DWRL Lesson Plans - Group Work

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Cultural Context

Historical Context

Literary Criticism

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Research

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Scavenger hunt worksheets, enough for each student (should be created by the instructor prior to the class; see "Suggestions for Instructor Preparation")
Computers for student research (since the exercise takes place in the library, using the library computers works just fine or even better)

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

There are a variety of ways an instructor could set up for this activity, but here's what I did (and found successful):

We met in our regular classroom, where I distributed my twenty-question worksheet and broke them into teams (see "Suggestions for Instructor Preparation"). After everyone had a chance to read over the sheet, we walked over to the PCL together, whereupon I showed them where I’d be waiting on the ground floor in case they had any questions or when they were ready to submit their worksheets. I emphasized that they needed to submit their worksheets by the end of the class period, whether or not they were finished. Thanks to our 75-minute class period, they all had plenty of time to complete their work.

I did not require my students to stay with their team members at all times. I said they could remain together, or they could split up if they found it more efficient to do so, as long as they each turned into me a worksheet with answers that matched those of their teammates, to prove that they'd discussed their findings with one another.

For the first portion of the following class period, we reviewed their findings and discussed the commonly missed answers.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

First, I would strongly recommend having discussed digital research strategies and research goals for the class prior to this activity. We had already done these things, which was helpful because the digital research components of the exercise were much-needed practice but not first-time efforts (which undoubtedly saved time), and because they had a better understanding of why exactly I'd be encouraging them to find resources about Nigerian history, for example, when we were discussing a coming-of-age novel set primarily in Lagos (Chris Abani's GraceLand).

More immediately prior to the library scavenger hunt day, the instructor should create the scavenger hunt sheet. Because my own questions were so tailored to our specific class, I don't want to lay out our exact set of questions here, but here are some of the types of questions I found most productive:

Questions about relevant library resources. For example, I asked them how they'd obtain a copy of a certain book of which I knew UT didn't have a copy. Some of them already knew about Interlibrary Services, others decided to ask someone at the Help desk, etc.
Questions for which the answers could be found either digitally or physically. For example, I asked them to decide which chapter of a particular history book seemed like it would offer the most relevant context for a story we'd been analyzing in class. I chose this book purposely both because it was pertinent and because I knew it was available both via Google Books and in hard copy at the library. In our subsequent class discussion, we compared/contrasted strategies for tracking down digital vs. physical resources.
Questions that require students to consider the library's physical layout. That is, I asked them to find a particular book (the collection of short stories from which we had read) and then identify two others on nearby shelves that seemed relevant and interesting. A lot of them later indicated that even if they'd tracked down a book at the library before, they'd never thought to look around for pertinent titles in the area.
Questions that require just one extra step of Googling and/or that are solveable by using a series of different research strategies. For example, I asked them to find an article in Research in African Literatures about the novel we were reading. (I knew the journal had published several articles on the novel over the last ten years or so.) Most of them didn't know what Research in African Literatures was, but they all came up with an appropriate article, some because they'd Googled the journal title, others because they used library databases, and so forth. The various strategies they deployed to answer this question led us to an especially fruitful conversation later.

Ideally, the instructor should also assign teams in advance of the scavenger hunt. What worked well for me was to create an even distribution of English/Rhetoric majors, students with different class standings, etc., among the teams.

The instructor should also take into account questions of student mobility, disability, etc. I conferred with my students beforehand to make sure that the walk from the classroom to the library and the movement around the library was not at all burdensome for them.

Instructions For Students:

You have until the end of the class meeting to complete the library scavenger hunt worksheet. If you have any questions over the course of the scavenger hunt, you are welcome to come find me, but of course I can't give much away. You do not have to remain physically with your team members, but if you choose to split up research tasks, you must reconvene at the end to discuss your answers with one another. When you submit your worksheets, I will check to make sure that your sheets all have matching answers, to confirm that you've gone over everything with each other.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I scored their worksheets after class. The teams earned between 16.5 and 19 points out of a possible 20 points, so I was pretty happy with that result.

