Assembling what's been learned

We should have a number of reports on our writers available to deal with. With some luck, they'll be very different, and perhaps contradictory, and organized quite differently. Remember that people went out to find answers to these questions about the writer they'd been assigned:

• What are the most important and immediate things we should know about the writer and her works?
• What are the most important works?
• What are the works we should read to begin with (that are actually available to be read)?
• What are the best, or most useful, sources of information about the writer and her works?

I've printed out the ones available for printing up to a few minute ago, so you can work from hard copy to start with, but you'll want to work on a laptop or in a lab. If you have a report that didn't get posted, work with that; if someone posted a report but isn't here, make sure to include it.

Where the collaborative reports will live and breathe

I've created five "wiki" pages, one for each of the five writers. These pages can be edited by anybody in the group, and they "track" edits so that if someone screws up, you can go back and replace what she mistakenly deleted or changed. They're linked from the groups page (so are all the individual reports on each writer). All can be found directly on the course Moodle page, too.

The editing process that's most efficient in these cases is to copy and paste from the reports, putting together the bits that are necessary and (in the case of duplication) that fit best with what else there is, and then to edit the whole thing to make sure it's consistent. I'd begin working with the printed pages, marking what needs to be copied onto the wiki, and then gather around one screen and do the copying and pasting, and then the editing.

Between now and Wednesday

Read the other four reports (and, of course, your own) and be prepared to help make some decisions about what we should all read first.