English 76-101 Interpretation and Argument Spring 1999 Section Q: M,W,F 12:30-1:20; PH226C Section T: M,W,F 1:30-2:20; SC 201 Instructor: David Van Every Office: SC 106B Phone: 268-5739 or 268-8057 Email: dv2a@andrew.cmu.edu Mailbox: BH 245 (a drawer in the large cabinet just inside the door—don’t be confused by boxes or carousels with slots). Office Hours: W, 4:30-6:00pm. Also by appointment. (I will at a table in the 2nd floor dining area of the University Center that overlooks Lord Aquatic Center and the patio area). REQUIRED TEXTS Available at the campus bookstore: Dickens, Charles. Hard Times : An Authoritative Text, Backgrounds, Sources, and Contemporary Reactions, Criticism (Norton Critical Edition edited by George Ford and Sylvere Monod). 2nd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. 1990. (Note: one of the 1st critical articles we will read is reprinted in the above Norton edition of Hard Times. Here is the citation for one of its previous reprintings: Leavis, F. R. "Hard Times: An Analytic Note." The Great Tradition. London: Chatto & Windus, 1948. 227-248.) Kaufer, D. S., C. , Geisler, and C. , Neuwirth. Arguing from Sources: Exploring Issues through Reading and Writing. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1989. On reserve at the Hunt Library: NOTE: You are expected to make copies of the reserve readings. Furthermore, you are expected to bring those copies to class (especially the most current readings). Also bring your copies of Hard Times and Arguing From Sources. Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Teaching and Learning. In Ideological Dilemmas: A Social Psychology of Everyday Thinking. (pp. 41-64). London, UK: Sage Publications. Connor, S. (1987). Deconstructing Hard Times. In Bloom H (Ed.), Charles Dickens's Hard Times. (pp. 113-127). New York: Chelsea House. Gilmour, R. (1967). The Gradgrind School: Political Economy in the Classroom. Victorian Studies, 11, 207-224. Hirsch, E. D. (1987). Literacy and Cultural Literacy. In Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. (pp. 1-32). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Hirschberg, S. (1996a). Strategies for Writing Arguments. In Strategies of Argument. (pp. 313-347). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hirschberg, S. (1996b). Issues in Education. In Strategies of Argument. (pp. 637-662). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hirschberg, S. (1996c). Strategies of Argument. In Strategies of Argument. (pp. 28-105). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hoffman, D. M. (1996). Culture and Self in Multicultural Education: Reflections on Discourse, Text, and Practice. American Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 545-569. Holloway, J. (1962). Hard Times: A History and a Criticism. In Gross J & Pearson G.(Eds.), Dickens and the Twentieth Century. (pp. 159-174). London: Routledge & Kegan. McCarthy, C. (1994). Multicultural discourse and curriculum reform: A critical perspective. Edcational Theory, 44(1), 81-98. Rodriguez, R. (1982). Aria. In Hunger of Memory: The Education of Richard Rodriguez. New York: Godine. Sonstroem, D. (1969). Fettered Fancy in Hard Times. PMLA, 84, 520-529. Watkins, W. H. (1994). Multicultural education: Toward a historical and political inquiry. Edcational Theory, 44(1), 99-117. Wurzel, J.S., & Fischman, N.K. (1995). A Different Place: The International Classroom. Newtonville, MA: Intercultural Resources Corporation. Available in class: Hirschberg, S. (1996e). Understanding Arguments. In Strategies of Argument. (pp. 1-19). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hirschberg, S. (1996d). Claims in the Humanities, Social Sciences, and Sciences. In Strategies of Argument. (pp. 153-163). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. COURSE GOALS This course seeks to help students develop their skill in college-level reading and writing, giving special emphasis to the skills of interpretation and argument. Reading and writing as skills are inextricable (you can be a good writer only to the degree that you are also a perceptive reader, and you will be a perceptive reader only to the degree you can also construct good arguments). And in as much as college-level work demands both of these skills, 76-101 combines the goal becoming a good arguer (one of the traditional aims of an education in rhetoric) with the goal of becoming a perceptive interpreter (one of the traditional aims of an education in the humanities). Courses that teach skills such as reading and writing require