On Tuesday, December 15, we prepared for Thursday’s final by reading and discussing a previous CUNY exam given in relation to the New York Times article, “A Natural Fix for A.D.H.D.”.
On Thursday, December 10, we prepared for next week’s final by walking through two example exams: “It’s Hard to Be a Hero” by Joe Nocera and its related prompt, as well as a previous CUNY exam given in relation to the New York Times article, “Hello, Stranger.”
On Tuesday, December 8, we completed a close reading of J. Robert Lennon’s untitled McSweeney’s piece, exploring the power of word choice, the influence of punctuation (commas vs. periods vs. semicolons), and the effects of strategic repetition.
On Thursday, December 3, argument papers were returned.  I met with students individually to field questions, and to review any over-reaching concerns.
At the very beginning and very end of class, two articles were mentioned as they relate to pieces we have read and discussed this semester:
- “On Guns, We’re Not Even Trying” was written by Nicholas Kristof, the same op-ed journalist whose New York Times piece on gun violence we used as our exemplar of argument writing.
- John Cassidy’s piece in the New Yorker, “Mark Zuckerberg and the Rise of Philanthrocapitalism,” touches upon issues that are raised in Andrew Carnegie’s “The Gospel of Wealth.”
On Tuesday, December 1, we read and discussed Blake Butler’s “List of 50 (22 of 50): CURSE LOOP,” paying particular attention to how he uses conceptual transitions to move readers through the essay.
The prompt for our narrative OR process essay revision was also distributed:Â revisions will be due on Thursday, December 10.
On Tuesday, November 24, we discussed Ross Gay’s “Some Thoughts on Mercy,” focusing on exceptional qualities of essay, as well as questions it stirred among folks in class.
During the second half of class, we reviewed a quote integration handout; peer-edits and graded polished drafts were then returned, allowing time for questions.
On Thursday, November 19, we discussed Judith Shulevitz’s “Siri, You’re Messing Up a Generation of Children,” a secondary source, and evaluated it against one of the primary sources Shulevitz cites (a Developmental Psychology research report)
Ross Gay’s “Some Thoughts on Mercy” was distributed, as we will discuss it on Tuesday.
On Tuesday, November 17, argument essays were collected and redistributed to facilitate a peer review.  Peer edits, due Tuesday, November 24, should consist of your filling out page 1 of the editing guide and writing a letter that addresses the questions posed on page 2 of the guide.  Letters can be hand-written.
We spent the majority of class completing group-work to support a five-team debate where teams weighed which of the five senses is most essential.  The debate involved both initial claims and rebuttals.
Judith Shulevitz’s “Siri, You’re Messing Up a Generation of Children” was distributed, as we will discuss it on Thursday.
On Thursday, November 12, we broke into groups and reviewed articles published by three different news sources covering this week’s resignation of the University of Missouri’s President, Tim Wolfe: “Wolfe resigns as president of UM Systems,” written by the staff at the Columbia Daily Tribune; “U. of Missouri President and Chancellor Resign After Mounting Protests Over Racism,” from Andy Thomason of The Chronicle of Higher Education, and “Missouri president Tim Wolfe resigns amid student criticism of handling of racial issues,” an article posted on ESPN.com.
For those who are interested, here is the link to Joe Nocera’s New York Times article, which contains a timeline related to the development of UM student protests: “College Athletes’ Potential Realized in Missouri Resignations.”
On Tuesday, November 10, we thought through a hypothetical argument essay topic that argues against raising the federal minimum wage to $15/hour by answering a few research questions. Specifically, we read “The Birth Of The Minimum Wage In America” by National Public Radio’s David Kestenbaum to gain a better understanding of the history of minimum wage in the U.S., and “Fatburger CEO: Why Nobody Wins With $15 Minimum Wage” by CheatSheet.com’s Sam Becker to better understand a CEO’s perspective on the matter.
Following, we ran a “speed dating” exercise in order to interrogate and think through individual research topics.
On Thursday, November 5, we discussed Jacob Riis’ “How the Other Half Lives,” evaluating how he used pathos to appeal to readers’ emotions, logos by presenting readers with logical facts and figures, and mythos by demonstrating how those living in NYC tenements developed a unique relationship with death. As Riis himself had been homeless for a spell, it could be argued that he also used ethos in developing his argument.
For those who are curious to learn more about the geographic locations of the wards noted in Riis’ essay, visit the New York Public Library digital collection to see a map. For those wishing to learn more about the specific impetus for different ethnic groups to immigrate to the U.S., the Lower East Side Tenement Museum provides a great resource that we’ll discuss on Tuesday.
On Tuesday, November 3, we discussed Andrew Carnegie’s piece, “The Gospel of Wealth,” paying attention to what Carnegie was arguing, how the argument is made, and how it applies (or doesn’t apply) to current wealth inequalities. We also identified pieces of evidence Carnegie could introduce to bolster and/or undermine his argument.
- “The Gospel of Wealth” – 1
- “The Gospel of Wealth” – 2
- “The Gospel of Wealth” – 3
- “The Gospel of Wealth” – 4
As not every edition of our textbook contains Jacob Riis’ “How the Other Half Lives,” the reading was distributed in class and scanned copies can be found below.
- “How the Other Half Lives” – 1
- “How the Other Half Lives” – 2
- “How the Other Half Lives” – 3
- “How the Other Half Lives” – 4
On Thursday, October 29, we evaluated arguments for both their content and delivery.
With regard to content, we explored the qualities of a claim (what the writer thinks), reasoning (why the author thinks this way), and evidence (how the author knows what he or she thinks is the case).
With regard to delivery, we started to differentiate between appealing to our readers’ logic (logos); emotion/sensibility (pathos); cultural beliefs/shared conscience (mythos); and their understanding of or position of credibility.
No texts were distributed, as we will be reading a selection from our textbook on Tuesday; please see our “Assignments” page for more information about our homework.
On Tuesday, October 27, by referring back to “Kristof: Lessons From the Virginia Shooting,” we explored how Monroe’s Motivated Sequence, a technique for strategically organizing persuasive speeches, can inform our argument writing. While not distributed in class, here is a great resource from Michigan State University’s Eli Broad College of Business that reviews Monroe’s Motivated Sequence.
Scott Blakeman’s Huffington Post article, “In Defense of Justin Bieber,” was also distributed and will be discussed in class on Thursday.
On Thursday, October 22, we took our midterm (a practice final exam) by reading and responding to Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer’s New York Times article, “Do Happier People Work Harder?”
On Tuesday, October 20, we peer edited using a process essay editing guide. We also listened to an episode of This American Life and discussed both the benefits of contextualizing outside sources and the pitfalls of packing process pieces with too much anecdotal evidence.
On Thursday, October 15, we used a matrix to evaluate Colson Whitehead’s “The Colossus of New York” and an excerpt from Ian Frazier’s book, Travels in Siberia. During class discussion we explored how these two pieces differed in purpose, point of view, intended audience, and order. We also spent time evaluating how each author’s individual style contributes meaning to his writing and determined whether we may be able to embrace similar stylistic choices when writing our own process essays.
Whitehead’s piece is published in our textbook; Frazier’s work can be accessed below.
On Tuesday, October 13, we reviewed the City Tech “Why and How to Avoid Plagiarism Guidelines” as well as a Purdue OWL resource regarding MLA in-text citations.
An excerpt from Ian Frazier’s book, Travels in Siberia, was also distributed; as is noted on our “Assignments” page, we will discuss Frazier’s writing during our next class.
On Thursday, October 8, we spent the first thirty minutes of class reviewing process essay topics. Following, we went to the library and met with a research librarian who introduced us to City Tech’s library and primed us on many of CUNY’s electronic databases. No new materials were distributed.
On Tuesday, October 6, graded narrative essays were returned and the process essay prompt was distributed. We also completed a series of Purdue OWL exercises in order to review tense usage: the answer key is available here.
Please visit the “Useful Links” page to access the J.D. Salinger excerpt that was distributed as an example of how to punctuate dialogue.
On Thursday, October 1, we delved into the particulars of process essay writing by discussing a resource from Austin Peay State University.
On Tuesday, September 29, we peer edited using a narrative essay editing guide. We also listened to cover songs and discussed the benefits of making our work unique and capable of moving our audience to feel a certain way.
On Friday, September 25, we put Suki Kim’s two essays into conversation with one another by filling out a matrix. No new materials were distributed.
On Thursday, September 24, we discussed Suki Kim’s “Facing Poverty with a Rich Girl’s Habits” (which can be found in our textbook).  Another essay written by Kim, “Forced From Home Yet Never Free of It,” was distributed and will be discussed during class tomorrow.
On Thursday, September 17, we discussed Colin Powell’s “My American Journey” (which can be found in our textbook). Our narrative essay prompt was also distributed: narrative papers will be due on October 1.
Please visit our “Assignments” page for more information about the narrative essay.
On Tuesday, September 8, we used our LAB hour to peer-review and then we discussed pre-writing. Â No new materials were distributed.
On Thursday, September 3, we reviewed the below-noted texts; no new materials were distributed.
On Tuesday, September 1:
Today in class we tried annotating by completing this annotation packet. Additionally, the following texts were distributed and will be discussed (both on Thursday and throughout the semester):
- “The Storm” (1 of 3)
- “The Storm” (2 of 2)
- “The Storm” (3 of 3)
- Excerpt from Suburban Nation
- “Kristof: Lessons From the Virginia Shooting”
On Thursday, August 27, the following texts were distributed:
