DWRL Lesson Plans - Word Choice

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Textual Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Using a university database, computer literacy

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Computer/Laptop, course readings so far, OED worksheet, access to university database with OED online

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

My students were focusing on writing close reading based entirely in the text anot not contextual resources. So to show them the ways in which exploring a single word can lead to new interpretations or ideas about a text, I created this exercise using the OED online. My goal for the exercise was to give students an introduction to using UT's library page and navigating to databases, in addition to give them an outside tool that could help them do their Essay 1 close reading. I told them that the word they exmained for the exercise could be used for their larger essay.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

You may want to make hard copies of the worksheet so that students can write their answers down and use the computer just for the search process. You may also upload a soft copy of the worksheet to a class management site (ex. Blackboard, Canvas, PBworks wiki) and give the students the option to type in their responses. They can then either print the completed worksheet, E-mail it to the instructor, or upload it to the class management site (ex. Discussion Board). I also prepared an "exemplar" for them where I completed the worksheet just as the students would. It helped them to see the length of response I expected and also how my own process (which was surprisingly fruitful as prepartion for class discussion on the reading) led to new and improved readings of the original text.

Instructions For Students:

1. Make sure you have read at least one reading in class that students can use to pick their word from.

2. Show students to steps required to navigate your university's databases website in order to get to OED online.

3. Briefly showcase the search options and also the "Cite" button which provides MLA citation for the students (they love this).

4. Either take the chance to go through your exemplar together, with you explaining the questions and why you gave the responses or give students time to read through the exemplar, and then allow time for students to ask clarifying questions about the assignment.

5. Students then go to their computers/laptops and given the time you allow (at least 30 minutes though 45 minutes is probably a better time period), have them complete the worksheet, either in hard or soft copy (see "Instructor Preparation" below).

6. Students turn in the worksheet for instructor feedback.

You can also do Steps 1-4 as preparation for assigning this as homework. This has the benefit of giving students more time to explore; on the other hand, it does not allow the instructor to help students out as needed in the process.

The blank worksheet is copied below in its entirety:

Close Reading Strategies: OED Exercise

Directions: use the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) website as accessible through lib.utexas.edu to explore the etymology and multiple meanings of a word in the passage(s) you are considering for Essay 1, or any word from Douglass, DuBois, Washington, if you do not have your heart set on a passage yet. Look at the example of “propaganda” provided to be sure you complete this in proper detail. You may write on the hard copy or on the soft copy of the class website.

Go to http://www.lib.utexas.edu/ and then click on the “Databases” tab of the scoUT box. Click on the letter “O” and click on the link that read “OED (Oxford English Dictionary).”

Use the search box and type in the word you’ve chosen. Note if there is more than one entry.

Click on the entry (or entries) and read through them. Makes notes about key information, such as (but not limited to):

Etymology (origins of the word; how it has been used)

Difference between different parts of speech (is it both a noun and verb? If so, how does the word used differently as a noun or a verb?)

How many definitions? How similar or different are the definitions from each other?

Are there any “compounds” listed in the entry? If so, what does this say about the primary use of the word?

Overall, what are the thoughts you have about the word? How does this information tie into how the author might (or might not) be using the word? Is the word being used in an archaic (old, out-of-fashion) way or in multiple ways are the same time?

Make sure to consider how the word fits into the context of the entire sentence, into the context of the entire passage, and even into the context of the entire work. Write those thoughts here.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I graded this as participation, though if this a homework assignment, I would also give it a small grade. Or, you could make this an informal assessment. No matter what grade you do or do not ascribe to it, I think it is very important to give students feedback.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

I had planned a lot less time for this assignment initially but since I had made my schedule flexible for that day, I was able to adjust and add more time. I think this was appreciated by the students, who were able to complete most of the worksheet. In addition, a number of students ended up using the OED in their Essay 1's (a major writing assignment - a 4-page close reading of one text) and told me that they had been using it in other contexts. Because we did this exercise in class, I could offer commentary on their writing assignments about words I suggest they OED (we started using it as a verb) and I think that I may include OED definitions of words in future notes for students. I will definitely do this assignment again.

Additional Resources:

Below is the exemplar I created for my class, using the word "propaganda" from WEB Du Bois's "Of Booker T Washington and Others":

Go to http://www.lib.utexas.edu/ and then click on the “Databases” tab of the scoUT box. Click on the letter “O” and click on the link that read “OED (Oxford English Dictionary).”

Use the search box and type in the word you’ve chosen. Note if there is more than one entry.

Propaganda is both a noun and a verb, so I will make sure to check both links (I opened them as 2 separate tabs)

Click on the entry (or entries) and read through them. Makes notes about key information, such as (but not limited to):

Etymology (origins of the word; how it has been used)

The noun version actually originated in the church as a body that missionized groups. It wasn’t until the late 18^th century that the word took on a broader, more secular meaning as “an organization, scheme, or movement for the propagation of a particular doctrine, practice, etc.” (def. #2)

Difference between different parts of speech (is it both a noun and verb? If so, how does the word used differently as a noun or a verb?)

The verb version is rare and has the same meaning as most recent definitions of propaganda (i.e. to persuade or influence using propaganda). The noun is how DuBois uses it. But as noted above, the history of this word is quite interesting and though he probably means it in the more recent way, the church valences may still be there.

How many definitions? How similar or different are the definitions from each other?

After the church-related one, the third is fairly similar to the 2^nd one, except that they tend to emphasize the “biased and misleading” aspect of the information. There are only 3 definitions (not including the compounds).

Are there any “compounds” listed in the entry? If so, what does this say about the primary use of the word?

Yes, most of these are the tools of propaganda (like propaganda leaflet, propaganda movement, etc.)

Overall, what are the thoughts you have about the word? How does this information tie into how the author might (or might not) be using the word? Is the word being used in an archaic (old, out-of-fashion) way or in multiple ways are the same time?

