Researching the Rhetorical Situation; Pre-reading & Jigsaw workChris

It’s Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked Teens. dana boyd. Yale University Press, 2014. The front cover material is included in the text, https://sdsuwriting.pbworks.com/w/file/98749551/boyd_literacy_digital_natives_OCR.pdf

Could begin by showing the image on the front cover, the table of contents, the publishing information, the footnotes, the creative commons license for the electronic version of the text, etc., in order to start a discussion of the authors’ project and intended audience.

Assign students to research the author, her blog, the publisher, context, the license information, and key references in the text.

Homepage http://www.danah.org/ Blog http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/ Twitter feed https://twitter.com/zephoria which can provide a sense of the research and conversations she is involved in. Her social bookmarks: https://delicious.com/zephoria

Videos to introduce/Illustrate Claims and authors referenced in the text Marc Prensky explains digital natives to PBS interviewer on Frontline

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGQLTHyRG_g

Do "Digital Natives" Exist? Idea Channel, PBS Digital Studios (9 minutes) Fun video that echoes (and makes entertaining) many of Boyd’s claims. Does a nice job explaining where the concepts come from, the debate that has ensued, and also explores the “rhetoric of” digital natives/immigrants. Did I mention there is transcript? It’s very helpful. An excellent way of introducing the “conversation.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WVKBAqjHiE

It could also be used as part of a discussion of audience and strategy. Since the argument so closely replicates Boyd’s you could discuss why the author makes the choices he does. For example, the video seems to draw on texts and styles that young people may be familiar with from watching “epic rap battles in history” and the “crash course” videos by the Greene brothers. So it could be used later in the semester to introduce strategies, and perhaps even as part of unit 4 if you want to explore “alternative,” multimedia student contributions.

It could also be used to model the concepts of extending, illustrating, complicating, qualifying and challenging an argument. You could have students find examples of these moves in the comments section for this video, or in the reddit discussion groups for the video series https://www.reddit.com/r/pbsideachannel/.

1

Leo Laporte and danah boyd, author of "It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens," talk about how the idea of 'Digital Natives' is a misnomer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0k-Rx4sht8 (4 minutes)

Author and social media scholar danah boyd sat down with UW Comm undergraduate Austin Williams to discuss her new book, "It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens," parental anxiety and the importance of empowering youth communities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTvR2EFXRYU (12 minutes)

TED talk that assumes the division between digital immigrant and digital native.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_9gI0B4nS4

Dr. Devorah Heitner is the founder and director of Raising Digital Natives, a resource for parents and schools seeking advice on how help children thrive in a world of digital connectedness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRQdAOrqvGg (use to show existence and popularity of the term ‘digital native’)

Boyd cites the influential work of Tarleton Gillespie on the politics of algorithms.This 5 minute interview of Gillespie by an undergraduate spells out some main ideas of his work in a very accessible way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cT1i1_Nydw

Video: Eli Pariser TED talk, “Beware Online Filter Bubbles.” http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en

Excerpts from Tarleton Gillespie’s talk on The Politics of Platforms. Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive/events/luncheon/2010/01/gillespie

Headings, section titles and sub-section titles

It’s Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked TeensLiteracy: are today’s youth digital natives?

1. The Emergence of the Digital Native2. Youth Need New Literacies3. The Politics of Algorithms4. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production5. Digital Inequality6. Beyond Digital Natives

Charting

Micro-charting: have students do a close reading of the 4 introductory paragraphs (176-177). What do they notice about pronoun use, style, vocabulary, genre, references to past research, footnotes, etc.

Macro-charting: divide students into six groups and have them present on the main “moves” identifiable in the six main sections of the text.

1. The Emergence of the Digital Native

2

2. Youth Need New Literacies3. The Politics of Algorithms4. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production5. Digital Inequality6. Beyond Digital Natives

Some Questions for Discussion (or Homework)

1. Who is Boyd? What is her background? Who does/has she worked for? What kind of writing has she done in the past? How does this book/chapter fit with previous work?

2. What kind of researcher is she? Is there anything in the text that provides a clue to the work she does?

3. Boyd talks a lot about the ways young people use digital media, and the different skill levels young people have. Did you recognize yourself or people you know in any of her examples?

4. Boyd spends a lot of time talking about the “rhetoric of digital natives.” What does she mean by this? Why does she think this is important?

5. Boyd draws a distinction between authors such as Rushkoff and Barlow who originated the expression “digital native,” and writer Marc Prensky, who also used the term, and is now most associated with it. What does she imply about the way these authors use the term? Does she appear to approve more of some authors’ use? (see pages 178-9)

6. Boyd claims that the “rhetoric of digital natives” brings with it assumptions and implications. She thinks many problems have resulted from these. List all the problems Boyd associates with the concept.

7. What does she think should be done to address problems caused by the “rhetoric of digital natives”?

8. Boyd poses many questions in the text. List all the sentences in which questions are posed (use control-f “?”) and chart them – describe what they are “doing.” Do you notice a few main ways questions are used to achieve rhetorical effects?

9. According to Boyd, what concepts should we replace “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” with? What would be a better way of thinking about differences in the way people use new media and acquire digital literacy skills?

Boyd claims that young people should be taught critical digital literacy? Why does she claim this? What examples does she give of critical digital literacy?

3

10. Boyd talks about the importance of “empowering youth” by helping them develop sophisticated digital literacies. What does she mean by this – what skills, and what kinds of participation does she emphasize?

11. Boyd thinks it is important that youth become “powerful citizens of the digital world.” (183) What does she mean by this?

12. Boyd discusses the “politics of algorithms.” What does she mean by this?

13. Do you generally trust google results, and distrust Wikipedia? (186)

14. Boyd talks about how many young people consider google the “center of the digital information universe.” Does this conform to your views? (186)

15. How much do you trust the search results from google? Boyd discusses common assumptions about google (p 184). Do you or those you know, make similar assumptions?

16. Have you hear of “search engine optimization”? Have you thought about how algorithms shape search results?

17. Do you use Wikipedia in your schoolwork? Why/why not? What did your teachers say to you about Wikipedia, and how does this connect with the examples discussed in Boyd?

18. See page 191. She talks of how people she interviewed had not heard of discussion page of Wikipedia, or history of edits, or how it can be used to examine sources and knowledge as process.

4

Reading Danah Boyd’s “Literacy: Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?”

Jenny Shepherd

Response DirectionsBegin this assignment by reading CR pages 9 and 10 to find out more about identifying a writer’s claims and about strategies you can use to be a more critical reader.

Next, after using the previewing strategies to skim the structure, read Boyd’s chapter, making notes as you go. Once you are finished, respond to the following questions

Who is the audience for this chapter and how can you tell? What are Boyd's main claims? What are the main types of evidence you saw in the text? Identify a strategy Boyd uses to persuade her audience (see page 7 of the reader). Do you think this

is effective? Why/why not? What are some of the key terms that essential to understanding this chapter?

Notes and QuestionsArticle Structure:

1. Intro- Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives? (overview of argument) Digital natives vs. digital immigrants

2. Emergence of the Digital Native (background and definitions) History of terms/concepts

3. Youth Need New Literacies (critique of existing concepts and how to extend) What is media literacy and why is it important? Moving from critical consumption to knowledgeable production (not just using, but using

purposefully)

4. The Politics of Algorithms (example) Acknowledging bias in search algorithms and results and implications Summary and then rhetorical move to critique- 186 “Given the lack of formal gatekeepers and

the diversity of content and authors, it’s often hard to determine credibility online”- also a transition to next section, distinguishing between search capabilities of existing knowledge to how knowledge is socially constructed (and why that’s important to digital literacies)

5. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production (example) defining the social construction of knowledge in sites like Wikipedia and why the wider

concept is important to learning highlighting the idea that all content (print or online) is never entirely neutral

5

6. Digital Inequality (example) Tech access doesn’t necessarily equate to tech literacy Who is responsible for addressing digital inequality and what should be included in this?

7. Beyond Digital Natives (conclusion and looking towards new ways of conceptualizing the issue) Outlining shortcomings and what is useful about previous definitions/distinctions of “digital

natives” How to extend previous understandings of this concept for greater equality and more critical

use of technologies

Detailed Discussion Questions Boyd makes a key distinction on page 177 between consumption and production of digital content.

What is the difference between the two and why does it matter?

How would Boyd define being “literate” and “media literate” (p. 181)?

On page 178, Boyd discusses a quote about natives and immigrants in cyberspace. What role does the source/his background play in interpreting her argument?

Boyd often distinguishes between formal/explicit instruction about how to use technology with more personal/social/experimental ways of learning technology. What are the key distinctions between these and why do they matter to Boyd’s argument?

o What experiences did you have with learning digital technologies (both formal and informal)?

o Did your learning experiences ever include explicit attention to ways of being critical/questioning of particular technologies or their affordances? If so, what and how?

