Hi Everyone,

It was great talking with you all (and hearing you all talk) today. As I mentioned, I’m going to be observed on Tuesday, which just means someone will be sitting in class taking notes about me AND NOT YOU! So just remember, I’m being observed, not you.

The only reading required for Tuesday is the introduction to They Say/I Say, which you can find here. I usually don’t require you to print readings, but please PRINT this and bring it on Tuesday (it’s only 8 pages). In addition, I want you to write brief responses to these two prompts:
1) What is “the conversation” that the authors talk about in this introduction? In short (no more than a sentence or two), how do they propose that you “enter the conversation”?
2) What strategies have you used, either in writing or in your comments in class, to enter an academic “conversation” so far in college?

Finally, here is a link to the Sherry Turkle lecture about “Reclaiming Conversation”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyvJ6mqfJ6o

Watch it if you can!

Hi Everyone,

Three things:
1) A few of you brought to my attention an important point after class: how does one cite quotations from sources that don’t have page numbers (such as the Amy Tan essay, the Kevin Williamson article or the Ta-Nehisi Coates article)? The good news is that you do not have to. We will talk more in-depth about citing digital sources next week but for now, simply do not worry about it. However, if you do have a source with page numbers, please use parenthetical citations following the MLA format. This is as simple as a procedure as, “quotation” (page#).
2) The precis exercise was meant to get you to think about your source more generally (to remind yourself what it is basically about). Please do not think you have to include in your essay anything you wrote in your precis. You can if you want, but it is not required.
3) Remember to turn in your essay by 9AM on Thursday.

Write me if you have any questions at all. See you on Thursday.

Hello Everyone,

I just want to reiterate that the primary goal of your second essay is to spend as much time as you possibly can analyzing the article/chapter/essay you have chosen. Feel free to use a first-person perspective as much as you wish. Just make sure that the “meat” of your essay is analysis of the text.

For Tuesday please:
1) Finish reading the Strunk and White chapter I handed out today, which you can find a PDF of here. Choose one “rule” that interested/inspired/provided good advice for you and write a one-paragraph response.
2) PLEASE (this is very important) bring a copy of the text you are analyzing for this assignment to class. You can bring a paper version or an electronic version. Just bring it!

Oh yes, and regarding our conversation about infallibility, I was wrong about the Pope’s infallibility hat/cloak/ring (I swear I read about that somewhere but I can’t remember where now) but click here for more information about Papal Infallibility and here for more information about the Devil’s Advocate. It always a good practice to investigate the origin of terms that you think you know well. You’ll always learn something new. See you on Tuesday.

Hi Everyone,

For Thursday, please:

1) Write (handwritten or typed) and bring to class a very rough version of your essay to share with a partner. I want you to write whatever you possibly can between now and then. Perhaps you will just write an outline or an opening paragraph. Perhaps you will have more. Do whatever you can and bring it on Thursday.

2) Find your favorite book or your favorite piece of writing you’ve read recently and copy (handwritten or typed) the opening paragraph. We’re going to talk about opening paragraphs on Thursday and there is no better way to start this discussion than by looking at great examples.

That’s it. No other readings. See you on Thursday.

Hi Everyone,

For any of you who have still not been able to see my comments/your grade, please let me know. Remember to download Adobe Acrobat (it’s free), which should be all you need to do.

Remember also that we have NO formal class meeting tomorrow. We WILL have class on Tuesday as usual. On Thursday, Monday, and Tuesday I will meet with you in my office (located on the 7th floor of the vertical campus in cube 7-290P) to discuss your paper, ideas for your next paper and anything else we can talk about in fifteen minutes. Click here to see the sign-up sheet  in case you’ve already forgotten the time you signed up for.

Next, click here to see the guidelines for your next essay assignment. We’ll talk about it in-person and in-class on Tuesday. For Tuesday, please write a one-two sentence proposal about what you plan/want to write about for this second essay and bring it to class. You are going to share this with a partner on Tuesday so you must bring it! Your proposal should look something like this, “I plan to write about__________. I want to look more closely at ________’s claim about ______.”

I’m looking forward to meeting with you all in the next few days. See you then and see you in class on Tuesday.

