Key dates
| What | When |
|---|---|
| Project 3 opens | 2026-11-10 |
| Annotation workshop (in class) | 2026-11-19 |
| Project 3 due | 2026-11-27, 9:00 a.m. |
| Feedback returned | 2026-12-01 |
| Redo due | 2026-12-08 |
Overview
Project 3 is where your panel topic becomes finished work. You’ll continue the topic from your Project 2 proposal, using my feedback on your panel contribution and your revised proposal.
This is new work, not a polished version of your proposal. Project 1 asked you to analyze language on the page. Project 2 asked you to, in a live setting, begin talking aloud about a public issue and how you would like to approach it using SFL and CDA. Project 3 asks you to continue the work of Project 2, implementing feedback from Project 2.
What you’ll make
You choose the format. Some options:
- An academic paper
- Spoken word poetry or presentation (video recording)
- A mini-documentary
- Graphic non-fiction or fiction
- Annotated workshop slides that teach a specific audience
Other formats are welcome; check with me first.
You choose the topic. Some ideas:
- Power relationship between patients and health care providers
- Public discourse on banned and challenged books in schools
- Depictions of race/age/gender/sexual orientation/disability in public discourse, advertising, or social media
- Beauty standards, looks maxxing
- Political speechmaking
- Issues management (e.g., Cornell, Good Good, Converse shoes)
Whatever you choose has to do analytical work, not just mention concepts. In a creative format, the analysis can be built into the piece itself. If it is, your annotation must show me where SFL and CDA are doing the work.
Scope: Aim for work equivalent to a 1000-word paper. As a rough guide, that’s 6 to 8 minutes of audio or video, or 8 to 10 annotated slides.
Your project must:
- Build on your revised Project 2 proposal
- Apply SFL and CDA concepts accurately to specific evidence from your texts or discourse
- Take a position on your issue and defend it
- Be in your own words except where quoting relevant texts
As in Projects 1 and 2, naming a concept is not analysis. Show what the language does, and who it positions how.
The annotation
Attach a one-page annotation that:
- Names the feedback you received in Project 2
- Says what you changed or built because of it
- Points to where in your project I’ll find those changes
- Shows where in your project SFL and CDA concepts are applied (time stamps, page or slide numbers)
We’ll draft annotations in the 2026-11-19 workshop.
I will read your project with your annotation as a guide. If you’re vague about what changed, I’ll have trouble finding it.
If your Project 2 revised proposal is still marked Redo on 2026-11-27, your annotation must also show how you addressed the outstanding feedback. I’ll make the Project 2 call from that.
Complete / Redo
This project is graded Complete or Redo, consistent with the course’s ungrading approach.
Complete requires:
- SFL and CDA concepts applied accurately to a topic that builds on your Project 2 proposal
- A one-page annotation showing how you used feedback and where the concepts are applied
- Your own words, written or spoken, except where quoting relevant texts
Redo is assigned when:
- Concepts are named but not applied, or only one framework appears, or
- Feedback integration is weak or absent: the changes your annotation points to are superficial or not supported by the work
Borderline work is marked Redo, with feedback on what to change.
Redo attempts for this project are more limited than they were for projects one and two. You will only be able to redo between 2026-12-01 and 2026-12-08.
Submission
- Project and annotation: Moodle, under Project 3, by 2026-11-27.
- Annotation: PDF.
- Audio or video: [Moodle upload or TRU Media link TBD].