Microthemes are 500-word papers that serve as your "talking points" for that week's discussion, and they will be graded on a credit/no credit basis. Papers are due 48 hours prior to class, and late papers will receive no credit. Your work on these papers will account for 15% of your final grade. Please do not exceed 500 words.

If we are reading multiple pieces during a given week, please devote some space to each of the readings. However, you can devote more space to one of the readings if you'd like.

These papers need not be completely polished prose, but they should provide evidence that you've read the week's readings carefully and that you've developed some ideas for our discussions. They should be devoted to finding connections amongst our readings and to raising questions. They should not focus on whether or not you agree with the author(s).

Some questions that might guide a Microtheme paper are (this list is not exhaustive):

• What definitions of rhetoric and/or composition are assumed or outwardly stated by the author?
• What is the relationship of this text to others that we've read?
• How has the author constructed his or her argument? Why?
• Who are the possible audiences for this piece?
• What kinds of evidence are being used? Why?
• What possible counter-arguments could be raised? Who would raise them? Why?
• What scholarly problem is the author addressing? How have others addressed this problem?
• What body of scholarship is the author engaging with? What other scholarly conversations might we connect this piece to?
  

Each week, one student will provide a written synthesis of the submitted microthemes. This synthesis should locate common questions and topics raised by the microthemes and should serve as a launching point for the week’s discussion. The paper is due at the start of class, and the author will read the paper at the beginning of the class period. This paper will account for 15% of your final grade. Please do not exceed 750 words.

When grading these papers, I will be looking for the following:

• Does the paper locate common questions and trends in the microthemes?
• Does the paper tell a coherent narrative of the textual conversation?
• Does the paper raise questions and concerns that should be addressed during that week's discussion?
• Is the paper written effectively and coherently with very few grammatical errors?
• Has the author observed the 750-word limit?

Once during the semester, each student will review an article or book that is cited by one of our central texts. Reviews are 4-6 pages and shared with seminar members. While the review author will not read the paper aloud, s/he will give a brief (5-minute) presentation explaining the text, its argument, and its relationship to the texts we've read in class. Papers are due at the beginning of class and will account for 15% of your final grade. Please do not exceed 1500 words.

Note: Reviewers are not required to complete a Microtheme, but they are expected to read both the assigned text and the text they are reviewing.

When grading these papers, I will be looking for the following:

• Have you provided an adequate summary of the text and its argument?
• Do you explain the text's significance, its most important features, and its contributions to a scholarly conversation?
• Have you explained how this text connects with the texts we're reading for this class?
• Do you provide evidence for your claims?
• Is your paper written effectively and coherently with very few grammatical errors?
• Have you observed the 1500-word limit?

This paper is 7-10 pages and is written with a particular conference in mind. When submitting the paper, you are required to include a 250-word abstract and the Call for Papers (CFP) to which you are responding. Papers should address the CFP and should incorporate some of the works we’ve read in class.

This paper is submitted twice, once at the midterm and once at the end of the semester, so that students get an opportunity to revise. This paper will account for 40% of your final grade. The first submission is worth 15% of your final grade, and the second submission is worth 25% of your final grade. Your grade on the second submission will be, in part, based upon whether or not you've significantly revised the paper. The second submission will include a brief cover letter explaining how you've revised the paper and how you've incorporated feedback from me and your peers.

Papers should be between 1750 and 2500 words. They cannot exceed 2500 words.

When grading these papers, I will be looking for the following:

• Have you addressed a specific CFP and taken account of your audience?
• Have you explained the scholarly problem that you are addressing?
• Have you made a clear and specific argument?
• Do you provide evidence for your claims?
• Is your paper written effectively and coherently with very few grammatical errors?
• Have you observed the 2500-word limit?

For the second submission:

• Does your cover letter provide an explanation of your revision?
• Does this paper represent a significant revision?
• Have you incorporated the feedback by your peers during the writing workshop?
• Have you incorporated feedback provided by me?