DUE MON NOV 23
Drafting: SEE MY COMMENTS ON YOUR IP DRAFTS IF YOU POSTED A LINK TO YOUR GOOGLE DOC ON OUR CLASS HOMEPAGE POST.
Continue drafting and revising your IP essay in Google Docs. Biggest problems in drafts were: Organization — keep all information about each sub-claim together. Development of ideas — each sub-claim needs to be fully developed. As with most drafts, you need to include more evidence from your sources to support each sub-claim. Integration of sources: The need for signal phrases to introduce sources is crucial. This makes you sound smart when you tell us where you got your evidence. Avoid long quotes. Break up the quotes with your own ideas, and do not end paragraphs with quotes. Always draw conclusions from quotes.
LATE STUDENTS: Unfortunately, if you did not post your IP draft on time, I cannot guarantee I will be able to read and comment on your draft. I schedule my time carefully, and after reading Univ 200 drafts this morning, I will move on to read papers for my 3 other classes, which will take me a good amount of time. I encourage late students to make an appointment in the Writing Center to get fuller feedback on your draft.
Review and study: Review the opposition segment and my comments provided in this handout: IP Work opposition segment (click blue link IP Work opposition handout).
Draft your opposition section of your IP: If you are able to find someone that voices your opposition well, I encourage you to use that critic as a voice of your opposition, much as Justin did with Malcolm Gladwell. If not, you will have to generally state a key opposition that you have come across in your research.
Post: Copy your opposition segment from your Google docs, and POST your opposition segment on the Blackboard Discussion Board forum titled “opposition.”
DUE WED NOV 25
IP Drafting: Continue revising your IP draft based on my feedback. Some of you may need to read more research in order to provide fuller evidence for one or two of your sub-claims. See the Blog assignment below where you have to revise one sub-claim section for a blog post.
Peer Review of Opposition Segment: Post a review of the opposition segment of the peer writer who posts directly BELOW your post in Blackboard Discussion Board. Please answer the below questions about your peer’s opposition:
- Did writer state the opponent’s viewpoint clearly? Point out wordiness, lack of clarity.
- Did the writer provide some discussion of that viewpoint? Does the writer appear sensitive to the opposition? Does the writer need to concede that the opponents are not completely wrong by saying, “Granted, this concern is a legitimate one…” Tell the writer where to add concession or more information.
- Identify where the writer’s rebuttal begins. Does writer begin it with “However” or “But?”
- Does the writer provide evidence to support the rebuttal? Does the writer introduce the evidence with a signal phrase that names the source? (According to … Research conducted by … John Smith, researcher at Cornell, argues…) Does the writer pull out key quoted BITS from the source to support his/her rebuttal? If not — provide advice on doing so.
Working with Multimodality: “Multimodal” means, literally, “more than one mode.” For your purposes this means your Inquiry Project will include more than TEXT on a screen, since written text is only one mode. Multimodal writing helps you develop a better sense of audience — you must think about audience needs as you select images or video to place in your IP. While you chose humorous images in your Buzzfeed “4 Reasons Why” post, you will work to include images or video that more thoughtfully supplement your argument in your IP. The Buzzfeed post is to be contrasted with your IP. Your Buzzfeeed post was written for a broad, generalized web audience. whereas your IP is written for a more educated, thoughtful audience.
Review: Carefully review this handout about multimodality in practice: Sub-claim section
Blog Post: Revising a sub-claim: After reviewing the model in the link above — Choose one sub-claim section of your essay to revise. Make sure the sub-claim is stated in the first sentence, as the model does. Then return to one source that you use to support this sub-claim, and re-read the source. Look for material in that source that you can add to your draft to support your point. Work with the source in a fully developed way, as Justin does his source in the model. Add a quote from the source if you did not already have one. Add a second quote if you did already have one. Make changes to your draft by intentionally using one of your sources to develop your argument in this section. Work to smoothly integrate your quote. See the quote that I pointed out in my comments on the model.
Then choose an image or other media to insert in your sub-claim section. Carefully think about the image you choose, and the placement of the image within the text. Place the image exactly where you plan to place it in your IP.
This sub-claim section should be a mini-argument in itself (as Justin’s model is in the link above). Sub-claim, evidence to support the sub-claim, and analysis and discussion of that evidence. Somewhere within this mini-argument, you will also insert one media that helps expand or give an example to support the argument.
Writing Center: Make an appointment to go to the Writing Center if you’d like extra feedback on your rough draft, or you missed the chance to get my feedback! Appointments book fast at the end of the semester! Do this now!
DUE FRI NOV 27 (THANKSGIVING BREAK)
Optional: Late day allowance for Revising a Sub-claim blog post (see above) due Wed Nov 25.