Looking at this word, it made me think about it in a larger sense. I kept thinking about DuBois talking to the audience about Washington’s speeches and texts, just the print material, but I realize that DuBois is likely also talking about Washington’s “scheme” – maybe not in a nefarious way, but he is noticing that Washington’s ideas are disseminated in many ways beyond the text, by the Tuskegee machine, and by an organization that is represented by Washington but that encompasses many more people and organizations. Indeed, until I looked at this OED, I felt like propaganda was prettily singular but I can see how it connects to other aspects of the text outside of my own chosen passage.

Make sure to consider how the word fits into the context of the entire sentence, into the context of the entire passage, and even into the context of the entire work. Write those thoughts here.

I think that “propaganda” can be tied to DuBois’ invocation of the word “cult” on the second page of the text (CR 55). The cult is more related to a movement or organization and looking at this OED definition, I see propaganda as a more organized movement. In addition, I think it adds to the idea that Washington is spreading misinformation (“dangerous half-truth” on CR 60). The OED definition helped me make a connection within

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

This exercise was used in a lower-division literature course focused on African American literature and culture, Black Public Intellectuals (course-listed with African American Studies). Students are range from first-years to seniors. My class has 22 students.

Tags:

Using Comment Walls to Practice Rebuttal

Sloan — Fri, 18 Apr 2014 16:11:14 +0000

Author:

Casey Sloan

Image Credit:

Pixabay

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to think through the rhetorical practice of contributing to a discussion on a website's comment wall. After finding a video on YouTube, a blog entry, or an opinion article on an online news source, students will read through the comments section, locate effective and ineffective comments, and ultimately draft a possible contribution to the wall based on their understanding of any manifested disagreements. This exercise will highlight the importance of refutation, concession and rebuttal.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rebuttal

Stasis

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Social Media

Media Requirements:

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Students will be asked to think critically about ways to effectively make an argument in a small amount of space, the "venue" of forum comment walls, the genre of the comment post, and the importance of fair, balanced rebuttals. This exercise also helps students understand the impace that rhetorical skills can have in real-world situation. Students will find an online argument that takes a position in their controversy (YouTube videos work well here), read through the comments section, identify a disagreement, evaluate various users' use of rebuttal, and, ultimately, insert theirown opinion. This assignment works in-class for rooms with computers with internet access. It can also be assigned as homework.

Before this lesson, define refutation, concession, and rebuttal for your students. Ask students to surf the web (a simple Google search worked well for my class) for a position within their controversy. Ask them to examine the argument, then read through the comments section. Ask them to find some examples of effective and ineffective responses to the argument. Ask them to think about why particular comments are convincing and why others are not. Are some responses simply offensive? Do they give faulty evidence? Do they give a fair summary of the argument or misrepresent it?

After your students have looking through the comment walls, have them report to the class or to small groups on their findings. The ensuing discussion should solidify the importance of a fair summary, concession, and refutation.

Ultimately, ask them to write less than 100 words offering a rebuttal to either the argument or to a comment they found particularly intriguing. Instruct them to focus on fairly representing their opponent's position and finding common ground before persuasively using refutation.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

This assignment requires computers with internet access. Decide beforehand whether this assignment will be performed in-class or as homework.

Instructions For Students:

Before this assignment, students should be introduced to the concepts of refutation, concession, and rebuttal. This is a great way to emphasize the importance of brief, fair summaries and of finding common ground, or points of stasis, with opposing positions.

1) Locate an argument online that participates in your controversy. Try using some key words in the Google search engine. Make sure the blog post, opinion news article, YouTube video, etc. has a comments section that you can access. Read through the argument, then read through the comments wall. What do people disagree with in the article? Where are commenters disagreeing with each other?

2) Pick two comments that you think are particularly effective in convincing the reader. Pick two that are particularly ineffective. How do these comments differ from each other? Which comments fairly represent the main argument? Which comments use concession? Which comments use refutation? How does each comment go about rebutting the main argument (or another comment)? Do any of the comments make faulty claims?

3) Write up your own comment that will contribute to the conversation on this forum. It must rebut either the main argument or another comment on the wall. Your rebuttal must be less than 100 words, offer a fair summary of your oppositon's position, and offer some point of concession.

Course Type:

Course Description:

I used this lession in an introductory rhetoric course.

Tags:

Figuring Out Rhetorical Figures

Cowan — Thu, 17 Apr 2014 15:58:19 +0000

Author:

Jake Cowan

Image Credit:

Ed Stevenhagen

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment uses online resources (Wiktionary or Silva Rhetoricae) to introduce students first hand to different rhetorical figures.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Preferrably a computer for each student group, although with sufficient instructor preparation, the exercise could be done with simply pen and paper, or even orally.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

There are hundreds of rhetorical figures, some not well distinguished from the rest, and each with an impossible to remember, overly technical name. Yet learning a range of figures is invaluable to eloquent, persuasive, and swift writing. Knowing how to "rhetoricize" — an example of anthimeria — a sentence helps to speed up the composition process, and produces far more articulate and convincing texts. This assignment gives students an introduction to some of the most useful figures without delving into a lecture format.

The first thing to do is break up students into groups of 2 or 3, sending each set to a computer. Throughout the exercise, they will utilize the resources of either Wiktionary or Silva Rhetoricae to look up the defintion and examples of each term. Once the students are settled, the instructor should give the class as a whole an example sentence to manipulate throughout the assignment with each of the rhetorical figures. In my own class, we have a running joke about my pompadour, so the sentence I have used is:

Jake has a big problem — he ran out of hair gel this morning, and so his pompadour has fallen flat.

Next, give each group a single rhetorical figure to look up. They should write down the definition, any examples the website gives, and then rewrite the example sentence employing the rhetorical figure. After a few minutes, the groups will turn around and present their work to the class as a whole, providing the definition of the term and their own example. Once the first round is finished, the instructor should give each group a new figure of speech, and the process should be repeated. In my own classes, I have always tried to give each group 4 different figures throughout the time period.

In previous classes, I have used the following list of schemes and tropes:

Schemes / Changes in Arrangement — alliteration; anastrophe; anaphora; asyndeton; chiasmus; epistrophe; isocolon; synonymia

Tropes / Changes in Meaning — antanaclasis; anthimeria; anthypophora; antonomasia; hyperbole; metaphor; proslepsis; synecdoche

So, for example, using proslepsis to rewrite the aforementioned example sentence, the students might produce something like: It would be as poor form as the shape of Jake's pomp to point out what a problem his running out of hair gel has become. Or, to use antonomasia: The Instructor has a big problem — he ran out of Dapper Dan's, and so his pompadour has fallen flat.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Before class, the instructor would need to both decide on a list of rhetorical figures for the students to look up and work with, as well as devise an example sentence to be manipulated. The flexibility of the latter is crucial, so the instructor should try to re-work the sentence on her own with each figure before class meets.

Instructions For Students:

Once you have accessed either Wiktionary or Silva Rhetoricae, simply look up each term that the instructor gives your group. Write down whatever definition the website gives, any examples, and then use the term to rewrite the example sentence. When finished, present your work to the class.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This is an ungraded assignment. All that matters is worthwhile and engaged participation. However, I do ask that all future papers after this exercise is finished consciously incorporate more rhetorical figures, which I do look for and grade accordingly.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

So long as the example sentence is in and of itself somewhat interesting, my students have always found this a fun and worthwhile exercise.

Course Type:

Tags:

Ethos and Online Dating 2.0 - Incorporating Visuals

Cate Blouke — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 15:54:10 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

Image from The Dating Game scene in Mallrats. Found on The Baltimore Chop website.

Brief Assignment Overview:

A remix of a previous lesson plan, this exercise asks students to analyze the ethos of an online dating profile and then pair it with an appropriate image - drawing on the relationship between written and visual rhetoric.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Social Media

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This works as a great introduction to the concepts of ethos, audience, and/or visual rhetoric.

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

In theory, you could do this assignment without classroom technology, though an internet connection and projector would be ideal.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

#A - twocentsworth. "Studious." Flickr.com. 3 June 2008.

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This is an update on a previous lesson plan: Teaching Ethos Using Online Dating Profiles, which relies strictly on textual analysis. As I explain in that plan, "Perhaps more so than any other piece of writing, and even more so than my students' facebook pages, the self-summaries presented in online dating profiles are fundamentally arguments of ethos. Regardless of specific rhetorical aim (a casual hook up, a future spouse, or something in between), at heart, each of these texts is saying to readers, 'this is who I am, accept me.' So they seemed like a great source text to get my students really thinking about how and why they evaluate people: what sort of snap judgements they make, how they read into things without even realizing it."

In this version (re-designed for my Introduction to Visual Rhetoric course this semester), I ask students to draw connections between written ethos/self-presentation and pieces of visual rhetoric. I offer them a written profile alongside a series of pictures of eligible "bachelors" to choose from. They then had to make the case for why they thought a particular image fit the written profile.

For this specific class, we had just begun a unit on style, and my students had been reading excerpts from Barry Brummett's A Rhetoric of Style and Stuart Ewan's All Consuming Images. Our discussion, therefore, focused a lot on the stylistic choices in the images and how those might be read as reflections of particular values indicated in the written profile. While those readings and that framework aren't necessary for this exercise, they did help to get my students grounded in the way they read people's visual style. Without this kind of foregrounding, you may end up having to do a fair bit of extra wrangling to get students to articulate why they draw the conclusions they do (i.e. how they connect mustaches with driving a Vespa). But that can be a great discussion - forcing them to confront/explain the assumptions they make.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

I spent a fair bit of time compiling a set of "bachelor" photos from creative commons liscenced images that I found on the web, rather than using people's actual OKCupid profile pictures. I'd recommend just using the ones I've put together (see below), though you're welcome to make your own. The idea of using actual images from OKCupid profiles didn't sit well with me, even if they are publicly available. It seems like an invasion of privacy (in a way), or at least a kind of appropriation that I'm not comfortable with. The written profile I excerpted was previously a public page but has since been taken down/made private - which means if you have students do this as a homework assignment or on computers, they can't just google some key phrases to find the actual profile (one of the downfalls of the previous lesson plan).

I tried to compile a diversity of styles that nevertheless might fit with the written profile, as well as some that I thought clearly didn't fit. However, I was surprised by my students' responses. There were multiple votes for five of the seven images - a much wider range than I anticipated.

Instructions For Students:

In our introduction to the concept of style, we also talked about the idea of "ethos" - the character, or sense of authority, that one presents to the world, either through writing (as you may have addressed in previous rhetoric courses) or (for our purposes) through style.

This unit is all about thinking through the assumptions we make about, or (more kindly) ways in which we read, both the styles of others and our own styles. What we think of a particular style or clothing item isn't necessarily the same as how others view it.

There is, perhaps, no clearer instance of an argument based on character (and style) than online dating profiles. Each person's profile essentially makes the argument that "you should date me because of who I am." These arguments are paired with a selection of images, presumably chosen to cast the author in his or her most favorable light. On the free online dating site OkCupid, users combine images of themselves with written self-summaries in order to convince potential matches to give them a chance.

For this exercise, read over the written dating profile below, and then review the potential images. Your task will be to pair the written profile with one of the possible images. We'll assume that all elements of the image were carefully crafted/selected for this particular purpose/venue.

Questions to consider in making your choice: What kind of person does this profile describe? What does he value/care about? Which image do you think best reflects those values or that style?

Write a few sentences explaining your choice. Be sure to offer evidence for your analysis. Why does this image/person seem most fitting to you? What kinds of things about the man's style do you infer from the image? How, specifically, does that connect with the written description? You might also include your rationale for eliminating other potential options.

