Thanks to the COM352 students for contributing a bunch of new pages! I'll be moving these pages into the main area of the wiki soon.

From UMassWiki

Today’s activities

1. Turn in one copy of your second Identity draft.
2. Who read which pieces in the Student Anthology? Group together; take notes to post on the course wiki (whoever does will receive baseline credit). Include names of everyone in the group and identify their contributions. Ten minutes max!
   1. What identities do you (as readers) assume for the author? Provide evidence.
   2. What definition of identity does the author assume? Provide evidence.
   3. Looking at your evidence, what type of rhetorical strategy is the author using? Ethos, pathos, or logos?
3. Lecture/Discussion: the rhetorical situation – its elements (logos, pathos, ethos) and goal. What are you, as author of an “Identity” essay, trying to persuade your audience to believe? Ten minutes max!
4. Wiki tour: homework update, identity thread, play…
5. Return Peer Reviews of the first Identity draft to the Peer Reviewer. Freewrite in response to the comments Steph has made to you as the Reviewer – how well did you do in providing feedback to the author? Were you able to discern the author’s notion of “identity”? Did you impose your own notion of “identity” (if so, what is it?) Did you assume that you and the author share the same concept of “identity”? (Ten minutes.)
6. Research: Steph’s compilation from your first impressions of The Jacket.
   1. How does this help me as author?
   2. What rhetorical situation might I be trying to address?
   3. Who is my audience? How do I conceive of the audience beyond the obvious? (What rhetorical strategies will be most effective to reach them?)
   4. What is my subject? What are the messages, what point, do I want to convey?
7. In small groups: read one example of peer feedback on The JacketFirst Responses. Please do not work ahead: we will discuss the feedback first as a whole class before moving on to the actual paper:
   1. Read the feedback first. What picture does it give you of the writing? How much does it tell you about what the author is trying to convey? Compare and contrast the two styles of feedback: what are the strengths of each, and how could each be improved? Paul -> Tom, Dan -> Anna.
   2. Now, read the actual writing – remember, these were not written with “identity” in mind, but what kind of feedback might you give the author now IF the subject is supposed to be “identity”?
8. Time permitting – freewrite about your own Identity piece considering any/all of the information presented in class today.

Homework

due at the beginning of class on Thursday, February 22.

1. Quiz three “take home” – to be posted in the wiki. There are no “right” or “wrong” answers; this is a quiz of critical thinking (logic).
2. Building upon the freewriting you did in class about your Peer Review feedback to an author, write a letter to the author clarifying and expanding your feedback on their Identity paper. In particular, what can you tell the author, now, about the concept of identity that they are using in their narrative/essay? ALSO, explain to the author which rhetorical strategies you think they are using, explain why and provide evidence (direct quotes). Bring TWO COPIES: on Thursday you will give this letter AND the first draft with your original comments to the author; the second copy you will turn in to Steph.
3. Put your Identity portfolio together: first in (on the bottom, or last) is your first draft. Second is the copy you gave Steph, returned with highlighting. Next will be the copy with Peer Reviewer comments (to be added on Thursday) and the letter from your Peer Reviewer (to be added on Thursday). Be sure you date each document!
4. Free write about your own Identity narrative/essay. Where are you with it? What do you need to do, next, to improve it? Page counts will be taken on Thursday!

Note: Final drafts of your Identity narrative/essay will be due on Tuesday, February 27.