Carolyn LaPlant

3 December 2015

Assignment Sequence for Core Composition 1020--Argument and Visual Analysis Paper

Grade level: College freshmen

Required text: The Norton Field Guide to Writing

Time: 75 minute class periods

Rationale for assignment sequence: For this writing project Ive built a series of readings, discussions, and activities that scaffold students toward creating two commingled products: an analysis of a visual, and argument based off of the chosen visual. I believe this assignment guides students to demonstrate important skills for twenty first century academia; college freshmen in 1020 should be able to read a rich visual as they would read a complex text, and should be able to develop an argument about an important issue.

As citizens of an increasingly technologized and globalized world, students are bombarded with visuals as a means for communication. From layered advertising and aggressive political ads, to the simplest meme or GIF, visuals are embedded in many of our modern forms of communication. This assignment sequence works to foster critical reading skills in a visual context. Part of working toward their final close reading of a complex visual involves exposure to a wide variety of visual texts such as paintings, photography, and magazine covers. The beauty of this assignment sequence is the visual exploration piece is highly flexible; as an instructor I advise asking students to submit possible practice visuals for the class to analyze after you have practiced with one together in class. This offer creates student buy-in and heightens the interest level in the in-class activity. Additionally, the element of choice involved in both selecting the visual and the issue the visual conveys also augments student investment.

In my view, the ability to build a sound argument is equally as important as being able to closely read a text, print, or visual. This assignment sequence asks students to look at a provocative visual as a source of conversation; I want students to see that from a close reading of a visual can emerge a meaningful debate about the issue that visual conveys. The capacity to build a compelling, persuasive argument comes from many things: broader knowledge of rhetoric, an understanding of sound claims and counterclaims, the ability to spot and avoid fallacies, the ability to bring in persuasive evidence, and much more. This assignment sequence works to touch on as much of this as possible in order to support students toward the production of a cogent argument. Ive worked to create some hands on, kinesthetic activities that force a physical connection to the complexity of taking a stance on an issue; the in class spectrum activity on day three asks students to spatially conceive of the range of agreement and disagreement on an issue. This activity not only breaks up the monotony of sitting in desks, and only learning from the neck up, but allows students to visualize the nuance of a potent argument. This activity is also an excellent gateway for a discussion of the writerly ethos. If I take an absolutist stance, what does that do to my credibility? Its lessons like these that I believe strengthen the overall efficacy of this sequence.

Furthermore, this assignment sequence reinforces something I believe students should be focusing on day one of class: the power of the writing process. The way my semester is sequenced positions this paper as the third and final paper before the portfolio; many of the things I ask my students to do are founded upon writing process habits established earlier in the semester. Adapt this as you see fit. This adaptability, though, is what makes the focus on the writing process powerful and effective. The setup of 1020 affords instructors the time to help students see the relationship between reading, discussing, brainstorming, outlining, drafting, revising, drafting, revising, and on and on until students feel like they have reached a polished piece of work that demonstrates good thinking over perfection. The way I have designed the sequence that follows affords time in and out of class for students to work through this approach, hopefully curtailing the inclination to produce writing hurriedly the night before.

Finally, this assignment sequence offers flexibility for instructors. What I have mapped out works for me specifically. It may not work as well for you. Consider restructuring a large group discussion into a paired or small group discussion, or making it a writing prompt, or having students write thinking on the board for everyone to view, or? You may have a spectacular, creative idea that beats my offering. If you do, send it to me! In all seriousness, though, please see the space for versatility in these lessons and the final assignment. The framework for important skills is set; the pathway to get there is pliable.

Day one:

1) For next class: Reading in the textbook: Ch. 10 pages 119-124 and pages 135-137 (2-3 minutes)

2) Quick write: Initial reflection on paper 2 (10 minutes)

What changed between the first draft and the second draft?

What was helpful in the revision process, and what wasnt? What habits will you use for next time? If you could return to this paper right now, is there anything you would still revise? Explain.

3) Watch the argument clinic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y (5 minutes)

4) After watching the Argument Clinic, discuss the following as a class: What is an argument? When is the last time you got in a meaningful argument? What was the subject matter? Have students discuss in pairs, and then share out with the large group. Write findings on board--ask for a student volunteer if desired. (15 minutes)

5) Taking a stance activity: Clearly we have a Monty Python theme today. Before we view, answer these questions: what is a stance? What does it mean to take a stance? As you watch this scene, jot down observations about the stances the characters take, and how well they defend their stances. Bonus: can you spot the fallacy in this scene? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikssfUhAlgg (15 minutes)

Introduce paper three--see appendix A (10 minutes)

Day two:

1) For next class: Read Nicholas Carrs Is Google Making us Stupid? Annotate for the seven parts of argument we talk about today. (2-3 minutes)

2) Quick write: Thinking about visual analysis. What issue does the artist Banksy convey in this image? How does he convey this issue? Unpack at least THREE specific parts of the visual that show your thinking. Do you have a stance on this issue? Link to Banksy piece: http://www.stencilrevolution.com/banksy-art-prints/soldiers-painting-peace/

(10 minutes writing, 15 minutes discussing, 25 minutes total)

3) Class activity: First: each group will be responsible for one of the components of argument that you read about for today (pages 135-137). Your group needs to summarize two-three main points from the section of text that explains your component. Groups: 1: Clear, arguable position; 2: Background Info; 3: Good Reasons; 4: Evidence; 5: Appeals; 6: Tone; 7: Other Positions. Second: You need to take us to the example starting on page 119 and show us exact examples of that component in the text. Third: Read p. 727-728Should Gamers Be Prosecuted for Virtual Stealing? with your same group. As a group, identify the main components of an argument we just discussed. Be prepared to share as a group, and record your thinking on one sheet of paper that will represent your groups work. (45 minutes)

Day three:

1) For next class: Start thinking about what visual you want to use for Essay Threecome with at least two possibilities that you can show me next class. Have paper or electronic copies. Read Gamers articleAlex Weissp. 727annotate for parts of argument we have been discussing. (2-3 minutes)

2) Group discussion--Is Google Making us Stupid? We will circle up as a large group in a little bit. Our discussion today will revolve around the four questions on pages 744-745. Group onequestion one. Group twoquestion two. Group threequestion three. Group fourquestion four. We will have four groups guide our discussion. Each group will prepare responses to their assigned question and lead the discussion in response to that question. You must have AT LEAST TWO direct pieces of evidence from the text. I will collect your group work at the end of the discussion. (45 minutes)

3) Group activity: Whats your Stance? Group activity in response to Nicholas Carr--for this you will need to make two signs--one that says Fully Agree and one that says Fully Disagree. Post on opposite sides of the classroom.

Our purpose: to understand that a meaningful stance is complex and acknowledges the grey areas of argumentation. To practice writing a clear, arguable stance in response to someone elses argument. Imagine a line between Fully agree and Fully disagree. I want you to decide where on that spectrum YOUR stance on Carrs argument would land. 1) Find your place on the spectrum and be ready to verbalize why you positioned yourself where you positioned yourself. 2) Discuss your stance on Carrs argument with the people right next to you. 3) Then find one person that is as far away on the spectrum as possible, and discuss your stances. 4) Finally, write your own stance on Carrs argument based on this activity. (30 minutes)

Day four:

1) For next class: Have a decision made about your visual for next class. Use our Visual analysis notes and How to Analyze a Visual hand out to start to analyze your chosen visual. I dont care what this looks like; I just want to see you come with some preliminary analysis. (2-3 minutes)

2) Partner/Small Group Activity: Practice with ta