Semester.ly

Johns Hopkins University | AS.060.100

Introduction to Expository Writing

3.0

credits

Average Course Rating

(4.36)

Introduction to “Expos” is designed to introduce less experienced writers to the elements of academic argument. Students learn to recognize “The Fundamental Structure of Academic Argument” as they learn to read and summarize academic essays, and then they apply the fundamental structure in academic essays of their own. Classes are small, no more than 10 students, and are organized around three major writing assignments. Each course guides students’ practice through pre-writing, drafting, and revising, and includes discussions, workshops, and tutorials with the instructor. In addition to its central focus on the elements of academic argument, each “Intro” course teaches students to avoid plagiarism and document sources correctly. “Intro” courses do not specialize in a particular topic or theme and are available to freshmen only.

Fall 2012

(4.4)

Fall 2012

(4.05)

Fall 2012

(4.42)

Fall 2012

(3.95)

Fall 2013

(4.11)

Fall 2013

(4.5)

Fall 2013

(4.5)

Fall 2014

(4.16)

Fall 2014

(4.5)

Fall 2014

(4.6)

Fall 2014

(4.42)

Spring 2013

(4.47)

Spring 2013

(4.3)

Spring 2014

(4.35)

Spring 2015

(4.4)

Spring 2015

(4.63)

Fall 2012

Professor: Patricia Kain

(4.4)

The best part of this course was learning techniques for improving writing skills. Students enjoyed the small class setting and getting lots of feedback on their papers and essays. The worst aspect of the course was the long and dul lectures. The lessons were often taught in a short amount of time and had available class time left-over. The course would be improved if the class were more exciting and if the professor made more effective use of the class time. Also, the course would be improved if the students had more opportunities for feedback on their writing instead of waiting for the conferences. The course is recommended for anyone who wants to improve their writing skills and develop better arguments in their essays.

Fall 2012

Professor: Sarah Manekin

(4.05)

The best aspect of this course was the small, hands-on class sessions in which the professor was effectively able to deliver the course content. Students also received helpful, individualized meetings with the professor, which improved their writing skills. The worst aspects of this course included the heavy and sometimes difficult readings, as well as the dul nature of the lectures. The course would be improved if readings and class activities were more engaging. Prospective students should know that this is a moderately challenging course and it will help them improve their writing as long as they follow the guidelines and take advantage of meetings with the professor.

Fall 2012

Professor: Wil iam Evans

(4.42)

The best aspects of this course included the informative course readings, the small class size, and the organized professor who delivered the topics in an effective way to students. The students loved the tutorials the professor offered for each writing assignment because it ensured they were on the right track in their writing. The worst aspect of the course was the professor’s insensitivity while dealing with the students at times. He often intimidated students with his presence and harsh criticism. The course would be improved if the professor were more understanding and clearer about his expectations of his students. Prospective students should know that this is a very effective course with a manageable workload that is sure to improve their writing skills.

Fall 2012

Professor: Marie O'Connor

(3.95)

The best aspect of this course was the content, which helped students learn how to write better scholarly papers and essays. Students enjoyed conference discussions with the professor and received regular feedback on their work. The worst aspect of this course was the dul and repetitive nature of the course concepts. The course would be improved if it were more structured to include diversified materials, and if there was more in-class writing to help students practice their skills. Prospective students should know that this is a work intensive course designed to help students develop better writing skills, and they will learn a lot because of the individualized attention they will receive.

Fall 2013

Professor: Marie O’Connor

(4.11)

The best aspects of this course included the one-on-one writing conferences and the detailed feedback the professor provided. Students found these sessions to be very helpful when revising their works, and did not find the workload to be too strenuous. Suggestions for improvement included adding incentive for class participation and discussion, as students found some of the lectures to go a little long or feel monotonous. Prospective students can expect to write and revise multiple papers throughout the semester.

Fall 2013

Professor: Anne-Elizabeth Brodsky

(4.5)

The best aspects of this course included the writing workshops and the one-on-one conferences with the professor to review and edit essays. Students particularly enjoyed the creative writing assignments. Suggestions for improvement included additional creative writing assignments and the chance to develop a personal writing style. Students also wanted more writing conferences, as they found these sessions to be very helpful in revising their works. Prospective students should be interested in improving their writing skills and be willing to accept and implement revisions.

Fall 2013

Professor: Wil iam Evans

(4.5)

The best aspects of this course included the one-on-one sessions that students can take with the professor to review and improve their writing assignments. Suggestions for improvement included adding more interactivity within the class to encourage discussion amongst the students. Prospective students should be interested in learning how to improve their writing skills and learn the art of revision using peer-review edits.

Fall 2014

Professor: Anne-Elizabeth Brodsky

(4.16)

High praise was given to the small class size, extensive feedback from the professor and the in-class discussions. Students said they left the class feeling prepared for the expectations of academic writing. Multiple overlapping due dates and dry readings were the worst aspects of the course. More time to discuss readings and additional one-on-one conference time were both suggested improvements for the course. Prospective students should know that attending the one-on-one conferences and getting feedback from the professor was crucial. Students ultimately found the course was helpful at improving students writing so that they would be ready for college writing.

Fall 2014

Professor: Marie O'Connor

(4.5)

The best aspects of this class were the smal class size, the professor’s feedback, and seeing immediate improvements to writing. Students in particular praised the course’s one-on-one conferences with the professor. The worst aspects of the course included readings that were uninteresting and classes that sometimes dragged. Some students did not think there were enough long writing assignments. More writing assignments and different readings were suggested improvements to the class. Prospective students should know that the workload was low and the class helped improve students’ writing skills.

Fall 2014

Professor: Patricia Kain

(4.6)

The smal class size, extensive professor feedback and clear expectations were the most noteworthy aspects of this class. Many students praised the availability of the professor and her encouragement as high points in the class. At times the lectures seemed repetitive and the workload became demanding. Including more time for in-class discussion was suggested as an improvement to the class. Prospective students should know that your writing will improve if you take advantage of office hours and follow the feedback provided by the professor.

Fall 2014

Professor: William Evans

(4.42)

Students praised this course for having a knowledgeable and patient professor who provided insightful feedback on student’s work. Many students thought the frequent one-on-one meetings in particular were beneficial to their writing. The lowest ratings were given to the repetitive nature of many lectures and work that sometimes seemed redundant. Some suggestions for improving the course included giving more interesting and engaging readings and providing more in-class activities. Prospective students should know that students found the course was a good class for students who felt unprepared for academic writing.

Spring 2013

Professor: Anne-Elizabeth Brodsky

(4.47)

Some of the best aspects of this course included the smal class size and the quality of exposure to writing skills and the analytical thinking process. Students also appreciated that the instructor made sure that they had a firm understanding of the content before homework assignments were given. One student felt that, at times, the instructor’s directions for an assignment needed more clarity than what was provided. Suggestions included more conference time with the instructor, less group work, and smaller assignments (as opposed to 2 large writing assignments.) Prospective students should be aware that the class requires a good deal of work, particularly writing, but that the instructor thoroughly explains the writing process and conveys the content in a relatable way.

Spring 2013

Professor: Wil iam Evans

(4.3)

Some of the best aspects of this course included the individualized attention and the consistent feedback students received from the instructor. Some students felt that the pace of the course moved too slowly and that the instructor was, at times, repetitive. One suggestion was to lessen the amount of in-class reading. Another suggestion included expanding the variety of the readings. Prospective students should prepare to work hard and to do a significant amount of writing.

Spring 2014

Professor: Wil iam Evans, Anne-Elizabeth Brodsky

(4.35)

Many students agreed that the professors for this course were very personable and knowledgeable about writing. The class was fairly small and students learned to improve various aspects of their writing. Students enjoyed that one of the professors guided the class through tutorials and provided individual feedback. However, many students agreed that the professor can lack open-mindedness and the class moved slowly. Suggestions for improvement include: granting more freedom to students, more group work, and more challenging material. Prospective students should know that the quizzes help improve grades and that the course is more suitable for weaker writers.

Spring 2015

Professor: Anne-Elizabeth Brodsky

(4.4)

The best part of this course was that students were al owed to make multiple revisions of their papers in order to increase the final grade. Many students felt the workload was more than expected and some students found it aggravating to have assignments due on days they did not have class. This course could be improved by having more in class discussions and more opportunities for feedback on drafts. Prospective students looking to improve writing skills will find this course beneficial.

Spring 2015

Professor: Wil iam Evans

(4.63)

The best part of this course was that students were al owed to make multiple revisions of their papers in order to increase the final grade. Many students felt the workload was more than expected and some students found it aggravating to have assignments due on days they did not have class. This course could be improved by having more in class discussions and more opportunities for feedback on drafts. Prospective students looking to improve writing skills will find this course beneficial.