to follow throughout the text and shows little logical order of thoughts. The writer makes little effort to deeply analyze the artifact and the culture. The writer provides little researched background, the description of the artifact is lacks detailed, and the writers discussion of the culture lacks insight. Shows very little awareness of audience as cultural outsiders. Writer is not aware of context. Level of formality is not at all appropriate. Sentence-level problems obscure meaning.

Development

The writer makes an effort to deeply analyze the artifact and the culture. The writer provides a researched background, the description of the artifact is thick and detailed, and the writers discussion of the culture is insightful.

The writer is willing to deeply analyze the artifact and the culture. The writer provides a researched background, the description of the artifact is detailed, and the writers discussion of the culture is somewhat insightful.

Audience Awareness

Shows awareness of audience as cultural outsiders. Writer is aware of context. Level of formality is appropriate.

Shows some awareness of audience as cultural outsiders. Writer is somewhat aware of context. Level of formality is of average appropriateness. Illustrates a basic facility with language, but may have significant sentence-level problems. Errors are somewhat frequent in spelling and grammar. Some citations are within MLA guidelines but many have problems. May not meet length requirements.

Language

Editing, MLA formatting, and other requirements

Illustrates more than minimum facility with language; engages the reader; few sentencelevel problems. Few (less than 5) errors in spelling and grammar. With a few possible exceptions, all citations and format are within MLA guidelines. Meets length requirements.

Errors are common in spelling and grammar, which makes reading the annotation difficult. MLA citations & formatting are mostly incorrect. Length requirements are not met.

wra 110.730: writing science & technology

j.platt * msu * summer 2012