Climate Stories Video Project
- 1. Identify and explicate the central claims/concepts of ways excessive material accumulation negatively transforms the environment
- 3. Persuade an audience of their peers of the efficacy of their argument via situationally effective visual and verbal rhetoric
- 4. Respond to a rhetorical situation through process: invention, drafting, peer review, and revision
Video Project Checklist
- 1. Individual Introduction and Annotated Bibliography: A 300-500 word individual introduction, in MLA format, uploaded to Canvas as a .pfd or .docx file on date Video is due. See below for the Video Introduction Prompt.
Please also complete an Annotated Bibliography with a minimum of four entries: at least two sources need to be scholarly (i.e. peer reviewed and/or published by scholarly journal/press). For more on how to write a Annotation see this help document.
- 2. Prompt: Profile a collection/collector to show how collections are part of larger ecosystems and affect Climate Change. For example, toys, clothes, organic or plastic packaging, food waste, baseball cards, video games, data storage, etc. You are welcome to develop, as a group, topics from your posters and/or papers.
- 3. Specs: Video must profile the collection/collector, demonstrate larger ecological and climatological implications, and suggest solutions.
- 4. Design: final draft of Video needs to be 5 to 7 minutes long, available as a YouTube link, include some combination of dialogue, still images, stop motion animation, audio voice over, and/or animation
- 5. Process: Script, Storyboard, Collaborative Google Doc from group workshop, and any draft video
- 6. Submission/Publication: for full credit submit the video as a YouTube link, the 300-500 word Individual Introductions, and all process documents to Canvas. Also, decide if you would like to publish the video as part of the Georgia Climate Change Stories Project
- 1. Rhetorical Awareness: Does the video address writing the situation (and assignment) completely and/or with unexpected insight? Did you submit an Individual Introduction and 4 Entry Annotated Bibliography? (20%)
- 2. Stance: Does the video clearly articulate a unifying argument/goal? Does the video profile a collection/collector to show how collections are part of larger ecosystems and affect Climate Change. (20%)
- 3.Development of Ideas: Does the video develop the claim/goal by illustrating the key concept through a mix of interviews, external footage, still images, animation, charts/graphs, B-roll footage, and/or a voice/sound track? (20%)
- 4. Organization: Do the authors establish a clear pattern for reading through layout, design, transitions, headings, soundtrack, repetition, contrast, and alignment? (20%)
- 5. Design for Medium: Does the video use the affordances of its mode to enhance the goal/content? For example, does the video reinforce the content of the audio track visually and vice versa? (10%)
- 6. Process: Does the final draft demonstrate planning and revision? (5%)
- 7. Conventions: Do the video, Introduction, and Annotated Bibliography meet grammar, mechanics style, and syntax conventions with few or no errors? (5%)