On Tuesday, May 24, we reviewed the purpose and scope of the writing tasks we studied this semester (summary, critical reading/critique, argument synthesis and explanatory synthesis). Following, we took our in-class final exam.
On Tuesday, May 17, we devoted the first portion of class to practicing close-reading skills by reading and discussing the first page of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita.
Next, we read and discussed the second article that will be utilized during our in-class final (which will be administered next Tuesday).
Following, copies of the article read and discussed last week were made available to those students wishing to re-read the piece. Class concluded with our discussing any open questions folks had about the semester.
On Tuesday, May 10, we devoted the first third of class to discussing and working on final portfolios.
Following, we read and discussed one of the pieces that will be utilized during our in-class final (which will be administered on May 24). Folks who missed class tonight can either come to my office hour — from 2:45 to 3:45pm on Wednesday in Namm 529 — to review the article, or you can read through it while we break during class on May 17.
Finally, graded research papers were distributed and, together with members of class who continue to have questions about MLA citation, a sample student research paper was reviewed. We concluded class by discussing successful strategies utilized by the student, as well as a few missteps she made.
On Tuesday, May 3, we completed both self-evaluations and peer-reviews of our research papers. Feedback was centralized around three basic topics: strengths, areas for improvement, and things that surprised us/questions that came to mind.
Details about our final portfolio, due May 17, were then distributed and discussed.
Finally, we devoted some time to discussing the format of our final exam, which we will continue to focus on during class leading up to May 24. Should anyone want to practice for the final exam, I’d encourage you to read the two texts we touched upon during class — “A Balanced Psychology and a Full Life” (pgs 538-543) and “The Dalai Lama’s Ski Trip: What I Learned in the Slush with His Holiness” (pgs 533-538) — creating both an argument and an explanatory synthesis that would position you to explore some component of the two texts.
On Tuesday, April 19, we began class in the library, working with Instruction and Reference Librarian Nandi Prince who provided research/database insight and support.
We spent the last hour of class discussing our research paper prompt, as papers will be due on May 3, our first class after spring recess. A few key takeaways:
- MLA resources are available through OpenLab (scroll down on this page, looking for the Feb. 2 entry)
- Formatting information can be found in our class syllabus (under the “Submission Guidelines” sub-heading)
- Reference librarians are available for one-on-one research support
- Works Cited pages must be submitted with research papers
- When editing, read to remove generalizations, epically long sentences/paragraphs, and logic inconsistencies
- Consider writing for a specific audience (e.g., readers who are totally unfamiliar with your topic, readers who are New Yorkers, readers who are your age)
- You’ll want readers to be able to answer the question, “Why does this paper matter?” — consider what you are teaching your readers, and what you want them to learn/feel/think when they finish your paper
- Pages 148-157 of our textbook provide a great example of an argument synthesis/research paper
- You are welcome to email me with questions as you write and edit your paper — you’ll want to send me a portion of your work and ask specific questions to help me to understand what kind of support you’re after
- Happy break to you — see you next month!
On Tuesday, April 12, we began class by completing a speed-dating exercise, workshopping our research paper topics, discussing which text from the semester we plan to integrate into our work, how we intend to link the past and the present, and what additional outside sources we are considering using.
Following, brief one-on-one conferences were held to think through paper topics, to ensure that everyone is on a successful track.
Additionally, I shared with you an article and related research steps to demonstrate best practices you can use when completing your own research.
On Tuesday, April 5, we discussed the assigned texts by: 1) summarizing each piece; 2) assessing each author’s credibility (and, if applicable, the credibility of his/her sources); and 3) stating to what extent we agreed or disagreed with each author’s message. Following, we began to synthesize each article (Jobs’ speech with McCoy’s article; Haden and Tokumitsu’s articles, Jobs’ speech withTokumitsu’s article, etc.).
At the end of class, the prompt for our research paper was distributed and discussed.
On Tuesday, March 29 we began class by reviewing the MLA resources distributed earlier this semester (see the February 2 entry below to access said resources).
Next, we loosely discussed the idea of rumors, identifying a few recent rumors as well as the positive impact sharing rumors can have on relationships.
We then broke into groups and completed this exercise, meant to parse out salient information about the three “rumor” related pieces we read in our textbook and to help us think through how to synthesize information and cite sources.
The prompt for response paper 7 was distributed at the end of class, along with midterm grades.
On Tuesday, March 22, everyone wrote a letter of self-reflection, noting both the strengths and weaknesses of response paper 4.
Next, we discussed the Haruki Murakami story, “On Seeing the 100% Perfect Girl One Beautiful April Morning,” by delving into both the story (the events happening to the narrator on pages 1-3, and the last line of page 5) and the story-within-a-story (the tale that is told on pages 3-5). Following, we explored, Gabriel García Márquez’s “Sleeping Beauty and the Airplane,” paying attention to the dramatic and, at times, hyperbolic way Márquez’s narrator described his surroundings and Beauty.
We then tried our hand at creating thesis statements for both an explanatory synthesis and an argument synthesis that would allow us to draw meaningful relationships between these two stories.
Finally, we discussed response paper 6; please visit our “Assignments” page for a recap of the assignment’s components.
For anyone who is curious, here is a link to Shakespeare’s Sonnet 130 which begins, “My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun.”
On Tuesday, March 15, we discussed various elements of Mary Gaitskill’s “The Other Place,” paying attention to the story’s various themes, including the overlap between sex and danger, outlets for children whose home lives are stressful, and the notion of having an “other place.”
Following, we broke into small groups and engaged in a debate, with each group evaluating ways to support one of the following claims:
- As Mary Gaitskill demonstrates, a fiction writer does not need to have personally experienced a topic in order to write authentically about it.
- As Mary Gaitskill demonstrates, a fiction writer does need to have personally experienced a topic in order to write authentically about it.
The debate underscored the need to define key terms (like fiction, personally experienced, and authentically), and helped us think through how summary is related to synthesis (summary should be used to set up synthesis; synthesis should take center-stage).
At the close of class, an exemplar explanatory synthesis was distributed, as were the two readings for next week: Haruki Murakami’s “On Seeing the 100% Perfect Girl One Beautiful April Morning” and Gabriel García Márquez’s “Sleeping Beauty and the Airplane.”
On Tuesday, March 8, we dug into Roberto Bolaño’s “Beach,” identifying themes present in the story and thinking through how these themes potentially relate to heroin use. Following, we discussed two New York Times pieces about Bolaño in an effort to determine whether “Beach” is fiction or non-fiction, and to suss out what kind of relationship, if any, Bolaño had with heroin.
The second half of class was devoted to reviewing the basics of argument synthesis (outlined in more detail in our textbook, pages 130-173). We identified that an argument synthesis involves making a claim, gathering support, and generating an assumption. As our textbook indicates, “Argument synthesis draws upon evidence from a variety of sources in an attempt to persuade others of the truth or validity of a debatable claim” (130).
The prompt for response paper 4 was distributed, as was a New Yorker interview with author Mary Gaitskill and her short story, “The Other Place.”
Note! For anyone interested in learning more about the 2016 Literary Arts Festival and Mary Gaitskill’s events on campus, please visit the Festival’s OpenLab page.
On Tuesday, March 1, we discussed “An ‘American’ Publishes a Magazine” by breaking into groups. Each group was asked to focus on one component of Shawn’s essay by identifying supporting language relating to that component. Next, groups worked to articulate Wallace Shawn’s definition of what it means to be an American. Finally, groups were asked to try to come up with their own collective understanding of what it means to be an American…what we found, is that many of us in the room had distinct and different understandings of “American.”
As a class, we then discussed whether we noted any discernible shifts between our early/first understanding of what it meant to be an American, and our current understanding. As an exercise in curiosity, I shared related responses from 1st-6th grade students as published on Scholastic’s webpage, and also responses posted on a Yahoo answers page (including an instance of plagiarism…!).
Finally, we briefly discussed what an “explanatory synthesis” is (read pages 96-129 for more information!) and how it relates to response paper 3.
On Tuesday, February 23, we discussed “Society is in the Mind” by summarizing various components of the academic essay. In order to do so effectively, we created a working definition of “summary,” determining that it is a recap of something we have read/heard/encountered, written (or uttered) in our own words that is markedly shorter than the original story/experience. The amount of detail contained in a summary is determined by the scope and purpose of said summary (e.g., if you were asked to summarize a movie, specific details may not be relevant; however, if you were asked to summarize the love story in a movie, those details may be salient).
Following, we consulted our textbook to begin building an understanding of how summary relates to critical reading and critique; reading pages 51-77 in our textbook for homework will augment and bolster our understanding of critical reading and critique.
Wallace Shawn’s essay, “An ‘American’ Publishes a Magazine” was also distributed, as was the prompt for response paper 2:
On Tuesday, February 16, a reading and a response paper prompt were distributed:
- Charles Horton Cooley’s “Society is in the Mind”
- Response paper 1
On Tuesday, February 2, we reviewed our class syllabus, and discussed the work we are going to tackle throughout the semester. A number of handouts were also distributed, for review and/or completion before our next class (Tuesday, February 16):
- Proofreader’s Marks
- Lakeland Library “MLA-Text Citations”
- University of Minnesota “MLA Documentation Style: Works Cited Page”
- Quote integration exercise
- Annotation reference (created by Susan Gilroy from Harvard University)
- Unit 1 homework
For more information about the homework due February 16, please visit the “Assignments” page.
