On Monday, July 30 we convened for the second AP English Language and Composition summer seminar. We spent the entire class in room 2207 which had been recently cleaned. The desks were arranged in four rows with the two rows on the left facing to the right and the two rows on the right facing to the left. This set-up allowed us to share in pairs at a few points during the seminar.
I had several goals for the seminar. (1) I wanted to practice rhetorical analysis using Omnivore's Dilemma. (Rhetorical analysis is figuring out what argument a text makes and how it makes that argument.) Rhetorical analysis is at the core of AP English Language and Composition. (2) I also wanted you to practice making your own arguments in response to positions presented in a complex text.
Why these goals? On the AP English Language and Composition exam you will write three essays. (1) One essay asks you to analyze the rhetorical strategies in a piece of writing. (2) Another essay asks you to understand a position (an argument, a point, a thesis) and then to respond to that position with an argument of your own. (3) A third essay requires that you read several sources and then synthesize the sources into an argument of your own. (Omnivore's Dilemma is a book-length version of the third type of essay.) The summer is all about laying the foundations for writing these three essays.
Opening: Building a Bridge from All Souls to Omnivore's Dilemma
I opened the session by emphasizing the importance of making connections and analyzing the writer's choices when responding to quotations. I then quickly reviewed the quotation response grading rubric and returned your All Souls quotation responses. I asked you to remember the rhetorical strategies used by Michael Patrick MacDonald in All Souls and to explain how those strategies contributed to his purposes.
I explained that we read All Souls first because, like the fiction (novels and plays) that you're used to reading in English classes, memoirs rely on characters, setting, and series of related events to convey their themes and achieve their purposes. So although for many of you rhetorical analysis is new, the type of book was not new. On the other hand, Omnivore's Dilemma is probably quite different from what you're used to reading, and it presents readers with new challenges. We spent most of the seminar trying to make sense of what we found in the book and why it was put there (that way) by the author.
Rhetorical Analysis
After a five minute break I presented two big questions which I wrote on the board (using different words than I'll use here):
* What stands out in Omnivore's Dilemma? (In other words, what parts seem most interesting, most memorable, most important, most moving, most difficult, etc.?)
* In Omnivore's Dilemma what is the big argument that Michael Pollan makes? (In other words, what is his main point? What is his thesis?)
Then I divided the book into its three sections: I. Industrial, II. Pastoral, III. Personal. (I also divided the second section into its two parts (Big Organic and Polyface). Each section was given its own column on the whiteboard at the front of the class.
Industrial
In pairs you brainstormed "what stood out" in the first section. After the brainstorm the pairs shared their responses with the whole class. In the "Industrial" column I wrote down what the pairs reported out.
As we went I asked "how does that thing that stood out--that detail, that passage, that language choice, that idea--help reveal and contribute to Pollan's overall purpose in the book?"On the left side of the board I started to write down your ideas about Pollan's overall purpose. We continued making connections between what stood out and Pollan's purpose.
We decided that in the first section Pollan's purpose was (1) to reveal what's hidden behind and within the food most of us eat; (2) to show that industrial food unnaturally changes the human body, the environment, plants, and animals; (3) to show that emphasizing quantity over quality is bad for farmers, the environment, the health of eaters, animals, and tax payers; (4) to show that although industrial food feeds people cheaply and easily there are significant hidden costs; (5) to show that biodiversity is necessary: nature is a complex system (or organism) not a simple machine; (6) to remind readers of traditional ways that can help eaters and producers.
As we discussed how the parts that stand out contribute to the whole argument, we also discussed how parts relate to other parts, how parts relate to our own experiences, observations, and prior learning, and how the Pollan's particular strategies and choices--creating characters, telling stories, adding parenthetical comments, selecting details, weaving personal experience with research, organizing sections and creating sequences, writing in an authoritative but intimate voice--are effective or ineffective.
Pastoral & Personal
We spent more than an hour on the Industrial section so had less time for the Pastoral and Personal sections. However, we did have time for pairs to share "what stood out" in these sections and for the pairs to report out. We continued connecting the elements that stood out to Pollan's overall purpose.
Our Own Arguments
I'd hoped to have more time for this, but despite time constraints we were able to share in pairs and then report out our own opinions about particular, very specific parts of the book. Each of you chose one idea in the book (it could be one of Pollan's ideas or an idea presented by someone else) that you felt strongly about. I then asked you to decide whether you agreed with the idea, opposed it, or would revise it. We'll continue practicing our own arguments throughout the year.
During this part of class we also talked about becoming as knowledgeable as possible and making choices that support our opinions, particularly our most deeply held values.
Dogtown
At the very end of class I introduced the next book, Elyssa East's Dogtown: Death and Enchantment in a New England Ghost Town. In your quotation responses look for the big ideas (the overall argument, the important themes). Ask yourself, how do the parts contribute to the whole? How do the writer's choices work? How do they contribute? Do they ever detract? If you're able to understand the argument and how its made, then you can respond: agreeing, disagree, or revising.
***
Those of you who did not attend the second AP English Language and
Composition summer seminar must write a substantial response (300+
words) to the summary provided above. Your response may be informal but
it must thoughtfully relate your careful reading of the memoir with the
concepts presented in the summary. Although you are free to respond to
anything in the summary of the first session, you might want to pay
particular attention to the underlined passages. I look forward to
hearing from you.
***
[Final final note, the last seminar--on Dogtown--has been moved to
Wednesday, August 22, 9:00 a.m. at the Cape Ann Museum on Pleasant St. in
Gloucester.]
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Summer Session #1: All Souls & an Introduction to Rhetorical Analysis
On Monday, July 9 I held the first AP English Language and Composition 2012 summer seminar. We spent the first part of class in 2209 and then moved to the library. (Thank you Mr. Telles and Mrs. Saunders.)
The goals for the session were to introduce and have students work with (1) rhetorical analysis strategies (how do the writer's choices contribute to his purpose?) , (2) thematic tension (how do big concepts--like belonging and exclusion, civic pride and truth-telling--relate to each other in the book?), and (3) connections to yourself (how do your prior experiences and observations contribute to your understanding of the memoir and to its effect on you?)
(I've used italics to help you keep track of important concepts from the first session.)
Opening
I opened the session by asking you to think about what stood out to you in Michael Patrick McDonald's memoir All Souls. Then we considered how the book related to your prior experiences and knowledge. Although this might have seemed to be small talk, this opening contributed to our goals by getting us to notice the writer's choices, the memoir's themes, and the relationship those choices and themes have to our own lives.
Rhetorical Analysis
Then we went deeper into the concept of rhetorical analysis, a concept that is at the core of AP English Language and Composition. In small groups (pairs or trios) students shared preliminary ideas about the "purpose" of MacDonald's book. (Before we discussed I introduced three general possibilities for rhetorical purpose: to persuade, to inform, and to entertain. Most writing attempts some combination of all three.) The idea that MacDonald wanted to inform the reader about injustices in Southie came up. Another student thought that the memoir's purpose was to inform the reading by telling the truth about Southie. These ideas--and others--were woven through the rest of the session.
We then discussed some of the techniques that MacDonald used to achieve his purpose. Students seemed to agree that his narrative voice was important. It was suggested that MacDonald used informal, conversation language in the memoir. We then discussed how this choice of language might have contributed to his purpose (particularly in relation to "telling the truth about Southie). I also mentioned that when we talk about language choice we can speak more specifically about syntax (sentence structure) and type of word choice (diction). Syntax can be simple or complex. Syntax can be conventional or unconventional. Diction can be archaic, formal, standard, informal, colloquial, vulgar. These choice affect how a reader experiences a piece of writing.
We also talked about MacDonald's characterizations of people and places. For example, Frankie was characterized in a way that led to a certain amount of surprise about his death. Kevin was characterized in a way that made his death less of a surprise but still moving. MacDonald planted seeds earlier in the book so that the deaths would be moving. Again MacDonald's choices about how he portrayed characters served his larger purpose.
Another choice we discussed was the narrative structure. Why does MacDonald begin and end with the vigil? How does this contribute to his overall purpose?
Through this discussion of how the writer's choices contribute to his purpose we also discussed how Aristotle's rhetorical triangle could be used to explain the effectiveness of MacDonald's writing. Aristotle suggested that there are three main forms of persuasion. A writer can use reason (the Greek word is logos), emotion (the Greek word is pathos), her/his own credibility or trustworthiness (the Greek word is ethos) to appeal to the audience. We discussed specific was that MacDonald cultivated pathos and ethos in All Souls.
As we used discussed the rhetorical strategies used in All Souls important questions emerged. One question was in All Souls what is the relationship between "(1) the injustices, tragedies, and traumas in Southie; (2) the pride Southie residents feels about their neighborhood; (3) the need to tell the truth about what's happening in their neighborhood; and (4) healing from the traumas and improving the neighborhood?" We found this to be an essential but difficult question to answer. (For AP English Language the next question--which I never asked but which you might address in your rhetorical analysis web at the end of the summer--is how do MacDonald's rhetorical strategies contribute to his answer to that question? If you didn't attend the first session you might begin to address the question in your comment too.)
Socratic Seminar
Then in the library we practiced an inner circle / outer circle Socratic seminar in the library by discussing which of the following word pairs "belonging and exclusion," "appearances and reality" or "pride and critique" was most and least relevant to MacDonald's purpose in All Souls. (I may have used slightly different words on Monday.) We tried to explain the relationship of the word pairs to specific passages in the memoir.
For our penultimate activity I asked you to go through your quotation responses and mark places where you would add to your analysis particularly considering the importance of rhetorical analysis (how a writer's choices contribute to purpose) and the relationship between the individual passages and the book's overall themes (how do the parts contribute to the whole).
Finally, I introduced the next book, Omnivore's Dilemma. In doing so I encouraged students to pay attention to your food choices at home and in the supermarket. I also encouraged students to visit the farmers market on Thursdays at Stage Fort Park. When you're writing your responses make sure you (1) discuss the meaning of the passage in context, (2) discuss the relationship of the passage to other parts of the book and/or to the work as a whole, and (3) discuss how the writer's choices contribute to meaning.
[Final final note, the last seminar--on Dogtown--as been moved to Wednesday, August 22 at the Cape Ann Museum on Pleasant St. in Gloucester.]
Those of you who did not attend the first AP English Language and Composition summer seminar must write a substantial response (300+ words) to the summary provided above. Your response may be informal but it must thoughtfully relate your careful reading of the memoir with the concepts presented in the summary. Although you are free to respond to anything in the summary of the first session, you might want to pay particular attention to the italicized passages. I look forward to hearing from you.
Next session 8:00 a.m. July 30.
The goals for the session were to introduce and have students work with (1) rhetorical analysis strategies (how do the writer's choices contribute to his purpose?) , (2) thematic tension (how do big concepts--like belonging and exclusion, civic pride and truth-telling--relate to each other in the book?), and (3) connections to yourself (how do your prior experiences and observations contribute to your understanding of the memoir and to its effect on you?)
(I've used italics to help you keep track of important concepts from the first session.)
Opening
I opened the session by asking you to think about what stood out to you in Michael Patrick McDonald's memoir All Souls. Then we considered how the book related to your prior experiences and knowledge. Although this might have seemed to be small talk, this opening contributed to our goals by getting us to notice the writer's choices, the memoir's themes, and the relationship those choices and themes have to our own lives.
Rhetorical Analysis
Then we went deeper into the concept of rhetorical analysis, a concept that is at the core of AP English Language and Composition. In small groups (pairs or trios) students shared preliminary ideas about the "purpose" of MacDonald's book. (Before we discussed I introduced three general possibilities for rhetorical purpose: to persuade, to inform, and to entertain. Most writing attempts some combination of all three.) The idea that MacDonald wanted to inform the reader about injustices in Southie came up. Another student thought that the memoir's purpose was to inform the reading by telling the truth about Southie. These ideas--and others--were woven through the rest of the session.
We then discussed some of the techniques that MacDonald used to achieve his purpose. Students seemed to agree that his narrative voice was important. It was suggested that MacDonald used informal, conversation language in the memoir. We then discussed how this choice of language might have contributed to his purpose (particularly in relation to "telling the truth about Southie). I also mentioned that when we talk about language choice we can speak more specifically about syntax (sentence structure) and type of word choice (diction). Syntax can be simple or complex. Syntax can be conventional or unconventional. Diction can be archaic, formal, standard, informal, colloquial, vulgar. These choice affect how a reader experiences a piece of writing.
We also talked about MacDonald's characterizations of people and places. For example, Frankie was characterized in a way that led to a certain amount of surprise about his death. Kevin was characterized in a way that made his death less of a surprise but still moving. MacDonald planted seeds earlier in the book so that the deaths would be moving. Again MacDonald's choices about how he portrayed characters served his larger purpose.
Another choice we discussed was the narrative structure. Why does MacDonald begin and end with the vigil? How does this contribute to his overall purpose?
Through this discussion of how the writer's choices contribute to his purpose we also discussed how Aristotle's rhetorical triangle could be used to explain the effectiveness of MacDonald's writing. Aristotle suggested that there are three main forms of persuasion. A writer can use reason (the Greek word is logos), emotion (the Greek word is pathos), her/his own credibility or trustworthiness (the Greek word is ethos) to appeal to the audience. We discussed specific was that MacDonald cultivated pathos and ethos in All Souls.
As we used discussed the rhetorical strategies used in All Souls important questions emerged. One question was in All Souls what is the relationship between "(1) the injustices, tragedies, and traumas in Southie; (2) the pride Southie residents feels about their neighborhood; (3) the need to tell the truth about what's happening in their neighborhood; and (4) healing from the traumas and improving the neighborhood?" We found this to be an essential but difficult question to answer. (For AP English Language the next question--which I never asked but which you might address in your rhetorical analysis web at the end of the summer--is how do MacDonald's rhetorical strategies contribute to his answer to that question? If you didn't attend the first session you might begin to address the question in your comment too.)
Socratic Seminar
Then in the library we practiced an inner circle / outer circle Socratic seminar in the library by discussing which of the following word pairs "belonging and exclusion," "appearances and reality" or "pride and critique" was most and least relevant to MacDonald's purpose in All Souls. (I may have used slightly different words on Monday.) We tried to explain the relationship of the word pairs to specific passages in the memoir.
For our penultimate activity I asked you to go through your quotation responses and mark places where you would add to your analysis particularly considering the importance of rhetorical analysis (how a writer's choices contribute to purpose) and the relationship between the individual passages and the book's overall themes (how do the parts contribute to the whole).
Finally, I introduced the next book, Omnivore's Dilemma. In doing so I encouraged students to pay attention to your food choices at home and in the supermarket. I also encouraged students to visit the farmers market on Thursdays at Stage Fort Park. When you're writing your responses make sure you (1) discuss the meaning of the passage in context, (2) discuss the relationship of the passage to other parts of the book and/or to the work as a whole, and (3) discuss how the writer's choices contribute to meaning.
[Final final note, the last seminar--on Dogtown--as been moved to Wednesday, August 22 at the Cape Ann Museum on Pleasant St. in Gloucester.]
Those of you who did not attend the first AP English Language and Composition summer seminar must write a substantial response (300+ words) to the summary provided above. Your response may be informal but it must thoughtfully relate your careful reading of the memoir with the concepts presented in the summary. Although you are free to respond to anything in the summary of the first session, you might want to pay particular attention to the italicized passages. I look forward to hearing from you.
Next session 8:00 a.m. July 30.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)