2025 Grading and Reflections for English 1A and 1C
Three essays:
200
200
240
Here's the breakdown of points needed for each grade based on a conventional grading scale for an essay worth 240 points:
- **A (90-100%)**: 216 - 240 points
- **B (80-89%)**: 192 - 215 points
- **C (70-79%)**: 168 - 191 points
- **D (60-69%)**: 144 - 167 points
- **F (below 60%)**: 0 - 143 points
This follows the traditional grading scale where each letter grade corresponds to a percentage range of the total points.
9 Building Blocks
9 times 40 equals 360
Here’s the breakdown for a 40-point writing assignment using conventional grading:
- **A (90-100%)**: 36 - 40 points
- **B (80-89%)**: 32 - 35 points
- **C (70-79%)**: 28 - 31 points
- **D (60-69%)**: 24 - 27 points
- **F (below 60%)**: 0 - 23 points
This maintains the standard percentage-based grading system.
English 1A Assignments
Essay 1: Should We Follow Our Passion?
Building Block #1 for 40 points: In a 300-word paragraph, write about the conflict you have between passion and practicality in the context of your college major.
Building Block #2 for 40 points: Write two paragraphs, 200 words each, that contrast the Passion hypothesis and the Career Craftsman Mindset based on two Cal Newport blog essays: “The Passion Trap” and “The Career Craftsman Manifesto.”
Building Block #3 for 40 points: Write a 200-word counterargument-rebuttal paragraph for your essay.
In a 1,700-word essay that adheres to current MLA format and provides a minimum of 4 sources for your Works Cited page, write an argumentative essay that defends, refutes, or complicates Cal Newport’s claim from his YouTube video "Core Idea: Don't Follow Your Passion," his online article “The Passion Trap” and "The Career Craftsman Manifesto" and Ali Adbaal's YouTube video "Follow Your Passion Is Bad Advice. Here's Why" that the career advice to follow your passion is dangerous and should be replaced by the craftsman mindset. Be sure to have a counterargument-rebuttal paragraph before your conclusion. Be sure to have a Works Cited page in MLA format with 4 sources.
Essay 2: Why Do We Study African American History?
Building Block #1 for 40 points: Reading Clint Smith’s essays “Monuments of the Unthinkable” and “Why Confederate Lies Live On” and write a 300-word paragraph that explains how we arrive at the tragedy of millions of Americans white-washing and romanticizing slavery, Jim Crow, the Lost Cause, and Confederate soldiers.
Building Block #2 for 40 points: Watch the YouTube video “Confederacy: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver” and write 2 paragraphs: The first paragraph, about 200 words, should address the two types of people who defend confederate monuments as being “honorable”: There are the coy, disingenuous apologists for confederate monuments and the sincerely dumb guy who lavishes love and honor on his ancestors who performed crimes against humanity. How are the coy apologists more odious than the sincerely dumb one? Explain in 200 words. In your second paragraph, also 200 words, explain how being a romantic for the Confederacy and the Lost Cause reveals both a lack of moral maturity and an abundance of tribalistic narcissism, which surely is a pestilence to society.
Building Block #3: Watch Childish Gambino’s YouTube video “This Is America” and in a 300-word paragraph, analyze the video as a prophetic warning of what happens to America if it gets lost in entertainment, smartphones, and materialism as distractions from the moral and educational calling Frederick Douglass struggled to preach during his world-wide campaign to end slavery and champion human rights. You can use this paragraph for your essay’s conclusion.
Essay 2: Why Do We Study African American History?
Using Frederick Douglass’ memoir and Clint Smith’s essays "Monuments to the Unthinkable" and "Why Confederate Lies Live On," Dave Pilgrim’s YouTube video “Jim Crow Museum” and Childish Gambino’s YouTube video “This Is America,” explore how African-American history functions as a critical tool against the dangers of historical revisionism and cultural forgetting.
Essay #3:
Essay Prompt: Groupthink and Peer Pressure Vs. Critical Thinking
Essay Prompt:
Groupthink and peer pressure often act as powerful forces that suppress critical thinking and moral development. In H.G. Wells' "The Country of the Blind,”, Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery,” Ursula K. LeGuin's "The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas,” and Anton Chekhov's "The Lady with the Dog,” the protagonists face societal pressures that challenge their ability to think critically and act morally. These stories explore how individuals navigate the conflict between societal norms and their own ethical compasses, and how the pressure to conform can either erode or sharpen one’s moral judgment.
In a 1,700-word essay, compare and contrast how these stories address the theme of groupthink and peer pressure as the enemies of critical thinking and moral development. In your analysis, consider the following points:
- How do societal norms and expectations shape the behavior and decisions of the characters in each story? How does groupthink suppress or challenge their ability to think independently?
- Explore how peer pressure or the fear of social ostracism impacts the moral choices of characters in these narratives. Do these pressures lead to moral compromise, or do they ultimately strengthen individual resolve?
- Compare how each story’s protagonist (or dissenters) responds to the collective beliefs of their society. Do they succumb to the pressures, resist, or find a middle ground?
- Discuss how the societies in the stories enforce conformity and whether the individuals who challenge these societal expectations experience personal growth or face dire consequences.
- Reflect on the broader implications of groupthink and peer pressure for critical thinking and moral development in modern society. How do these stories provide insight into the dangers of suppressing individual thought in favor of collective beliefs?
Use specific examples from each story to support your analysis, and in your conclusion, consider whether the resistance to societal norms, as seen in these stories, leads to true moral development or simply a different kind of isolation or compromise.
Building Block #1 for 40 points: Write a 300-word personal account describing a time when you compromised your morals and integrity due to peer pressure or groupthink. Reflect on the consequences of this decision and how it affected you afterward. Consider how the experience led to personal growth or a change in your behavior, and what you learned about standing up for your values even in the face of pressure from others.
Building Block #2 for 40 points: Write a 300-word paragraph explaining how the society in H.G. Wells' "The Country of the Blind" represents a false paradise. Focus on how this so-called utopia is built on the denial of truth and maintained by fear of any knowledge that challenges their worldview. Discuss how the inhabitants of this blind society reject the concept of sight, dismissing it as a dangerous delusion, and how this willful ignorance creates a rigid, closed-off world. Explain how this refusal to acknowledge reality transforms what could be a peaceful, harmonious community into a false paradise that stifles individuality and critical thinking, ultimately leading to a society that values conformity over truth.
Building Block #3 for 40 points:
Write two paragraphs addressing the following:
- In the first paragraph (about 300 words), compare the theme of sacrifice in Shirley Jackson's “The Lottery” and Ursula K. LeGuin's “The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas.” Focus on how each story uses sacrifice as a means of maintaining social cohesion and the moral implications of using an individual as a scapegoat for the collective good. Discuss the differences and similarities in how the two communities justify their actions and the roles that tradition, conformity, and morality play in sustaining these rituals of sacrifice.
- In the second paragraph (about 300 words), write a personal story about someone you know who was unfairly scapegoated, bullied, or ostracized in a social setting. Reflect on how this mistreatment served as a way of bringing others together, creating a "bonding session" at the expense of the individual. Consider how this event affected the person involved and what it revealed about group dynamics and the power of exclusion in social settings.
THESIS EXAMPLES FOR ESSAY PROMPT
Here are five sample thesis statements for the essay prompt:
- **"In H.G. Wells' *The Country of the Blind*, Shirley Jackson's *The Lottery*, Ursula K. LeGuin's *The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas*, and Anton Chekhov's *The Lady with the Dog*, groupthink and peer pressure are portrayed as corrosive forces that suppress individuality and moral development, forcing characters either to conform to societal norms or to suffer isolation as the price for critical thinking and ethical resistance."**
- **"While *The Country of the Blind* and *The Lottery* depict characters who are crushed by groupthink and peer pressure, *The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas* and *The Lady with the Dog* explore the potential for moral growth when individuals challenge societal norms, demonstrating that the path to ethical clarity often comes with the burden of alienation."**
- **"In each of the four stories, groupthink acts as a powerful force that discourages critical thinking, but while the protagonists in *The Lottery* and *The Country of the Blind* are unable to break free from the constraints of societal pressure, LeGuin and Chekhov's characters find a fragile freedom in rejecting their societies' moral compromises, at great personal cost."**
- **"H.G. Wells' *The Country of the Blind*, Shirley Jackson's *The Lottery*, Ursula K. LeGuin's *The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas*, and Anton Chekhov's *The Lady with the Dog* highlight how groupthink and peer pressure undermine moral development by creating environments in which individuals are forced to choose between ethical compromise and social alienation, illustrating the complex dynamics between individual morality and collective belief."**
- **"Though groupthink and peer pressure are universal themes across *The Country of the Blind*, *The Lottery*, *The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas*, and *The Lady with the Dog*, each story offers a unique perspective on how societal conformity stifles critical thinking, while the few who resist their communities' moral blindness are either punished, ignored, or left isolated in their pursuit of ethical clarity."**
Each of these thesis statements sets up a nuanced comparison of how the four stories handle groupthink, peer pressure, and moral development, offering a range of interpretive possibilities.
### **2-Hour Class Presentation Outline: Ursula K. LeGuin’s *"The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas"***
#### **I. Introduction (10 minutes)**
- **Overview of the Presentation**
- Introduce the primary focus: examining *The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas* through the lens of groupthink, peer pressure, and moral development.
- Briefly describe LeGuin’s story: Omelas as a utopian society built on the suffering of one child, and the choice some make to leave the city.
- Mention how the story fits within the broader discussion of groupthink and moral responsibility, in the context of the essay prompt comparing it to stories like *The Lottery* and *The Country of the Blind*.
#### **II. Story Summary and Worldbuilding (15 minutes)**
- **Key Plot Points**
- The utopia of Omelas and the people’s joy, prosperity, and peace.
- The hidden, suffering child whose misery sustains the utopia.
- The societal consensus: Omelas’ prosperity depends on ignoring the child’s suffering.
- The moral dilemma: some accept this trade-off, while a few quietly walk away.
- **Worldbuilding as a Narrative Tool**
- Explore how LeGuin builds Omelas as an idealized society, only to reveal its moral compromise.
- Discuss how the world of Omelas contrasts with other utopian/dystopian settings.
#### **III. Groupthink and Peer Pressure in Omelas (20 minutes)**
- **Definition of Groupthink**
- Briefly define groupthink and peer pressure for the students, referring to examples from modern society (e.g., social media echo chambers, cultural norms).
- **Omelas and Groupthink**
- Discuss how the citizens of Omelas engage in collective denial, accepting the suffering of the child as a necessity for the greater good.
- Explain the role of societal pressure in ensuring most of the citizens remain complicit in this system. The silence of the majority enables the perpetuation of suffering.
- **Peer Pressure and Social Acceptance**
- Discuss how societal values in Omelas suppress moral questioning and promote the status quo.
- Explore why so few people leave and how the fear of being an outsider may keep others complicit.
#### **IV. Moral Development and Individualism (25 minutes)**
- **Individual Moral Choices**
- Contrast the groupthink of Omelas with the individual decisions of those who walk away.
- Analyze the moral development of those who walk away: How does their rejection of the society’s values reflect their ethical evolution?
- **The Consequences of Rejecting Groupthink**
- Discuss the costs of moral integrity: The individuals who walk away are isolated, leaving the comfort and prosperity of Omelas behind.
- Pose the question: Does walking away constitute a true act of moral courage, or is it simply an escape from the burden of moral complicity?
- **The Ethical Dilemma: Utilitarianism vs. Deontology**
- Introduce the philosophical frameworks at play:
- **Utilitarianism**: The greatest good for the greatest number (the Omelas perspective).
- **Deontology**: The moral duty to avoid harming others, regardless of outcomes (those who walk away).
- Class discussion: Ask students whether Omelas’ trade-off is acceptable under utilitarian logic. What are the moral implications?
#### **V. Textual Analysis: Key Passages (20 minutes)**
- **Close Reading of Key Passages**
- Choose key excerpts from the story:
- Description of Omelas' utopia.
- The revelation of the suffering child.
- The description of those who walk away.
- Discuss the language and tone LeGuin uses to contrast the beauty of Omelas with the horror of the child’s suffering.
- Encourage students to reflect on how LeGuin’s use of ambiguity (e.g., not describing the fate of those who walk away) adds complexity to the moral dilemma.
#### **VI. Comparisons to Other Texts (15 minutes)**
- **Comparison with *The Lottery***
- Discuss how both stories feature collective moral blindness, with individuals either complicit in or rejecting the societal structure.
- Examine Tessie Hutchinson in *The Lottery* vs. those who walk away in Omelas. What do their actions say about moral responsibility?
- **Comparison with *The Country of the Blind***
- Analyze how both stories present societies that enforce conformity at the expense of individual truth or morality.
- How do the communities in Omelas and the blind society reject alternative ways of thinking?
#### **VII. Class Discussion: The Modern Relevance of Omelas (20 minutes)**
- **Group Discussion**
- Divide students into small groups and ask them to relate Omelas’ ethical dilemma to modern-day scenarios where collective well-being comes at the cost of individual suffering (e.g., sweatshops, environmental damage, systemic inequality).
- Ask: Can modern societies be compared to Omelas? Are we complicit in similar trade-offs?
- **Class Debate**
- Pose the question: Is it better to walk away, challenge the system, or find a way to live within it?
- Have students debate whether the ones who walk away are truly moral heroes or if they abandon their society without making real change.
#### **VIII. Conclusion and Reflection (15 minutes)**
- **Wrap-Up Discussion**
- Summarize the main points of the presentation, emphasizing the role of groupthink and peer pressure in maintaining the moral compromises of Omelas.
- Reflect on how LeGuin’s story challenges readers to examine their own complicity in unjust systems.
- **Exit Reflection**
- Have students write a brief reflection (2-3 sentences) on what they would do if they were citizens of Omelas. Would they stay, walk away, or challenge the system?
This structure allows students to deeply engage with the themes of groupthink, peer pressure, and moral development in *The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas*, and places it within the context of broader societal issues and comparisons to other texts.
***
English 1C
Essay 1: Do We Have Free Will in the Realm of Weight Management?
Write a 1,700-word argumentative essay that examines the claim that losing weight and keeping it off is often framed by an overly simplistic narrative centered on self-agency, nutrition literacy, and self-discipline, regardless of one's economic standing. Consider the arguments presented in Johann Hari’s “A Year on Ozempic Taught Me We’re Thinking About Obesity All Wrong”, Harriet Brown’s essay “The Weight of the Evidence,” and Sandra Aamodt’s essay *“Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet.” Reflect on the role of disposable income in accessing drugs like Ozempic and similar weight-loss treatments. In your essay, analyze whether the story of “staying in shape” is based on truth, or if it is a myth that oversimplifies complex issues and obscures inconvenient facts about weight management. Does the narrative of free will and healthy eating overlook the societal and economic forces—such as the addictive Industrial Food Complex and the Diabetes-Management Complex—that influence obesity and health outcomes? Be sure to include a Works Cited page in MLA format with at least 4 sources.
Building Block #1 for 40 points: Write a 300-word personal account about yourself or someone you know who struggled with being overweight and felt trapped in a cycle of shame. Describe how they embarked on a challenging journey to lose weight, following all the recommended guidelines and rules. However, despite their efforts, the stress of the process began to take a toll on their mental health, leading to feelings of frustration and exhaustion. Ultimately, maintaining the strict regimen became unsustainable, and they were forced to confront the limitations of their efforts. Reflect on the emotional impact of this experience and how it influenced their relationship with weight loss and self-image.
Building Block #2 for 40 points: In a 300-word paragraph, compare the impediments to losing weight as described in Harriet Brown’s essay “The Weight of the Evidence” and Sandra Aamodt’s essay “Why You Can’t Lose Weight on a Diet.”
Building Block #3 for 40 points: Write a 200-word counterargument-rebuttal for Essay 1.
Essay 2: Chimera
Essay Prompt
In F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “Winter Dreams”, Anton Chekhov’s “Gooseberries”, Nikolai Gogol’s “The Overcoat”, and the Black Mirror episode “Nosedive”, and the Netflix documentary FYRE, the pursuit of illusory ideals, or “chimeras,” leads the characters into a Faustian Bargain. They sacrifice their dignity and genuine human connections for unattainable fantasies of happiness. In doing so, they become emotionally detached, warped in their perception of reality, and ultimately unhinged by their single-minded obsessions.
In a 1,700-word essay, explore how these works illustrate the consequences of chasing illusions. Discuss how each character’s pursuit of a false ideal leads to alienation, a distorted sense of fulfillment, and emotional unraveling. Show how these sacrifices ultimately lead to a loss of personal dignity, leaving the characters in a state of derangement. Use specific examples from each story to support your analysis.
Building Block #1 for 40 points: In a 300-word paragraph, define a chimera and write about a chimera that you pursued and how your pursuit ended.
Building Block #2: In a 200-word paragraph, identify the parallels between Dexter Green’s and Akaky’s disconnection from reality in the stories “Winter Dreams” and “The Overcoat.”
Building Block #3: In a 200-word paragraph, identify the way social media creates unrealistic expectations in “Nosedive” and the Netflix documentary FYRE.
---
### **Suggested Outline:**
#### **I. Introduction**
- **A. Hook**: Introduce the concept of the “Faustian Bargain” and the pursuit of illusory ideals.
- **B. Background**: Briefly summarize the four works and how their protagonists chase false visions of happiness.
- **C. Thesis Statement**: When the characters in *“Winter Dreams”*, *“Gooseberries”*, *“The Overcoat”*, and *“Nosedive”* sacrifice their dignity and connection to others to pursue unattainable ideals, they find themselves in a distorted, unhinged state, having lost their sense of reality and fulfillment.
#### **II. F. Scott Fitzgerald’s *“Winter Dreams”***
- **A. Dexter Green’s Obsession with Judy Jones**
- Dexter’s fantasy of Judy as the embodiment of success and happiness.
- How Judy becomes his unattainable ideal, a "chimera" that distracts him from genuine relationships and fulfillment.
- **B. Consequences of Chasing the Ideal**
- Dexter's emotional detachment and ultimate disappointment when Judy does not live up to his idealized image.
- Loss of human connection and personal dignity in his pursuit of wealth and status.
#### **III. Anton Chekhov’s *“Gooseberries”***
- **A. Nikolai’s Dream of the Country Estate**
- Nikolai’s fixation on owning an estate as the key to his happiness, neglecting the realities of life.
- His distorted view of happiness, equating material wealth with personal fulfillment.
- **B. Emotional Detachment and Unhappiness**
- The emotional cost of Nikolai's obsession, his disconnection from others, and his smug satisfaction despite the suffering of those around him.
- How the pursuit of this dream leaves him in a warped, self-centered state.
#### **IV. Nikolai Gogol’s *“The Overcoat”***
- **A. Akaky Akakievich’s Obsession with the Overcoat**
- Akaky’s fixation on the overcoat as a solution to his social invisibility and emotional alienation.
- How the coat becomes a symbol of unattainable status, blinding Akaky to the realities of his life.
- **B. The Tragic Consequences of Chasing the Overcoat**
- The unraveling of Akaky’s life when his coat is stolen, leading to his emotional and physical breakdown.
- The loss of dignity and human connection, showing how his obsession distorts his view of happiness.
#### **V. *Black Mirror* Episode *“Nosedive”***
- **A. Lacie’s Obsession with Social Ratings**
- Lacie’s relentless pursuit of a high social rating and validation from others as a false ideal of happiness.
- The episode’s commentary on the destructive nature of chasing superficial approval.
- **B. Breakdown and Emotional Unraveling**
- How Lacie’s fixation on her social score leads to her mental breakdown and social alienation.
- The cost of sacrificing her dignity and authentic relationships for an illusory sense of success.
#### **VI. Comparative Analysis: The Faustian Bargain and Its Consequences**
- **A. Common Theme**: Discuss the common thread of sacrificing human dignity and connections for false ideals in all four works.
- **B. Emotional Detachment and Distorted Happiness**: Show how each character’s pursuit of their chimera leads to emotional unraveling and detachment from reality.
- **C. Loss of Dignity and Connection**: Explore how their single-minded obsessions alienate them from meaningful relationships, leading to a distorted sense of self and fulfillment.
#### **VII. Conclusion**
- **A. Restate the Thesis**: Reiterate how the characters in these works sacrifice their dignity and human connection to pursue illusory ideals, ultimately losing their grasp on happiness and reality.
- **B. Final Reflection**: Consider the broader implications of these stories—how chasing material or superficial ideals can lead to emotional and social isolation in contemporary society.
Comments