DWRL Lesson Plans - Class Discussion

Generating Consensus on Textual Interpretation Through Circulating Critique

OyP — Wed, 03 Oct 2012 16:28:09 +0000

Author:

Image Credit:

Chris Ortiz y Prentice

Brief Assignment Overview:

This exercise has groups of three students answer questions about an assigned reading; read and revise other groups' answers; consider other groups' revisions of their first answer; and revise their first answer--all in preparation for class discussion.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Literary Criticism

Textual Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Rigorous and accurate reading is at the heart of this exercise: it is designed to argue to students that not all readings are correct and some are better than others. The goals are to get students to read closely and to use textual evidence to support their answers. Having each group critique (or agree with) each other's answers raises the stakes enough to make the students try in earnest; putting the students in groups of three reduces the fear of offending that often prevents productive peer review. Discussion is used to bring the students into concurrence and a sense of certainty, two things often lacking in humanistic discussion, which I believe often leaves undergraduate students feeling like texts mean anything at all, which is to say nothing.

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Required Materials:

An assigned reading and loose-leaf paper

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

The exercise has students break up into groups of three (a magic number for discussion purposes). The groups answer three questions about the reading (see "Instructions for Students"), writing down their answers on paper. Each group passes the paper to the next group. This group considers the other group's answers: any one they agree with in its entirety they place a check mark next to. If they think something needs changing, they revise the original sentence in a space provided on the sheet. If they think the answer is wrong, they place an X next to the answer and, in the provided space, explain why they think the answer is incorrect. Then they hand the sheet to the next group and repeat the process. Each group criticizes the original answers, but they can also see other groups’ work. This generates consensus or disagreement. At the end of the exercise, the groups pass back the sheets until they get back their original answers. They then consider the other groups’ responses: Did they get check marks? Were there revisions? Did they get X’s? They then have a chance to revise their original answers. Now they are prepared for discussion: I ask one student the first question. Heads nod in all directions and hands start to go up; there is consensus and even side-taking, because each person now has a strong idea of their own answers. The discussion after this exercise was the best I have witnessed in my short experience as a teacher.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

The success I experienced was likely due to asking the right questions. We were reading John Ruskin’s “Of the Pathetic Fallacy,” which suits itself well to three very straightforward questions: 1. In your own words, what is the Pathetic Fallacy for Ruskin? 2. Why is the Pathetic Fallacy a Fallacy? (What is fallacious about it?) 3. Why is the Pathetic Fallacy Pathetic? (What is pathetic about it?) There are better and worse answers to these questions, perhaps even right and wrong answers, and that is key, because it gives the students a stake in their responses. Select a text and write questions that students feel they can answer with some degree of correctness and comprehensiveness.

Instructions For Students:

Instructions for Students:

Part I. In your group, answer the three questions after discussing it with one another. Record your answers in the space below and then hand the sheet to the group on your right.

1. In your own words, what is the Pathetic Fallacy for Ruskin?

2. Why is the Pathetic Fallacy a Fallacy? (What is fallacious about it?)

3. Why is the Pathetic Fallacy Pathetic? (What is pathetic about it?)

Part II. Read the answers from the other group. Are they different than yours? If you agree with one of their answers and believe its entirely comprehensive, please place a check mark in the left margin next to the answer. If you think its missing or wrong about something, rewrite their sentence in the space below, indicating which sentence you're rewriting by numbering it accordingly. If you think the sentence is incorrect, please place an X in the left margin next to the sentence and explain below why you think the sentence is incorrect. Once you're finished, pass the sheet to the right and repeat Part II for the original group's answers.

Evaluation Suggestions:

If you evaluate what students are saying as they discuss, you can know whom to ask to get discussion started on the strongest possible foot. Evaluation is written into this assignment, since each group is evaluating the answers of the others to complete each pass. I believe this is why making small groups works well, since individuals are often more shy to criticize than groups. This exercise generates some team spirit. Since I use the exercise to generate classroom discussion, I don’t give it a grade.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This exercise, although very simple, holds several advantages. When it came time for discussion, I asked a student I’d been listening in on to answer the first question, "What is the Pathetic Fallacy?” Her response was concise and strong; I was satisfied. But two other students added nuances in Ruskin's text they found when critiquing other groups' answers. The first question took care of the second. Then I asked the third question (to a different student), and again the student provided a superior answer, which also tied in a previous comment from a different student. I think we all left class feeling like we were sure what Ruskin means by the “Pathetic Fallacy,” why he thinks it is a fallacy, and why he believes we pity a person making it. To emerge from discussion with clarity like this is very rare in my experience.