a suitable content. Therefore, for its content this course takes up the controversial issue of educational reform. Students will explore this issue by reading a Victorian novel that critiques an educational reform of that period, a set of critical essays that debate that novel’s status, and then a set of academic and personal essays that represent perspectives in the debate around the controversial contemporary movement in education known as “multiculturalism.” Exploring multicultural educational reform through these texts, students will have opportunity to probe some of the problems, possibilities, and consequences that have precipitated, driven, and followed from educational reforms past and present and to note some of the connections these have with larger societal issues. Finally, students will take positions of their own in the multiculturalism-as-educational-reform debate. Note that 76-101 is concerned with this issue and texts only insofar as they serve the aims of the course: to help students become better writers and more perceptive readers. And while it is hoped that the issue and readings will prove interesting in and of themselves, do not forget that they are means to an end only: their purpose in the course is to aid the development of generalizable intellectual skills. GRADED ASSIGNMENTS To end of helping students become better writers and readers, 76-101 features a cumulative sequence of three graded assignments: 1. Summary, in which students are expected to explain, in their own words and in accordance with the conventions of academic discourse, another writer’s argument about a problem. 2. Synthesis/Analysis, in which students tie together into one coherent description of a problem elements from a number of distinct arguments. 3. Contribution, in which students analyze a problem, surveying and evaluating past and potential responses to that problem, in order to arrive at some kind of convincing conclusion. COURSE POLICIES 1) Attendance: Since this is a small discussion class, attendance is mandatory. You are allowed three unexcused absences without penalty, and after that your grade is reduced by one letter for every day you’ve missed over three. Of course, illness and emergencies of various types are grounds legitimate absences. However, to have an absence excused, you must talk to me. Also, in the case of absences due to illness, you are required to provide me with a note from the health clinic or your doctor documenting the reason for your absence. NOTE: When you miss class, it is your responsibility to find out what you missed. If you miss class on a day when an assignment is due, unless you have made other arrangements with me, you must put the assignment in my mailbox (in BH 245) by 5pm that day. 2) Participation in class discussions: When we are scheduled to discuss a reading, your are required to bring your notes and copy of the article to class. Those who fail to do so or have not read the article will not be allowed to participate in discussion. 2) Grading: For graded assignments and participation, percentages break down as follows: Summary Paper peer review, rough draft,* and final draft 20 points Synthesis/Analysis Paper peer review, rough draft,* and final draft 25 points Contribution Paper peer review, rough draft,* and final draft 30 points Class Participation 25 points (that is, class reading, writing, and discussion; homework; workshops; quizzes, etc.) * Neither peer reviews nor rough drafts will not be graded. However, peer reviews or rough drafts that are not turned in each will result in the grade of the final draft being penalized 5 percentage points. For example, the grade of a draft will be lower by 10% if the student has not turned in a rough draft or a peer review of a classmate’s paper. Concerning ungraded assignments: There will be a number of ungraded assignments that will count as part of the participation grade and will be evaluated on the “check” system. That is, these assignments will be given either a “check plus,” a “check,” or a “check minus”: a “check plus” will mean “excellent” or “exceeds assignment requirements” (a relatively uncommon grade); a “check” will mean “good” or “on target”; and a “check minus” will mean “does not meet the assignment requirements“ or “needs improvement.” (Of course, as with the graded assignments, ungraded assignments that are not turned will count against the overall participation grade.) One additional note: the ungraded assignments are intended to allow you to practice the skills required by the graded assignments. The “check” system is intended to serve as a rough guide as to how well you seem to grasp the particular concept or skill being practiced. Furthermore, while these assignments are ungraded, as alluded to above, they will be considered (along with participation in class discussion) in toto when it comes time for me to determine your class participation grade at the end of the semester. 3) Due dates. Unless you have made other arrangements with me in advance, all assignments, graded or ungraded, must be turned by 5pm of the day indicated on the syllabus. 4) Late assignments: graded assignments will be marked down one letter grade for every day they are late; late ungraded assignment will not be accepted. 5) Assignment format. With the exception of in-class assignments, all papers and drafts must follow the conventions below or they may not be accepted: They must be— double-spaced and printed on one side of the page. They must have— 1-1.25” margins; a title page featuring your name, the date, and the course number and section; and pages that are numbered and stapled together CHEATING AND PLAGIARISM In 76-101, talking your ideas over with your friends and getting comments on your writing from them are not examples of cheating (in other classes, such activities may constitute cheating--check with your instructor for the class). Otherwise, 76-101 follows the CMU Student Handbook policy in regards to cheating and plagiarism. In particular, the CMU Student Handbook defines cheating as including but not limited to "submission of work that is not the student's own for papers, assignments or exams" and "use of unauthorized material ... in the preparation of an assignment..." It defines plagiarism as including but not limited to "failure to indicate the source with quotation marks or footnotes where appropriate if any of the following are reproduced in the work submitted by a student: (1) A phrase, written or musical, (2) A graphic element, (3) A proof, (4) Specific language. (5) An idea derived from the work, published or unpublished, of another person." Although you can talk over your ideas and get comments on your writing from friends and classmates, your writing must be your own. Cheating and plagiarism have dire consequences, including flunking the paper in question, flunking the course, and university disciplinary action, depending on the circumstances of the offense. The simplest way to avoid plagiarism is to document the sources of your information carefully. See your instructor if you have any questions. The normal penalty for cheating or plagiarism in 76-101 is failure in the course. To discourage cheating or plagiarism, instructors in 76-101 occasionally exchange papers among sections. SCHEDULE Summary: Part I: Hard Times, 19th Century educational reform, and the status of the novel as a Dickens masterpiece (weeks 1-7). Part II: Multiculturalism as educational reform (weeks 8-15). NOTE: Unless noted otherwise, all assignments are due the class period after the period where they are listed as assignments on the syllabus. For example, a reading listed as an assignment on under Monday the 12th should be completed by class on Wednesday the 14th. Exceptions to this will have due dates specified in parathesis as part of the assignment listing. For example, in the following assignment statement article “B” is to be read by the next class period and reading “A” is to be read by the following Monday: “Assignment: Read Author1, ‘A’ (to be completed by next Monday); Author2, ‘B.’” Week One January M 11 Course administration and overview. Assignment: Read Hirschberg, "Understanding Arguments" (pp. 1-19) and "Claims in the Humanities, Social Sciences, and Sciences" (pp. 153-163); Also, read Hard Times, Book I (you should finish Book I by next Monday). W 13 Diagnostic Test; The nature of academic argument, finding a thesis, marking as you read, keeping a reading journal, & claims in the academic disciplines. Assignment: Read F. R. Leavis, "Hard Times: An Analytic Note," (found on pp. 340-360 of your Norton edition of Hard Times.). F 15 Discuss Leavis; Introduction to summary unit: What is a summary?, Why summarize? & Summary as an interpretative act. Assignment: Read Arguing From Sources (aka KGN) chaps. 1 & 2 (pp. 1-15) . Highlights of the KGN reading: chaps. 1 & 2—what an issue is; types of issues; entering an issue; aspects of a problem case; keywords; and locating; classifying; and evaluating resources. Week Two M 18 Martin Luther King Jr. Day: No Class. W 20 The "aspects of a problem case" heuristic: Agent-Action-Goal-Result (aka A/A/G/R); Apply heuristic to Leavis article. Assignment: Read KGN chaps. 