Writing and Reading Schedule
March 25 Frankl 1-40
March 27 Frankl 41-100
April 1 Frankl 101-150
April 3 Quiz 4 due in classroom
April 8 Frankl 151-end
April 10 Quiz 5 due in class
April 15 Essay 3 Peer Review. Bring typed essay to class.
April 17 Essay 3 due in class
April 22 Alexander 1-96
April 24 Alexander 97-177
April 29 Alexander 178-220
May 1 Alexander 221-end
May 6 Quiz 6 due in class
May 8 First 3 pages of essay typed for peer review questions
May 13 Essay 4 N-Z due in my office PE4
May 15 Essay 4 A-M due in my office PE4
Essay 3 for 180 points
Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl: Argumentation, Refutation
In a 1,000-word essay (4 pages), address the following in an argumentative essay:
Many argue that Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning is worthy manifesto that champions meaning as the antidote to the universal affliction, the existential vacuum. On the other hand, some critics dismiss Frankl’s message, arguing that meaning, as Frankl presents it, is the product of strict moral and religious dogma disguising itself as universal meaning; that Frankl’s critieria for meaning, Herculean in scope, is nearly impossible to adhere to; that unrealistic expectations for “Absolute Meaning” will lead to disappointment; that the obsessive search for meaning can be a neurosis that impedes us from living fully; and that, contrary to VK’s Gospel of Meaning, there are virtues, pleasures, and satisfactions from living a life in the existential vacuum and moral relativism that escape a rigid dogmatist such VK.
In an argumentative essay, evaluate the defenders and critics of VK and develop a thesis that takes one of the two positions.
Include no fewer than 3 research sources for your Works Cited page.
Essay 4 for 280 points
In a 1,200-word essay defend, critique, or outright refute Michelle Alexander's argument that mass incarceration represents the "New Jim Crow" by analyzing the legitimacy of her claims, the quality of her rhetoric and moral appeals, and by examining possible opposition to her logic and reasoning. Be sure you have a thesis statement with mapping components that will direct the organization of your essay.
Essay Requirements:
One. Students will express critical viewpoints and develop original thesis-driven arguments in response to social, political, and philosophical issues and/or to works of literature and literary theory. This argumentative essay will be well organized, demonstrate an ability to support a claim using analysis and elements of argumentation, and integrate primary and secondary sources.
Two. The paper should use at least three sources and 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.
Three. This paper will be approximately 4-5 pages in length, not including the Works Cited page, which is also required. The Works Cited page does NOT count toward length requirement.
Four. Within your argument, address issues of bias, credibility, and relevance.
Five. Analyze and employ logical structural methods such as inductive and deductive reasoning, cause and effect, logos, ethos, and pathos, and demonstrate understanding of formal and informal fallacies in language and thought.
Six. You must use MLA format for the document, in-text citations, and Works Cited page.
Seven. You must integrate quotations and paraphrases using signal phrases and analysis or commentary.
Eight. You must sustain your argument, use transitions effectively, and use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
Peer Review Have Been Culled from Dartmouth Institute for Writing and Rhetoric
Peer Review Questions
- Summarize the argument. If a reader has trouble summarizing the writer's argument, it's likely that the argument has a gap, or that its logic is unclear. Summarizing can help students to see where and how an argument has gone awry.
- Predict the argument. After reading only the paper's introduction and thesis, can a reader predict the argument to follow? If not, then perhaps the introduction has failed to frame the argument, or the thesis has failed to make its point. This exercise is fruitful because it helps students to assess the strengths and weaknesses of a paper's introduction and thesis sentence. They will also see the link between a good, clear introduction and the overall structure of an argument.
- Ask questions. The most important aims of the peer review are to get the student writer to understand how it is that her paper needs to be revised, and to determine strategies for that revision. Questions are a good way to encourage this process. Students can ask questions about parts of the paper that they don't understand; they can ask questions about the writer's process; they can ask questions about a writer's intention; they can ask about the writer's rhetorical strategies. All will get the conversation started and keep it lively.
- Reflect what the writer is trying to say. If a particular point is unclear, it can be useful to try to reflect that point back to the writer: "What you seem to be saying here is..." The writer will usually see that his point is unclear and can then consider how to communicate the point more effectively to the reader.
- Label problems. Student writers appreciate it when their peers take the time to find and to name the problems in their papers. Student reviewers can make a list of the problems they find on their peers' papers and can then work together with the writer to correct these problems. In this case, students are teaching good writing to their peers. If students need additional help they can consult a grammar handbook, confer with you, or see an RWIT tutor.
- Make suggestions. Student writers seek advice. They don't simply want to know what's wrong with their writing; they want to know how to fix it. Their peers should therefore be prepared to make suggestions for improvement. Note that we use the word "suggestions" in the plural: a peer reviewer should not insist on one solution to a problem. Rather, reviewers should offer several strategies for solving the problem, allowing the writer to determine which of these solutions might work best.
English 1C SLOs
English 1C Critical Thinking and Composition Students will:
One. Compose an argumentative essay that shows an ability to support a claim using analysis, elements of argumentation, and integration of primary and secondary sources.
Two. Identify and assess bias, credibility, and relevance in their own arguments and in the arguments of others, including primary and secondary outside sources.
Three. Organize an essay in proper MLA format and will also be technically correct in paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling, and usage.
English 1C Instructors Use an SLO (Student Learning Outcome) Check Form
SLO 1 (Thesis Support) Essay shows an ability to support a claim using analysis, elements of argumentation, and integration of primary and secondary sources. Acceptable/Unacceptable
SLO 2 (Critical Thinking) Argument reflects an ability to identify and assess bias, credibility, and relevance in their own arguments and in the arguments of others, including primary and secondary outside sources. Acceptable/Unacceptable
SLO 3 (MLA, grammar) Essay is well organized in proper MLA format AND is technically correct in paragraph composition, sentence structure, grammar, spelling, and usage. Acceptable/Unacceptable
Grading Template
Three 1,000-word essays, 180 points each
Final 1,200-word essay, 280 points
Six 300-word quizzes, 30 each, 180
6,000 words; 1,000 points
Comments