As I mentioned before this semester my students have to blog critical responses every other week to the readings from our text, ReReading America. Their first response covered readings on Proposition 8 and the myth of marriage in America. They also were allowed to write a response to President Obama's speech, "A More Perfect Union," that we watched in class the second week. While grading the responses it became clear that due to my vague assignment sheet and some people's lack of listening skills during class that most people weren't sure what I meant by a "critical" response. Everyone did a great job summarizing and giving a personal opinionated response to the readings, but very few people actually engaged critically with the material.
So, what am I expecting from a critical response? Simply put I'm expecting you to use the components of either the rhetorical situation or Aristotle's rhetorical triangle to critique the subject matter. Don't just tell me that the essay was really good and changed your opinion on something tell me HOW it changed your beliefs. Was it the author's ethos? Or maybe the reading was boring and you don't feel it belongs in an 1102 class. Why not? What kind of audience should this reading be geared towards? Yes I said that the minimum should be 200 words, but that does not mean you should stop when you get to the 200 word mark if you have not critiqued the reading thoroughly.
Out of both classes only one person received a perfect score on the first reading response. Take a look to find out why: "A More Perfect Union"
No comments:
Post a Comment