| MLG HOME |
Discovery Core I/CUSP 101 & 107 (Composition and Individual and Society) Composition Assignment 2 (Oct. 2) |
Composition Assignment 2: Critical Response Paper
This week you will move from a critical perspective about your own experience to a critical perspective about a piece of writing, using your own experience to inform your response. As with any writing assignment that engages another source, this one starts with the need to understand the basic meaning of the source. It then requires a critical engagement that questions its usefulness, effectiveness and validity. The assigned reading from NMHH provides the basic tools for engaging a source critically; we will be practicing using these tools this week. The NMHH reading also provides a complete description of the "Critical Response Paper" assignment, along with a sample (Ch. 7e, p. 157-160). You will write your paper on one of two of the assigned articles by Michael Pollan. Pollan is an acclaimed writer (as much for his writing style as for its substance) who communicates fairly complex arguments effectively to a college-educated audience. Since you are just starting your college career, the writing may be just above your area of comfort. You will therefore want to be attentive to vocabulary and references that you are not familiar with, and to make sure you understand them before writing about them. However, Pollan is much more accessible than most of the academic prose we will be encountering later in the course, and so serves as a useful stepping stone to these more demanding texts.
In part because Pollan is such a polished writer, you should take great care when assessing his writing for accuracy and validity. Even when you agree with Pollan, you should consider ways his argument might be extended or made more nuanced. Your critical response paper should not only relate what Pollan argues, but also should contribute a perspective that adds to his, either by challenging a specific point or by adding to a point you agree with. As the NMHH assignment makes clear, your Critical Response Paper should focus on a single, significant point, and should not try to review the entire piece. If you do that, your response will only be able to skim the surface of the source's meaning and will not be able to consider it with any depth or complexity. Almost certainly, you will have more to say than the word limit will allow. However, the word limit is absolute. Very rarely does a writer have an opportunity to communicate his or her ideas without some kind of word limit. Pollan himself was given limits for his articles. A writer should be able to identify the appropriate scope of his or her ideas given the space allowed. This constraint will probably force you to edit unnecessary words , phrases and sentences—possibly whole paragraphs. These edits will require you to identify parts of the essay that are not required given the word limit—not necessarily those which do not have validity or interest.
Three additional outcomes have been added to reflect your critical engagement with a source.
Due date and time: Sunday, 8pm.
| Learning Outcome | Criteria: Weak |
Strong |
NMHH |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Understand and effectively respond to assignments as given and seek clarification for questions about assignments when necessary. | Writing leaves out most of the required parts of the essay, including content, structure, and tone. Student does not communicate with instructor about most to any concerns or questions s/he has about the assignment, or communicates and doesn't follow up when confusion still exists. | Writing contains all of the required parts of the essay and demonstrates a deep understanding of its intent. Student gets clarification from instructor on all questions or concerns, and follows up as necessary. | 2a,b,c |
| 2. Shape well-developed paragraphs with effective transitions leading to an integrated text. | Paragraphs have multiple ideas and little internal consistency; sentences do not follow each other logically; ideas are not supported by logic and evidence. Reader cannot determine the logical connection between paragraphs. | Paragraphs contain a single idea that is developed to its natural conclusion given the scope of the topic sentence and with the proper support for assertions made. Reader follows the argument or narrative within and between paragraphs with ease. | 4 b,c, d; 5f |
| 3. Adopt appropriate and genuine voice, tone, and level of formality. | Choice of voice, tone, and level of formality creates dissonance with the reader because they do not correspond to the needs of the assignment (using humor inappropriately, using academic language in a personal essay, etc.); consistency of choice is maintained throughout. | Choice of voice, tone, and level of formality draw the reader in and enhance interest rather than distract it. | 2c,d.e.f |
| 4. Make thoughtful choices about diction (word choice) and syntax (word order); distinguish correct from captivating. | Use of wrong, inappropriate or nonexistent words creates confusion or suggests a different meaning for the reader. | Diction and syntax choices enhance interest and help clarify meaning for the reader. | 5h, i; Parts 8, 9 |
| 5. Edit with care so that choices regarding grammar, punctuation, style, spelling and mechanics enhance rather than detract from the writing's meaning and effect. | Reader has trouble understanding the majority of sentences because of these errors. Inconsistencies in usage, tense, etc. cause reader to be distracted. | Reader reads through the piece without stopping to ponder meaning. Errors are minimal and non-invasive, and grammar, punctuation, etc. improves the experience of the reader. | 5h, i; Parts 7, 10. 11 |
| 6. Write with precision--employ adequate details, definition, and context. | Piece communicates only surface or imprecise ideas and descriptions. Writing is abstract and non-specific with few or no details or imprecise or confusing definitions and with little or no integration to the context of the piece's argument or framework so that reader is confused about the writer's true intent. | Piece communicates the essence of the writer's intended meaning with clarity and specificity, offering details and definitions as needed within the argument or framework of the piece. | |
| 7. Develop a focused thesis that allows for appropriate depth and complexity. | Piece does not contain a thesis. Piece contains a very broad thesis with no specificity, a thesis that is unarguable, or a thesis with too many parts to be developed adequately within the space constraints of the assignment. | Thesis lays out the complexities of the argument to be developed, conveys the importance of the assertion, and restricts its scope to the space constraints of the assignment. | 3b; 5d |
| 8. Utilize clear organizational strategies to develop lines of inquiry. | Piece contains no obvious organizational strategy, bounces from point to point without making connections, and provides little or no sense of the overall direction of the argument. | Organizational strategy leads the reader through the complexities of the argument laid out by the thesis, and leads logically to a compelling conclusion. | 3c; 5e |
| 9. Value and practice genuine intellectual exploration and risk-taking. | Piece includes few if any original ideas or conclusions that are not obvious and unchallengeable; writer's work never develops intellectually over the life of the course. | Piece demonstrates willingness to push beyond the obvious and assert ideas and conclusions that compel the reader's attention; writer's work demonstrates intellectual growth over the length of the course. | 1a; 2a; 3a |
| 10. Examine personal position on a topic or a text; perform comparison of new and prior knowledge. | Piece reveals little or surface reflection of your own position; piece contains little or no attention to the implications of an observation. Reader learns little or nothing from the discussion. | Piece contains evidence of deep reflection going beyond obvious observations; reader comes away with worthwhile insight based on writer's self-reflections. | 1a |
| 11. Examine personal position on a topic or a text; perform comparison of new and prior knowledge. | Piece reveals little or surface reflection of your own position; piece contains little or no attention to the implications of an observation. Reader learns little or nothing from the discussion. | Piece contains evidence of deep reflection going beyond obvious observations; reader comes away with worthwhile insight based on writer's self-reflections. | 1a |
| 12. Identify, comprehend and describe a single point used in analytical, persuasive and interpretive writing, and apply it to a new situation. | Piece does not identify a substantive point or identifies an obvious one, misrepresents a substantive point and applies it to an inappropriate situation, or applies it to an appropriate situation in a way that offers no useful insight. | Piece identifies substantive point and represents it in a way that allows for it to be applied to an appropriate situation in a way that provides insight and advances the overall argument. | 7 |
| 13. Use active reading for inquiry, learning, thinking, and communication--learn how to read more precisely and evocatively, to make sense of difficult texts, both linguistic and visual. | Piece reveals little to no understanding of both the basic and underlying meaning of the source, or only a surface understanding of both; piece demonstrates little to no ability to contextualize points or facts within larger argument or framework of source. | Piece communicates the essence of both the basic and underlying meaning of a source in a complex way that does justice to its context within the argument or framework of the source. | 7 |
| 14. Follow all formatting and submission guidelines. |
Steps to take:
© 2001-7 Michael Lewis Goldberg: intellectual property information