We also had a follow-up class discussion during our next meeting, which was a good opportunity to compare/contrast their various research strategies and to review the answers to commonly missed questions.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students seemed to enjoy and learn from the activity. Among the gains they later mentioned were that they had mostly never thought about looking around the shelves for similar titles, that they got a better sense of the library's layout, that they were less anxious to ask for help from a librarian, and that they learned from each other's research strategies (ex. brainstorming different search terms). It also didn't hurt that getting out of the classroom for a day seemed like a novel experience for many of them.

Course Type:

http://nypost.com/2014/02/09/sugar-daddy-website-has-coeds-rationalizing...

Course Description:

Violence, social inequality, anarchy, authoritarianism, poverty, disease, natural disaster, manmade disaster: what makes a place truly dangerous, and for which people? And how can books that merely depict dangerous places seem so threatening that they themselves are deemed too risky for certain audiences? With a broad understanding of what might constitute “danger,” we will investigate these and other questions through reading banned fiction set in dangerous places around the world.

The primary aim of this course is to help students develop and improve the critical reading, writing, and thinking skills needed for success in upper-division courses in English and other disciplines. They will also gain practice in using the Oxford English Dictionary and other online research tools and print resources that support studies in the humanities. Students will learn basic information literacy skills and models for approaching literature with various historical, generic, and cultural contexts in mind.

This course contains a writing flag. The writing assignments in this course are arranged procedurally with a focus on invention, development through instructor and peer feedback, and revision; they will comprise a major part of the final grade.

Tags:

Rhetorical Analysis of "Sugar Dating" Ads and Audience(s)

Wiedner — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:59:46 +0000

Author:

James B. Wiedner

Image Credit:

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students work on argumentation techniques, rhetorical fallacies, and other concepts via reading a heavily-biased article from the New York Post discussing the relatively new but quickly growing phenomenon known as "sugar dating," which consists of web sites that pair older men (sugar daddies) who are willing to pay money for the company of young girls ("sugar babies"). The amount that any potential sugar daddy can range from several hundred to several thousand dollars.

While sugar dating sites seem to be happy to recruit young girls of all stripes, they are clearly most interested in attracting students, as evidenced in part by the fact that membership fees are waived for any potential sugar baby who registers with a .edu email address. The banner ad above is illustrative of most common underlying technique found on these sites. That is appealing to the fact that the typical undergraduate student is cash-strapped, and that being a sugar baby is an easy way to solve the problem. The titillating subject matter and the fact that half of the classroom are part of the demographic being so narrowly marketed towards caught everyone's attention from the get-go.

After they finish reading the article, displaying and bouncing through one of the sites on a projetor is great in a classroom that is equipped to do so, but it is by no means necessary.

The class is divided into two groups who assemble their respective arguments as to the propriety of selling such a product using the rhetorical appeals employed and the audience to which they are marketing (primary and otherwise); a loosely-moderated class debate/discussion ensues.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Social Media

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Increasing Classroom Participation, Building Rapport Between Students, Building Rapport Between Instructor and Individual Students, Building Rapport Between Instructor and Class as a Whole

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Required Materials:

Nothing other than copies of the article distributed by the instructor at the beginning of class.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

The instructor distributes copies of an article taken from the web site of what is generally regarded as a reputable source for news. The class has no access to the article beforehand. The instructor asks the class if any of them are familiar with “Sugar Dating;” calling on student(s) with raised hands to explain what sugar dating generally refers to. The instructor then elaborates on the definition provided, paraphrasing points that might have been lost in the student’s explanation, adding any aspects of the concept that were not mentioned in the process. (5 minutes)

Students read the article individually. (5-10 minutes) phenomenon

The class then divides into two equally-sized groups, and discuss positive and negative aspects of the concept of sugar dating in general, along with the article’s presentation of the concept. One group is identified as the “pro” group, with the other identified as the “con.” However, the instructor does not articulate a specific question upon which they are taking sides. The two groups each work to flush out and organize what they believe to be their most salient points. (10-15 minutes)

