Office: 414 Benson Hall            Office phone: 2-7469           Return to Wollaeger's home page
Office Hours: MW 12:30-2:30               Secretary (Dori): 2-6527

Texts and  Materials
Aims
General Requirements
    Essays
    Final Exam -- Updated Thursday, April 22, 1999
    Response Pages
    Presentations
    Grading Criteria
Computer-Mediated Instruction
     E-mail
     Garland Lab Dates
Grading Percentages
Schedule of Assignments -- Last updated:  Wednesday, April 28, 1999
Archive of Handouts -- Last updated: January 22, 1999
Daedalus Handbook
Useful Writing-Related Links
 
 
 
 

Texts and Materials

Columbo, Cullen, and Lisle, Rereading America 4th edition(RA)
Arthur Miller, Death of a Salesman
Hacker, The Bedford Handbook for Writers, 5th Edition
One formatted 3.5" IBM computer disk
One pocket-style folder big enough for a semester's worth of writing

Aims

This course is designed to help you to write confidently, deliberately, and appropriately for your various college courses.  We will focus most intently on critical thinking and argumentation.  Writing will be assigned throughout the semester, with ample opportunity for revision.  Revision, in fact, is the key to good writing, so we will work hard on learning to revise effectively.

General Requirements

In general, you must complete the appropriate assignment for each day and bring the appropriate text(s) to class.  Attendance and participation in class discussions are mandatory. An absence will considered to be excused only if you have received my permission in advance to miss class or in serious emergencies. After more than two unexcused absences I will begin to penalize your grade. You must also attend a minimum of two scheduled writing tutorials in my office, though I strongly encourage you to meet with me more frequently.  Missing a scheduled tutorial will count as an unexcused absence. To pass the course you must complete all writing assignments, including response pages (see below). Active participation in all class discussions and workshops is crucial: this is a small class; we need your voice.

Essays:  During the semester you will write five essays, each one word-processed on a computer and four to five pages in length (unless otherwise specified).  One page = a page of approximately 250 words, double spaced. The first four will be extensively revised.  I will give detailed responses to your essays, but assign a grade only to the revised version. Failure to produce a good faith effort on a draft will result in a grade penalty on the graded version.  Format: follow MLA guidelines, which are laid out in The Bedford Handbook. (Note that this means each essay should include parenthetical citations and a bibliography page listing the essays cited instead of footnotes or endnotes.) All written work must be paginated and titled (though please don't use a separate title page).

Keep all your essays together in a folder, and always hand in the previous draft(s) with every new version.  Given that the class will operate on a workshop schedule, it is essential that all papers come in as scheduled; late papers without a prearranged extension (given only under dire circumstances) will suffer a grade penalty.

Final Exam: there will also be a final exam, worth 10% of your grade.

The Vanderbilt Honor Code governs all work in this class, though collaborative work as described in class is not only permitted but required. You may read your essay aloud to someone to gauge its effectiveness or ask someone to proofread it, but you cannot ask anyone else to edit or revise your work.
 
 
 
 
 

Response pages: Throughout the semester I'll ask you to write response pages. These will be one-page typed responses either to the assigned reading for that day or to a prior response page written by one of your classmates. These will either be due in class as hard copy or on Daedalus (DIWE). The first page will be due Monday, January 18. We'll discuss the initial format for these in class. If you devote careful attention to these response papers, you will find it easier to generate beginning ideas for your papers, and you will feel more actively engaged in class discussions. I'll modify the nature of these assignments along the way, but assume that on any day reading is assigned, you've got a response page due. Evaluation of these will be incorporated into your participation grade; you won't receive a grade on each one.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Presentations:  in the last weeks of the semester, each of you will give a ten-minute oral presentation on a topic of your choice. A four- to five-page written version of the report is due at the exam.  On the presentation days during which you are not presenting, you will select two presentations and write a response page to each: bring two copies of each to class, one for the presenter and one for me. When you write your final written version of the presentation, use these response to help the revision process.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Computer-Mediation Instruction

Garland Lab sessions:  over the course of the semester we will meet about six times in the Garland Microcomputer Lab, where you will participate in various collaborative activities using the Daedalus Integrated Writing Environment (DIWE). Bring your computer disk.

