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 Activity—Finding 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.