Keep in mind that you want to think about the "big picture" of this profile. While one or two aspects of the written part might point toward a particular image, is that image wholly congruent with the rest of the profile?

The Written Profile:

I have a yearning to explore different territory. To frolic in a refreshing mist atop the Yellow Mountains of Mainland China. To play with other great musicians. To watch shows in the opera house of Lyon, with an intermission of French kids break dancing outside the hall. To cook my own recipe in a Paul Bocuse culinary. These are things that most of my homies won't touch. Lest we forget, I am an abnormal guy; and I am looking for an extraordinary girl.

I want a girl who can be fun and adventurous. The kind of girl who isn't too afraid to suddenly break out of a three-day isolation and take a road trip across the country on a 1987 Vespa which I am convinced can take at least another hundred thousand miles.

Interestingly, my most passionate relationships involved completely contradictory personalities. Speaking of character--unfortunately, not all of us can be satisfied with pixellated photos and interview format autobiographies. Call me old-school, but coffee and a heated intellectual conversation beats the hell out of a 9 day back and forth email chat marathon. If you want to get to know me, call me. Tell me about yourself. Talk to me about politics. What is really important to you? I never get tired of meeting new and inherently good people.

The Potential Bachelors:

Bachelors.jpg

Image Credits:

#B - Mosborne01. "Ashs-student-playing-guitar." Wikimedia Commons. 1 July 2010.

#C - torbakhopper. "Cool Dude." Wikimedia Commons. 10 Nov 2011.

#D - Chris Hunkeler. "Running with Music." Flickr.com. 5 May 2013.

#E - siuhonglo. "Singapore Flyer." Flickr.com. Aug 27 2011.

#F - connerdowney. "7 - Meditation." Flickr.com. 08 Jan 2009.

#G - sadly, I have lost the citation information for this one. I know it was CC licensed, though. I will post citation if I can find it again.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This was in in-class exercise, so it wasn't evaluated.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students really enjoyed the exercise, and I was surprised by the arguments they made for one image over another. It fostered a lively conversation about stereotypes and assumptions (particularly the way they read the image of bachelor #C).

Course Type:

Intermediate Writing Course

Course Description:

RHE 315 - Introduction to Visual Rhetoric

With the rise of new media and network television, Americans are exposed to thousands upon thousands of images on a daily basis. From our facebook streams to our television viewing choices to our personal email accounts, we are bombarded with images: of celebrities, of politicians, of consumer goods, of natural disasters, of… cats. And we must filter through it all in order to make sense of our world.

In this course we will explore the ways in which images can be read, analyzed, constructed, and manipulated. We will interrogate how images inform our reading of historical and political events, of personal identity, of public and private spaces. We will think through issues of self-presentation: how our stylistic choices convey messages to the world around us, and how we interpret the choices of others. We will look at the spaces we frequent and consider the rhetorical effects of everything from the architecture to the furniture to lighting. In short, we will investigate how the visual (non-linguistic, non-textual) world conveys its messages.

Tags:

Using Debates to Teach Rhetorical Analysis

Sloan — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:19:55 +0000

Author:

Casey Sloan

Image Credit:

Image Credit: Short Excursions Into Allyson's Mind

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to watch a debate and evaluate the participants' use of ethos, pathos and logos given their goals and their audience. It then asks students to select a debate “winner,” construct an argument justifying their position, and debate the issue with other students, incorporating concession, refutation and rebuttal.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Media Requirements:

Media Console/Projector

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This assignment has students evaluate speakers' use of ethos, logos and pathos, perform a rhetorical analysis on the effectiveness of that use, and debate their own conclusions with their classmates by relying on concession, refutation and rebuttal. Ideally, this assignment will help students solidify their understanding of rhetorical appeals and allow them to practice calling upon argumentative strategies to persuade a skeptical audience. The debate chosen can be a fantastic hook to catch student interest in rhetorical analysis. Presidential debates or heated public debates could be introduced for a class that seems particularly politically conscious, but I personally used a semi-humorous debate between comedian Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly, television host and social commentator. The debating then required of students should help them develop their own use of persuasive strategies.

Students will first watch a debate in class. A classroom equipped with a computer and screen is necessary for this assignment. While viewing the debate, students should take notes on both (or one, if you want to divide your students neatly into two camps) speakers' use of ethos, logos and pathos. Ask them also to think about the audience for this debate and whether or not the rhetorical moves made by the speakers would be received well by that audience. This should take up one class period.

For homework, have your students write up a brief report arguing why one speaker “won” the debate. They should use the notes taken during the debate and focus on the use and effectiveness of rhetorical appeals.

During the next class period, ask students to share their arguments. Go back and forth between the two camps, asking students to use various combinations of concession, refutation and rebuttal to answer one another.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Be sure to pick a debate video that will fit neatly in with your available class time. Decide whether you want to assign students to a single debater or offer them the option of picking their own side. If you assign students to a single speaker, you can ask them to focus solely on her while watching the debate video.

Instructions For Students:

Ideally, before performing this exercise students should already be familiar with rhetorical analysis and refutation, concession and rebuttal. I used this assignment as an end-of-semester wrap-up to synthesize various ideas and skills.

1) For the first class period, students should closely watch this debate video. They should focus on both speakers' (or a single speaker's) use of ethos, pathos and logos. Instruct them to take detailed notes, citing specific examples. Ask them to pay special attention to these questions: what kind of ethos do the speakers establish? How? When do they use pathos and why? When do they use logos and why? Also, define the audience for this debate.

2) For homework, students should write up a 1-2 page argument about why one debater "won" the argument by more effectively using rhetorical appeals to convince her audience.

3) For the next class period, ask a volunteer on each side summarize why her debater won. Then, ask opposing sides to use various combinatinos of refutation, rebuttal and concession to argue against one another.