An open discussion in a point/counterpoint format is the conducted, with the instructor keeping the discussion from straying to far afield, while casually interjecting to emphasize and elaborate upon the concepts that are relevant to rhetoric and/or law as they arise during the discussion. It is important that the instructor is as unobtrusive as possible throughout the ensuing discussing, to the extent that the collective “personality” of a particular class will allow. (30 minutes for a class meeting twice a week)

The instructor wraps up the debate and the class by highlighting some of the most important substantive points and the most effective argumentation techniques from each side of the discussion. Students are informed that there is a discussion prompt related to the day’s discussion; each student must submit one original posting, along with at least one response to another student’s original posting before the next class meeting. (5-10 minutes)

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

To prepare for the class, the instructor should spend time analyzing the specific article to be distributed to the class, composing a rough outline of considerations such as (1) the arguments (and counterarguments) most likely to be made by students, (2) the rhetorical concepts the instructor is most interested in covering, (3) questions that the class discussion might not touch upon.

The instructor should also do their due diligence in researching the subject in general. Visiting the actual sugar dating web sites is especially important. Students will have varying degrees of knowledge on the subject. Given the fact that these sites specifically target female college students, there is a strong likelihood that at least a couple of students will be well-versed on the subject; the instructor does not want to be learning about nuances of the sugar dating process, etc. from one of their students.

Instructions For Students:

As indicated above, instructions to be given to students are minimal (intentionally so). They're instructed to take about 10 minutes reading the article being contemporaneously distributed, with particular attention to tone, word choice, authorial bias, context, and visual rhetoric. They are then divided into two groups with opposing viewpoints, and are instructed to construct the most persuasive argument that they can, taking rough notes (to be submitted at the end of class) outlining the same.

They're reminded to consider likely arguments from the other side, and the best way to address/respond to them. Students then partake in a debate wherein the instructor guides them back on track if they are getting off-topic, overly emotional, or missing each other entirely (from a stasis theory standpoint).

At the end of the class, the students are given instructions to make a substanive blog posting responding to an instructor-provided prompt; the will seek to continue aspect(s) of the in-class discussion. Along with one original blog posting, students are instructed to post at least one response to the original posting of a classmate.

There is not any reading students are instructed to do in preparation for the class.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

The article’s author has a clear bias from the title onward, so I ask for a show of hands as to who agrees with the author’s…unflattering…representation of sugar dating and their advertisement and recruitment techniques. To my surprise, about 18 of my 22 students said that they agreed with the author. To keep the group numbers equal, I (somewhat lightheartedly) pointed out that the pinnacle of achievement for any rhetorician is to be able to effectively argue a point with which they wholly disagree. As my class is entitled “Rhetoric of Law,” I pointed out that this skill is of particular importance to attorneys, given that they take an oath to be “zealous advocates” for their clients in court, even if those clients are individuals whom they might find repugnant on a personal level. I then split the class roughly in half, based only upon where they happened to be sitting (or standing) at that moment, and then moving individual students towards one of two camps in order to arrive at numerical parity. I did not give consideration as to what side any particular student chose during our initial show of hands.

This lesson plan is well-suited for developing familiarity between students, increasing student participation, and establishing rapport between the instructor and his students- both individually and as a class. For these reasons, the lesson plan might be particularly useful at the beginning of the semester, or later on if class participation begins lagging.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

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:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

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:

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:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

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:

Oral History Group Podcasting Assignment

Anonymous — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 16:41:56 +0000

Author:

Amanda Moulder

Image Credit:

"Microphones"via Sue Langford's Flikr stream

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students conduct oral history interviews, write papers narrating the interviews, and then work in groups to create a multi-segment “radio show."

Type of Assignment:

Major Course Project

Assignment Length:

Multiple Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Organization

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Invention, style, multimodal composition, digital literacy.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

A way to record digital audio files for each student in the class

GarageBand software

Access to “This American Life” and “RadioLab” podcasts to discuss with your students as sample “papers”

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Students do oral history interviews, write papers narrating the interviews, and then work in groups to create a multi-segment “radio show."

