Breakthrough Writer

1A Agenda 11-27-19: Marijuana Debate

Essay #5

You need 5 credible sources for the MLA Works Cited page in your final capstone essay.

Your guidelines for your Final Research Paper are as follows:

This research paper should present a thesis that is specific, manageable, provable, and contestable—in other words, the thesis should offer a clear position, stand, or opinion that will be proven with research.

You should analyze and prove your thesis using examples and quotes from a variety of sources.

You need to research and cite from at least five sources. You must use at least 3 different types of sources.

At least one source must be from an ECC library database.

At least one source must be a book, anthology or textbook.

At least one source must be from a credible website, appropriate for academic use.

The paper should not over-rely on one main source for most of the information. Rather, it should use multiple sources and synthesize the information found in them.

This paper will be approximately 5-7 pages in length, not including the Works Cited page, which is also required. This means at least 5 full pages of text. The Works Cited page does NOT count towards length requirement.

You must use MLA format for the document, in-text citations, and Works Cited page.

You must integrate quotations and paraphrases using signal phrases and analysis or commentary.

You must sustain your argument, use transitions effectively, and use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

Your paper must be logically organized and focused.

Default Setting Essay Template for 1,200-word essay

9 Paragraphs, 135 words per paragraph, approx. 1,200 words (1,215 to be exact)

Paragraph 1: Attention-getting introduction

Paragraph 2: Transition from introduction to argumentative claim (thesis)

Paragraphs 3-6: Body paragraphs that give reasons for supporting your claim.

Paragraphs 7 & 8: Counterarguments in which you anticipate how your opponents will disagree with you, and you then provide rebuttals to those counterarguments.

Paragraph 9: Conclusion, an emotionally powerful re-statement of your thesis.

Make sure to include a Works Cited page.

Final Essay #5 for 1,200 words

Option A

Develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. Consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate, John Oliver video on vaccinations. See Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” See New York Times logical fallacies video. Also see "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem."

Option B

See video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea. See Netflix documentary Grass Is Greener. Also see Netflix Explained Season 1, "Weed."

November 25 Essay #4 due on turnitin. Watch PBS Frontline documentary “The Vaccine War” (55 minutes). We will develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. We will consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate, John Oliver video on vaccinations. See “Anti-Vaxxers Trolled a Doctor’s Office” in the Washington Post. We will also consult Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” We will also consult New York Times logical fallacies video, and we will read "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem." Your homework #14 for next class is to read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and in a 200-word paragraph support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea.

November 27 We will see video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and go over Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts. See NYT editorial “Marijuana Damages Young Brains.” If we have time, we will also see Netflix documentary The Grass Is Greener.

December 2 Chromebook In-Class Writing: Your objective is to write an introduction and a thesis.

December 4 Chromebook In-Class Writing: Your objective is to write 4 supporting paragraphs.

December 9 Chromebook In-Class Writing: Your objective is to write your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, and Works Cited page.

December 11 Essay 5 is due on turnitin. In class, we will grade Portfolio #2, which consists of homework reading responses 10-14.

Option A

Develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. Consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate, John Oliver video on vaccinations. See Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” See New York Times logical fallacies video. Also see "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem."

Also take note:

In Peter Beinart's "What the Measles Epidemic Really Says About America," we have an excellent analysis of how the measles epidemic points to a larger breakdown of American society.

This is a compelling work that relates to essay assignment on Anti-Vaxxers.

Variation of Option A

Defend or refute the claim made in "The Anti-Vaxxers Spreading Measles in Portland Should be Arrested" by Patrick A. Coleman.

According to Frank Bruni, we are beyond a public health crisis. We are in the realm of a public sanity crisis with people following the advice of hacks and charlatans and believing in this fake intel over the scientific community.

Marijuana Debate

Option B

See video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea. See Netflix documentary Grass Is Greener. Also see Netflix Explained Season 1, "Weed."

Salient Points That Complicate the Topic:

One. There is a history of racism in America's war against pot. See the role of racist Harry Anslinger in America's stigma against pot. See Netflix documentary The Grass Is Greener. Anslinger tortured Billie Holiday, a story that goes down in infamy. You can read in-depth history of this tragic event in Politico.

Two. Increased potency raises the stakes in the debate about pot legalization.

Three. Study the claim from mainstream studies that pot hurts teens more than alcohol.

Four. Edibles need regulations because of the amount of THC that can be overdosed.

Five. Is pot benign, non-addicting, and safe? If pot is addictive, how addictive is it compared to other substances?

Six. New study shows pot affects pregnancies.

Seven. Studies show link between heavy pot use and psychosis and schizophrenia. However, this NYT article rebuts the link by pointing out mitigating factors.

There are more or less 3 positions:

One. Keep marijuana illegal.

Two. Legalize marijuana with the caveat that you regulate it.

Three. Legalize marijuana and don't regulate it because regulation will create a black market thereby cancelling the benefits of legalization.

Suggested Outline for Marijuana Debate

Paragraph 1:Introduce your topic with a salient statistic about pot growth, profits, dependence numbers, or the new study in The Atlantic about pregnancy risk.

Paragraph 2: Transition to your thesis in which you make an argumentative claim about legalized marijuana and its effects on society.

Paragraphs 3-6 would be your supporting paragraphs.

Paragraphs 7 and 8 would be your counterargument-rebuttal paragraphs.

Paragraph 9, you conclusion will be a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Excerpt from Annie Lowrey's "America's Invisible Pot Addicts" (headings my own):

Daily Use from 9-40%

Public-health experts worry about the increasingly potent options available, and the striking number of constant users. “Cannabis is potentially a real public-health problem,” said Mark A. R. Kleiman, a professor of public policy at New York University. “It wasn’t obvious to me 25 years ago, when 9 percent of self-reported cannabis users over the last month reported daily or near-daily use. I always was prepared to say, ‘No, it’s not a very abusable drug. Nine percent of anybody will do something stupid.’ But that number is now [something like] 40 percent.” They argue that state and local governments are setting up legal regimes without sufficient public-health protection, with some even warning that the country is replacing one form of reefer madness with another, careening from treating cannabis as if it were as dangerous as heroin to treating it as if it were as benign as kombucha.

3 Causes of Pot Rising to Addiction Levels

But cannabis is not benign, even if it is relatively benign, compared with alcohol, opiates, and cigarettes, among other substances. Thousands of Americans are finding their own use problematic in a climate where pot products are getting more potent, more socially acceptable to use, and yet easier to come by, not that it was particularly hard before.

For Keith Humphreys, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University, the most compelling evidence of the deleterious effects comes from users themselves. “In large national surveys, about one in 10 people who smoke it say they have a lot of problems. They say things like, ‘I have trouble quitting. I think a lot about quitting and I can’t do it. I smoked more than I intended to. I neglect responsibilities.’ There are plenty of people who have problems with it, in terms of things like concentration, short-term memory, and motivation,” he said. “People will say, ‘Oh, that’s just you fuddy-duddy doctors.’ Actually, no. It’s millions of people who use the drug who say that it causes problems.”

Users or former users I spoke with described lost jobs, lost marriages, lost houses, lost money, lost time. Foreclosures and divorces. Weight gain and mental-health problems. And one other thing: the problem of convincing other people that what they were experiencing was real. A few mentioned jokes about Doritos, and comments implying that the real issue was that they were lazy stoners. Others mentioned the common belief that you can be “psychologically” addicted to pot, but not “physically” or “really” addicted. The condition remains misunderstood, discounted, and strangely invisible, even as legalization and white-marketization pitches ahead.

Central Debate

The country is in the midst of a volte-face (abrupt turnaround) on marijuana. The federal government still classifies cannabis as a Schedule I drug, with no accepted medical use. (Meth and PCP, among other drugs, are Schedule II.) Politicians still argue it is a gateway to the use of things like heroin and cocaine. The country still spends billions of dollars fighting it in a bloody and futile drug war, and still arrests more people for offenses related to cannabis than it does for all violent crimes combined.

Yet dozens of states have pushed ahead with legalization for medical or recreational purposes, given that for decades physicians have argued that marijuana’s health risks have been overstated and its medical uses overlooked; activists have stressed prohibition’s tremendous fiscal cost and far worse human cost; and researchers have convincingly argued that cannabis is far less dangerous than alcohol. A solid majority of Americans support legalization nowadays.

Marketing a Lie

Academics and public-health officials, though, have raised the concern that cannabis’s real risks have been overlooked or underplayed—perhaps as part of a counter-reaction to federal prohibition, and perhaps because millions and millions of cannabis users have no problems controlling their use. “Part of how legalization was sold was with this assumption that there was no harm, in reaction to the message that everyone has smoked marijuana was going to ruin their whole life,” Humphreys told me. It was a point Kleiman agreed with. “I do think that not legalization, but the legalization movement, does have a lot on its conscience now,” he said. “The mantra about how this is a harmless, natural, and non-addictive substance—it’s now known by everybody. And it’s a lie.”

Thousands of businesses, as well as local governments earning tax money off of sales, are now literally invested in that lie. “The liquor companies are salivating,” Matt Karnes of GreenWave Advisors told me. “They can’t wait to come in full force.” He added that Big Pharma was targeting the medical market, with Wall Street, Silicon Valley, food businesses, and tobacco companies aiming at the recreational market.

Sellers are targeting broad swaths of the consumer market—soccer moms, recent retirees, folks looking to replace their nightly glass of chardonnay with a precisely dosed, low-calorie, and hangover-free mint. Many have consciously played up cannabis as a lifestyle product, a gift to give yourself, like a nice crystal or an antioxidant face cream. “This is not about marijuana,” one executive at the California retailer MedMen recently argued. “This is about the people who use cannabis for all the reasons people have used cannabis for hundreds of years. Yes, for recreation, just like alcohol, but also for wellness.”

Pot Replaces Motivation

Evan started off smoking with his friends when they were playing sports or video games, lighting up to chill out after his nine-to-five as a paralegal at a law office. But that soon became couch-lock, and he lost interest in working out, going out, doing anything with his roommates. Then came a lack of motivation and the slow erosion of ambition, and law school moving further out of reach. He started smoking before work and after work. Eventually, he realized it was impossible to get through the day without it. “I was smoking anytime I had to do anything boring, and it took a long time before I realized that I wasn’t doing anything without getting stoned,” he said.

His first attempts to reduce his use went miserably, as the consequences on his health and his life piled up. He gained nearly 40 pounds, he said, when he stopped working out and cooking his own food at home. He recognized that he was just barely getting by at work, and was continually worried about getting fired. Worse, his friends were unsympathetic to the idea that he was struggling and needed help. “[You have to] try to convince someone that something that is hurting you is hurting you,” he said.

Weaponizing Marijuana Potency as a Consumer Product Is Big Money with Big Health Consequences

Lax regulatory standards and aggressive commercialization in some states have compounded some existing public-health risks, raised new ones, and failed to tamp down on others, experts argue. In terms of compounding risks, many cite the availability of hyper-potent marijuana products. “We’re seeing these increases in the strength of cannabis, as we are also seeing an emergence of new types of products,” such as edibles, tinctures, vape pens, sublingual sprays, and concentrates, Ziva Cooper, an associate professor of clinical neurobiology in the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University Medical Center, told me. “A lot of these concentrates can have up to 90 percent THC,” she said, whereas the kind of flower you could get 30 years ago was far, far weaker. Scientists are not sure how such high-octane products affect people’s bodies, she said, but worry that they might have more potential for raising tolerance, introducing brain damage, and inculcating dependence.

As for new risks: In many stores, budtenders are providing medical advice with no licensing or training whatsoever. “I’m most scared of the advice to smoke marijuana during pregnancy for cramps,” said Humphreys, arguing that sellers were providing recommendations with no scientific backing, good or bad, at all.

In terms of long-standing risks, the lack of federal involvement in legalization has meant that marijuana products are not being safety-tested like pharmaceuticals; measured and dosed like food products; subjected to agricultural-safety and pesticide standards like crops; and held to labeling standards like alcohol. (Different states have different rules and testing regimes, complicating things further.)

Health experts also cited an uncomfortable truth about allowing a vice product to be widely available, loosely regulated, and fully commercialized: Heavy users will make up a huge share of sales, with businesses wanting them to buy more and spend more and use more, despite any health consequences.

Prohibition Is Not the Answer: Regulation Is

This is not to say that prohibition is a more attractive policy, or that legalization has proven to be a public-health disaster. “The big-picture view is that the vast majority of people who use cannabis are not going to be problematic users,” said Jolene Forman, an attorney at the Drug Policy Alliance. “They’re not going to have a cannabis-use disorder. They’re going to have a healthy relationship with it. And criminalization actually increases the harms related to cannabis, and so having a strictly regulated market where there can be limits on advertising, where only adults can purchase cannabis, and where you’re going to get a wide variety of products makes sense.”

Still, strictly regulated might mean more strictly regulated than today, at least in some places, drug-policy experts argue. “Here, what we’ve done is we’ve copied the alcohol industry fully formed, and then on steroids with very minimal regulation,” Humphreys said. “The oversight boards of a number of states are the industry themselves. We’ve learned enough about capitalism to know that’s very dangerous.”

A number of policy reforms might tamp down on problem use and protect consumers, without quashing the legal market or pivoting back to prohibition and all its harms. One extreme option would be to require markets to be noncommercial: The District of Columbia, for instance, does not allow recreational sales, but does allow home cultivation and the gifting of marijuana products among adults. “If I got to pick a policy, that would probably be it,” Kleiman told me. “That would be a fine place to be if we were starting from prohibition, but we are starting from patchwork legalization. As the Vermont farmer says, I don’t think you can get there from here. I fear its time has passed. It’s generally true that the drug warriors have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”

Then, there are THC taxes, designed to hit heavy users the hardest. Some drug-policy experts argue that such levies would just push people from marijuana to alcohol, with dangerous health consequences. “It would be like saying, ‘Let’s let the beef and pork industries market and do whatever they wish, but let’s have much tougher restrictions on tofu and seitan,’” said Mason Tvert of the Marijuana Policy Project. “In light of the current system, where alcohol is so prevalent and is a more harmful substance, it is bad policy to steer people toward that.” Yet reducing the commercial appeal of all vice products—cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana—is an option, if not necessarily a popular one.

Weak Arguments?

Counterargument and Rebuttal Section of Your Essay

Where can we seek counterarguments? Websites that champion cannabis consumption, of course. So let's look at a cannabis blog.

https://cannabis.net/blog/opinion/shutting-up-the-invisible-pot-addicts-idea

Counterargument #1: Daily Wine Vs. Daily Pot, Faulty Comparison?

Perhaps most important might be reintroducing some reasonable skepticism about cannabis, especially until scientists have a better sense of the health effects of high-potency products, used frequently. Until then, listening to and believing the hundreds of thousands of users who argue marijuana is not always benign might be a good start.

There’s no shortage of other reasonable proposals, many already in place or under consideration in some states. The government could run marijuana stores, as in Canada. States could require budtenders to have some training or to refrain from making medical claims. They could ask users to set a monthly THC purchase cap and remain under it. They could cap the amount of THC in products, and bar producers from making edibles that are attractive to kids, like candies. A ban or limits on marijuana advertising are also options, as is requiring cannabis dispensaries to post public-health information.

According to organizations such as NIDA, these daily wine drinkers are “alcoholics” or “heavy drinkers”. Within their realm of rationalization, consuming anything daily means automatically you’re an addict.

Counterargument #2: People rely on daily substances all the time: Two Wrongs Make a Right Fallacy

However, it is important to make the distinction between daily use and addiction. For instance, if someone smokes up every single night after a long day of work to unwind…how does that make them an addict. Just because of the substance in question?

If you’re having trouble sleeping and go to a doctor, they will either prescribe you a regimen of exercises or some Zoloft to get you sleeping. Within this scenario, if you take Zoloft every night to go to sleep…are you addicted or just ‘medicating’?

And this is where Cannabis is also very different from every other type of recreational drug on the market. Due to the cannabinoid activity within the plant and the plethora of medical benefits these terpenes and cannabis provides to the endocannabinoid system; many people substitute cannabis for medicines like Zoloft.

Counterargument #3: Addicts are going to be addicts anyway; if it's not pot, it will be something else, so what the hell?

Of course, the psychological aspects of cannabis could play a role within the mental structure of an addict. However, for an addict…if it’s not one substance it’s another. If they aren’t addicted to cannabis, they would be addicted to food, sex or anything really.

Nonetheless, we can’t place heavy regulations on cannabis based on the reactions of a small minority of people.

Counterargument #4: Lots of things are dangerous, like cars. Should we illegalize cars?

Let me put it to you this way. Some people will inevitably crash their cars and kill other people. This is fact. Does this mean that we get rid of all cars, place limits on how fast cars can go?

We do have some regulation when it comes to cars though. We make sure they are road worthy, we have certain rules and guidelines within the public space…however we’re not placing limits on manufacturers. We’re not setting a National Top Speed of 60 MPH where every car manufacturer is forced to make cars that can only go 60 MPHs.

Similarly, placing restrictions on a budding industry, setting limitations on THC levels and so forth is irrational.

Counterargument #5: "You can't trust the government."

The only reason why “some people” are having issues with cannabis is because the government has been spreading misinformation about cannabis for decades. The “trust” in the government authority have diminished over time.

Rebuttal:

A lot of studies Lowrey refers to are independent academic studies, not government ones.

Counterargument #6: "Just be careful, bro."

Cannabis is a mind altering substance and you should always be careful when you’re playing with brain chemistry, however the problem doesn’t lie with the substance but rather education surrounding the substance.

Furthermore, addiction goes far beyond any particular substance. It has to do with identity, purpose, behavioral patterns, genetics and of course a sense of belonging.

Posted at 09:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

1A Agenda 11-25-19: Vaccine Debate & Breakdown of Critical Thinking & Democracy

Essay #5

You need 5 credible sources for the MLA Works Cited page in your final capstone essay.

Your guidelines for your Final Research Paper are as follows:

This research paper should present a thesis that is specific, manageable, provable, and contestable—in other words, the thesis should offer a clear position, stand, or opinion that will be proven with research.

You should analyze and prove your thesis using examples and quotes from a variety of sources.

You need to research and cite from at least five sources. You must use at least 3 different types of sources.

At least one source must be from an ECC library database.

At least one source must be a book, anthology or textbook.

At least one source must be from a credible website, appropriate for academic use.

The paper should not over-rely on one main source for most of the information. Rather, it should use multiple sources and synthesize the information found in them.

This paper will be approximately 5-7 pages in length, not including the Works Cited page, which is also required. This means at least 5 full pages of text. The Works Cited page does NOT count towards length requirement.

You must use MLA format for the document, in-text citations, and Works Cited page.

You must integrate quotations and paraphrases using signal phrases and analysis or commentary.

You must sustain your argument, use transitions effectively, and use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

Your paper must be logically organized and focused.

Default Setting Essay Template for 1,200-word essay

9 Paragraphs, 135 words per paragraph, approx. 1,200 words (1,215 to be exact)

Paragraph 1: Attention-getting introduction

Paragraph 2: Transition from introduction to argumentative claim (thesis)

Paragraphs 3-6: Body paragraphs that give reasons for supporting your claim.

Paragraphs 7 & 8: Counterarguments in which you anticipate how your opponents will disagree with you, and you then provide rebuttals to those counterarguments.

Paragraph 9: Conclusion, an emotionally powerful re-statement of your thesis.

Make sure to include a Works Cited page.

Final Essay #5 for 1,200 words

Option A

Develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. Consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate, John Oliver video on vaccinations. See Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” See New York Times logical fallacies video. Also see "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem."

Option B

See video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea. See Netflix documentary Grass Is Greener. Also see Netflix Explained Season 1, "Weed."

November 25 Essay #4 due on turnitin. Watch PBS Frontline documentary “The Vaccine War” (55 minutes). We will develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. We will consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate, John Oliver video on vaccinations. See “Anti-Vaxxers Trolled a Doctor’s Office” in the Washington Post. We will also consult Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” We will also consult New York Times logical fallacies video, and we will read "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem." Your homework #14 for next class is to read Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts” and in a 200-word paragraph support, refute, or complicate the argument that legalizing weed is a bad idea.

November 27 We will see video “3 Arguments Why Marijuana Should Stay Illegal” and go over Annie Lowry’s essay “America’s Invisible Pot Addicts. See NYT editorial “Marijuana Damages Young Brains.” If we have time, we will also see Netflix documentary The Grass Is Greener.

December 2 Chromebook In-Class Writing: Your objective is to write an introduction and a thesis.

December 4 Chromebook In-Class Writing: Your objective is to write 4 supporting paragraphs.

December 9 Chromebook In-Class Writing: Your objective is to write your counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, and Works Cited page.

December 11 Essay 5 is due on turnitin. In class, we will grade Portfolio #2, which consists of homework reading responses 10-14.

Option A

Develop an argumentative thesis that analyzes the intersection of tribalism and fake facts as anti-vaxxers bring disease back to the world. Consult the following: “The Real Horror of Anti-Vaxxers” by Frank Bruni, Michelle Au’s fear tactic essay in Slate, John Oliver video on vaccinations. See Bulwark “Contagion of Folly.” See New York Times logical fallacies video. Also see "Why Vaccination Refusal Is a White Privilege Problem."

Also take note:

In Peter Beinart's "What the Measles Epidemic Really Says About America," we have an excellent analysis of how the measles epidemic points to a larger breakdown of American society.

This is a compelling work that relates to essay assignment on Anti-Vaxxers.

Variation of Option A

Defend or refute the claim made in "The Anti-Vaxxers Spreading Measles in Portland Should be Arrested" by Patrick A. Coleman.

According to Frank Bruni, we are beyond a public health crisis. We are in the realm of a public sanity crisis with people following the advice of hacks and charlatans and believing in this fake intel over the scientific community.

Sample Outlines for Anti-Vaxxer Topic

Outline #1

Paragraph 1, Introduce the crisis of resurgence of diseases we thought we had conquered like measles. Or describe the growing fear between vaccines and autism.

Paragraph 2, transition to a thesis that argues the breakdown of sanity that informs the Anti-Vaxxer movement.

Paragraphs 3-6 should analyze 4 major causes of the bipartisan tribalism and anti-science that informs the Anti-Vaxxer movement.

Paragraphs 7 and 8 should be counterargument-rebuttal paragraphs.

Paragraph 9, your conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Outline #2

Paragraph 1: Introduce the crisis of resurgence of diseases we thought we had conquered like measles. Or describe the growing fear between vaccines and autism.

Paragraph 2, transition to a thesis in which you defend or refute the claim made in "The Anti-Vaxxers Spreading Measles in Portland Should be Arrested" by Patrick A. Coleman.

Paragraphs 3-6 should be your supporting paragraphs.

Paragraphs 7 and 8 should be your counterargument-rebuttal paragraphs.

Paragraph 9: Conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Causes of Resurgence of Measles

According to Peter Beinart, there are several causes of this resurgence:

One. Lack of historical memory. Many don't know how horrible it was to suffer outbreak of measles, polio, and other diseases.

Two. Many people have "over confidence in their own amateur knowledge," and at the same time, these same people disdain expertise.

Three. American spirit of "autonomy and personal choice" confuses many who think that ignoring science is a way of asserting their freedom and individuality.

Four. Many have diminished trust in government, which is looked upon as a conspiratorial hornet's nest to be held in contempt.

Five. Many have a diminished trust in media. Conservatives say the media is "owned by the libs." Liberals say the media is owned by giant conglomerates and "Big Pharma."

Six. There is rising faith in alternative medicine. One visible example is Steve Jobs who after getting cancer consulted alternative therapies and only pursued mainstream medical attention when it was too late.

Seven. There is confusion between causation and correlation when it comes to autism. Most people are diagnosed with autism at two to three years of age, the time when people get vaccinated, so many parents confuse the vaccinations with being the cause of the autism when it is really a correlative connection, but anecdotal testimony creates overwhelming fear so that parents make fear-based decisions rather than science-based ones.

Eight. Social media spreads fake Intel that becomes people's reality. For example, there is thimerosal scare. Thimerosal is a preservative in vaccines.

Nine. Many Europeans share the same mindset described above, so that international travel between the States and Europe is spreading measles.

Sample Outlines for Anti-Vaxxer Topic

Outline #1

Paragraph 1, Introduce the crisis of resurgence of diseases we thought we had conquered like measles. Or describe the growing fear between vaccines and autism.

Paragraph 2, transition to a thesis that argues the breakdown of sanity that informs the Anti-Vaxxer movement.

Paragraphs 3-6 should analyze 4 major causes of the bipartisan tribalism and anti-science that informs the Anti-Vaxxer movement.

Paragraphs 7 and 8 should be counterargument-rebuttal paragraphs.

Paragraph 9, your conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Outline #2

Paragraph 1: Introduce the crisis of resurgence of diseases we thought we had conquered like measles. Or describe the growing fear between vaccines and autism.

