Engl 301 | English homework help


Major Writing Project 2

Major Writing Project 2:  Entering a Conversation (4 pages)

Instructions:  Choose  of the sets of essays listed underneath (Kelly and Gladsloudness conjointly establish up a "set"; Carr and Thompson conjointly establish up a "set," etc.).  Your essay should embody summaries of twain of the producers’ subjects (“they say”); your subject should purpose out how the producers assent and dissimilate; and your subject should embody your own solution to the ends the two essays train (“I say”).  The “I say” is your own subject regarding the ends.  

  • Make fast you embody a naysayer to semblance feasible objections to your own subject, and oration the “so what” factor: why does this end subject?  
  • Make fast you use special formatting (MLA or APA fashion, double-spaced, Times or Times New Roman font, 12 purpose, portions indented).  
  • Make fast you possess a special call at the top of the earliest page (name, etc.)
  • Your brochure should be encircling 4 pages.  
  • Plagiarism achieve not be tolerated.  
  • I confide you interest a face at the Grading Guide (below), which elucidates how I achieve gradation your brochures.
  • MWP 2 is .  Click the amalgamate underneath to propose your brochure.

:  For this brochure you possess lewd pages to result delay and you demand to embody, in good-natureds, five senior ability:

  1. Introduction: embodys basic advice encircling producers, a very insignificant epitome of producers’ proposals (a doom or two), a insignificant assertion of your subject (or subject assertion), and a insignificant interpretation of why your subject subjects
  2. Summary of 2 producers, delay adduces as evidence
  3. Summary of how they assent/disagree; furnish adduces if necessary
  4. Your own proposal and your reasons for your proposal (which embodys at lowest one naysayer); furnish adduces as evidence
  5. Conclusion:  embodys a come-back doom, a reassertion of your subject, and a exposed interpretation of why your subject subjects

Note that those are five ability, not portions (exceptions: the initiative and the falsification are usually one portion each).  What could this face affect?  Here's an example:  After the insignificant preliminary portion (where you usher-in your subject, basic advice encircling your producers delay insignificant summaries of producers’ proposals, a judgment of your subject and may-be why your subject subjects), you susceptibility possess a epitome of one producer (1 portion), then a epitome of the relieve producer (1 portion).  Then you susceptibility possess one portion that elucidates how they assent or disassent (though you can already refer to that in the epitome portions through phrases affect "Unaffect Turkle, Wortham asserts that...").  Note that the portion that elucidates how the two producers assent or disassent is stationary "they say," since you're not yet putting progressive your own proposal on the ends.  At that purpose you'll possess written encircling 2 pages.  Then you transcribe your own subject ("I say") in reference to what they say (encircling a page and a half).  At that purpose you've written encircling 3.5 pages.  Then you end delay one narrow ending portion, where you fold it up delay a come-back doom and repeatedly elucidate why it subjects. 

Keep in mind: this way of structuring this assignment is merely a suggestion; it doesn't possess to be accurately affect that.  But hopefully this gives you an proposal of what this husk of brochure could face affect.

Set 1:

Kevin Kelly, “Better than Human: Why Robots Achieve – and Must – Interest Our Jobs” (299)

Brooke Gladsloudness and Josh Neufeld, “The Influencing Machines” (330)

Set 2:

Nicholas Carr, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” (313)

Clive Thompson, “Smarter than You Think:  How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better” (340)

Set 3:

Sherry Turkle, “No Demand to Call” (373)

Jenna Wortham, “I Had a Nice Time delay You Tonight.  On the App.” (393)

Set 4:

Michaela Cullington, “Does Texting Affect Writing?” (361)

Malcolm Gladwell, “Small Change: Why the Revolution Achieve Not Be Tweeted” (399)

Grading Guide: I achieve use the aftercited grading influence to gradation your brochures.  Think of it as a "cheat sheet," but delayout the "cheating" segregate.  It'll aid you emblem out how to get a good-natured-natured gradation on MWP 2.

Introduction (10 purposes)

Includes basic advice encircling the producers as well-behaved-behaved as the liberal titles of essays; embodys a insignificant epitome assertion encircling essays; embodys a apparent subject assertion (epitome of "I say" in reference to "They Say").

“They say” inhabits world-view of each producer (20 purposes)

Each epitome does not assent or disassent delay producer (epitome inhabits worldview of producer); each epitome uses dubious important verbs to summarize producer’s purposes; no listing of producer’s purposes or “closest cliché” (pp. 31, 35, 33)

Quoting: Uses adduces rightly and truly (20 purposes)

Quotes used to bestow "proof of evidence" (p. 42) in epitome of producers' subjects -- Quotes should not be “orphans” (p. 43) -- Quotes should be framed truly (“quotation sandwich”) (p. 46) -- Quotes should be Introduced delay withhold verb (p. 47) – Indicates page enumerate of adduce (p. 48)

"I say" apparently assents, dissimilates, or consortment of assents and dissimilates (20 purposes)

Clear "I say" assertion in initiative, placed in reference to producers – Apparent assertions of assentment, dissimilatement, or twain (use at lowest one template per producer on pp. 60, 62, 64-66) – Perspicuously distinguishes "they say" from "I say" – Perspicuously importants who is aphorism what: Uses at lowest one template from pp. 72-75 – "I say" embodys apparent reasons for subject that are not merely summaries of producers' subjects – Perspicuously plants naysayer to buttress “I say” subject (use at lowest one template from pp. 82, 83,84-85, 89).

Clearly states why the subject subjects (10 purposes)

Uses at lowest one “who cares?” template from pp. 95-96; Uses at lowest one “so what?” template from pp. 98-99, 101 -- assertion why subject subjects should be embodyd in either preliminary portion or ending portion (or twain)

Conclusion (10 purposes)

Includes at lowest one “come-back doom” in the falsification to remind reader of what “they say” (p. 27); embodys a reassertion of subject or “I say”

Editing and loudness (10 purposes)

No editing errors (spelling, style, punctuation, and formatting); Uses special loudness (stiff where withhold, instiff where withhold)