A Little Sum Sum I've Been Working On [Due: September 2005]

ENG 151
Writing as Reflective Action: A Reader
Paper Sequences
by Squirrleymojo


Sequence One: Exploring the Self
Readings: Robert Coles’ “Entitlement,” Annie Neeposh Iserhoff’s “Excerpts,” and bell hooks’ “Killing Rage.”
Paper One: Reflective Essay/Narrative on the Self, Focus on Cultural Blindness
[Prompt adapted from p. 145]
Write an essay in which you define cultural blindness by including examples from the three texts you have read and reflective examples from your own life’s situations. For example, examine your own life through the definition you come up with and consider such questions as how and when you might have been (or are) culturally blind. How does this blindness affect your life and your understanding of others?

Reading #1: Coles’ “Entitlement”
Prewriting: Learning to resource and reflect on what you already know [p. 19].
*Establish background on Coles and suggest topics/ideas to look for [p. 48].
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 4-5 passages.
Day One: Begin discussion w/dialogue journals.
“What” is being said? Summary.
Supporting what you know textually–“how do you get that?”
Connotation v denotation.
Work through Qs on p. 81-82, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: “How” does Coles establish meaning and purpose?
Objectivity v subjectivity. What counts as logos.
Methodology.
Anecdotal evidence.
Work through Qs on p. 82, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p.83]:
Write a description of your family life applying Coles’ arguments to yourself and the psychology and economic context of your childhood. To what things, rights, advantages did you feel “entitled,” and where did this sense of entitlement come from?
Reading #2: Iserhoff’s “Excerpts”
What is a personal narrative? Under what context does Iserhoff tell her story? How does Iserhoff’s perspective differ from Coles’ [p.84]?
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 3-4 passages.
Day One: Sharing from journals.
“What” is being said? Summary.
World views.
Explicit & implicit arguments and meanings.
Work through Qs on p. 99, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: Who is shaping meaning, and how?
Tone / Voice / Diction
How does pathos work in this essay?
Work through p. 99-100, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p.100]:
Write your own personal narrative in which you have found yourself shifting cultures. Was the shift painful in any way? How might understanding Iserhoff’s experiences help you rethink your own transitions between or among cultures?
Reading #3: hooks’ “Killing Rage”
How have we been taught to think, talk and feel about race? What would it be like if we were invited to dive into the mind of a black woman? What are our expectations of how black intellectuals should write academically?
Assign reading w/dialectical journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Exchange journals for comment.
What argument(s) does hooks explicitly make?
Who is her audience?
How do we feel reading this essay?
Work through Qs on p. 110, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: Analyze hook’s rhetorical moves.
Can anger be used for change?
Can writing (and thinking) be viewed as action?
Work through p.110-11, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p.111]:
We tend to think of anger as a negative emotion, but hooks suggests otherwise. Can you think of an experience or instance in which anger helped someone else to change? Was this a positive change, as hooks imagines the result of her anger to be, or was it a negative change? Be sure to give vivid details to the context of your anecdote.

Working the First Paper
Day One: What is a Reflective Essay?
What is Cultural Blindness? [p. small group work from 145]
Finding connections in the readings.
Day Two: Brainstorming what you want to say.
What is “good” writing?
Understanding the rubric.
Day Three: Peer Critiques.
First Draft Due w/conference.





Sequence Two: Constructing Identity
Readings: Gloria Steinem’s “Ruth’s Song,” Doug Robinson’s “The Hurt, Betrayed Son,”and Victor Villanueva’s “An American of Color.”
Paper Two: Forming and Sustaining an Argument, Focus on Role Playing in Society
[Prompt adapted from p. 258]
Thinking about one of the many roles you have learned to play, consider how much of that role is biological/genetic, and how much of it is learned. From what social influences, from which people, did you “learn your lines”? Compare your learning process with that of Ruth Steinem, Rambo, or Victor Villanueva. Would you say that you have been “programmed,” or have you been left with a good deal of freedom to reinvent the role, should you wish to do so?

Reading #1: Steinem’s “Ruth’s Song”
Prewriting: Reflecting on roles in pop culture and within the family [p. 149].
*Establish background on Steinem and suggest topics/ideas to look for [p. 150-3].
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Begin discussion w/dialogue journals.
“What” is Steinmen’s implicit argument? Summary.
What roles does she examine? List. Consequences?
What transformations do you see at work?
Work through Qs on p. 169, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: How is meaning implied & still understood?
Collage & fragments.
Looking for Patterns.
Private v Public Arguments.
Qs on p. 169-70, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW:
One implicit argument that Steinem makes by simply writing about her mother is that there are millions of voices that go unheard. Because reflexivity asks that you step into another’s shoes, to see the world from that person’s view, try writing a 2 page letter from your mother to yourself. Avoid chatty tones; instead, aim for seriously considering what your mother may want to tell you about her own life that she has never been able to disclose with you for whatever reasons. [Due to the nature of this very personal assignment, you may choose to submit the work folded in half and stapled for your own privacy.]