Course Type:

http://poetry.rapgenius.com/F-scott-fitzgerald-the-great-gatsby-chapter-...

Course Description:

I used this assignment for Rhetoric 306, an introductory course.

Tags:

Rap Genius Close Reading Exercise

Uzendoski — Sat, 28 Sep 2013 21:52:58 +0000

Author:

Andrew Uzendoski

Image Credit:

2013 Genius Media Group

Brief Assignment Overview:

This close reading assignment uses “Rap Genius”, an Internet annotation website, to connect each student with multiple audiences while also creating a forum where the entire class can pool their knowledge together in order to better analyze and understand the work of a specific author.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Annotation

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Web Design

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

A computer for each small group, ideally for each student in the group. A media consolae/projeftor for the small groups to present their completed annotation project.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

In this assignment, students practice their close reading skills in small groups of three or four students. Each group is given a different poem or a short story by the same author. While discussing the text together, they must identify and analyze important passages or lines. After their discussion, they will annotate a copy of their text—a copy which has previously been posted by the teacher on the Rap Genius website—using the analysis they produced in their small group.

When each group has completed their annotation of their text, the class will reconvene as a whole to share their close readings. Each group shares their analysis of the text using their annotated copy on the Rap Genius website. After each group’s presentation, there should be an opportunity for anyone in the class to add an annotation to the poem or short story. Because the same author wrote each text analyzed by the small groups, the students should better be able to use their knowledge of the author’s style, biography or evolution as a writer to expand on the original analysis of the poem or short story.

This assignment provides the students with multiple audiences—the individual members of their small group, the class at large, and the Rap Genius online community. It also encourages the students to learn from each other. The exercise offers multiple points where class participation shapes the analysis of the text, and the diverse readings of different texts by the same author are able to inform each group’s close analysis as well as the larger appreciation of the author’s body of work.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

This assignment works best after the fundamentals of close reading have been established in the class. Ideally, the teacher will have first modeled the close reading of a passage from a poem or short story, as then lead a collaborative close reading with the class of another text. Once the teacher is confidant the class can lead their own close readings, he or she can use this assignment as a platform for allowing the students to execute a close reading without the direct guidance of a teacher.

Please note that this assignment requires the instructor to upload each text that the students will analyze to Rap Genius prior to the closer reading exercise. It is easy to post a text; there are detailed instructions on the website and it requires you to paste a copy of the text onto the website. (And if there are any questions, do not hesitate in asking Jeremy Dean, the head of “Education Genius Department” for Rap Genius and a University of Texas alum! His contact info is Jeremy@rapgenius.com)

Instructions For Students:

1. Each group of students (3-4) will be handed a different text, either a poem or short story, written by the same author. (Note: This can either be done at the beginning of class if it is a short text, or before the beginning of class if it is a longer text.)

2. Each group will discuss the text and identify important passages (Usually 6 – 8).

3. Each group will then analyze these passages, providing insight on the style, historical context or thematic value of the passage. Each analysis should be 1 – 4 sentences long. This analysis can either be done on paper or on a computer, but if it is done on a computer it will be easier for the students to copy the analysis and paste it in their annotation.

4. Each student will make an account on Rap Genius (rapgenius.com), which will allow them to annotate texts on the website. An email, a username and a password are all that are needed for an account.

5. Each group will then find their text on the Rap Genius database.

6. Once the text is found, they should add their analysis of each passage as online annotations to the text

a. To add an annotation:

i. Highlight the passage you wish to annotate

ii. An option “Annotate” will appear. Click this button.

iii. Add analysis to the text box.

7. When the group's annotations are complete, all of the small groups should reconvene as a whole class.

8. Each group can now present their analysis of their text, going through each annotation and explaining the importance of each passage.

a. For example:

i. How does each of their annotations analyze the author’s use of rhetorical style?

ii. What are the central symbols or themes present in the selected passage?

iii. What historical context did the group add in their annotation to help the reader better understand the passage?

iv. What biographical details from the Author’s life or career might help deepen our understanding of the passage?

9. After each group finishes the presentation of their analysis, allows other students in the class the opportunity to amend or add to any of the annotations.

Evaluation Suggestions:

This exercise is perhaps best assessed as component of the student’s participation grade. A specific number of annotations should be required form each group (6-8 usually works well). Their presentations should also be clear.

However, the Rap Genius annotation platform could be used in a version of this assignment that is completed by each individual student, and not as a small group exercise. Or the teacher could add an annotation component to a student’s essay on the close reading of a passage; the student could have to submit both a short essay and export a certain number of annotations from his essay onto the Rap Genius website.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students generally reacted well to this assignment, especially to the fact that their final analysis was posted on Rap Genius, available to anyone on the Internet. It was also a good way to incorporate the computer classroom into a English literature class. Furthermore, some students continued to annotate other texts on the Rap Genius website after the exercise was completed, as Rap Genius is continuing to expand their inclusion of literary texts. A few students were especially interested in annotating texts from the extensive list of Rap, Indie Rock and Pop songs on the website.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Course Description:

This assignment is designed for an English Literature course with access to a computer lab. It has been used effectively in Ethnic American literature classes, where it is important to consider both literary style and historical context when close reading passages. The assignment is also good for analyzing poems that are influenced by historical events, where the students can identify in selected passages how authors directly engage political and cultural touchstones from their respective eras. The exercise is also designed for class with 25 or less students.

Tags:

Locating Bias Within A Dictionary

Cowan — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 06:33:54 +0000

Author:

Jake Cowan

Image Credit:

Sir Joshua Reynolds

Brief Assignment Overview:

In the course of discussing David Foster Wallace’s essay “Tense Present,” I asked my students to compare and contrast the entries for various questionable or controversial words — such as “irregardless” and “hopefully” — in a few competing online dictionaries.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

Assignment Length:

Partial Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Ideology

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Research

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Presentations

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Critical Thinking & Controversy Mapping

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

A classroom with a number of computers that have internet access for students to use in groups. An OED account, whether personal or provided by the university, would also be useful. If no computers are available, however, using traditional hardcopy dictionaries is always an option.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

From grade school on, students have been told by teachers to look up proper spellings and nuanced definitions in dictionaries. Rarely, if ever, have those students given a second thought to (or been told to question) which dictionary they picked off the shelf. The specific aim of this assignment is to help students locate bias, controversy, and differing positions in what ostensibly seems like a matter-of-fact, trustworthy source. More generally, I want my students to consider the complexity and importance of high-level writing beyond the level of content, at the simplest level of word choice.

To begin with, I introduce the “descriptivist” and “prescriptivist” dichotomy of lexicographical camps to my students, using the Wallace essay mentioned above to guide the discussion. Together we consider why language users — from lexicographers to future employers, their rhetoric professor and their peers — might have a stake in either side of the “usage wars.” Briefly, we walk through the history of the controversy, and list ways in which a student’s use of certain words, styles and spelling conventions might affect her personally. If any ESL or bilingual students are a part of the class, I ask them to compare and contrast the rules of English usage with those of, say, Spanish or German.

At the end of the discussion, I divide my students into small groups and assign them individual dictionaries to explore (see Instructions for Students below). At no point do I indicate which might be “descriptivist” and which could be considered “prescriptivist.” The students take about 10 minutes with their groups to research and then they relay the results to the rest of the class. Once a certain amount of factual information has been presented, I ask the students to make educated guesses as to the various ideologies and positions of their dictionaries.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Prior to class, I organized a list of controversial words that I thought would be illustrative, and researched their respective entries in each dictionary, taking note of what I wanted my students to look for when they were given the chance.

Instructions For Students:

Students should break apart into small groups, each with their own computer. Provide each group with the URL for a particular dictionary, such as:

American Heritage Dictionary
Merriam Webster
Oxford English Dictionary (an account will be needed for access)
Wiktionary

(If you are feeling adventurous and don’t mind rather vulgar language, Urban Dictionary makes for an interesting counterpart to the more traditional sites.)

Once the sites are loaded, each group should look up a short list of controversial words. In my class, we explored the entries for:

Irregardless
Literally
Hopefully
Infer

Using either a word processor or a pen and paper, the students take notes on different aspects of each entry, answering a few questions raised in our earlier discussion. These include:

Are there usage notes, and if so, what is the tone?
Which definitions are given priority as the primary?
How is the etymology of each word presented?

After about 10 minutes, the class will reconvene and discuss the findings with their peers. When each entry in turn has been considered, the students hypothesize which dictionaries might be traditionally labelled as “descriptivist” and which could be thought of as “prescriptivist.” Although the dictionaries claim a certain amount of objective authority, students should dig through the minor details to find where bias is buried.

Evaluation Suggestions:

As an in-class group assignment, I graded my students on participation.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students — a collection of freshmen and sophomores with non-writing majors — seemed surprised at the variety of dictionaries available, as well as the variance between each. None could name a particular one that they had used with any consistency in past assignments, nor had they considered that a dictionary could have bias. Interestingly, the user-generated entries on Urban Dictionary — which we had predicted to be the most permissive and forgiving of the choices — were in fact the harshest, strictest and most pejorative.

Course Type:

Course Description:

This excercise was originally designed for use in Rhetoric 306: Rhetoric and Writing. Any introductory composition course that focuses on researching a controversy might be able to use this lesson plan.

Student Digital Activism as Rhetorical Advocacy/Analysis

Hoag — Sun, 04 Aug 2013 21:05:39 +0000

Author:

Trevor L. Hoag

Image Credit:

Graphic posted on xomariee.wordpress.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment challenges students to become digital activists/advocates for a cause of their choosing, and aids them in developing a portfolio of work in the service of that cause.

Type of Assignment:

Semester-long Project

Assignment Length:

Semester-long Project

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Textual Analysis

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Media Requirements:

Timeline for Optimal Use:

First Day/Week

Full Assignment Description:

This ambitious assignment challenges students to become digital activists/advocates for a cause of their choosing, and aids them in developing a portfolio in the service of that cause. Students begin the class by researching a cause to advocate for such as vegetarianism, marriage equality, or gun rights. Students then produce a series of compelling “media artifacts” for that cause such as social media websites, blog sites or websites, an image or infographic/meme, an “anti-artifact” in the form of information deletion/lockdown, a digital map or timeline, and finally, a collaborative project. Instructors can also ask students to “justify” their artifacts by theoretically analyzing them and by comparing them to other analogous artifacts.

Note: Many other options for artifacts exist such as games, videos, and more.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Not for the faint of heart, instructors who wish to employ this assignment arc must familiarize themselves with a number of different technologies including, for example: Facebook, Twitter, Wordpress, tumblr., Wix, easel.ly, Wordle, quickmeme, Storify, and many other applications. However, instructors should not fear discovering and learning new technologies alongside their students as it encourages a more “horizontal” classroom structure. An instructor who attempts such an assignment will learn much!

Instructions For Students:

In this course on digital writing/humanities, you will become a digital activist in the service of a cause. You will develop a portfolio of work in the service of this cause that you will present at the end of the semester. You are also responsible for theoretically analyzing the “media artifacts” that you create by applying course readings as well as comparing the rhetorical strategies you have employed with other similar (or different) media artifacts.

Step #1: Research a cause to advocate for across the arc of the semester. You have a lot of options, so make sure you care deeply about the cause for which you are advocating. Students in past courses have become digital activists regarding, for instance: body image, disability, cheating in sports, net neutrality, vegetarianism, cyber-bullying, women’s health services, marriage equality, and much more!

Step #2: Once you have an exciting/fulfilling cause to advocate for, you will now begin producing and analyzing “media artifacts” in the service of that cause. In this particular course, you will produce six different types of digital media/humanities writing: a social media website (or sites), a blog site or website, an image or infographic (which can include a series of memes), an “anti-artifact” in which you will delete or lock down information online, a digital map or timeline, and finally, a collaborative project with others in the class. You do not have to have any prior knowledge of the technologies that you employ to develop your artifacts—a big part the assignment is just exploring! So take a look at the following examples, create accounts on whatever sites you think will work best, and go to town!

P.S., It’s a big help to find others in the class who are using similar sites/technologies or advocating for similar causes at any given time. Start collaborating as soon as you can, and you’ll find it eases your classroom tasks immensely!

REMINDER: Every artifact is accompanied by a 1-page theoretical analysis. For example, one might discuss one’s Twitter feed in reference to, say, Denis Campbell’s Egypt Unshackled: Using Social Media to @#:) the System. Likewise, all deletions should engage Viktor Mayer-Schonberger’s Delete: The Virtues of Forgetting in a Digital Age. Analyses are also encouraged to include comparisons/contrastings of rhetorical strategies with other similar artifacts, whether those of student colleagues or “outsiders.”

Artifact A (Social Media—Facebook, Pintrest, Twitter, etc.)

https://www.facebook.com/veggiedc?ref=hl

https://www.facebook.com/NoSpecialTreatmentofReligiousOrganization?ref=hl

http://pinterest.com/pin2891/rhe312/

http://pinterest.com/gendernorms/genders-created-by-society/

https://twitter.com/kidsaresponges

https://twitter.com/ChurchesTax

Artifact B (Blog or Website—tumblr., Wordpress, Blogspot, Jux, Wix, etc.)

http://loverealyou.tumblr.com/

http://lgbtmarriagenow.tumblr.com/

http://fucknoqueerfetishization.wordpress.com/

http://healthstartfoundation.wordpress.com/

https://aforactivism.jux.com/

http://copywritecopy.wix.com/copyrightorwrong

http://getyourkidsoffline.blogspot.com/

Artifact C (Image—easel.ly, quickmeme, Photoshop, Paint, etc.)

http://i.imgur.com/1vX9GVx.jpg

https://s3.amazonaws.com/easel.ly/all_easels/92675/Drugusage/image.jpg

https://s3.amazonaws.com/easel.ly/all_easels/94299/Queerfetishization/image.jpg

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3t8ws8/

http://www.wordle.net/

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/analytics/manyeyes/

Artifact D (Deletion)

Note: The deletion is in some ways the hardest artifact to produce. Essentially, your goal is to “become-imperceptible” by removing yourself from the Web, or by blocking access to content that’s related to you and/or your cause. You can also find a website or application to analyze that “deletes” something for you. Be creative and try your best! (See also: http://lessonplans.dwrl.utexas.edu/content/becoming-imperceptible-or-how-disappear-completely)

https://duckduckgo.com/

http://suicidemachine.org/

Artifact E (Map or Timeline—Google Maps, Text2MindMap, Storify, Zeega, Tiki-toki, ManyEyes, Wordle, etc.)

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=210792301150685076515.0004d98cf1fb8dcdd07a1&msa=0

http://www.text2mindmap.com/vBL47F

http://storify.com/Dopeandsports/drug-enhancement-in-professional-sports

http://storify.com/ryleegonzalez/queer-fetishization-and-gay-marriage

http://storify.com/dawn1/women-s-sports-uniforms-across-time

http://zeega.com/103969

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/115265/Idiot-Nerd-Girl-Meme/#vars!date=2012-01-04_21:28:09!

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/analytics/manyeyes/

Artifact F (Collaboration)

Note: The collaborative artifact can be approached in a couple different ways. One is to use a familiar technology but in tandem with others. Another is to find a wholly new technology and try it out. It’s up to your group—what matters is that you’re writing and advocating/analyzing with others!

http://i.imgur.com/kCTt3xF.jpg

https://twitter.com/kidsaresponges

Other (Video, Reddit, etc.)

http://vimeo.com/63134670

http://www.reddit.com/r/occupyaustin/

Step #3: Now that you have produced a series of sophisticated media artifacts (that is, various forms of digital media/humanities writing), it’s time to show off your work to your classmates in the form of a presentation. Keep in mind that this presentation isn’t merely show-and-tell, but yet another opportunity to rhetorically advocate for your cause. Aim to persuade!

Note: Your instructor will be extra impressed if you use a presentation platform other than Powerpoint!

Presentation Examples:

http://prezi.com/2w58dqz1nlm0/untitled-prezi/

http://prezi.com/wwjfvklxd8wx/untitled-prezi/

http://prezi.com/uz0fbnnbqb_l/genders-game/

Evaluation Suggestions:

There are many ways to approach evaluating the above assignment(s). The simplest is via “completion” grades, but what “completing” the assignment means may vary widely from instructor to instructor. I would recommend developing a rubric for evaluating each artifact. For instance, one might have a ten-point scale where the following criteria are considered (I use the following rubric myself):

Does the artifact make a clear argument (or series of arguments)?

Does the artifact provide evidence for any claims it makes (e.g., by citing any and all sources)?

Does the artifact respectfully engage an opposition and an audience?

Is any written text on/in the artifact clearly and carefully composed?

Is the artifact accompanied by a theoretical analysis/comparison that is sophisticated (that is, considers/cites either the readings for the course or similar artifacts)?

How well does any analysis grasp the theoretical texts it employs?

Does the artifact employ good design (for instance, color, arrangement, etc.)?

How persuasive is the artifact in terms of rhetorical appeals? Does it contain any fallacies?

Has an “appropriate” amount of effort been exemplified by the student (e.g., number of posts on a social media site, number of pages on a website, and so on)?

Has the artifact been peer-reviewed twice?

Have peer and instructor comments been integrated following peer review?

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This assignment arc has been employed to great success at the University of Texas in a “Writing in Digital Environments” course. The students seemed to really enjoy the work, though were sometimes frustrated by how surprisingly hard it is to get outsiders interested in what they are/were producing. However, whether a particular student project is getting feedback from outsiders is often an opportune moment to discuss kairos. If I would recommend anything, it would be: get students to really think about and research their topics, make sure to show students lots of examples, don’t be afraid to let a student use a technology no one is familiar with, encourage theoretical analysis of artifacts, assign whatever media types you like and don’t be confined by what I’ve listed above, stick closely to a rubric and encourage students to pay close attention to whatever rubric is provided. This will better the life of all involved!

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Course Description:

Writing in Digital Environments/Writing for the Digital Humanities

Tags:

Using Juxta to Compare Editions

nhgray — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:47:08 +0000

Author:

Nicole Gray

Image Credit:

Image by Seth Sawyers on sidewalk flying (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sidewalk_flying/5124506505/).

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson plan prompts students to use Juxta (collation software) to compare different witnesses or instances of a text. Students compare multiple versions of a literary work, locating revisions in order to discuss word choice and textual instabilities. Most useful for literary works with full-text editions available online.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Collaboration

Creative Commons

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This assignment is intended to get students thinking about revision, or how changes to literary texts get incorporated into different editions over time.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Technology based classroom

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

Juxta is open source collation software developed by NINES (based at UVA) that allows the user to compare multiple versions of a text. There are several visualization options that can assist in the process, including a parallel display, which sets two or more witnesses next to each other and tracks the changes between them, and a histogram of edits over the course of the entire document.

Edits made to literary texts by authors can be interesting in a number of different contexts, demonstrating evolution of the text and the author’s (and publisher’s) ideas and constructions over time. It’s particularly interesting for the Banned Books course to think about whether some such edits might be responses to conditions of censorship and protest that affect particular works. But this is also an exercise that encourages close reading, particularly when applied to a piece of poetry that goes through multiple revisions, because changes at single-word and punctuation level can prompt discussions of the meaning of, for instance, dashes versus ellipses, the role of publishers and printers in the revision process, and so forth.

In preparation for a close reading assignment on Whitman’s “Song of Myself,” I considered having students use Juxta to compare two sections of the poem from different editions. Whitman published several editions of Leaves of Grass over the course of the nineteenth century, and the poem changed drastically from the first (1855) to the final (1891-2) edition.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

It might be useful, if doing this in class, to select a passage in advance that has substantive or interesting revisions likely to prompt good discussion.

A bit of experimentation with Juxta also is in order. Juxta Commons I think is in testing phase, and should be rolled out soon – this version would be easier, because it doesn’t require download. Students will need to create accounts and copy and paste the text of the documents they are comparing into the "Sources" box. These documents can then be made into "Witnesses," and then compared as a "Comparison Set." The Comparison Set can be shared or not, as the user desires.

Until Juxta Commons is available, students can download Juxta as a standalone desktop application at www.juxtasoftware.org, so if this is the route you take, it might be worth making sure the software can be downloaded on local machines.

Instructions For Students:

Go to www.juxtasoftware.org.
Select “Download” on the left, and select the appropriate operating system.
Find two versions of your assigned text online to compare, and copy and paste or type them into two separate plain text documents (NOTE: don’t use Word for this – any plain text editor like NoteTab will do.)
Save each version in a separate document with a unique name (for instance, Song_of_Myself_1855_Section_7).
In Juxta, select “Add Document” (the +) from the shortcut menu, and add both documents to the list.
Select one of the documents, and then in the screen at the right, select “Comparison View.” This should show you both documents side by side, with the differences highlighted. You can see the highlights in each document individually in “Collation View.”
You can see a visualization of the changes in the document over time in the “Histogram.”
Write down a few sentences describing what you have found. What kinds of changes can you identify between these two editions? Select one or two changes that seem most significant to you. What is the effect of these changes on the poem?
Be prepared to discuss your answers.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Instructors can assess this activity in a few ways: by calling on individual students to provide and explain their responses, by having students incorporate comparisons into their papers, or by making this a more formal written assignment that can be collected.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

I didn’t try this with Juxta yet, but I did have my students do a collation by hand across three versions – manuscript, periodical, and Leaves of Grass – of Whitman’s “The Dalliance of the Eagles,” one of the poems challenged by officials in the late nineteenth century. It worked surprisingly well. They were excited to find differences, and interested to talk about what they might mean. In the case of “Dalliance,” the manuscript version is very different from the Leaves of Grass version, while the periodical version only has a few small changes, so it was useful to consider the importance of word and punctuation choice and the different scales of revision. It seems like Juxta-based comparisons of different versions of “Song of Myself” or any other text with multiple variants could open up a way to talk about revision, textual instability, punctuation-level edits, and outside influences (printer, publisher, censor, &c), and Juxta’s clear indication of differences and multiple-panel displays would have been handy to put up on the screen.

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

This section of Banned Books introduces students to literary analysis and takes a look at books that have been challenged, edited, or banned over the past two centuries in the U.S.

Tags:

Creating OED Word Constellations

Roberts — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 17:53:24 +0000

Author:

Michael Roberts

Image Credit:

Magnifying Glass by chrisjohnbeckett on flickr

Brief Assignment Overview:

In this assignment students use the Oxford English Dictionary to make individual mindmaps of the multiple definitions of related words, then the class together creates a constellation of meanings surrounding a seemingly simple topic that becomes more and more complex.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Commonplaces

Invention

Kairos

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Textual Analysis

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

The main goal of this exercise is to get students familiar with using the OED, and to increase their awareness of the multiple overlapping meanings of words. The secondary goal is to get the students thinking complexly about a seemingly simple concept through an elaboration of the many words associated with that concept. The more they describe and map the intersections relating to a concept, the more complex the concept becomes.

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Computer classroom, access to the OED.

Timeline for Optimal Use: