Day 6 - Tuesday
- roll call
- return second skeletal arguments
- syllabus review: first papers assigned
II. Evidence Review
Evidence a double-headed monster: not debatable but
subjective. How do you know? Recall ad: "The senses don't
Today we deal with even less objective evidence:
music. What makes this music Copland-esque? Students listen and
respond, noting ideas down on paper.
"But what about?" A/R proves that you're a
thoughtful writer, responsive and dialogic, interested in more than
simply winning the argument. Ex: Calvin and Hobbes cartoon.
- How do you respond?
In your response, you politely state why the
acknowledged different opinions are insignificant, incorrect,
ill-formed, etc. You rebuild your original position, extending it
a bit to account for the concerns you've acknowledged. In the
response, you make a mini-argument, complete with evidence,
A/R is a process. First, you sum up the opposing
argument (acknowledgment): "Some might argue that" Next, you respond
to the argument: "However, those people overlook/misunderstand/are
only partly right/etc."
IV. Back to the Copland CD
Students will A/R at the level of evidence. They may
1) dispute Copland evidence interps already offered or 2) offer an
interpretation that anticipates opposition.
V. Group Work
Students share their returned skeletal arguments with
a partner, one who chose either the same myth (but different artist)
or same artist (but different myth). Goals: 1) to review the parts of
argument and their function and 2) to be able to acknowledge/respond
to one portion of partner's argument for homework. This A/R will be
written out in paragraph form.
V. Claims Revisited
Use evidence and A/R to properly limit your claim.
Can you not think of any evidence to support the claim/reasons you'd
like to offer? Change the claim. Can you think of a million obvious
opposing arguments -- arguments that you can't respond to?
Change the claim.