3 &4 (pp. 32-50, & 73-96) and John Holloway, "Hard Times: A History and a Criticism." Also, read Hard Times, Book II (to be completed by class next Monday); Highlights of the KGN reading: chaps. 3 & 4—reading for direction; marking the text; transitions; points; main; faulty; & return paths; support, amplification, & qualification; and the "milestones" heuristic. F 22 Discuss Holloway; Discerning the structure of an argument: two heuristics: 1) the "milestones," (aka "Issue/Problem/Solution" or "I/P/S"); and 2) "main," "faulty," & "return" paths (aka "M/F/R"); Apply the "milestones" and M/F/R heuristics to the Leavis & Holloway articles. Assignment: Read Hirschberg, " Strategies of Argument" (pp. 28-105). Week Three M 25 Discuss Hirschberg, " Strategies of Argument": claims, support, assumptions and warrants, & audience; The summary paper assignment handed out. Assignment: Read Robin Gilmour, "The Gradgrind School: Political Economy in the Classroom". W 27 Discuss and ask questions about the summary assignment; Discuss Gilmour. Assignment: Read Hard Times, Book III (to be completed by class next Monday); KGN chap. 5, "Draft the Summary" (pp. 97-105); KGN "Appendix on References and Documentation" (pp. 277-291); and Review KGN pages 74-76. Highlights of the KGN reading: chapt. 5—outlining; drafting an introduction; the author as topic; revising for your readers; and a revision checklist for summaries. F 29 Answers to common questions about the summary assignment; Drafting summaries: applying KGN Chapt. 5. Reminder: due next class—a draft of summary paper. Bring in 2 copies, one for your peer partner and one for the instructor Week Four February M 1 The Peer Review process. Assignment: Bring peer review to next class (2 copies). Due: Draft of summary paper. Bring in 2 copies, one for your peer partner and one for the instructor. W 3 In-class peer review; Introduction to synthesis-analysis unit. Assignment: Read KGN, chpts. 6-7 and chpts. 9-11 (9-11 to be completed by the beginning of week 6). Highlights of the KGN reading: chaps. 6 & 7 (synthesis)—formulating tentative common points of discussion; creating a grid of common points; discerning patterns in the "conversation"; creating a synthesis tree; major, minor, & preliminary splits; chaps. 9 thru 11 (analysis as exploration)—selecting problem cases, "narrating the tension," identifying aspects of problem cases; varying aspects; selecting a paradigm case; using possible solutions to explore a case; implications, assumptions, principles, & counterexamples; exploring for strengths & faults; formulating alternative problem definitions; testing problem definitions; drawing conclusions. Due: Peer Reviews. Bring in 2 copies, one for peer partner and one for the instructor. F 5 Identifying common points of discussion and creating issue trees: applying KGN Chapters 6 & 7; Early course evaluation questionnaire. Assignment: Read David Sonstroem, "Fettered Fancy in Hard Times." Week Five M 8 Discuss Sonstroem; Response to questionnaires. Assignment: Read Steve Connor, " Deconstructing Hard Times." W 10 Discuss Connor; First synthesis-analysis tool: the grid; Begin a grid for Leavis, Gilmour, Sonstroem, Connor, and Holloway. Assignment: Create a grid that features at least 3 "common points of discussion"—that is, points that are addressed by all 5 authors. F 12 Put selected students grids on the board; discuss uses of grids; Second synthesis-analysis tool: the issue tree; Begin an issue tree for Gilmour, Sonstroem, Connor, and Holloway; The synthesis-analysis paper assignment handed out. Assignment: Complete an issue tree for the 5 authors. Due: Final draft of summary paper & grid of common points of discussion. Week Six M 15 Discuss and ask questions about the synthesis-analysis assignment; Put selected homework trees (all or part) on the blackboard; Overview of analysis revisited: exploring issues, questions and problem cases. Assignment: Read KGN, chpts. 8 & 12 (to be completed by the beginning of week 7). Highlights of the KGN reading: chapt. 8—various strategies for outlining, strategies for getting a reader to "see the issue," characterizing an author's position, reviewing the state of an issue, a checklist for synthesis; chap. 12—labeling approaches, organizing a draft by approaches, an outline for characterizing and evaluating approaches, techniques for writing about positions, a checklist for revising an analysis. Due: 5-author tree. W 17 Answers to common questions about the summary assignment; Drafting synthesis-analysis papers: applying KGN chaps. 8 & 12; Criteria for evaluating synthesis-analysis;Arguments of existence and significance. F 19 Synthesis-analysis paper workshop; Introduction to contribution unit and 2nd half of the semester. Assignment: Read four short arguments: Asante, Wortham, Lehrman, & Spender (in Hirschberg, "Issues in Education"). Week Seven M 22 The peer review process for synthesis-analysis papers; Discuss Asante, Wortham, Lehrman, & Spender. Assignment: peer review of synthesis-analysis draft. Due: First draft of synthesis-analysis paper. Bring in 2 copies, one for your peer partner and one for the instructor. W 24 Discuss Asante, Wortham, Lehrman, & Spender (continued); In-class peer review. Assignment: Read Michael Billig, "Teaching and Learning." Due: Peer reviews. Bring in 2 copies, one for peer review partner and one for the instructor. F 26 Discuss Billig: Ideologies of education; education's connections to society at large, etc. Assignment: Read Watkins, "Multicultural education: Toward a historical and political inquiry" and Hirschberg Chapt. 6, "Strategies for Writing Arguments." Week Eight March M 1 Mid-semester break: no class. W 3 Discuss Watkins; Apply strategies from Hirschberg Chapt. 6. Assignment: Review KGN, chaps. 9, 10, & 11 (to be completed by next Monday); Read Diane Hoffman’s "Culture and Self in Multicultural Education." Highlights of the KGN reading: chaps. 9 thru 11 (analysis as exploration)—selecting problem cases, "narrating the tension," identifying aspects of problem cases; varying aspects; selecting a paradigm case; using possible solutions to explore a case; implications, assumptions, principles, & counterexamples; exploring for strengths & faults; formulating alternative problem definitions; testing problem definitions; drawing conclusions. F 5 Discuss Hoffman in relation to the others; The contribution paper assignment handed out. Assignment: Read the contribution paper assignment. Week Nine M 8 Discuss and ask questions about the contribution paper assignment; Applying KGN chapts. 9-11 & Hirschberg Chapt. 6 to the contribution paper assignment: exploring cases, solutions, and problem definitions and using strategies from Hirschberg Chapt. 6. Assignment: Read E. D. Hirsch, "Literacy and Cultural Literacy." Due: Final draft of synthesis-analysis paper. W 10 Answers to common questions about the contribution paper assignment; Discuss E. D. Hirsch: What is "cultural literacy"? How does Hirsch’s perspective on education and multiculturalism compare with others we’ve encountered? Assignment: Complete the exercise titled "The problem of many cultures in the discussion classroom." F 12 "A Different Place": video and discussion, part I. Due: your response to the "many cultures" exercise. Week Ten M 15 "A Different Place": video and discussion, parts II & III. Assignment: Read Richard Rodriguez, "Aria." W 17 Discuss Rodriguez. Assignment: Read McCarthy, "Multicultural discourse and curriculum reform: A critical perspective." F 19 Discuss McCarthy; Some possible approaches to meeting the contribution paper assignment’s requirements. Assignment: Write a "Contribution Paper Proposal" in which you describe at least 1 argument (but no more than 3 arguments) you might make for your contribution paper. Limit your description of each argument to 1 or 2 paragraphs. Bring 2 copies of the proposal to next class. Week Eleven M 22 Spring Break: No Class W 24 Spring Break: No Class F 26 Spring Break: No Class Week Twelve M 29 Small group work: split up into small groups and take turns trying out possible contribution paper arguments while the others in the group play devil’s advocate; In class, begin creating a grid of the current "voices in the conversation"—Hirsch, Hoffman, "A Different Place," Rodriguez, Billig, Watkins, McCarthy, and the others (save your notes from this activity and bring them to class next Monday). Sign up for conferences (optional). (Those who sign up for a conference must bring a tree of their contribution paper argument with them to the conference.) Supplemental assignment: Those who do NOT sign up for a conference with me are strongly encouraged to create a tree of their contribution paper argument and bring to class Friday. Assignment: Read KGN, Chaps. 