schedule 11.24/11.30: Sontag FRQ / logical fallacy notes. DUE: nothing

schedule 11.24/11.30: Sontag FRQ / logical fallacy notes. DUE: nothing
12.1/2: “Singer Solution” discussion (note: questions need to be reworked to align closer with assessments) / logical fallacy mix-up / rough draft peer edits. DUE: first rough draft. 12.3/4: logical fallacy ID / argumentation quiz 2 / philosophy discussion with Levinovitz article (note: questions need to be written that align with test). DUE: not a darn thing 12.7/8: AP MC strategy review and practice (pull AP 16- from test 1) / grad paper graphics gallery walk / review Sontag FRQs. DUE: nothing 12.9/10: AP MC (pull from test 1) / review student grad paper / ??? (possible library day? Ask Nadia for ideas.) DUE: nothing 12.11/14: vocab. 6 quiz / argumentation FRQ intro (notes from Five Steps) / some sort of test review (Kahoot?). DUE: nothing 12.15/16: argumentation unit test (scantrons?) / post-test: lost generation article. DUE: nothing 12.17/18: argumentation practice FRQ (last year’s, pull resources from College Board) / Gatsby intro and assign first three chapters. DUE: Final rough draft

11.24/ TUE/MON 11.24/11.30: FRQ (graded) 12.3/4: Argumentation quiz 2 (enthymemes, logical fallacies, syllogisms) 12.11/14: Vocab. 6 quiz 12.15/16: Argumentation test 12.17/18: Argumentation FRQ 12.17/18: Gatsby assigned 12.17/18: final rough draft due! Merry non-denominational holiday expression of good will! Begging the question/circular reasoning Ad hominem Hasty generalization False dilemma Equivocation Red herring Tu quoque Appeal to doubtful authority Post hoc Non sequitur Slippery slope Bandwagon

11.24/30 activity: FRQ This is the Barry prompt. You know the drill.
A couple sheets of paper.

11.24/30 activity: FRQ 45 minutes. Hi, Mr. Barry!

11.24/30 activity: Identifying logical fallacies
Fallacies are defects that weaken arguments. First, fallacious arguments are very, very common and can be quite persuasive, at least to the causal reader or listener. You can find dozens of examples of fallacious reasoning in newspapers, advertisements, and other sources. Second, it is sometimes hard to evaluate whether an argument is fallacious. An argument might be very weak, somewhat weak, somewhat strong, or very strong. An argument that has several stages or parts might have some strong sections and some weak ones.

Begging the question/circular reasoning: An argument is circular if its conclusion is among its premises, if it assumes (either explicitly or not) what it is trying to prove. A is true because B is true; B is true because A is true. Begging the question is bad a fallacy to commit because it’s not very good to commit it. The pope is always right because he claims to be infallible (well, not this pope, but historically this was true). Happiness is the most important emotional state to achieve since every other emotional state is inferior to it.

Ad hominem: Probably the easiest one. Attacking the person instead of attacking the claim. This can also be directed at a group of people. That corporation cannot be trusted to do the right thing because they’re evil! Socrates' arguments about human excellence are rubbish. What could a man as ugly as he know about human excellence. Take that, Socrates! And of course . . .

Hasty generalization: conclusion can’t be supported based on the evidence. Stereotypes are often hasty generalizations. Josh must be smart because he’s an AP student. Drawing a conclusion based on a small sample size, rather than looking at statistics that are much more in line with the typical or average situation is also a hasty generalization: I asked all my five of my friends (which is a lot of friends for an AP student to have ) about the 7:15 start time, and they all agreed that it was too early. Therefore, it’s too early!

False dilemma: either/or fallacy. Falsely claiming that only two alternatives exist. You’re either with us or against us. I thought you were smart, but you aren’t taking AP Lang, so . . . Give me liberty or give me death (well, it is, innit?).

Equivocation: Deliberately misconstruing words to make your point. We actually looked at this yesterday. All people are born with equal rights; some people are, however, born with physical disabilities; therefore some people do not have equality. The priest told me I should have faith.. I have faith that my son will do well in school this year. Therefore, the priest should be happy with me.

