DWRL Lesson Plans - Thesis Statements

Having computers for every student would enable them to save electronic copies of their documents with ease; however, this exercise could easily be adapted for use with pen and paper.

You will need a stopwatch or other timing device.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

For this activity, have students bring in a draft of their proposed thesis statement. After a short introduction about what you expect from their thesis statements (which could vary widely, depending on what type of class you’re teaching), provide questions for students to answer about their peers’ claims.

Give students 2 minutes to provide feedback to each thesis statement, as you keep time and facilitate their rotation around the room.

When they’ve made a complete rotation, each student should have a document full of suggestions about how to improve their existing thesis statements.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Instruct students to bring working drafts of their thesis statements to class on the day of the exercise.

Make sure you have a stopwatch or some other timing device handy.

Some instructors may prefer to use an audible signal, like a bell or an alarm, but there's really no other prep involved.

Instructions For Students:

Write your thesis statement in a Word document and save it to your computer as LastNameTHESIS. It may help your readers if you make the thesis statement stand out in some way (larger font, highlighting, bold, etc).

Once everyone is finished writing and saving their thesis statements in the document, you will stand up and move one computer to the right (or clockwise, if computers are in a circular format).

Sit down and read the thesis statement in front of you.

Below the thesis statement, give feedback to the author of the thesis statement about the effectiveness of his or her claim.

Try to respond by rewriting the thesis statement for clarity and specificity. Consider the following templates:

Tell more about WHY the author's claim is persuasive by adding a "because" statement.
Foreground something you really like about the thesis statement by expanding on it. Offer additional significance.
Foreground something that is unclear by making the thesis statement more specific. Replace vague words and phrases with clearer ones.

If you are unable to rewrite the thesis statement, offer narrative feedback, telling the author:

Why you agree with their thesis statement
What you like about their thesis statement
What you wish you knew more about their thesis statement
What confuses you about their thesis statement
What you wonder about their thesis statement
What their thesis statement makes you think of

Hit save after you've left your feedback.

Remember that you will only have two minutes to read and respond to each thesis statement, so think quickly and succinctly. I will signal you when it's time to rotate again.

Also, upon subsequent rotations, remember to return to the author's original thesis statement, leaving all peer feedback intact for the author.

We will repeat this process until you arrive back at your original document, which should be full of ideas for revision!

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

Literary Studies Course

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

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

Author:

James B. Wiedner

Image Credit:

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

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

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

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

In-class Exercise

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:

Introductory Writing Course

Course Description:

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

Tags:

Evaluating Satire With Rhetorical Analysis

Sloan — Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:20:25 +0000

Author:

Casey Sloan

Image Credit:

Tete-a-Tete provided by Lacy B Timeless via Flickr

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment asks students to locate a product ad on their computers, and evaluate its use of ethos, pathos, and logos given its goal and target audience. It then asks students to write or visually construct a brief parody of the advertisement, share it with the class, and explain their own use of ethos, pathos and logos in relation to their goal and audience.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

One-Two Class Periods

Multiple Class Periods

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Genre

Imagery

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Style

Thesis Statements

Media Requirements:

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Mid-Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This assignment has students evaluate a product advertisement using rhetorical analysis, construct working definitions of satire and parody, and experiement with writing and analyzing satires for their chosen ads. Ideally, these steps will help students solidify an understanding of ethos, logos and pathos, as well as attend to the wide range of genres using rhetoric to make arguments. The creative wring required introduces an engaging hook to keep students interested in the analytical process, and evaluating the success of their own satires helps them develop close-reading and peer-review skills.

They will first individually locate an ad (static image, audio or visual commercials, textual). If you have a technology-based classroom, you can have students conduct this step in class. If not, ask them to locate an ad ad bring in a copy or a detailed description of the video/ audio stream for homework. After finding an ad, students will write up an evaluation its use of ethos, logos, and pathos in relation to its goals and its target audience. This should take up one class period.

Next, discuss parody and satire with your students. I showed a makeup commercial followed by a commercial parody. We discussed how each used ethos, logos, and pathos to achieve its distinct goals and to relate to its target audience.

Next, ask students to type up or construct a visual parody of their selected ad. Since students can get overenthusiastic about using visual software, I asked them to use only thirty minutes of class time to accomplish this goal instead of assigning it for homework, but it could easily be achieved on their own.

Finally, have students trade parodies and evaluate the use of ethos, logos and pathos in their classmate's parody. Have them construct a brief thesis statement about whether or not the use of rhetoric accomplished the satire's goal in relation to the target audience.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Decide which steps should be conduct inside and outside of class. I had my students perform each step in class because I was in a technology-based classroom, but asking them to bring in ads for homework would enable students to explore print materials as well as web sources. I also had my students develop their creative satire projects in class, but this could easily be accomplished at home.

Instructions For Students:

Before this assignment, students should be familiar with rhetorical analysis, have been introduced to ethos, logos, and pathos, and have a working understanding of how to construct a thesis based on source goals and audience. This assignment can be stretched out for multiple class periods depending on how much outside work you ask them to bring to class.

1) Have students locate or bring to class an advertisement.

2) Ask students to list incidents of the use of ethos, logos and pathos in the ad, then construct a thesis: Does the ad successfully accomplish its goals in relation to its audience using rhetoric? Why or why not?

3) For the next class, introduce students to satire and parody. I showed several videos to familiarize my students with the concept, but there are many sources of satire that could be used. As a group, discuss how your chose satire uses rhetoric to influence its audience and accomplish its goals.

4) Either as homework or in class, have your students construct a parody of their chosen ad. I gave my students the option to draw their parody by hand or pull images from Flickr and doctor them in Photoshop.

5) Finally, have the students exhange parodies and perform a rhetorical analysis of their classmate's work. Ask volunteers to share parodies and evaluations.

Course Description:

I used this assignment in Rhetoric 306, an introduction to rhetoric course.

Tags:

Workshopping Student Claims for Close Reading

Cate Blouke — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:46:13 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

"Reading (30th/52)" by skippyjon

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students are given a passage to close read and asked to compose a short analysis paper. After submitting the paper, all claims/thesis statements are compiled anonymously and discussed in an in-class workshop.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Textual Analysis

Word Choice

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

This exercise is designed to introduce students to the skills of close reading and thesis/claim formation. It also eases them into peer review and provides the oppotunity to discuss what makes a strong thesis.

Media Requirements:

No Classroom Technology Required

Adaptable For Use Without Classroom Technology

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

This exercise can feasibly be completed without any classroom technology. That being said, it works well with a media console/projector and a computer - so that the list of claims can be presented to the class. I did, nonetheless, make hand outs with all of the claims to give each student.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Early in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

After practicing some close reading as a class, students are given a short writing assignment requiring that they analyze a pre-determined passage of text. For my course, I used a speech from a Shakespeare play (The Tempest) as this offers a particularly rich source in a minimal number of lines. It's important that the passage be fairly short and that the students all work individually on the same passage. A short passage encourages them to read extremely closely, and having all of them analyze the same passage will help to highlight the varying ways of reading that each student will bring to a text.

After students have submitted their assignments, I then cull each paper for its major claim or thesis statement regarding the passage. For this kind of short writing assignment, I ask my students to directly begin the paper with their claims - which makes it easy to extract the thesis, and it encourages students to be direct and to the point. I then compile all of the claims into a hand out (keeping them anonymous), and we discuss the claims during the following class period.

While I have mixed feelings about workshops in general, this sort of focused and highly anonymous workshop allows students to see each other's work in a low-stakes and informative manner. I ask them to pick out some of the "stronger" claims and identify the characteristics of such claims. We also discuss how other claims might have been improved.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

It's particularly important to keep this exercise anonymous and not to favor particular thesis statements in the handout. I scatter the thesis at random - avoiding an alphabeticl (by student) recreation or a list that moves from "good" to "bad." I find it more useful to let the students evaluate the quality o the claims than to feed them my own thoughts. By pointing out to the class that we're looking at the work of their peers and that this is a learning exercise, I've found that most students are kind and thoughtful in their responses. It helps the students who are less certain of their writing abilities or less comfortable making claims, by giving them concrete examples from a text with which they are familiar. It also helps the stronger writers articulate what makes a thesis "strong" or "weak." (I try to avoid the evaluative labels of good and bad, in favor of strong and weak).

Instructions For Students:

Now that we’ve had some practice close reading in class, it’s time to apply these skills on your own. For this assignment you will write a 1-2 page single-spaced close reading of the passage below, offering your own analysis of the passage’s significance both on its own and in the context of the work as a whole.

Your reading should take the form of a mini-essay, or an excerpt from a longer work. Avoid a long general introduction, as that would come off as mere space-filler in this type of short assignment. Begin with a claim or thesis stating what insight your reading will provide into the work as a whole, and then offer evidence from the passage to support your claim.

The bulk of your paper should consist of a close examination of the passage given. It is not enough to merely note interesting syntax, images, tone, etc. You must connect these details back to your claim/thesis for your reader, and show how the language of the passage expands, contradicts, or otherwise complicates your initial insight.

In a paper this short there is no need for a summary at the end. However, you should try to say what the implications of your reading are in a manner that is more complex (because your reader knows more now) than your original claim/thesis. You may want to suggest other passages in the text that would be useful complements, or make a larger claim about the author's argument.

Papers should be MLA formatted (though single-spaced), with your last name and page numbers in the header, and with the passage included at the top of the page. Please see the student example for both formatting and content guidelines.

ANTONIO

Ay, sir; where lies that? if 'twere a kibe,

'Twould put me to my slipper: but I feel not

This deity in my bosom: twenty consciences,

That stand 'twixt me and Milan, candied be they

And melt ere they molest! Here lies your brother,

No better than the earth he lies upon,

If he were that which now he's like, that's dead;

Whom I, with this obedient steel, three inches of it,

Can lay to bed for ever; whiles you, doing thus,

To the perpetual wink for aye might put

This ancient morsel, this Sir Prudence, who

Should not upbraid our course. For all the rest,

They'll take suggestion as a cat laps milk;

They'll tell the clock to any business that

We say befits the hour.

Evaluation Suggestions:

The in-class exercise is not evaluated, while papers are graded according to instructor's discretion/rubric

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Most of my students found this exercise extremely helpful - both because they were able to see a variety of different readings of the same text, and because they were provided a series of concrete examples of what a "claim" or "thesis" might look like for a close reading. Particularly for students who are less comfortable with close reading, this is a fruitful opening exercise.

Additional Resources:

Here are some of the student examples (provided with permission) written about the passage above:

Claims about Antonio’s Speech in The Tempest (Act II, Scene 1)

In this passage from The Tempest, Shakespeare portrays Antonio as a crafty man who thinks of nothing but power and who uses words to manipulate others.

The above passage from Shakespeare’s play The Tempest underscores the idea of power, and the attempts to assuage the consciences of those who choose its usurpation.

In this passage, Antonio is described as cold hearted and mean person, and he does not value others especially who are obstacle to his success.

Within The Tempest there is a constant struggle for power between the characters. A common channel the characters use in trying to achieve this power over one another is manipulation.

This passage from Shakespeare’s The Tempest is rife with strong connotations, imagery, and irony, providing a rich subtext to the great opportunity laid at the feet of Sebastian, who up to this point was simply a source of bitter humor in the play. There is no more insightful example of power struggle in The Tempest than in Sebastian’s swing in temperament before and after Antonio’s cold reply.

In this passage from Act 2 Scene 1 of The Tempest, Antonio’s alternating pronouns and powerful imagery highlight Antonio’s different point of views between his inferiors and himself, and his ability to manipulate those around him with his words.

Antonio in William Shakespeare’s The Tempest proves to be an honest, considerate character. This notion appears most apparently through Antonio’s relationship with Sebastian. Shakespeare augments Antonio’s personable personality through the character’s actions, word choice and syntax.

In this passage from The Tempest, in which Antonio responds to Sebastian in regards to his “conscience,” Antonio resolves to persuade Sebastian that it is okay for him to murder, as he himself has no “conscience” after having done the same for the throne of Milan. Antonio persuades by example.

In this passage Antonio justifies that circumstances, derived by personal feelings towards remorse, can define the meaning of guilt in different ways. Here, Antonio is proposing a different world to Sebastian; a world without the feeling of guilt.

Many people would claim that Antonio is the obvious villain in The Tempest. This may be true from Prospero’s point of view, but that does mean that Antonio is not the typical evil villain. In fact, he is simply a true realist and this passage helps prove that point.

Antonio’s passage proves that Antonio is indeed an evil conspirator who does not feel bad about uprooting his brother Prospero and would not feel bad about killing the King of Naples, Alonso, for the power that would accompany it.

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

I used this assignment in my introduction to literary studies course, E314J Literature and Theater.

The broad goals of this course are to introduce students to the basic tools of literary analysis and to develop students’ own critical writing. No expertise in literary criticism or theater is presumed.

Tags:

Essay Revision with Automated Textual Analysis

Michael Widner — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 18:47:21 +0000

Author:

Michael Widner

Image Credit:

Screenshot of Voyeur interface by Michael Widner

Brief Assignment Overview:

This assignment uses Voyeur to analyze word frequencies and word distribution in student writing to help students see the paper’s thesis and how the argument progresses without reading the paper.

Type of Assignment:

In-class Exercise

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Arrangement

Rhetorical Analysis

Style

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Textual Analysis

Word Choice

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Open Access Software

Remediation

Visualization

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Gain an objective, computer-assisted understanding of one's writing. Learn how to use Voyeur for textual analysis.

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

Computer, Voyeur software, student writing

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Useful Anytime

Full Assignment Description:

I like to discover and play with digital humanities tools. One I recently discovered is Voyeur, which creates word clouds and word frequency graphs for texts you provide it. Despite the warning by Jacob Harris that we should be wary of word clouds, they can serve as a gentle introduction to automated text analysis for students. While experimenting with Voyeur, I wondered how I could best use this tool to expose my students to the ways the digital humanities are transforming how we interact with and study literature. Rather than explore a literary text, however, I decided that it might be interesting to see if textual analysis can help with the process of revision. My hope is that this exercise might make students see the value of such tools in a different way and see their own writing as texts available to (and requiring) interrogation.

Voyeur is an easy tool to use. You simply upload or paste a text and click “Reveal”. You’re then provided with a workbench-like screen that starts with a word cloud and copy of the text you submitted. You can also upload multiple documents in many common file formats such as Microsoft Word or PDF. Doing so allows Voyeur to create a corpus of texts that it can then compare for word frequencies. Voyeur also provides two pre-defined corpora: one of Shakespeare’s plays (which would be fun for a course on his works) and another of a humanist listserv archive. The initial word cloud includes every word in the document, which is often not very useful because of common words like “the,” but the tool provides a pre-programmed list of “stop words” that will cause Voyeur to redraw the word cloud with those words omitted. Clicking on any word in the cloud will provide a graph of the relative frequency of that word. The tool also provides information about vocabulary density, distinctive words, length of documents, and a number of other statistical details worth investigating.

Rather than delve into the possibilities some of the more advanced statistical measures provided, I decided to focus on word clouds and word frequencies when I use this tool with students; those two elements seem the most accessible to students who probably lack experience with automated textual analysis. I also want to focus on seeing if this approach can help address one of the biggest and most prevalent problems I encounter in student writing: the difficulty stating a clear thesis and then staying focused on that thesis throughout the paper. I wondered, then, if a word cloud and graphs of word frequencies might allow a way to visualize the actual (rather than implicit or imagined) topics of a paper and their appearance and disappearance in different sections. I came up with this exercise as a result of these ideas. Note: I teach in a classroom that provides a computer to each student. Still, this exercise could, with only a little effort, be repeated with laptops or outside of class time. Voyeur does allow users to export all data, so it would be fairly simple to share work.

First, have students upload their papers to Voyeur. If they have multiple revisions of a paper, all the better, as it allows a comparison of the iterations of their writing. After setting the stop words and exploring the different word frequencies of their own work, students should then trade and look at a peer’s work. This switch allows the students to avoid being biased by what they think the paper is about and instead focus on what Voyeur shows. Here are a few instructions I have come up with for students to ask:

Use Voyeur to see if you can get an idea of the paper’s thesis and how the argument progresses without reading the paper.

What can you determine about the paper's organization?
What words are most common? What words would you expect to be most common based on the thesis?
What words rise and fall (or do not) in frequency together? Would you expect them to do so?
How can you revise your paper so that the most important words to the argument appear more frequently or in more effective combinations?

I have tested this technique on some of my own writing and found that it does, in fact, reveal some interesting patterns. For example, in one essay I wrote, I juggle three major topics, which rise and fall in sequence through the paper. It was surprising to me to see just how regularly the paper followed that pattern, in fact, and confirmed that I had organized it in a logical manner that accords with my argument. What other uses might you suggest for Voyeur? Are there other questions you think I could pose for students as they use this tool to analyze their own writing? Do you know of other tools that might be useful for this exercise?

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Play around with Voyeur first.

Instructions For Students:

Download the file containing your essay.

Go to the Voyeur website

Upload the file via the "Upload" link.

Hit "Reveal".

Select the gear icon in the upper left box titled "Cirrus". Select the "Taporware (English)" stop words list to remove common words like "the", "a", "and", etc. from the word cloud.

Shrink the text-view window by clicking the arrows on the bar on the far right. This action will reveal several new windows, including a word frequency chart.

Explore various word frequency combinations to see if the most common words in your paper match your thesis, to see how different, important words vary in frequency throughout the paper, and how word combinations appear (or do not).

Have a peer look at the graphs you've created and see if they can determine the main topics of your paper from them. Trade places with your peer; explore one another's texts using Voyeur to see if you can get an idea of the paper's thesis and how the argument progresses without reading the paper.

What can you determine about your paper's organization?

What words are most common? What words would you expect to be most common based on your thesis?

What words rise and fall (or do not) in frequency together? Would you expect them to do so?

How can you revise your paper so that the most important words to your argument appear more frequently or in more effective combinations?

Evaluation Suggestions:

None

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Intermediate Writing Course

Introductory Writing Course

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

Why do we read literature? What, if anything, do we get out of literature that makes it important? What cognitive faculties to we use when we read and how do those faculties effect or even determine our interpretations? In this course, we will explore these and related questions in order to introduce students to the study of English literature through criticism focused on how the mind works. We will emphasize, in particular, the rapidly growing field of cognitive literary studies, which applies the findings of contemporary cognitive science and neuroscience to traditional humanities questions about the nature of literature, the practice of reading, and the possibilities of interpretation. We will read selections from some of the leading cognitive scientists and cognitive literary theorists and test their theories and methods through our own interpretations of primary literary texts. We will also discuss the history and practice of psychoanalytic critical approaches like Freudian, Lacanian, and feminist theories. We will read an eclectic mixture of literary works including contemporary science fiction, classic novels and short stories, and medieval and Renaissance poetry.

As an introduction to the study of English literature and preparation for upper-division English courses at UT, this course will also focus on developing the fundamental skills of close reading, critical writing, research, and critical analysis. In other words, this course is not primarily about psychology. Instead, that is the lens through which we will view our primary object of study: literature. We will receive an introduction to various formal, historical, and cultural approaches to literary texts, all of which will use some form of psychology. We will also learn how to use the Oxford English Dictionary and other resources central to literary studies.

Tags: