They Say/I Say Intro & Chp 1


In the introduction of the book “They Say/I Say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing, Gerald Godd and Kathy Birkenstein provide templates designed to structure an essay for someone. Specifically, Graff and Birkenstein argue that the the types of writing templates they offer will allow for a well written paper that holds a clear argument for the reader. As the authors themselves put it, “In our view, then, the best academic writing has one underlying feature: it is deeply engaged in some way with other people’s views.” Although some people believe that it is “possible to argue effectively without being in conversation with someone else,” Graff and Birkenstein insist that doing that “but it leaves out the important fact that in the real world we don’t make arguments without being provoked.” These types of arguments are very complex, and they require a lot of thinking and time.

I agree with their writings. I feel as though that the types of templates they provide are an excellent way to structure essays, and they will help create a strong argument in a paper. These types of templates that they provide will give the reader a clear set of “directions” where he would state his opinion, and analyze the opinion of others as well.


Chapter 1:

The purpose of chapter one is to discuss the importance of what others are saying as well as your own opinions. Don’t leave any important information out; you don’t want your audience guessing what your work is about. If something important is left out of a paper, then it is confusing and is worth nothing, so people need to make sure that people who have no idea what the author is talking about at first can understand the message he is trying to give through his work.

“Remember that you are entering a conversation and therefore need to start with ‘what others are saying,’ as the title of this chapter recommends, and then introduce your own ideas as a response.” (pg 20-21)

“This story illustrates an important lesson; that to give writing the most important thing of all-namely, a point-a writer needs to indicate clearly not only what his or her thesis is, but also what larger conversation that thesis is responding to.” (pg 20)

“The point is to give your readers a quick preview of what is motivating your argument, not to drown them in details right away. ” (pg 21)


I feel as though this depends on the topic that someone is writing about…However, if someone is reading a paper, they want to know what it is about before they read it, or even the first couple of sentences in, so if we talk about the people’s opinions first, what is going to draw the reader in to read more?

“Revising Attitudes” Blogpost

Whenever I imagine revisiting my writing, the author is right, I am always frustrated because I feel like I worked hard the first time so there couldn’t possibly be anything wrong with it. However, though, once I actually start looking at my old writing, I can see some mistakes that I could fix or even a better idea than the one I originally used. By revising my work, I learned that there is definitely more than one way to do something, and by going back and revising what I have already written, it is easy to brainstorm from there. For example, the rough draft is sort of like an outline for me, and it helps me to think of other ways to write things or even other things to write about in the paper. I think revising is just about what better words I could write somewhere, or even a different idea to write about instead of the one I wrote about which only sort of applies to a topic, whereas editing to me is looking for grammatical errors and things like that. Proofreading would just be to not necessarily make changes to the words of a paper, but just move things around and check one final time for any grammatical errors that need to be fixed in one’s writing.

I agree with Brock Dethier’s piece on revision a lot! I think he does have a good point about how we need to change out attitude on revision for it to even become useful. I love how he created lists about how people normally say they feel about revision and things like that. I already really liked how he added his one work in there and made it a more personal piece, and he let the audience know that he has struggled with revision himself too. The only one I really agreed with him with was number one, because I always seem to have a problem with it. It stated

1. Revision is trivial, the nitpicky correcting of superficial niceties.
Revision can include editing and polishing, but it means, after all, reseeing, so in extreme cases (as you’ll see later in this chapter) it can mean rescrambling every paragraph of a paper or throwing out everything except the conclusion. Naturally, if you think of revision as concentrating on surface errors, you’ll dis- like it; few people enjoy having to focus on their own mistakes.”

This one pertains to me because I hate having to look at my work and be like “oh, wow, what was I thinking when I wrote this? Is it really that bad?” I hate having to throw away work that I’ve done, or even just realize the mistakes I have made, because it makes me feel inferior because  I could have done so much better to start with.

Writers Notes: Rhetorical Analysis

After I read through both articles, I decided to dissect each one alone then compare the two of them. I discussed what each one’s purpose was, as well as the audience, tone, and many other things. I also looked at the many different types of media that was used in the articles, how they affected the article, and how they compared to one another. I spent a lot of time on Friday analyzing both of the articles, and I think I have a really good understanding of what I’m going to write about and how I’m going to write it.

Notes on Sexual Assault Victims

Annotated Bibliography for Source #1

“College Women: Stop Getting Drunk”

Source #1 Women At Wrong


Annotated Bibliography for Source #2

“Alcohol and Sexual Assault: The Connection”

SOURCE 2 annotated bibliography


Annotated Bibliography for Source #3

“Actually, the Link Between Sexual Assault and Alcohol Isn’t As Clear As You Think”

SOURCE #3 annotated Bibliography


Annotated Bibliography for Source #4

“Victim-blaming Obscures Gravity of Sexual Assault”

SOURCE 4 annotated bibliography



extra, possible sources: (comm)


“Wall Street Journal Columnist: Rape Victims Are Just As Guilty As Rapists If They’re Both Drunk

//////// (comm)

/////// (comm, actual article)