Thanks for a great discussion about Coates’s essay today. I’m looking forward to us continuing the discussion on Tuesday.

For next time, read this article, which is the response to Coates in the National Review that I referenced today and complete this assignment:

Write a short three paragraph response (handwritten or typed) using this structure:
Paragraph 1: (Sentence 1) In Ta-Nehisi Coates’s 2014 article for the Atlantic Monthly, “The Case for Reparations,” Coates claims (argues, explains, and etc.)____________(insert a quotation here that you think is important-you are more than welcome to use one of the quotes you used in the assignment that was due today!). (Sentences 2, 3, and maybe 4) Summarize and analyze the quotation.

Paragraph 2: (Sentence) In his response to Ta-Nehisi Coates’s article, Kevin Williamson claims (argues, explains, and etc.) in The National Review,___________(insert a quotation here that you think is important or that responds directly to the quote you use in paragraph 1). (Sentences 2, 3, and maybe 4) Summarize and analyze the quotation.

Paragraph 3: Write a few sentences in which you try to make sense of how these writers’ claims connect or conflict. Try writing sentences like, “On one hand x, on the other hand y.” Or if you want, simply use this paragraph to show why you think one of the writers’ claims is more persuasive than the other writers’ claims.

That’s it.

Please make sure to bring this to class, rather than email it to me, because you will be sharing what you wrote with a partner on Tuesday.

See you then!

Hello,

The reading for this Thursday is Ta-Nehisi Coates’s big article in the Atlantic, “The Case for Reparations.” Since it is quite long, you are not required to read the whole thing for Thursday (though if you have time, please read all of it!). Rather, please read sections I, IV, V, VIII, IX, and X.

Then, please write responses to these three questions and bring your responses to class on Thursday:

1) In your own words, write down what you think a “case” for something is. What is it to “make a case” or to “rest your case”? In other words, what do you think are the necessary components that make up a “case” or an “argument”?

2) As succinctly as possible (no more than two sentences), explain Coates’s “case” for reparations?

3) Find three quotations from the article that support Coates’s argument and a write a one or two sentence explanation for why you think each quote supports his argument.

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for a great discussion about care ethics today. For Tuesday, here is what I would like you to do

1) Read George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” (we originally had two reading for Tuesday but I deleted the other one because I want us to focus on Orwell’s story instead)

2) Write a brief response to this very simple prompt (no more than a page):
In “Why Care About Caring?” Nel Noddings claims that “Caring is largely reactive and responsive. Perhaps it is even better characterized as receptive. The one-caring is sufficiently engrossed in the other to listen to him and to take pleasure or pain in what he recounts” (19). How does Orwell’s story explore “reactive” and “responsive” caring? More simply, how is this a story about “caring”? (You can answer either of these or both).

That’s it. I’m reading over your essays now and should get them back to you sometime next week. They’re all great! See you on Tuesday.

Prof. Rowe

Hi Everyone,

A few announcements:

-Remember that our reading for tomorrow is the Nel Noddings’s piece about ethics, which you can find here.

-For tomorrow please: 1) Find a paragraph in the Nel Noddings piece that stood out to you as important/interesting 2) Summarize in one sentence what the paragraph is about 3) Write a few sentences about why you chose this paragraph.

Your response should look something like this:
1) __paragraph on page___
2) Single sentence summary
3) Description of why you liked paragraph

-Also, for those of you interested in reading more of the Jane Jacobs article, here is a reprint of it from Fortune magazine’s website.

See you tomorrow!

Just wanted to remind you that our first assignment  is due on Tuesday the 29th by 9AM. I gave a very short, perhaps too short, tutorial on how to turn your essay in at the end of the class. So here is a reminder of how it works:

1) Go here to the Essay Assignments page on the blog. At the top, you will see a link called “Turn In Essays Here.”

2) Click on this link and enter the password (english2150). Then upload your essay in PDF format.

That’s it. If you have any questions at all, please ask me. You can also check out a demo here from Dropittome.

Also, I have assigned a short William Blake poem for you to read for Tuesday. Please read it/print it/save it on your desktop/device and write down one discussion question (i.e. what is a “marriage hearse”? what is a “charter’d street”?). Something brief but strong enough to give us some points to discuss.

Good luck and see you Tuesday!