It's hard to write a good paper about a bad topic. That's why ... - English

It’s hard to write a good paper about a bad topic. That’s why strong brainstorming skills
will benefit you immensely in college. Here are a few sources of inspiration:
Personal Reflection:
Consider the perimeters of the assignment and try to locate your interests within them. In
this case, we’re looking at issues in Higher Education (ie college). Brainstorm a list of
answers to these questions:
1. What would I change about college if I could?
2. What worries me about college?
3. What are some of the major trends or changes I have noticed in this or other
universities? Could any of these be problematic?
Now brainstorm a list at least 5 of your personal interests. How could they relate to
issues in higher education? Be creative.
Now think of your major (or an academic field that interests you). What are some major
issues in your field at the college level?
Interview:
We all have probably done this casually at one time or another; ask a friend, family
member, or professor for ideas. Ask one other person these questions:
1. What would I change about college if I could?
2. What worries me about college?
3. What are some of the major trends or changes I have noticed in this or other
universities? Could any of these be problematic?
Sometimes these kinds of questions lead to discussions, which can get your ideas
flowing.
The Internet:
Yes, the internet is home to MANY unreliable sources that are inappropriate for college
papers. However, it is an excellent resource when used correctly and a great place to get
ideas.
Go to www.publicagenda.org
Under “Issue Guides,” click the link to Higher Education (There’s also an Education link
that might be worth checking out but make sure to visit HIGHER Education).
Now Browse. You know how.
List at least 5 new issues in education that you found.
Browse the “Sources and Resources” as well. Most of these are academically viable
internet sources. They do exist! We’ll discuss how to distinguish these as the semester
progresses.

Annotated Bibliography Script Rhetoric 105
Rationale:
You should think of using sources by putting them into conversation with each other and
finding your own role in that conversation. This assignment asks you to take that
“conversation” metaphor seriously.
Assignment:
Using at least 5 of your 8 sources, create a 2-3 page script of a conversation among the
sources and yourself. That is, write a script of the conversation that might take place if
you and all the authors of your sources could be together in the same room at the same
time. You can write whatever you want for your own contributions, but the contributions
from your sources should consist of either direct quotations or paraphrases, which should
be cited parenthetically.
Notes on the Script:
- Be creative. While the default format is a dramatic script (that is, written like
a play), you may choose to represent this conversation in any way you like.
- Start by providing a “cast of characters,” a list of participants in this
conversation.
- Briefly describe the imaginary setting for this conversation.
- The majority of the script should be direct quotations from your sources.
- Put quotation marks around everything you are taking directly from a source,
and put the author’s last name and the page number for that quote in
parentheses. If you need to add anything to the quotes to make them “flow”
better, put that stuff in brackets [like this].
- Don’t just make a list of random quotes from sources. Rather, make the
sources “speak or respond to each other, or make them respond to questions
you might pose to them.
- Also, don’t limit yourself to presenting quotes from sources that agree with
you. Try to represent the range of possible positions concerning your topic.
- Make yourself a character or participant in this conversation. You might
choose to mostly ask questions of your sources, or you might take a position
of your own.
- In addition to your sources and yourself, you may include “fictional”
composite characters that represent a particular position or way of looking at
your issue. Don’t overuse this function.
Criteria of Evaluation:
- The degree to which this collage puts your sources into a genuine
conversation with each other, rather than simply listing quotations from these
sources.
- The degree to which you fairly represent a range of possible positions or
points of view on your topic.
- The correctness of the in-text citations (see the Wadsworth Handbook)
Due Date: Monday 4/3

Paragraphing with Sources Rhetoric 105
Read the following and consider how they might best be arranged, along with your own
sentence-combining and transitional phrases. Write the best paragraph you can on a sheet
of note paper. Things to consider: Which of the statements below makes the best topic
sentence? What sequence seems most logical? How are ideas best connected to one
another with transitional phrases? What signal phrases are most appropriate to introduce
the given quotes and paraphrases?
1. The majority of jobs given to people from poor backgrounds as well as the jobs
given to minorities are ones that offer no opportunities for influencing the system.
2. The health care system today perpetuates the racist and sexist stereotypes that
exist in society.
3. “Women of color, immigrant women and poor women, as well as lesbians are at a
significant disadvantage as long as the delivery system is controlled by
individuals whose backgrounds are so different from [theirs]” (Sherwin 232).
4. By keeping the oppressed out of health care, the health care system keeps these
people from being healthy, and thus keeps them from having the same chances as
affluent whites.
5. Most doctors and hospital administrators are white males, and most nurses are
white females (Humana par. 11).
6. Women and minorities have no real voice in the health care system.
7. The health care system does not merely mirror the power and privilege structures
of the larger society; it maintains them (Sherwin 228).

Texts In Conversation Rhetoric 105
Note: Keep in mind that your aim in this exercise is not to arrive at your opinion of the
sources, but to construct the conversation that you think the author of one might have
with the author of another. How might the author of number 1 recast the ideas of the
author’s of either number 2 or 3?
* * *
1) If I write “The history of the United States begins with the Mayflower,” a
statement many readers may find simplistic and controversial, there will be little doubt
that I am suggesting that the first significant event in the process that eventuated in what
we now call the United States is the land of the Mayflower. Consider now a sentence
grammatically identical to the proceeding one and perhaps as controversial: “The history
of the United States is a history of migration.” The reader may choose to understand both
uses of the word history as emphasizing a sociohistorical process. Then, the sentence
seems to suggest that the fact of migration is the central element in the evolution of the
United States. But an equally valid interpretation of that sentence is that the best
narrative about the United States is a story of migration. That interpretation becomes
privileged if I add a few qualifiers: “The true history of the United States is a history of
migrations. That history remains to be written.”
2) The literature on slavery in the Americas and on the Holocaust suggests that there
may be structural similarities in global silences, or at the very least, that erasure and
banalization are not unique to the Haitian Revolution. At the level of generalities, some
narratives cancel what happened through direct erasure of facts or their relevance. “It”
did not really happen; it was not that bad, or that important. Frontal challenges to the fact
of the Holocaust or to the relevance of Afro-American slavery belong to this type: The
Germans did not really build gas chambers; slavery also happened to non-blacks.
3) I prefer to say that Columbus “stumbled on the Bahamas,” or “discovered the
Antilles,” and I prefer “conquest” over “discovery” to describe what happened after the
landing. Such phrasings are awkward and may raise some eyebrows. They may even
annoy some readers. But both the awkwardness and the fact that the entire issue can be
dismissed as trivial quibbling suggests that it is not easy to subvert the very language
describing the facts of the matter. For the power to decide what is trivial—and
annoying—is also part of the power to decide how “what happened” becomes “that
which is said to have happened.”

Paragraph Glossing Rhetoric 105
Paragraph glossing is a method of evaluating and revising your writing at the level of the
paragraph. Following the steps listed below should help you determine if your essay is
structurally coherent, if your argument proceeds logically, if it is repetitive, and if your
paragraphs are in the right order.
Step 1: Number each of the paragraphs in your paper, e.g. 1, 2, 3…
Step 2: On a separate piece of paper, write a gloss (a one sentence summary) of each
paragraph, leaving 3-4 lines after each one numbering them just as you did on the paper.
Your gloss can be your topic sentence if that works best.
Step 3: Set your essay aside, and read through your glosses in the order you have written
them.
Step 4: Ask yourself these questions about each of your glosses, then make notes where
appropriate:
A. Immediately after each gloss, state its relationship to the previous gloss.
B. Do the glosses seem to proceed logically? Identify those that seem out of
place.
C. Do any of the glosses repeat topics already covered? Identify those that do
and consider either deleting the associated paragraph or combining paragraphs
on the same subject.
D. If the gloss does not appear as written in its associated paragraph, would it
work as a topic sentence?
Step 5: Identify those glosses/paragraphs whose order troubles you. Try reading the
glosses in different order, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 5, 4, 6, 9, 7, 8…. Does anything change? If the
order doesn’t seem to matter, then your essay probably needs a controlling purpose or
idea that will give it momentum or direction.

(Note: This assignment can be used either when the instructor reserves the Cites computer lab in the
Undergraduate Library or in any other computer classroom. This assignment will not take an entire class
period; the rest of the period, then, can be devoted to individual research.)
Undergraduate Library Research Worksheet Rhetoric 105
1). What are the differences between EBSCO and LexisNexis? What sorts of sources
does each specialize in providing?
2). At this point, what are the key terms guiding your research? What is the topic
and what ideas/concepts regarding this topic do you plan to explore? Try to come
up with at least three key terms.
3). For each of these key terms, come up with at least five synonymous or related
keywords you might use to expand your searches in online databases and catalogs.
4). Find at least one web resource that pertains to your topic that would not be an
appropriate or reliable source for your paper. List the name of the site, where it’s
found, and explain why you believe it wouldn’t work.
5). Locate at least one pertinent scholarly article via the online databases, skim it,
and explain—based on this quick look—how you think it might contribute to your
argument. Be sure to write down what database you found it in and what
publication it appears in.