Reading #2: Robinson’s “Betrayed Son”
Can film be “read”? What rhetorical devices might film use? Can film influence the ways in which we feel and think about “others”? Do films implicitly model what it means to be gendered?
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Play a clip from the film.
“What” is Robinson’s main argument? Summary.
Define “programmed.”
Qs on p. 189, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: Academic uses of quotations.
Analyze context/purpose of each quotation.
Work through p. 190, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p.190]:
Write about one particular film that has had the most influence on you. What role did you identify the most with? How did the film work to create certain expectations about society or expectations you may have about others?Reading #3: Villanueva’s “American”
What does it mean to be “American”? What does it mean to be a minority in America today? What does it mean to belong to the majority? How does class and educational opportunity help define who we are, who we turn out to be?
Assign reading w/dialectical journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Exchange journals for comment.
What’s the problem?
Alienation v. assimilation.
Metaphor of the “melting pot.”
Work through Qs on p. 209-10, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: Analyze Villanueva’s rhetorical moves.
Multiple voices.
Defining terms; logos, pathos, ethos.
“Blended” writing, advantages & disadvantages.
Work through p.210, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p.211]:
Think back through your own memories of childhood and young adulthood. Write a brief collage of your own. Use your memories as the stories or vignettes. Then read back over your collage noticing connections or similar themes and ideas about your own identity. Finally, identify one theme or idea that you find and add or delete stories in order to create a clustering around that particular theme.
Working the Second Paper
Day One: Analyzing arguments.
P. 258 small group work on socially constructed roles.
Finding connections in the readings.
Day Two: Finding your own argument.
Citing from the text Work Shop.
Grammatical WorkShop as needed..
Day Three: Peer Critiques.
First Draft Due w/optional conference.






Sequence Three: Engaging Culture
Readings: Jane Tompkins’ “Me and My Shadow,” James William Gibson’s “Paintball As Combat Sport,” and Clifford Geertz’ “From the Native’s Point of View.”
Paper Three: Critical Analysis, Focus on Public/Private and Mother/Father Tongue
[Prompt adapted from p. 346]
In “Me and My Shadow,” Tompkins quotes Ursula Le Guinn’s speech at a Bryn Mawr college commencement (270). Return to that passage and read it carefully. Write an analytical essay in which you examine Tompkin’s, Gibson’s, and Geertz’ essays for examples of “mother tongue” and “father tongue.” Be sure to comment on how these examples work rhetorically and how they serve the writer in making her or his points and arguments. If you’d like, you could also critique the notion of mother/father tongue as Le Guin defines it and Tompkins makes use of it.
Reading #1: Tompkins’ “Shadow”
Prewriting: If we have different roles we use to function in society, what do those roles sound like on paper? What voices do we use? Describe how you might define public and private writing. What are your expectations for each [p. 261]?
*Establish background on Tompkins and suggest topics/ideas to look for [p. 262-65].
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Begin discussion w/dialogue journals.
“What” is Tompkins’ argument? Summary.
Can two voices ever be “whole”?
What’s the relationship between writing and reading?
Work through Qs on p. 281, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: What’s so different/difficult for Tompkins in the essay? Does it work?
Stylistic features.
Transitions.
Private and Public Arguments.
Qs on p. 281, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p. 282]:
Find three examples of academic discourse from the field in which you wish to study, for example scholarly journals. Analyze these articles; do they demonstrate the features of academic writing that Tompkins objects to or approves of? Would you call your finds examples of “mother” or “father” tongue? Perhaps a blend? Write a short analysis of your findings.

Reading #2: Geertz’ “Native’s”
What is a cultural study? How might reflexivity be important to the study of another culture outside of one’s own? What are the roles of an anthropologist and/or an ethnographer?
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Understanding the text. Small group work on Java / Bali / Morocco.
What’s is being said?
Day Two: Reflexivity
Oscillation between Public and Private.
Work through Qs on p. 340-1, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Three: Methodology.
Abstract & concrete details.
Point of view.
“Objectivity.”
Work through p.341, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”

Reading #3: Gibson’s “Paintball”
How do you feel about war? Could war games be considered a ritual transition from boyhood to manhood? Does our culture glorify or admonish war? Do we view war privately or publically?
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Play an arrangement of clips from various films:
Apocalypse Now, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, etc.
What is a “paramilitary culture”? Summarize essay.
Is there a connection between fantasy & reality?
What are the implicit argument about class in this essay?
Is this a “cultural study”? Why or why not?
Qs on p. 314, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: What counts as evidence?
Can an “I-less” essay still have the author’s presence?
Organization.
Work through p. 314, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p.314]:
For the next two days, as a collaborative writing assignment, identify some aspect of culture that as a group you think would lend to a cultural study or critique. Observe and take notes. Briefly interview at least one person who is involved or touched in the activity or item you have chosen. How does this artifact or phenomenon seem to work or engage in society? What is the significance of your findings?
Working the Third Paper
[Note: If the class is truly engaged with the collaborative assignment above, it can easily be developed into a formal paper itself.]
Day One: Small Group Discussion from p. 346.
What connections can you find between public and private writings?
How do the concepts of “mother” and “father” fit academic essays?
Day Two: Analysis, breaking down & fitting back together.
Revision WorkShop.
Grammatical WorkShop as needed..
Day Three: Peer Critiques.
Paper Due. [Option to rewrite non-disclosed]


Sequence Four: Writing in the Community/Writing as Action
Readings: Studs Terkel’s “Working the Land,” Wallace Terry’s “Private First Class Reginald ‘Malik’ Edwards, Phoenix, Louisiana,” and John Tateishi’s “Violet De Cristoforo–Tule Lake.”
Paper Four: Research Paper, MLA Format.
[Prompt adapted from p. 431]
Select one of the oral histories in this section and conduct some simple research on historical developments relevant to your choice (for example, developments in agriculture since WWII, the deployment of Black soldiers in Vietnam, or the internment of Japanese during WWII, ect). Then, write an essay in which you compare the historical generalizations you find to the individual accounts embodied in oral histories. In what respects do the two accounts differ? Concur? What conclusions can you draw?
Reading #1: Terkel’s “Land”
Prewriting: If histories are written and composed by those in power for others who share power, what might be lost along the way? What do we know about the stories of ordinary people in times of historical events?
*Establish background on Oral Histories and flesh out its complications [p.360-362].
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Begin discussion w/dialogue journals.
What values are established in this piece? Summary.
Do the speakers see themselves in the “bigger” picture?
Work through Qs on p. 375, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Day Two: How does Terkel “frame” this essay?
Can you imagine Terkel’s editing process?.
What does Terkel hope to reveal here?.
Qs on p. 281, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW [p. 326]:
Do you see the past a kind of golden age from which we have fallen or a brutal, primitive existence above which we have risen? Think about Walker and Acuna’s world view; does it affect how they see their future? In what ways? Does this line of thought speak to you about how you see the past, as well as your own future?
Reading #2: Terry’s “Edwards”
How might oral histories work as cultural studies? How might the historian use reflexivity to piece together what is of value, what is important? In this excerpt, look for the intersection between race and war.
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Memory and experience.
Paradox & process.
Multiple stereotypes.
“Institutionalized insanity.”
Day Two: Composition.
Patterns of organization.
Attention to language.
Surfacing the role of Media (again).
Work through Qs on p. 389, “Reflecting on the Reading.”
Informal Writing HW [p.390]:
Allow students to choose from the three prompts given.
Reading #3: Tateishi’s “Tule Lake”
Read through Tateishi’s intro: “In a time of war, at home or abroad, political judgement can be colored by emotion, patriotism, and fear.” Is this statement true? Today?
Assign reading w/dialogue journal, 2-3 passages.
Day One: Exploring how we think and feel about his text.
What do we make of Violet’s tone & why?
How do we, as outsiders, explain her situation?
Who is to blame?
Day Two: Rhetoric of culture.
Understatement.
Sensory detail.
Work through p. 406, “Understanding Rhetorical Strategies.”
Informal Writing HW:
Take two pages to theorize, in free-writing format, on resistance and compliance found in individuals. Why do some people resist the predicaments in which they find themselves while others become silently complacent. Do you have a personal account that might illustrate your ideas? If so, relate the story with as many sensory details that you can muster.
Working the Fourth Paper
Day One: Choosing an area of interest.
Listing key words to begin your search.
Research WorkShop (finding the conversation).
In-text MLA Workshop.
Day Two: Fitting into the conversation.
Working with quotations from multiple sources.
Documentation & Works Cited.
Day Three: Peer Critiques.
First Draft Due w/conference.


Sorry about the format peeps--didn't quite transfer . . . enjoy!