Exploration, analysis, and application of the elements comprising the bioengineering professional persona along with those elements’ centrality to the process of becoming a world-class bioengineer. Topics include rhetorical strategies for communicating with diverse audiences across various genres and media as well as the sociotechnical ethics of modern engineering work.
Athena Title
Bioengineering Prof Persona
Non-Traditional Format
The W suffix is used for courses taught as writing intensive, which means that the course includes substantial and ongoing writing assignments that a) facilitate learning; b) teach the communication values of a discipline—for example, its practices of argument, evidence, credibility, and format; c) support writing as a process; and d) prepare students for further writing in their academic work, in graduate school, and in professional life. Writing instruction and assignments are integral to the class’s learning objectives, and the instructor (and/or the teaching assistant assigned to the course) will be closely involved in supporting students as writers.
More specifically, writing-intensive classes:
— involve students in informal writing assignments that promote course learning;
— stage and sequence assignments to encourage writing as a process of creating and communicating knowledge;
— maximize opportunities for guidance, feedback, and revision;
— teach the writing conventions that are inseparable from modes of inquiry in a discipline; and
— make writing a substantive component of the overall course grade to underscore the value of writing to the course, the discipline, and student learning.
Prerequisite
ENGL 1050H or ENGL 1060H or ENGL 1102 or ENGL 1102E or ENGL 1102S or ENGL 1103
Semester Course Offered
Offered every year.
Grading System
A - F (Traditional)
Student Learning Outcomes
Upon completion of the course, students will be familiar with and adept at analyzing, developing, devising, and delivering bioengineering content via a variety of writing- and speaking-related deliverables.
Upon completion of the course, students will be able to recognize specific rhetorical situations, the objectives that arise out of them, and the types of written documents and presentations most suitable to a given scenario.
Upon completion of the course, students will be able to analyze stakeholders and suit format, content, and tone accordingly in written documents and presentation slide decks.
Upon completion of the course, students will be able to design writing- and speaking-related deliverables that are structurally, mechanically, and aesthetically effective and that conform to expected standards for professional communication.
Upon completion of the course, students will be able to identify and explain the fundamental concepts of social policy through the prism of professional ethics and communication at the local, national, and global scales.
Upon completion of the course, students will be able to interpret interconnections among and differences between social institutions, groups, or individuals as pertaining to professional ethics and communication.
Topical Outline
1. Basics of analysis and development
• Stakeholder-centeredness and purpose
• Refresher on mechanical and stylistic considerations
2. General structure and organization
• User-friendly organization
• Standard deliverable structures
Low-stakes writing assignments: active-learning case studies such as “The Propeller Car: Writing to a Misguided Reader,” “The AutoHen Email Exchange,” guided peer review for the high-stakes assignment below
3. Genres and associated rhetoric
• Correspondence (email)
• Statements of purpose and job-related materials
• Technical descriptions for professional scenarios
• Research reports on engineering-research or engineering-ethics topics
• Lab reports
• Proposals
High stakes writing assignment: cover letter or personal statement/state of purpose for professional scenarios (the job search, applying for graduate or medical school)
4. Interpreting and visualizing data
• The logic of interpretation: what do the data mean?
• Drawing appropriate conclusions
• Choosing visual schemes
Low-stakes writing assignments: creating infographics, choosing the appropriate graphic, data-interpretation exercises; “The Korean Skyscraper Incident” (research, vetting sources, and writing about complex physical phenomena); guided peer review for the high-stakes assignment below; guided slide review for the high-stakes assignment below; midterm team evaluation
High-stakes writing assignments: “Three Levels of Explanation” — explaining a bioengineering topic (concept, process, or device) for a high-school STEM club, a panel of reviewers with any of the UGA Innovation Gateway's startup programs, and a technical class of the writer’s peers; final slide deck for the first presentation (selected science current events topics)
5. Slide decks, visual aids, and delivery
• Slide and poster design
a. Color and font choices
b. Balancing text and imagery
• Delivery
a. Vocal volume and variety
b. Eye contact and overall body language
c. General enthusiasm and audience engagement
6. Professional ethics and communication
• General principles of professional ethics
• Documenting source material (citing, plagiarism)
• Case studies and analysis: Henrietta Lacks; the Bhopal chemical disaster; Jeffrey Wigand and the socio-personal costs of whistleblowing; Theranos, Elizabeth Holmes, and biotech startup fraud; et al.
Low-stakes writing assignments: “What information needs citing?” exercise; exercise on creating appropriate paraphrases; drafting abstracts for the high-stakes assignments; analysis of the writing that went on during the space shuttle Challenger disaster; final team evaluation
High stakes writing assignments: collaborative report on a research or ethics topic (students’ Capstone design projects; the ethics of gene and cell therapy; antibacterial coatings; CRISPR/Cas9 technology; advantages and controversies surrounding cochlear implants; etc.); slide deck for a presentation on the report described above