Evaluating Electronic Sources Rhetoric 105
For our next class:
Find three online sources that you find credible and three that are not-so-credible.
Be sure to print them out and bring them to class. In the margins note what makes
each source credible or not.
Then, in class:
In small groups, develop a list of qualities that the credible sources share and the
less credible sources share.

(This in-class assignment can be used for individual work, group work, or whole-class discussion. The
point is to present students with sample passages that have a variety of errors that they can attempt to
correct. This not only emphasizes documentation techniques, but offers students a chance to become even
more comfortable using the guide to troubleshoot.)
Rules for Writers Worksheet Rhetoric 105
1) In “The Crown,” a 1915 metafictional essay that complements the philosophies
explored in Women in Love, Lawrence writes, “He who triumphs, wins.” (262).
2) As John King Fairbank and Merle Goldman rightly claim, the “rigid mold”
established by Hongwu at the onset of the Ming era left “the Ming
administration…eventually unable to adjust…to China’s changing needs”
(Fairbank and Goldman 133).
3) Discussing the development of America’s middle class, Stewart Ewen offers a
corollary that can help us clarify the nature of liberal education, he claims that as
the American middle-class developed the production of lower-quality replicas of
high-quality goods comprised the formation of new “cultural wages” (191).
4) Laurence Pringle notes that the hatcheries in which female chickens are housed
while they produce eggs leave only enough room for each chicken to eat, drink,
defecate, and lay eggs.
5) In The Weak King Dilemma in the Shakespearean History Play, critic Manheim
writes, “The incompatibility between man and job appears most clearly and
emphatically in Richard II” (57).
6) In 1928, Hines and Armstrong collaborated on revolutionary recordings that,
“have had a lasting influence on jazz piano” (Pareles 32).
7) Although the town and the country are often pitted against each other in literary
and artistic representations, Mr. Williams notes with irony that “directly or
indirectly most towns seem to have developed as an aspect of the agricultural
order itself” (48).
8) The novel “News From Nowhere” exhibits William Morris’ own
conceptualization of utopia.
9) Since the Middle Ages Norwich has been among the most important cities in
England; in fact, until the early-eighteenth century, Norwich was England’s
second largest city, surpassed only by London (Daiches, Flower 172).
10) Rather than encouraging his readers to improve society, Emerson dismisses
society as a hopeless concept. In “Self-Reliance” he writes,
“Society never advances. It recedes as fast as one side as it gains on the
other. It under undergoes continual change: it is barbarous, it is civilized, it

(Rules for Writers Worksheet cont.)
is christianized, it is rich, it is scientific; but this change is not
amelioration. For every thing that is given, something is taken. Society
acquires new arts and loses old instincts” (1556).
Society offers no opportunity for true human improvement, because it continually
and arbitrarily exchanges one thing for another, controls and surrenders impulses
in favor of religious, or political, or social doctrines that deem our instincts
wrong.
11) In a discussion about the Australian poets of the 1890s, critic G.A. Wilkes wrote
that “their work was aimed always at the meridian of popular taste: they wrote
the sort of literature that did not need to be interpreted before it could be
understood,” (33).
12) The following passage from Robert Baden Powell’s 1908 Scouting for Boys
illuminates a significant cultural call for men to return to the masculinity of the
imperial Victorian age:
The “trappers” of North America, hunters of Central Africa, the British
pioneers, explorers, and missionaries over Asia and all the wild parts of the
world, the bushmen and drovers of Australia, the constabulary of North-
West Canada and South Africa—all are peace scouts, real men in every
sense of the word…they…are strong and plucky, ready to face any danger
and always keen to help each other. They are accustomed to take their lives
in their hands, and fling them down without hesitation if they can help their
country doing so (qtd. in Blakely 192).
13) In the movie “Saving Private Ryan” a brand of war-related realism is brought to
the screen.
14) Essentially, both Love on the Dole and The Aerodrome implicitly argue for the
need for Ideological balance in the struggle for societal progression.
15) As R.W. Sharples notes on page 123, “the ultimate motivation for virtuous
behavior in Stoicism is concern for one’s own virtues.”
16) According to Samuel Sillen, Orwell concedes that humans are deplete of any
decency which they once possessed. And are doomed to self-incurred destruction
(276).
17) As M.H. Abrams explained, gender does not denote the specific, physical traits
of a sex; instead, it addresses the attributes bestowed upon a sex by society, as
well as the determinate aspects that members of the same sex adopt (235).
18) In his New York Times editorial, Nicholas Kristof argues that America’s
freedom of press is being stymied by the limitations on information exchange put
in place by the Bush Administration.

Avoiding Plagiarism Rhetoric 105
Incorporating and Attributing Your Sources
Write a new paragraph that corrects the plagiarism in the samples. In your correction, be
sure to make attributions—identify the author and smooth the “seams” between your
source’s ideas and your writing. Add in-text and parenthetical citations when needed.
Source: John Culhane, The American Circus, p. 305
At the Cirque Napoleon in Paris in 1859, Jules Leotard presented the first flying trapeze
act. A contemporary account marveled at Leotard’s “reckless breakneck flights from
trapeze to trapeze like some tropical bird swooping from branch to branch.” In case he
fell, a padded mattress was spread the whole length of the stage. Eventually, the mattress
was replaced by a net…the old-fashioned rope net is the form of protections still used in
the circus. “The net itself can be very dangerous,” said Tito Gaona (a trapeze artist), “but
it’s a circus tradition. Our fans love to see us bounce from the net.”
Paraphrased: According to John Culhane, the first flying trapeze act was in Paris in
1859. Jules Leotard swung from the trapeze like a tropical bird swooping from branch to
branch, and audiences ever since have been thrilled by the daring man on the flying
trapeze. To break his fall, “a padded mattress was spread” that covered the length of the
stage. Even though technology has improved, the net is a circus tradition. Tito Gaona
says that fans “love” to see them “bounce” from the net.
Source: John Culhane, The American Circus, p. 132
In [P.T.] Barnum’s version, Jumbo laid down his own life to save the little clown
elephant, Tom Thumb. Jumbo, wrote the mast publicist, “snatched the little elephant
from in front of the thundering train and hurled the little fellow twenty yards to safety.”
After he rescued Tom Thumb, wrote Barnum, Jumbo turned to face the oncoming
freight…”Jumbo…gave bun one groan after being struck and then assumed an attitude of
determination and composed himself to meet death with a becoming dignity and
fortitude.” Millions of Americans, included those who had never seen Jumbo, mourned
him as if they had lost a beloved pet and preferred to accept Barnum’s version of his
death.
Paraphrased: Barnum invented his own version of the death of Jumbo the Elephant.
“Millions of Americans” were saddened by the elephant’s death. They behaved as if they
had lost a beloved pet, says Culhane. Barnum described how Jumbo met his death being
very determined, with a “dignity” that elephants don’t usually have, and fortitude.

(Note: The following are instructions on how to conduct an in-class exercise aimed at strengthening thesis
statements.)
One Group, One Thesis Rhetoric 105
a. Everyone must bring a copy of their thesis to class on a sheet of paper (no name)
b. Shuffle the papers, pick 6 thesis statements
c. Distribute one thesis per group
d. Have the groups write on the board the points the paper will have to discuss and a
possible paper outline
e. Discuss

(Note: This set of workshopping questions was designed to encourage students to reconsider concepts from
specifics texts as they workshop each other’s work. To complete this assignment, students spend a few days
reading a peer’s essay and responding to each of these questions in depth. You might opt for different
questions—or a different amount of questions—if you plan to have students read and respond to drafts
during a single class period.)
Research Paper Workshop Worksheet Rhetoric 105
1). Read the first paragraph only (or until you reach the thesis statement) and stop. Now,
write the thesis statement in the space below, paying careful attention to the language of
the statement as you write it.
2). Now that you’ve copied the thesis statement on the page, take a moment to review the
introduction, but no more. Based on the introduction and the current thesis statement,
what exactly do you think this essay is going to be about? Be as specific as possible in
your prediction. Use the specific language of the intro—the words, the details, the tone,
etc—to support your prediction. Be sure to indicate what you see as the “keywords” for
the argument.
Once you’ve finished your prediction, proceed to read the remainder of the paper. Mark
notes on and around the text as you read. When you’re done reading, answer the
following questions. Answer each question as clearly, thoroughly, and thoughtfully as
possible.

(Research Paper Workshop Worksheet cont.)
3). Now that you’ve read the entire essay, in what ways do you think the introduction
succeeds? In what ways does it need work? For instance, does it begin too broad? Is the
exact nature of the essay’s topic raised? Does the intro successfully contextualize the
thesis statement? Be sure to be specific in your answer, drawing on your own experience
as well as our in-class discussion of intros. When you provide criticism, make sure that
you provide suggestions for improvement as well.
4). At this point, it makes sense to have another look at the thesis statement. What
strengths and weaknesses do you recognize? What suggestions can you offer? Is it
focused enough? Does it move beyond the obvious? Is the language clear? Is the claim
contentious? Does it accurately represent and introduce the argument that follows? These
are just a few of the many questions we’ve been raising as we’ve worked on thesis
statements. Feel free to address other thesis-related questions as well.

(Research Paper Workshop Worksheet cont.)
5). As we’ve seen, successful analytic writing involves interplay of claims and evidence.
In the paragraph directly following the thesis statement, go through the paragraph
sentence by sentence, identifying each time you see a claim and each time you see
evidence. (Write a “C” or “E” above each sentence to indicate what you see.) In this
paragraph, are there areas in which claims are not adequately supported with evidence?
How about evidence that is analyzed in a way that shows how the writer sees the
evidence proving the claim? Are the claims and evidence strong enough to provide
analytic insight? Focus on this paragraph and offer whatever suggestions or compliments
you feel relevant.
6). Locate other sections of the essay in which the author provides evidence without
thoroughly analyzing it. In other words, places where the author seems to be using
evidence to tell us about something (or report) rather than using evidence to uncover
assumptions, implications, etc. in order to make his/her own argument stronger. Mark
these sections in the text. (Write, maybe, “Analyze more?”) Below, offer suggestions for
more effective analysis of a few of these examples.

(Research Paper Workshop Worksheet cont.)
7). At any point(s) in the essay, do you see the writer moving away from analysis and
toward either reporting or personal opinion? If so, where exactly do you see this
happening? Also, explain to the writer why you feel this doesn’t work and how he/she
might improve these sections.
8). As we’ve discussed in class and read in Reading Rhetorically and other handouts,
academic, analytic essays constantly develop and refine their chief claims—doing this, in
part, by introducing what we’ve called “complicating evidence” and by providing strong
transitions that guide the reader from one paragraph to the next. First, have a look at the
transitions that link paragraph to paragraph (or, on a larger level, idea to evolved idea).
Find at least one example of a successful transition—or some aspect of a transition that
works. Then find at least one example of a weak transition—or some aspect of a
transition that doesn’t make clear how the argument is progressing. Write each of these
below, and explain, in detail, why you believe each one does and does not work.

(Research Paper Workshop Worksheet cont.)
9). Now, scour the essay for “complicating evidence”—or, in other words, evidence that
causes the author to reveal some complexity or contradiction or challenge to his/her
central argument. Does the author succeed in his/her analysis of the evidence? Might she
do more? Does she do too much? Do you see places in the essay where complicating
evidence seems absent? (In other words, where the author seems to be simplifying the
subject or avoiding pertinent evidence or questions? Or maybe he/she merely hasn’t
thought of a pertinent strain of evidence worth considering?) Explain below.
It’s time to think globally—about the logical structure that holds this essay together. As
we’ve talked about, essays should maintain a clear focus at the same time that they
develop the primary claim laid out in the thesis statement. And the essay should deepen
its primary claim—moving beyond the obvious as it does this. So:
10). Describe the logical flow of this essay. Using specific details, describe the ways in
which this essay does and/or does not move from one point to the next. Does each section
of the essay logically flow into the next? Does what you read in, say, paragraph 12
depend on the developed argument that comes before it? Offer suggestions and insights
here.

(Research Paper Workshop Worksheet cont.)
11). Does the author maintain his/her focus? Locate areas in which in the essay’s focus
becomes unclear or the direction of the essay seems to stray. Do you see any sections that
either need to be tied in or cut? Where? Why? On this note, is the essay focused enough?
Why or why not?
12). On the whole, does the essay move beyond making an obvious claim about the
subculture in question? What suggestions can you offer the author in terms of moving
beyond the obvious?

(Research Paper Workshop Worksheet cont.)
13). In class and in one-on-one conferences, we’ve spent time discussing the organization
and development of an essay. Below, use arrows, keywords, paraphrases—whatever
works for you—to visually represent the flow and organization of this essay. If there are
16 paragraphs in the essay, you should account for the main theme of each paragraph,
and indicate whether or not the transitions and logical development between these
paragraphs are clear. In other words, construct the architecture of this essay, as you see it.
End note: In a paragraph or so, explain the basic suggestions that you’d offer to this
author as he/she moves into the next stages of the writing process. (Feel free to attach
another sheet of paper if it’s easier.)