Links to articles for essay 1

“Why the Supreme Court Should Rule that Video Games Are Free Speech” by Daniel Greenberg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/29/AR2010102905315.html

"Daring to Discuss Women in Science” by John Tierney
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/science/08tier.html?_r=2

“‘Daring to Discuss Women in Science’: A Response” by Caroline Simard
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/caroline-simard/daring-to-discuss-women-i_b_605303.html

“Our Gas Guzzlers, Their Lives” by Nicholas Kristof
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/28/opinion/28kristof.html

“Carbon Neutral Is Hip, but Is It Green?” by Daniel Revkin
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/weekinreview/29revkin.html?pagewanted=all

Essay 1 – Rhetorical Analysis

“To analyze an argument rhetorically means to examine closely how it is composed and what makes it an effective or ineffective piece of persuasion. A rhetorical analysis identifies the text under scrutiny, summarizes its main ideas, presents some key points about the text’s rhetorical strategies for persuading its audience, and elaborates on these points.”                               -- Ramage, Bean, and Johnson in Writing Arguments

Read the essay “

Your essay should explain the argument presented in the article and evaluate its effectiveness in persuading its audience of its central claim and reasons. Your essay should identify at the outset the audience at which the piece is aimed, its argumentative purpose, and its central argument.  Once you have identified these concerns, evaluate the rhetorical effectiveness of the given text.  A rhetorical analysis examines 1) the writer’s use of the three rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, and logos); 2) the arrangement and style of the piece; 3) the context (kairos) of the piece (use what you know and what is in the textbook about the piece only, as research is not a component of this assignment). 

To earn a passing grade, your essay should include:

1.     A title!

2. An introduction that identifies your article and sets up your argument about the article.
3. A thesis that evaluates the effectiveness of the article based on the author’s use of rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos), style, and context.
4. Effectively organized paragraphs with strong topic sentences and transitions.
5. Analysis of examples from the article (summaries and paraphrases in your own words and sentence structure, as well as some brief, correctly integrated direct quotations).

6.     A conclusion that provides closure to the essay and considers the implications of the argument.

7.     Consistent, correct use of MLA style, including

1. Proper MLA in-text citations for all paraphrases and direct quotations from the article (see pp. 384-7) and
2. A Works Cited page in correct MLA format (which does NOT count towards your page minimum) since you will be quoting from your article (see pp. 387-96). Your only source will be your article. No other research is allowed.

8.     Adherence to the conventions of standard written English.

Prewriting:

1. Choose an article and read it over carefully a few times. 
2. Free write on your response to the argument made in the article.  What is the argument? Did the author convince you of the argument? Why or why not?  Be specific.
3. Free write or brainstorm responses to each of the following questions: 

a.     How does the author present her- or himself as credible (ethos)?  Does this strategy work? Why or why not?

b.     How does the author use emotional appeals (pathos)?  Are such appeals effective?  Why or why not?

c.     Does the author use sound reasoning (logos) to present the argument?  Identify and discuss a few examples. Be specific.

d.     How is the argument organized? Is this effective? Why or why not? 

e.     How would you describe the style of the article? Is it aimed at a particular audience? Is the style effective?

f.      What does the author do to frame the context (kairos) of the piece?  Is this effective? Explain.

4.     List 4 quotes you might use in your essay, and explain how each one relates to your assessment of the author’s use of ethos, pathos, logos, or kairos.

5.     Write a possible thesis for your essay.

Due Dates: 

Prewriting/Outline (5%): To receive full credit, you must bring your prewriting to class and participate in the prewriting/outline workshop. No credit for late prewriting!

Rough Draft (5%): Your rough draft must be typed and double-spaced (Be sure to save it somewhere you can easily find it. If you don’t have your own computer, email it to yourself!).  To receive full credit, you must bring your draft to class and participate in the draft workshop. No credit for late drafts!

