Quantitative minimum

If you go back and reread the section of the course introduction on assessment, you'll see that one part of the process of generating a mark in this course is to see what (if any) minimum mark has been generated by sheer participation in the ongoing work of the course -- that's the section on "Quantitative factors (time and effort"). Please bear in mind that the record of this is simply a record; it doesn't get changed by my judgment about whether or not someone had a good reason for missing an assignment, because I simply assume that people have good reasons. It doesn't alter the fact that an assignment was missed; it was. (It might clarify things to think about the extreme case: suppose someone had a really good excuse for missing everything during the term. Would anyone argue that we should give credit for the course in that case?)

So, the first thing you need to do is look at the records page. There will now be a "Total" column at the right, which simply adds up all the tasks I've been able to count to that point. Using those numbers as a base, and bearing in mind my rule of thumb that people need to do about 3/4 of the tasks in order to establish a minimum mark at all, here are the minima as they currently stand.

24 and above: B
19 and above: B-
15 and above: C+
below 15: no minimum

You can (if you choose) demonstrate this by writing a convincing learning reflection (as you'll remember, there's an explanation of this in the course introduction). I won't elaborate on that explanation here, but I will offer you some questions which you can choose among (or ignore) as you write your reflection.  Remember, in any case, that you are writing this as though for someone who doesn't know about the course, isn't interested in whether you have enjoyed it or not, and knows no more than you did at the beginning of September about literary journalism. I often suggest, stealing an idea from my colleague Thom Parkhill, that you write it as though you were explaining to a well-loved but pretty skeptical aunt, who wants to know that you're not wasting your time in university (and especially in this course).  Here are some questions she might ask.

• What is this "literary journalism" you're on about, and why does it matter that someone understand what it is? How are you coming to know that?
• If it's journalism, isn't it just a matter of writing down things that are true, in an orderly and grammatical way?
• What do you mean, "literary"? Is it just that it's written in a fancy way?
• What challenges does someone writing this sort of stuff face? What problems does she have to solve? How do you know?
• What are you learning about how to find out about things in the library and online, and how are you learning those things?  What do you still have to learn?
• What are you learning about writing in different forms than academic essays (or texting, or email, or whatever else you write regularly)? How are you learning that?

Remember that your aunt thinks your learning is something you do, not something that happens to you, and she's not very interested in why you haven't learned. She's only interested in what you have learned, and how.

Remember, also, that this is not the place to explain why the course is wonderful, or awful; no one will take such assertions seriously, and your aunt doesn't care. There will be, next week, a midterm course evaluation questionnaire where you'll have an opportunity to do that anonymously, and where it will matter.

Take a couple of hours to write this; think of it as a midterm examination in which you get to choose, or even make up, the questions. Write it as a file with your usual word processor, and post it in the "Midterm Reflections" forum.  You don't have to do it at all, but if you do, post it before next Monday morning -- and, rather than posting a weekly learning journal as well, post a one-line entry there saying that you've posted a midterm reflection.