Red herring: divert the audience from the real issue (this can sound a lot like tu quoque and ad hominem). Argument A is presented by person 1. Person 2 introduces argument B. Argument A is abandoned. Mike: It is morally wrong to cheat on your spouse, why on earth would you have done that? Ken: But what is morality exactly? Mike: It’s a code of conduct shared by cultures. Ken: But who creates this code? [et cetera ad infinitum] Ken has successfully diverted Mike from the initial topic. Red herrings are often deliberate and (attempt to be) clever. Sorry. The picture for this one is not very good.

Tu quoque (two kwo kwee): You also. You did it, so you’ve lost all ethos to speak on the subject. It’s an appeal to hypocrisy. Kampolmi (the evil alternative version of an AP Lang teacher) has no right to grade me on grammar because he often has grammar mistakes on his quizzes and such. Oh. That might actually be valid. Sorry he’s such a jerk. Lucky you’re stuck with me.

Appeal to doubtful authority: the people whom you’re relying on for their ethos aren’t exactly the most reliable people. I’m not scientist, but I can totes tell you that global warming is not real. I’m not an archaeologist, but it’s just my personal opinion that the pyramids were built to store grain not as tombs for the pharaohs. et cetera Sorry. No picture. Wait!

Post hoc: We’re good on this, right? I taught it to you so you know it. Wait? Is that begging the question? Hmmm . . .

Non sequitur: also known as “that does not follow.” It’s a little like post hoc but doesn’t have to be spatially related. In post hoc the two events occur about the same time. Compare.

non sequitur Claim A is made. Evidence is presented for Claim A. Therefore, claim C is true. Buddy Burger has the greatest food in town. Buddy Burger was voted #1 by the local paper. Therefore, Phil, the owner of Buddy Burger, should run for President of the United States. post hoc A occurs before B Therefore A caused B Phil opened Buddy Burger about the same time crime escalated around here. About Buddy Burger is the source of all this crime.

Slippery slope: a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. A occurred therefore B is bound to occur. Give ‘em an inch; they’ll take a mile. If we don’t stop animal abuse in labs, pretty soon these scientists will be coming to your homes and experimenting on your cats! Hooray!

Bandwagon: the appeal to stupid and gullible people. A is popular therefore A is correct. “I Can’t Feel my Face” must be a great song because everyone likes it. You should totally take six AP classes because everyone else is doing it. I mean, that’s just silly, amarite?

CLOSE and HW 11.24/11.30 We’re going to switch texts temporarily.
Read “The Singer Solution” in Shea’s, the white book you haven’t touched yet. Make some notes while you read. We’ll discuss next class. First three pages of rough draft due on 12.1/ Please make sure you have a works cited with your draft. Turnitin.com? What’s that? Why’s that? Should I know about that?

12.1/ Wed/Thu 12.3/4: Argumentation quiz 2 (enthymemes, logical fallacies, syllogisms) 12.11/14: Vocab. 6 quiz 12.15/16: Argumentation test 12.17/18: Argumentation FRQ 12.17/18: Gatsby assigned 12.17/18: final rough draft due! Did you know “Jingle Bells” was not originally an Xmas song? It was originally written as a Thanksgiving song which is almost too absurd to be believed. I mean, Thanksgiving songs? Really? DUE: first three pages of rough draft. warm-up: Solve this, Singer! Analysis questions and discussion for “The Singer Solution.” activity 1: An actual activity! Logical fallacy match game activity 2: peer edits. close: Logical fallacies review

12.1/12.2 warm-up: Singer Solution discussion
What mode does Singer begin his essay with? Is it effective? Does he come back to this mode? Singer identifies himself as a “utilitarian philosopher” (5). What does he mean? Why does Singer cite and quote from Unger’s book Living High and Letting Die? Why does Singer focus most of his argument on helping children? Singer begins using second person pronouns in paragraph 9. Why? When and why does he switch to first person? Paragraph 13 appears to be fallacious. How so? Why does Singer acknowledge that “[h]ypothetical examples can easily become farcical” (16)? Singer claims that morality can’t be decided by “taking opinion polls” (17). How then is morality decided upon? What counterarguments does Singer acknowledge in paragraph 19? How does he refute them? “We are all in that situation” (final paragraph). What situation is that? Who is Singer’s audience? What is Singer trying to persuade his audience to do? What is Singer’s tone? What warrant (overall major premise) is Singer assuming throughout his essay? (There are probably only one or two.)

12.1/12.2 activity: Oh snap! It’s an actual activity!
You’re going to choose a partner or two (but not three. Three is not correct. Neither is four. Five is right out.) You’re going to get a folder. It’s got terms and definitions and examples and they’re all mixed up. And you’re going to put them together. And then you’re to win a prize! Prizes!

12.1/12.2 activity: rough draft edits.
Check citations first. Is everything on the works cited in the paper and vice versa? Are citations correct (as far as you can tell) on the works cited and in the paper? Does the intro answer the three basic questions? Is the policy claim argumentative? Read the background paragraph. Is there evidence in there that could make a good chart/graph? Read one body paragraph. Is it structured using Toulmin? Identify what type of claim the BP uses and the type of warrant it uses. Does the warrant relate to a particular audience?

12.1/2 activity: Serious art project time
Do we have time for this? I sure hope so! Pick a logical fallacy of your choosing. Create an example for it. Put the term, definition and example of that fallacy on one of the following: A snow flake or snowman or nondenominational holiday tree or magic flying hypocritical jerky reindeer!

CLOSE and HW /12.2 Print, read, annotate the article on my website “Why I’m a Philosophy Professor” (not me; I’m not a philosophy professor. Not like Quentin Robert de Nameland and feel free to Google “Quentin Robert de Nameland” when you get home—I dare you!).

12.3/ THU/FRI 12.3/4: Argumentation quiz 2 (enthymemes, logical fallacies, syllogisms) 12.11/14: Vocab. 6 quiz 12.15/16: Argumentation test 12.17/18: Argumentation FRQ 12.17/18: Gatsby assigned 12.17/18: final rough draft due! Wish somebody special a happy winter time celebration of non- religious affiliated cheer. Due: “Why I’m a philosophy professor.” In tracker as “philosophy.” This will fill up the tracker. Staple article to tracker and turn in. I’ll return while you’re quizzing. warm-up: Fallacious review. (Does that mean the review is fallacious? Hmmm.) activity: argumentation quiz post-quiz: philosophy? close: grad paper graphs?

12.3/4 warm-up: logical fallacy identification!
According to my English teacher, Kampolmi (evil doppelganger!), the skills one learns in mathing class are useless. All maths are useless because I have yet to find any use for them! (Is this two?) Either you will pass your maths class or fail at life! I hope you’re happy about that! My maths teacher cannot be right because she dresses so stupid! Look at her stupid outfit. We were told that AP Lang would teach us how to create better arguments which I find offensive. If there’s one thing this world needs less of it’s people arguing with each other! I failed my maths test because it was raining today. I always fail tests when it rains! I know how to maths the heck out of stuff because I signed up for this super hard maths class! begging the question ad hominem hasty generalization false dilemma equivocation post hoc appeal to doubtful authority

12.3/4 activity: Can I argue my way out of this quiz?
No, you can’t because you’re equivocating the term “argue” with what is actually argumentation. They’re two different things. Way to logically fallacize, champ. Your face is a logical fallacy. And, yes, I just ad hominemed you. I’m ok with that. Usual quiz procedures. Post quiz: questions for Levinovintizzn

12.3/4 post-quiz: PHILOSOPHIZE THIS!!!
What function does the second paragraph (lines 4-7) serve? Why does Levinovitz admit that a lot of “academia is [useless]” (8)? (Look! I save you from having to read bad words. I’m so nice.) What definition of “the good life” is Levinovitz using (11)? Syntax is our next unit. Look at the sentence on line 10 that begins “I should just quit.” What do you notice about the way that sentence is written? Then notice the three sentences that begin line 15. Anything stand out there particularly in light of that last sentence? Did he do that on purpose? Why is the paragraph on lines funny? (It is funny, too. If you don’t think so then you lack a sense of humor. I’m sorry.) How is Levinovitz part of a “sacred order” (19)? What is the implication of that diction choice (since the next unit in addition to looking at syntax also looks at diction)? How does Levinovitz use figurative language in paragraph 7 (lines 22-24)? How does the simile in this paragraph relate back to a previous statement? (This question is asking you to make connections between two techniques that the rhetor uses to achieve his purpose.) YAY!!! CUSSING!!! How does, according to Levinovitz, a humanities class benefit humanity? What hypocrisy does Levinovitz note in lines 37-42?

12.3/4 post-quiz: PHILOSOPHIZE THIS!!!
1. Do you know what a humanities class is (as opposed to, say, a science or math class)? 2. What is philosophy? Do you have a personal philosophy? 3. Do you enjoy reading books and articles and watching videos that expose you to other cultures? Is there some social benefit to this type of exposure? 4. Are there some classes that are more important than others? Why?

12.3/12.4 notes: grade paper graphics
A few notes. Label the graph. “Figure 1: The number of cats experiemented on in America.” “Figure 2: The amount of politicians it takes to change a light bulb.” “Figure 4: The jerkiness of the characters from Rudolph the Red- Nosed Reindeer in relative terms.” Etc. Underneath the graph, put your source. This does not need to be the whole works cited entry. If, for example (oh! exemplification you say! yes please!), this is my works cited entry: Gleick, James. Chaos: Making a New Science. New York: Penguin, Print. Underneath my graphic, I can put “Source: James Gleick.”

Regardless of size or amount, the graphic(s) counts as ½ page. Your background paragraph(s) is often the best place to get information to use for the graphic. I recommend putting that thing on the last page. Reference the graphic in your paper. So, for example . . . “Animal experimentation on cats has been on the rise since 1990 (see Figure 1 on page 10).” COLOR!!! BIG!!! LEGIBLE!!! EFFORT!!! EXCLAMATION POINTS!!! er . . .

12.3/12.4 activity: grade paper graphics gallery walk
Huh? Getting up? Moving around? In this class? That’s weird. Around the room are ten graphics from student papers. They are of various quality. Choose five of them to study. Write down some notes, general impressions, non-denominational winter holiday song lyrics—you know, usual stuff. At the end of about ten minutes or so, we’ll review and discuss what the students did well here and what they did poorly.

CLOSE 12.3/12.4 So we are basically done with the argumentation unit.
We’ll spend the last few weeks of the quarter practicing AP test strategies (writing FRQs, taking MCs), fine-tuning grad papers and discussing Gatsby. I figure we’ll start the next unit, Diction/Syntax/Tone, when we come back from winter break. We’ll have a few weeks—er, like a week--when we come back before a cumulative midterm. My plan as of right now for the midterm looks like this: 15-20 terms to match to definitions 10-15 AP MC questions 10-15 questions for two texts covering modes 10-15 questions for two texts covering argumentation

CLOSE and HW /12.4 Next class we’ll discuss the Barry prompt. Here are your FRQs back (without, for now, my commentary). Please make sure you bring these back for next class! Take home this student sample essay and score it. Resist the temptation to google this online. I’d also like to complete a peer edit next week (either Mon/Tue or Wed/Thu). Please make sure you have a hard copy of your rough draft with works cited both of those days. If you have Five Steps, please bring this all next week as well. You can leave Patterns at home for the conceivable future.

12.7/ MON/TUE 12.11/14: Vocab. 6 quiz 12.15/16: Argumentation test 12.17/18: Argumentation FRQ 12.17/18: Gatsby assigned 12.17/18: final rough draft due! Let the spirit of unbridled avarice be with you! warm-up: grad paper graphics? Activity??? Questions marks???????? activity 1: FRQ review activity 2: rough draft peer edits close: AP MC notes? Maybe? Due: You are bringing Five Steps this week, a hard copy of your rough draft and your Barry FRQ. Due: You need to print a new tracker.

12.7/12.8 warm-up: grade paper graphics gallery walk
Huh? Getting up? Moving around? In this class? That’s weird. Around the room are ten graphics from student papers. They are of various quality. Choose five of them to study. Write down some notes, general impressions, non-denominational winter holiday song lyrics—you know, usual stuff. At the end of about ten minutes or so, we’ll review and discuss what the students did well here and what they did poorly.

A few notes. Label the graph. “Figure 1: The number of cats experiemented on in America.” “Figure 2: The amount of politicians it takes to change a light bulb.” “Figure 4: The jerkiness of the characters from Rudolph the Red- Nosed Reindeer in relative terms.” Etc. Underneath the graph, put your source. This does not need to be the whole works cited entry. If, for example (oh! exemplification you say! yes please!), this is my works cited entry: Gleick, James. Chaos: Making a New Science. New York: Penguin, Print. Underneath my graphic, I can put “Source: James Gleick.”

Regardless of size or amount, the graphic(s) counts as ½ page. Your background paragraph(s) is often the best place to get information to use for the graphic. I recommend putting that thing on the last page. Reference the graphic in your paper. So, for example . . . “Animal experimentation on cats has been on the rise since 1990 (see Figure 1 on page 10).” COLOR!!! BIG!!! LEGIBLE!!! EFFORT!!! EXCLAMATION POINTS!!! er . . .

12.7/8 activity: FRQ How does uncertainty make “one tentative” (3)?
Why does Barry claim that scientists need to “embrace” uncertainty (10)? Why does Barry exemplify Einstein in the third paragraph? Barry claims that scientists must have a “strength deeper than physical courage” (22). How does this characterize scientists? Paragraph 4 uses a lot of figurative language. Where is it? What’s it doing? How should one answer the rhetorical questions in paragraph 5? So what was Barry’s view? How did he convey it?

12.7/12.8 warm-up: Barry FRQ I guess you’re wondering why you got the score you got. I’ve got your justifications right here (all 13 pages of them, some 9800 words), and I had them last week and I totally could’ve given them to you then. I have a logical equation bouncing around my hand that sounds something like your educative experience increases exponentially with the horrible and hilarious and hilariously horrible things I can do to you. Anyway. Let’s see what College Board had to say about this one. And then, yes, I’ll let you see your justifications. Then we’ll look at a few of their released essays.

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ First of all, here’s their language for an 8: Essays earning a score of 8 effectively analyze how Barry uses rhetorical strategies to characterize scientific research. The prose demonstrates an ability to control a wide range of the elements of effective writing but is not necessarily flawless. Ok. That’s helpful (you should try grading these things based on how little they give you). So what did they want you to see?

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ What was the intent of the question?
This question asked students to consider the rhetorical strategies used by science writer John M. Barry to characterize the heroic and pioneering nature of scientific research [emphasis mine]. Students were required to consider how Barry uses elements of language to portray the qualities required of scientists: intelligence, curiosity, passion, patience, creativity, self-sufficiency, and courage. So you needed to claim that Barry positively views scientists.

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ How well did students do?
The mean score for this question was 4.18 out of a possible 9 points. [This is a full ½ point below the typical average.] In his book Berry relates the history of the 1918 influenza pandemic, focusing on scientists’ efforts to identify the cause and respond to the threat. Barry identifies his story as an “epic” and characterizes scientists as heroes. This passage demonstrates how skilled writers can use elements of language to reveal their attitudes toward their subjects. Successful students noted how Barry’s word choice, imagery, figurative language, and selection of detail create an image of the scientist as hero

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ What were common student errors or omissions? This passage seemed deceptively simple; although students could generally understand what Barry says about science and scientists, they often struggled to explain how he characterizes science. Some merely summarized or commented on the passage. Often students identified a whole host of rhetorical and literary terms without explaining how these worked together to achieve a particular effect. Some students seemed determined to talk about diction, imagery, and syntax without recognizing that Barry’s syntax, in particular, proves less important than other elements for explaining how he creates his image of the scientist. So with all that in mind, let’s look at your essays; then compare them to the released essays.

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ Sample 2A:
Showing an unusually keen understanding of Barry’s text, this student says that in order to deliver what might seem an “ethereal” idea, Barry “utilizes comparison and logical hypothetical situations to convey that idea.” As it discusses those situations, this essay proves to be one of the rare responses that recognizes the questions Barry poses not as rhetorical ones in the technical sense, but rather as questions posited to illustrate the workings of the inquiring mind of the scientist. The essay explains that the rhetorical effect of the questions is “to simulate the thought process of the pioneer scientist.” It analyzes Barry’s analogies, his use of antithesis, and the arrangement of the piece. The student writes with a confident voice, unafraid to be humorous, comparing Barry’s image of the scientist falling off the metaphorical cliff to “Wile E. Coyote, who himself is very methodical, persistent, and courageous in the pursuit of his goal.” The response is well written throughout and in fact improves as it progresses, demonstrating a student writing his or her way into an effective response. This essay earned a score of 9 both for its mature control of language and for its effective understanding and analysis.

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ Sample 2B: read through the essay and give it as score. You’ve seen the top of the pile . . . This essay presents an adequate response as it analyzes how Barry characterizes scientific research “as an unforgiving Wonderland of discovery.” Its analysis of Barry’s use of metaphor is quite strong, and overall the essay demonstrates good control of language. The student knows how to incorporate quoted material deftly into the syntax of the surrounding prose. For example, the student writes: “Barry insists that ‘experiments do not simply work,’ but with stubbornness and ingenuity ‘an investigator must make them work.’” Paragraph 3 explains that for scientists the “pursuit of scientific research leads them ‘into a wilderness region ’” The essay concludes by saying that Barry presents scientific research as a process “that leads us, like Alice, ‘through the looking glass.’” Such clear expression is often a feature of upper-half responses. But although the prose style might seem to warrant elevation of the score to 7, the essay would require more thorough analysis to rise above adequacy, so it only earned a score of 6.

12.7/12.8 notes: Barry FRQ So . . . How do you score yours in light of these responses? Resubmit? You may edit, refine, rework your essay and resubmit it by next class. Typed? Yeah, typed and submitted to turnitin.com. This is applicable to any student who scored a 5 or below. The due date does not apply to student in KT.

12.7/12.8 activity: rough draft edits.

CLOSE and HW /12.8 Tonight, review the information on AP MCs on p in The Jackson Five Steps and take a few notes. We will review next class. Make sure you have Five Steps and a hard copy of your grad paper for next class. You may continue leaving Patterns at home.

12.9/12.10 warm-up: enthymeme practice
Let’s not forget how to do this. Identify the major premise that has been omitted from each enthymeme in 14. RoyLee is a plagiarizer and should be expelled. a. All cheaters have plagiarized c. All plagiarizers should be expelled b. Plagiarism is against the rules at our school d. Some expulsions are a result of plagiarism 15. ElRoy is allergic to nuts, so he cannot eat grandma's chocolate chip cookies. a. Some nuts cause ElRoy to die c. ElRoy likes most chocolate chip cookies b. Grandma's cookies all contain nuts d. All allergies are caused by nuts 16. LeRoy's college application was submitted after 15 November and will not be considered. a. Some college applications are invariably turned in late b. All applications will be considered c. All applications submitted after 15 November will be rejected d. No applications will be considered

12.9/ MON/TUE 12.11/14: Vocab. 6 quiz 12.15/16: Argumentation test 12.17/18: Argumentation FRQ 12.17/18: Gatsby assigned 12.17/18: final rough draft due! My parents were totally going to name me “The Grinch” when I was born. Not because I tried to steal Xmas from anyone but because I was born with a heart that was three sizes too small. It took 23 surgeries to correct that serious birth defect, but here I am now with a full range of emotions. There’s um, hunger and uh, awake and annoyed. You know. All the emotions. All three of them. warm-up: Who is Alexander Pope and why should I care about him? (Pssst. You shouldn’t.) activity 1: AP MC notes and test taking strategies activity 2: AP MC practice and scoring guidelines activity 3: grad paper writin’ and reviewin’! Yee-haw! activity 4: magical snowman building contest. Failure to create a magical snowman will result in failure of the course. close: grad paper example