Final Draft (90%): Bring a paper copy in class and uploaded to Turnitin.com before class. Please put your final draft in this order: (1) clean, revised draft of your essay, (2) rough draft with peer comments on it, (3) the peer review sheets your group gave you, and (4) your prewriting. Please do not put your paper in any kind of folder. A corner staple will be fine. 

Before you turn in your essay, you will be given 5-10 minutes to write a brief cover letter for your paper (you may prepare your cover letter in advance, if you wish). In your cover letter, you should reflect on your writing process and identify issues you especially want your reader to respond to. You may explain what you were trying to achieve with your essay, what you feel you did well, and/or what you had trouble with.  

Aristotle and Arguments

Aristotle’s categories for basic appeals in arguments:

Emotional appeals (also known as pathos) play to the reader’s feelings and values.

            Example: In an argument for health care reform, the writer presents a story about one family suffering under the current system that evokes the reader’s sympathy and sense of fairness. 

Ethical appeals (also known as ethos) seek to establish the credibility of the writer as trustworthy.

            

Example: The writer cites a source that the reader trusts; the writer gives the reader a sense that complete facts are being presented and/or all sides of an issue are being treated fairly. 

Logical appeals (also known as logos) use reasoning and logic to make their points.

            Example: The writer makes strong logical connections between steps of her argument, such as clearly explaining how a cause produces a particular effect. The writer supports her claim with convincing factual evidence. 

Reading Analysis Questions

Guidelines for Reading Analysis Presentations 1 & 2

Sign-up for one reading during Week 1 and one reading during Week 2. Make a note of the article titles and presentation dates that you sign up for below.

Reading analysis 1 article: __________________________   Presentation date: _______________

Reading analysis 2 article: __________________________   Presentation date: _______________

You will be presenting your analysis in class along with two to five of your classmates. The class will be counting on you to be on top of the article you are covering, so please be prepared!

This assignment is worth 40 points – to receive credit, you must participate in the presentation of your analysis. You will be graded primarily on your written analysis (breakdown of scoring below), but outstanding presentations will be rewarded.

Before you begin your work, examine the Evaluating Arguments handout. 

Read the article you will be analyzing carefully. If possible, read it twice. On your first reading, just try to identify the main idea(s) and get a feel for the writer’s approach and the flow of the piece. On your second reading, go over the text more carefully; notice how the writer constructs his or her argument. You will probably want to mark up your text and/or take notes.

To prepare your written analysis:

Identify the author’s name and the title of the article. Answer the following questions. Put your answers in outline form (see sample analysis on the reverse side of this sheet).

1.     What is the central claim (or thesis) of the selection? Your answer should be a complete sentence in your own words (not a quote!). Be as specific as possible, but remember that your claim should cover the whole article. (12 points)

2.     Is the central claim expressed explicitly or implicitly? The claim is explicit if the writer spells out what it is. The claim is implicit if the writer only implies the claim but does not state it outright. (2 points)

3.     What reasons link the evidence to the claim? In other words, why does the evidence support the claim? Reasons may be presented explicitly or implied. (8 points)

4.     What evidence does the writer present to support his or her claim? Specify and categorize the evidence (e.g. examples, personal experiences, analogy, authoritative opinion, facts, statistical data, cause-effect reasoning, results of scientific experiments, comparison, interviews, etc. – see sample on back). Do not answer this question with detailed quotes or paraphrases from the article! For additional guidance, see the table of Kinds of Evidence on pp. 91-4 of your textbook Writing Arguments. (10 points)

5.     Comment briefly on the persuasiveness of the article by answering one or more of the following questions.  (5 points)

·       Is the argument convincing? Does it rely on emotional, ethical, and/or logical appeals?

·       Are there flaws in the reasoning of the argument? Does it rely on questionable sources? 

·       Does understanding the argument require knowledge of the historical or cultural context in which it was written?

·       How do the style, organization, and/or tone contribute or detract from the persuasiveness of the argument?

·       What is your personal reaction to the article?