Additional Resources:

Another advantage of this exercise is that it requires very few resources.

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

E314J: Psychology and Literature::

This course explores key literary and psychological works in which the two fields become deeply indebted to one another. The course is designed with both English majors and non-English majors in mind. The skills it focuses on help students succeed in upper-division courses in many majors across campus, including English. These skills include close analytic reading and critical writing, as well as methods for understanding texts in their formal, historical, and cultural dimensions.

Tags:

Audience Appeal - Making Commercials with Animoto

Cate Blouke — Sun, 24 Jun 2012 16:07:55 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

"Blank Billboard" by mediaboytodd

Brief Assignment Overview:

Using the extremely user-friendly online video creation tool, Animoto, students create short commercials pitching (potentially) odd combinations of products to target audiences (pianos to businessmen, running shoes to retirees, etc.)

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Invention

Organization

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

The primary goal for this assignment is to encourage students to think about audience - how to construct appeals catered to particular audiences. However, it is also useful for thinking through visual rhetorical choices (which images and pre-set video themes to use), audio choices (which song to accompany the video), and arrangement (how to structure the appeals/advertisement).

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

To do this in-class, your students would need computer access (either a technology-based classroom, or a number of students could bring in their personal laptops) and access to an Animoto account. For one month of service, Animoto only charges $5 (a relatively minor investment for a really fun classroom activity) and your students could all work in the same account. The DWRL has a yearly subscription ($30), and lab instructors should contact Will Burdette or one of the ADs for the login information.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

As an in-class exercise, students select a generic product from a set of options either provided by the instructor or generated by the students themselves and then re-distributed at random. Some example products might be: running shoes, sports cars, toothpaste, laptops, etc. Students then select a target audience (or "market") for thier product - also at random from a pre-determined set of options. With their basic product and target audience, students are then asked to produce a short commercial advertising their product using Animoto.

Students are required to make a number of rhetorical choices linking their product to their audience - selecting an appropriate brand name, generating a catchy slogan slogan, creating a short sales pitch, and choosing appropriate images and music to accompany their appeals.

Animoto allows users to insert small amounts of text in between images and/or video clips, constructing a short "commercial" or video trailer with predetermined "themes" and a limited selection of music. Unlike iMovie or Windows Movie Maker, Animoto does not offer a large amount of user-agency (in terms of timing, transitions, etc), but, as such, it also requires little (or no) instruction. Students are generally able to sort out how to use the tool in under five minutes and can easily complete their commercial with time to show the final product to the class and discuss it. The class discussion, then, provides an opportunity to discuss the freedoms afforded by more complicated editing programs. So, Animoto is an excellent "baby-step" towards more sophisticated video creations - particularly for students who are wary of technology.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

The assignment is made particularly exciting through the element of chance - so I bring a number of generic products (sporting goods, frozen dinners, tupperware, etc.) written out on slips of paper, and a set of audiences (parents, the elderly, businessmen, etc.) written out on separate slips. Students are divided into groups (usually of 3-4) and each group draws a product and an audience from the slips. The incongruity that tends to result from this random selection makes the exercise both challenging and engaging. I've also let my students come up with the product options, though this did result in the rather silly pairing of selling "underwear" to "mothers." So, you may want to come up with your own options if you feel this might disrupt the classroom.

Instructions For Students:

As we've discussed, making effective rhetorical appeals is all about discerning the relationship between an author and his or her audience. This exercise is designed to get you thinking about how to cater your appeals to a particular audience - which can be especially challenging if you are confronted with a potentially hostile or disinterested audience. How will you approach them (i.e. effectively cultivate your ethos) if your audience isn't necessarily receptive to what you're pitching? How would you sell a given product to an audience that (normally) might not be inclined to buy it?

You will use a simple on-line video creation tool (Animoto) to generate short "commercials" for your product. You'll select a generic product from the options generated by your classmates. You'll then select a target audience from options that I've compiled, and it will be your job to create a product and commercial aimed at that audience. This will entail a number of rhetorical choices - from brand name, catch-phrase/slogan, specific appeals, visual rhetoric (the images you choose to employ), and the music that will accompany the commercial. For each one of these, you will want to consider your company's ethos (why this audience should buy your product), pathos (what emotions or values might convince them to buy it), and logos (do your appeals make sense).

While I'm hoping that the random selections will result in odd combinations, be sure to take this 'seriously.' It might be tempting to use humor, but be careful not to alienate your audience by making light of them or their interest in the product. You'll present your finished product at the end of class, and as a group we'll discuss what makes the commercials rhetorically effective.

Here are the requirements for your commercial:

You need to select a brand name for your product
You need to come up with a slogan/sales pitch for your target audience (e.g. "Beef: It's what's for dinner" or "Milk: does a body good" or "Just Do It," etc.)
You need at least three images connected to the product you're pitching, and three images connected to the audience (though you're welcome to add more than this)
Select music that seems appropriate for your audience, product, and sales pitch
The commercial should be "real" - as in, take it seriously and avoid egregious rhetorical fallacies (no scare tactics or ridiculous promises)

Evaluation Suggestions:

I typically give my students 20 minutes or so to put together their commercials, then we watch them as a class. I ask them to consider what makes the commercial effective, and to point out the qualities they see as particularly appealing (to that given audience). Then we try to think through some possible objections that the audience might have, and we discuss how the commercial might have been more effective. This usually revolves around questions of ethos (product reputation and reliability) and the logos of the commercial (is it making unsubstantiated claims; does it make sense). Adittionally, we talk about what the groups hoped to accomplish and the challenges they faced.

Students will often express frustration at the textual limitations of Animoto (it only allows for lines of 20-30 characters), and/or the limited amount of agency in terms of timing and transitions. This opens up a space to talk about these aspects of video editing/composition, which is especially useful if future video editing projects are on the syllabus.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students love this exercise. It's a low-stakes and fun way to introduce the concept of audience, and it inevitably produces a range of high quality of work. After I tried this exercise the first time, it was quite helpful to show my next set of students an example before turning them loose.

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

Course Description:

I've used this exercise in both my introductory writing course (RHE 306) and my intermediate course (RHE 309K) with similar, positive results.

RHE 306 – Rhetoric & Writing is a course in argumentation that situates rhetoric as an art of civic discourse. It is designed to enhance your ability to analyze the various positions held in any public debate and to advocate your own position effectively. Your work in this course will help you advance the critical writing and reading skills you will need to succeed in courses for your major and university degree.

Tags:

In-Class Group Evaluations of Short Videos

Gulesserian — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:30:07 +0000

Author:

Lisa Gulesserian

Image Credit:

Image of Chrysler's "Imported from Detroit" taken from a post on Jalopnik

Brief Assignment Overview:

For an entire class period, groups of students are tasked with evaluating a short video. Each group is assigned a video and a category of evaluation that they will use to evaluate their assigned video. They will work together to come up with criteria, evidence, and an evaluative claim for their video. By the end of the activity, students will present their evaluation to the class.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Video

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

With this activity, I want students to get familiar with seeing how evaluations can look very different if the category of evaluation is not the same. This activity is also quite useful for getting students to practice coming up with criteria for a given category, as well as making them see that some criteria need justification depending on the audience. Students also start thinking about the rank of importance for the different criteria that they've chosen.

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Computer classroom with internet access. I use my course Wiki at PBworks to get students to post their group's findings, which I then project onto the screen so that the whole class can see a group's Wiki page as they present their evaluation. I can see a number of different websites besides PBworks fulfilling the same function.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

In small groups, students evaluate one of two short videos, Chrysler's "Imported from Detroit" Superbowl Commercial with Eminem and Jay-Z's "Empire State of Mind." Each group is assigned a video and a category of evaluation. Students then work in groups to come up with at least three criteria (appropriately ranked and supported/justified with two other "texts" from the same category) to use to evaluate their video. Students will then find evidence for whether or not their text meets/doesn't meet each criterion. By the end of the activity, each group will present their findings, starting with an evaluative claim that they drafted together.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

I spent the previous two classes discussing evaluations, categories, and criteria. The first class was mostly spent explaining the concepts, and the second was spent looking at sample evaluations (of the same item, such as an album by a specific musical group). Students should be familiar with evaluation, category, and criteria before this in-class activity.