12.9/12.10 activity: AP MC Note: I have not looked at the actual questions for this section before writing these questions. Hopefully there is a good match-up and you’ll see that the things we do in class are useful. If not, um, duenna! What does Johnson mean when he claims that Pope is not “the nicest model” (1)? The third paragraph represents a shift in description from Pope’s _____ to his _____. Paragraph 4 emphasizes what aspect of Pope’s personal life? Johnson claims that Pope wrote often about “poverty” and ridiculed it. Is Johnson judging Pope for this condemnation of the poor? Should we discuss “The Singer Solution” again??? Duenna??????? How did Pope feel about Dryden? How would you describe the relationship Pope felt toward Dryden? Lines characterize Pope’s approach to writing. How so? What does it mean that Pope had “nothing left to be forgiven” (29)? TRUE/FALSE: Johnson considers Pope a better poet than essayist/novelist. Explain the figurative language in the final two paragraphs. How does the comparison between Dryden’s “natural field” and Pope’s “velvet lawn” contrast the style of the poets (33, 34)? How does Pope’s writings compare to Dryden’s? Whom does Johnson prefer?

12.9/12.10 notes: AP MC Ah, Five Steps . . .
“Multiple choice? Multiple guess? Multiple anxiety?” (Murphy and Rankin 41). Well, it’s been my experience that this section of the test is easier on my students. In fact, while I generally score in the 60-70% range on MC sections, y’all usually score in the 70-80% range. Go figure. It’s almost like you have more practice at taking standardized MC-style tests at this point in your life or something . . . Oh well. At least I know what a duenna is.

12.9/12.10 notes: AP MC Anyhow . . . You are given one hour to answer (usually 55) questions on four or five (usually five) passages. The passages can be fiction or non-fiction. Passages are self-contained, meaning if you are unfamiliar with the subject or the time period or even a reference, it shouldn’t matter. These passages don’t gauge your ability to memorize historical facts or plots or literary movements. It does expect that you will have memorized some terms specifically applicable to rhetoric, but that’s what we have the next three months for. Hooray!

12.9/12.10 notes: AP MC I think the biggest issue students have, then, is not with the terms (I will have taught you the terms so you will know the terms ). It’s not the the difficulty of the passages, either (consider all the difficult passages you’ve already read this year; this selection of difficult passages will prepare you for all future difficult passages—er, wait a sec ). It’s timing. You have a little over one minute per question, not factoring in your reading and annotating of the passage. Practicing how to annotate quickly and knowing what to annotate for is key.

12.9/12.10 notes: AP MC Pay attention to punctuation, diction, syntax, tone and organization of ideas (modes). Try to read the passage as if you were the rhetor reading it to an audience. What is being emphasized and why? Where are the major points and what sort of rhetoric is used to make those points? Don’t skim. If tracing the passage with a pencil or your finger forces you to slow down, then do so. You’ll see me do this when I take MCs with you (usually only in 4A—no sense in me taking it two days in a row). They will ask you about footnotes, the title, the author—be aware of the details contained not just inside the text but around it, too.

12.9/12.10 notes: AP MC Five Steps acknowledges that this is a “flawed method of gauging your understanding” (42). I agree to a degree. The thing with any MC section (whether I create it or College Board or the sophisticatedly trained monkeys qualified test-makers our state uses to create their EOCs) is that the test-writer’s reading of the text is the only interpretation of that text you are allowed. I admit that sometimes my readings of a text are flawed, and I go back year to year and revise, cut and edit as I continue to research. College Board doesn’t have this problem (that problem being me). These are some of the best test questions around, and I wouldn’t care so much about this class if preparing for this test didn’t teach you valuable and widely applicable skills. Let’s practice the actual questions now. It’s p. 19 in your Five Alive book if you brought it.

12.9/12.10 activity: AP MC 13 minutes:
Answers w/ explanations on p. 62 A E D B C I use a curve when putting AP MCs into the gradebook that is intended to represent the curve AP historically has given to the test. 5/12 = 7.75/12 4/12 = 6.93/12 So your score is in actuality 3/12 = 6/12 12/12 = 12/12 2/12 = 4.9/12 11/12 = 11.5/12 1/12 =3.46/12 10/12 = 11/12 0/12 = pictures of food 9/12 = 10.4/12 Next class we’ll work through some math to figure out what this average means for passing your AP test. 8/12 = 9.8/12 7/12 = 9.17/12 6/12 = 8.49/12

12.9/12.10 activity: grad paper example
Basic structure of your grad paper 1-2 paragraphs: Intro with policy claim (or thesis) 1-4 paragraphs: expository information that gives definition to the problem. Facts, data, history proving that a problem is obvious and in need of solving. 3-??? paragraphs (three main points at least): benefits of adopting your claim. Structured using the Toulmin model. 1-??? paragraphs: Counterargument and refutation. Easiest way to structure this is to use Rogerian model. 1 paragraph: conclusion. Tell your audience where they can volunteer or suggest a future that has adopted your policy claim and is a much better place as a result. I sort of skim this in all honesty. Sorry?

Intros should answer the following questions: What is this? Why am I reading it? What do you want me to do? Does this intro accomplish those simple tasks? When a cat is released into the wild, it breeds, breeds, and breeds again. Each offspring branches off to breed, and the population gradually spirals out of control. The United States feral cat population is now estimated at 50 million, though some say the population is even greater than that (Williams). The cats are seen as a nuisance and a public and environmental health threat, as they loudly fight in neighborhoods, leave odors when marking their territory, carry disease, and kill vulnerable bird species (Williams; LaCroix). It is clear that the population must be controlled, and there are two dominant methods of doing so: trap, neuter, release (TNR) and trap and kill. Despite these options, governmental agencies ignore the burgeoning feral cat population, leaving the problem unresolved (Levy and Crawford). Local governments should subsidize TNR programs to stabilize and, therefore, reduce feral cat populations.

BPs should be structured according to Toulmin. Topic sentence = claim that the BP is going to prove and clearly states a benefit of adopting the overall thesis (or policy claim from the intro). Grounds support the claim and can take a variety of forms (description, exemplification, C&E, C&C, even narration in small doses). Warrant relates directly back to policy claim and makes explicit the appeal to the intended audience for this benefit. Review your notes for different ways to structure a warrant. Nah. I’m kidding. You don’t take notes. Here they are: Argument based on Generalization with the sample can be inferred of the group/population. Argument based on Analogy Argument via sign/clue Causal argument Principle argument Argument via authority

Toulmin model? Government subsidization of TNR would be very cost-effective because TNR procedures already cost very little. According to Libby Post, executive director of the New York State Animal Protection Federation, trapping and killing costs $100 to $125 per cat and TNR is $35 to $55 per cat (Figura). Due to the fact that population control must be conducted on a large scale, utilizing TNR would save a large amount of money. More cats could be sterilized than euthanized when given a set subsidy. Furthermore, a large network of volunteer organizations dedicated to TNR already exists across the country. Post asserted that the aforementioned New York legislation would “bolster” the efforts of volunteer organizations (Figura). People would not have to be hired to implement TNR, as volunteers could continue to do so with subsidization. Most importantly, no additional money would be required to subsidize TNR programs. In New York’s proposed bill, money comes from the Animal Population Control Program, which, as said before, generates funds from dog license fees. This system could be implemented in all states, as “nearly all major municipalities require licensing” (Giordullo). The public is required to pay no more money than they already do, and the money will be used to efficiently manage the feral cat population.

12.9/12.10 activity: grad paper peer edits

CLOSE and HW 12.9/12.10 Next class: bring your grad paper
Study for your vocab. quiz You will have a scored AP MC. We will review for your argumentation test. Make sure you bring any questions you have for this unit. Test format?  1-7: matching of basic terms 8-12: induction or deduction? 13-15: identify what is missing from the syllogism 16-20: logical fallacy match term to example 21-26: visual argumentation analysis 27-35: historical essay analysis (circa 1780s) 36-44: historical letter analysis (circa 1950s) 45-50: historical speech analysis (circa 1850s)

schedule 11.24/11.30: Sontag FRQ / logical fallacy notes. DUE: nothing

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "schedule 11.24/11.30: Sontag FRQ / logical fallacy notes. DUE: nothing"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

schedule 11.24/11.30: Sontag FRQ / logical fallacy notes. DUE: nothing

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "schedule 11.24/11.30: Sontag FRQ / logical fallacy notes. DUE: nothing"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback