This document outlines the syllabus for a science writing course taught in spring 2018. The course will focus on effectively communicating scientific information to non-scientific audiences. Students will analyze examples of science writing, produce their own works in various formats like news releases and infographics, and conduct a semester-long project analyzing a scientific issue's impact on a community. Assignments include weekly analyses of science articles, comparative analyses of scientific works, and producing materials to communicate a scientific issue to a particular community. Students will provide feedback on each other's drafts and are expected to attend class, participate in discussions, and treat others respectfully. The course aims to help students understand different approaches to science communication and develop practical science writing skills.

1. [ENGL 318/JAMM 328]
SCIENCE WRITING
SYLLABUS | SPRING 2018
INSTRUCTOR
Dr. Jodie Nicotra
jnicotra@uidaho.edu
202 Brink Hall
Office Hours: M,W
2:30-4:00, by appt.
TEACHING
ASSISTANT
Kenetta Nunn
knunn@uidaho.edu
COURSE
INFORMATION
MWF 12:30-1:20
EP 202
COURSE DESCRIPTION
“How ordinary citizens come to know what is collectively known by science is simultaneously
a mystery that excites deep scholarly curiosity and a practical problem that motivates
urgent attention by those charged with assuring democratic societies make effective use of
the collective knowledge at their disposal.”
-Kahan (2015)
It is widely acknowledged that a public informed about scientific thought
processes and facts is crucial for a democracy; such a public is one that can
participate in making thoughtful decisions about science- and health-related
policy.

2. And because science has a language of its own - dense, precise, and often
jargon-laden – those preparing to write about it for non-scientific audiences
might expect to focus mainly on “translating” this specialized language into
terms that are accessible to laypeople, often referred to as the “science
comprehension” approach (or what one of my friends calls the “Listen up,
people! SCIENCE!!!” model). However, the reality is more complicated than
that. Recipients of science communication also have beliefs, values,
identifications, and affiliations that affect how they interact with scientific
information, making science writing about much more than just telling
people the facts and expecting them to “listen up!” What’s more, science
literacy isn’t a matter only of individual literacy, but of literacy at the level of
the community as well. In this class, we will take multiple approaches to the
communication of scientific information: you will do work that analyzes the
unique nature of science and communication about science (at the individual
and community levels), and you will also do a fair amount of your own
communicating about science.
What to Expect
Be prepared to read—original research papers, press releases, academic,
newspaper and magazine articles, books. Be prepared to do research—in
the library, on the web, and through interviews with local scientists. And be
prepared to compose in a variety of formats — written, visual, and
multimodal. You’ll also read and analyze some of today’s best science
writing, and learn strategies for evaluating and making reasonable
judgments about scientific evidence. Classes will be discussion-oriented;
some classes will feature outside speakers.
When you’re working on a writing project, good feedback from a variety of
readers can really help. That’s why you and your classmates will be
providing one another with regular feedback on your work via draft
workshops - attendance (with completed draft) to these workshops is
mandatory. I also recommend making appointments with the University
Writing Center (3rd Floor Commons), www.uidaho.edu/class/writing-center.
(CDA students can take advantage of online tutoring.)
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this course, students should be able to do the following things:
 Understand why and how communication between scientists is
different from that of communication between scientists and the
public, and articulate the rhetorical moves native to each.
 Develop a greater understanding of the range of resources and skills
needed to effectively communicate complex material.

