back Return to Unit 1:TR

Unit 1, Day 6:  Thursday, September 6


What you'll do today in class:


-         Practice academic summary with Molloy

-         Introduce different types of responses

-         Consider how the different types of response might work for developing a response to the Essay 2 context

-         Practice analysis with Molloy essay (using evidence as criterion)

-         Develop criteria for Essay 2 (prewriting activity)


Connection to course goals:  Practicing summary reinforces the skills students will need to meet the context for Essay 2.  The different types of response and the analysis of Molloy’s text provide an opportunity to practice the critical thinking and reading they'll need to meet the context for this unit.  The prewriting activity emphasizes again the need to meet the context but moves students into how they can make choices within the expectations of the context—there are different ways to set up the criteria and still meet the context.


INTRODUCTION:  Devise a brief introduction that explains what they'll be doing today in class and why.


1.      Review academic summary by looking at students’ homework assignments (10 minutes): On the board compile a list of what should be included in an academic summary of Molloy.  Make sure students are on track with the main ideas and that they can articulate Molloy’s thesis or overall claim.  Also, check to make sure they’re not summarizing too many details about his experiments.


·        What did you summarize out of the Molloy essay? What were his main ideas?

·        Which quotes did you include or mark that you thought were ESSENTIAL?


Main Points of Molloy’s “Dress for Success”


·        The way we dress is a distinct sign of our class position.

·        Dress is an "essential element in helping a man to function in the business world with maximum effectiveness.” (254)

·        The way we dress has a direct impact on how we are treated and how we may treat others.

·        Molloy suggests the several "experiments" he conducted prove his theory.


Transition:  “Now that we've effectively summarized Molloy’s text, let's move to the next step in our evaluating process and make judgments about how well this essay would meet our criteria for the audience. To help with that evaluation, let's first look at the different types of response from the PHG and how they might be used to fulfill the context for Essay 2.”


2.      Introduce the types of response from PHG (5-7 minutes):


-         List the types of response on the board.

·        Analysis—looking at the effectiveness of the text—how strong/credible/relevant the evidence is, how effective the tone or organization is, etc.

·        Agree/Disagree—why do you agree or disagree with what the author says?

·        Interpretation/Reflection—explaining key underlying assumptions and implications of a text, often utilizing a writer's personal experience. 


-         Emphasize to students that these approaches above are modes of development for supporting a judgment.  We do not want students to think of them as simple “forms” that they can use as a structure for their paper.  Here it might be useful to juxtapose how development of their response in Essay 2 differs from Essay 1.


Essay 1:  reaction / reasons / evidence

Essay 2:  evaluation / reasons—using modes of analysis or development / evidence


3.      Connect types of response to criteria (10 minutes):


-         Hand out the typed compilation of the criteria from the previous class and lead a discussion on how types of response might be used to develop criteria.


·        Which type(s) of response seem most applicable to our context for Essay 2?

-         Probably analysis

·        How might the other types of response be used?

·        Which of our criteria might involve showing how a reader might agree or disagree?

·        Which of our criteria might involve looking at the author's assumptions or implications?


-         Summarize the discussion:  Emphasize how the context for Essay 2 certainly requires some sort of analysis, but the other types of response can also be incorporated as well.  Each approach is only a way of explaining their evaluation.  For example, students might be able to use an agree/disagree response to show how a text elicits an energetic response from a reader. Perhaps an essay is so controversial that it would make readers especially emotional about the issue, and thus they would want to talk about the essay. Thus, the agree/disagree response could be used to show how the essay would make an effective discussion generator, which could be a goal of the seminar professor.  Also, a text with well-founded or problematic assumptions might serve or not serve the goals of the seminar professor, providing other options for response here.


Transition:  “Now let's apply one of these types of responses—analysis of evidence—to Molloy’s text to practice evaluating.”


4.      Discuss effective evidence (7-10 minutes): 


-         Generate a list of what would be considered effective evidence.

·        relevant to context

·        detailed

·        specific

·        credible

·        explained


-         Ask students to identify a few examples of evidence from any of the essays we've read before that they found effective and explain why.


-         Ask students to consider how this list would play into the criteria the class has established.

·        Why would effective evidence be useful for the professor?

·        What would a professor be interested in regarding evidence?

·        How might an essay with less effective evidence be useful to the professor's needs?


5.      Analyze Molloy's evidence (10 minutes):  To evaluate Molloy’s evidence fairly, it’s important to first discuss his context.


-         Define Molloy’s context:

·        What do you know about the situation for his text?  Where was it published?  When?

·        Considering that situation, who was Molloy writing this article for, primarily?  And what was his purpose?  What did he hope to accomplish in writing to these readers?


6.      Group activity—evaluating Molloy's evidence for different contexts (10 minutes): The goal of this activity is to show students that while Molloy’s evidence might be effective or valid given his particular purpose and audience, it may not be considered effective for the context of the seminar course.  Divide the class into four groups and give them the following instructions.  


Groups 1 and 2 should respond to the following based on Molloy’s context:

·        Find at least two places where you think Molloy's evidence is effective and explain why.

·        Find at least two places where you think Molloy's evidence is less effective and explain why.

·        Explain, based on either (or both) of the above, why you think Molloy’s text achieves the purpose we’ve identified earlier.


Groups 3 and 4 should respond to the following based on our Essay 2 context:

·        Find at least two places where you think Molloy's evidence is effective and explain why.

·        Find at least two places where you think Molloy's evidence is less effective and explain why.

·        Explain, based on either (or both) of the above, why you think the text would or would not serve the purposes of the seminar professor (see the course description on Essay 2 assignment sheet). How well does it meet the criteria? 


7.      Discuss group findings (10-15 minutes):


1)      Have groups 1 and 2 present their findings.  Then discuss the relevance of Molloy’s context:

·        Is it fair to evaluate Molloy’s evidence based on our context in Essay 2?

·        Do we need to consider his context in our papers?  In what way?


2)      Have groups 3 and 4 present their findings.


3)      Then, discuss as a class how well the essay meets OUR criteria:

·        Where is Molloy's evidence effective? Why is that effective?

·        Where is Molloy's evidence less effective? Why?

·        How could he improve the evidence in the essay?

·        How might his use of evidence have been influenced by his audience?


8.      Prewriting ActivityFinding and narrowing their criteria (10 minutes):  The goal of this activity is to show students that in writing their Essay 2 one of their tasks will be "personalizing" the criteria list to fit their purpose for the assignment.  Make clear to students that it would be too much to try to evaluate a text in terms of all of the possible criteria we've generated, so based on which text they choose and how they want the professor to view it, they'll have to decide which of those criteria are the most important and relevant to their purpose.  Get them to practice narrowing the criteria list using the essays we’ve read so far.


-         Assign WTL: 

·        Choose any text we've read so far, and then take 5 minutes to write a narrow list of criteria to better reflect your evaluation of that particular text.  That is, which of the criteria seem most relevant to this text?  Which features of the essay are most notable/important?  Which part of the text was most influential to you as a reader?  What would you want a professor to know about this essay?


-         Summarize:  Tell students to hang on to these WTLs and emphasize that once they actually do choose the text they'll evaluate for their next paper, they should go through this process of narrowing the criteria.


CONCLUSION:  Summarize (or perhaps ask a few students to summarize) the main concepts from today's class. What did they learn? How does it relate to their assignment?


Optional Activity (if time)—have students discuss their narrowed criteria:

-         Have two or three students offer their new criteria list for the text they chose, and list their criteria on the board.

-         Ask students to explain why they chose that list of criteria.  What were their reasons for focusing on these features (such as evidence, organization) or parts of the text?

-          Ask the class if what the person has selected seems like it would work to meet the context for Essay 2.


Assignment for Day 7:


-         Read Schor’s, “The Overworked American” in RC (385-89) and Hochschild’s, “Work:  The Great Escape” in RC (390-99).

-         Write a paragraph summary for each reading.  Then write a 1-page response to either Schor or Hochschild focusing on how well that text meets one of our established criteria, and then explain why you chose that criterion.