6.     Write two to three discussion questions to ask the class about the article. The best questions will stimulate interesting discussion about the issues raised in the article. You may also ask questions that “test” your classmates’ recall and understanding of the article. (3 points)

SAMPLE ANALYSIS of “The Myth of ‘Practice Makes Perfect’” by Annie Murphy Paul

Central claim: Mastery of a skill demands deliberate practice, focusing on improving weak areas, rather than just spending time repeating the activity (Explicit).

Reason: Improvement at a skill only occurs when the practitioner works to notice and eliminate errors through practice.

Evidence: 

• Authoritative opinion from cognitive psychologist Gary Marcus argues that deliberate practice is much more effective than unfocused just-for-pleasure practice.
• Marcus cites studies that show that working to improve weaknesses is more likely to result in improvement than just spending more time practicing.
• Authoritative opinion from a 1993 Anders Ericsson paper suggests that although practice focusing on fixing errors may not be the most enjoyable, it is probably the most effective. 
• Research on practice sessions of pianists published in the Journal of Research in Music Education indicates that the best pianists put a stronger focus on immediately fixing errors so they do not occur again.  

Comment: The argument is fairly persuasive because, as presented, it makes good logical sense (logos = logical appeal) and basically validates my personal experiences. The results of the studies on the musicians’ practices made the argument much more credible (ethos = ethical appeal) and convincing to me. In fact, I would have liked hearing about the studies in more detail. I liked the author’s use of the example of learning to play an instrument because I could relate to it (pathos = emotional appeal) and it made the argument more “real” for me. Perhaps, for the same reason, the article might be less interesting and compelling to someone without any formal musical experience.

Discussion questions: 

• Have you found focusing on correcting errors to be a more effective learning strategy than practicing for fun? 
• When you’re learning something new, do you find yourself putting effort into correcting mistakes or practicing what you’re already good at?

The Myth of Practice Makes Perfect

by Annie Murphy Paul

How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, practice. In a groundbreaking paper published in 1993, cognitive psychologist Anders Ericsson added a crucial tweak to that old joke. How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Deliberate practice.

It’s not a minor change. The difference between ineffective and effective practice means the difference between mediocrity and mastery. If you’re not practicing deliberately — whether it’s a foreign language, a musical instrument or any other new skill — you might as well not practice at all.

I was reminded of the importance of deliberate practice by a fascinating new book, Guitar Zero: The New Musician and the Science of Learning. Its author is Gary Marcus, a cognitive psychologist at New York University who studies how the brain acquires language. Marcus is also a wannabe guitarist who set out on a quest to learn to play at age 38. In Guitar Zero he takes us along for the ride, exploring the relevant research from neuroscience, cognitive science and psychology along the way. One of his main themes is the importance of doing practice right.

“Hundreds of thousands of people took music lessons when they were young and remember little or nothing,” he points out, giving lie to the notion that learning an instrument is easiest when you’re a kid. The important thing is not just practice but deliberate practice, “a constant sense of self-evaluation, of focusing on one’s weaknesses, rather than simply fooling around and playing to one’s strengths. Studies show that practice aimed at remedying weaknesses is a better predictor of expertise than raw number of hours; playing for fun and repeating what you already know is not necessarily the same as efficiently reaching a new level. Most of the practice that most people do, most of the time, be it in the pursuit of learning the guitar or improving their golf game, yields almost no effect.”

So how does deliberate practice work? Anders Ericsson’s 1993 paper makes for bracing reading. He makes it clear that a dutiful daily commitment to practice is not enough. Long hours of practice are not enough. And noodling around on the piano or idly taking some swings with a golf club is definitely not enough. “Deliberate practice,” Ericsson declares sternly, “requires effort and is not inherently enjoyable.” Having given us fair warning, he reveals the secret of deliberate practice: relentlessly focusing on our weaknesses and inventing new ways to root them out. Results are carefully monitored, ideally with the help of a coach or teacher, and become grist for the next round of ruthless self-evaluation.

It sounds simple, even obvious, but it’s something most of us avoid. If we play the piano — or, like Marcus, the guitar — or we play golf or speak French, it’s because we like it. We’ve often achieved a level of competency that makes us feel good about ourselves. But what we don’t do is intentionally look for ways that we’re failing and hammer away at those flaws until they’re gone, then search for more ways we’re messing up. But almost two decades of research shows that’s exactly what distinguishes the merely good from the great.

In an article titled “It’s Not How Much; It’s How,” published in the Journal of Research in Music Education in 2009, University of Texas-Austin professor Robert Duke and his colleagues videotaped advanced piano students as they practiced a difficult passage from a Shostakovich concerto, then ranked the participants by the quality of their ultimate performance. The researchers found no relationship between excellence of performance and how many times the students had practiced the piece or how long they spent practicing. Rather, “the most notable differences between the practice sessions of the top-ranked pianists and the remaining participants,” Duke and his coauthors wrote, “are related to their handling of errors.”

The best pianists, they determined, addressed their mistakes immediately. They identified the precise location and source of each error, then rehearsed that part again and again until it was corrected. Only then would the best students proceed to the rest of the piece. “It was not the case that the top-ranked pianists made fewer errors at the beginning of their practice sessions than did the other pianists,” Duke notes. “But, when errors occurred, the top-ranked pianists seemed much better able to correct them in ways that precluded their recurrence.”

Without deliberate practice, even the most talented individuals will reach a plateau and stay there. For most of us, that’s just fine. But don’t delude yourself that you’ll see much improvement unless you’re ready to tackle your mistakes as well as your successes.

Syllabus English 101 #3182 Fall 2015

English 101 - College Reading and Composition I

Course Syllabus

Instructor: Tommy Amano-Tompkins                                     Term: Fall 2015

Section: 0919 – Th 6:45 pm - 9:55 pm                                                Location: NEA 205    

Office hours: Th 6:15-6:45 pm in NEA 205

Voicemail: (310) 233-4698, mailbox #4850   

Email: tomp99@earthlink.net (best way to communicate with me outside of class!)

Course Web site: Eng101F2015.blogspot.com

English 101 is a course in critical reading and prose writing designed to refine the student’s skills in thinking logically, reading carefully, and writing effectively. Stress is placed on the organization and composition of objective expository essays, including the research paper.

Prerequisite: Completion of English 28 or 31 with a “C” or better or appropriate score on assessment test.

Student Learning Outcomes:

Students who successfully complete English 101 should be able to

·      Apply critical reading/thinking/writing skills analyzing and writing, both in and out-of-class essays, about various freshman composition level readings including essays and the novel.

·      Demonstrate the ability to follow academic conventions by formatting expository essays, including page-layout, parenthetical citations and Works Cited entries, in the current standard MLA format.

·      Write freshman-level essays that follow the various stages of essay writing, including pre-writing, thesis development, illustration and support of the thesis using concrete, specific evidence/examples, editing, proofreading and which are free of most errors in syntax, grammar, punctuation, diction, and spelling.

·      Demonstrate understanding of effective college-level argumentation by producing logically supported arguments and by recognizing and avoiding common logical fallacies.

·      Produce a research paper, which utilizes the various elements of research production, such as designing a research plan, compiling research notes, producing an outline, developing a draft, producing a finished paper that utilizes at least five sources and has a complete MLA-formatted Works Cited page.

ADA Statement:

Students with disabilities, whether physical, learning, or psychological, who believe that they may need accommodations in this class, are encouraged to contact Special Programs & Services as soon as possible to ensure that such accommodations are implemented in a timely manner. Their phone number is 310-233-4620, and they are located in Cafeteria 108.

Required Texts: (available at the campus bookstore)

Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings by John C. Ramage, John C. Bean, & June Johnson

 – ISBN 0-205-17163-X

The Things They Carried by Tim O’Brien – ISBN: 0618706410

The Ethics of What We Eat by Peter Singer & Jim Mason – ISBN #: 1-59486-687-6

You will also need to purchase two blue exam books for in-class essays.

