Portfolio Drop Off!

How you will feel after dropping off your portfolio

How you will feel if you don't...

 Folks:

This is the end.

Drop off your portfolios in my office (COAS/ARHU 270A) before 11:30am today, May 1st.

Please DO NOT leave your portfolio in my box; there is no guarantee that I'll get it and this is too big of a grade to take a chance like that. Plus, there are evil, portfolio stealing gnomes that wander these halls. Be on the safe side; turn your portfolio into me personally.

And have a great summer! Woot woot! Life long and prosper, punks! :D

COMPOCON 3! The Grand Finale

Folks:

This is it: the main event! Aren't you excited?

Compocon III will take place on Monday, April 29th and Tuesday, April 30th. We'll be in the ARHU lobby. Stop by and see all the awesomeness that we've created.

Representing us?

MWF 11:45 -- FYC at UTPA: A Student's Perspective
Prezi by Erick, Adriana and Cassandra

TR 9:10 -- Consider Your Source! Research in the 21st Century
A animation by Danielle and Robert

TR 10:35 -- Encouraging Active Aging
A powerpoint by Diana H, Irene and Maricruz

Attendance is mandatory, so please come by during your class period and sign in with me.

Compocon III will be all about showing off what you've created, celebrating how far you've come, sharing your knowledge, learning from your peers. Let's showcase our success. See you there!

Portfolio!

Soon, my evil plan will be complete...

Folks:

All portfolios are due on Wednesday, May 1st. This will be our last day together ::cue tiny violin music:: Your portfolio is hefty. It's a big piece of your grade (60%!). Be sure to go a good job with it.

Your portfolio must include:

1. Graded copies of stages 1-5 with my comments. If you've misplaced my comments, then instead of including this, you'll need to write a one page reflection on your revision process (what you've changed and why) for each missing paper.

2. Your original Stage VI -- of course, without my comments. This will be your pre-peer review version. 

3. Revised and edited copies of stages 1-6. For your revisions, I expect more substantial changes to stages 1, 5 and 6. Stages 2, 3 and 4 may just be light adjustments at this point.

Please be sure you're turning in polished work. At this point, I will be looking at grammar, spelling, punctuation, and formatting in addition to content. Many students have asked if MLA formatting is required. The short of my answer is "yes" -- UNLESS you have a reason for not using MLA. For example, if, throughout the semester, your writing has been focused on a science discipline, you may choose to use APA instead. Maybe your essays are all about how MLA ruined your life D-: in which case, it would make sense to use something else.

So in other words, if you don't use MLA, be sure to articulate WHY you've made the rhetorical decision not to.

 How you decide to present this information to me is entirely up to you. As long as it is presented in a way that your audience (me!) can easily make sense of your work, you'll be in good shape. Is turning in a big pile of crumpled/unstapled and messy papers audience centered? I'm thinking no.

You are being graded on the quality of your finished product and the rhetorical effectiveness of your writing.

May the force be with you! Make it so! For Durotar!

 

We're almost done! :-)

Stage VI!

Yes, yes it is.

 Here are the four main "things" I'll be looking for in your Stage VI essays! These can also be guiding questions for your peer review discussions


1. Narrative: What story is told in the essay? Does the narrative connect to the author's development as a reader/writer/learner and their experience in 1302?

2. Vivid Details: Does the author include vivid details? Do these details contribute to the narrative in a meaningful way? Examples of details, for this assignment, can be quotes from class discussions, samples of your writings, quotes/paraphrases from the readings, anecdotes, etc.

3. Significance: What significance does the essay have to your literacy i.e -- who you are as a writer today, in contrast to who you WERE as a writer before 1302? How do you apply what you learned here to who you are, going forward from here?

4. Discourse: How does the author situate their development as a writer within the greater discourse of writing studies?


DUE DATES: Drafts are due Monday, April 22nd for MWF, Tuesday, April 23rd for TR. PLEASE BRING 3 COPIES TO CLASS. We will be having peer review. Also, this is the one assignment you won't be getting my feedback on before putting this in your porftolio, so peer review participation will be essential.

And if that's not enough, here are some memes and pictures of cute animals:

 

And my cat. Like a boss.

Group Project Grades?