Before the activity, I assigned two short videos for students to watch for the day's homework: Chrysler's "Imported from Detroit" Superbowl Commercial with Eminem and Jay-Z's "Empire State of Mind." Students should have finished watching these videos before the in-class activity.

On the day of the activity, split students up into six groups.

Instructions For Students:

You will be put into one of six groups. I am going to assign a video and a category of evaluation to each group. Groups 1-3 will evaluate Chrysler's "Imported from Detroit" Superbowl Commercial with Eminem, and Groups 4-6 will evaluate Jay-Z's "Empire State of Mind." The first Chrysler group will evaluate the Chrysler video as a Chrysler commercial, the second will evaluate it as a 2011 car commercial, and the third will evaluate it as a 2011 Superbowl commercial. The first Jay-Z group will evaluate "State of Mind" as a rap music video, the second will evaluate it as a Jay-Z music video, and the third will evaluate it as a music video set in NYC.

In the next 45 minutes, each group should:

Find two other "texts" in the same category using YouTube.
Use the assigned video and the two supplemental "texts" to come up with at least three criteria for the category, justifying the criteria as necessary for your audience of peers.
Decide on a rank for the criteria.
Provide evidence as to whether or not the assigned video meets each criterion.
Draft an evaluative claim about the video.
Post their findings (category, criteria, evaluative claim) to our PBworks "Group Work" folder.

At the end of 45 minutes, each group will present their findiings to the class using their Wiki page.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I did not assign a grade for this assignment, since I want students to experiment with evaluations before they had to write their own without the help of their peers.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students love this activity! They enjoy giving their opinions, and they gain confidence in the rhetorical concepts of evaluation, category, and criteria. Many of them say it's the activity that finally made them understand what kind of paper they'd be writing in the coming weeks! Plus, I inevitably have a few Jay-Z or Eminem fans in the classroom who are always vocal about their undying love for either artist.

Additional Resources:

Jay-Z's "Empire State of Mind"

Chrysler's "Imported from Detroit" 2011 Superbowl Commercial

youtube.com

pbworks.com

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Course Description:

RHE 309K: Rhetoric of Suburbs & Slums

Depending on who you ask, London can be a cultural mecca or a den of vice, Los Angeles can be a palm tree paradise or a polluted suburb, and Lagos can be a dangerous slum or an exciting place where residents reclaim space for their own uses. In this course, we will identify, analyze, and evaluate the discrepant ways that we think and feel about cities (and their respective suburbs and slums) around the world. We’ll begin our exploration by looking at explicit arguments made about (sub-)urban places by urban planners, architects, and citizens. After rhetorical analyses of the various arguments made about these places, we’ll then move into uncovering and evaluating implied arguments made about cities, suburbs, and slums by artists, musicians, writers, and filmmakers. We’ll end our journey through these locales with you and your peers adding to the conversation. For better or for worse—with the rapid urbanization of our planet—cities, suburbs, and slums are here to stay. What we say about the nature, value, and future of these places is just as important.

Tags:

Exploring 18th-19th Century Crime Broadsides Online

coulson — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:09:22 +0000

Author:

Doug Coulson

Image Credit:

Harvard Law School Library

Brief Assignment Overview:

As a conclusion to an online research workshop, students explore the rhetoric of 18th-19th century crime broadsides from the Harvard Law School Library's online collection of crime broadsides.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Historical Context

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Research

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

The goals of the assignment are to further a discussion of the symbolic aspects of legal rhetoric, or how legal rhetoric operates not only to decide the outcomes of legal cases but to shape communal values and norms, by having students conduct an in-class rhetorical analysis of texts and images describing crimes and the apprehension of criminals during the 18th-19th century when such information was widely disseminated in broadsides and public discourse regarding the investigation of crimes common. The assignment is also designed to facilitate the teaching of online research and communication techniques and to generate engaging class discussion.

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

In-class computers with internet access and a course blog.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

As a conclusion to an online research workshop, students explore the rhetoric of 18th-19th century crime broadsides from the Harvard Law School Library's online collection of crime broadsides.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Previous discussion of legal rhetoric should have covered the symbolic aspects of legal rhetoric, or how legal rhetoric operates not only to decide the outcomes of legal cases but to shape communal values and norms.

To begin the assignment, introduce students to the Harvard Law School Library's online collection of crime broadsides. With students at their computers, demonstrate the site's search features and discuss a couple of sample broadsides as a tutorial of the site.

