Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

syllabus

From Campus to Cafés: Writing the Middle East for Your Daily Read

In our dynamic seminar, we will shift away from the traditionally dense academic prose and venture into writing engaging, accessible narratives about the Middle East that resonate with a wider audience. This course is designed for those eager to break down the barriers of academia and bring their scholarship into everyday discourse. We will kickstart our exploration by reflecting on writings that have effectively brought the Middle East to public attention, and then move towards identifying captivating topics that hold broad public interest. As we navigate through the complexities of the region, our emphasis will be on ethical research practices, crafting persuasive arguments, and employing impactful rhetorical strategies to challenge pre-existing narratives. Beyond the writing process, we will engage in lively peer review sessions to foster collaborative learning and improve our writing skills. By co-writing sections of our papers, we will learn to ensure coherence and clarity even when multiple minds are at work. The goal is not only to improve our individual writing skills but also to enhance our ability to contextualize complex topics for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. By the end of the course, students will have developed a compelling piece of writing that is ready to be shared with the public, effectively translating academic insights into engaging stories that could be part of your daily read.


1 – Tue Oct 15 12–2 PM – course introduction

  • Defining the Core Purpose: The primary function of academic writing is to help readers understand something they want to understand well, better.
  • The Reader’s Role: Highlight the importance of identifying the specific audience and how their background, knowledge, and expectations influence writing.
  • Academic vs. Other Writing: Clarify the distinction between academic writing, which focuses on enhancing understanding, and other forms like political or business writing where persuasion takes precedence.

2 – Tue Oct 22 12–2 PM – independent writing time

3 – Tue Oct 29 12–2 PM – independent writing time

4 – Tue Nov 5 12–2 PM – independent writing time

TASK #1: You have 4 weeks time to write a scholarly text of 7–15 pages according to the call for papers (LINK); we will use these texts as a basis for working through aspects of reader-centered writing in the coming weeks and you may also continue with these papers for the final assignment. Deadline: Thu Nov 7, 2 PM. Submit as a pdf, including a cover page and indicating one of five topic areas, too, by e-mail from the zedat or @fu-berlin.de e-mail address to my email address, use the subject “porcupine”.

5 – Tue Nov 12 12–2 PM – reviewing your texts

Swap your 7–15 page papers with 2–3 classmates. As you read their drafts, identify areas where the intended audience and purpose are unclear. Provide feedback on how to better orient the writing toward specific reader communities.

6 – Tue Nov 19 1–2 PM – identifying readers

  • Understand that writing serves different functions for different audiences (teachers, professionals, etc.)
  • Identify the specific community of readers you are writing for and what they care about understanding
  • Learn to write within the norms and codes of that particular community

TASK #2: Analyze your paper topic and the disciplinary field(s) it relates to. Identify 2–3 distinct reader communities who may be interested in your work and what they likely care about understanding related to your topic. Submit this as a pdf with the topic of your paper, a max. 5 sentence abstract and list of the reader communities including elaboration by e-mail from the zedat or @fu-berlin.de e-mail address to my email address, use the subject “porcupine”. Deadline Thu Nov 21 6 PM.

7 – Tue Nov 26 1–2 PM – constructing a problem

  • Understand the importance of creating instability and tension to show value
  • Use language that signals inconsistencies, anomalies, and contradictions
  • Employ cost/benefit language to highlight the consequences of the problem

TASK #3: For your paper topic, construct a motivating problem that creates instability and tension. Highlight the inconsistencies, anomalies or costs to the reader communities you identified if the problem persists unresolved. Bring the 2–3 paragraphs with you for the independent writing session to discuss with your fellow students.

8 – Tue Dec 3 12–2 PM – improving your text // independent writing time // peer-review

Break into small groups and discuss the “problems” you’ve constructed for your papers. Do your peers find the problems motivating and value-creating for the stated audiences? Provide suggestions for strengthening the instability, costs/benefits framing.

TASK #4: After peer reviewing others’ problem constructions, submit your feedback on 1-2 examples as a pdf with the examples and your feedback by e-mail from the zedat or @fu-berlin.de e-mail address to my email address, use the subject “porcupine”. Deadline Thu Dec 5 6 PM.

9 – Tue Dec 10 1–2 PM– the perils of gaps and the power of errors

  • Avoid relying solely on “gap” formulations, which often fail to demonstrate value
  • Embrace “error” formulations that challenge the community’s current understanding
  • Argue persuasively why the error exists and why it matters to the readers

TASK #5: Officially issue of final paper topics. Students confirm their selected topic by Thu Dec 12 6 PM. Writing time for the final 15–18 pages paper begins. You may either continue with the paper you have submitted or write a completely new paper. You are encouraged to write papers as a team of authors.

