Short Paper #1 Presentation

Overview

In this short paper, you are asked to deal with the way old and new media respond, react, or engage each other.

Pick at least two texts and write a solid two paragraph paper (framed by a brief introduction) that addresses this topic.

Do NOT use parenthetical citations or include a works cited (you will lose a letter grade if you do)

Overview

• Brief introduction paragraph (2-5 sentences)• Two body paragraphs (8-11 sentences)– Final sentence tying it all together.

• NO Conclusion paragraph

Old Media• The Written can be seen as

old media when contrasted with something newer, like the visual qualities of the internet or the computer screen.

• The Manuscript, for instance, is replaced by the printing press.

• Or you could think of kinds of writing – for instance, Stephen King’s encounter with the new technology of the word processor.

New Media• The Written can be seen as

new media when contrasted with what it replaces: Orality.

• Through the myth of Theuth and Thamos, Plato argues that this has a negative effect.

• Walter Ong further discusses what this effect is.

Sample Introduction Paragraph

• Brief introduction thoughts (1-3 sentences).• Explicit Thesis statement

The Reading at Risk report presents a bleak picture of the state of reading and literacy in the contemporary world. Similarly, Nicholas Carr argues that “Google is making us stupid” by challenging and shaping our consciousness negatively. In this paper, I look at both Carr’s article and the report to show the means by which new media

AvoidBroad, Sweeping Statements

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, Technology is “. . . .”Ever since the world began . . .In the past hundred years . . .

Listing authors names. This is boring for your reader.

STICK TO THE TEXTS. I don’t want your abstract theorizing. I want claims that can be backed up by evidence.

For this paper, your introduction should be brief and to the point.

A weak introductionIn the Reading at Risk report, Dana Gioia, the chairman for NEA argues that “While oral culture has a rich immediacy that is not to be dismissed, and electronic media offer the considerable advantages of diversity and access, print culture affords irreplaceable forms of focused attention and contemplation that make complex communications and insights possible. To lose such intellectual capability – and the many sorts of human continuity it allows – would constitute a vast cultural impoverishment.” In other words, while talking allows for immediate exchange of ideas, and technology gives access to multiple resources of information, they cannot replace print as forms of communication because it allows us to focus and think deeply while we read which makes us understand more complex ideas and communicate at a higher level with more detail. Gioia says that if we lose the ability to think deeply as a result of not reading literature or print, we would be intellectually diminished as a culture. This means that he is attributing our advancement as a culture to reading print. Gioia’s view is shared by many prominent academics and readers alike, while many in the popular media, who use the former modes of communication that Gioia mentions, have taken an opposite stance to his arguments.

This doesn’t introduce: it summarizes one article. We need something more that will lead us into the topics that paper will explore.

A weak introductionMedia has changed throughout history. The way media is displayed and produced is one of the bigger changes. Is new media completely different from old media? Media has transformed to fit the needs of the public today. New technology is produced daily that interacts and transforms the way old media was produced and experience. The creation of the computer, which leads to how the Internet plays a huge role in the way society today looks at books.

Too broad: it’s unclear what the paper is going to be about, and it just list really broad facts.

A Good Introduction

Walter Ong argues that “Writing is passive, out of it, in an unreal, unnatural world. So are computers.” In other words, writing does not allow us to participate in the world, but further withdraws us from it. Stephen King seems to support this view with his vision of a magical word processor that creates alternate realities. However, John Keats shows the way that the written word allows us even greater experiences.

Another Good Introduction

In this paper, I will examine the way new media does attempts to remedy the problems of old media. In Stephen King’s horror story The Word Processor, we see the way technology seems to offer this possibility. However, though King’s story is intriguing, Plato shows the way new media does not solve the problems, but only enhances them.

Strategies

• Pick a quote or significant point from one of the texts that you can interrogate. (Summarizing and explaining this quote will be your introduction)

• Use the other texts to challenge or affirm this quote (two 11 sentence paragraphs)

Strategies

• Have a more typical thesis (In ______ we see this, but in _______ we see this) in an introduction paragraph.

• Write two 8 sentence paragraphs explaining each point and the significance, then a final 8 sentence paragraph synthesizing and contrasting them.

Strategies

In your introduction, explain that you are going to show two attitudes inherent to old and new media

• Write two solid 11 sentence paragraphs, one on old media and another on new. The second paragraph should build on the first, explaining how one attitude challenges another.

Your body paragraphs should be organized. They should not be:

- Overwhelmed with information- A summary of one text- A bunch of ideas that are incoherent.

Body Paragraphs

Body Paragraphs should have:

Body Paragraphs

• Body Paragraphs must have a structure.– They must begin with a claim, then be followed by

evidence and analysis.– Paragraphs should be unified, coherent, and individual

arguments that work as a part of the whole paper.– Paragraphs should not merely be summaries, but

arguments.– Introductory claim should be argumentative, exploratory,

and focused. Not explanatory.– Claims should reveal the logic and order of the paragraph.

Introduction/Claim• Claims should be argumentative

– Weak claim: “Technology is an important issue.” (Way too big; doesn’t tell me what the paragraph is going to about.)

– Weak claim: “Nicholas Carr wrote an article called Is Google Making Us Stupid.“ (Not a claim at all)

– Weak claim: “Nicholas Carr and Douglas Rushkoff have different ideas about technology” (Too broad, anticipate what is different about them)

– Weak claim: Nicholas Carr writes, “Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.” (This should follow an introduction sentence, and should not be the beginning of a paragraph. Quotes should not introduce a paragraph.)

– Better claim: Since technology is approaching a limit, the steps to achieve perfection will become infinitesimally small, and true perfection will never be reached, as both technology and our definition of perfection are ever-changing. (This sets up an argument that the texts can use to develop.)

Bad Claims• Nicholas Carr is among those who share the point of view of

Gioia, especially with respect to online media which is considered new media while print is considered old media – This isn’t a claim – it’s a statement. Look over the claims, evidence

analysis material. Claims should be argumentative.• It is difficult not to glean what the author says about technology.

– Too broad. This needs to be a more specific argument.. The introduction should lay that out clearer.

• The author presents us with many philosophical questions that add to the underlying meaning of this article.– Again, too broad. Vague terms “Philosophical Questions” . ..

“Underlying Meaning”

Bad Claims

• Michael Seifert wrote “An Act of Faith in America,” which is about how a run-down town in Texas that does not have basic services like paved roads– Don’t just introduce texts in the opening sentence.

• From the aspect of rhetorical appeals, Carey and Seifert take different approaches in building their points.– Too Broad; be as specific as possible.

Bad Claim to a good claim

• William Shakespeare’s Sonnet 138 is a poem that describes the love found within a couple’s relationship.– Too broad; it explains, it doesn’t explore.

• In Sonnet 138, William Shakespeare describes the way relationships have to be unconventional in order to work.– Now it’s an argument, a specific reading, and will say

something about both WHAT Shakespeare does and HOW he does it.

• The speaker then compares the woman’s “dun” breasts to the whiteness of snow. – Too broad

• When the speaker compares his lovers “dun” breasts to the whiteness of snow, he shows the way his vision of the lover is unaffected by the way she actually looks. He moves on to show how content he is even with her obvious flaws.

Bad Claim to a good claim

Good Claims• In Donne's Holy Sonnets, forgiveness is also entirely within

God's power, and there is no direct reference to penance. • Yet what the speaker recognizes in the second part of the

sonnet through the use of logic and provocative language is the fact that while time may dictate what is new and old with its eternal view of life, it is really man who “makes them born to our desire”

• Both poems use darkness to represent sin, however Donne presents that darkness as much more “consuming.”

Evidence

• Use concrete, vivid, and specific evidence to illustrate and develop your claim.

• Use quotes and examples. Paraphrase when necessary. If you quote, make sure you explain the significance of the quote.

• Do not OVERQUOTE. If a quote is there, it needs to be there for a reason.

• It’s important that you give specific examples that build on your claim. Use the language to make your case.

Analysis

• You need to show the reader why the evidence you presented is relevant and important.

• Analysis may be peppered throughout the paragraph, or it may come all at the end.

• A good strategy is to present a claim, follow it up by giving evidence, and then show how that evidence is significant to your overall argument.

A Weak Paragraph (with comments)

A strong paragraphWhile new, electronic media offer the reader advantages such as accessibility and diversity, they should be considered a reading supplement to old print media rather than a replacement. As Rushkoff says in his article, “A new medium only replaces an old one if it does everything better.” He also explains one aspect of physical books that electronic media cannot replace when he says, “Books offer a different experience than digital media…A book has totemic value. Like a photograph or a piece of jewelry, the impression of ink on paper creates a physical connection with its author.” Reading requires one to actively participate, as the book will not move forward on its own, while electronic media often offers the opposite of this. As the NEA asserts, “By contrast, most electronic media such as television, recordings, and radio make fewer demands on their audiences, and indeed often require no more than passive participation.” It is entirely possible to watch a film passively and form no opinion or analysis of its content. However, reading a book causes one to slowly absorb the material and, at least on a subconscious level, think about the subject matter at hand. Reading a book will usually create an enveloping and thought-stimulating experience, while electronic media can easily lull one into becoming a passive participant.

The opening claim is an argument that can the entire paragraph can fulfill

The Rushkoff quote is effective, persuasive language.

Additional quote adds to the significance and builds on the claim. However, this long quote could you use some more analysis, or be shortened. Too many terms go unexplained.

The NEA quote could probably be paraphrased – it’s too lengthy. The only key terms here is “passive participation.”

The analysis is strong, because it builds on the significance of the claim and the quotes used.

Sample Format

Your Name (Bold)

Date: 02/03/11 (Bold)

EN295 – BlackTITLE (CENTERED AND BOLDED)

This is how your paper should look . . .

GENERAL STUFF

PAY attention to the following issues! If I see papers overloaded with the following “avoids,” you’ll receive a lower grade!

• Avoid superlatives• Avoid vague terms• You must introduce quotes.• Refer to authors by last name• You should not refer to yourself too much

Avoid superlatives

InterestingBrilliantExcellent

WonderfulFascinating

These words tell rather than show. By saying something is interesting, you don’t elucidate why it is interesting.

Avoid vague terms

GoodBadPeopleThings

What kind of people? What is good? Why is it good?

You must introduce quotes.

On the other hand, I think increasing the amount of soldiers in the Middle East would be beneficial to the United States. “U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has warned that Afghanistan will become a failed state without full NATO support” (Lancaster 4). – The second sentence must be introduced; someone has to say

it.• On the other hand, I think increasing the amount of

soldiers in the Middle East would be beneficial to the United States. For instance, John Lancaster points out that “U.S. Secretary . . .”

Referring to authors

• Refer to authors by last name– Not “Walter,” not “Mr. Ong.” He is just “Ong” – The first time, refer to them by their whole name.

Then refer to them by the last name.– You might refer to a character by the first name if

they are a character in a novel. (Huck Finn would probably be “Huck.”)

– But Authors need to be dealt with formally.

First Person

Though these are formal papers, you can use first person.

However, you should not refer to yourself too much. Avoid “I think,” “I feel,” “In my opinion,” etc. You are making an argument.

A few other things• Don’t use Contractions (like don’t on won’t; do not or will not

instead)• Quote correctly –see the sample format sheet and the earlier slide.• Use transitions.• Avoid conversational language –see the “Do Not Use” section of the

Writing Instruction Sheets• Avoid passive voice as much as possible (“This is seen;” “His

feelings are shown when . . .”)• Don’t use semi-colons or parentheses (except for parenthetical

citations). In my experience, 90% of student writing that uses semi-colons uses them incorrectly.

See also

The paper materials on Canvas – some of the information here is repeated on these, but these are really helpful in explaining the kinds of things I grade for and the expectations I have for writing.