182-183 “In order to attract wide audiences, many technologies are designed to be extraordinarily simple… Although it is not necessary to be technically literate to participate, those with limited technical literacies aren’t necessarily equipped to be powerful citizens of the digital world.”

o What are the arguments for and against this technological simplification and how do they fit with Boyd’s argument? (can use the example of creating a website through hand-coding or through a site like Wordpress)

o This is also a good spot to talk about affordances and drawbacks, the idea that few issues are pro/con and are instead much more complex and filled with tradeoffs

185- why is it important to be able to think critically about underlying biases? What are the consequences of NOT attending to these?

187- What is “knowledge production” and why does Boyd think it is important?

189- Boyd discusses the edit and discussion features of Wikipedia. Why or how are these important to her argument and to larger understandings of Wikipedia/web 2.0 capabilities?

o 191- does teaching critical digital literacies necessitate using a context like Wikipedia to help “youth to interrogate their sources and understand how

6

information is produced”? Why or why not?

189- Why does Boyd use the examples of bias and cultural perspective in textbooks to help support her argument about how bias and differing perspectives exist in online sources like Wikipedia?

192- What is the “digital divide”? Does it still exist? Why does this distinction matter?

197- Boyd advocates for the concept of “active learning”. What is this and how does it connect to Boyd’s argument (or the larger “conversation” on digital literacy)?

197- Boyd makes a distinction between developing an “intuitive sense” for how to use technology and more explicit understanding of how to use technologies critically. What does she mean by this and why is it important?

Argument/Claims “digital natives” is a term that implies youth have an inherent understanding of all things digital-

176

rhetoric of “digital natives” is a distraction to understanding what youth in digital environment need to know/do (this is a stereotype that is harmful to understanding the real literacy needs of students/youth)- 176

implicit claim, p. 177- Literacy practices change much faster than they used to in a print world, so teaching a static set of skills for being literate is no longer sufficient

179- lumping together all youth as digital natives obscures uneven distribution of technology skills and literacies

180- Inequality reproduces itself when we aren’t being critical of what we’re doing and why

180- familiarity with latest gadgets or services is often less important than possessing critical knowledge to engage productively

181- “Youth must become media literate”

181- “people must also learn to question the biases and assumptions underpinning the content they see”

185- although it isn’t necessary to understand the technical details, it is important to recognize that algorithms aren’t neutral, that they can reveal politics and biases when they prioritize certain content over others

186- personalization algorithms “produce social divisions that may undermine any ability to create an informed public”

7

191- Dismissing Wikipedia (and similar crowd-sourced content) because it may contain biases or inaccuracies misses a prime learning opportunity for “helping youth to interrogate their sources and understand how information is produced”

193- equating tech access to tech know-how is problematic and leads to a “participation gap” 195 Rhetorical Move- summarizes prior claims made by others and acknowledges relevance

of some of it, but then disputes and extends:“There is little doubt that youth must have access, skills, and media literacy to capitalize on opportunities in a networked society, BUT focusing on these individual capacities obscures how underlying structural formations shape teens’ access to opportunities and information”

197- “I believe that the digital natives rhetoric is worse than inaccurate: it is dangerous. Because of how society has politicized this language, it allows some to eschew responsibility for helping youth and adults navigate a networked world.”

197- developing an implicit or “intuitive sense” of how technology works is different/insufficient from an explicit critical approach to its use

Finding claims:Locate problem/solution pairs in the textLocate all the question answer/pairs in the text Locate passages in the text where Boyd emphasizes how much an issue matters, or where she explicitly uses the language of argument

Main ClaimA useful place to start when identifying the main claim or overall argument, is this quotation from the introduction:

“The notion of the digital native, whether constructed positively or negatively, has serious unintended consequences. Not only is it fraught, but it obscures the uneven distribution of technological skills and media literacy across the youth population, presenting an inaccurate portrait of young people as uniformly prepared for the digital era and ignoring the assumed level of privilege required to be “native.” Worse, by not doing the work necessary to help youth develop broad digital competency, educators and the public end up reproducing digital inequality because more privileged youths often have more opportunities to develop these skills outside the classroom. Rather than focusing on coarse generational categories, it makes more sense to focus on the skills and knowledge that are necessary to make sense of a mediated world. Both youth and adults have a lot to learn.” (179)

8

Connections to rhetorical analysisThe chapter engages in an analysis of the “rhetoric of digital natives.” Boyd presents a genealogy of the expression, explaining where it begins, how different versions evolved, and how the terms were taken up by certain authors and groups. She claims this rhetoric has had many bad effects, and explains why she thinks it has led people to misunderstand young people’s relationship to digital technologies.

“The burden of responsibility shifts depending on how we construct the problem rhetorically and socially. The language we use matters.” (196)

“The ‘rhetoric of digital natives,’ far from being useful is often a distraction to understanding the challenges that youth face in a networked world.” (176)

“The notion of digital natives has political roots, mostly born out of American techno-idealism.” (177)

“Yet many who use the rhetoric of digital natives position young people either as passive recipients of technological knowledge or as learners who easily pick up the language of technology the way they pick up a linguistic tongue. These notions draw on the frames that Barlow and Rushkoff put forward but twist them in ways that are far from their intention.” (178)

“In 2001 educational consultant Marc Prensky penned an article entitled ‘Digital Natives, Digital immigrants.’” (179)

“As the term took off and began to permeate popular discourse, scholars began critiquing the underlying implications.” (179)

“The notion of the digital native, whether constructed positively or negatively, has serious unintended consequences.” (179)

“The challenges brought forth by media literacy stem from and reinforce the broader issue of digital inequality, which is often elided by the frame of digital natives.” (192)

“[As Henry Jenkins explains] talk of digital natives may also mask the different degrees of access to and comfort with emerging technologies experienced by different youth.” (192)

“By focusing on the ‘digital divide’ between levels of access and types of competencies, Jenkins highlights how a well-intentioned public uses the rhetoric surrounding digital natives to obfuscate and reinforce existing inequalities.” (193)

“The burden of responsibility shifts depending on how we construct the problem rhetorically and socially. The language we use matters.” (196)

9

“I believe that the digital natives rhetoric is worse than inaccurate: it is dangerous. Because of how society has politicized this language, it allows some to eschew responsibility for helping youth and adults navigate a networked world. If we view skills and knowledge as inherently generational, then organized efforts to achieve needed forms of literacy are unnecessary. In other words, a focus on today’s youth as digital natives presumes that all we as a society need to do is be patient and wait for a generation of these digital wunderkinds to grow up. A laisses faire attitude is unlikely to eradicate the inequalities that continue to emerge. Likewise, these attitudes will not empower average youth to be more sophisticated internet participants.” (197)

Boyd Teaching Notes - Susan

A brief breakdown of the article, pointing to some of her claims and evidence, and some ideas for writing and discussion in class. Susan.

Boyd – Ch. 7 literacy: are today’s youth digital natives?

1. Introductiona. Terms – digital natives, digital immigrants, networked publicsb. Gives background details that inform her discussion of digital nativesc. Makes several small claims about the idea, which are really previews of her larger

argumentd. Evidence: briefly mentions her work and previews some findings from that work

2. The Emergence of the Digital Nativea. Terms – techo-idealism, cyberlibertarianism, b. Evidence: definition of term digital native, including details about the originals of the

term based on other scholar’s workc. Evidence: presents the arguments by Barlow, Rushkoff, and Prinsky as the generally

accepted views on the term/subject, which she begins to counter at this point in the text

i. Unintended consequences (179)ii. Point leading to her main claim: “it makes more sense to focus on the skills and

knowledge that are necessary to make sense of a mediated world. Both youth and adults have a lot to learn” (180)

d. Claim: “Familiarity with the latest gadgets or services is often less important than possessing the critical knowledge to engage productively with networked situations” (180)

i. Consider who decides and what specifically constitutes productive engagement?ii. What networked situations?

10

e. Purpose (?): Starts to make a call to action of educators (she doesn’t quite follow through on this, though)

3. Youth Need New Literaciesa. Terms – critical media literacy, native participantsb. Claim: “Youth must become media literate” (181)c. Provides a clarification of what it means to be media literate and gives background on

the concept as it predates the interneti. Emphasizes the more pressing need to be media literate today (par. 3 181)

d. Prescriptive explanation of specific knowledge and skills she deems necessary to develop media literacy

e. Evidence: Example – MySpacef. Claim: Makes a sub-claim that speaks to her purpose: “those with limited technical

literacy aren’t necessarily equipped to be powerful citizens of the ditial world” (183). She’s claiming that students who don’t learn about coding and other technical skills have less power.