Students must work together to discover the best possible way of combining their individual papers into a podcast. They must also learn to use GarageBand. Finally, recording their papers gets students to think about concerns such as word choice, syntax, and overall style.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Familiarity with the rechnology and podcasting genre will help. See "Instructions for Students" below for detailed explanation of how the assignment was implemented.

Instructions For Students:

STEP ONE - Writing Assignment Description:

Paper III Assignment Sheet: Analyzing Culture/Oral History. (1500-1750 words)

This assignment requires you go out into the world and find a story worth recording. It’s a difficult task, really. Your first step is to conduct oral history research and make a record of interviews you conduct. You need to listen closely to how individuals process and frame their beliefs and/or respond to what you ask. You will nee to determine the overall purpose of your essay and make the stakes of the essay clear. Why is this story worth telling? To do this you will place the interviewees’ experiences and/or perspective within a larger historical, social, or political context OR you use the interviewees’ experiences and/or perspectives to make an argument about a larger historical or social context.

Prior to this assignment, we will read Paul Thompson, “The Voice of the Past: Oral History,” The Voice of the Past: Oral History (1988) and Hugo Slim and Paul Thompson, with Olivia Bennett and Nigel Cross, “Ways of Listening,” Listening for Change: Oral History and Development (1993). We will also have an expert in oral history research come in to talk about how to conduct interviews.

Although this particular assignment is a 6-8 page paper, it will also require that you record and save the interview(s) you conduct as mp3 files because you will use sound bytes from these interviews in your Unit IV podcast assignment.

STEP TWO - In-class Exercise:

Student “speed-dated” their papers. I put them into groups of three and they talked about how their papers were related for seven minutes. After 7 minutes, the groups rotated so that each students was in a new group. We repeated this exercise as many times as class time would allow, so that by the end of class, each student had an idea of who they might want to work with for the podcast assignment.

STEP THREE - Paper revisions:

I wanted my students to think about sentence structure in their revisions. I spent one class day talking about the following grammatical forms that their papers used and we talked about how they might revise their papers at the sentence-level. The following sentences were some of the examples that I used in class (the first two are adapted from in-class exercises that Patricia Roberts-Miller has done in her own classes):

Passive Voice, Nominalization, and Verb Choice:

Hubert was bitten by Chester. (The agent is the predicate). Biting happened between Chester and Hubert.

It seems as though the writer does not know which dog bit the other. So, she turns the verb into a noun through the process that grammarians call nominalization. This happens to your sentence when you really don’t know the agent.

Biting happened on the part of Chester toward the dog of Hubert.

The writer of this sentence knows the agent of the action, but doesn’t show the action in a concrete way, which makes the sentence unclear. If you are Chester’s attorney, this is your sentence, but it’s not rhetorically effective if you want your audience to understand what happened.

Using Punctuation Rhetorically

The family held a reunion on the Fourth of July, and everyone had a great time. vs. The family held a reunion on the Fourth of July; everyone had a great time.

Both sentences are grammatically correct according to standard rules, but the semicolon produces a tighter connection and give emphasis to the second clause.

My favorite activities are skiing, playing golf, and bowling; unfortunately, they cost more than my budget can stand. vs. Unfortunately, my favorite activities—skiing, playing golf, and bowling—cost more than my budget can stand.

The second sentence is tighter, and the dash acts as an attention-getter. It tells the reader: “Pay attention. This is important!”

STEP FOUR - Podcast Assignment:

(45-60 minutes total)

For this assignment, you will work with two or three of your classmates to create a podcast in the style of the radio shows (“This American Life” and “RadioLab”) we have listened to this semester. Initially, you will work as a group to discuss the pieces you wrote during the semester, decide on a target audience (or audiences) for your podcast, play with how to frame one piece per group member together in a cohesive way, and create a schedule and series of task assignments for group members.

Your next step will be to revise (dramatically) your chosen piece of writing so that it more clearly reflects the theme or idea that your group has chosen to explore in the podcast and the target audience for the podcast.

Then, your group will write a title for your podcast, a short introduction to your show, short transitions between the pieces in the show, and a conclusion to your show. You will be allowed some class time for the planning, but should use this time to create a schedule of deadlines for these parts of the assignment and divide up the labor evenly between group members.

You will use personal audio recorders and the GarageBand software in the DWRL lab to record and edit these audio stories. The podcasts will incorporate sound bytes from interview. You may want to include other sound effects that add depth, dimension, affect, or comic relief to your stories.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Rubric for Paper 3 (I had the students read “The Transom Review” and they created this rubric based on that reading):

The story you tell must:

Give background, as well as consider carefully where to start and how to give background.
Make clear the stakes of the story.
Either build up central conflict so that the point of the story is apparent, or directly state the point.
Strike a balance between the big ideas (reporting) and the personal narrative (interview, quotes)

Students will get two grades for the podcast, one for their individual contribution and the quality of their revision, and a group grade for the overall cohesiveness of the podcast, the quality of the transitions, and how well it addresses the target audience they selected.

Additional Resources:

Ira Glass' "The Transom Review"

The DWRL's Guide for Podcasting in Pedagogy written by Kevin Bourque

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Course Description:

This assignment was implemented in an intermediate rhetoric and composition course.

Tags:

Revising/Drafting/Editing With Wikis

detweiler — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 17:19:32 +0000

Author:

Eric Detweiler

Image Credit:

Eric Detweiler

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students engage with and revise each other's texts using a wiki platform. Allows students to consider the various ways of composing a summary of a single text.

Type of Assignment:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Software

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

For my RHE 306 (introductory composition) course, I created a course wiki to which students posted numerous in-class activities and homework assignments. I find wiki particularly advantageous for group activities, as students can create pages that all group members can edit/revise/view/etc. (which GoogleDocs can also allow, but in a different manner). A wiki can thus be a useful space for foregrounding the collaborative nature of writing. Also worth noting is the “page history” feature of PBWorks, the wiki platform I use, which can allow both students and you, the instructor, to see how a particular page developed.

This lesson plan provides a way for students to think carefully about the rhetorical choices they make when summarizing a text by collaborating on the creation of a trio of wiki pages. The lesson plan is also designed to help students learn the difference between drafting, revising, and editing—three stages of the writing process we have already discussed as this lesson plan unfolds.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Computers with internet access, preferably one per student; a course wiki (as mentioned above, I use PBWorks).

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

I divide students into groups of 3.* Each group is assigned one chapter from the RHE 306 first-year forum book, and each member of that group is responsible for composing a “research summary” (RS) of their assigned chapter. (RSs are one-page summaries of a source’s argument, and are ideally free from the summarizer’s opinion about that argument.) I have students compose their RSs as Word documents, then copy and paste them into the body of a wiki page. I also ask them to choose a distinct color for their wiki-page summaries. Below is a screenshot of a student’s RS. The student has turned it blue using the bottom-left button in the formatting toolbars above the text window.

Once each student's research summary (RS) is drafted and uploaded, I assign her/his RS to another group member to revise—for instance, if Jaime, Harold, and Terry are a group, Jaime is assigned to revise Terry’s RS, Harold is to revise Jaime’s, and Terry to revise Harold’s. I ask each student to make her/his revisions in a different color than the original draft of the RS.

Finally, I reassign the revised RS to the third group member, who is charged with editing (i.e., Terry drafts, Jaime revises Terry’s draft, and Harold edits the revised draft).

Since deletions obviously don’t have a color, I also have students record any removed phrases, words, punctuation, etc., at the bottom of the page.

The timing on this whole process can differ—you can assign it as homework and have each stage due on a different day, or you can have the revision and editing stages take place during a class meeting.

After the editing work is done, I have the original drafter look at her/his revised and edited RS. I then let the groups have internal discussions about how they made the choices they did at each stage: Why did Harold choose to quote different lines than Jaime during his drafting process? What led Terry to cut the first line of Harold’s second paragraph? If you want something tangible, you can have students write out their reflections: Where did their group members original drafts differ? What rhetorical choices did their group members make that led to these differences? What differences in opinion were revealed in what group members chose to revise about each other’s RSs, and did any revisions seem especially effective? Etc. Broadly speaking, I like these questions to get students thinking about writing—even summary—as a rhetorical process rather than a fill-in-the-blanks sort of task.

