Your two new sources are due Wednesday, Oct 6th. Conferences will be Wed and Thur as needed. Sources must be highlighted with understanding.
Comparison of Sources Rough Draft Due Tuesday, October 12th. Peer evals in class.
NO CLASS Oct 15th, 20th, and 29th
Journal #5 Due Sunday, October 17th at midnight.
First Revised Draft Due Tuesday, October 19th before class.
Reflective Analysis Due at the end of class on the 19th.
Annotated Works Cited Due with the final paper.
Final Draft of Comparison of Sources Due at midnight on Sunday, October 24th.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Essay Exam
By this point, you should be immersed deeply enough into your research and your topic that you are wallowing in the complexity of your position. In an essay, present to me how you have gone about the research process and the choices you have made as your ideas have evolved. Compose a thesis statement that embodies your journey through this process, and support it effectively in a five-paragraph essay. You can focus on how your views have changed, how your writing has changed, how you have changed...anything related to this journey. You should have at least three supporting points in the body, one per paragraph. These should come from your research, experiences, or readings from the text.
Remember, your thesis should be a concise statement that answers a question. Remember to use because clauses if those are helpful to you.
Compose an outline first. Plan and organize your ideas before you begin writing. Proofread before you submit via Turnitin.
Essays are due at the end of class.
Remember, your thesis should be a concise statement that answers a question. Remember to use because clauses if those are helpful to you.
Compose an outline first. Plan and organize your ideas before you begin writing. Proofread before you submit via Turnitin.
Essays are due at the end of class.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
A Modest Proposal
Using the criteria for the SSSR, evaluate the following source:
http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html#hit
We will discuss when you are finished.
http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html#hit
We will discuss when you are finished.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Due Dates--CHANGES
Timed Essay Exam will be Thur Sept 3oth. We will discuss this in class.
Final draft of essay is due Friday Oct 1st.
Final draft of essay is due Friday Oct 1st.
Monday, September 20, 2010
SSSR Peer Evals
Read the entire essay first; then go back and complete the review. Copy this form and post your comments on the individual's blog. Then, make sure you offer the opportunity to discuss this review with them.
You must review at least five essays. You must also review your own. That's six total.
CHANGE THAT--ONLY DO THREE PLUS YOURS: FOUR TOTAL
1. How does the title of the essay convey the purpose of the essay?
Introduction
2. In what way does the "grabber" prepare the reader for the information contained in the essay?
3. Does the introduction follow the conventions of S/R essays as detailed in the format instructions? If not, indicate what is missing.
4. Does the essay have a clearly stated thesis in the introduction that previews what the writer will discuss in the response? If not, indicate with reader suggestions about what the thesis could be.
Summary
5. Does the summary paragraph restate the author and other publication information?
6. Is the summary concise and clearly written with no quotations or paraphrasing?
7. Does the summary include only the author's ideas and none of the writer's ideas?
8. If there are quotations or paraphrased material, underline what needs to be deleted from the summary.
9. List the points the writer includes in the summary.
10. Talk with the writer about what s/he left out of the summary (if anything), and the reason why the writer decided not to put that in the summary.
Response
11. Is the response directly related to the thesis?
12. How has the writer organized the response--by points from the summary or logos, ethos, and pathos?
13. In what ways does the writer use quotations and/or facts and statistics from the article to support his/her thesis?
14. Discuss with the writer how s/he could use quotations/facts more effectively.
15. Has the writer used proper citations format? If not, underline where the errors or omissions occur.
16. Are there other issues from the summary or from the article that you as a reader think the writer should include in the response? Discuss this with the writer; indicate where this additino might be most effective or appropriate.
Conclusion
17. Does the conclusion restate the writer's thesis? (I would avoid word for word, to prevent sounding redundant, but make the same argument)
18. Does the conclusion concisely summarize the main points the writer makes in the response? If not, discuss with the writer what s/he might consider including in the conclusion.
19. Does the conclusion provide closure for the essay? If not, discuss with the writer how this might be done.
Other Issues
20. What is the author's bias?
21. When in the essay does the writer address author bias?
22. Discuss with the writer whether this is the most effective place to discuss bias...should the discussion be earlier or later in the essay?
23. Is there a Works Cited attached with a critical analysis of the source?
24. Is the paper properly formatted according to the course directives?
25. Does the essay read smoothly from one paragraph to the next? If not, discuss with the writer where s/he might include transitions.
Overall
Explain the impression you get from reading the essay.
What did you learn about the writer from reading his/her essay?
How would you rate this draft? Based on the following criteria, is it an Early Draft, Middle Draft, or Late Draft?
An early draft means that your draft seems to be an early one--one that could benefit from some rethinking and re-seeing . The draft may not fully explore the ideas it has introduced or may lack a clear focus on its subject or a clear sense of purpose. Perhaps it could benefit from a stronger sense of organization.
A middle draft means that your draft appears to be in the middle stages of the writing process. This draft has some solid and interesting ideas, but it could benefit from some revision and editing in order to prepare it for presentation. Usually, these drafts have established a clearly focused subject and have begun to explore the subject in ways that suggest a strong sense of purpose. Sometimes, middle drafts need further fleshing out of ideas or sharpening of the structure through which those ideas are presented.
A late draft means that your draft is close to a portfolio draft--a draft that is ready to be presented in your portfolio. These drafts usually have a clearly focused discussion with sufficient substance to achieve their purpose. The writing itself may not yet be as clear and effective as it might be. This draft probably needs some polishing and editing.
Explain why you believe this is an early, middle, or late draft.
You must review at least five essays. You must also review your own. That's six total.
CHANGE THAT--ONLY DO THREE PLUS YOURS: FOUR TOTAL
1. How does the title of the essay convey the purpose of the essay?
Introduction
2. In what way does the "grabber" prepare the reader for the information contained in the essay?
3. Does the introduction follow the conventions of S/R essays as detailed in the format instructions? If not, indicate what is missing.
4. Does the essay have a clearly stated thesis in the introduction that previews what the writer will discuss in the response? If not, indicate with reader suggestions about what the thesis could be.
Summary
5. Does the summary paragraph restate the author and other publication information?
6. Is the summary concise and clearly written with no quotations or paraphrasing?
7. Does the summary include only the author's ideas and none of the writer's ideas?
8. If there are quotations or paraphrased material, underline what needs to be deleted from the summary.
9. List the points the writer includes in the summary.
10. Talk with the writer about what s/he left out of the summary (if anything), and the reason why the writer decided not to put that in the summary.
Response
11. Is the response directly related to the thesis?
12. How has the writer organized the response--by points from the summary or logos, ethos, and pathos?
13. In what ways does the writer use quotations and/or facts and statistics from the article to support his/her thesis?
14. Discuss with the writer how s/he could use quotations/facts more effectively.
15. Has the writer used proper citations format? If not, underline where the errors or omissions occur.
16. Are there other issues from the summary or from the article that you as a reader think the writer should include in the response? Discuss this with the writer; indicate where this additino might be most effective or appropriate.
Conclusion
17. Does the conclusion restate the writer's thesis? (I would avoid word for word, to prevent sounding redundant, but make the same argument)
18. Does the conclusion concisely summarize the main points the writer makes in the response? If not, discuss with the writer what s/he might consider including in the conclusion.
19. Does the conclusion provide closure for the essay? If not, discuss with the writer how this might be done.
Other Issues
20. What is the author's bias?
21. When in the essay does the writer address author bias?
22. Discuss with the writer whether this is the most effective place to discuss bias...should the discussion be earlier or later in the essay?
23. Is there a Works Cited attached with a critical analysis of the source?
24. Is the paper properly formatted according to the course directives?
25. Does the essay read smoothly from one paragraph to the next? If not, discuss with the writer where s/he might include transitions.
Overall
Explain the impression you get from reading the essay.
What did you learn about the writer from reading his/her essay?
How would you rate this draft? Based on the following criteria, is it an Early Draft, Middle Draft, or Late Draft?
An early draft means that your draft seems to be an early one--one that could benefit from some rethinking and re-seeing . The draft may not fully explore the ideas it has introduced or may lack a clear focus on its subject or a clear sense of purpose. Perhaps it could benefit from a stronger sense of organization.
A middle draft means that your draft appears to be in the middle stages of the writing process. This draft has some solid and interesting ideas, but it could benefit from some revision and editing in order to prepare it for presentation. Usually, these drafts have established a clearly focused subject and have begun to explore the subject in ways that suggest a strong sense of purpose. Sometimes, middle drafts need further fleshing out of ideas or sharpening of the structure through which those ideas are presented.
A late draft means that your draft is close to a portfolio draft--a draft that is ready to be presented in your portfolio. These drafts usually have a clearly focused discussion with sufficient substance to achieve their purpose. The writing itself may not yet be as clear and effective as it might be. This draft probably needs some polishing and editing.
Explain why you believe this is an early, middle, or late draft.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Sample Sum/Resp
Is health care reform truly bureaucracy? Or is that statement just an opinion? In an op-ed posted by former Governor, and Vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in a Wall Street journal opinion section,"Obama and the Bureaucratization of health care", Ms. Palin asserts that President Obama's proposals at health care reform will create an enormous, inefficient, and ethically questionable bureaucracy. Does her opinion have evidence? Or is it strictly argument? While Ms. Palin makes a potent argument for her side on Health care, using appeals to emotion, logic, and ethics, makes a strong case for her beliefs. however, in the interest of promoting those beliefs, she takes a very emotional approach, and sometimes colors the evidence to suit those views.
Ms. Palin in her op-ed "Obama and the Bureaucratization of health care", makes several arguments against current health proposals. At first, she acknowledges the need of a society to care for the elderly and sick, and indicates this as a responsibility of the people.
Ms. Palin appeals to the conservative base of her party by stating the President's proposals for health care reform as "Bureaucratic" in nature. Her opposition fits in with many of her Conservative colleagues' beliefs against the current health care reform attempts by Democrats in Congress. Many of her fellow conservatives in Congress, have spoken out against and continue to speak out against the current health care reform proposals.
She then acknowledges the "crippling expenses of health care." She also states that allowing government health care spending to continue unabated will add to the federal budget deficit, and that the current medicare and medicaid programs are wrought with waste and inefficiency. Ms. Palin then cites an article from the Congressional budget office that indicates that the current legislation in congress will do little to deter federal health spending. She also states that the legislation creates an independent advisory council that is "unelected, and largely unaccountable" that is given the task of reducing costs. She refers to such a council as a "death Panel" in her op-ed article.
After making several notable points against the health care reform, such as the aforementioned "Bureaucracy" and "Death panels" she summarizes her thoughts in the last few paragraphs. She states that the health care reform will lead to lower wages for American workers, unwanted influence of government power in ordinary citizen's lives, uncontrollable deficits, and take the individual power of medical choice out of the hands of Americans.
Now, these points about health care having been made Sarah Palin does have credibility to her argument. She lists several studies done by other groups, such as the Congressional Budget Office, and the Cato Institute. Also, having her article published in the Wall street journal gives her some more credibility, with millions of average Americans, as well as millions of businessmen and women. However, She does intermingle a good deal of fact, with opinion.For example, the Medicare advisory council, that Ms. Palin asserts is a completely new entity that would bring about "rationing of care" and "death panels" is not a new entity at all. In a published letter to House majority leader Steny Hoyer on page 3, the director of the congressional budget office states that the individuals, who would have to be physicians, or specialists in health care, would be appointed by the president, and only approved of if the Senate passes them. Furthermore, any actions proposed by the Medicare advisory council, would have to be approved by the secretary of health and human services, and the President. Also, on page four of the letter, the CBO also states that the council would not have a set target of budget cuts, and there would not be a requirement to deny care due to budget circumstances.
The next fact that Sarah Palin asserts is a quote from the congressional budget office that the current health care proposals will not generate much savings. According to the Director Elmendorf and his staff's research, this is correct. In a letter to House majority leader Steny Hoyer from Director Elmendorf, he states that the current proposal would not bring about much in the way of cost savings.
Ms. Palin also takes information provided by the Cato institute to make her argument that such health care reform would result in lower wages. This is a debatable subject, and given that the Cato institute has sided with conservatives on many issues, including taxation, foreign events, and financial regulation (see Cato.org) individuals should consider the probability that they are not completely un-biased.
In all, Ms. Palin's article does contain some fact, and some strict argument and opinion. Throughout her article, she uses various methods of connecting with the audience. Some of these methods include appealing to emotion, logic and reasoning, and ethical arguments.
At the onset of her article, Ms. Palin quotes former President Reagan on the need to ensure that everyone can get medical care. She then proceeds to make the argument for the responsibility of society to care for the sick and the elderly, and those who cannot care for themselves. This kind of argument will appeal to those people who feel that there is a moral duty of society to care for these groups of people. This is a strong appeal to the Evangelical base of her party, and is a recurring theme with many of the Evangelical-Christians in the party base.
Ms. Palin also makes an appeal to logical reasoning here, by citing examples from the Congressional budget office, and the Cato institute studies done on health care. She could be trying to appeal to moderates and independents that are on the sidelines of the health care debate by using independent sources that aren't directly affiliated with either party.
Perhaps her most potent argument now, comes from the emotional side of the issue. Many members of her party base have a distrust of the government. If not a distrust, then at least a deep skepticism on the ability, and competency of the government to operate. She appeals to this base again with the statements that while insurance companies can be unaccountable, the federal government is perhaps even more so. Now, this part of her article involves much opinion, and contention. However, it is most probably very effective for the base of her party that questions the efficiency, and even honesty of the federal government. She continues to claim in the article that many of the proposals from the democrats will increase the deficit, decrease the earnings of everyday Americans through inflation, and "increase the power of unaccountable government technocrats". Again, all of this is more opinion then fact. Independent agencies and fact check organizations have not verified these claims with any certainty, so they should be taken at best with a grain of salt.
At the end of her article, Ms. Palin states that despite President Obama's promise to the contrary, the current health reforms will not provide more stability to American families and individuals. Again, this could be a very debatable subject here, depending on the audience receiving it. There are legitimate points to her article, she uses some credible evidence to support her argument, and makes a strong emotional and ethical appeal. However, all of these facts may become clouded by the simple reality that her description of the "death panels" does little to appeal to logic, due to it being untrue, and does not broaden her appeal to audiences beyond the base.
As an audience member, I appreciate the appeal to logic by using findings from independent groups, however they were too few and far between to be an effective argument on the subject for me. Also, due to the fact that her claims about the Medicare advisory panels were inaccurate, I have not been swayed by this article to her position.
It is my conclusion that Ms. Palin makes several arguments in her paper that are swayed by emotion, rather than logic. Her appeals to pathos are the strongest. While her uses of logos were effective, they were, in some of the cases in her article, either biased with Ms. Palin on the subject, or an incomplete analysis of the facts at hand that present her case in a better light.
Now, from reading Ms. Palin's article, can one make the determination if health care reform is truly creating bueraucracy? Or will the reader decide it is just Ms. Palin's opinion on the issue? You are the reader, it is up to you to decide.
Ms. Palin in her op-ed "Obama and the Bureaucratization of health care", makes several arguments against current health proposals. At first, she acknowledges the need of a society to care for the elderly and sick, and indicates this as a responsibility of the people.
Ms. Palin appeals to the conservative base of her party by stating the President's proposals for health care reform as "Bureaucratic" in nature. Her opposition fits in with many of her Conservative colleagues' beliefs against the current health care reform attempts by Democrats in Congress. Many of her fellow conservatives in Congress, have spoken out against and continue to speak out against the current health care reform proposals.
She then acknowledges the "crippling expenses of health care." She also states that allowing government health care spending to continue unabated will add to the federal budget deficit, and that the current medicare and medicaid programs are wrought with waste and inefficiency. Ms. Palin then cites an article from the Congressional budget office that indicates that the current legislation in congress will do little to deter federal health spending. She also states that the legislation creates an independent advisory council that is "unelected, and largely unaccountable" that is given the task of reducing costs. She refers to such a council as a "death Panel" in her op-ed article.
After making several notable points against the health care reform, such as the aforementioned "Bureaucracy" and "Death panels" she summarizes her thoughts in the last few paragraphs. She states that the health care reform will lead to lower wages for American workers, unwanted influence of government power in ordinary citizen's lives, uncontrollable deficits, and take the individual power of medical choice out of the hands of Americans.
Now, these points about health care having been made Sarah Palin does have credibility to her argument. She lists several studies done by other groups, such as the Congressional Budget Office, and the Cato Institute. Also, having her article published in the Wall street journal gives her some more credibility, with millions of average Americans, as well as millions of businessmen and women. However, She does intermingle a good deal of fact, with opinion.For example, the Medicare advisory council, that Ms. Palin asserts is a completely new entity that would bring about "rationing of care" and "death panels" is not a new entity at all. In a published letter to House majority leader Steny Hoyer on page 3, the director of the congressional budget office states that the individuals, who would have to be physicians, or specialists in health care, would be appointed by the president, and only approved of if the Senate passes them. Furthermore, any actions proposed by the Medicare advisory council, would have to be approved by the secretary of health and human services, and the President. Also, on page four of the letter, the CBO also states that the council would not have a set target of budget cuts, and there would not be a requirement to deny care due to budget circumstances.
The next fact that Sarah Palin asserts is a quote from the congressional budget office that the current health care proposals will not generate much savings. According to the Director Elmendorf and his staff's research, this is correct. In a letter to House majority leader Steny Hoyer from Director Elmendorf, he states that the current proposal would not bring about much in the way of cost savings.
Ms. Palin also takes information provided by the Cato institute to make her argument that such health care reform would result in lower wages. This is a debatable subject, and given that the Cato institute has sided with conservatives on many issues, including taxation, foreign events, and financial regulation (see Cato.org) individuals should consider the probability that they are not completely un-biased.
In all, Ms. Palin's article does contain some fact, and some strict argument and opinion. Throughout her article, she uses various methods of connecting with the audience. Some of these methods include appealing to emotion, logic and reasoning, and ethical arguments.
At the onset of her article, Ms. Palin quotes former President Reagan on the need to ensure that everyone can get medical care. She then proceeds to make the argument for the responsibility of society to care for the sick and the elderly, and those who cannot care for themselves. This kind of argument will appeal to those people who feel that there is a moral duty of society to care for these groups of people. This is a strong appeal to the Evangelical base of her party, and is a recurring theme with many of the Evangelical-Christians in the party base.
Ms. Palin also makes an appeal to logical reasoning here, by citing examples from the Congressional budget office, and the Cato institute studies done on health care. She could be trying to appeal to moderates and independents that are on the sidelines of the health care debate by using independent sources that aren't directly affiliated with either party.
Perhaps her most potent argument now, comes from the emotional side of the issue. Many members of her party base have a distrust of the government. If not a distrust, then at least a deep skepticism on the ability, and competency of the government to operate. She appeals to this base again with the statements that while insurance companies can be unaccountable, the federal government is perhaps even more so. Now, this part of her article involves much opinion, and contention. However, it is most probably very effective for the base of her party that questions the efficiency, and even honesty of the federal government. She continues to claim in the article that many of the proposals from the democrats will increase the deficit, decrease the earnings of everyday Americans through inflation, and "increase the power of unaccountable government technocrats". Again, all of this is more opinion then fact. Independent agencies and fact check organizations have not verified these claims with any certainty, so they should be taken at best with a grain of salt.
At the end of her article, Ms. Palin states that despite President Obama's promise to the contrary, the current health reforms will not provide more stability to American families and individuals. Again, this could be a very debatable subject here, depending on the audience receiving it. There are legitimate points to her article, she uses some credible evidence to support her argument, and makes a strong emotional and ethical appeal. However, all of these facts may become clouded by the simple reality that her description of the "death panels" does little to appeal to logic, due to it being untrue, and does not broaden her appeal to audiences beyond the base.
As an audience member, I appreciate the appeal to logic by using findings from independent groups, however they were too few and far between to be an effective argument on the subject for me. Also, due to the fact that her claims about the Medicare advisory panels were inaccurate, I have not been swayed by this article to her position.
It is my conclusion that Ms. Palin makes several arguments in her paper that are swayed by emotion, rather than logic. Her appeals to pathos are the strongest. While her uses of logos were effective, they were, in some of the cases in her article, either biased with Ms. Palin on the subject, or an incomplete analysis of the facts at hand that present her case in a better light.
Now, from reading Ms. Palin's article, can one make the determination if health care reform is truly creating bueraucracy? Or will the reader decide it is just Ms. Palin's opinion on the issue? You are the reader, it is up to you to decide.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Due Dates
Journal #3 will be due Sunday night. 9-12
Your three highlighted articles will be due Monday. 9-13 We will have individual conferences Monday and Tuesday as needed.
Your works cited will be due THURSDAY with your rough draft 9-16 Use proper MLA format. Ask if you need to. Otherwise, it's easily found on the internet, and some sources document them for you.
A rough draft of your Single Source Strong Response (SSSR) essay will be due THURSDAY 9-16
You will submit these to Turnitin.com AND have another electronic copy to use for class for peer evaluations.
NO CLASS FRIDAY 9-17
Your first revised draft will be due Thursday 9-23
Journal #4 is due Sunday 9-26
Final Draft of SSSR is due Wednesday 9-29
MIDTERM Essay Exam Friday 10-1
Your three highlighted articles will be due Monday. 9-13 We will have individual conferences Monday and Tuesday as needed.
Your works cited will be due THURSDAY with your rough draft 9-16 Use proper MLA format. Ask if you need to. Otherwise, it's easily found on the internet, and some sources document them for you.
A rough draft of your Single Source Strong Response (SSSR) essay will be due THURSDAY 9-16
You will submit these to Turnitin.com AND have another electronic copy to use for class for peer evaluations.
NO CLASS FRIDAY 9-17
Your first revised draft will be due Thursday 9-23
Journal #4 is due Sunday 9-26
Final Draft of SSSR is due Wednesday 9-29
MIDTERM Essay Exam Friday 10-1
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Ch. 3 and 6 notes
Angle of Vision:
What influences your angle?
How do you construct your angle based on audience, purpose, and genre?
Logos: reason; logic
Ethos: creditiblity; ethics--trustworthy, thoughtful, fair
Pathos: emotional appeal, persuasion (passion)
How do I logically present my view, suport with credible resources, and persuade with emotional appeal?
Q: How do visual images make implicit arguments (logos) while also appealing to our values and emotions (pathos) and causing us to respond favorably or unfavorably to the artist (ethos)?
Think of advertisements.
Ch. 6
-listen carefully to the text, recognize parts and functions, summarize ideas
-formulate strong response by interacting with text through agreement, interrogation, or opposition
Play Devil's Advocate
Read WITH the grain:
-see world through author's perspective
-open yourself to the argument
-apply insights to new contexts
-connect to your own experiences and knowledge
Read AGAINST the grain:
-resist ideas by questioning points
-raise doubts
-analyze limits of perspective
-refute argument
Read Rhetorically
Be aware of the effect a text is intended to have on you
Critically consider that effect
Enter into or challenge intentions
Summaries/Abstracts
Criteria for an effective summary incorporated into your own prose p. 119 checklist
Strong Response
Rhetorical Critique: analyzes a text's rhetorical strategies and evaluates how effectively the author achieves his/her own goals; focus on how text is constructed, rhetorical strategies, effectiveness of appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos; closely analyze the text itself; read both with and against the grain and discuss what is effective and ineffective
Ideas Critique: focuses on the ideas; treat as a voice in a conversation you are involved in; one perspective on an issue, how does it compare with your and others; RESEARCH is key, combined with personal experiences and critical thinking; challenge ideas, point out flaws, provide research to refute and extend argument; speak back to the text
Reflection: avoid this one for now as your primary focus; too open-ended, too abstract; better once you are further into the argument; WOULD work with a blend, but it should be a very small part
Strong Response should be written on a Single Source but you must consult many before making your final selection; I want to see at least three highlighted and noted sources at your conference and would expect you to read many abstracts before making your final selection.
Single Source/Summary Response/Strong Response
These are all the same thing; different versions of the text have just given them different names.
You will be evaluating a single source, but you must show me at least THREE that you have looked at, minimum. Do not just pick the first source you find.
You must be able to think critically about what you read, particularly when evaluating sources found on the internet.
In text, use "Criteria for Evaluating Web Sites"
p. 640 (old edition)
Internet research site:
http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/
What influences your angle?
How do you construct your angle based on audience, purpose, and genre?
Logos: reason; logic
Ethos: creditiblity; ethics--trustworthy, thoughtful, fair
Pathos: emotional appeal, persuasion (passion)
How do I logically present my view, suport with credible resources, and persuade with emotional appeal?
Q: How do visual images make implicit arguments (logos) while also appealing to our values and emotions (pathos) and causing us to respond favorably or unfavorably to the artist (ethos)?
Think of advertisements.
Ch. 6
-listen carefully to the text, recognize parts and functions, summarize ideas
-formulate strong response by interacting with text through agreement, interrogation, or opposition
Play Devil's Advocate
Read WITH the grain:
-see world through author's perspective
-open yourself to the argument
-apply insights to new contexts
-connect to your own experiences and knowledge
Read AGAINST the grain:
-resist ideas by questioning points
-raise doubts
-analyze limits of perspective
-refute argument
Read Rhetorically
Be aware of the effect a text is intended to have on you
Critically consider that effect
Enter into or challenge intentions
Summaries/Abstracts
Criteria for an effective summary incorporated into your own prose p. 119 checklist
Strong Response
Rhetorical Critique: analyzes a text's rhetorical strategies and evaluates how effectively the author achieves his/her own goals; focus on how text is constructed, rhetorical strategies, effectiveness of appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos; closely analyze the text itself; read both with and against the grain and discuss what is effective and ineffective
Ideas Critique: focuses on the ideas; treat as a voice in a conversation you are involved in; one perspective on an issue, how does it compare with your and others; RESEARCH is key, combined with personal experiences and critical thinking; challenge ideas, point out flaws, provide research to refute and extend argument; speak back to the text
Reflection: avoid this one for now as your primary focus; too open-ended, too abstract; better once you are further into the argument; WOULD work with a blend, but it should be a very small part
Strong Response should be written on a Single Source but you must consult many before making your final selection; I want to see at least three highlighted and noted sources at your conference and would expect you to read many abstracts before making your final selection.
Single Source/Summary Response/Strong Response
These are all the same thing; different versions of the text have just given them different names.
You will be evaluating a single source, but you must show me at least THREE that you have looked at, minimum. Do not just pick the first source you find.
You must be able to think critically about what you read, particularly when evaluating sources found on the internet.
In text, use "Criteria for Evaluating Web Sites"
p. 640 (old edition)
Internet research site:
http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/
Late start days for 1:00 class only
Class will begin at 1:20 on the following days:
Sept 13
Sept 27
Oct 11
Nov 8
Sept 13
Sept 27
Oct 11
Nov 8
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)