summarizing 2 short articles both 30 pages then comparing between both in an essay

STS 2411 Article Review Rubric 1

STS 2411 (Elwick) 2018: Article Review Rubric

Things I'm looking for in your Two-Article Review for STS 2411

See 'Topics' and accompanying articles to be reviewed, below • (e.g. if you choose "Data and Algorithms" you must review the articles by Denis &

Goeta, and by Crawford). All articles can be downloaded from the Moodle page.

Minimum expectations. For your Review to be marked, it must be

• Accompanied by evidence of successful completion of an Academic Integrity Quiz. o Attach a screenshot right to your submitted document.

• Written in paragraph – sentence form. • About 1500 words minimum.

o Why 'about'? Because I'd rather have 1400 words that form an interesting and insightful review rather than 2000 words that are dull and repetitive.

• When referring to a specific point made by the author, must include a reference, including page number.

o Thus (Author, Page) (eg 'Kleinman, 23')

If your Review does not meet the conditions noted above, it will be handed back to you, and you will have to resubmit; late penalties will apply upon being handed back (though you can spend tokens).

For your Review to receive a passing grade it must be

• Grammatically correct and clearly written. • Polished appearance (shows that you proofread it).

Additional requirements for the Review (for you to receive above 50%, must fulfil conditions below)

Tip: systematically go through these below, crossing each one off like a list.

• Your first two paragraphs must summarize the central claims of the two reviewed article or book excerpt, in your own words.

o Hint: look at the abstract (if there is one) or the conclusion. • After this…

• Look at "Newell's Questions" to see which of them (if any) are applicable to the reading. o For instance, in reading Bond, questions about who bears the risk of deepwater oil

drilling will be relevant. o Use them to come up with some more things to say.

STS 2411 Article Review Rubric 2

• Look at the "Questions" section of the SPARK 'Effective Reading Strategies' module, and pose and answer those questions, focusing especially on who, why, and how.

o (http://www.yorku.ca/spark/effective_reading_strategies/question_question.html) • Look at the "Review" section of that SPARK module and pose and answer its questions,

particularly focusing on any alternative arguments or what the authors might be leaving out. o (http://www.yorku.ca/spark/effective_reading_strategies/review_review.html )

• Relate points to other class readings, and say why. • Relate points to issues raised in various classes for this course, and say why.

o You might also relate them to the assigned readings for that day. • Discuss the points, if any, that changed your opinion about this particular topic; be sure to say

how. If nothing in the article/excerpt changed your views, then say so and say why. • Discuss how this particular article undermines (or supports) clichés about science and

technology, such as those we saw at the beginning of the course. • Raise questions you wish each author had addressed and that you would like to explore further. • You must say which article / book excerpt you thought was better argued, and give reasons why.

What else are we looking for?

• Signs of critical thinking o self-awareness of one's own beliefs; questioning those beliefs; o pointing out weaknesses in text such as

 imprecise language or definitions  logical contradictions  scanty or insufficient evidence for the claim the author is making  assumptions made by author they don't seem to be aware of

o I especially value "contrarian" thinking, if backed up with evidence and logically self- consistent

• Signs of analytical thinking o able to break down argument or definitions into parts, possibly summarizing each one

 e.g. "Smithson says there are 2 forms of ignorance: conscious ignorance (knowing one doesn't know something) and meta-ignorance (not knowing that we don't know)."

• Signs of synthetic thinking (able to show how a point made by an author in one section relates either to another article, or a point made in class)

• Precision of language o e.g. don't just say "artificial intelligence" where you really mean "machine learning" (a

specific kind of AI); don't say 'southern Africa' when you really mean Zimbabwe; don't say "the 1990s" when you really mean April 21, 1997.

STS 2411 Article Review Rubric 3

Article review topics: choose ONE

Algorithms and Data

Denis and Goeta (2017), Open Government Data Crawford (2016), Can an algorithm be agonistic?

Disasters! Perrow (1984), Normal Accidents Bond (2013), Governing Disaster

Expertise, Science, and Democracy Wynne (1992), Misunderstood misunderstanding Weinel (2007), Mbeki and AZT

Fake News! Stocking (1998), Drawing Attention to Ignorance Smithson (2008), Social Theories of Ignorance

Innovation Studies Godin (2006), Linear Model of Innovation Gordon and Poulin (2009), Cost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System Exceeds the Cost of Giving every Qualified Researcher a Baseline Grant

Rethinking Technology MacKenzie and Wajcman (1999), Social shaping of technology Winner (1980), Do artifacts have politics

Science and Neoliberalism Parry (2004), Trading the Genome Mirowski (2011), Science-Mart

Scientists' Images Browne (2003), Darwin as celebrity Shapin (1998), Philosopher and the Chicken

"Southern" Science Lachenal (2016), At home in postcolony, Lamto Pollock (2014), South African drug discovery

STEM and Gender Ford and Wajcman (2017), Wikipedia's gender gap Wynn and Correll (2018), Puncturing the pipeline

STS 2411 Article Review Rubric 4

STEM and Indigeneity TallBear (2014), Standing with Bocking (2010), Indigenous Knowledge

STEM, Art, and Creativity Calvert and Schyfter (2017), Synthetic Aesthetics Borkenhagen (2017), Art, science, fine dining

What does Objectivity Mean? Latour (1986), Visualization and cognition Haraway (1988), Situated Knowledges