3.  Recognize and understand the genre conventions that govern writing
about science, and investigate the strengths and limits of those
conventions, both at the meta level and at the sentence level.
 Cultivate practical communication skills (including writing, visual, and
multimedia) about science-related topics to audiences with varying
levels of scientific expertise.
 Understand science and science literacy as a community as well as an
individual enterprise.
 Develop analytical and research skills in understanding how science-
and health-related issues affect communities, and how communities
can develop means to respond to these issues.
Textbooks and Other Materials
 Articles on BbLearn.
 A blog to be used for Weekly Analysis assignments (see below).
 A notebook - bring this every day to class for in-class writing, note-
taking, etc.
COURSE POLICIES
Come to class. Attendance is mandatory. If you miss more than 3 classes,
your participation grade will drop by 10 points for each subsequent class
missed.
Turn off your phone, for the sake of lessening distractions for those around
you, including me (I hate talking to a room of bent-over heads that aren’t
paying attention). If you have a laptop, bring it, but I’ll only have certain
times when we’ll be using them - the rest of the time (e.g., during lecture
and class discussion), it should be stored. Bring a notebook to class for
taking notes.
Be civil. In any environment in which people gather to learn, it is essential
that all members feel as free and safe as possible in their participation. To
this end, I expect that everyone in this course will treat each other with
mutual respect and civility, with an understanding that all of us (students,
instructors, professors, guests, and teaching assistants) will be respectful
and civil to one another in discussion, in action, in teaching, and in learning.
Should you feel our classroom interactions do not reflect an environment of
civility and respect, please meet with me during office hours to discuss your
concern. Additional resources for expression of concern or requesting
support include the Dean of Students office and staff (5-6757), the UI

4. Counseling & Testing Center’s confidential services (5-6716), or the UI Office
of Human Rights, Access, & Inclusion (5-4285).
Participate in draft workshops. You must come prepared (with a complete
draft) to each draft workshop. Workshop attendance and preparation is
worth 100 points total.
Turn things in on time. I have given you two deadlines for most of the
projects: one for the initial draft, and one for the final draft. If you turn in
homework late, you can only receive half credit for it; late major
assignments will be docked one letter grade per day. In certain cases I will
give you extensions on assignments, but you must ask for these in advance.
Write down your due dates, anticipate how much time these will take you,
and plan accordingly.
Don’t plagiarize. See Article II-A1 of the Student Code of Conduct for an
explanation of what plagiarism entails. I will refer serious (deliberate) cases
to the Dean of Students’ office and I’ll assign a 0 to the work (and possibly
the course).
CENTER FOR DISABILITY ACCESS AND RESOURCES REASONABLE
ACCOMMODATIONS STATEMENT:
 Reasonable accommodations are available for students who have
documented temporary or permanent disabilities. All accommodations
must be approved through the Center for Disability Access and
Resources located in the Bruce M. Pitman Center, Suite 127 in order to
notify your instructor(s) as soon as possible regarding
accommodation(s) needed for the course.
 Phone: 208-885‐6307
 Email: cdar@uidaho.edu
 Website: www.uidaho.edu/current-students/cdar
ASSIGNMENTS
Below are brief descriptions of each of your assignments. You can find more
detailed assignments, including grading rubrics, at the Assignment Sheets
link on BbLearn.
1. Weekly analysis of recent popular science articles and
presentation. By reading and analyzing the work of other science writers,
you’ll improve your own writing. For this course, you are expected to read
and report weekly on either the New York Times science section or the
National Geographic Phenomena science blog. Each week, you will choose

5. one short-format piece from either of these sources and write a brief (200-
word) analysis of the writer’s rhetorical choices on a blog that you set up
specifically for this purpose (we’ll post the links in BbLearn). By the end of
the semester, you should have ten entries total, worth 10 points each.
2. A comparative rhetorical analysis (Project 1) of a scientific article
and its popular “accommodation.”
3. A news release (Project 2), based on a recent article written by a
University of Idaho scientist (written in explanatory style, as described in Ch
20 of A Field Guide for Science Writers).
4. An infographic (Project 3) that visualizes scientific information clearly
and concisely to an audience.
5. An analysis of how a scientific issue affects a particular
community (Project 4). For this project, which will take the second half of
the semester, you will identify a scientific issue that affects a given
community and produce the following deliverables: an annotated
bibliography, an analysis & communication action plan, and two pieces of
communication that will help achieve your plan.
6. A final reflective memo. Here, you’ll reflect on how you met the course
outcomes and do a self-evaluation of the work you produced this semester.
GRADES
Each assignment has a rubric that more specifically details the grade criteria.
Weekly science story analysis + summary 100 points
Project 1: Comparative Rhetorical Analysis 100 points
Project 2: News Release 100 points
Project 3: Infographic 100 points
Annotated Bibliography (Project 4) 50 points
Community & issue analysis and communication action plan 150 points
Community material #1 75 points
Community material #2 75 points

6. Attendance and participation 100 points
Draft workshop participation 150 points
Final reflection 50 points
TOTAL 1050 points