10 – Tue Dec 17 12–2 PM – improving your text // independent writing time // peer-review

Swap your revised problem statements identifying gaps vs. errors. Assess whether the stance is clear and persuasive in demonstrating why the reader communities should care. Offer feedback.

TASK #6: After peer reviewing problem framings as gaps vs errors, submit your feedback on 1–2 examples as a pdf with the examples and your feedback by e-mail from the zedat or @fu-berlin.de e-mail address to my email address, use the subject “porcupine”. Deadline Thu Dec 19 6 PM.

11 – Tue Jan 7 1–2 PM– beyond background and definitions

  • Move away from traditional introduction models focused on background and definitions
  • Ditch the “hourglass” approach that prioritizes stability over instability
  • Learn to open with the problem and its consequences, not generic context

12 – Tue Jan 14 1–2 PM– literature review as problem-enriching

  • Approach literature reviews not just as summaries, but as value-creating exercises
  • Identify tensions, complications, and costs within the existing literature
  • Use the review to enrich and deepen the motivating problem for your work

13 – Tue Jan 21 1–2 PM – co-producing texts with the help of ai

Key Session Content:

  • Understand the fundamental differences between human writing processes and AI text generation
  • Avoid getting trapped in AI-dependent workflows that bypass critical thinking
  • Structure your writing process to maximize human insight while critically evaluating potential AI assistance

    Core Concepts:
    1. Human Writing Process vs. AI Generation
  • Writing as thinking vs. writing as pattern matching
  • The value of struggle and uncertainty
  • When clarity emerges through writing process
    2. Critical AI Workflows
  • Identifying when AI seems tempting (language barriers, writer’s block, time pressure)
  • Understanding what you lose by outsourcing different parts of writing
  • Developing criteria for justified vs. convenient AI use
    3. Community-Based Writing Strategies
  • Building peer support networks
  • Collaborative writing and editing practices
  • Shared resources and knowledge banks

14 – Tue Jan 28 12–2 PM – improving your text // independent writing time // peer-review

Trade paper drafts and examine them through the lens of AI co-production. Each reviewer should:

  1. Identify sections where AI assistance might be tempting but would bypass crucial thinking work
  2. Suggest alternative approaches that maintain intellectual sovereignty
  3. Find opportunities where limited AI use might be justified by clear social/academic benefit

TASK #7: Critical Writing Process Analysis
After peer reviewing each other’s drafts, submit a reflection (1-2 pages) that:

  • Takes 1-2 examples from the papers you reviewed
  • Analyzes specific passages where AI tools might be commonly used (e.g., language polishing, transitional phrases, literature summaries)
  • Discusses the tradeoffs involved (environmental cost, thinking process, accessibility needs)
  • Proposes concrete alternative strategies for addressing writing challenges through peer support and collaborative work

Submit your analysis as a PDF by e-mail from your zedat or @fu-berlin.de address to my email address, using the subject “porcupine”. Deadline Thu Jan 30 6 PM.

15 – Tue Feb 4 1–2 PM – course wrap-up // interdisciplinary challenges

  • Navigate the unique challenges of writing for multiple disciplinary communities
  • Explicitly identify and address the distinct problems faced by each community
  • Find creative ways to demonstrate value across diverse reader perspectives

16 – Tue Feb 11 2 PM – first deadline to submit your final polished 15–18 page paper, by e-mail from the zedat or @fu-berlin.de e-mail address to my email address, use the subject “porcupine”.

17 – Tue Feb 25 2 PM – first deadline to submit your final polished 15–18 page paper, by e-mail from the zedat or @fu-berlin.de e-mail address to my email address, use the subject “porcupine”.

learning outcomes

By the end of this course, students will be able to:

  • Identify compelling and accessible writings on the Middle East targeted at general audiences.
  • Recognize effective rhetorical techniques for establishing value and relevance for readers.
  • Craft engaging narratives that challenge assumptions and shift perspectives on the Middle East.
  • Employ ethical research practices when writing on complex regional issues.
  • Provide constructive feedback to peers to improve clarity, organization, and flow of writing.
  • Revise their own writing to strengthen reader-centered focus and persuasive impact.
  • Translate academic insights into compelling stories and arguments for broader audiences.
  • Develop dissemination strategies to share their work with target readers.
  • Articulate goals for reaching wider publics beyond academic circles.
  • Reflect on their growth as public scholars able to make regional knowledge accessible.