*If the total number of students in the class isn't divisible by three, I'll create groups of four, but each group member will only engage with two other group members' summaries as revisor/editor.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

At this point in the semester, my students are already familiar with the wiki and the process for creating wiki pages. We have also discussed the differences between drafting, revising, and editing, which I roughly define as the following:

Drafting: The creation of new written material—getting words on the page for the first time, similar to invention.
Revising: Working with the words you’ve already composed (moving paragraphs or sentences around, rewriting phrases for clarity, deleting extraneous sentences/paragraphs/pages), which can include some new writing (scrapping and recomposing your introduction, or adding a new sentence at the end of a paragraph to better establish that paragraph’s purpose).
Editing: Cleaning up/polishing your grammar, spelling, citation, etc. (removing commas, adding in-text citations, changing “th” to “the”).

We will have also already covered methods of forwarding a source’s argument, particularly the relative merits of summary, paraphrase, and direct quotation.

Instructions For Students:

Relatively similar to the full instructions above--mostly, assign the students the chapter summary as homework in advance, have them post it to the wiki before class begins the day of the activity, and put them into (ideally) groups of three. From there, instruct them to revise one of there group member's summaries using a particular color of text, the edit the third group member's summary with yet another particular color. At the end, have them discuss why they made the specific revision and editorial choices they did and discuss what they found particularly effective about the group's summaries.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I generally grade this assignment on a pass/fail basis—as long as the student completed all three stages, they get credit.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students do occasionally find the process tedious, especially by the editing stage. As an alternative, the original drafts could be shorter. Really, one paragraph of drafted material could be enough given how extensive this activity can become.

Course Type:

Course Description:

Rhetoric 306 is a course in argumentation that situates rhetoric as an art of civic discourse. It is designed to enhancestudents' ability to analyze the various positions held in any public debateand to advocate positions effectively. Students work in this course willhelp them advance the critical writing and reading needed to succeed in coursesfor their major and university degree.

Tags:

End of Semester Reflection on Political Rhetoric

Voss — Wed, 02 May 2012 21:45:54 +0000

Author:

Jay Voss

Image Credit:

storyful.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students consider an ostentacious example of political rhetoric, then consider the other side's analysis of said rhetoric.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rebuttal

Rhetorical Analysis

Stasis

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This lesson plan is well-suited for a class period near the end of term, when students have started or nearly completed end of semester work. It encourages students to reflect upon what they've learned, how it's useful, and why a public university might require basic composition courses.

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

Printouts of articles (if not in an electronic classroom), rrelevant URLs to bring to class and show on room's projector.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Start by breaking students into small groups and asking them to reflect upon why the university feels it's important to require that they take the course. Give them 10 minutes or so and move from group to group while providing a little coaching or feedback. Once everyone comes back together, ask them what they came up with. You might consider having something prepared to say about how basic composition courses have been a feature of American public universities since their inception. Once they've said all the obvious things, ask them to highlight how these things are particularly relevant to the 21st-century American experience.

Play for them a recent political TV advertisement. When I used this lesson plan, I played Mitt Romney's latest shtick, the motto of which is "Obama Isn't Working." The advertisement is much like a trailer for new cheap action movie, and the sense of impending doom it gives for the upcoming Democratic National Convention is scary. Have the students discuss the rhetorical strategies at play in the advertisement. Ethos, pathos, and logos are all relevant, and as a group they should be able to nail down which stases are coming into play.

Next, have them watch a recent campaign speech of the same candidate. Ask them to think about how the candidate used the different medium (a public speech) to advance a now familiar argument. (What's helpful here is that as a group, the students now have some context for the argument being made and are able to discuss it on equal footing. Often what happens in composition classes is that students are all writing on very different topics, and it's hard for them to see how another's question is relevant to their own.) Faulty logos will probably be apparent no matter which candidate one chooses to examine, so be sure to press students on whether or not the arguments are successful.

