Semester.ly

Johns Hopkins University | EN.661.110

Professional Writing and Ethics

3.0

credits

Average Course Rating

(3.97)

This course teaches students to write skillfully, think ethically, and reason persuasively by responding to ethical challenges that arise between technology and society in the twenty-first century. Topics for these activities are drawn from the WSE’s Grand Challenges and other ethical contexts relevant to engineering, including contemporary debates about the social, economic, and environmental responsibilities of professional engineers. Course activities give students techniques to write effectively as individuals and collaboratively in teams, hone their ability to think critically, evaluate and use evidence to support their ideas, communicate effectively with professional and public stakeholders, iterate and refine their ideas, create appropriate visuals and infographics, and other relevant areas. Course-specific topics may include: equitable health systems, trusted artificial intelligence, resilient cities, robot ethics, privacy and fair computing; accessible and inclusive design, sustainable energy, and the social responsibility of science.

Fall 2012

(3.88)

Fall 2012

(3.39)

Fall 2012

(4.06)

Fall 2012

(2.67)

Fall 2012

(4.4)

Fall 2012

(4.17)

Fall 2012

(4.63)

Fall 2013

(4.08)

Fall 2013

(3.68)

Fall 2013

(4.0)

Fall 2013

(4.15)

Fall 2014

(4.64)

Fall 2014

(4.38)

Fall 2014

(4.0)

Fall 2014

(4.31)

Fall 2014

(4.06)

Spring 2013

(4.36)

Spring 2013

(3.39)

Spring 2013

(2.14)

Spring 2013

(3.94)

Spring 2013

(4.0)

Spring 2013

(4.45)

Spring 2014

(4.11)

Spring 2014

(4.0)

Spring 2014

(4.35)

Spring 2014

(4.44)

Spring 2015

(3.56)

Spring 2015

(4.26)

Spring 2015

(4.21)

Spring 2015

(3.47)

Spring 2015

(3.91)

Fall 2012

Professor: Keith Quesenberry

(3.88)

The best aspects of this course included the lessons and useful skil s that students learned in this class. The material taught in class was relevant to the workplace and other aspects of life as well. The worst aspect of the course was the somewhat dry and simple material. The professor could have structured the course better and could have been stricter with the group projects. The course could improve if it included more exercises and in-class activities to engage students. Prospective students should know that course wil teach them how to present better and perform well in diverse job settings.

Fall 2012

Professor: Donald McNeil y

(3.39)

Students enjoyed the interactive and engaging class sessions where they learned helpful writing and communication tips. The professor was very humorous and also made an attempt to learn everyone’s names. The worst aspect of the course was the disorganized class structure where both professor and students often went off topic. The course would improve if the professor were more organized and if there were more practice exercises. Prospective students should know that the course is fairly easy and the work is light.

Fall 2012

Professor: Nora Frenkiel

(4.06)

The best aspects of this course included the class presentations and the hands-on tools students learned for professional communication. The worst aspect of the course was the dull and inactive class sessions. There was not a lot of work done in class and the discussions often lagged. The course would improve if there were more class activities to make the class more interesting. Prospective students should know that this course involves some presentations and a good amount of writing.

Fall 2012

Professor: Christopher Thacker

(2.67)

The best aspect of this course was the applicable course content students learned. The worst aspect of the course was the vague and repetitive lectures. The professor was disorganized and it reflected in what students didn’t learn. The course would improve if the professor were more organized, and structured the class with more content so that the students wouldn’t be learning the same things over and over. Prospective students should know that this class is work-heavy, but they will learn useful skills.

Fall 2012

Professor: Charlotte O'Donnel

(4.4)

The best aspect of this course was the wide range of topics covered regarding professional communications. The students learned different writing styles and many felt like the course helped them improve their writing. The worst aspects of the course included the heavy workload and assignments that were due back to back. The course would improve if the amount of work assigned was reduced and better organized. Prospective students should know that this course is writing-intensive, but will really help them improve on their writing and communication skills. 253

Fall 2012

Professor: Caroline Wilkins

(4.17)

The best aspect of this course was the lively and engaging professor who made the class sessions interesting. Students learned some helpful writing skil s and improved their own writing through this class. The worst aspect of this course was the lack of timely feedback on assignments, because students didn’t know the areas where they needed to improve. The course would improve if the students received quicker feedback on their assignments. Prospective students should know that this course is somewhat writing-intensive, but they will learn a lot as long as they do the work and participate in class.

Fall 2012

Professor: Jason Heiserman

(4.63)

The best aspects of the course included the class discussions, engaging lectures, and in-class presentations. The professor was very helpful and students learned various communication styles which will be of great benefit in the future. The worst aspect of the course was the repetitive and unfocused assignments. The course could improve if the assignments were more related to the class and if students had one longer presentation, opposed to many shorter presentations. Prospective students should be prepared for lots of presentations in this very practical communications course.

Fall 2013

Professor: Caroline Wilkins

(4.08)

Students praised the instructor for fostering a fun and engaging classroom experience. Many students felt that the instructor was slow to grade and return assignments, however, and students desired more feedback. Suggestions for improvement included a desire that work be returned to student quicker and with more feedback on their performance. Prospective students should know that the course had a light workload and that it required students to think creatively.

Fall 2013

Professor: Jay Thompson

(3.68)

Students praised this course for its small class size and the captivating and helpful instructor. Some students disliked the large amount of writing in the course and found that they didn’t get enough feedback on the assignments they submitted. Many students suggested cutting down the writing requirement of the course. Other students wanted to see an increase in the amount of oral presentations in the course. Prospective students should know that the course useful in terms of showing students how to improve their writing style and create resumes, cover letters, and other documents.

Fall 2013

Professor: Charlotte O’Donnel

(4.0)

The best aspects of this course included writing a wide variety of professional documents, although some students thought diagramming sentences during class periods was overdone and unnecessary. Suggestions to improve the course included a desire to cut down the amount time spent on grammar and the basics of writing. Prospective students should know that the course was writing intensive but also enjoyable.

Fall 2013

Professor: Benjamin Parris

(4.15)

Students liked the useful writing exercises that allowed them to improve their ability to write resumes, cover letters, and other documents. Students complained that distribution of assignments in the course was uneven, and that the bulk of assignments occurred in the first half of the course. Suggestions for improvement included adding more activities to the lectures, either as in-class writing assignments or other interactive activities. Prospective students should know that the course is reading and writing intensive, but that the skills gained in the course were applicable to a wide variety of areas and fields.

Fall 2014

Professor: Caroline Wilkens

(4.64)

Students felt the best element of this course was the instructor who they believed was both engaging and knowledgeable and provided effective assignments. In expressing what they thought the worst aspect of this course was, some students commented that they wished that feedback on assignments could have been returned more quickly. Students also believed that the course could be improved by dividing the current 3 hour class sessions into multiple shorter sessions. Students thought it was useful for people thinking about taking this class to know that the course emphasized writing practice and the workload was manageable.

Fall 2014

Professor: Robert Graham

(4.38)

Students found that their favorite aspects of this class were the opportunity to develop both writing and speaking skills as well as the helpfulness of the instructor. Students thought that the least favorable element of the class was the way that teacher’s lectures sometimes diverged into anecdotal tangents. Students also believed that there may have been too much of an emphasis on business writing. Students felt the course could be improved with a more even distribution of work over the duration of the class with more small assignments rather than a few large ones. Students thought it was important for those thinking about taking this class that the course was useful but required a heavy workload of assignments.

Fall 2014

Professor: Jay Thompson

(4.0)

Students found that the best aspect of this course was the engaging and approachable instructor. Students also praised the usefulness of the course content. They believed the weakest element of the course was the lack of timely feedback and grades on assignments. Some students also suggested that the final project could be redesigned to be more relevant. Students believed that it was useful for people considering taking this class to know that while it was writing intensive, the workload was manageable.

Fall 2014

Professor: Nicole Jerr

(4.31)

Students thought the best aspect of this course was the applicability of the content for their professional lives. They also appreciated the approachability of the instructor. Students believed the least effective element of the course was the review of grammar usage, which they thought wasn’t useful. Students thought the course could have been improved with a greater focus on resume writing and interviewing. Students felt it would be useful for future participants to know that the workload for the course mostly consisted of few major assignments, but otherwise was manageable.

Fall 2014

Professor: Jenny Bernstein

(4.06)

Students were the most appreciative of the helpful and engaging instructor for this course who they believed gave useful feedback. They believed that the biggest drawback of the course was that too many large assignments were due at the end of the semester. Students thought the course could be improved by distributing the work more evenly over the duration of the class and offering a greater variety of assignments. They also thought it would be useful for future potential participants to know that this class was especially useful for improving writing skills.

Spring 2013

Professor: Nora Frenkiel

(4.36)

The best aspects of this course included the small and relaxing class atmosphere, and the passionate professor who was very experienced in the field. The worst aspects of the course included the vague reading assignments and unclear class guidelines. Students also felt like class time wasn’t always used effectively. The course would improve if the class was more structured with better guidelines. Prospective students should expect to do a substantial amount of writing and group work in this relatively fun course.

Spring 2013

Professor: Benjamin Parris

(3.39)

The best aspects of the course were the fun projects and the useful lessons on professional communications and resume writing. The professor taught the class effectively and provided lots of helpful feedback to students. The worst aspects of the course included the lengthy class time and the harsh grading structure. The professor was strict and somewhat unapproachable to students. The course would improve if the assignments were more creative and if there was more time to go over the projects in class with the professor. Prospective students should spend lots of time with their assignments because the class is writing intensive.

Spring 2013

Professor: Christopher Thacker

(2.14)

The best aspects of the course included the professor’s overall enthusiasm for the class and the healthy feedback he always provided to students. The worst aspects of the course included the professor’s lack of structure, as well as the unclear assignment guidelines. The students felt that the course focused too much on business and financial analysis, and not enough on professional communication itself. The course would improve if there was variety in the assignments and a better class structure with clearly defined assignment rubrics. Prospective students should know that this course is more geared towards financial and business writing than professional communications, but it involves a significant amount of work.

Spring 2013

Professor: Keith Quesenberry

(3.94)

The best aspects of the course were the passionate professor, interesting weekly assignments, and effective communication lessons. The worst aspects of the course included the dul lectures and the ambiguous grading system. The students felt like the lectures lacked content and were just summaries of the readings that students were assigned. The course would improve if there were more group assignments and interactive class sessions. It would also improve if the presentation and lectures notes were posted online. Prospective students should know that the course is writing intensive and will help them improve on skills such as resume writing.

Spring 2013

Professor: Caroline Wilkins

(4.0)

The best aspects of the course included the writing workshops, useful peer feedback, and laid back class setting where lots of discussions were facilitated. Many of the students felt that their writing skills really improved by taking this course. The worst aspects of the course included the late feedback students received on assignments and the overload of assignments all around the same time. Many students also expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that there was little to no business writing even though that was supposed to be a major part of the course. The course would improve if there was more focus on the business and professional communication aspects. Prospective students should be prepared for lots of writing in this effective professional communications course.

Spring 2013

Professor: Charlotte O'Donnel

(4.45)

The best aspects of this course included the smal class size and the feedback students always received on their work. The worst aspect of the course was the heavy focus on sentence diagramming. Students also felt like there was a lot of work for this course and that the expectations were somewhat high. The course would improve if there were less sentence diagramming exercises and more interactive exercises. Prospective students should know that the course is writing intensive, but will help them with some skills that are transferable to the work force.

Spring 2014

Professor: Jay Thompson

(4.11)

According to students, this course al owed them to practice group project and presentation skil s. The professor was flexible when it came to deadlines, and he also was patient and kind. Many students agreed that they learned how to write clearly and concisely. The texts used did not receive good reviews and the group project paired some students with others that portrayed horrible work ethic. It was suggested that more graded assignments be added to the course, that the group project be individual, and that more resources such as handouts be used as a teaching tool. This course will give prospective students the break they might need from their typical workload.

Spring 2014

Professor: Caroline Wilkins

(4.0)

The community that was created in this course is a difficult thing to find at this university. The professor was very supportive, and group work was beneficial to students. The assignments helped students learn about different aspects of communication, and they were also able to practice writing for various audiences. Feedback was slow, and the professor was not available via email on the days class didn’t meet. In addition, the textbooks were barely used. It was highly suggested by students that the professor be timelier in returning feedback and that she use Blackboard. Prospective students should know that the work required is doable.

Spring 2014

Professor: Benjamin Parris

(4.35)

The best aspect of this course was that it provided students with very practical skil s. They learned how to create their own resume and cover letter, and the work load is shared between groups of students. The book required for this course was never used and there were a couple weeks where the assignments overlapped. Also, many students felt like they were not taught much after the first assignment. Suggestions for improvement include: more feedback, tighter deadlines, and less class time because the whole time was never used. Prospective students should know that attendance is very important. Missing three classes will reduce their grade.

Spring 2014

Professor: Charlotte O’Donnel

(4.44)

During this course, students learned how to write grant proposals and refine their rhetorical skills. The small class size made students feel comfortable participating in discussions led by the professor, and they received individual attention. The workshops were helpful for the most part, and the professor’s feedback was appreciated. But, it was nearly impossible to get an A in this course, and the professor’s expectation for course work was unreasonable. Suggestions for improvement include: student examples for the research report and long report assignments, a clearer grading policy, and stricter deadlines. Prospective students should be aware of the huge time commitment this course wil be.

Spring 2015

Professor: Nicole Jerr

(3.56)

The best aspects of the course included developing important skills such as learning how to write professionally and present effectively. Students felt that assignments piled up by the end of the semester and grading was unclear and subjective. Students also felt that some assignments were busy work and that no new information was learned from the course. Suggestions for improvement included having more guidelines and organization for assignments, creating more opportunities for course relevant work over social change projects, providing more feedback, and having more assignments to contribute to the course grade other than a heavily weighted final project. Prospective students should be aware that this course involves a significant amount of writing and public speaking.

Spring 2015

Professor: Jenny Bernstein

(4.26)

Students enjoyed the engaging teaching style of the instructor as well as the opportunity to think critically and be creative with the writing assignments. Students noted that the professor kept classes engaging and interesting, and provided useful feedback. Students found the workload to be overwhelming and some of the writing assignments repetitive at times. Suggestions for improvement included having more course related assignments such as resume writing exercises and increasing the opportunities for feedback from the professor. Prospective students are encouraged to keep up with assignments and choose a social topic of interest for the semester writing assignment.

Spring 2015

Professor: Jay Thompson

(4.21)

The best aspects of the course included the passionate instructor who was accessible, knowledgeable, and gave students helpful feedback on assignments. Students felt that assignments piled up by the end of the semester and that class notes and other information were not posted on Blackboard. Lectures were boring at times and the instructor did not always stay on topic. Suggestions for improvement included having a more definitive schedule for assignments, making lectures more interactive, and making information available to students via Blackboard. Prospective students have the opportunity to gain valuable practical application and improve writing skills in a low intensity environment.

Spring 2015

Professor: Robert Graham

(3.47)

The best aspects of the course included the ability for students to apply concepts through projects and presentations, gain applicable skil s, and obtain expert feedback on assignments. Students felt that the course at times focused more on basic grammar instead of professional communication. Some students felt that assignment expectations weren’t clear and that grading was strict and subjective. Suggestions for improvement included shortening the class meeting time, providing more feedback and guidelines on assignments, and making lecture more engaging and interactive. Prospective students should allocate sufficient time to work on writing assignments.

Spring 2015

Professor: Caroline Wilkins

(3.91)

Students enjoyed the engaging, humorous, and energetic instructor who created a comfortable learning environment for the students. Students felt that feedback on completed assignments was not returned in a timely manner, peer review sessions were not helpful, and the workload was overwhelming at times. Some students felt the instructor was insensitive regarding her remarks to other students. Suggestions for improvement included having assignments graded in a timelier manner so students are able to improve from feedback, and having a more interactive lecture. Prospective students should be aware that this course involves a significant amount of writing and participation in class discussion would be beneficial.

Lecture Sections

(01)

No location info
B. Conner
09:00 - 10:15

(02)

No location info
C. Dickason
10:30 - 11:45

(03)

No location info
J. Forte
10:30 - 11:45

(04)

No location info
L. Foxwell
12:00 - 13:15

(05)

No location info
E. Walker
09:00 - 10:15

(06)

No location info
M. Choy
13:30 - 14:45

(07)

No location info
R. Hearty
15:00 - 16:15

(08)

No location info
Staff
13:30 - 14:45

(09)

No location info
Staff
15:00 - 16:15