4. The Politics of Algorithmsa. Evidence: example of teenager’s understanding of Wikipedia as an unreliable source,

and Google as a reliable sourceb. Explains that Google has no involvement in the veracity of contentc. Explains algorithms and the biases that are inherent in them because of the people

involvedd. Evidence: Eli Pariser – filtering algorithmse. Evidence: “scholars at Harvard’s Berkman Center”

5. Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Productiona. Points out that teachers aren’t explaining what about credible sources make them sob. Wikipedia as an example of a “evolving document” (191)c. Claim: “Crowdsourced content…can, and often does, play a valuable role in making

information accessible and providing a site for reflection on the production of knowledge” (191-92)

6. Digital Inequalitya. Terms – digital inequality, digital divideb. Evidence: Henry Jenkins highlights the problems with thinking about an entire group of

people using one term that fails to consider variations in group dynamics and individuals who don’t meet the criteria for the term

c. Digital divide, specifically the divide between access along economic linesd. Evidence: “Scholars and governmental agencies began to argue that access alone

mattered little if people didn’t know how to use the tools in front of them” (193).e. Evidence: Her fieldwork with teens (doesn’t identify their races)f. Evidence: Kate Crawford and Penelope Robinsong. Explains that there are political implications of the ways we frame digital inequality

(doesn’t really go into this much – maybe this is a preview of a later discussed point?)7. Beyond Digital Natives

a. Evolution of term digital nativesi. Movement to reclaim the term digital native

1. Claims that she doesn’t believe yet that it can be reclaimed (196)b. Claim (framed as a belief – ugh): “I believe that the digital natives rhetoric is worse than

inaccurate: it is dangerous” (197)

11

c. Purpose (?): Starts to make a call to action of educators (she doesn’t quite follow through on this, though)

d. Closes with a sort of call to action (really more of a warning), urging us to reconsider how we view and discuss our youth

Pre-reading Activities:Quick write before they read the text– Describe how technologically advanced or skilled your generation is, providing examples to explain. How do you understand the term digital native? Digital immigrant? Do you find these terms – native/immigrant – to be flawed in any way? Why/why not? What do you think about the inherent connotations with the terms?Read only the section headings and predict what the section will be about

Discussion questions after they’ve read the text:Boyd is very focused on the necessity of students developing digital knowledge, not just by practical use of specific platforms like Facebook and Google (as mere participants), but by learning how these platforms work, perhaps even learning coding and computer programming skills. What is your reaction to this emphasis – this new literacy that she advocates students become skilled in?

Activities/writing after they’ve read the text:Write a précis of the chapter (paying attention to her motivations behind writing this – what does she want her audience to do? Who is her intended audience? It seems sometimes she is aiming this at educators, but she veers away from that angle and doesn’t offer any real solution to how we as educators can help students improve their digital literacy).

My observations about the text itself (notes to myself to consider for later classroom discussion about critical reading):I noticed that she gave several examples of white teenagers, with that specific distinction, but later in the section on digital inequality, she didn’t include the teens’ races. Was this deliberate or does she get into this later in the book? What motivations might she have had to highlight the privileged students races (who were only white) and downplay the underprivileged students races (by not identifying them at all)? How does this exclusion speak to other potential biases the author may hold? How does this exclusion potentially highlight the inequality in a positive way? How do you consider race to be a factor in the discussion on digital ability?

12

Possible Source texts & Areas of Focus for Student-led Group work and/or Presentations Chris

Complicating, defending, challenging and extending the idea of “digital native” Do "Digital Natives" Exist? Idea Channel, PBS Digital Studios. Fun video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WVKBAqjHiE John Palfrey and Urs Gasser, Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation Of Digital Natives.

Published by Basic Books, 2008. (We have the electronic copy. Students could look at the introduction, a chapter or a section on the concept).

Vaidhyanathan, Siva. “Generational Myth.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 55.4 (Sep 19, 2008): B7-B9. Extends Boyd. Accessible and easy to read.

Doug Holton, “The Digital Natives / Digital Immigrants Distinction Is Dead, Or At Least Dying.” Blog post March 19, 2010. Collection of articles, stories, conference papers on the topic. http://tinyurl.com/ngpjshh

“On Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives: How the Digital Divide Affects Families, Educational Institutions, and the Workplace.” http://www.zurinstitute.com/digital_divide.html (This accepts the category but qualifies it by creating many distinctions and sub-categories.)

Michael Thomas, (ed.) Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology, and the New Literacies. Routledge, 2011. “…an unprecedented assemblage of critical scholarly perspectives on the digital native.”

Christopher Jones and Binhui Shao. “The Net Generation and Digital Natives: Implications for Higher Education.” A literature review commissioned by the Higher Education Academy, 2011.

Research on the digital literacies of young people/undergraduates – does it confirm, extend, complicate or challenge Boyd?

Results from RWS survey of digital literacies from spring 2015 Steve Kolowich, “What Students Don't Know.” Inside Higher Ed, August 22, 2011. Summarizes

key research project on student research practices (http://tinyurl.com/p7eoytm) This is the ERIAL project (Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries). “The majority of students -- of all levels -- exhibited significant difficulties that ranged across nearly every aspect of the search process.”

“When Students Can't Compute.” Dian Schaffhauser. October 2013 digital edition of Campus Technology. “Online education promises learning opportunities for all, but too many community college students lack the tech skills--and the access--to take advantage of these resources.”

Hargittai, E. “Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet Skills and Uses among Members of the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry. 80(1):92-113, 2010.

“Adaptability to Online Learning: Differences Across Types of Students and Academic Subject Areas.” Di Xu & Shanna Smith Jaggars, CCRC Working Paper No. 54.

Publications from the Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries (ERIAL) Project, http://www.erialproject.org/.

Digital Literacy & Inequality Astra Taylor, “Open Systems and Glass Ceilings.” http://www.nationofchange.org/open-

systems-and-glass-ceilings-1397223100

13

Hargittai, E. “Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet Skills and Uses among Members of the “Net Generation”. Sociological Inquiry. 80(1):92-113, 2010.

What search skills do young people have? What attitudes do they have to Google and Wikipedia? Are they aware of “search engine bias” and the politics of algorithms?Boyd claims that many young people have unsophisticated search skills, trust too easily in the results provided by Google, and are unaware of the “politics of algorithms.” The texts below could be used to illustrate, extend, complicate, challenge and qualify Boyd’s arguments.

1. Video: Eli Pariser TED talk, “Beware Online Filter Bubbles.” http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en

2. Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Donna M. Lanclos, and Erin M. Hood, "'I always stick with the first thing that comes up on Google....' Where People Go for Information, What They Use, and Why," EDUCAUSE Review Online, December 6, 2013.

3. “At Sea in a Deluge of Data,” Alison J. Head and John Wihbey Chronicle of Higher Education, JULY 07, 2014. http://tinyurl.com/qx76ao8

4. “In Google We Trust: Users’ Decisions on Rank, Position, and Relevance.” Bing Pan et al. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. Volume 12, Issue 3, pages 801–823, April 2007.

5. Alison J. Head, "Learning the Ropes: How Freshmen Conduct Course Research Once They Enter College," Project Information Literacy Research Report, December 4, 2013.

6. Alison J. Head and Michael B. Eisenberg, "Lessons Learned: How College Students Seek Information in the Digital Age," Project Information Literacy First Year Report with Student Survey Findings, University of Washington's Information School, 2009

7. Soo Young Rieh and Brian Hilligoss, "College Students' Credibility Judgments in the Information Seeking Process," in Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility, eds. Miriam J. Metzger and Andrew J. Flanagin, MIT Press, 2008.

8. Sook Lim, "How and Why Do College Students Use Wikipedia?" Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 11, 2009

9. Alison J Head and Michael B. Eisenberg, "How Today's College Students Use Wikipedia for Course-Related Research," First Monday, vol. 15, no. 3, 2010.

10. Helen Georgas, "Google vs. the Library: Student Preferences and Perceptions When Doing Research Using Google and a Federated Search Tool," Libraries and the Academy, vol. 13, no. 2, 2013, pp. 165–185.

11. “The ERIAL Project: Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries” by Andrew Asher, Lynda Duke, and Dave Green. Academic Commons, May 2010.

12. The ERIAL (Ethnographic Research in Illinois Academic Libraries) project is a series of studies of student digital literacy conducted at Illinois universities. “The majority of students -- of all levels -- exhibited significant difficulties that ranged across nearly every aspect of the search process”… They tended to overuse Google and misuse scholarly databases. They preferred simple database searches to other methods of discovery, but generally exhibited ‘a lack of understanding of search logic’ that often foiled their attempts to find good sources.”

13. Cass Sunstein, “The Daily We: Is the Internet Really a Blessing for Democracy?” Boston Review, Summer, 2001.

14. “Algorithms and Bias: Q. and A. With Cynthia Dwork.” The New York Times, AUG. 10, 2015. http://tinyurl.com/po3rq26

Critical Digital Literacy New York Times: “Skills and Strategies: Determining the Reliability of Sources”

14

http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/skills-and-strategies-fake-news-vs-real-news-determining-the-reliability-of-sources/

"Crap Detection 101.” City Brights, Howard Rheingold, SFGate.com. SFGate Blogs. Rheingold, Howard – video on crap detection. http://rheingold.com/2013/crap-detection-mini-

course/ Prezi on the subject: https://prezi.com/cutjhwskuqbk/chapter-2-rheingold-prezi/ Scott Rosenberg, “In the Context of Web Context: How to Check Out Any Web Page,”

Wordyard Blog, September 14, 2010, http://www.wordyard.com/2010/09/14/in-the-context-of-web-context-how-to-check-out-any-web-page.

Bing and the Microsoft Education Team, “From Search to Research: Developing Critical Thinking through Web Research Skills” PDF, pp 3-14, 31-37.

15

Prompt & Guidelines for Organization of Paper 3

ASSIGNMENT PROMPTLength 8-9 pages

This assignment asks you to select a point of difference, disagreement or connection between Boyd, Thompson and Carr that you find significant or interesting. You will use this point of intersection to launch your own argument or contribution to this debate. Your paper should use outside sources (and/or data you collect) to support your position, and should explain how your argument adds to the “conversation.” That is, you should explain how your paper extends, illustrates, clarifies, complicates or qualifies an issue or question taken up by the authors. The paper thus follows the “They Say/I Say” framework described by Graff and Birkenstein.

When discussing what others have said (“They Say”) include some evaluation of the texts. Your position may be that the authors’ arguments are effective in different ways, that one argument is superior to the others, or that all contain significant shortcomings. However, you should attempt to add something to the conversation, and you can draw on evidence from other texts as well as your own experience to do this. You can collect or curate data people you know, or from online sources. You can discuss how your own position extends, complicates, illustrates, challenges or qualifies one (or more) of the arguments other authors have made. Assignment OptionsYou are welcome to suggest variations on this assignment, as long as they are in keeping with the “spirit” of the assignment. Examples:

1. Depending on class interest, we may decide on key “research areas” and 2. You could suggest a project that focuses on an element of digital literacy you are interested in. 3. You could organize this paper around a problem/solution framework, describing a problem

discussed by several authors (critical digital literacy, search literacy, use of Wikipedia in school, etc.) and presenting and evaluating several solutions.

4. You could suggest a group project5. Talk to me about options.

Important Dates: Rough draft due November 30 Final Draft due December 14

16

Template phrases:1) Author, term (illustrates, clarifies, extends, complicates), Boyd’s claim (insert chosen claim),

by…(cite evidence from the author’s text). 2) Author, term (illustrates, etc) the matter/claim/idea/concept further by

stating/asserting/revealing…(cite evidence from the supplementary text).3) Boyd’s claim regarding (insert claim), is (insert appropriate term), by (author), in his/her

article/editorial/book (insert attribution phrase), as he/she states/claims/argues/queries, (insert author’s claim).

4) If the text is ‘doing’ more than one thing to Boyd’s argument: Not only does (state the author)’s claim regarding (insert author’s claim) + (appropriate term) Boyd’s argument of (insert Boyd’s claim), it also (insert correlating term) this idea by (cite additional evidence from the author’s text). OR

In addition to (insert appropriate term) Boyd’s argument concerning (insert Boyd’s claim), (author’s name) + also (correlating term) the argument by (cite additional evidence from the author’s text).

Example using template:1) Author, Michael Cannon, complicates Michael Moore’s argument for a ‘right’ to

universal health care, by revealing important issues not considered by Moore, including financial strain and provision of extensive medical care.

3) Moore’s claim regarding the failure of profit-based health insurance companies to protect their clients, is extended by a staff writer from KMBC-TV in Kansas City, when he provides a follow-up on Julie Pierce’s devastating testimonial, debuted in Moore’s film, of losing her husband to cancer after he was denied life-saving treatments. KMBC-TV claims that Moore’s documentary gave Pierce “a voice and a stage.”

4) In addition to illustrating Moore’s argument concerning the excessive price tags of poor health-insurance plans, and the need for drastic modification of our current system, author Scott Shore, in his article, “The Nightmare of Universal Health Care,” complicates Moore’s argument by claiming that universal health-care is not the appropriate solution for our health-care mess.

TEMPLATE # 2Author A complicates Author B’s argument by ______________, _______________, and ____________________.

Author A suggests that Author B fails to ______________________.

Author A acknowledges that Author B is_________________________ yet Author B still does not/does not address _____________________________________________.Although Author A agrees with Author B that ____________________ he/she (refutes/counters/rebuts) _________________________.Author A’s assertion contrasts with Authors B’s claim that ___________________

17

Templates for Introducing all Three Authors

The following templates may be helpful when you’re introducing all three authors.

Both of these authors examine issues similar to the ones Boyd discusses. ________________ addresses the issue of ________________, and (clarifies, illustrates, etc) Boyd’s argument by __________________________. _________________ discusses the idea of _______________________, and (clarifies, illustrates, etc) his analysis of _______________ by showing __________________________.

Both authors address issues related to Boyd’s argument, but in different ways. __________________ offers an alternate viewpoint of ______________ portion of Boyd’s argument (cause of the problem, solution, etc). He/she (illustrates, complicates, etc) his idea by ________________________. In contrast, _________________ addresses the portion of Boyd’s argument that deals with ____________________ (effects, solutions, etc). He/she (clarifies, illustrates, etc) his idea by _____________________________.

All three authors are concerned with the issue of _______________________. Boyd addresses ____________’s opinions in his article, saying ______________________. _______________’s writing (clarifies, illustrates, etc) Boyd’s because _________________________. The third author, _______________, (clarifies, illustrates, etc) both of them because _______________________.

18

Sample Body Paragraphs Using Rifkin

Disclaimer: These paragraphs are taken from multiple sources. They are meant to show examples of possible body paragraphs, which students should analyze to decide what works and what doesn't. Not all paragraphs are good models.

Intro: In "A Change of Heart About Animals," a 2003 editorial published in the Los Angeles Times, Jeremy Rifkin argues that new research calls into question many of the boundaries commonly thought to exist between humans and other animals. As a consequence, he suggests that humans should expand their empathy for animals and treat them better. To support this argument, Rifkin points to studies suggesting that animals can acquire language, use tools, exhibit self-awareness, anticipate death, and pass on knowledge from one generation to the next. Rifkin's argument provides a much-needed expansion of human empathy "to include the broader community of creatures" (Rifkin 16). However, a logical extension of Rifkin's argument requires that humans anthropomorphically proscribe all characteristics of human emotions on animals in ways that are not supported by similar studies. In order to more clearly define the limits of similar emotions in humans and animals, I will here outline the lack of guilt, morality, and spiritual faith in animals.

Potential body paragraphsBody Paragraph A:     A researcher at Barnard College, Andrea Horowitz writes about a study that was done on dogs to determine where "the guilty look" comes from (Horowitz 447). In her article, she says that the guilty look is something that humans perceive, but that dogs actually emit as a response to owner behavior rather than any prior obedience or disobedience. This disagrees with Rifkin, because he claims that animals and humans share similar emotions.

Body Paragraph B:  In a recent study at Barnard College, dogs who exhibited signs of "the guilty look" were tested to see if the look came as a result of animal disobedience or owner behavior (Horowitz 447). Guilt is an emotion that is often described as differentiating humans from animals. The results of this study indicate that dogs give the guilty look based on the cues their owners give them rather than any connection with their own disobedience (Horowitz 448). This proves that Rifkin's argument may be limited to baser emotions like excitement, grief, and stress - emotions that are instinctual and not of a higher order.

Body Paragraph C: Rifkin's argument examines several emotions that many might claim are instinctual; several critics have argued that excitement, grief, and stress are often impulsive emotions rather than ones achieved through reflection. Considering that animals do share some emotions, it is natural on this basis alone to extend our empathy to animals that feel other instinctual emotions - like pain - and to develop better practices accordingly. However, an examination of reflective emotions reveals limits in the connections between humans and animals. In a recent study at Barnard College, researchers demonstrated the false attribution of the feeling of guilt to dogs who had exhibited disobedient behavior. In an article describing the study, Andrea Horowitz concludes that the results "highlight the priority, instead [of guilt based on disobedience], of the human's behaviour over the evidence of wrongdoing" (Horowitz 450). In other words, the study indicates that the appearance of guilt arises as an instinctual reaction to human cues rather than any self-reflection on the dogs' part on the act in question. This is significant for two reasons: first, because it indicates a common misattribution of human emotions to animals on the part of

19

pet owners, and secondly because it demonstrates the limits of Rifkin's argument in applying only to instinctual emotions rather than reflective emotions.

Prospectus for Paper 2 (1 -2 pages)It’s a good idea to write a prospectus before you construct a paper with multiple sources as it gives you a chance to plan and think through the paper early in the drafting process.

What is the point of difference, disagreement or connection between Boyd, Thompson and Carr you will explore?

Summarize the texts/data/material you plan to use in your paper. Compose an annotated bibliography that summarizes these texts and includes two key quotations for each text.

Explain how you will use outside sources (and/or data you collect) to support your position, and add to the “conversation.” That is, how will your paper extend, illustrate, clarify, complicate or qualify an issue or question taken up by the authors.

If you plan to draw on evidence from other texts as well as your own experience to do this. You can collect or curate data people you know, or from online sources. You can discuss how your own position extends, complicates, illustrates, challenges or qualifies one (or more) of the arguments other authors have made.

Your prospectus should include the following parts: Introduction : this is where you will give some background on the issue, question or topic

and discuss why it is of interest to you and others. Consider the following questions: Research : this where you describe the point of difference, disagreement or connection

between Boyd, Thompson and Carr you will explore. connect the two secondary sources you will be using to write this paper. Consider the

following questions:o How do these secondary sources connect to your central text? o What issue(s) in these secondary sources will your paper explore?o HOW do these outside sources affect your understanding of the central text?

Think in terms of verbs, what the outside text does to your reading of the central

20

text, i.e. challenge, illustrate, qualify, extend or complicate. WHY do they do that? In other words, in what ways do they make you re-visit the central text?

Conclusion : this is where you round up your prospectus. This section should highlight your main point – i.e., your purpose for writing this paper.

o At this moment, what do you think the main point of your paper will be? This may be a good opportunity to write your “purpose statement.”

MLA Works Cited Page, annotated. Under each source entry, write a few sentences why you selected the source.

21

Describing relationships between texts

How texts “extend,” “complicate,” “illustrate,” “challenge,” or “qualify” other texts

Academic writing requires that you build arguments using multiple texts. To do this effectively, you will want to describe the relationships between these different texts.

Extend: When a source advances, develops, expands, or take further some element of an existing argument, we say that the source extends an argument.

Extending an argument involves presenting additional evidence or reasons that are in line with the original argument but go beyond it.

Some verbs you might use to describe the way a source extends a text include: Gives additional evidence, develops, elaborates, expands, extrapolates, teases out, advances, takes further, provides additional evidence/support, supplements, etc.

Complicate: When a source presents evidence, arguments or claims that are at odds with an author’s position, suggesting that the position needs to be qualified, we say that one text complicates another.

Complicating an author’s argument is not quite the same as disagreeing with it, although disagreement may be involved.

It usually involves suggesting that an author has not dealt with the full complexity of an issue, has failed to consider relevant evidence, or that there is a gap, shortcoming or limitation in an author’s account.

Complicating an argument may involve exposing problems, contradictions, or presenting counterexamples and counterarguments that challenge some part of the argument.

Some verbs you might use to describe the way a source complicates a text include: challenges, contradicts, disagrees, locates problems with, identifies shortcomings, notes that X fails to account for, notes that X ignores A, suggests that X’s account is exaggerated, is vulnerable to counterarguments/counterexamples, rests on several highly questionable assumptions

Qualify: When a source presents evidence/claims that suggest an author’s argument goes too far, is too strong, or overgeneralizes, we say it qualifies the author’s argument. When a source limits the scope or extent of claims in an argument, we say that the source qualifies the argument.

22

Example of unqualified argument: All video games incite violence and should be banned.

Qualified argument: Miller asserts that certain extreme video games may desensitize impressionable young people to violence and advocates a ban on these types of games. However, Jenkins points to evidence from MIT demonstrating that most games are innocent fun and may even teach useful skills. Nevertheless, he acknowledges Miller’s concerns and suggests that only games that realistically simulate murder should be banned. In addition, he limits the ban to children under the age of 14. Thus, Jenkins qualifies Miller’s claims.

Challenge: when a source directly contradicts or challenges an author’s position.

Illustrate: When a source provides examples, additional evidence, cases or arguments that help explain a position we say that the source illustrates an argument.

Illustrating an argument means to present additional examples that illustrate or support a claim or argument. The illustration may not be explicitly mentioned by the original author.

Some verbs you might use to describe the way a source clarifies or illustrates a text include: illuminates, exemplifies, explicates, confirms, supports, etc.

NOTE: As with most sets of terms, there is some overlap between them. For example, something that illustrates an argument may also clarify it. An element of an argument can thus do more than one thing. The important thing is to try to figure out the general relationship between texts/parts of texts.

EXAMPLE: While Chua sees conflict between ethnicities in developing countries as driven largely by globalization and democratization, others believe that poor government is the main culprit. In “The Myth of Global Ethnic Conflict,” John Bowden argues that many countries composed of diverse ethnic groups have avoided conflict because their governments have created “multiethnic coalitions” which encourage different groups to “seek the large electoral middle ground.” The countries he uses as examples are all democracies. Bowden thus complicates Chua’s argument by suggesting that democracy, properly run, can prevent ethnic violence, and that the solution is thus renewed commitment to democracy rather than a retreat from it. This contrasts with Chua, who believes that in countries where there is a “market dominant minority,” popular majorities always tend

23

toward ethnocentrism, and some form of “backlash” is very likely. Bowden, on the other hand, believes that ethnic conflict exists only when ethnicities are left out of the power structure, or when destructive “political choices” are made. He acknowledges that cultural diversity does present challenges to peace, and that certain other factors can make conflict likely. …However, Bowden insists that democracy and globalization do not lead inevitably to the kind of problems Chua outlines, and that we must focus on the underlying factors that are the real drivers of violence. Bowden thus complicates Chua’ argument in several ways; firstly, he presents evidence that is at odds with Chua’s thesis, and which can be read as questioning the extent to which it is true. Secondly, Bowden’s article suggests that Chua’s position is overstated and needs to be severely qualified. Lastly, Bowden’s article suggests that Chua has failed to deal with the full complexity of what causes ethnic violence in developing countries.

24

Framework for Body paragraphsProject #3: Using outside sources to illustrate, extend, clarify, or complicate and argumentUsing the Prospectus you wrote for this project, start filling in the blanks below to help organize your ideas. Please note that you will need to provide more than one example from each source. This is just an exercise to help you organize your ideas as you get started.

Introduce the text

Introduce the author

Describe main argument(s) addressed in this text

Quote author’s claim from primary text that you will investigate

Introduce outside sources and STATE whether they (illustrate, extend, clarify, and/or complicate) the text

[This statement is your claim that you will be trying to prove throughout your paper]

Identify outside source #1 and EXPLAIN how outside research relates to the author’s claim (HOW does it illustrate, extend, clarify, complicate the argument?)

25

Quote the source that was just introduced in order to provide evidence for your claim – SHOW how this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text

Analyze the quote, explaining why it is meaningful - EXPLAIN WHY this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text

Identify outside source #2 and EXPLAIN HOW outside research relates to the author’s claim (HOW does it illustrate, extend, clarify, complicate the argument?)

Quote the source that was just introduced in order to provide evidence for your claim – SHOW how this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text

26

Analyze the quote, explaining why it is meaningful - EXPLAIN WHY this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text

Explain HOW the evidence from both sources illustrates, extends, clarifies, and/or complicates the claim and WHY this evidence is SIGNIFICANT (why should we care)

27

Framework for Body paragraphs + Sample Body paragraphsOrganizing your writing:

Project #3: Using outside sources to illustrate, extend, clarify, or complicate and argument

I have filled in the blanks below as an example, using the paragraph I drafted regarding how documents written by Roman Catholic leaders complicate Kidder’s argument. Please note that you will need to provide more than one example from each source. This is just a starting point.

Introduce the textIn his bestselling novel Mountains Beyond Mountains

Introduce the author Journalist Tracy Kidder

Describe main topic(s) addressed in this text

discusses liberation theology as a “branch of Catholicism” (62).

Quote author’s claim from primary text that you will investigate

He states that “Latin America’s Catholic bishops had endorsed some of its tenets” in the “late 1960s,” and describes its “central imperative” which is “to provide a preferential option for the poor” (62, 81).

Introduce outside sources and STATE whether they (illustrate, extend, clarify, and/or complicate) the text

[This statement is your claim that you will be trying to prove throughout your paper]

However, several documents written by Roman Catholic leaders complicate the argument presented by Kidder.

Identify outside source #1 and EXPLAIN how outside research relates to the author’s claim (HOW does it illustrate, extend, clarify, complicate the argument?)

Though his book was published in 2004, Kidder failed to make note of the fact that Prefect Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) presented a document specifically discussing the Roman Catholic stance on liberation theology during the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in August, 1984, entitled “Instruction on Certain Aspects of the ‘Theology of Liberation.’”

28

Quote the source that was just introduced in order to provide evidence for your claim – SHOW how this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text (Kidder)

In this text, Prefect Ratzinger points out that there are “essential aspects [of Christianity] which the ’theologies of liberation’ especially tend to misunderstand or eliminate.”

The Prefect also discusses ways in which some of the “theologies of liberation” can misrepresent the “Christian meaning” of the poor, “by confusing “the 'poor' of the Scripture and the 'proletariat' of Marx. In this way they pervert the Christian meaning of the poor, and they transform the fight for the rights of the poor into a class fight within the ideological perspective of the class struggle.”

Analyze the quote, explaining why it is meaningful - EXPLAIN WHY this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text (Kidder)

Kidder fails to mention the Marxist associations of some branches of liberation theology, the violent political tenets of which contradict the teachings of Catholicism.

Identify outside source #2 and EXPLAIN HOW outside research relates to the author’s claim (HOW does it illustrate, extend, clarify, complicate the argument?)

In an interview held during a flight to Brazil for The Fifth General Conference of the Bishops of Latin America and the Caribbean in May, 2007, Pope Benedict XVI (formerly Prefect Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) responded to questions about current exponents of liberation theology in Brazil, and also explained the intent behind his 1984 text regarding liberation theology.

Quote the source that was just introduced in order to provide evidence for your claim – SHOW how this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text (Kidder)

. . . there is room for a difficult but legitimate debate on how to achieve [necessary reforms, in the fight for fairer living conditions] and on how best to make the Church's social doctrine effective. In this regard, certain liberation theologians are also attempting to advance, keeping to this path; others are taking other positions.

In any case, the intervention of the Magisterium was not to destroy the commitment to justice but rather to guide it on the right paths, and also with respect for the proper difference between political responsibility and ecclesiastical responsibility.

Analyze the quote, explaining why it is meaningful - EXPLAIN WHY this source illustrates, extends, clarifies, or complicates the text (Kidder)

This interview, which takes place more than 20 years after “Instruction on Certain Aspects of the ‘Theology of Liberation’” was published, extends the argument set forth in this document. Pope Benedict XVI points out that some practitioners of liberation theology follow the “path” advocated by the Catholic Church, while others do not, and that the Church wishes to guide Christians who advocate for the poor to do so without violence and without pushing a specific political agenda.

Explain HOW the evidence from both sources illustrates, extends, clarifies, and/or complicates the claim and WHY this evidence is SIGNIFICANT (why should we care)

Though Kidder alluded to the fact that only “some” of the tenets of liberation theology have been endorsed by the Catholic Church, his failure to mention the reasons why other tenets of liberation theology were not endorsed by the Church reveal a shortcoming in his presentation of liberation theology as a “branch of Catholicism.”

29

Rubric/Peer Review: Joining the Conversation

Needs Imp. Satisfactory Strong INTRODUCTION1. Does the writer introduce the issue and make a case for its

significance? How? (summarize how s/he does this). Provide suggestions for strengthening this section.

2. Where/how does the writer present concrete evidence that the issue exists? (summarize how s/he does this)

3. Does the paper state what it will do and give the reader an overview of its structure? (If it doesn’t, suggest how it could do so).

4. Does it describe the “angle” or aspect of the issue that will be addressed? List possible ways this could this be strengthened.

BODY 1: THEY SAY (WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID)1. Where and how does the writer describe how others (2-3

other authors) have approached the issue? (summarize how s/he does this). List possible ways this could this be strengthened.

2. Does the paper focus particular attention on one of the authors (the one the paper will extend, complicate, illustrate, etc.)?

3. Does the writer evaluate one or more of the authors – discussing a strength or weakness, and thus creating a “space” for the writer’s contribution? (This can be done later in the paper – but if you can’t find it, ask your peer )

4. List any suggestions for this section of the paper

30

BODY 2: PRESENTING YOUR ARGUMENT1. Does the writer present his own argument (supported by reasons and

evidence) as persuasively as possible? How could this be improved (be specific)?

2. Does the writer use the language of claims (“my claim is…I argue that…”)(summarize how/where this happens) List possible ways this could this be strengthened.

3. Does the writer talk about how her contribution extends, complicates, illustrates, qualifies, etc. another position? List possible ways this could this be strengthened

4. If not covered previously, does the paper discuss a strength or weakness in what some other author has said? List possible ways this could this be strengthened

5. How well does the writer support her claims with reasons and evidence from her own research and reading? (list suggestions).

6. Does the writer deal with objections? (where, how?) How could this be improved (be specific)?

CONCLUSIONHow does the writer conclude the paper? How did it impact you? Can you suggest any changes?

MECHANICSComment on at least one aspect of mechanics – is there effective structure that smoothly guides the reader from one idea to the next? (transitioning and topic sentences are relevant here) Does it follow MLA format? If not, where? Are there any sentences that are unclear or could be revised?

31

ORGANIZATIONYour Rating: How would you rate the organization of this paper?

7. Excellent Sophisticated arrangement of content with evident and/or subtle transitions.

6. Very good Effective arrangement of content that sustains a logical order with evidence of transitions.

5. Good Functional arrangement of content that sustains a logical order with some evidence of transitions.

4. Average Consistent arrangement of content with or without attempts at transitions.

3. Poor Confused or inconsistent arrangement of content with or without attempts at transitions.

2. Very poor Minimal control of content arrangement without attempts at transitions. 1. Disastrous No apparent content arrangement and no attempt at transitions.

GENERAL COMMENTS: please note any strengths and/or suggested improvements. Include discussion of mechanics (comma splices, fragments, etc.)

TIPS FOR DOING WELL ON ASSIGNMENT 3a) You can make this where you assert your position, using the outside source as support,

or you can make the outside source more of the focus. Example 1: Outside source CAN BE READ AS complicating, or I WILL USE THE SOURCE TO CHALLENGE, complicate, etc.

b) You NEED TO DO INTERPRETIVE WORK – don’t just line two texts up, and talk about vague similarities. It may be that the outside text does not directly reference Boyd, and the author likely has not read Boyd. So you have to show how the outside text is relevant, and how the author would respond to Boyd. You may need to spell out the implications of claims made in the outside text, and connect these to Boyd.

c) You must make a good, solid connection, and present a case for it – pretend you are a lawyer, faced by a skeptical jury and judge. They won’t take your word for it – you need to persuade them to see things as you do, and you need to present strong evidence.

d) You must choose very carefully when selecting quotations. Present the reader with quotations that fully support your case, are directly relevant to your point, and discuss them at length. They will be crucial for the next step, namely,

32

e) You must spend a lot of time detailing exactly HOW the outside text can be seen as complicating, extending, qualifying, etc. See the verbs in the handout. UNPACK what it means to complicate or challenge.

Paper 3 “Cheat Sheet”INTRODUCTION

1. Introduce the issue/problem/question you will focus on.2. Get the reader’s attention and/or make a case for the significance of what you are

writing about. 3. Give a clear indication of how the paper will proceed.

CONVERSATION & EVALUATION (“THEY SAY,” & STRENGTHS/WEAKNESSES)4. Present an account of the “conversation” (positions adopted by other texts. You can go

“global” (Thompson to Boyd to Carr) or be more “focused” (Carr and responses to his argument). In some instances one text will suffice if this text covers a lot of ground.

5. Evaluate (strengths and weaknesses) an element of one or more text. You can choose where in your paper you do this. For example, you could include evaluation when discussing the “conversation” by saying why you think one position is weaker or stronger than another. You can also include evaluation when you present your argument. For example, you could argue that your argument extends, supports, qualifies, challenges, complicates etc. an existing author’s claims. When you do this, you can discuss why the existing author’s argument needs to be extended, supported, challenged, etc. You can explain this in terms of your evaluation of this text (a strength or weakness).

YOUR ARGUMENT6. Present your own position (supported by reasons and evidence) as persuasively as possible,

anticipating objections and the dreaded “so what?” question. 7. Support your claims with reasons and evidence, establish how your position extends,

complicates, challenges or qualifies prior arguments (can include evaluation of a strength or weakness in existing texts).

Anecdotes as EvidenceOne strategy we have discussed is anecdote. Authors often use anecdotes to invite readers into a conversation. Anecdotes can work on the audience in a number of ways. They can result in an emotional response as well as help the audience make logical connections to more complex concepts. They can also work to reveal something about the author’s character as the author presents a story that reflects an ethos the audience will be receptive to. You can use an anecdote to advance your argument. For example, your anecdote could include how your experience with reading, writing, and/or collaborating online has affected your thinking. First, consider how your thinking has been impacted, improved, or hindered by reading and writing online: consider the issues of clarity, audience, memory, connection, collaboration, concentration, and contemplation to name a few. Rather than merely agreeing or disagreeing with a specific claim, think of your anecdote as evidence that either extends, complicates, or qualifies a claim made by an author. The key think is to make sure your anecdote is interesting, lines up with your argument, and is supplemented with other kinds of evidence.

33

DUE DATES: Wednesday Dec 02: drafts due & peer review in classFriday & Monday Dec (04 & 07) conferencesLast class Wednesday 12/09Final paper due Monday 14th (posted on blog, printed copy handed into SHW141 – mailbox “Werry”)

34

Writing Tips For Boyd Paper/Unit 3

Analysis: The paper should focus on explaining HOW the outside source extends, illustrates, complicates, qualifies or challenges Boyd. See page 77-78 of the reader. This is the most important part of the paper.

Provide a detailed account of both Boyds’ claim and the claim in the outside source. If you provide only a brief, general account of claims, your analysis of connections (which is the heart of the paper) will be weak.

The introduction should contain a) introduction to topic, and/or attention-getter, b) brief background on Boyd, c) summary of overall argument and support, d) statement of purpose (‘In this paper I will…”)

Each body section shoulda) Introduce a key claim(s) from Boyd that you will focus on, b) Explain the claim, provide a quotation or two to illustrate the claim, c) describe the support Boyd provides for this claim, d) transition to the outside source.

Organize your account of Boyd’s claim so that it helps “set up” your analysis of the outside text. Focus on the parts of Boyds claim, and the evidence he uses, which best allow you to establish connections to the outside source.

Read and re-read the outside source, and make sure you capture the claims as accurately as possible. Student papers sometimes provide a rather superficial account of the outside source. Some papers just note very loose, vague similarities. If you look at the list of outside sources handout, you’ll see short summaries of some of the texts, with some key phrases in bold, to alert you to important points. You may want to create a list of similarities and differences that focus on claims and evidence.

ABC = ALWAYS BE using the language of CLAIMS. Focus relentlessly on claims, evidence and purpose– and on making a strong case that your interpretation of the claims is correct.

Attributions (always focus on primary author.) If you discuss others referred to in a text, frame this in terms of how the primary author draws on these people. The same applies to each outside source – talk about how the main author draws on the work of other authors. Try to talk about what authors DO with the other writers/authors they use. That is, answer why they refer to the other author? Eg., “Bloom supports his claim by citing research done by Smith…Bloom illustrates his point by drawing on case studies originally conducted by Jones…Bloom concedes that writers like D’Souza are uneasy with the implications of an evolutionary view of morality…”

No “parallel parking” Don’t provide a series of general points loosely based on the text, or provide points that feature your own thoughts on the issues (except in the conclusion, where this may be appropriate.) Instead, focus relentlessly on the claims in the text, and your analysis of the relationship between claims and outside sources.

35

No hanging/hit and run quotations. ALWAYS introduce a quotation with your own words. NEVER insert a quote that stands alone. Always introduce, integrate and explain quotes.

Quotations - the period goes inside the quotation, not outside it – even if there is no period in the original quote (see handbook for a full explanation). Example: Oreskes states that she “would like to fight Michael Crichton in a cage match.” NOT Oreskes states that she “would like to fight Michael Crichton in a cage match”.

Long, complex sentences with complex syntax (embedded clauses, multiple verbs, etc) can sometimes be hard to understand. Check that these are clear. If they are not, try breaking the long sentence into several shorter, simpler sentences, tied together with simple connectives. See handouts on unity, cohesion, focus and coordination.

Avoid “cheerleading” (“Boyd’s brilliance is revealed in his masterful argument that leaves opponents no place to hide from the glare of his logic.”)

Article titles go in quotation marks (“The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change.”) Book titles, movie titles, and magazine titles are italicized (Moby Dick, Food Inc., Newsweek magazine, etc.)

Avoid comma splices, fragments, and agreement problems – see handouts and handbook

36

Sample Student Paper

For-profit Institutions Need Stronger Regulation            The 2008 Recession had tremendous impact on the governmental budget at all levels. One area that felt the strongest impact on budgetary constraints is education.  John Douglas describes how budgetary constraints affected education in the State of California.  He claims. “In the mega-state of California, for example, it has led to estimates that in the 2010-11 academic year approximately 250,000 eligible students were denied access to the state’s public higher education system” ( Douglas 11).  This is due to severe budget cuts. As a result many young adults have been left out without an opportunity to obtain higher education.  The other option for these students is for-profit education. However, some for-profit institutions have taken advantage of prospective students. They use misleading and unethical tactics to recruit their customers due to insufficient regulation. It is important to address this issue because the for-profit colleges are growing, and the state and federal funding for the traditional education is decreasing. Therefore, the for-profit institutions are not going anywhere. The under-regulation of these programs has impact on the taxpayer and the students of the traditional institutions. The institution educates less than 12 of the students, but uses 25 percent of federal student loans (Senate 2). The problem with the for-profit institutions using federal loans stem from high default rates. Less than half of all students tend to finish programs at for-profit colleges (Senate 4).  In addition, for-profit education institutions do not have high job placement rates (Senate 5).  Job placement rate refers to institution’s ability to place a graduate to a position in a particular field of study that generates adequate income. Therefore, low percentage of graduates combined with low amount of adequate job placement results in high default rates because the graduate cannot generate sufficient income to pay for the loans. This can be attributed to the lack of regulation of recruitment practices. In this paper, I will examine two positions on the for-profit education. One position attempts to defend the institutions and other position attacks the unethical practices by the for-profit institutions. In addition, I will describe my undercover investigation of these recruitment practices and provide the analysis of the investigation’s results.

            In, “For-Profit Education under Assault,” Brian Darling takes a position that attempts to defended the for-profit institution.  His defense methods resemble an old cliché, “The best defense is the offense.” Darling attacks the federal government and the non-profit educational instructions.  He calls them “elitists who hate the idea of free market educational institutions” (Darling 25).  In other words, Darling claims that a small and powerful group of people wants to exercise exclusive control over educational fields and they do not want to relinquish control because they are scared of the competition.  Since the traditional institutions are intimidated by the competition they “use the power of the federal government to provide non- profit schools a competitive edge to slow the growth of for-profit institutions” (Darling 25). Darling claims that regulation already in place such as the 90-10 rule and many proposed regulations such as reducing the number of financial aid available to for-profit students or forcing the for-profit colleges to address the gainful employment are designed by federal government and traditional institutions to impede  for-profit colleges from freely conducting business in order to give traditional universities a competitive edge.  He claims that federal government does not apply the above regulations to the traditional institutions.  Darling argues that such policies “ unfairly hold for-profit institutions to a higher standard for student debt and default than all other institutions” (Darling 26).  Traditional universities and colleges have

37

similar or greater dropout rates. In addition many students find themselves unable to find desired employment with their degrees after graduation.  In Darling’s opinion, there is no reason for the government to place regulations on for-profit colleges and not on the traditional institutions because both have similar problems.  Darling claims that for-profits add great value to education. While the student with the degree in Latin studies would have a problem finding a financially adequate career, the for-profit schools “have proven to be uniquely qualified to help students find jobs in today’s complex economy” ( Darling 26).   They are successful in helping finding jobs for their students because most for-profit programs are vocational degrees.  Since vocational degrees are specifically tailored to a particular job, persons with these degrees are better able to find jobs because they have specific skills needed for that career. Next position takes an opposite approach towards the for-profit education.                The second position questions the methods and practices used by the for-profit institutions. In “Opportunity, Ease, Encouragement, and Shame: a Short Course in Pitching ForProfit Education”, Joshua Woods takes a position that attacks the for-profit institutions. He claims that the for-profit education institutions resort to unethical and sometimes illegal methods to recruit their students. The government recognized that these institutions resort to such practices because various for profit “education companies have faced lawsuits and federal investigations” (Woods 31). This shows the need for the additional regulation for the for-profit institutions. Woods addresses several problematic tactics used by the for-profit institutions. The initial problem with recruitment is the “aggressive sales tactics” which stems from “the pressures put on them to enroll students” (Woods 31). This is problematic because the for-profit institution admission specialists might pressure students who are unable to perform in these institutions or are unsure if the program is the right fit for them.  In the past, for profit education institutions have “systematically misled students about their chances of finding employment after graduation” (Woods 31).  Woods argues that this is a major problem in the for profit institutions. According to his claim, if a person commits to pay significant amount of money for education, he or she needs to know the realistic chances for getting an adequate job. The 2010 report by Government Accountability Office (GAO) on for-profits supports Wood’s position and claims. The report disclosed that some pro-fit institutions provided misleading information to undercover agents such as the student’s ability to find employment with the FBI with only an associate degree and significantly misrepresented the salary size for the barber positions and medical assistants (GAO 28).  In addition, for-profit institutions engage in shaming tactics. They would use shame tactics by asking if the person is happy with their current situation (Woods 32).  Then these institutions would offer a key to solve all of their problems by obtaining a degree from their university. According to Wood’s position, such recruitment tactics are highly unethical and should be regulated.  The federal government should use sanctions to discourage the for-profit institutions from resorting to these tactics.  Lack of regulations will result in increase of these practices and the student along with the taxpayer would pay the ultimate cost for the for-profit unethical behavior. Since the non-profit institutions do not resort to the practices of aggressive recruitment, misrepresentation of employment prospective, and shaming, government should regulate for profit school more than the traditional universities.

In order to evaluate the use of deceptive tactics by for-profit colleges, I pretended to be a twenty one year old male, who was looking to get a degree in criminal justice.  To begin, I used Google search to find criminal justice degrees. The search provided me with two top choices for educational institutions in a form of advertisement.  The choices were Kaplan College and Ashford University.  Ashford University did not accept any person under age of 22 to apply to

38

the Bachelor programs, unless the person has an Associate degree from an accredited university. Since Ashford was not available to speak with me, I requested information from Kaplan College. Within several minutes, Kaplan College representative, Rodrigo, called me on my cellphone.  After explaining to me how furthering the education would help me to advance in life, I asked him several questions.  First, I expressed huge concerns about the affordability and cost of the program.  Rodrigo answered, “The program [Associate Degree in Criminal Justice] costs about 30,000 dollars, but this is the worst case scenario.  Most students do not pay the full cost out of the pocket.  They get financial aid.” My second question was “ What is your job placement percentage?”  To this question Rodrigo provided the following answer, “I don’t have them [job placement rates] with me, but our associate Jim would able to tell you at your orientation. He [Jim] is really good at placing people. He used to do hiring for the county. He has connection. He is able to place a lot of students. For example some of our students started with the private security to get field experience”.  My following question was, “Would security experience help me to get a job?” Rodrigo assured me that such experience would help to obtain a law enforcement position because the experience shows that the student is interested in the field and the students has some hands on experience. He explained that private security experience would set students apart from applicants with just  a college degree.   Finally, I expressed doubts about succeeding in the program because I was kicked out of community college for failing all my classes.  Rodrigo informed that there is an aptitude test that any perspective student must pass before Kaplan would accept the student into the program.

In addition, I evaluated a website that is supposed to match persons with the most fitting institution to obtain a degree.  After entering my information on onlinedegreepath.com, a representative contacted me.  The representative assured me that he would match me with the best possible degree based on my interests, age, location, and other information.  He ended up matching me with ITT Technical Institute. After several minutes, ITT contacted me. To my surprise, an ITT representative informed me that ITT campuses in San Diego area does not offer degrees in criminal justice but they do offer degrees in cyber security. Then within an hour, another onlinedegreepath.com representative contacted me.  He explained that they were able to match with the “best” possible educational institution for my interest.   The representative explained that he has an admission specialist from Argosy University waiting on the other line to help me “further my dream”.  The admission specialist asked me about the reason for my interest in criminal justice. My answer was, “I watch a lot of CSI and I want to be just like them.”  She asked me about my highest level of education. I informed her that I was dismissed from the community college for failing all my classes.  The specialist asked me, “What do you think was the reason for the lack of success?” My answer was lack of interaction with the teacher and the classes were too difficult. Then the specialist inquired if I would be interested in taking online courses.  She informed that the cost to obtain Associate of Science in criminal justice is about 6,000 dollars for tuition and around 125 dollars for the books per semester. She informed that I would be taking one to two classes a semester.  To my question about the placement rate, she answered that the university does not assist with job placement.  Similar to Kaplan, I asked the representative about my ability to succeed in their program given my inability to perform in the community college. The specialist assured me that they can help me to succeed by providing free tutoring and any other assistance.  The specialist informed me that there is no admission test and a high school diploma will admit any student into the program.

My research determined that for-profit colleges still resort to misleading practices. The type of practice depends on the institution. However, some deceptive practices that Woods

39

encountered in his investigation were not used by for-profit colleges in this field research. None of the colleges used shaming tactics. ITT Technical Institute, Kaplan College, and Argosy University did not attempt to instill lack of self-worth or unhappiness with the current situation. The pretend situation was set up in order to give opportunity for these institutions to use shaming tactics, but these refrained from using them. It is not clear from this research that all institutions have decreased or eliminated shaming tactics but these specific admission specialists were reluctant to use them. However, the shaming tactics might not have been necessary in my particular case because the specialist felt that I was already interested in the program. In addition, Kaplan College has programs in place designed to eliminate unqualified applicants. One must take the aptitude test in order to be accepted into the Criminal Justice program.  It is not clear how rigors and effective the aptitude test to restrict the unqualified applicants from entering into the program. However, Kaplan College and Argosy University did resort to unethical recruitment practices.  The first problem with the recruitment techniques was Kaplan admission specialist’s misrepresentation of the true cost of obtaining the Associate degree in Criminal Justice. Rodrigo commented that most students do not pay “out of pocket” for the degree because they get financial aid.  In this situation, Rodrigo attempted to frame the financial aid as “ free money” given by the government and not as a loan. Kaplan College might mislead a person who is not familiar with the financial aid system to think that education at Kaplan College would come without significant financial burden. In contrast, San Diego State University requires each student to take loan counseling before the institution would certify the loan and disperse the funds. Second problem with the Kaplan requirement methods was with the misdirection of students. Rodrigo attempted to suggest that gaining employment with the private security company would help me to get a position in law enforcement. There are several problems with this framework. First, Kaplan wanted me to accept that obtaining a private security guard position is an acceptable or even desired job placement method after graduation. This is also problematic because this placement would go into official statistics. In addition, the student would be stuck with significant debt while working an almost minimum wage job. In my experience, private security companies prefer not to hire persons with criminal justice degree who aspire to become law enforcement officers because they do not want their officer to act like the police. Security officers who see themselves as law enforcers are a liability to these companies. Also in my experience, many police officers have little respect for the security officers. Lack of respect hinders applicant’s chances to get hired. Unlike Kaplan, Argosy University does not have programs in place to ensure all students entering the program are qualified. After I informed the admission specialist that I failed the community college because all classes were too difficult, the specialist did not have any doubt that I could succeed in the program. One can interpret the specialist’s confidence in two ways.  Frist, the program is extremely easy that even a failed out from community college student can complete it.  Second, the specialist was not concerned with the student’s ability to succeed but only with securing admission for the program. The latter is more likely than the former. There have been incidents were the admission specialists attempted to recruiting homeless persons and “Marines with serious brain injuries” (Perteus 24).  It shows that some admission specialists only care to secure an admission deal by getting unqualified applicants to an orientation process.

It is important to address the final misleading tactic used by the for profit colleges. These institutions create or partner up with websites that would recommend the for-profit educational institutions to persons seeking information about degrees. The problem with these websites stems from misleading claims made by the representatives. These website representatives claim

40

to match a person with the best possible option for a degree based on information provided. However, these websites only match persons with the profit colleges. In my investigation, Alexander Jones (my undercover name) asked the website representative to match him up with the best possible choice regarding cost, quality, location and etc. The representative assured Alexander that the he would get the best possible match.  The representative ended up finding a highly non-matching program for Alexander. The representative matched Alexander with ITT Technical Institute. ITT was not best in regard to location.  Alexander gave an address that was walking distance to the Sand Diego State University, while ITT was almost six miles away. The San Diego State University Criminal Justice program is rated top seventy in the United States, while ITT Tech is not even regionally rated.  In terms of cost, San Diego State University is much more affordable. According to the ITT Tech program information cost release, the online Bachelor degree in Criminal Justice costs $83,806 , while the San Diego State charges less than 30,000 (http://programinfo.itt-tech.edu/cost.pdf) .  Finally, ITT offered a program that was not in Alexander’s field of interested.  Alexander requested information about law enforcement position. ITT tech admission specialist informed Alexander that ITT San Diego campuses only offer degree in cyber security when it comes to Criminal Justice degrees. This shows that the websites such as onlinedegreepath.com do not attempt to match a person with best possible degree. Their goal is to serve as a referral machine for for-profit institutions while misleading any person inquiring about degree that they provide the best possible match for a person.

The unethical practices such as web-site referrals, misrepresentation about the financial burden, and recruiting unqualified students must be dealt with. These education institutions are businesses and students are customers. For-profit institutions provide a product to a public. One should regard students as consumers. Therefore, one should regard the federal regulations on the for-profit institutions as consumer protection. Bennett, Lucchesi, and Vedderargues argue, “Government has a long record of enacting regulations on private enterprise, often intended to protect consumers” (42).  Government has numerous regulations for misleading practices by corporations such as a civil liability for false advertisement, product liability, misrepresentation of investment opportunity, and etc. There is no reason for the federal government not to enact consumer protection laws for the profit-colleges. Such regulations are not attack from elitists, who want to ensure a completive edge for traditional institutions (Darling 25), but a response to growing concerns about unethical requirement practices. The for-profit institutions do not suffer any cost from the loan default, but the consumer and taxpayer do.  The high default rate also affects the federal budget which in turn reduces spending on the traditional institutions. Therefore, institutions can accept fewer students and more students are forced to look for an alternative education.  It becomes a vicious cycle in which the for-profit institution is the sole benefiter. The government should enact tougher regulations such as forcing the admission specialist to disclose information predetermined by the department of education. The federal government should also restrict the number of federal loans students can obtain in order to attend the for-profit institutions.

41