Week 3 Follow-Up Email Text

Hello all,

Thank you for your attention and participation in class today. I’m writing (as usual) to review some key points, direct you to some very important supplementary information (which will help you to be successful in completing the homework assignment for this week), review homework assignments, and, of course, start a dialogue for any questions you may have. This information is also posted on our course blog.

Before I get to the key points, let me mention that I have attached the comma rules review I mentioned in class and the “Reading for Meaning” worksheet we used in conjunction with the “helicopter parents” article. The comma review sheet is for you to review independently. The “Reading for Meaning” worksheet -- alongside with your notes from class and Chapter 2 in your text book – will help you to generate evaluative writing in order to successfully complete Brief Assignment 3.

Key Points Review:

·       An evaluation of a text moves beyond summary and provides a critique.

·       A critique should summarize the article, identify rhetorical aspects like purpose, topic, issues, conclusions, tone, etc., and broadly answer questions such as “to what extent does the author succeed in his or her purpose” and “to what extent do you agree with the author?”

·       Sometimes, a text will have multiple purposes, but you can usually identify a main purpose for evaluation purposes.

·       Become a master of critical reading: annotate, underline, and respond critically to points as you read.

·       Ethos, pathos, and logos are often employed in persuasive texts – ask yourself how the author is attempting to persuade you as a reader, and whether or not the correlations being made from the attempt are valid (or not).

·       Sometimes, ethos, pathos, and logos are used in conjunction with one another.

·       Always think about what type of audience an article is being written for – does the author make assumptions about that audience? If so, are they always true?

·       To quote from your textbook: “Your task in writing this evaluation (Brief Assignment 3) is to turn your critical reading of the chosen article into a systematic evaluation in order to deepen you reader’s (and your own) understanding of the article. Among other things (which means any and all items discussed about article evaluation in class today), you’re interested in determining: what and author says, how well the points are made, what assumptions underlie the argument, what issues may have been overlooked, and what implications can be drawn from such an analysis. Remember that you can’t simply say ‘I liked it’ or ‘the article didn’t meet its intended purpose’ – you should be concerned with specifically HOW and WHY each of the strategies/techniques/pieces of evidence employed in your article do or do not work.”

Important Supplementary Information

Before beginning Brief Assignment 3, (and in addition to the readings assigned in “Reading 3” below), please review in detail the following items in your textbook:

·       Chapter 2 as a whole – pay special attention to sections which detail how to answer the questions “to what extent does the author succeed in his or her purpose” and “to what extent do you agree with the author?” Also, once you determine your chosen article’s purpose, make sure to review the keys to evaluating the various purpose and employ the techniques suggested in the text (these can be found toward the beginning of the chapter).

·       Chapter 2, Pg. 63 – guidelines for writing critiques – this page provides a concise overview of possible organization and focus for your Brief Assignment 3. I’d highly advise using this as your guide (in correlation with the attached “Reading for Meaning” worksheet questions we went over in class). The basic model to follow here is: introduce, summarize, assess, respond, conclude. Please make sure you have an understanding of these terms before you begin writing.

·       Pgs. 655-656 – provides two real-life examples of Brief Assignment 3 for your review. Note that these examples not only give an introduction and summary of the article(s), but they also assess the presentation of the article (using the parameters given in Chapter 2, pg. 63 in particular, the topics covered on the “Reading for Meaning” worksheet, and other sources of basis for rhetorical evaluation and critique), respond to the presentation of the article, and conclude in a way which deems the article suitable (or unsuitable for further analysis).

Homework Review:

After reviewing the information above, please complete the following items by Friday, September 24, 2010 at 11:59 p.m.:

Brief Assignment 3: Critical Reading

Reading 3:

·       McWhorter, “Reading and Writing about Text” (available from E-Handbook site)

·       E-Handbook Ch. 2c

·       Ch. 9

·       Textbook Ch. 4 Rhetorical Analysis p. 101-130

Objective: To demonstrate your ability to read critically and to effectively evaluate an article as potential source material for a college-level analysis assignment.

Purpose: To gain practice in evaluating sources, you’ll read and evaluate one article from the list provided below or an article specified by your instructor. Use the Guidelines for Evaluating Sources in Ch. 14c and 14d of The St. Martin’s Handbook to assist you in your evaluation.

Description: This is a two-part assignment. To complete the first part, go to the e-handbook site, enter Prep-U, and take the quiz labeled “First Reading Quiz.”

To complete part two of this assignment, first include your reading quiz score at the beginning of your assignment. Then, write an evaluation of the text you have chosen from the following list:

- MacNeil, Robert. “Do you Speak American?”First-Year Writing: Writing in the Disciplines. Boston: Pearson Custom, 2010. 313-323.

- Bryson, Bill. “Good English and Bad.” First-Year Writing: Writing in the Disciplines. Boston: Pearson Custom, 2010. 330-338.

- Crystal, David. “Why a Global Language?” First-Year Writing: Writing in the Disciplines. Boston: Pearson Custom, 2010. 350-359.

Remember that you are looking at this text as if you were going to use it as your object of evaluation in your Draft 1.1. To that end, you’ll want to read carefully and pay particular attention to the rhetorical features of the text. Your evaluation should be approximately two paragraphs in length, or 400 – 500 words. Your audience for the evaluation is an individual whom you are trying to convince that the article you’re evaluating is a good one for the upcoming Draft 1.1 assignment. This means it would make sense to reference Draft 1.1 directly in your conclusion.

Any Questions?

As always, if you have any questions, I am here to help – please email me, visit my office hours, or schedule a time to discuss any concerns you might have. And, again, as usual, check the blog if you need direct links for anything.

Have a great week,

Erin Trauth