Inform students that their task is to isolate and analyze the ways in which norms and identity are rhetorically constructed in one of the broadsides from the site. (Alternatively, students could be instructed to isolate multiple broadsides to compare and contrast.) The remainder of the class is devoted to students conducting their own research and posting their broadsides along with a brief rhetorical analysis to the course blog. The blog posts may then be discussed collectively as a class with or without requesting individual students to present on their broadsides and analysis. The assignment may be completed in a single class period or span two class periods, depending on the details of the assignment.

Instructions For Students:

In furtherance of our discussion of the symbolic aspects of legal rhetoric, or how legal rhetoric operates not only to decide the outcomes of legal cases but to shape communal values and norms, you will isolate and analyze the ways in which norms and identity are rhetorically constructed in one [or more] of the crime broadsides from the Harvard Law School Library's online collection of crime broadsides. Your task is to identify a broadside that reflects a particularly interesting example of a rhetoric of identity and post the broadside with a brief rhetorical analysis to the course blog. At the conclusion of the assignment, we will discuss your collective findings and analyses.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I've never graded this assignment. It's primarily designed to engage students in questions considered during the course and facilitate class discussion.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

I've used this lesson plan with two classes and both found the broadsides and their rhetoric fascinating and enjoyed the assignment. Their contributions were often very engaged and insightful.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Course Description:

In his book On the Contrary, rhetoric scholar Thomas Sloane writes, ”Rhetorical thought is—let us admit it—highly perverse and lawyerly in nature.” In this statement, Sloane not only alludes to the closely intertwined history of rhetoric and law from the earliest days of Western thought to the modern era, but highlights their shared promotion of an agonistic “art of controversy” which seeks to facilitate controversy through the practice of arguing both sides of a case, a practice classical rhetoricians called in utramque partem (“on either side”). The principal theorists of classical Greek and Roman rhetoric promoted agonistic contests in which speakers argued opposite sides of disputed issues, often with specifically judicial contexts in mind, and the American legal system’s adversarial system of justice is founded on a contest of accusation and defense between parties in which each seeks to persuade a judge or jury of disputed issues of fact and law on opposite sides of a case.

Despite the close relationship between rhetoric and law, however, and the fact that the lawyer remains, in the words of legal scholar James Boyd White, “the modern rhetorician in its purest form,” the modern professionalization of law has frequently attempted to deny or repress the rhetorical aspects of legal discourse and the agonistic conflict on which the adversarial system of justice is founded. Instead, modern law has promoted a view of legal discourse as a value-neutral “science” based on logical deduction and immune to social and political influence. This paradoxical relationship between law and rhetoric in modern legal discourse has produced a recent revival of questions about modern law’s denial of rhetoric, including important questions about the role of character and emotion in legal argument, the role of narrative in the analysis of legal evidence, the effect of the adversarial system of justice on social cohesion and division, and the relationship of legal rhetoric to democracy, coercion, and violence.

In this course, we will study these questions by first examining the forms of argument used in the legal profession today, focusing on arguments regarding the interpretation of circumstantial evidence in legal cases and the analogical, or case-based, form of legal argument known as “legal reasoning” which is used to argue for or against the application of judicial precedent to new cases. Specifically, we will study arguments regarding the evidence in controversial trials such as the 1935 Richard Hauptmann (“Lindbergh Kidnapping”) trial, the 1982 Lindy Chamberlain (“Dingo”) trial, and the 1992 Randy Weaver (“Ruby Ridge”) trial, as well as arguments and judicial opinions in U.S. Supreme Court cases regarding the minimum standards of effective legal advocacy found in the Sixth Amendment’s right to assistance of counsel. After examining the forms and purposes of legal rhetoric as it is actually employed in the legal profession, we will then consider contemporary critiques of the adversary system and the agonistic rhetoric on which it depends, including critiques implicit in public perceptions of the legal system and cultural representations of lawyers.