 
 
 

Send me an email message by Friday, January 22: mark.wollaeger@vanderbilt.edu  If you need help establishing an email account or learning to use email, please consult the Garland Computer Lab.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Currently Scheduled Lab Dates:

• Wednesday, January 20
• Wednesday, February 3
• Friday, February 19: added on 2/12/99
• Monday, March 1
• Wednesday, March 17
• Wednesday, March 31
• Friday, April 16: added on 4/8/99

Grading Percentages: changed after class vote 4/7/99

Essay 1:  10%
Essay 2:  10%
Essay 3:  15%
Essay 4:  15%
Essay 5: 10%
Presentation:  10% for oral presentation and 10% for the written version.
Final Exam:  10% (for one hour essay writing on Death of Salesman)
Participation:  10% (includes response pages, computer exchange, and class discussion)

Note that no single part of the course will make or break you. Rather, steady engagement throughout the semester is the best way to improve your writing.
 
 

W Jan. 13

Introduction

AThinking Critically@ (1); Hacker 1a

M Jan. 18

RA: Rose (174), Kingston (251). Photocopy: Sizer
Response page #1

GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab in Garland Hall.
Reading: RA: Malcolm X (219), Rodriguez (202)
Response page #2

RA: Rozak (277); Hacker 1b-c
Response page #3

RA: Anyon (186); Sadker and Sadker (228)
Optional: Hacker 2a-c (pay particular attention to thesis discussion)
Response page #4

Draft of Essay 1 due at the beginning of class: three copies
In-class Writing Workshop

RA: Cheney (263), Meier and Schwarz (289); Hacker, pp. 43-5; (sign up for conferences)
Response Page #5

No class: Conferences (before tutorial, read Hacker 3b; come with revision plan)

Conferences

GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab in Garland Hall
Reading: none

Revision of Essay 1 due by 3 p.m. in my mailbox 3rd floor Benson Hall English Office

F Feb. 5

RA: Takaki (538); Hacker 4a-b
No Response page

RA: Parrillo (562), Terkel (575)
Response page #6

RA: Pincus (586) , Williams (604)
Response page #7

RA: Anzaldua (665), Morales (675); Hacker 4e
Response page #8

Prospectus for essay 2 due in class (1-2 pp)--bring two copies
In-class writing workshop

W Feb. 17

Essay 2 due in class
Reading to be announced.

New meeting place: GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab
Workshop on Essay 2: bring two copies
Reading: brochures distributed in class on Wednesday

Final Report: Ad Hoc Committee on Greek Life at Vanderbilt
As ClassPak from Campus Copy, or on-line: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/greek_life/study_report/final_report.html
Response page #9 --updated Sunday, February 21: options broadened.

Clippings to be distributed in class
Response page #10
Revision of Essay 2 due in my mailbox, 3^rd Floor, Benson Hall, by 3 p.m. or thereabouts.

Read 2-3 of the articles on Alcohol Consumption distributed in class on Wednesday.
(The one-page items won't count as one of the two to three.)
Response page #11

Essay 3: Introduction and five topic sentences, in order, for succeeding paragraphs.
One copy is fine.
GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab in Garland Hall.

Revise your introduction in response to Monday's peer review; then write the next two paragraphs of your essay. Bring two copies to class.
No reading; no response page.

Essay 3 due by 3 pm (or thereabouts)

Unit 4: Myths of Individual Opportunity

M March 15

RA: Alger (306); Dalton (320); pick up Class Pak for new reading
No Response page

GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab in Garland Hall
Read materials from the Class Pak and come prepared to role-play.
Note Specific Instructions for Revision of Essay 3, due Friday.

RA: Blue and Naden (314), Terkel (326)
No Response page
DIWE Component for Essay 3 Revision, due on Tuesday, March 23
Debate Preparation for Monday

RA: Mantsios (331)
Debate Preparation

        Revision of Essay 3 due in my box by 3:00 p.m. (or thereabouts): new date!
        DIWE Component for Essay 3 Revision, due today

W March 24

RA: Chang (366); Bartlett and Steele (356)
Discussion Question Preparation

RA: Garland (390); Chan (401)
Response Page
Start thinking about your presentation topics

Thesis Workshop: bring in two copies of thesis statement for Essay 4
Keep thinking about your presentation topics

Two copies of Essay 4 due in class
GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab in Garland Hall.

Individual Conferences

No Class: Individual Conferences
Presentation Prospectus due

M April 5

Library Resources Workshop: Researching a Presentation
Meet in the lobby near the reference desk by 9:10 a.m.

Revision of Essay 4 due in my mailbox by 3 p.m.

Death of a Salesman, Act One
Presentation Schedule Posted -- updated Monday, April 5, 1999
No response page; expect a quiz instead.

Death of a Salesman, finish

Finish discussing Death of a Salesman
(Meet in Benson 200 as usual, not in the lab.
Optional Revision of Essay 2 due.

Presentations

GARLAND LAB SESSION: Meet at the Microcomputer Lab in Garland Hall.
(Formerly listed as no class for this day.)

Presentations
Optional Revision of Essay 3 due.

Presentations

Presentations

Presentations

Essay 5 due
Optional Revision of Essay 4 due.

Final Exam

 

English 100W-2
Wollaeger
Spring 1999
 

Essay #1

 Write a personal narrative (4-5 pages) about an experience in school (at any level) from which you can draw an interesting generalization about the educational system. Aim to discover, in other words, ways in which your experience might be representative of issues others encounter in school. For examples, you might turn back to the personal narratives by Mike Rose, Maxine Hong Kingston, or Malcolm X, but you needn't limit yourselves to those models. Sizer's essay about high school, while not a personal narrative, also suggests ways that personal experience can be linked to broader issues. The essays by Anyon and the Sadkers show how issues of gender and social class structure educational institutions, but many other possibilities will occur to you as you reflect. For instance, what generalizations are implied in Rodriguez's essay?

 If one of our essays (or something else you have read) seems relevant to your discussion, by all means cite it. In the revised version of the essay, you will be required to cite at least one source.

 You may decide to build toward your broader points through the telling of your story, or you may decide to make a claim for the significance of your experience at the beginning and work from there. Find what works for you.

 A draft of your essay is due in class, Wednesday, January 27. Class on Wednesday will be a writing workshop, so it is crucial that you arrive ready to participate in peer review.

Remember to bring THREE COPIES TO CLASS!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

Response Page #5: due Friday, January 29: Compare Sadker and Sadker on women in education with Cheney on the same topic. Who seems more accurate or persuasive and why? No more than one page, please.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Conferences on Monday, Feb. 1 and Tuesday, Feb. 2

Come with a one-page typed plan for revision. Carefully consider your peer reviews and my comments before decided how to expect to improve your essay. Remember, revising is a more comprehenseive and potentially radical activity than is editing. The schedule for our conferences appears below:

Monday

8:30:  John Steiner
8:50: Guillermo Torres
9:10: Kate Burson
9:30:  Natalie Holden
9:50:  Burt Dickinson
10:30:  Edmond Wang
10:50: Ammar Zaatari
11:10: Caroline Smith
1:10: Maria Tsagaris
1:30: Stuart Radin
1:50: open
2:10: Rael Ellis
2:30: Matt Williams

Tuesday

8:50: open
9:10: open
9:30: open
9:50: open
10:10: Kathryn Dunkelberger
10:30: Dan Stricker
11:00: Lana Housholder
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Response Page 6:  Following the instructions in our Daedalus handbook (distributed in class, but also available here), access the DIWE InterChange transcripts from Wednesday. They are called melt, 2melt, and 3 melt (with the date 2/4 thrown in after each name); you can print out entire transcripts, copy them to a file, or copy and paste what you need. Read through the two conferences in which you did not participate, and find a message about race or prejudice that seems relevant to the two essays assigned for Monday. Copy out the message as usual at the top of your page; then, using either essay (or both), write a one-page commentary in which you discuss the relationship between the message and some specific aspect or aspects of our reading. Our reading might support, contradict, complicate, or qualify the message. If Friday's reading becomes relevant (Takaki), feel free to write about that, too; but be sure to address at least one of the Monday essays. Some very interesting issues and disagreements came up in your conferences.
 
 
 
 
 

Response page 7: Write one well-crafted paragraph in your argue for or against the existence of structural discrimination as defined by Pincus. Cite Williams's essay as evidence either to support or undermine the claim that structural discrimination exists. Read (or reread) the Bedford section on paragraphs as guidance for paragraph organization. (It really is a very useful section.)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Response page 8: For Friday, instead of writing a response to the reading for that day, come in with a paragraph in which you write about what most interests you in this unit (i.e., all the reading since Takaki last Friday) as a potential topic for a persuasive essay. Note that you need not have a thesis yet, just a topic. (For the distinction, see the handout in Archive of Handouts on the web pages.) Given that you will have to cite at least two essays from Rereading America in your essay, you might begin the process of thinking about your paragraph by deciding which essays you find most interesting and why. Or it may be that a particular topic has already struck you: affirmative action in the context of essays about diversity, for instance, or an argument about the effects of mass media on race relations, ethnic stereotypes, or understandings of America (e.g., what metaphors for American identity are implied by particular TV shows, ads, or movies?). If you have such a topic in mind, then you can think about what in particular attracts you to this issue, what position you might take on it, and which essays you might use. Either way, you need to end up with a well-crafted paragraph in which you describe a potential focus for your next essay. This is not a contract: you are free to change your mind. But by Monday you'll be required to come in with a more detailed plan for an essay, so the more thought you devote to it now, the better off you'll be later.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Essay 2

For Monday, February 15 you'll produce a 1-2 page prospectus instead of a draft. Bring two copies of the prospectus to class for a workshop. The paper should be a persuasive essay (not in the form of a personal essay) on an issue raised in this unit. Unlike the previous essay, in this one you must engage with two of our readings from Rereading America. Your prospectus must indicate which two essays you plan to cite.

By "prospectus" I mean a formal summary of your proposed paper. You should not simply produce the first two pages of your essay. Rather, you should first try to map out the paper as a whole – your provisional thesis, subordinate claims, data, and so on. Then, in your best prose, write a summary of the paper you plan to write. An ideal prospectus would include the topic sentence for each paragraph in your proposed essay. If it helps, write an outline first, but I don't want you to hand in an outline: I want the summary that an outline would permit you to write. We'll use these in class to help sharpen your plans. For the criteria for a good thesis, see the handout on Thesis vs. Topic.

After the workshop, the first version of the essay will be due in class on Wednesday, February 17 (not, as the printed syllabus indicates, on Tuesday, February 16).
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Response page 9:  one paragraph (not the usual quotation first; just a paragraph) in which you  write about whatever you find most interesting or important in the Committee Report on Greek Life.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Response page 10: one paragraph (not the usual quotation first; just a paragraph) in which you adapt one of the potential topic sentences from the Committee Report and write a paragraph developing it. You can select from about ten or more in the "General Observations" paragraph on p. 2 (under the "Findings" heading); these are pro and con on the Greek system. Or you can select from the bullet items on p. 14 or those on pp. 15-16, all of which have to do with the rush system, especially the sophomore rush. Or if you can find a suitable topic sentence elsewhere in the report -- e.g., one focused less intently on the Greek system per se --  use that. To develop your paragraph, you might want to draw on materials elsewhere in th report (e.g., statistics, quotations from surveys, etc.). Be sure to note where your topic sentence comes from, so I can look back at the context. You needn't copy the topic sentence word for word (in fact, many aren't even complete sentences in their current form). E-mail me with questions.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Response page 11: Write a tightly focused paragraph in which you make a case exactly opposite to the one you made in Response page 10. Then decide how to link it to Response page 10, as if the two paragraphs were part of a single argument. You'll probably need to adjust 10 to make it fit with 11.  You may also want to revise 10 in response to the kind of comments I put on Response page 9. You aren't required to use any of this material for the essay due next week, but . . .
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Class Pak for new reading: The Class Pak will be composed of your drafts of Essay 3. You will each be designated to read two essays in particular; you will also select a third to read on your own. In the Garland Lab on Wednesday, you'll enter InterChange Conferences in groups of three, where you'll take turns role-playing the Provost responding to the two essays you (as"he") read, as if in a meeting with concerned students. A pseudonym function will permit you actually to appear in the conference as Provost1, Provost2, or Provost3 (depending on when you take your turn). As preparation for the conference, prepare a brief opening statement (about a paragraph) in which you address the two essays written by the other members of your group; do not write in response to the third essay. Try to think your way into the role of someone whose job is to oversee campus life in general, making sure that conditions are conducive to learning and personal growth. As provost, you'll probably find yourself disagreeing with some aspects of the proposals and agreeing with others: say why you do or do not agree. Then be prepared to field responses from the two student writers, who no doubt will wish to defend their proposals. The technologically fluent can bring in their opening statements on disk and cut and paste into InterChange; if you want to do this, be sure to save your statement as a .txt file or an .rtf file. If you'd like to but don't know how, let me know and I'll help. Or you can simply bring in hardcopy of an opening statement and type it in. Have some fun with this: you need to make serious points, ultimately, but they can be made in an engaging, entertaining, even amusing way, whether you are playing yourself or the Provost.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Instructions for Revision of Essay 3:

For your rewrite of Essay 3, I want you to recast your essay in the form of a letter to the Provost in order to throw into relief the importance of crafting your writing in relation to a particular audience and the importance of sustaining a clear sense of purpose. You also need to incorporate two comments from our DIWE transcripts, as described below. Below I've also printed out an actual letter from me to a University Committee (with all the names and particulars changed to protect privacy). Follow this format (though if you cite outside materials, as I encourage you to when appropriate, include a Works Cited page, even though a letter would not normally use one). Note how a letter recommending that the reader take particular measures gets to the main point right away before backing up to fill in all the reasoning. It also concludes, as a letter normally does, with your name.

English 100W-2
Wollaeger
Writer's name

March 15, 1999

Dear Professor Challenger:
    I am sending this letter in support of Joeline Student's petition to fulfill the College Writing Requirement by substituting English 112W for English 100W or English 120W. Ms. Student is transferring into the College from Blair, where she was not required to take English 100W. Her score on the SAT-II Writing Test, taken in Spring 1997, would have placed her into English 100W if she had entered the College last year as a Freshman. Normally I would say that a student fitting this description should be required to take English 100W. But this case is different.
    While enrolled in Blair in 1997-98, Ms. Student took English 104W-5, Introduction to Fiction, in the Fall and received an "A"; in the Spring she took English 106W-1, Introduction to Literary Criticsm (a less intellectually familiar class to most first-year students) and received a "B+." Both these classes are considered Level 2 writing classes; English 100W is our only Level 1 writing class. Ms. Students's performance in these Level 2 classes indicates that she no longer needs to take English 100W and that she should consequently be permitted to take English 112W, Introduction to Poetry.
    This recommendation is consistent with the policy of several years standing that permits transfer students with writing credits but no equivalent to English 100W to substitute English 120W, Intermediate Composition, for English 100W. (In many cases, of course, transfer students will place out of English 100W regardless of transfer credits owing to high standardized test scores.) Given that all Level 2 writing classes, not just English 120W, are designed to offer what amounts to intermediate instruction in composition (whether grounded in fiction, poetry, history, or anthropology, etc.), intramural transfer students who have received a "B"or better in two Level 2 writing classes should be permitted to substitute any writing class for English 100W. In this instance the case for my recommendation is stronger still because English 112W is the gateway to the English major, and Ms. Student  intends to be an English major.
    This situation suggests the need to make explicit a modification of the existing policy that permits some students to substitute English 120W, and only English 120W, for English 100W. In a separate memo I intend to recommend to Deans Garbanzo and Chickpea that we do precisely that.
     I have already discussed Joeline Student's case extensively with Deans Garbanzo and Chickpea, and I would be happy to discuss the matter further with you or your committee.

Sincerely,
 

Mark A. Wollaeger
Director, College Writing
 

DIWE Component for Essay 3 Revision, due on Tuesday, March 23:

In order to give you time to make more use of the InterChange transcripts from Wednesday's lab, I've decided to postpone the due date for your revision of Essay 3 to Tuesday, March 23, 3 pm or thereabouts. BUT: You must do a DIWE assignment in the meantime (described below). There is no response page for Friday, but I will expect everyone to have read carefully. I've not assigned a response page in order to open time for you to do the DIWE assignment. for Monday, there will be preparation comparable to a respone page for Monday.

DIWE Assignment (don't leave this for the last minute!):

1. If in your group the 3rd provost did not receive much response owing to lack of time, please re- enter your InterChange group and add a substantial comment. The DIWE users' manual is available here on line, if you need it.