You wish, punk! (and so do I )-':  )

In case you're wondering how you'll be graded, here's my rough rubric:

Rhetorically Smart (Full five points -- document demonstrates an awareness of audience, purpose, and form. It is also complete and polished)
Rhetorically Aware (Four Points -- document demonstrates an awareness of audience, purpose and form, but is either unfinished/unpolished, or could have been approached in a more effective manner).
Rhetorically Average (Three points -- document is missing one of the crucial elements -- audience, purpose, context!)
Rhetorically Dull (Two Points -- document is missing two elements! and/or is unfinished/sloppy)
Rhetorical Fail (One point -- you know where this is going)


And for the reflective essay:

 1. How does the author describe the public document in their essay? There should be enough detail to get an idea of what is being described.

2. How does the author address the document's purpose? In other words, why was the public document created? Does the author give reasons for choosing this purpose?

3. How does the author address the document's audience? The audience should be a specific, targeted group of people. Are there any secondary audiences? How are they addressed? Does the author give reasons for choosing this specific audience?

4. Does the author include a detailed narrative in the project about who contributed what?

5. How does the author bring research (inquiry) into their discussion of their document? A works cited page should also be included.


For the Presentation:

1. Do the presenters effectively use their alotted time? Presentation should be between 5-10 minutes.
2. Do the presenters communicate with the audience? (I.e -- voice, body language, tone, etc)
3. Content of the presentation -- do the presenters go in depth in describing their document? How do they explain their rhetorical decisions to the audience?
4. Does each participant contribute to the presentation? 
5. Are they ready to present on their due date? This is like, free points guys. Just be ready.

Class! We Have Class!

And you better not do this, or I may break out into song

 On Monday/Tuesday. Be there, or be square.

MWFers -- Your research papers are due Monday :-D We'll be tying up any research loose ends and having warm fuzzy time.

TRers --  Be prepared to give a progress report update on your group projects. At this point, you should have some work completed, so you will be receiving a grade on your current progress. Be ready for the following questions!






1. Briefly describe your project/project plans.

2.  What is the purpose of your project? What message are you trying to get across?

3. Who is your intended audience? Why did you all choose this particular audience?

4. What genre did you choose to work in? Why did you pick this, considering your audience and purpose?

5. What are you plans going forth from here? Who is in charge of what?

MWFers -- Be prepared for THIS on Wednesday :-)

Also, all, we will be having a special guest in class towards the beginning. Please do not be late!

Compocon II

It was either a random picture of a goat, or this.

Compocon II will begin on Monday! Here's the schedule:

Monday -- Ballroom
Tuesday 8-12 -- PHYS 1.101.

Come prepared to talk about your research! There will be plenty of experts on hand and cool people to chit chat with. The main focus of Compocon II is finding ways to adapt your research projects to a public audience (your group assignment!). It is also a good time to finish up any last minute primary research you might still have... dangling.

Attendance is mandatory. Be there or be square (and fail).

Conference Day Schedule

Don't stand me up >:O

While we're conferencing, work on revisions. You should also be meeting with your groups to discuss your public documents and presentation projects. All meetings take place in my office ARHU (formally COAS) 270A. Please bring a copy of your Stage V. You will receive a grade for attendance!

MWF 11:45

<sup>Wednesday, March 27th

11:45 -- Carolina
11:55 -- Erick
12:05 -- Andrella
12:15 -- Tania
12:25 -- Cassandra
12:35 -- Jose V

Monday, April 1st

11:45 -- Adriana
11:55 -- Cynthia
12:05 -- Abel
12:15 -- Silas
12:25 -- Pedro
12:35 Alekxia

Wednesday, April 3rd 

11:45 -- Brittany
11:55 -- Olivia
12:05 -- Thomas
12:15 -- Armando
12:25 -- Sarai
12:35 -- Izamar

Friday, April 5th

11:45 -- Monica
11:55 -- AVAILABLE
12:05 -- AVAILABLE
12:15 -- AVAILABLE
12:25 -- AVAILABLE
12:35 -- AVAILABLE</sup>
 

TR9:10 

Thurs, March 29th

9:10 -- Tiffany
9:20 -- Michelle
9:30 -- Emily
9:40 -- Danielle
9:50 -- Milton
10:00 -- Joanna
10:10 -- Sarah
10:20 --  Alexandra

Tues, April 2nd

9:10 -- Eric
9:20 -- Monica
9:30 -- Angelica
9:40 -- Cecilia
9:50 -- Chelsea
10:00 --
10:10 -- Kevin
10:20 --

Thurs April 4th

9:10 -- Roberto
9:20 -- Martha
9:30 --Matthew
9:40 -- Ahmad
9:50 -- Maria
10:00 -- Kassandra
10:10 -- Yosbelly
10:20 -- Amy

TR 10:35

Thursday, March 28^th

10:30 Araceli
10:40  Kaylie

10:50 Priscilla

11:00 Stephanie

11:10 Javier

11:20 Miguel

11:30 Bianca

11:40 Samantha

Tuesday, April 2^nd

10:30 Jorge

10:40 Kimberly

10:50 Diana H
11:00 Jose

11:10  Jessica
11:20 Claudia

11:30 Eliseo

11:40 Elizabeth

Thursday, April 4^th

10:30 Horacio
10:40 Armando

10:50 Michael

11:00 Maria

11:10 Diana S

11:20 Maricruz 

11:30 Irene

11:40 Eunice

Stage V Peer Review Q's

My cat, grading YOUR papers :-)

You know the drill! Here are the questions I'll be asking myself while grading your papers. Won't it be helpful if your peers ask themselves these questions, too, while peer reviewing yours?

1. What research question are they setting out to answer here, and how does it connect to the discourse of writing studies? Why is this question one worth exploring?

2. How did the author go about conducting their research? What methodology did they use? Is it clearly illustrated? How does it connect to their research question?

3. What original claim is the author making? How do they support this claim with evidence? How is it related to the existing research?

4. Here's the big Q -- so what? What does this investigation mean? To whom? What might we do with it? Are these questions answered within the context of the paper?

5. How does the author go about giving proper credit to their sources? Do they incorporate a works cited page for both primary and secondary sources? Do they use parenthetical citations when paraphrasing/quoting?

Peer review responses due Thursday/Friday of this week. 1/2 page typed, double spaced for each partner. Bring 2 copies -- one for me, one for your partner.

Public Document and Research Presentation Assignment

:-) You're going to fail if you don't contribute! :-)

For the next couple of weeks, we will be revising our research projects and conferencing about them. I've set aside a good amount of time for our one-to-one conferences where you'll be getting personalized feedback on your research papers.

While we're conferencing, we won't have class; however, you will have an assignment to work on.

Going Public: Creating a Public Document and Preparing you Research Presentation

In groups of three (below), you'll be either a. choosing one research project to further develop into a public document or b. integrating all three projects into one public document that you will present to the class. Each group member must contribute. Your group members will have a chance to "review" your participation. Don't be a bum!

Public documents can take a variety of formats and genres; it's up to you to decide what's the most rhetorically effective way to reach your intended audience. You may decide to do a Youtube video, create a blog, conduct a TED talk, create a research panel discussion, develop a ragecomic, create a brochure, a poster, a prezi, etc.

You will need the following to be successful:
1. A rhetorically effective public document
2. A presentation to go along with your public document that each group member participates in. You'll be presenting this in front of the class and possibly at compocon
3. A written reflection on the process (this part is individual; each group member is responsible to turn in their own). For the written reflection, describe your public document and how it connects to the research project, the purpose, the intended audience. You'll also explain how each group member contributed to the project.  This doesn't need to be long; roughly two pages.

Each "piece" is worth 5 points to your final grade, so we're talking big points here! Use the conferencing days to meet with your group members and begin planning for this. You're welcome to meet in our classroom during class time or any time that your group members deem convenient.

Due Date:

MWF -- Wednesday, April 15th
TR -- Thursday, April 18th


GROUPS:

MWF 11:45


Group 1:

Britany

Tania
Izamar

 

Group 2:

Olivia

Andrella

Monica

Group 3:

Carolina

Mario

Armando

Group 4:

Adriana

Cassandra

Erick

Group 5:

Cynthia

Silas

Sarai

Group 6:

Jose V

Thomas C

Group 7:

Abel

Pedro

Group 8:
Jose. D
Joaquin

TR 9:10

Group 1:

Kassandra

Milton

Angelica

Group 2:

Amy

Alex

Joanna

Group 3:

Eric

Kevin

Monica

Group 4:

Yosbelly

Sarah

Michelle

Group 5:

Cecilia

Chelsea

Tiffany

Group 6:

Ahmad

Emily

Matthew

Group 7:

Martha

Maria

Group 8:

Robert

Danielle

TR 10:35

Group 1:
Horacio
Jorge
Maria

Group 2:
Kimberly
Priscilla
Bianca

Group 3:
Eunice
Diana S
Jessica

Group 4:
Araceli
Armando
Michael

Group 5:
Maricruz
Irene
Diana H

Group 6:
Jose
Eliseo
Miguel

Group 7:
Kaylie
Claudia
Javier


NOT IN A GROUP? Let me know asap.


Here are a few examples of a "public document"

Who's the intended audience? What's its purpose? Are these rhetorically effective? Thoughts to ponder...

That's So Gay
Teach Preschool
School in a Cloud

Spring Break!

But it's because I care about you guys!

As you know, your research papers (stage V) drafts are due when we return from spring break. Please bring 4 copies to class, as we will be peer reviewing them, and you'll be turning one in to me for additional feedback. Of course, if you have any questions or concerns, I'm just an email away.

Special note for MWF Students: On Monday, we'll be having some special guests come to our class for FESTIBA to talk about graduate writing courses. DO NOT BE LATE.

Interesting Things

(O//o)

Ever surf the web and find something interesting?

It happens to the best of us. Here's an article one of my wonderful students found that might be relevant to some of your research Qs. It's also pretty interesting (in case, you know, you've ever wanted to rationalize an irrational love for video games, like... errr... me).

Ten Surprising Truths

If you happen to stumble upon an article you'd like to share, you're welcome to post it here in the comments section. Perhaps it can help someone with their research. In celebration of mindless surfing! /prof. hoerth

Primary Research?

I love this meme.

As we wrap up our secondary research, it's time to begin shifting gears and moving on to Stage IV which involves primary research. In class, we'll be discussing the different ways we can choose to conduct primary research, ethical considerations, and some general strategies/advice. Your task for the next week is to create your survey instrument and... begin researching! Deadlines are really going to start sneaking up on us; don't put this off!


Here's some required reading on creating instruments and conducting research.

Use that as a guide when conducting your own. You don't need to read the entire thing; first decide what type of research you'll be conducting, and read/absorb what's relevant to you and your project. If you decide not to go with a survey/interview and prefer to do an observation or analysis, you'll be turning in your raw results (A typed version of your observation notes, for example, or a typed analysis of a paper). If you're doing a survey/interview, your results don't need to be ready yet -- you'll be turning in your questions. If you've already gotten some preliminary results, though, you're welcome to hand those in, too, for some additional feedback.

For TR Students:

Drafts of your instrument are due Tuesday. Since we're a little short on time, your instrument doesn't have to be beautiful and perfect. Just bring something to class on Tuesday so you can benefit from feedback on it. 3 copies! Your finalized draft will be due Thursday, March 7th (our last meeting before spring break -- woot woot!).

For MWF Students:

Drafts of your instrument are due Wednesday, March 6th. Bring 3 copies to class for peer review. It doesn't have to be perfect at that point, but do come with something so you'll benefit from feedback. Revisions will be due on Friday, March 8th (our last meeting before spring break -- woot woot!).

AN AMENDMENT TO STAGE IV: Please also include a brief explanation about your primary research plans and your process so  far. This doesn't have to be hugely long or elaborate, but it will help me to better access what you're doing.

Annotated Bibliography Example

But you must.

Because you need it. 

Here are the questions I'll be asking myself while grading your annotated bibliographies.

1. Does the author offer a thorough summary of the article? Are the main points addressed? Is it in their own words?

2. How does the author address the strengths and weaknesses of the article? Does it discuss the author's motives, how the claims exist in discourse?

3. How does the article relate to the author's research question? Does the author make a clear connection as to how they'll be using this to support/refute their own claims?

4. Does the author include a properly formatted works cited entry? It should be BEFORE the actual citation, as indicated in the example above.

Hope this helps, guys. Get to work on your Stage III's! 

First Compocon Meeting

I thought this was cute. Also, it's an example of brainstorming.

Kiddos:

On Monday/Tuesday, we'll be meeting with other 1302 classes and experts from around campus as part of the Compocon project. Here are the details:

 

Monday 2.18.13

8:00 am – 12:30 pm | ARHU 107 (this is the theater room)

 

Tuesday 2.19.13

8:00 am – 12:30 pm | VC 1.108 (the visitors center)

1:10 pm – 4:00 pm | VC 1.108

 

 

 

Please come during our class time with your research question and something to take notes with. You'll have an opportunity to discuss your projects with other students and get feedback from a variety of different people.

 

Your assignment will be as follows:

 

Write a one page reflection on your experience with our first Compocon meeting. Who did you talk with? How are you going to use this information to help you with your research?

 

This needs to be typed, double spaced. It is due on Wednesday/Thursday after Compocon. 

 

 

Stage II Concerns

Here are the leading questions for our peer review session today!

1. Interest

How does the author express their interest in their topic? Do they articulate why the topic made them curious?

2. The Question

Is my topic focused enough? How might I focus it further/add detail?

Are their any other perspectives to my research question that I could add?

Is my question researchable?

Is it "fresh" -- has it already been answered within this context?
Is it meaningful?
Is it investigatable, given our resources?

3. Hypothesis

Does the author include their best guess as to the answer? Do they explain why they think this might be the case?

4. Resources

Will my resources help me answer/investigate my research question?

Does my plan include plans for both primary and secondary sources?
Do my sources seem legitimate?

Developing Your Research Question

This weekend, you've got two tasks:

1. Read Kleine

and 2 (maybe a little more important) is to begin working on your Stage II.

The first step of Stage II is drafting and developing your research question. Please bring a draft of your question to class on Monday/Tuesday.

Having trouble honing down your research question?

Here are just a few examples:

• Do college freshmen and seniors use rhetorical strategies at all or in similar ways?
• How do grammar skills develop?
• What makes a classic literary work a "classic"?
• What makes an effective business plan?
• How does music effect writing or revision?
• How do literacy activities vary at high or low income daycares?
• What kind of writing will a social work major encounter?
• Is writing taught in medical school? Should it be? How?

Need a little more help? Why not post it here and see if your peers can help? I'll be popping in, too, for advice and guidance.

Feel free to ask anything research related in the comments section. This will be a good opportunity for us to share our thoughts/ideas/concerns/complaints about that smelly old professor, etc...
 
Extra points available IF you're particularly helpful to someone else.

Mustache not required to participate.

"Greeneisms" Assignment

Warning: This Assignment Requires Rhetorical Thinking

Choose a concept from the Greene article (aka a Greeneism) and work with your group to come up with a definition of it. Then, find a way to "Teach" your concept to the class. You're required to include a visual aid, which can be anything, really, that helps us to have an idea as to what your concept means (within the context of Greene's article). You might choose to do a drawing/sketch, rage comic, meme, skit, or my personal favorite -- an interpretive dance! Have fun; great creative. And this doesn't need to be uber complicated. Sometimes the most simplistic explanations and visuals are the most effective. I'll be posting some of the better ones on the blog!

Thoughts on Greene

Greene's article is all about constructing arguments. But I think to first understand what he means, we have to understand how he defines certain terms. Do you think his term "argument" is different from the one above? How do you define "argument"? How is it defined in an academic setting?

I think I'm pretty guilty of throwing out lofty academic words, but this might be a good time to flesh out their definitions. What lofty words come up in our readings, class conversations, emails, etc that you think we would benefit from fleshing out, as Greene does with "argument?" Rhetorical is one example that I tend to throw around all the time -- what are some others?

For extra credit, feel free to discuss Greene below and/or pose examples and try to define some of these lofty Professor Hoerthisms. We'll be discussing this more in class. 

Thoughts on Sherman Alexie

I like Sherman Alexie quite a bit. He's an awesome poet and writer. Anyway, I think there's an important link between his essay, "The Joy of Reading and Writing" and the Richardson reading. Do you see any correlation between the two? Do you think Alexie and Richardson would agree on much?

We'll be talking about this, and other things, in class. Here are a few things to think about as you're reading. You're welcome to start the conversation below in the comments section (for possible extra credit), or to just keep these queries in mind while reading, as these are some of the points for our discussion:

1. What was expected of Alexie as a child growing up? How did this influence who he is as a man today? Can you think of examples from your past where expectations (either positive or negative) shaped you?

2. How would you define literacy? How does Alexie define it?

3. Who are Alexie's literary role models? How might his life have been different had he had access to more powerful literary role models?

4. Why does Alexie feel that books saved his life? Do you agree with him?

Watching this video will hopefully give you some context to Alexie's experience. It's short, and we'll be watching it in class too if we have time. 

Feel free to discuss the reading below.



Here are our talking points for class:

Richardson writes that common sense myths about writing are pernicious. Do you think Alexie would agree? Why or why not?

Alexie claims that Indian children were "expected to be stupid." Explain in a paragraph or two how expectations can impact children's literacy learning. Can you think of any examples from your own childhood where expectations of you, either postive or negative, shaped what you did or didn't do? Feel free to share these thoughts below, too.

Peer Review Guidelines

Our Golden Rule!

TR 9:10

1. Be specific in your responses (rule)
2. Use PQP (guideline)
3. Use constructive criticism, not destructive!
4. Understand that the critic is about the paper, not the person
5. Your paper will be read aloud by another group member
6. Groups consist of 3 people
7. 10 minutes per paper, Professor Hoerth will keep time (guideline)
8. If you come to class unprepared, you are still responsible to give feedback
9. Groups are generally constant, though they may be changed up through the semester to allow for variety

TR 10:35

• Always support your statements with specifics (rule). If you say "I like it" back it up!
• Avoid bashing. Keep your critics constructive by emphasizing both the good and bad about an essay (keep it balanced). (rule)
• Understand that feedback is about the paper, not the person
• PQP (Praise, Question, Polish) is encouraged (guideline)
• You can either address the person in your feedback OR give your interpretation.
• The first groups are student selected. Future groups are selected based on research topics.
• Groups are student selected, but will change throughout the semester. Students can choose to work with others with similar research interests.
• Three members per group
• Either you or one of your partners will read your paper to the group
• Professor Hoerth keeps time, lets us know when to switch
• Unprepared group members are still responsible to give feedback (but they lose points!)

MWF 11:45


1. Be specific in your responses (rule)
2. Use PQP (guideline)
3. Use constructive criticism, not destructive!
4. Understand that the critic is about the paper, not the person
5. Your paper must be read aloud, but you can do it, or a partner can do it (author's discretion)
6. Groups consist of 3 or 4 people, but Professor Hoerth will let us know beforehand
7. 10 minutes per paper, Professor Hoerth will keep time (guideline)
8. If you come to class unprepared, you are still responsible to give feedback
9. Groups will change throughout the semester. Be ready for it!

Stage I Sample for Peer Review

Here's the essay we'll be peer reviewing on Tuesday/Wednesday. You can use it as just one example of how this type of essay could be approached. It's also a good example of a properly formatted MLA paper (I hope!).

Writing Doesn't Happen in a Vacuum!

If you'd like to be uber prepared for class, you can start thinking of a critical response to this piece. It's just a rough draft, and the author is in need of some help!


Feel free to discuss below (and earn extra credit, perhaps!).


Just a reminder --

Your homework assignment (for Thursday/Friday) is as follows:

1. Read and review your partners' essays for peer review. We'll be having that in class on Thursday/Friday. Type up a response to each partner's essay, which needs to be a minimum of half a page per paper you review. Bring two copies of each review to class. You'll be turning one in to me, and you'll be giving the other to your partners. 

2. Read and print out Alexie. It's short and easy and related to what we're working on. A quiz is likely.

As always, let me know if you have any questions or concerns. I'm here to help!

Thoughts on Stage I

Scrutinize! Challenge! Explore! Write.

You've got a busy weekend ahead!

On Tuesday/Wednesday, you'll need to bring in your draft of stage 1. Don't forget to bring 3 copies, as we will be doing peer review.

Here are the "questions" I'll be asking myself while grading. You can use this as a guideline as to what you need to include in your "myth analysis":

1.       Description – How does the author illustrate their myth? As a reader, are you able to construct meaning from the text given? Is there enough vivid detail?

2.       Inquiry – How did the author engage in inquiry to challenge their myth? Did they engage in any primary/secondary research? What new information are they adding to the conversation?

3.       Discourse – How does the author build the connections between their work and experience, and the experiences of others?

4.       Significance – What does it all mean for the author, for us as writers, for our understanding of literacy? In other words, so what? 

 We will be continuing these discussions in class, but if your essay addresses these four areas, you'll be in super shape. 

I'd also like to point out that this blog is mean to be a forum -- your forum,and that it's as much mine as it is yours. With that being said, you're welcome to post comments, ideas, questions, advice in the comments section below. I'll be responding throughout the weekend, and if you RESPOND to another person's question on here, there's some extra credit in it for you! Let's work together on this.



             Editing in: Some of you all have expressed an interest in a refresher of MLA format. We'll be talking about making rhetorical formatting choices throughout the semester, but here's an example of a properly formatted MLA paper:

 

Welcome To English 1302

This semester is going to be a wild ride! 



But first things first, peruse the class syllabus and course calendar. We'll be discussing this in class, too, but this will give you a better idea as to what to expect this semester.