Tags:

Instructions for Daily Blogging of Class Readings

herbly — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 16:13:16 +0000

Image Credit:

From our class blog and icanhascheezburger.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

Every day one student posts a blog entry covering the reading for the day. Their task is to summarize the reading selection briefly and accurately, to observe linguistic or thematic trends in the day's reading or across the text (or indeed texts), and to post 3-5 substantive (not summary-based) discussion questions to spur class discussion. Since this is a blog post, they are required to observe that genre's conventions, which for our purposes include adding images, personal touches, and candid (but rigorous) discussion of the text. Close to the beginning of each class, the student presents their blog post, walking us through the summary, explaining any critical observations they had about the text, and explaining their rationale for their posting style (why use certain pictures, captions, tone, etc.).

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This assignment encourages at least one student per class day to think about how to present the text that they've just read to their classmates. I like doing this because I've sometimes found that students aren't always forthcoming about what they understand or don't understand in the text, and sometimes my discussion plans may assume a direction, or (less often) a level of sophistication that they aren't interested in or haven't yet reached. For example, I may begin discussions with a set of questions that make sense to me, the professor who has probably read the book at least twice, while they on the other hand are still unsure about what is actually going on in the text. By allowing students to speak directly to each other in the form of a presentation, I often find that things that I tend to overlook or unthinkingly find "obvious"--questions about character, plot, language--inspire much fruitful discussion from them.

It's also often interesting to query them about the style they choose for their posts--this includes tone and imagery. Many of their images, for example, reference popular culture, thus implying a connection between the "old" literature that we're reading, and the newer forms of culture that they reference. Making the blog post itself a topic of discussion often how they connect our readings with popular culture.

Finally, since they often cite the text, and sometimes even outside sources, in their posts, the blog also gives me a chance to go over correct citation style with them.

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

You will need to set up an account with the blogging service of your choice--I use Wordpress. You will also have to make sure that each student sets up an account with the blogging service, and is identified as a contributor to the blog.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

Blog Post Assignment

Everyone must, once during the semester, introduce the day’s reading. This introduction will consist of a short summary of what happens, some background information about the text, and 3-4 discussion questions. For the summary, stick to relevant details; there’s no need to be overly inclusive. Do try to include some critical insight in your post. For example, you could relate the events in question to some of the work’s larger themes, or you could explain how the events in the reading relate to the larger historical/cultural context. This post should average 300-500 words, excluding discussion questions.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

First, set up your blog. Then you will need to set aside 10-15 minutes to direct your students to the blog so that they can set up Wordpress (or whatever) accounts. After class, you will then need to add each student to the blog by inviting them to contribute through the blog's "add user" service. (Again this will probably vary according to which blogging service you use.) Make sure that each student confirms their invitation. Invariably someone will forget and email you frantically the day their post is due wondering why they can't post. After that, set aside about 10-15 minutes each day for blog presentations. The class discussion often begins organically from the discussion questions.

Instructions For Students:

For background information, you may include some biographical information about the author, some social or cultural information that is relevant to the text, or something about the work’s publication history. For this kind of information, I suggest you consult the Dictionary of National Biography and/or Oxford Reference Online (both available through the UT library database bank). The point here is to provide a cultural and historical context for the reading that will complement our formal analysis. You may consult Wikipedia, but don’t cite it, as it doesn’t count as a scholarly source. If you do use a source, make sure to cite it at the bottom of your post.

Your discussion questions should be critically inclined. That is to say, since you’ve already included a summary, your questions shouldn't encourage answers that encourage more summary: for example, don't ask "what happened in chapter 2" but rather, "what does a particular event in chapter 2 tell us about the theme of knowledge vs. emotion in this novel." You can highlight passages you’re having trouble deciphering, but make sure you ask a discrete question: instead of “what’s going on in paragraph 3” ask “how is the word “nature” functioning in paragraph 3” or some such. Be ready to present your thoughts and questions to the class on the day you post.

Evaluation Suggestions:

In accordance with blogging conventions, I wanted this to be a somewhat informal assignment that would encourage a more personal engagement with the texts. Therefore I graded this assignment pass/fail--basically if they do it they pass. If they do a poor job, though, I will send them an email with some comments.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

They appear to like the assignment, and I think I can see why. It gives them a chance to express themselves in ways that they may not feel comfortable doing in class--speaking out in class discussion, for example. Many of them are web-savvy, so they often bring memes and web-speak into their posts. I take this to mean that they are engaging with the text on their own terms. The blog posts also help me to get an idea of what they're really intererested in in the readings--sometimes I go with this and sometimes I acknowledge this interest and try to make it lead elsewhere.

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

E314L Banned Books and Novel Ideas

Tags: