Rebuttal Drafts Due Wed. 3/2

Final reminder: Essay 2.1 is due on your class blog by the time class meets this Wednesday, March 2. Please refer back to the assignment details before posting your paper.

Remember that this paper--even the first draft--must include at least two secondary sources, one of which must be scholarly, and this research must be sufficiently cited (with in-text citations and a Works Cited page) and incorporated. I encourage you to utilize OWL as a resource when writing your paper.

Good luck!

Workshop Schedule

I have posted the class workshop schedule under Course Content on Blackboard (one schedule for section 3 and one for section 4). Please note the date you are signed up to have your paper workshopped in class. It's crucial that you are present in class that day to receive class feedback. (If you were absent today, I randomly drew a date for you.)

This is the schedule that you will be accessing regularly in order to keep track of whose papers are up for discussion in class. Even if you are absent in class, it is your responsibility to keep up with the workshop schedule and to provide feedback to the appropriate authors.

We'll talk more about the workshop process in class on Wednesday.

Essay 2.1 Due Wednesday

Here's a preview of the big week ahead...
Monday 2/28: Quiz on Documentation. Workshop Date Drawing. Incorporation Presentation.
Wednesday 3/2: The first draft of your rebuttal argument is due!
Friday 3/4: Workshops begin!

I'm really pleased to see that many of you are using your blogs to continue your pre-writing and even to keep track of your research. This may be a useful tool for you, and it also helps me to peek into your process when I evaluate your portfolios. So keep up the good researching and writing.

I'm enjoying reading your rhetorical analyses and will aim to have all of them graded by Wednesday, when your next paper is due. You can check your blog (specifically the essay 1.2 entry) for my comments and Blackboard for your grade. Please note that I have to enter numeric grades, but they correspond directly to letter grades (95=A, 92=A-, 88=B+, 85=B, and so on...).

Class Cancelled

I am cancelling class for today, Friday, February 25, because of the snowstorm.  To make up for the missed class, please view and listen to this recorded lecture on Documentation.  This is a very important lesson that will help you make decisions about citing your research in MLA format. 

Be prepared to take a brief quiz on the material in class on Monday.  The quiz will be open-note, and you will also have access to the OWL website during your quiz.  So you do not need to write down or memorize the form for citing each kind of source.  But you need to have a basic understanding of how and why sources are cited.

Have a good weekend and enjoy the snow!

Addendum to Rebuttal Assignment

Please note that your rebuttal argument must contain a minimum of two secondary sources, and at least one of these sources must be scholarly.

Research, Documentation & Incorporation

The next three classes will be important ones to attend. We will be discussing research and its proper and effective use.  But in case you must miss class, here are three recorded lectures, on Research, Documentation, and Incorporation. Again, these were recorded for a previous class, so disregard anything that seems irrelevant to our class. You do not need to take the quizzes after these lectures, but you are strongly encouraged to view these lectures so that you don't miss out on important information for your papers.

No Office Hours Mon. 2/21

I'm cancelling my office hours on Monday due to a meeting with the dean.  If you need to see me that day, please e-mail me to make an appointment. 

Editorials for Rebuttal

Here are the three editorials you will choose from for your second paper, a rebuttal argument:

"In support of fracking: the facts and the science" by Thomas Kurth, Houston Chronicle

"Huck Finn: Censorship? Sure it is, but changes to 'Huckleberry Finn' are warranted," The Lufkin Daily News

"Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior" by Amy Chua, Wall Street Journal

Read all three articles carefully and choose the one with which you have the strongest disagreement--or the one that you think is the weakest argument.  In your paper, you will provide a careful refutation of the argument, so it's important that you print, read, and think about it thoroughly. 

I've tried to provide a range of recent topics and points of view that students will be likely to take issue with.  But if you're not interested in rebutting any of these editorials, you may choose your own.  If you take this path, you must choose an editorial published in 2011 and you must bring it to my office hours (MWF 10 to 11:30) by Friday, February 25 for my approval.

Essay 1.2 Due Fri. 2/18!

The second and final draft of your rhetorical analysis is due on Friday, February 18.  Please reread the assignment details for information about how to title your post.  Please post the essay to your blog by the time class meets.

In addition, you need to complete the reading below.

Rebuttal Readings for Fri. 2/18

For Friday, February 18, please print, read, and be prepared to discuss "The Lessons In My Son's Death" by Spencer Kim and Sarah Keech's rebuttal, "Who's to blame for James Kim's death?".

Rebuttal Readings for Wed. 2/16

For Wednesday, February 16, please print, read, and be prepared to discuss two essays: "What's the Matter with College?" by Rick Perlstein, and Travis Weinger's rebuttal, "Why College Matters."  What is Perlstein's basic argument?  And what strategies does Weinger use to rebut it?

Essay 2: Rebuttal Assignment

“Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress.”

—Mahatma Gandhi

Expressing our disagreement with other points of view is a basic and essential skill. This assignment asks you to present a forceful, coherent, and thoughtful rebuttal.

1. Read the three assigned arguments (to be posted soon) and choose the one with which you have the strongest disagreement.

2. Write a letter to the author rebutting his or her argument. You will need to determine whether you want to use refutation, counterargument, or both. If you choose to use refutation, you will need to determine whether you want to question the assumptions of the argument, question the evidence, or both. Whatever strategy you choose, you should explicitly refer to and contextualize the argument you’re rebutting. Before class on Wednesday, March 2, post your first draft on your blog. In the title box, include an appropriate title and also label your paper Essay 2.1. In your post, you should also include a link to the argument you’re rebutting. Note that, while it’s okay for your first draft to be rough, it should be complete.

3. After receiving feedback from me (and, for some of you, the entire class), write a second draft of your rebuttal and post it on your blog by Monday, March 21. Again, include a link to the original argument.

Your “electronic portfolio” will include the following:

• Prewriting

• Draft 1 (with my comments and possibly comments from the class)

• Reflection 1

• Draft 2

• Reflection 2

• Any other notes that document your process along the way (be sure to identify them clearly)

The grade you receive on the portfolio will be based on the final product as well as the process it reflects. All parts must be present in order for the portfolio to be considered complete.

Final length: 1000 words, minimum

Percentage of final grade: 15

Research: Strong rebuttals, especially those that question the evidence of the argument they are refuting, will be based on strong evidence. At least two secondary sources are required for this paper.

Format: Your sources must be cited in MLA format. When you post your paper on your blog, do not double space or indent your paragraphs. Instead, include a single space between paragraphs. In the title box, include a title such as “Essay 1.2: Why Rush Limbaugh Is Still a Big Fat Idiot.”

Additional help: I encourage you to see me during my office hours to discuss arguments, claims, structure, or any other concerns at any point during your writing process. Remember that the writing centers are also excellent resources for extra feedback (if you utilize a writing center, consider reflecting on this experience as part of your portfolio).

Grading Criteria

An “A” paper (90–100):

• advances a clear and insightful claim

• rebuts the chosen argument with a clear, appropriate, and effective strategy

• supports the rebuttal with sufficient, compelling, and well-selected evidence

• uses research critically and ethically and incorporates it appropriately

• acknowledges other views and responds to them thoroughly

• is constructed of unified, well-developed paragraphs in logical order with clear transitions

• demonstrates control of documentation, grammar, mechanics, and usage

• shows sophistication, originality, and creativity with style, diction, and voice

A “B” paper (80–89):

• advances a clear argumentative purpose, but may lack the insight of an “A” paper

• rebuts the chosen argument with an effective strategy, but strategy may lack decisiveness or self-awareness

• supports the analysis with evidence, but support may be limited

• makes an attempt to use research, but support may be insufficient

• makes an effort to acknowledge other views, but may overlook obvious counterarguments or may not adequately respond to them

• progresses logically, for the most part, and shows some attempt at transition

• exhibits few documentation and grammar errors

• provides evidence of an evolving, but perhaps underdeveloped, individual voice

A “C” paper (70–79):

• demonstrates an attempt, though perhaps inconsistent, at an argumentative purpose

• rebuts the chosen argument, but perhaps indirectly or indecisively

• provides some support, but support may be generalized or insufficient

• does not use research, but perhaps in an inappropriate or obvious way

• provides no consideration of other views, or consideration is undeveloped

• orders paragraphs logically and coherently, with perhaps a few lapses

• exhibits lapses in documentation and patterns of grammatical error, but they do not significantly impede meaning

• may be simplistic in style or reliant on clichés; may lack sentence variety

A “D” paper (60–69) may lack any of the following:

• an argumentative purpose

• strong rebuttal strategy

• support

• analysis of evidence

• acknowledgement of other views

• logical paragraph order or clearly defined paragraphs

• understanding of grammar or documentation

An “F” paper fails to meet most requirements and/or the writing exhibits serious deficiency.

Reading for Mon. 2/14: Rebuttal Arguments

For Monday, February 14, please read the file called "Rebuttal Arguments" posted under Course Content on our Blackboard page.  This is a chapter selected from a textbook called Good Reasons.  You will see a number of my notes scribbled on the pages, but try to ignore them.  Please print out and be prepared to discuss this chapter in class.

Also, I will not be available for my regular office hours on Monday.  If you need to see me in the afternoon, please e-mail to make an appointment.
Have a good weekend!

First Drafts Due Wed.; No Class; Conferences

Remember that class will not meet on Wednesday, February 9.  Post your first draft of your rhetorical analysis by 8 a.m. on Wednesday (see the instructions in the assignment below).  You will meet me in my office (Smiddy 407) for a one-on-one conference on Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday (check the conference schedule on Blackboard).  Please bring two copies of your essay and a copy of the article you're analzying. 

Good luck with your first drafts!

Reading for Fri. 2/9: "Shitty First Drafts"

For class on Friday, February 9, please print, read, and be prepared to discuss the essay Shitty First Drafts by Anne Lamott. 

Homework for Mon. 2/7

For Monday, read the three articles linked in the assignment below and decide which one you'd like to analyze in your paper.  Then print it out, make notes on it, and bring it to class on Monday.  We'll talk about these editorials in groups as we get started on these papers.

Essay 1 Assignment: Rhetorical Analysis

Here is the assignment for your first paper, a 750-word Rhetorical Analysis. The first draft is due next Wednesday; the final draft is due the following Friday.  See the post below for further information.

Before we can write well, we must read well. Before we can practice rhetoric skillfully, we must be able to identify, understand, and analyze the skills of other rhetoricians. This assignment asks you to apply the rhetorical concepts learned so far to one of three recent student editorials from The Ithacan:
--“Haitians still need help one year after earthquake” by Shamika Edwards

--“Government should create stricter gun laws” by Megan Weintraut

--"Act would give education to undocumented youths" by Jessica Perez

Your task is to choose an essay and analyze its rhetorical techniques in order to make a statement about its effectiveness and meaning. Begin by reading each essay carefully, studying the text as well as the context. 

Your consideration should include:
--the argument’s rhetorical situation (audience, occasion, and purpose)
--the author’s use of rhetorical appeals (logos, ethos, and pathos)
--the parts of the argument (claim, reasons, evidence)
--the argument’s consideration of other views (acknowledgement and response)

Choose the essay that you think is the strongest and most engaging argument and analyze it.  Ask yourself what you think makes it an effective essay. (It’s okay to point out rhetorical weaknesses in the essay—no essay is perfect—but keep in mind that your purpose is not to dispute the claim of the argument.  You will be doing that in your next assignment, the Rebuttal Argument.) What techniques stand out to you as being particularly noteworthy? A strong essay will not simply list the essay’s techniques in an obligatory way, but focus on one or two of the essay’s most significant effects or areas. You will have to decide what structure would best suit your analysis, and how you are going to dispense your attention to each of the elements you are required to analyze. In order to provide a close reading, a strong essay might zero in on only one or two paragraphs, as long as it analyzes all of the necessary elements in some way.

At the beginning of the analysis, you should introduce the essay you have chosen by providing the context surrounding it (who wrote it, what it is, where it was published, when it was published, and why it was written). You should also give your essay a title that not only points to your subject but to your point of view on the subject.  Academic papers often begin with a title that suggests the point of view on the subject, followed by a colon and a subtitle explaining what it is you are analyzing (“Building Bridges: A Rhetorical Analysis of Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail”).

And your essay should have a point of view. A strong rhetorical analysis doesn’t just operate with the claim “This is a good essay because...”  How is the essay good? What would be a more accurate adjective to describe it? What particular effect does it render?

No additional sources are required for this assignment. At the end of your paper, skip a few lines and include the words “Work Cited” followed by a single listing, formatted like this:

Robinson, Becky. “DIII policy needs to balance classes with sports.” The Ithacan. 1 Dec. 2010. Web. 2 Feb. 2011.

You should also use MLA format for in-text citations, but because you are only using one source, you do not need to include the author’s name in parentheses every time you refer to or quote from a line in the essay; you only need to include the paragraph number(s). For example:

In her editorial, Robinson expresses disappointment that students’ course schedules often conflict with sports practice times (par. 1).

(As in this example, you should write about arguments in the present tense. Also, after initially introducing the author, you should refer to her by her last name only.)

For more details about MLA format, see the class blog’s link to the MLA Formatting and Style Guide at OWL. Please note that essay titles are formatted in quotation marks, and book titles are formatted in italics. OWL includes a special page on the 2009 MLA update. We will cover MLA documentation in detail before your write your second paper.

The minimum length for the final draft of the Rhetorical Analysis is 750 words (about 3 typewritten pages).

A strong paper is built on many stages, so this class places a value on the entire process of your writing, not just the final product. The online “portfolio” for your Rhetorical Analysis will include prewriting, first draft, first reflection, second draft, and second reflection. 

The first draft is due on your blog on Wednesday, February 9 at 8 a.m. (note that class will not be held on that day) and the final draft is due on your blog on Friday, February 18 by the time class meets.

To post your drafts:

--Compose your draft in a Word document and copy it.

--Go to “New Post” in the upper right-hand corner of your blog.

--In the “Title” box, type the essay number followed by a colon and the working title of your essay. For example:

Essay 1.1: Logos with a Conscience: A Rhetorical Analysis of Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”

--Paste the text of your paper into the text box. Do not include a header on your paper (with your name, date, etc.). All identifying information is already included on your blog.

--Click “Publish Post.” (You can also choose to “Save,” “Draft,” or “Preview” first.)

GRADING CRITERIA

An “A” paper (90–100):· advances a clear and insightful claim
· analyzes a full range of rhetorical techniques, placing emphasis on the most important
· supports the analysis with sufficient, compelling, and well-selected evidence from the text
· offers strong insight into the significance of the argument’s context
· exhibits confidence in the use of proper rhetorical terminology
· is constructed of unified, well-developed paragraphs in logical order with clear transitions
· demonstrates mastery of documentation, grammar, mechanics, and usage
· shows sophistication, originality, and creativity with style, diction, and voice

A “B” paper (80–89):
· advances a clear argumentative purpose, but may lack the insight of an “A” paper
· analyzes a full range of rhetorical techniques, but perhaps without emphasis, or analysis may lack development
· supports the analysis with evidence from the text, but support may be limited
· offers some insight into the significance of the argument’s context
· exhibits some comfort with use of proper rhetorical terminology
· progresses logically, for the most part, and shows some attempt at transition
· exhibits few documentation and grammar errors
· provides evidence of an evolving, but perhaps underdeveloped, individual voice

A “C” paper (70–79):· demonstrates an attempt, though perhaps inconsistent, at an argumentative purpose
· analyzes several rhetorical techniques, but in a perfunctory way
· provides support, but may contain generalizations or overlook relevant examples
· offers perfunctory insight into the significance of the argument’s context
· exhibits some uncertainty in use of proper rhetorical terminology
· orders paragraphs logically and coherently, with perhaps a few lapses
· exhibits lapses in documentation and patterns of grammatical error, but they do not significantly impede meaning
· may be simplistic in style or reliant on clichés; may lack sentence variety

A “D” paper (60–69) may lack any of the following:· an argumentative purpose
· consideration of important rhetorical techniques
· sufficient and relevant support
· analysis of evidence
· attention to context
· proper use of rhetorical terminology
· logical paragraph order or clearly defined paragraphs
· understanding of grammar or documentation

An “F” paper fails to meet most requirements and/or the writing exhibits serious deficiency.
The Rhetorical Analysis accounts for 10 percent of your final grade. 

Instructions for Cancelled Class Wed. 2/2

Due to the winter storm warning for tomorrow, I have cancelled class (as well as office hours).  Instead of meeting in the classroom, you will listen to a recorded lecture on your own time and read the assignment for your first essay.  I will give a brief quiz on the lecture in class on Friday, so take notes and pay close attention as you would in a regular lecture. 

Click here for the lecture on Rhetorical Analysis.  This is a lecture I recorded for a previous online class of a similar nature.  You only need to watch and listen to part of it.  Scroll down the contents of the lecture and click on "Slide 21."  Listen to the remaining part of the lecture.  You do not need to listen to the last slide about the quiz; you will take a quiz in class instead.  Make sure your speakers or headphones are on, as there is audio.  Please forgive any parts of the lecture that seem irrelevant to our class.  For example, I make reference to a textbook that we're not using and to previous parts of the lecture.  Don't be bothered by these details; just pay attention to the concepts of Rhetorical Analysis. 

See the post above for your Rhetorical Analysis assignment.  It would be a good idea to get started reading the three editorials you will choose from to write your Rhetorical Analysis, but you are not required to do so by Friday.  If you have questions about the assignment, we can address them in class on Friday.

You do not need to contribute to an online class discussion, as I suggested in my e-mail.  Just think about the material and be prepared for a brief quiz.  This will not be an intensive quiz, but it will ask you to demonstrate awareness of the basic concepts in the lecture on Rhetorical Analysis.

Finally, finish reading the two files called "Rhetorical Analysis 1" and "Rhetorical Analysis 2," posted on Blackboard under Course Content.  We will discuss this chapter in class on Friday.  Some of the concepts you will come across in the reading are also introduced in the recorded lecture.  The readings and the lecture are intended to supplement each other to provide a full understanding of Rhetorical Analysis and to prepare you for writing your own.

Questions?  E-mail me at ehenderson@ithaca.edu.