13 & 14 (to be completed by Friday). Highlights of the KGN reading: chap. 13—newness, freshness, & accountability; searching for a main point; filling in points at the various milestones; and finding and distributing faulty and return paths; chap. 14—a checklist for information for an introduction; concessions, disclaimers, conditionals, & qualifications; checklists for revising and restructuring a draft. Due: Contribution Paper Proposal (2 copies). W 31 Conferences: no class. April F 2 Drafting your contribution paper: applying KGN chaps. 13 & 14. Week Thirteen M 5 In-class, collaborative synthesis of the articles from the last half of the semester: in groups, develop a grid. (save your notes from this activity and bring them to next class.) W 7 In-class, collaborative synthesis of the articles from the last half of the semester: in groups, develop a tree; Put selected trees on the board. F 9 Discuss problems with the contribution paper; The point of giving a presentation; How to give a presentation; Lottery for "slots" for oral presentations. Week Fourteen M 12 Contribution paper workshop. W 14 Inclass peer review. Due: First draft of contribution paper. Bring in 2 copies, one for your peer partner and one for the instructor. F 16 Spring Carnival: No Class Week Fifteen M 19 Contribution paper workshop. W 21 Presentations F 23 Presentations. Week Sixteen M 26 Presentations. W 28 Presentations. F 30 Turn in Contribution Paper Due: Final draft of contribution paper. I. What is the issue? II. According to the author, how is this issue connected to a larger context and what is its importance? A. How does the author argue for this? III. According to the author, what is the nature of the problem? A. What conflict is at its heart? B. How does the author argue for this? C. What terms, insights, or frameworks does the author offer and how does he or she argue for them? IV. What “solution” does the author argue for? A. What does the author want his audience to believe or do? B. How does she or he argue this? Multiculturalism as Educational Reform Some initial questions: 1. What is the author’s argument? 2. What are the key terms? (e.g., What is “multiculturalism”? The answer may vary from author to author) 3. What are the important cases? Three central questions: 1. What is at issue in multicultural educational reform? 2. What is the problem in multicultural educational reform? (i.e., How is the problem defined?) 3. What is an appropriate solution in multicultural educational reform? Other questions we should ask: 1. Are there links between the readings? 2. If so, what are they and (for each link) what is the nature of the link? (e.g., a common point, an example, a counterexample, an elaboration, etc.) 1998-99 Official Academic Calendar 1999 Spring Semester Spring: (M-14, T-15, W-15, Th-15, F-14) Total=73 Spring & Mini-3 Classes Begin January 11 (M) Martin Luther King Jr. Day (No Afternoon Classes Noon-4:30 p.m.) January 18 (M) Last Day To ADD Spring & Mini-3 Courses Without Dean's Permission January 22 (F) Last Day To Elect Spring & Mini-3 AUDIT Or PASS/FAIL Grade Option January 22 (F) Last Day To DROP Spring & Mini-3 Courses And Receive Tuition Adjustment January 22 (F) Last Day To DROP Mini-3 Courses With NO "W" Grade February 9 (T) Mini-3 Faculty Course Evaluations February 22-26 (M-F) Mini-3 Last Day Of Classes February 26 (F) Last Day To DROP Mini-3 Courses With "W" Grade February 26 (F) Mini-3 Exams (Day Courses) 3,5 Feb. 27-March 2-3 (Sa-T-W) Mid-Semester Break (No Classes Except For Monday Evening Mini-3) March 1 (M) Mid-Semester & Mini-3 Grades Due By 4:00 P.M. March 5 (F) Mini-4 Classes Begin March 4 (Th) Last Day To ADD Mini-4 Courses Without Dean's Permission March 17 (W) Last Day To Elect Mini-4 AUDIT Or PASS/FAIL Grade Option March 17 (W) Last Day To DROP Mini-4 Courses And Receive Tuition Adjustment 1 March 17 (W) Last Day To DROP Spring Semester Courses With NO "W" Grade March 15 (M) Spring Vacation (No Classes) March 22-26 (M-F) Summer Registration Begins April 5 (M)- May 17[M] Last Day To DROP Mini-4 Courses With NO "W" Grade April 9 (F) Spring Carnival (NO Classes) April 16-17 (F-Sa) Fall Registration Week April 19-23 (M-F) Spring & Mini-4 Faculty Course Evaluations April 19-23 (M-F) Spring & Mini-4 Last Day Of Classes April 30 (F) Last Day To DROP Spring & Mini-4 Courses With "W" Grade 2 April 30 (F) Final Examinations May 3-4 (M-T) Reading Day May 5 (W) Final Examinations May 6-7 (Th-F) Final Examinations May 10-11 (M-T) Spring Final & Mini-4 Grades (Graduating Students) Due By 9:00 A.M. May 13 (Th) Spring Final & Mini-4 Grades (All Other Students) Due By 5:00 P.M. May 14 (F) Commencement May 16 (Su) Final Grades Mailed To Students May 17 (M) 76101Q-and T Syllabus_S99.doc 18