Bring your books, a notebook (or notebook paper), and a pen to every class meeting. To complete some assignments, you will need access to the Internet and to a computer word processor.

Students who succeed in English 101 usually choose to:                        **Read carefully!**

• Make a serious commitment to succeeding in this class.
• Come to class on time and prepared.
• Get the required texts as soon as possible.
• Do all the assignments, including readings, and keep up with the class schedule.
• Participate in class discussions and activities.
• Refrain from using their cell phones during class.
• Let me know immediately if they experience a problem with the class or if other areas of their lives seriously interfere with their ability to do their class work.
• Seek out all legitimate help with their course work, if they need it, including the Writing Lab, Special Programs & Services, campus librarians, their textbooks, and me.

·      Maintain academic integrity by doing his or her own work. They do not plagiarize; they do not cheat. (See box on plagiarism on next page.)

• Treat their classmates and instructor with respect and consideration.
• Recognize that real learning is difficult – it involves making mistakes and taking risks.

If you are not willing to make these choices, you are not likely to succeed in this class!

I will be happy to meet with you to discuss your work in this course. I encourage you to visit me during office hours, but if that is not convenient for you, we can make an appointment to meet at another time.

Plagiarism can mean copying, word for word, all or part of something someone else has written and turning it in with your name on it. Plagiarism also includes using your own words to express someone else’s ideas without crediting the source of those ideas.

Plagiarism is a very serious form of academic misconduct. It’s both lying and stealing, and it’s a waste of time for students and teachers. College and departmental policy on plagiarism will be strictly enforced: Any student caught plagiarizing will automatically receive a zero for that assignment, with no possibility of making it up, and may be subject to a formal reprimand and/or suspension.

Cite your sources! Please retain all notes and drafts of your papers until grading for the course is completed.

Attendance/Tardiness

Attendance in class is mandatory. This is the college policy. If a student is absent for more than the hours than a class meets per week, or if there is irregular attendance or a pattern of absences, the instructor has sufficient cause to drop a student from the class. For example, if a course meets 3 hours a week, then a student is allowed a maximum of 3 absences. Students who enter the class after the official starting time will be marked for ½ an absence for that particular day.

If a student is absent from the first and/or second class meeting of the semester, then he or she will be dropped, because there are people who want to enroll. If you miss three classes during the semester, you will be dropped from the class.

Electronic Communication Devices Policy

According to Communications Division policy, electronic communication devices must remain off during class time. Exceptions may be considered by faculty consultation (i.e. family emergency). A first offense may result in the student being suspended from the class for one meeting. Repeated offenses may result in up to a 2-day suspension from the class pending a conference with the Vice President of Student Services.

Grading:

Your final grade in this class will be computed as follows.

Essays (2)                                                      30%                 300 points (150 points each)  

Prewriting/Outlines & Drafts                       4%                 40 (10 points per outline/draft)          

Research Paper                                                24%                 240                                   

Proposal, Outline, & Draft                           3%                  30  (10 points each)   

Reading Analysis Presentations (5)                 20%                 200 (40 points each)

Midterm (in-class essay)                                   10%               100                 

Quizzes                                                             5%                   50 (14 quizzes, 2-4 points each)

Participation                                                      4%                 _40 points

Total                                                                100%               1000 points

A = 90%   900-1000 points          B = 80%   800-899                             C = 70%   700-799

            D = 60%   600-699                      F = 50%    0-599

English 101 is a UC-CSU transferable course, so rigorous academic standards must be applied to grading your work. All assignments are required. In-class work, such as reading analysis presentations and quizzes, cannot be made up.

Missing assignments can significantly impact your grade and prevent you from passing the course. For example, if you fail to turn in one essay (worth 150 points) and one Reading Analysis Presentation (40 points), you will need to complete every other assignment with an average score of more than 87% in order to pass the class with a C (70%).

No late assignments will be accepted, unless an extension has been arranged with the instructor in advance.

Quizzes will be given at the beginning of the class session; students who are absent or arrive late may not make up quizzes, even if they have really good excuses. There will be other quizzes during the semester at random intervals.

Reading Analysis Presentation assignments: You are required to present your analysis of one of the assigned readings every few weeks for the duration of the class. There will be a sign-up sheet for each set of readings; in some cases, you may be assigned to analyze a specific reading. You must do your analysis on the reading you signed up for (or were assigned) – you may not switch to another reading without clearing it with your instructor before the class. Your written analysis is due the day you discuss discuss it in class, and you will present your findings to the class during our discussion of the reading. Late reading analyses will not be accepted. Guidelines for the reading analyses will be distributed separately.

Essays (including Research Paper) must be typed and formatted according to MLA (Modern Language Association) guidelines. For guidance, see the MLA Formatting and Style Guide at the Web site of the Purdue Online Writing Lab (http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01/ - link available on the course site). Papers must be written using Microsoft Word or Pages software. They must be submitted by email, unless another arrangement has been made. Late papers will receive an automatic 10% point deduction and will not be accepted later than one week after the original due date. The research paper will not be accepted late!

Turnitin.com: To verify the originality of writing submitted for this class, all essays must be uploaded to Turnitin.com. Turnitin.com will generate an originality report for the instructor identifying any borrowed material in student essays (borrowed material includes correctly documented quotes, as well as plagiarized material). In order to receive full credit, students must upload their essays to Turnitin.com before class on the day the assignment is due. No essay will be graded until it is uploaded to Turnitin.com.

Go to Turnitin.com to create a student profile. Use the following information to upload your essay:

                        Class ID: 10473902                            Enrollment password: 3182

Revising: You may revise one or both of the two take-home essays (not the research paper) and resubmit your work for a new grade. To improve your grade, you will need to do more than correct grammatical errors and reword or reorder a few phrases. Revision means a new vision; it means looking at your work with fresh eyes and reconsidering the content, focus, and organization of your essay. It may involve rethinking, as well as rewriting. You are strongly advised to consult with your instructor and/or the Writing Lab before you begin revising. Revised essays are due within one week of receiving your original essay back and must be accompanied by your original essay. Please do not revise and resubmit essays that receive a score of 90% or higher.

Los Angeles Harbor College Mission Statement

Los Angeles Harbor College promotes access and student success through associate and transfer degrees, certificates, economic and workforce development, and basic skills instruction. Our educational programs and support services meet the needs of diverse communities as measured by campus institutional learning outcomes.

Contact information for a few reliable classmates

___________________________________________________________________

Name                                                                            Phone                                        Email

___________________________________________________________________

Name                                                                            Phone                                        Email

___________________________________________________________________

Name                                                                            Phone                                        Email
Schedule of Topics, Readings, and Written Assignments (subject to change)

Date	Readings to be completed before class	Quizzes, exams, and major assignments
	Week 1
Thurs. 9/3	Handout: “The Myth of ‘Practice Makes Perfect’”	Writing diagnostic
	Week 2
Thurs. 9/10	Writing Arguments: Ch. 1 – Argument: An Introduction, pp. 2-22 Ch. 2 – Argument as Inquiry, pp. 23-50 “Violent Video Games Recruit American Youth,” William Lugo, pp. 459-64 “The Expanding World of Poverty Capitalism” by Thomas B. Edsall (search nytimes.com) **Last day to drop classes without a fee or a “W” is Sept. 10 (in-person) and Sept. 13 (online)	Quiz 1 (Reading Analysis 1)
	Week 3
Thurs. 9/17	Writing Arguments: Ch. 3 – The Core of an Argument: A Claim with Reasons, pp. 58-71 Ch. 4 – The Logical Structure of Arguments, pp. 72-88 Ch. 8 – Analyzing Arguments Rhetorically, pp. 156-74 Women in Math and Science, p. 535  “The Science of Difference: Sex Ed” by Steven Pinker, pp. 538-41 “Male Scientist Writes of Life as Female Scientist” by Shankar Vedantam, pp. 541-3	Quiz 2 (Reading Analysis 1)
	Week 4
Thurs. 9/24	Writing Arguments: Ch. 5 – Using Evidence Effectively, pp. 89-108 Ch. 6 – Moving Your Audience, pp. 109-23  “Sophia’s Choice: Problems Faced by Female Asylum-Seekers and Their U.S. Citizen Children” by Anita Ortiz Maddali, pp. 491-9 “Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Aid That Does Harm” by Garrett Hardin, pp. 595-602 Prewriting/Outline 1 Workshop	Quiz 3 Prewriting for Essay 1 (Reading Analysis 2)
	Week 5
Thurs. 10/1	Writing Arguments: Ch. 7 – Responding to Objections and Alternative Views, pp. 124-44  “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King, Jr. pp. 582-95 Draft 1 Workshop	Quiz 4 Draft of Essay 1 (Reading Analysis 2)
	Week 6
Thurs. 10/8	The Things They Carried:  pp. 1-64 (The Things They Carried… Enemies)	Quiz 5 Essay 1 due (Reading Analysis 3)
	Week 7
Thurs. 10/15	The Things They Carried:  pp. 65-116 (Friends… Sweetheart of the Song Tra Bong)	Quiz 6 (Reading Analysis 3) In-Class Essay

	Week 8
Thurs. 10/22	The Things They Carried:  pp. 117-136 (Stockings… Style) The Things They Carried:  pp. 137-180 (Speaking of Courage… Good Form) Prewriting/Outline 2 Workshop	Quiz 7 (Reading Analysis 3) Outline Essay 2
	Week 9
10/29	The Things They Carried:  pp. 181-246 (Field Trip… The Lives of the Dead) The Ethics of What We Eat:  Preface, pp. v-viii & Introduction, pp. 3-12 Draft 2 Workshop	Quiz 8 (Reading Analysis 3)
	Week 10 (check changes)
Thurs. 11/4	REWORKED SYLLABUS Writing Arguments:  Ch. 15 – Finding and Evaluating Sources, pp. 348-66 Discuss The Things They Carried (continue presentations, begin work on essay2)	Quiz 9 Brainstorm and Outline Essay2 (Reading Analysis 4)
	Week 11
Thurs. 11/12	MLA Cheat Sheet Writing Arguments: Ch. 16 – Incorporating Sources into Your Own Argument, pp. 367-82 Finish Things They Carried discussion The Ethics of What We Eat: Preface, pp. v-viii & Introduction, pp. 3-12 Ch 1-3 Ch. 4-5, pp. 42-80 Ch. 6-8, pp. 83-110	Quiz 10 Rough Draft of Essay 2  (Reading Analysis 4)
	Week 12
Thurs. 11/19	The Ethics of What We Eat: Ch. 9-10, pp. 111-150 Ch. 11-12, pp. 151-183 **Last day to drop classes with a “W” is Nov. 19 (in-person) and Nov. 22 (online)	Quiz 11 Final Draft of Essay 2 Research Proposal Handout: MLA  (Reading Analysis 5)
	Week 13
Thurs. 11/26	THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY – NO CLASS
	Week 14
Thurs. 12/3	Writing Arguments: Ch. 17 – Citing and Documenting Sources, pp. 383-96 The Ethics of What We Eat: Ch. 13-15, pp. 187-230	Quiz 12 Research paper outline (Reading Analysis 5)

	Week 15
Thurs. 12/10	The Ethics of What We Eat: Ch. 16-17, pp. 231-269 Ch. 18. pp. 270-284 Research Paper Draft Workshop	Quiz 13 Research paper draft (Reading Analysis 5)
	Finals Week
Thurs. 12/16	Present research papers	Research paper due