Paragraph 2, transition to a thesis in which you defend or refute the claim made in "The Anti-Vaxxers Spreading Measles in Portland Should be Arrested" by Patrick A. Coleman.

Paragraphs 3-6 should be your supporting paragraphs.

Paragraphs 7 and 8 should be your counterargument-rebuttal paragraphs.

Paragraph 9: Conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Posted at 11:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

1A Agenda 11-13-19: Alfie Kohn "From Degrading to Degrading," "Why Can't Everyone Get A's?"

Essay Assignment 4: Due November 25

Option A

See Monica Lewinsky Ted Talk video “The Price of Shame” and John Oliver video on “Public Shaming” and develop an argumentative thesis about what type of shaming is good for society and what kind of shaming cannot be defended. Consult Conor Friedersdorf essay “John Oliver’s Weak Case for Callout Culture.”

Option B

Read Kajsa Elas Ekman’s essay “All surrogacy is exploitation” and write an argumentative thesis that supports or refutes her claim.

Option C

Develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the human inclination for staying within the tribe of sameness as explained in David Brooks’ “People Like Us.” Consult Vice video about social media and tribalism; also consult Brian Klaas video on how tribalism in social media is undermining democracy. Also consult the role of Backfire Effect and tribalism.

Option D

Develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the claim that community college should be free. Be sure to have a counterargument section. For research, use Rahm Emanuel’s “A Simple Proposition to Revive the American Dream” and Jay Mathews’ “Maybe tuition-free community college comes at too high a price” and any other credible sources.

Option E

Support, refute, or complicate Harlan Coben’s argument from “The Undercover Parent” that spyware is a legit and compelling safety measure that parents may need to use for their children’s computers.

Option F

In context of Alfie Kohn’s “From Degrading to De-Grading,” support, refute, or complicate Alfie Kohn’s assertion that grading is an inferior education tool that all conscientious teachers should abandon. In other words, will students benefit from an accountability-free education? Why? Explain.

Option G

Watch The Game Changers on Netflix and develop an argument that either supports the claim that the documentary makes a persuasive case for a plant-based vegan diet or the assertion that the documentary is a work of cheap propaganda.

October 21 Essay 3 Due on turnitin. See Monica Lewinsky Ted Talk video “The Price of Shame” and John Oliver video on “Public Shaming” and develop an argumentative thesis about what type of shaming is good for society and what kind of shaming cannot be defended. If we have time, we will go over Kajsa Elas Ekman’s essay “All surrogacy is exploitation” and address essay strategies. Homework #10 is to read David Brooks’ Atlantic essay “People Like Us” and explain why we gravitate people who share our values.

October 30 We will go over “People Like Us” and watch two videos about social media and tribalism from Vice News and Brian Klaas. If we have time, we will go over surrogacy essay topic. Homework #11: Write 200-word paragraph that explains the free community college debate covered by Rahm Emanuel’s “A Simple Proposition to Revive the American Dream” and Jay Mathews’ “Maybe tuition-free community college comes at too high a price.”

November 4 Go over free community college debate. Your homework #12 for next class is to read Harlan Coben’s argument from “The Undercover Parent” and in 200 words argue if spyware is a legit and compelling safety measure that parents may need to use for their children’s computers.

November 6 Go over “The Undercover Parent.” Homework #13 is to read Alfie Kohn’s “From Degrading to De-Grading” and explain in 200-word paragraph how Kohn supports his claim that grades are bad for education.

November 11 Veteran’s Day Holiday

November 13 Go over “From Degrading to De-Grading” and Alfie Kohn’s “Why Can’t Everyone Get A’s?”

November 18 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write an introduction, thesis, and two supporting paragraphs.

November 20 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write supporting paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, Works Cited page.

November 25 Essay #4 due on turnitin.

“From Degrading to De-grading” by Alfie Kohn 238-250

Also by Alfie Kohn: "Why Can't Everyone Get A's?"

One. Kohn asserts that good teachers de-emphasize grades and that bad teachers, who even lack a conscience, emphasize grades. How compelling is his argument?

Some would accuse him of an over simplification and an either/or fallacy. “Either you drink my Kool-Aid and stop using grades, or you are proving to be a horrible, immoral teacher."

This extreme position, many would say, is an oversimplification and a form of bullying, evidence of a false prophet.

Furthermore, the “three effects of grading” that Kohn refers to could be disputed.

For example, we read, “Grades tend to reduce students’ interest in the learning itself.” What’s the baseline of interest that Kohn assumes will deteriorate if we push grades on students? Is there a baseline? If there is, he doesn't define it in any way.

He also claims that students will shy away from challenging tasks and suffer the reduction of “quality” thinking.

Again, Kohn is throwing an either/or fallacy in our face: Either hold students accountable with grades and suck the creativity out of their learning or cut out grades altogether and inject creativity into their learning. Why can’t there be a balance of both?

Two. What Are Some Possible Refutations of Kohn? (A Defense of Grading)

1. Competition from grading prepares students for real world.

2. Not all students try and perform equally. Those who are superior, as a result of their hard work, should enjoy seeing their hard work rewarded with higher grades.

3. It’s human nature to be motivated by the carrot and the stick. Kohn is living in a candy-coated dream world that ignores the realities of human nature.

4. Grades are not perfect, but they are an important motivational tool.

5. Grades are not perfect, but they do help show the “cream rising to the top,” an important process in any meritocracy. A meritocracy is a society that rewards the people based on merits.

6. It turns out that Kohn also is against homework. Thus, it appears he subscribes to the Cult of Academic Relaxation, a form of “creative laxity,” which I oppose.

7. Kohn's argument contradicts empirical evidence: In my 30 years of teaching, A students tend to be responsible; C and D students tend to be less responsible.

Three. What does Kohn mean when he says grades "spoil relationships with students"?

He uses an anecdote of a teacher whose instruction has been reduced to fanatical grading and that is served as evidence that grading is this monster that takes over teaching. In other words, he uses an extreme example to argue against grading. That's a logical fallacy.

Then there's the argument that a teacher should be less of a grader and more of a friend. Is this a good idea?

What if the student doesn't want to comply with his "friend's" educational goals?

The student might say to the teacher, "Sorry, friend, I don't feel like writing my Works Cited page."

Four. What is the Maternal Fallacy and how does this fallacy apply to Kohn?

The Maternal Fallacy is the emphasis on nurture and protection at the exclusion of discipline and control, qualities associated with the Patriarch or father figure. "Education should be a place of nurture and unconditional acceptance," says this line of thinking. "We don't want to traumatize the students by judging them harshly and hurting their self-esteem."

But in fact coddling students like this makes them weak and helpless in the real world. Creating dysfunctional citizens with no skills for the real world is hardly serving them.

In an affluent society in which the young generation have a foundation of basics in math and writing, some of Kohn's maternal outlets for creative freedom are valid. However, in the absence of these basic skills, grading and basics in education are sometimes necessary.

Five. Would you be more motivated if you did not receive grades? Explain.

Answers may vary.

For me personally, if I had an interest in the class, I might not need to be motivated so much by grades as much as I would be seeking approval from the instructor. But if the class were a requirement outside my sphere of interest, I might not do anything.

Six. Is it fair to compare grading to a polluted city or is this rhetorical demagoguery? Explain.

Circular reasoning or logic embedded in the premise of the comparison, which is a fallacy.

"Wearing diamonds is equal to killing slave children in Africa," it could be argued, has more of a basis in reality than Kohn's statement above.

Summarize Kohn's Arguments

“Grades tend to reduce students’ interest in the learning itself” (238).

“Grades tend to reduce students’ preference for challenge tasks” (239).

“Grades tend to reduce the quality of students’ thinking” (239).

“Grades aren’t valid, reliable, or objective” (240).

“Grades encourage cheating” (241).

“Grades spoil teachers’ relationships with students” (241).

Sample Responses

Student Who Disagrees with Kohn

My experience as a student contradicts everything Kohn tries to say. I’ve walked into classes with absolutely no interest in the subject, but because I had a gun to my head, that is the pressure of grades pointing at my temple, I forced myself to get acquainted with the material. Contrary to Kohn, my being forced to know the material made me respect and like the subject matter far more than a situation in which I knew I would not be graded. Without the pressure of grades, I would remain ignorant of the subject, and that ignorance would perpetuate my lack of interest in the material.

Kohn’s second assertion is that grading will discourage me from embracing challenging tasks. He’s assuming that without grades, I’d be more inclined to take intellectual and creative risks. He is wrong. When I was a college student, I was lazy and was not predisposed to taking on any kind of challenge. The path of least resistance was my work ethic. Grades or not, I was an incurably lazy human being. If anything, I needed grades to prompt me off my butt and to do some actual homework.

Kohn’s third assertion is that grading will compromise my critical thinking skills. Again, I don’t think Kohn knows what he’s talking about. When I was in college, I had no critical thinking skills to lose. Grades were hardly the reason I was so ignorant. My youthful naiveté, my laziness, and my being sheltered in the suburbs had far more to do with my lack of critical thinking skills than any teacher’s grading system.

Kohn’s fourth argument is that grading is not a reliable system because the teachers can be biased, unfair, and use unreliable grading measures. I’ll admit these are possible scenarios, but in my years at high school and college, it seems that over 95% of the time, students did indeed get the grades they deserved. If there is a five percent error, that is hardly sufficient reason for dumping grades.

Kohn goes on to say that grades encourage cheating and spoil students’ relationship with teachers. Of course, a grading system is going compel students to cheat. They want to be up to par with the A students whose A performance has earned them top honors. Any system with a top and a bottom is going to have cheaters. To deny that reality is to try to create a world that does not exist. And that world is the one provided by Alfie Kohn.

Regarding the final point about our relationship with teachers, Kohn is assuming there is this great relationship that is forged without grades and that grades spoils the deal. Again, he is in error. We are not friends with the teachers. They are hired to do what they do because of their presumed expertise and authority in the subject. They are our guides and mentors, and their grading system is their way of showing us how well we are at reaching the benchmarks that are part of each class. Kohn’s assertion that these benchmarks measured by a grading system is a degradation of the student-teacher relationship has no bearing in reality and again shows that he is trying to impose an artificial world on the real one. For all these reasons, I have dismissed Kohn convincingly. Can we move on to a new topic, please? (avoid hubris in the conclusion)

Student Defense of Alfie Kohn

Alfie Kohn is trying to save education from being a terrible place of fear, elitism, and students being helpless pawns before their maniacal teachers who use grades to bully, control, and traumatize their students.

First off, everyone knows that grades are unfair. Teachers don’t really care how well you write. All they care about is that you agree with them, so you spend your time kissing up to them, trying to make your essays reflect what your instructors say in the class.

Secondly, Kohn is right that grades reduce interest. How can you focus on the subject with any interest when you’re always worried about achieving a 4.0 so that you can get into a good university? Interest is irrelevant. It’s all about the grades. And seeing some students get As while others get Cs is traumatizing for the lower students who feel stigmatized and shamed, often wearing these negative emotions for the rest of their lives. How dare we let teachers have so much power over our self-esteem. We should cut their grading power out from under them just as Alfie Kohn says we should.

Third, Kohn is so correct to point out that grading makes us students avoid challenging approaches to the subject matter. We always seek the easiest path to The Land of A. Why take risks by doing something more challenging than we have to?

Finally, what kind of relationship can I have with my teachers when I fear their power over me? Their grade determines my place in the world. One wrong move and my life as a successful banker could be diminished to a milk truck driver. It’s impossible to develop strong relationships with figures that wield so much power. Therefore, I commend Alfie Kohn for telling us to stop the insanity, cut out grades, and bring real education back to the classrooms.

Refutation of the Above Response

While I concede that there are too many teachers who want their students to regurgitate their ideas rather than think critically for themselves, the rest of the student’s defense of Alfie Kohn is a mishmash of egregious fallacies, clichés, and sloppy thinking, all of which serves to highlight Kohn’s dangerous arguments for ending grading systems as we know them.

Perhaps the biggest danger is this idea that we are hurting students’ self-esteem and subjecting them to lifelong traumas by judging them with clear benchmarks to see if they are fulfilling course requirements. The sentiment of preserving self-esteem has everything to do with the fantasy of staying home in the safety of Mother’s House and nothing to do with the reality of competing in the real world. The fantasy of preserving the Big Baby for eternity is typically an upper class one. Narcissistic, well-to-do parents who can’t accept the foibles of their “perfect” Junior want teachers who can only mutter obsequious flattery, and if their grading system in any way is less than flattering, then clearly grading, as Kohn argues, is the enemy of all: self-esteem, creativity, student interest, the buddy-buddy relationship with student and teacher.

Of course, this fantasy bears no resemblance to the real world. Imagine a jiu-jitsu instructor who elevates his students’ self-esteem by giving everyone a black belt. The tournament comes along and that instructor’s students have to spar with real black belts. I think we all know what the outcome will be.

Kohn is the instructor who’d love to give everyone a black belt, which of course is a fantasy, and a dangerous one at that.

Break Down the Assignment into Your Own Words

We're asked in the prompt to explain, perhaps in one sentence, what Kohn means when he says we must move from a grade to a learning orientation. Clearly, a grading orientation for Kohn excludes learning. We have to explain why Kohn believes this and then explain whether or not we agree with him.

Student Refutation of Kohn

Kohn has created a false opposition, between grading and learning, to propel is phony argument that grades are a plague ruining schools and minds. What Kohn and his ilk are afraid of is this big scary thing called judgment. Grades are a form of judgment, and judgments for Kohn are a very scary thing because they take a child’s fragile self-esteem, Kohn’s view, and dismantle it.

I’ve got some scary news for Kohn. Judgment is here to stay. Judgment is everywhere. Judgment is how we survive. Judgment is how we flourish. And judgment is how we measure our educational success. When we choose toothpaste or a cold cereal or a web browser, or a laptop, or a smartphone, or a boyfriend, or a girlfriend, we exercise judgment. When a university picks students from a pool of community college students, the university exercises judgment.

Kohn’s argument is so removed from reality that it seems he must live inside a bubble in which he talks only to himself or his Kool-Aid drinking believers. Grades aren’t going anywhere. Grades are a normal part of the judgment process. And Kohn’s fantasy of taking judgment out of the education process is so lunatic that he is nothing more than a provocateur and a demagogue whose flea-sized arguments will be crushed in the elephantine marketplace of real ideas.

Alfie Kohn's "Why Can't Everyone Get A's?"

For a generation now, school reform has meant top-down mandates for what students must be taught, enforced by high-stakes standardized tests and justified by macho rhetoric — “rigor,” “raising the bar,” “tougher standards.”

Here’s a thought experiment. Suppose that next year virtually every student passed the tests. What would the reaction be from politicians, businesspeople, the media? Would these people shake their heads in admiration and say, “Damn, those teachers must be good!”?

Of course not. Such remarkable success would be cited as evidence that the tests were too easy. In the real world, when scores have improved sharply, this has indeed been the reaction. For example, when results on New York’s math exam rose in 2009, the chancellor of the state’s Board of Regents said, “What today’s scores tell me is not that we should be celebrating,” but instead “that New York State needs to raise its standards.”

The inescapable, and deeply disturbing, implication is that “high standards” really means “standards that all students will never be able to meet.” If everyone did meet them, the standards would just be ratcheted up again — as high as necessary to ensure that some students failed.

The standards-and-accountability movement is not about leaving no child behind. To the contrary, it is an elaborate sorting device, intended to separate wheat from chaff. The fact that students of color, students from low-income families and students whose first language isn’t English are disproportionately defined as chaff makes the whole enterprise even more insidious.

But my little thought experiment uncovers a truth that extends well beyond what has been done to our schools in the name of “raising the bar.” We have been taught to respond with suspicion whenever all members of any group are successful. That’s true even when we have no reason to believe that corners have been cut. In America, excellence is regarded as a scarce commodity. Success doesn’t count unless it is attained by only a few.

One way to ensure this outcome is to evaluate people (or schools, or companies, or countries) relative to one another. That way, even if everyone has done quite well, or improved over time, half will always fall below the median — and look like failures.

Consider widespread complaints about a supposed epidemic of “grade inflation” in higher education, a claim often accompanied by indignant expostulations about young people’s sense of entitlement. The reality is that even if more students today really are getting A’s — arguably a dubious claim if we look at transcript data rather than self-reports, by the way — that doesn’t prove these grades are inflated.

But here’s the key point: Many critics don’t even bother to assert that grades have risen over time or are undeserved. They simply point to how many students (in a given class or school) get A’s right now, as if a sufficiently high number was objectionable on its face.

As Richard Kamber, a philosopher at the College of New Jersey, sees it, “If grades are to have any coherent meaning, they need to represent a relative degree of success.”

The goal, in other words, isn’t to do well but to defeat other people who are also trying to do well. Grades in this view should be used to announce who’s beating whom. And if the students in question have already been sorted by the admissions process, well, they ought to be sorted again. A school’s ultimate mission, apparently, is not to help everyone learn but to rig the game so that there will always be losers.

This makes no sense in any context. Perhaps, for example, we can justify rating states or nations based on the quality of their air, health care or schools, but ranking them is foolish. Relative performance tells us nothing of interest because all of them may be shamefully low — or impressively high — on whatever measure we’re using. Comparative success just gives the winner bragging rights (“We’re No. 1!”). And again, it creates the misleading impression of inevitable, permanent failure for some.

But boy, do we love to rank. Worse, we create artificial scarcity by giving out awards — distinctions manufactured out of thin air specifically so that some cannot get them.

Framing excellence in these competitive terms doesn’t lead to improvements in performance. Indeed, a consistent body of social science research shows that competition tends to hold us back from doing our best. It creates an adversarial mentality that makes productive collaboration less likely, encourages gaming of the system and leads all concerned to focus not on meaningful improvement but on trying to outdo (and perhaps undermine) everyone else.

Most of all, it encourages the false belief that excellence is a zero-sum game. It would be both more sensible and more democratic to rescue the essence of the concept: Everyone may not succeed, but at least in theory all of us could.

Study the Templates for Counterargument-Rebuttal Section of Essay

While the author’s arguments for meaning are convincing, she fails to consider . . .

While the authors' supports make convincing arguments, they must also consider . . .

These arguments, rather than being convincing, instead prove . . .

While these authors agree with Writer A on point X, in my opinion . . .

Although it is often true that . . .

While I concede that my opponents make a compelling case for point X, their main argument collapses underneath a barrage of . . .

While I see many good points in my opponent’s essay, I am underwhelmed by his . . .

While my opponent makes some cogent points regarding A, B, and C, his overall argument fails to convince when we consider X, Y, and Z.

My opponent makes many provocative and intriguing points. However, his arguments must be dismissed as fallacious when we take into account W, X, Y, and Z.

While the author’s points first appear glib and fatuous, a closer look at his polemic reveals a convincing argument that . . .

Option E

Support, refute, or complicate Harlan Coben’s argument from “The Undercover Parent” that spyware is a legit and compelling safety measure that parents may need to use for their children’s computers.

Suggested Outline:

Paragraph 1: Either summarize Coben's essay or write an anecdote about a child getting into trouble using the internet.

Paragraph 2: Agree or disagree with Coben's claim and explain your reasons.

Paragraphs 3-5: Your supporting paragraphs.

Paragraphs 6 and 7: Your counterarguments and rebuttals.

Paragraph 8: Your conclusion, a powerful restatement of your thesis.

Option G

Watch The Game Changers on Netflix and develop an argument that either supports the claim that the documentary makes a persuasive case for a plant-based vegan diet or the assertion that the documentary is a work of cheap propaganda.

Suggested Outline:

Paragraph 1, your introduction, summarize the documentary's major claims.

Paragraph 2, your thesis, argue how persuasive the documentary was in presenting its claim that all people, including athletes, should embrace a vegan plant-based whole food diet. Be sure to address the criticisms on various online reviews, including YouTube reviews, in your thesis.

Paragraphs 3-7 are your supporting paragraphs.

Paragraph 8: Your counterargument-rebuttal.

Paragraph 9: Your conclusion is a powerful restatement of your thesis.

"The Undercover Parent"

Example of an essay that acknowledges opposing views: Harlan Coben’s “The Undercover Parent” (24)

Not long ago, friends of mine confessed over dinner that they had put spyware on their 15-year-old son’s computer so they could monitor all he did online. At first I was repelled at this invasion of privacy. Now, after doing a fair amount of research, I get it.

Make no mistake: If you put spyware on your computer, you have the ability to log every keystroke your child makes and thus a good portion of his or her private world. That’s what spyware is — at least the parental monitoring kind. You don’t have to be an expert to put it on your computer. You just download the software from a vendor and you will receive reports — weekly, daily, whatever — showing you everything your child is doing on the machine.

Scary. But a good idea. Most parents won’t even consider it.

Maybe it’s the word: spyware. It brings up associations of Dick Cheney sitting in a dark room, rubbing his hands together and reading your most private thoughts. But this isn’t the government we are talking about — this is your family. It’s a mistake to confuse the two. Loving parents are doing the surveillance here, not faceless bureaucrats. And most parents already monitor their children, watching over their home environment, their school.

Today’s overprotective parents fight their kids’ battles on the playground, berate coaches about playing time and fill out college applications — yet when it comes to chatting with pedophiles or watching beheadings or gambling away their entire life savings, then...then their children deserve independence?

Some will say that you should simply trust your child, that if he is old enough to go on the Internet he is old enough to know the dangers. Trust is one thing, but surrendering parental responsibility to a machine that allows the entire world access to your home borders on negligence.

Some will say that it’s better just to use parental blocks that deny access to risky sites. I have found that they don’t work. Children know how to get around them. But more than that — and this is where it gets tough — I want to know what’s being said in an e-mail and instant messages and in chat rooms.

There are two reasons for this. First, we’ve all read about the young boy unknowingly conversing with a pedophile or the girl who was cyberbullied to the point where she committed suicide. Would a watchful eye have helped? We rely on the real world on teachers and parents to guard against bullies — do we just dismiss bullying on the Internet and all it entails because we are entering difficult ethical ground?

Second, everything your child types can already be seen by the world — teachers, potential employers, friends, neighbors, future dates. Shouldn’t he learn now that the Internet is not a haven of privacy?

One of the most popular arguments against spyware is the claim that you are reading your teenager’s every thought, that in today’s world, a computer is the little key-locked diary of the past. But posting thoughts on the Internet isn’t the same thing as hiding them under your mattress. Maybe you should buy your children one of those little key-locked diaries so that they too can understand the difference.

Am I suggesting eavesdropping on every conversation? No. With new technology comes new responsibility. That works both ways. There is a fine line between being responsibly protective and irresponsibly nosy. You shouldn’t monitor to find out if your daughter’s friend has a crush on Kevin next door or that Mrs. Peterson gives too much homework or what schoolmate snubbed your son. You are there to start conversations and to be a safety net. To borrow from the national intelligence lexicon — and yes, that’s uncomfortable — you’re listening for dangerous chatter.

Will your teenagers find other ways of communicating to their friends when they realize you may be watching? Yes. But text messages and cell phones don’t offer the anonymity and danger of the Internet. They are usually one-on-one with someone you know. It is far easier for a predator to troll chat rooms and MySpace and Facebook.

There will be tough calls. If your 16-year-old son, for example, is visiting hardcore pornography sites, what do you do? When I was 16, we looked at Playboy centerfolds and read Penthouse Forum. You may argue that’s not the same thing, that Internet pornography makes that stuff seem about as harmful as “SpongeBob.”

And you’re probably right. But in my day, that’s all you could get. If something more graphic had been out there, we probably would have gone for it. Interest in those, um, topics is natural. So start a dialogue based on that knowledge. You should have that talk anyway, but now you can have it with some kind of context.

Parenting has never been for the faint of heart. One friend of mine, using spyware to monitor his college-bound, straight-A daughter, found out that not only was she using drugs but she was sleeping with her dealer. He wisely took a deep breath before confronting her. Then he decided to come clean, to let her know how he had found out, to speak with her about the dangers inherent in her behavior. He’d had these conversations before, of course, but this time he had context. She listened. There was no anger. Things seem better now.

Our knee-jerk reaction as freedom-loving Americans is to be suspicious of anything that hints at an invasion of privacy. That’s a good and noble thing. But it’s not an absolute, particularly in the face of the new and evolving challenges presented by the Internet. And particularly when it comes to our children.

Do you tell your children that the spyware is on the computer? I side with yes, but it might be enough to show them this article, have a discussion about your concerns and let them know the possibility is there.

Harlan Coben Acknowledges Opposing Views

In paragraph 1, his gut reaction was to reject his friend’s use of spyware on his children’s computers.

In paragraphs 2 and 3, Coben concedes that it is scary to contemplate the ability to invade your child’s privacy with spyware, but he says it’s worth it.

In paragraph 4, he concedes that this is a scary totalitarian tactic that “reeks of Dick Cheney” but he counters by writing we’re not the government; we’re parents.

In paragraph 5, he makes a comparison argument: “parents fight their kids’ battles on the playground, berate coaches about playing time and fill out college applications—yet when it comes to chatting with pedophiles or watching beheadings . . . then their children deserve independence?”

In paragraph 6, he addresses the rebuttal that we should “just trust” our children, but he rejects this notion because we’re not talking about trust; we’re talking about neglect: “surrendering parental responsibility to a machine that allows the entire world access to your home borders on negligence.”

In paragraph 7, he counters the claim that parental blocks, not spyware, should be used by saying that he tried parental blocks, and they do not work. For example, they do not work with cyber-bullying or cyber-pedophiles.

In paragraph 9, he makes the rebuttal that the Internet already violates privacy; children should learn that the Internet is “not a haven of privacy.”

In paragraph 10, Coben rejects the comparison of private thoughts kept in a diary with Internet activities.

In paragraph 11, Coben distinguishes the notion of “being responsibly protective and irresponsibly nosy.”

In paragraph 12, Coben shows that texting on a phone is less dangerous than the Internet because the latter is more porous, allowing thousands of predators into the child’s world.

Coben concedes in paragraph 13, that there will be tough choices. At what point does a child’s curiosity for porn cross the line?

Coben concludes by saying freedom and privacy are not absolutes; they are relative terms that have to be addressed in a radically different way in our Internet age.

Letter of Rebuttal

Counterargument

In “The Undercover Parent” (Op-Ed, March 16), the novelist Harlan Coben writes that putting spyware on a child’s computer is a “good idea.”

As a mother and advice columnist for girls, I disagree. For most families, spyware is not only unnecessary, but it also sends the unfortunate message, “I don’t trust you.”

Mr. Coben said a friend of his “using spyware to monitor his college-bound, straight-A daughter, found out that not only was she using drugs but she was sleeping with her dealer.” He confronted her about her behavior. “She listened. There was no anger. Things seem better now.”

Huh?! No anger? No tears or shouting or slammed doors? C’mon. If only raising teenagers were that simple.

Parenting is both a job and a joy. It does not require spyware, but it does require love, respect, time, trust, money and being as available as possible 24/7. Luck helps, too.

Carol Weston
New York, March 16, 2008

Assumptions in Carol Weston's letter:

One. She assumes that proclaiming herself to be a mother and an advice columnist for girls gives her credibility and superior moral standing. Some might say, her opening phrase sounds cliched and pompous.

Two. She assumes that spyware means "I don't trust you." That assumption could be in error. The parent could be saying, "I don't trust predators."

Three. She assumes that because the parent used spyware to catch his daughter using drugs and sleeping with the drug dealer that the discovery is somehow compromised because it hurt the daughter's feelings. This assumption is erroneous. The girl's welfare, not her feelings about getting caught or invasion of privacy, are the priority.

Four. When she lectures Coben by writing, "Parenting is both a job and a joy," she is implicitly saying that Coben is ignorant of the hard work and joys of parenting. In fact, she has proven neither. Again, she comes across as a pompous, ignorant scold.

Five. When she lectures Coben by saying parenting requires "love, respect, time, trust," she again implies that Coben is abnegating his parental responsibilities by using spyware. To the contrary, Coben has made the case that Internet predators make spyware another took parents must use their toolbox to protect their children. Carol Weston's letter is not only wrong; it's insufferable.

Dannielle Thompson Analysis:

Analysis of "The Undercover Parent"

In Harlen Coben's The Undercover Parent, Coben argues in favor of spyware being applied to the computers of children. He claims that spyware will allow the parent to protect the child from himself/herself as the parent will be able to see every keystroke that the child makes. In doing so, the parents would be able to protect their children from tragic events such as, the author mentions, "gambling away their entire life savings" or having a child being "cyber bullied until the point where she committed suicide". According to Coben, spyware on computers would, in fact, help to prevent situations such as these.

Although Coben mentioned many points, he fails to include several factors in his argument. Coben acknowledges the fact that teenagers will find other ways to communicate once they learn that parents are watching. He argues against this valid point by stating "text messages and cellphones do not offer the anonymity and danger of the Internet". Although cellphones may not offer quite as much anonymity, the dangers of cellphones are rather equivalent, if not higher than the Internet. An example would include one of my former classmates. She was dating a boy in middle school and entrusted him with graphic photos and videos that she sent him on her cellular device. Four years later, one particular video of her was found on a website and the majority of her classmates as well as faculty had either seen or heard about the video. Although the video was found on a website, the video was first sent between two preteens' cellphones. There was no anonymity. However, Coben fails to acknowledge the fact that not only are strangers dangerous, but people of which one may trust can be equally dangerous. Incidents such as these are far from rare among teenagers.

Coben argues further to acknowledge parents' role in spyware and apply accountability on their behalf as well. He makes the assertion that "With new technology comes new responsibility... There is a fine line between responsibly protective and irresponsibly nosy... you're listening for dangerous chatter". Although this is a good point. Coben fails to clarify the definition of "dangerous chatter". This definition may be widely varied in the millions of homes across the nation. Coben lists a few examples of nosy irresponsibility such as "Mrs. Peterson gives too much homework" or "what schoolmate snubbed your son". However, cyber bullying and snubbing are very similar. Both attacks the confidence of the victim. Both are simply harsh words. Therefore, would snubbing be just as dangerous as cyber bullying? The phrase "dangerous chatter" has not been made clear and this phrase can be widely interpreted.

Although these are simply a few points in Coben's essay that are questionable, the topic is one worthy of consideration. However, spyware is not practical, or necessary, in order to provide a nurturing, safe, and protected household. Simply providing an open avenue of communication between children and parents could be the key to a happy household.

McMahon's Thesis

While I would be tempted to put spyware on my daughters' computers as a way of repelling predators, I would not do so, as Coben advocates, for several reasons. One, the spyware might lull me into a false comfort and impede me from communicating with my daughters about the dangers of indiscreet internet activities; two, if I violated my daughters' trust, I may compel them to turn away from me, and find more insidious ways to do internet communications that jail break my spyware; third, a prison-like security environment in my daughters' internet landscape strikes me as the kind of overkill that overprotective fathers use who alienate their children.

Checklist for Evaluation Letters of Response (or any rebuttal for that matter)

What assumptions does the letter-writer make? Do you share those assumptions?

What is the writer’s claim?

In what ways does the writer consider the audience?

What evidence, if any, does the writer offer to support the claim?

Is there anything about the style of the letter—the distinctive use of language, the tone—that makes the letter especially engaging or especially annoying?

A Checklist for Examining Assumptions

What assumptions does the writer's argument presuppose?

Are these assumptions explicit or implicit?

Are these assumptions important to the author's argument or only incidental?

Does the author give any evidence of being aware of the hidden assumptions in her argument?

Would a critic be likely to share these assumptions, or are they exactly what a critic would challenge?

What sort of evidence would be relevant to supporting or rejecting these assumptions?

Am I willing to grant the author's assumptions? Would most readers gran them? If not, why not?

Posted at 01:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

1A Agenda 11-6-19: Transitions; Spyware Debate

Essay Assignment 4: Due November 25

Option A

See Monica Lewinsky Ted Talk video “The Price of Shame” and John Oliver video on “Public Shaming” and develop an argumentative thesis about what type of shaming is good for society and what kind of shaming cannot be defended. Consult Conor Friedersdorf essay “John Oliver’s Weak Case for Callout Culture.”

Option B

Read Kajsa Elas Ekman’s essay “All surrogacy is exploitation” and write an argumentative thesis that supports or refutes her claim.

Option C

Develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the human inclination for staying within the tribe of sameness as explained in David Brooks’ “People Like Us.” Consult Vice video about social media and tribalism; also consult Brian Klaas video on how tribalism in social media is undermining democracy. Also consult the role of Backfire Effect and tribalism.

Option D

Develop an argumentative thesis that addresses the claim that community college should be free. Be sure to have a counterargument section. For research, use Rahm Emanuel’s “A Simple Proposition to Revive the American Dream” and Jay Mathews’ “Maybe tuition-free community college comes at too high a price” and any other credible sources.

Option E

Support, refute, or complicate Harlan Coben’s argument from “The Undercover Parent” that spyware is a legit and compelling safety measure that parents may need to use for their children’s computers.

Option F

In context of Alfie Kohn’s “From Degrading to De-Grading,” support, refute, or complicate Alfie Kohn’s assertion that grading is an inferior education tool that all conscientious teachers should abandon. In other words, will students benefit from an accountability-free education? Why? Explain.

Option G

Watch The Game Changers on Netflix and develop an argument that either supports the claim that the documentary makes a persuasive case for a plant-based vegan diet or the assertion that the documentary is a work of cheap propaganda.

October 21 Essay 3 Due on turnitin. See Monica Lewinsky Ted Talk video “The Price of Shame” and John Oliver video on “Public Shaming” and develop an argumentative thesis about what type of shaming is good for society and what kind of shaming cannot be defended. If we have time, we will go over Kajsa Elas Ekman’s essay “All surrogacy is exploitation” and address essay strategies. Homework #10 is to read David Brooks’ Atlantic essay “People Like Us” and explain why we gravitate people who share our values.

October 30 We will go over “People Like Us” and watch two videos about social media and tribalism from Vice News and Brian Klaas. If we have time, we will go over surrogacy essay topic. Homework #11: Write 200-word paragraph that explains the free community college debate covered by Rahm Emanuel’s “A Simple Proposition to Revive the American Dream” and Jay Mathews’ “Maybe tuition-free community college comes at too high a price.”

November 4 Go over free community college debate. Your homework #12 for next class is to read Harlan Coben’s argument from “The Undercover Parent” and in 200 words argue if spyware is a legit and compelling safety measure that parents may need to use for their children’s computers.

November 6 Go over “The Undercover Parent.” Homework #13 is to read Alfie Kohn’s “From Degrading to De-Grading” and explain in 200-word paragraph how Kohn supports his claim that grades are bad for education.

November 11 Veteran’s Day Holiday

November 13 Go over “From Degrading to De-Grading” and Alfie Kohn’s “Why Can’t Everyone Get A’s?”

November 18 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write an introduction, thesis, and two supporting paragraphs.

November 20 Chromebook In-Class Writing Objective: Write supporting paragraphs, counterargument-rebuttal paragraph, conclusion, Works Cited page.

November 25 Essay #4 due on turnitin.

Transition Word List 1

Transition Word List 2

Example of an Essay That Never Uses First, Second, Third, Fourth, Etc., for Transitions, But Relies on "Paragraph Links"

Stupid Reasons for Getting Married

People should get married because they are ready to do so, meaning they're mature and truly love one another, and most importantly are prepared to make the compromises and sacrifices a healthy marriage entails. However, most people get married for the wrong reasons, that is, for stupid, lame, and asinine reasons.

Alas, needy narcissists, hardly candidates for successful marriage, glom onto the most disastrous reasons for getting married and those reasons make it certain that their marriage will quickly terminate or waddle precariously along in an interminable domestic hell.

A common and compelling reason that fuels the needy into a misguided marriage is when these fragmented souls see that everyone their age has already married—their friends, brothers, sisters, and, yes, even their enemies. Overcome by what is known today as "FOMO," they feel compelled to “get with the program" so that they may not miss out on the lavish gifts bestowed upon bride and groom. Thus, the needy are rankled by envy and greed and allow their base impulses to be the driving motivation behind their marriage.

When greed is not impelling them to tie the knot, they are also chafed by a sense of being short-changed when they see their recently-married dunce of a co-worker promoted above them for presumably the added credibility that marriage afforded them. As singles, they know they will never be taken seriously at work.

If it's not a lame stab at credibility that's motivating them to get married, it's the fear that they as the years tick by they are becoming less and less attractive and their looks will no longer obscure their woeful character deficiencies as age scrunches them up into little pinch-faced, leathery imps.

A more egregious reason for marrying is to end the tormented, off-on again-off-on again relationship, which needs the official imprimatur of marriage, followed by divorce, to officially terminate the relationship. I spoke to a marriage counselor once who told me that some couples were so desperate to break-up for good that they actually got married, then divorced, for this purpose.

Other pathological reasons to marry are to find a loathsome spouse in order to spite one’s parents or to set a wedding date in order to hire a personal trainer and finally lose those thirty pounds one has been carrying for too long.

Envy, avarice, spite, and vanity fuel both needy men and women alike. However, there is a certain type of needy man, whom we'll call the Man-Child, who finds that it is easier to marry his girlfriend than it is to have to listen to her constant nagging about their need to get married. His girlfriend’s constant harping about the fact their relationship hasn’t taken the “next logical step” presents a burden so great that marriage in comparison seems benign. Even if the Man-Child has not developed the maturity to marry, even if he isn’t sure if he’s truly in love, even if he is still inextricably linked to some former girlfriend that his current girlfriend does not know about, even if he knows in his heart of hearts that he is not hard-wired for marriage, even if he harbors a secret defect that renders him a liability to any woman, he will dismiss all of these factors and rush into a marriage in order to alleviate his current source of anxiety and suffering, which is the incessant barrage of his girlfriend’s grievances about them not being married.

Indeed, some of needy man’s worst decisions have been made in order to quell a discontented woman. The Man-Child's eagerness to quiet a woman’s discontent points to a larger defect, namely, his spinelessness, which, if left unchecked, turns him into the Go-With-the-Flow-Guy. As the name suggests, this type of man offers no resistance, even in large-scale decisions that affect his destiny. Put this man in a situation where his girlfriend, his friends, and his family are all telling him that “it’s time to get married,” and he will, as his name suggests, simply “go with the flow.” He will allow everyone else to make the wedding plans, he’ll let someone fit him for a wedding suit, he’ll allow his mother to pick out the ring, he’ll allow his fiancé to pick out the look and flavor of the wedding cake and then on the day of the wedding, he simply “shows up” with all the passion of a turnip.

The Man-Child's turnip-like passivity and his aversion to argument ensure marital longevity. However, there are drawbacks. Most notably, he will over time become so silent that his wife won’t even be able to get a word out of him. Over the course of their fifty-year marriage, he’ll go with her to restaurants with a newspaper and read it, ignoring her. His impassivity is so great that she could tell him about the “other man” she is seeing and he wouldn’t blink an eye. At home he is equally reticent, watching TV or reading with an inexpressive, dull-eyed demeanor suggestive of a half-dead lizard.

Whatever this reptilian man lacks as a social animal is made up by the fact that he is docile and is therefore non-threatening, a condition that everyone, including his wife, prefers to the passionate male beast whose strong, irreverent opinions will invariably rock the boat and deem that individual a troublemaker. The Go-With-the-Flow-Guy, on the other hand, is reliably safe and as such makes for controlling women a very good catch in spite of his tendency to be as charismatic and flavorful as a cardboard wafer.

A desperate marriage motivation exclusively owned by needy, immature men is the belief that since they have pissed off just about every other woman on the planet, they need to find refuge by marrying the only woman whom they haven’t yet thoroughly alienated—their current girlfriend. According to sportswriter Rick Reilly, baseball slugger Barry Bonds’ short-lived reality show was a disgrace in part because for Reilly the reality show is “the last bastion of the scoundrel.” Likewise, for many men who have offended over 99% of the female race with their pestilent existence, marriage is the last sanctuary for the despised male who has stepped on so many women’s toes that he is, understandably, a marked man.

Therefore, these men aren’t so much getting married as much as they are enlisting in a “witness protection program.” They are after all despised and targeted by their past female enemies for all their lies and betrayals and running out of allies they see that marriage makes a good cover as they try to blend in with mainstream society and take on a role that is antithetical to their single days as lying, predatory scoundrels.

The analogy between marriage and a witness protection program is further developed when we see that for many men marriage is their final stab at earning public respectability because they are, as married men, proclaiming to the world that they have voluntarily shackled themselves with the chains of domesticity in order that they may be spared greater punishments, the bulk of which will be exacted upon by the women whom they used and manipulated for so many years.

Because it is assumed that their wives will keep them in check, their wives become, in a way, equivalent to the ankle bracelet transmitters worn by parolees who are only allowed to travel within certain parameters. Marriage anchors man close to the home and, combined with the wife’s reliable issuing of house chores and other domestic duties, the shackled man is rendered safely tethered to his “home base” where his wife can observe him sharply to make sure he doesn’t backslide into the abhorrent behavior of his past single life.

Many men will see the above analysis of marriage as proof that their fear of marriage as a prison was right all along, but what they should learn from the analogy between marriage and prison is that they are more productive, more socialized, more softened around his hard edges, and more protected, both from the outside world and from themselves by being shackled to their domestic duties. With these improvements in their lives, they have actually, within limits, attained a freedom they could never find in single life.