Finally, provide students with the other side's rebuttal. As them to think about the way the left is challanging the right's rhetoric (or vice versa), and how this complicates the things being said. Also, ask them if there's any suspect rhetoric in the rebuttal. Ask them to reflect about how what they've learned in the course is informing how they're consuming this public content. Ask them to think about the ways in which rhetorical invention and rhetorical consumption are related.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

When I did this lesson plan in my class I strove the appear bipartisan. This involved researching how various criticisms could be applied to both sides of the political spectrum.

Instructions For Students:

The basic instructions for this assignment are implicit in the "Full Assignment Description" above. One thing I found myself reminding them of is that they should be thinking out of the box in this activity. It isn't always apparent how rhetorical training relates to civic discourse -- esp. for 18-year olds who don't read the paper every day -- and it takes a little imaginative thinking to get them thinking in this way.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This assignment wasn't graded. Rather, it works really well for a day late in the semester when students are turning in work, or when they're in the final stages of completing a major assignment. It's a productive way to get them thinking about class content on a day when they haven't done any specific reading for the course.

Course Type:

Course Description:

RHE 306 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:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

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:

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:

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:

Composing Tutorials for Navigating Databases

Schultz — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:18:29 +0000

Author:

Patrick Shulz

Image Credit:

"Database cleanup work" by windsordi on Flikr

Brief Assignment Overview:

RHE 306 group work: Students write short manuals outlining how to use databases (LexisNexis, Infotrac Newsstand, Academic One File, Opposing Viewpoints, Google/Wikipedia).

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Audience

Delivery

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Research

Summary

Technical Writing

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Teach students how to use databases; students familiarize themselves with advanced search techniques

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Each group needs at least one computer with internet access; probably will not work very well outside computer classrooms.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

We look at the UT library website to find opinion, editorial and viewpoint articles.

Then students work in groups of four or five; each group produces a guide (including screenshots) to one database to help their classmates use this database. I usually make them them look at LexisNexis, Infotrac Newsstand, Academic Onefile, Opposing Viewpoints, (Factiva), Google/Wikipedia.

They basically write down (1) how to search the database most efficiently (2) how to find opinion articles as opposed to news reports (3) what kind of material this database offers. See below for detailed instructions.

They then present their findings to class and e-mail the completed manual to me. I put the .pdf on the wiki for students to use later on. We talk about strengths and weaknesses of each database (How to use texts from Opposing Viewpoints? Is it okay to use Wikipedia? etc.).

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Print out worksheets and familiarize yourself with databases enough to assist students.

Instructions For Students:

This is the worksheet (needs a little adaptation to work with Google/Wikipedia).

Group X: Database X

Go to the University of Texas Libraries website, and access the databases

Pick a topic you are interested in (or just use the "Texas textbooks" example) and search for material in this database.

1. Do you get useful results? How can you sort your results?

2. Does the database focus on a specific sort of text, e.g. scholarly articles, newspaper reports, editorials? Does it include other media such as videos?

3. Is it easy to tell opinion articles and news texts apart? What is the easiest way to find an opinion article?

4. Take screenshots* of the homepage and the results page, be prepared to show your classmates how to navigate the database.

5. Does the database have an “Advanced Search” feature? How can you filter your results? (For example, can you restrict the search to a text genre like “editorial” or a newspaper, e.g. “The New York Times”?).

6. Take a screenshot of the “Advanced Search” interface and be prepared to show your classmates how to use this feature.

7. What is good/bad about this database? Does it have any special features that seem helpful?

8. Is it a good place to find material for your research summary? Why (not)?

9. Put all the screenshots in a word document (one per group) and write a little manual on how to use this database. Present to class and email the document to the instructor. Make sure to put the names of all group members in the document.

*Taking a screenshot on a Mac: Press Command-Shift-3. The image will be saved to the desktop. In Word, click “Insert”, then choose “Picture”/”from file” in the drop down menu to insert the image into your word document.

Taking a screenshot in Windows: Press F14. Open “Paint”. Click paste. Save image to desktop. In Word, click “Insert” and then “Picture”.

Evaluation Suggestions:

It was not graded.

Course Type: