Today you write three messages. The tutor email gets Tuesday’s seven-clause checklist; the extension request and group opener have their own checks.
Before the lab#
Optional: bring an email you’ve actually sent to a staff member this semester, with names removed. It will get tested in round 3, if you want it to.
Run sheet#
Times below run from the 14:05 start; finish at 14:55.
| Time | What happens |
|---|---|
| 0:00–0:03 | Form pairs and read the three fictional cards below. |
| 0:03–0:18 | Write. Five minutes per card: a tutor email, an extension request, and a group-work opener. |
| 0:18–0:31 | Test. Swap. Your partner records pass or fail for each of the tutor email’s seven clauses. For the extension request: is there a date, and is it under 120 words? For the group opener: does it propose all five agreement items? |
| 0:31–0:41 | Fix. Rewrite every failure, or write one line on why the clause shouldn’t apply to this message. |
| 0:41–0:50 | Optional: test a real, anonymised sent email. Otherwise compare one justified exception. Use the last two minutes to record one change and why you made it. |
The three cards#
- Tutor email. You are drafting an Interoperation Report clause: “We reply promptly.” The brief requires a checkable clause. Ask Jonah for feedback on your proposed replacement, “reply by 18:00 on the next weekday”, before your partnership meeting on Friday. Use a fictional name and student number.
- Extension request. A family commitment has interrupted your report work. The report is due 30 May; you are halfway through and want until 2 June. Ask Wren before the deadline. No invented personal history is needed.
- Group opener. A fictional three-person group has agreed to work together but nothing else. Propose roles, a channel, a reply time, a decision rule, and what happens when someone goes quiet. Mark these as proposals for the others to accept or change.
Why “the right call” is allowed#
The seven clauses are a specification, not a law, and a good specification documents its exceptions. An email to a tutor who has told you “just message me on Ed” can break clause 7. A reason on paper is a pass. Silently breaking a clause is a fail. That’s also the standard for your Protocol Specification.
What leaves the room#
Three messages that pass their tests, with any exceptions explained. For Sunday’s journal, check one clause against a real email and the reply it got. Did the clause help, or did the exchange give you a reason to revise it?