2. Incorporating DIWE transcripts into your revision of Essay 3 (letter to Provost). Re-enter your InterChange group and read through the entire discussion in order to select a comment by a classmate that you want to quote or paraphrase in your letter to the Provost. Then enter a second group and pick a second comment to quote or paraphrase. (You can look back at your Class Pak for an indication of focus of the papers in each group — alcohol, sophomore rush, etc.) The idea here is to find two comments from classmates that you can use to support your argument; the comments might directly support your position, or they might offers points to refute. For instance, you might end writing in support of one of your points: "As my classmate Caroline Jones has commented (or "said" or "written"), ‘most Greek houses do not condone binge drinking and therefore should not be blamed.'" Or you might find yourself writing, "Although my classmate Caroline Jones has argued that ‘most Greek houses do not condone binge drinking and therefore should not be blamed.'she fails to acknowledge that the very culture of the Greek system encourages drunkenness.'" Either of these examples could have used paraphrase instead of quotation. To find useful comments, you'll want to read the InterChange discussions with an eye to what could be inserted into your essay.

We'll also discuss this in class.
 
 
 
 
 

Debate Preparation for Monday, March 22: In class on Monday, we'll debate the following proposition: "Popular understanding of the American Dream is deeply misleading because success in America depends much more on luck and birth than on hard work and ambition. Belief in the American Dream may therefore cause more harm than good."

Preparation: look through our reading for this unit — the essays on Colin Powell and Stephen Cruz, the Horatio Alger story about Ragged Dick and Dalton's critique, and Monday's reading on class in America — and gather evidence to support or contest this claim. You'll want specific references to our reading: bring in typed notes with page #s from Rereading America, which I'll collect at the end of class, so you can make specific claims and back them up during the debate.
 
 

Discussion Question Preparation for Wednesday, March 24: Type up and bring in 2-3 discussion questions that you think could generate the kind of discussion you would like to have in class (i.e., engaging, instructive, probing, illuminating, scintillating). Your questions should focus primarily on the reading for Wednesday, but they can also ask for connections between Wednesday's reading and earlier assignments, whether from this unit or before. (When you were debating about minorities on Monday, I thought back to Takaki's essay on multiculturalism, in which he points out that white immigrants [e.g., German, Irish] have historically fared much better than non-white immigrants).
 
 
 

Response Page for Friday, March 26: Write no more than a page, in your best prose, in response to question 8 on p. 400 of Rereading America. Rush Limbaugh, it seems, has read the chapter we've been studying, and didn't like it. You can be sure that the pinko editors of RA share Al Franken's view of Limbaugh as, to cite part of the the title of Franken's book, "a big fat idiot." But even those unsympathetic to Limbaugh (and I suppose we must have at least a few in the class), have to admit that even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Is this one of those times? Why or why not?
 

Start thinking about your presentation: Soon I'll ask you to sign up for times as well as give me a preliminary sense of what you plan to do. The presentation must be an argument of about 10 minutes (multimedia aids of any sort are fine) on a topic of your choosing. It could be anything from gender equity in sports to the ethics of Michael Jordan's endorsement of Nike. Or affirmative action if you haven't already written about it), or anti-tobacco legislation, or the cultural influence of films, or capital punishment, or the bombing of Kosovo (probably underway as I type), why tangerines are superior to oranges (well, maybe not that one) . . . you get the idea. In your research, you'll be required to make use of at least three non-Internet sources.
 
 

Presentation Prospectus: A one-page description (max) of your proposed topic, including your expectations about the kind of research you expect to do and the sources you intend to use. You don't have to name actual books and articles. Rather, a prospectus might indicate that you intend to find out how many minority scholarships Vanderbilt offers, and how long they have been offered, as well as read some articles about the history of affirmative action in colleges and/or debates about affirmative action in colleges. The prospectus would also indicate what kind of argument you intend to make (e.g., pro, con, recommendation for particular changes, etc.). This isn't a contract, but the clearer idea you get now the more time you'll have to find the information you need.
 
 
 
 
 

Conferences on Thursday, April 1 and Friday, April 2:

Come with a one-paragraph typed plan for revision. Carefully consider your peer reviews (of your thesis and of your draft) deciding how to improve your essay. Remember, revising is a more comprehenseive and potentially radical activity than is editing: you may need to plan entirely new paragraphs, rearrange paragraphs, or cut paragraphs. Most important, you may need to revise your thesis. The schedule for our conferences appears below:

Thursday, April 1

8:40:    open
9:00:    open
9:20:    open
9:40:    Kathryn
10:00:   Maria
10:40:    John
11:00:    Matt
11:20:    Edmond
1:00:      Burt
1:20:     Ammar
1:40:     Open

Friday, April 2

8:40:    open
9:00:    Caroline
9:20:    Lana
9:40:    Natalie
10:00:    Kate
10:40:    Rael
11:00:    Dan
 
 
 
 
 

Presentation Schedule:

Wednesday, April 14: Edmond, Stuart, Kathryn
Monday, April 19: Natalie, Guillermo, Kate
Wednesday, April 21: John, Burt, Dan
Friday, April 23: Caroline, Rael, Matt
Monday, April 26: Maria, Alana, Ammar
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Final Exam

Our exam is Friday, April 30, at 9 a.m. in Benson 200. Please bring one blue book. The final exam will count for 10% of your grade and will consist of an hour-long essay on Death of a Salesman.

Also due at the final is the written version of your oral presentation. This should be a 4-5 page essay using the same format we've used for all essays (MLA style for citations, Works Cited, etc.). Make use of your classmates' responses to reshape your argument as necessary. Giving the argument orally should have given you a distinct sense of your audience; keep that audience in mind as you write and revise.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Essay 5: Portfolio Essay

Essay 5: A Writing Portfolio
(adapted from Thinking Through Theory by James Thomas Zebroski)

 

Your final essay assignment for this course is to compose a writing portfolio. This portfolio will present a view of your development as a writer in this course across time. It is a kind of history of your writing that tries to develop and support a main claim about your writing. The claim or main point might take the form of an explicit thesis statement, or it might be a metaphor that structures your account.

The portfolio will include:

1. A selection of your writing this semester carefully arranged in a thought-out order.

These texts should give the reader some sense of the variety of writing you have done and the wide range of writing of which you are now capable. Such texts could include free writing and other forms of prewriting, introductory paragraphs, thesis statements, response papers, drafts, final essays, and peer editing responses. I won=t set a rigid set of guidelines for what to include, but I would think you=d want to selecting at least one or two drafts and final versions of essays as well as some other kinds of writing. 2. Annotations attached to each text; these annotations briefly (in one paragraph or less) tell what the text is and why it is important as evidence of your writing development;

3. An essay (4-5 pages double-spaced) that analyzes your writing development by citing the texts included.

The essay should not be a simple narration of the term, though you may do that to set up the point you wish to prove. Rather, the paper should interpret the texts, analyzing the purpose and rhetoric of the texts and giving the reader other information not included in the texts that is important in the evaluation of writing development across time. You have worked this semester to write persuasive essays, to analyze the arguments of others, to revise and edit your prose; this essay assignment asks you to use these skills to reflect on your own writing and thinking over the semester.

Writing development is usually NOT one long story of steady improvement. It is often irregular and intermittent, going backward in order to go forward at a later point. Risk-taking is crucial to growth but often creates errors or inadequacies. Your job is to spot some of the patterns of growth in your writing over this term, both to formulate a sense of what you have learned and to suggest where you may grow next in your writing abilities. I should stress that this essay can include responses to my comments about your essays but it should not simply re-present what I have already said about your writing. The goal of this assignment is to encourage you to think critically about your own patterns of growth and difficulty so that after you leave this class, you will be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of your writing and argumentative skills in order that you might continue to improve them. Becoming more self-conscious about your own writing process is crucial to further development.

This collection of texts (and texts about texts) should reflect your growth in writing. This is why selection, annotation, and arrangement are so crucial in putting the portfolio together. Chronological ordering, for instance, may not always be the best way to chart your development.

Your portfolio should be presented in a folder that is clearly labeled with your name. The order in which it should be read should be clear. Keep in mind that what counts here is: (1) insight into your own writing processes rather than just summary of what you did; (2) evidence of varied writing; (3) examples that are arranged to reflect the pattern(s) of your writing as it has developed over the course of the semester; and (4) a clear point (or metaphor) that structures all of this material.