mazumdar wi certification portfolio 1 15 april 2019 dear

Mazumdar WI Certification Portfolio 1

15 April 2019

Dear Alicia,

I’m excited to share my materials with you as part of the Fast-Track WI Certification

program. Attached in this email are materials specific to one of my courses, English 3401, Law

through Literature. You’ll find my syllabus, which includes the paper rubric I use as well as a

discussion of the role of writing in the class (instructions for the research project are also

included in the syllabus); instruction sheets for two formal projects, which include instructions

and due dates for scaffolding; and the peer review sheets I use for each project. This course is

open to all students who have met the prerequisites (either English 1121 or a 2000-level English

class), but it most often is filled with students in the Law and Paralegal Studies program.

Instructors can select their own reading list and devise their own assignments and exams. I

approach the course as a way to use literature to better understand the basic tenets of American

society, including justice (and injustice), the right to a fair trial, oppression and power, and

patriotism and its perversions.

While nearly every course I teach is designated WI (indeed, there are no non-WI versions

of any upper-level English class), I’m using this class as an exemplar of the ways in which I’ve

incorporated writing to support student growth. I’m a staunch supporter of WI courses, because I

believe that real engagement with ideas can only happen when one tries to make sense of those

ideas within the context of familiar material. Writing is one way we can do this. Thoughtful

writing assignments, like the ones I strive to hone in my classrooms, become learning moments

rather than data-dumps, and give students the opportunity to wrestle with the complex themes of

a course. Writing Intensive courses afford students the chance to practice their writing as well as

their higher-order thought processes like analysis, synthesis, and responding to others’ ideas.

This course has several course outcomes that writing helps me address:

• Gather, interpret, and assess information from a variety of sources and points of view.

• Evaluate evidence and arguments critically or analytically.

• Produce well-reasoned written or oral arguments using evidence to support conclusions.

[…]

• Summarize the main ideas and themes of the literary works assigned, in class discussions,

analytical essays and essay exams.

• Quote, paraphrase or summarize, and analyze specific passages in the text to support

interpretations of the main ideas and themes and explain why these passages are

important to an understanding of each work, in analytical essays and essay exams. […]

• Analyze the structuring of character, character conflicts, human values, and religious,

and/or mythological features of texts and show how these reflect the cultural and

intellectual life of various eras as reflected in the legal codes and practices of specific

societies. […]

• Make critical judgments, by interpret, analyzing, and evaluate literary works from

different cultures, using established critical approaches.1

It’s clear that the course is designed to be writing intensive in its reliance on writing pedagogy

and literary criticism. However, as I explain below, I’ve designed my writing assignments in

1 “ENG3401.” The New York City College of Technology City University of New York English Department. www.citytech.cuny.edu/english/docs/courses/ENG3401.pdf. 15 April 2019.

http://www.citytech.cuny.edu/english/docs/courses/ENG3401.pdf


such a way as to encourage student engagement with difficult texts, new media, and each other,

so that the course isn’t solely a literature class or solely a course in legal issues, but an

examination of human society that is greater than the sum of its parts.

The students’ first project asks them to engage with Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s

Tale. One of my main goals with this project is to get students to engage critically with an

author’s decision to use first-person point of view alongside two other elements of fiction (style,

plot, character, theme, or setting). I’ve long ago discarded conventional paper topics in this class,

due to what I perceived to be low numbers of students who completed the readings accompanied

by high numbers of students who misused or blatantly plagiarized source material. So this

project is in two parts, an oppression journal and an explication. As you can see in the attached

instruction sheet, I’ve scaffolded the project in such a way as to support student progress on what

I understand to be an unfamiliar and potentially alienating assignment. I also provide models for

the types of work I want them to do for certain stages of the project. For the oppression journal,

students write their own creative piece, using first person narration to generate the fictional diary

of an oppressed individual. This assignment gets students to emulate Atwood’s stylistic

decisions, even as it asks them to develop an understanding of the ways that structures of power

in our society work to disenfranchise entire swaths of the population. Some write about

misogyny, some about unlawful searches and abuses of law enforcement against minorities,

others write about the anxieties of undocumented immigrants or DACA recipients. Students

generate drafts that are peer reviewed before the revised versions are posted to our class

OpenLab site.

Part two of this project asks students to perform literary close readings that lead to

explications. I ask students to explicate a passage from another students’ oppression journal. I

give them models of explications and we work through a practice one as a class. Then, students

write explications that analyze specific elements of the student’s oppression journal; one required

part of these explications is an objective comparison of one element of the student writer’s piece

alongside Atwood’s. I explain that they aren’t to compare writing abilities, but instead to discuss

the different effects on the reader of the two authors’ decisions pertaining to one of the elements

of fiction we’ve been studying. Then they post their explications as a comment on the student’s

oppression journal on OpenLab. The students end up producing work that meets all the literary

outcomes I want them to achieve, plus it gets them responding to each other, it helps them to see

that they have ideas worth sharing, and it makes plagiarism almost impossible since they’re not

writing a conventional report about a canonical text.

I share my grading rubric in my syllabus, so that there’s always transparency about my

grading process. I also make the scaffolded assignments part of the project grade, so that failure

to produce a draft or participate in peer review significantly depresses the project score. Students

engage in informal writing during the peer review process, in that their work on drafts and their

answers on the peer review handouts are not evaluated for a grade; they simply get credit for

completing them. This also holds true for the introductory email I ask them to send me at the

start of the semester. The projects comprise 35% of students’ semester grades, but keep in mind

that part of the research project, as well as the majority of both the midterm and final exams, are

essays as well.

The course highlighted here is a 3000-level class, so I do make some assumptions about

the writing experience that students bring to the classroom; nonetheless, I recognize that I’m

asking them to write unconventional assignments (Project 2 is a podcast that seeks to determine


the truth about a character from Arthur Miller’s The Crucible). Therefore, scaffolding is essential

to students engaging with the course content in the ways I want them to.

Thank you for this opportunity to review my materials in light of the WI Certification

process. Please let me know where you see room for improvement or clarification. I look

forward to your feedback.

Best wishes,

RM

Rebecca Mazumdar

[email protected]

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 1 Law through Literature ENG 3401 / D614, Fall 2018 Tuesdays and Thursdays, 4:00 – 5:15 pm, Midway 307 Professor Rebecca Mazumdar, Ph.D. ([email protected] – allow 24 hours for response) Office hours: Tuesdays 10:00 am to 12:00 pm; Thursdays 2:45-3:45 pm, and by appointment Office location: Namm 528 // Mailbox location: Namm 512 // Office phone: 718-260-5118 Prerequisites: Students in this course must have successfully completed English 1121 or a 2000-level English class. Course description and objectives:

You’re probably already familiar with the College’s description of this course: An exploration of concepts of justice, higher law, customary law and written law expressed through works of fiction and non-fiction. The course seeks to enhance the student’s sensitivity to issues of ethics, gender bias and class consciousness as they affect the administration of justice. Readings improve communication skills and strengthen legal skills of identifying, articulating and locating problems in the context of underlying legal issues. Written assignments emphasize expository writing skills. (Learning Outcomes Document)

What this description means for this specific section of 3401 is that you’ll read a number of literary texts that explore controversial issues related to law and the legal system. We’ll discuss these texts alongside their cultural, social, and political contexts, in order to apply their lessons to your careers as legal professionals.

I expect you to participate in class to show that you understand the assigned readings and can analyze them on multiple levels. We will use the elements of fiction (plot, setting, point of view, characterization, theme, and style) to analyze assigned readings. We’ll also discuss various genres and engage in comparative analysis. You’ll be expected to use these skills in formal writing assignments and exams. Please refer to the Learning Outcomes handout for a full explanation of these goals, since they are key to our class and to each of our assignments.

You will do a lot of work in this class. College classes expect two hours of homework for every hour of class time; since we’re in class 2.5 hours a week, that means an average of five hours of homework each week. Factor this commitment into your schedule now. Required course materials (books have been ordered through the City Tech bookstore; you must use these editions, even if you purchase or borrow them somewhere else):

Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale. 978-0385490818. $8.58. E. L. Doctorow, The Book of Daniel. 978-0812978179. $13.24. Arthur Miller, The Crucible. 978-0142437339. $9.01. Alibi podcast. Eight episodes, available free at http://alibi.org.za/wordpress/ A writer’s manual, like Rules of Thumb or the Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL)

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/ A reliable computer, with internet (email) access and a printer. Save electronic files of all your work. A folder or notebook devoted to this class. Supplemental materials on our Open Lab site.

*If you choose to use an eReader, that’s fine. However, please know that you cannot use any electronic devices, at all, on any exam in this class. This means that you will need to prepare for these exams, which include open-book sections, accordingly. Required assignments: ***Project 1 (Oppression Journal): 15% ***Project 2 (Podcast “Transcript”): 20% ***Research Project (Oral presentation and written report published on Open Lab): 15% ***Midterm exam: 10% ***Final exam: 15% Participation: 10% Unannounced reading quizzes: 15% (quizzes cannot be made up; lowest quiz grade will be dropped) ***Passing this class is contingent upon successfully completing all assignments and passing the final exam.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 2 Students with disabilities: If you have a disability that requires accommodation, please see me as soon as possible so I can accommodate you. If you think you may have a disability that requires accommodation, see the Student Support Services Program in Room A237, or call them at 718-260-5143. Class policies:

Regular attendance: This course is designed as a seminar-type class, which means that active participation is necessary if you and your peers are to succeed in this class. I expect you to come to class prepared (which means you’ve read the assigned readings and you’ve completed any homework assignments). I also expect you to come to class on time and stay for the duration of our meeting. I take attendance at the start of class; if you’re not in your seat when I take attendance, you will be marked absent. If you arrive after attendance is taken, you’ll be marked late. If you do miss a class, please know that you are responsible for the information we covered while you were gone. If your religion is not directly recognized by the school calendar, and you anticipate missing classes for religious reasons, please see me as soon as possible. Absences will be excused only in the case of unavoidable, unforeseeable emergencies affecting you or an immediate family member; documentation is required. If you stop attending class and do not return, without officially withdrawing, you will receive a WU grade.

Responsible scholarship: I expect you to complete all assignments on time, and to do so honestly. We will discuss academic integrity and plagiarism early in the semester. Know now, however, that I will not tolerate any academic dishonesty in my course. The school’s statement on academic integrity is in the box below; in this class, an act of academic dishonesty will result in a grade of zero (0) on the affected assignment and a report filed with the school’s Academic Integrity Officer. A second act of academic dishonesty in this class will result in additional sanctions. If you have any questions about plagiarism and how to avoid it, please ask me.

Another aspect of responsible scholarship is doing your best to meet course requirements. If you find you are having trouble keeping up with your assignments, please see me during office hours. Requests for extensions will only be considered if they are received at least 24 hours before the original due date. Formal papers are due in hard copy (stapled) at the start of class on the days indicated on the course calendar, and must adhere to MLA guidelines. Late papers will not be accepted.

Writing: This course is designated as writing intensive. That designation means a few things for us. Of course, it means

that we’ll have several formal and informal writing assignments, which will ask for at least 15 pages of writing from you over the duration of the semester. But this writing serves important purposes. It’s not just an opportunity for you to convince me that you’ve “done the reading”; more importantly, these assignments are your opportunities to wrestle with – and hopefully develop a more confident understanding of – the complex themes raised in those readings. We will use writing to help us learn about our literary texts, even as we use literature to teach us about our own writing. You must submit two successful, complete papers and a completed research project in order to pass this class. Larger formal assignments will be scaffolded, which means that you’ll work on them incrementally, turning in outlines, drafts, or other early-stage procedural drafts before submitting the final draft. These drafts are just as important as the final submission, and therefore are required parts of the writing projects.

Letters of recommendation: In the future, a potential employer or school may ask you for a letter of recommendation from

a professor. If you wish to ask me for a letter of recommendation, please be prepared. I’ll need the name and address to which the letter should be sent, as well as a deadline. Regardless of which professors you ask for such letters, you should be prepared to provide this information when you request the letter. I’ll also ask you to visit me during office hours (or make an appointment) so I can write a letter specific to your strengths and goals. Please notify me at least a month before the letter is due; it should go without saying that I write letters only on behalf of students who passed my class in good standing.

New York City College of Technology Policy on Academic Integrity Students and all others who work with information, ideas, texts, images, music, inventions and other intellectual property owe their audience and sources accuracy and honesty in using, crediting, and citing sources. As a community of intellectual and professional workers, the College recognizes its responsibility for providing instruction in information literacy and academic integrity, offering models of good practice, and responding vigilantly and appropriately to infractions of academic integrity. Accordingly, academic dishonesty is prohibited in The City University of New York and at New York City College of Technology and is punishable by penalties, including failing grades, suspension, and expulsion. The complete text of the College policy on Academic Integrity may be found in the catalog.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 3

Extra credit: You are only eligible for one extra credit opportunity. Extra credit opportunities must be accessible to the

entire class and therefore cannot be offered on an individual basis. Option 1: A comment on a classmate’s research paper (on Open Lab) in which you use the IQIAA method to demonstrate the relationship between a presentation and the assigned reading will be eligible for up to 10 points in participation. Option 2: A hand-written diagram of the excerpted passage on a quiz will be eligible for up to full credit on that quiz. Diagrams must follow all rules for sentence diagramming and include every word of the quoted passage. Occasionally, classroom activities will carry the possibility of extra credit as well.

Paper grades: Your papers will be evaluated according to the following rubric. Please read it carefully and let me know if you have any questions. A, A- Papers earning an A or an A- are excellent examples of critical literacy in action. They carefully and

intelligently respond to the ideas in the readings and are easy and enjoyable to read. Organization is smooth and the argument is well-polished and convincing. These papers demonstrate the student’s mastery of the goals for the course as outlined by CUNY. A paper would earn an A- rather than an A if it met these standards but fell short in an area of sentence-level revision (e.g., minor typographical errors, occasional editing missteps).

B+, B, B- Papers earning grades in the B range (B+, B, or B-) are good; they set themselves apart by being thoughtful

and interesting, though they may still have some rough spots. Overall, the paper succeeds, even if some kinks still need to be ironed out. These papers are more successful than papers earning grades in the C range, because these papers take risks with original analyses or interesting responses to the readings. These papers are less successful than papers earning grades in the A range, because they still need attention to significant paragraph- or sentence-level issues like organization, appropriate use of evidence, appropriate levels of analysis, frequent editing and proofreading missteps, or unclear phrasing. Within this range, papers earn a B+ when these paragraph and sentence level issues occur infrequently but still impede the writer’s attempts to communicate; papers earn a B- when the issues occur more frequently, substantially impeding communication.

C+, C Papers earn a C+ or a C when they meet the requirements of the assignment, but they do so unspectacularly.

Such papers are considered average. These papers often have one or more weaknesses on the global level that substantially affect(s) the paper’s readability. If your thesis is unclear, if your argument vacillates, if you summarize more than you analyze… these issues often negatively affect the success of a paper. These papers are more successful than papers earning a D because they do, in fact, meet all the requirements of the assignment; these papers are less successful than papers earning grades in the B range because they don’t take risks with original analyses or interesting responses to readings and because they present substantial global weaknesses that impede the writer’s ability to communicate his or her ideas.

D If a paper earns a D in this class, it is because it clearly failed to meet the requirements of the assignment. It

may have dramatically fallen short of the page requirement or have lacked a thesis statement or argument entirely. Papers earning grades in the D range demonstrate an honest attempt to address the assignment, though they need substantial global and paragraph level revisions in order to meet CUNY’s requirements for this course. Papers earning a D are less successful than papers earning a C because they don’t meet the requirements of the assignment or the course; they are, however, more successful than papers earning an F because they demonstrate a good faith attempt to complete the assignment.

F Papers earning an F clearly fall short of meeting the requirements of the assignment. They have no focus and

demonstrate no engagement with the assigned readings at all. These papers are less successful than papers earning a D, because they fail to demonstrate any attempt to meet the standards of the course or the requirements of the assignment.


Mtg #

Date Reading (Check Open Lab before each class for announcements and reports from your peers.)

Assignments Due Today Classroom Activities

Student Presentations at the Start of Class Today

1 8/28 Syllabus

Course introduction

2 8/30 Charters, “The Elements of Fiction” (handout)

Introduction email to Prof. Mazumdar, with research project selection

Elements of Fiction activity

3 9/4 Atwood, chapters 1-2 Open Lab membership Discuss Atwood; Project 1 assigned and discussed today

4

9/6 “Margaret Atwood on What The Handmaid’s Tale Means in the Age of Trump,” handout

Response paper due as a post on Open Lab by 11:59 pm tonight

No class meeting today; please refer to assignment instructions, p. 16

5 9/13 Atwood, chapter 3

Comment on classmate’s response (on Open Lab) due by 11:59 pm tonight

Practice quiz

6 9/20 Atwood, chapters 4-5 Idea page for Project 1 Understanding the jeremiad genre

(1) The Stonewall Riots

7 9/25 Atwood, chapters 6-7

Plagiarism quiz (2) The History of Birth Control in the US; (3) Rape culture

8 9/27 Draft of Oppression Journal

Peer Review

9 10/2 Atwood, chapters 8 through Historical Notes

Continue discussing Atwood

(4) Suffrage; (5) Feminism in America

10 10/4 Alibi, Episodes 1-2. [Consider reading ahead: start 5 pp/day of Doctorow now.]

Publish Oppression Journal to Open Lab by midnight tonight.

Translating elements of fiction to a nonfiction broadcast

(6) The Innocence Project; (7) Apartheid

11 10/9 Alibi, Episode 3-4

Annotation; submit Part I peer review handout today.

Discuss the Devries case

(8) Legal Procedure (TBD)

12 10/11 Alibi, Episode 5-6 Debate

(9) Reportage

13 10/16 Alibi, Episodes 7-8

Explication rough draft. Peer Review (10) True-crime movies

14 10/18 Post Explication to Open Lab by midnight tonight.

Conclude discussion of Alibi; exam preparations

(11) Polygraph tests

15 10/23 Midterm Exam Midterm Exam. Submit Part II peer review handout today.

Midterm Exam

Midterm Exam


Mtg #




16 10/25 Miller, Act 1 Introduction to Miller

(12) Theocracy

17 10/30 Miller, Act 2 Project 2 assigned and discussed in class

(13+14) The Salem witch trials

18 11/1 Miller, Act 3 Idea page for Project 2 Continue discussing Miller and Cold War politics

19 11/6 Miller, Act 4 Discussion questions Finish discussing Miller

(15) Witch trials in European history

20 11/8 Annotated Outline for Project 2

Transition to Doctorow, with introduction to Cold War culture

(16) Joseph McCarthy

21 11/13 Doctorow, pp 1-30 Introduction to Book of Daniel (Prezi: Making Sense)

(17) HUAC

22 11/15 Doctorow, pp 31-60 Draft of Podcast due at the start of class

Peer Review

(18) Treason in the USA

23 11/20 Doctorow, pp 61-80; Howl by Allen Ginsberg (Open Lab)

Thematic analysis: The Individual in Society (Prezi)

(19) The cold war; (20) The Rosenberg trial

24 11/27 Doctorow pp 81-100

Podcast due at the start of class

Focus on characterization in Doctorow

(21) The censorship trial of “Howl”

25 11/29 Doctorow, pp 100-121 Focus on POV in Doctorow

(22) Fat Man and Little Boy

26 12/4 Doctorow, pp 121-140

Focus on plot in Doctorow

(23) J. Robert Oppenheimer

27 12/6 Doctorow, pp 141-160 Focus on style in Doctorow

(24) 1967 March on the Pentagon; (25) The Berlin Wall

28 12/11 Doctorow, 160-180

Last day to submit any extra credit assignments

Focus on setting (domesticity) in Doctorow (Prezi)

29 12/18 Doctorow, finish

Reviewing for the final exam

30 12/20 Final Exam

Final Exam Final Exam Final Exam


Open Lab Instructions This semester, we’ll use City Tech’s Open Lab to continue our classroom discussions and as a resource hub for course materials. One of your required assignments this semester is participation in the class blog on Open Lab, so it is essential that you activate your membership and check the page regularly. First, you’ll need to sign up for Open Lab and request membership to our class. Here’s how you can do that. 1. You must activate your City Tech email account. You must be able to log into your account and read emails. I cannot help you with

this. If you have problems with your account, visit the Welcome Center on the first floor of the Atrium building. 2. Sign up for Open Lab at http://openlab.citytech.cuny.edu/register/ 3. After you sign up, you’ll need to log on to your City Tech email account and click on the registration link you receive from Open Lab. 4. Log on to Open Lab at http://openlab.citytech.cuny.edu/ 5. In the search box at the top right of the page, search for your professor’s last name: Mazumdar. 6. In your professor’s list of courses, choose yours. 7. Select “Request Membership” to gain access to your class. After I’ve added you to the class, you’ll have access to the course material. 8. When viewing our course on Open Lab, make sure you click “Class Site” to see the full site.

Emailing your professor By August 30, please send me one paragraph to introduce yourself to me. Use this opportunity to practice appropriate email etiquette:

● Use your official school email address (or an address that uses your name or a professional title; avoid using personal accounts with screen names that might be considered offensive or that contain a long series of numbers.

● In the subject line, indicate which class and section you’re in, and the general topic of your message. ● Use an appropriate greeting, and address your audience respectfully. In this case, “Dear Professor Mazumdar” would be

appropriate. ● The content of your message should be clearly organized, free of grammatical and typographical mistakes, and direct. ● Sign your name to your email. You should always do this, but it is especially important if your name is not in your email address.

These guidelines should be used any time you email any of your professors. Failure to follow these guidelines could mean a delay in getting a response. If I can’t identify you in your email, I may not respond at all.

Information about the Research Project 15% of your semester grade will come from your work on this research project. The project has two parts: an oral presentation in class, using visual aids (Power Point, Prezi, or handouts), and a blog post published on our Open Lab site, available to the entire class as reference. You should also post your visual aids with your blog post, so we’ll have access to them. The Blog Post: Around 1000 words; 70 points

At least two days before your scheduled presentation, you should post your research report as a blog post on our Open Lab page. (You should also post your visual aids for the presentation, but these can be added later, as a comment on your post.) Consider this a formal research paper: this means that you must correctly quote, cite, and provide bibliographic information for all of your sources. Failure to do so will constitute academic misconduct, and will result in a zero for the entire research project as well as a complaint filed with the school’s academic integrity officer. Your post should be composed thoughtfully in a Word document before being pasted into the Open Lab platform: this means that you’ll be evaluated on your organization and clear presentation of information.

Please remember: we all know how to Google something. Your report should not simply repeat the information from Wikipedia; instead, buttress the statistical or factual information with your interpretation of the event or issue. What were the primary concerns? Who were the key players? How did your event/person/issue change the lives of people who experienced it, or people who lived afterwards? Which legal issues are connected to your topic? You will be evaluated on your ability to balance the factual, encyclopedic repetition of facts with your own subjective interpretation and analysis of those facts. You must use at least one source found through the library’s databases. The Oral Presentation: Five minutes, visuals; 80 points

The presentation should be prepared (e.g., not improvised) and practiced. It should take 5 minutes (not 3, not 8; practice your presentation so you’ll know it’s exactly 5 minutes long), and should provide the important highlights of your topic. If you use any video or audio clips, the time they take will not count toward your five minutes. I’ve selected topics that will provide important context for our assigned readings, so your presentation should (a.) assume that the class has read your blog post, and (b.) focus on the connection between your topic and our reading for the day. This means that you should not simply read your blog post; you should instead explain how your blog post helps us to make sense of a particular part of the assigned text. You must include the following:

Brief summary of the online report Quotation from the assigned reading for the day of your presentation, with explication A proposed essay question for the midterm or final exam, based on your research and the assigned text.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 7 ** To select a presentation topic (and, therefore, to select your presentation date), you must include your top three preferences for a research topic in your introductory email to me. Presentations will be assigned on a first-emailed, first-served basis. Emails sent during our class time will be read last. Presentation date / relevant author Topic Due date of Open Lab post

1. 9/20 (Atwood) The Stonewall Riots 9/20 Paris 2. 9/25 (Atwood) The history of birth control in the USA 9/23 Selena & Jennifer (separate presentations) 3. 9/25 (Atwood) Rape culture in the USA 9/23 Antoinette 4. 10/2 (Atwood) Suffrage in the USA 9/30 Janelle and Dao (separate presentations) 5. 10/2 (Atwood) Feminist movement in the USA 9/30 Tiffany 6. 10/4 (Alibi) The Innocence Project 10/2 Sharon and Dominique(2 presentations) 7. 10/4 (Alibi) Apartheid 10/2 Nowshen 8. 10/9 (Alibi) Procedure (TBD) 10/7 9. 10/11 (Alibi) Reportage/New Journalism style 10/9 Almagul 10. 10/16 (Alibi) True crime movies 10/14 Nicole & Ayarilis (separate presentations) 11. 10/18 (Alibi) Polygraph tests 10/16 Javonni 12. 10/25 (Miller) Theocracy 10/25 Lesly 13. 10/30 (Miller) Salem witch trials 10/28 Amanda 14. 10/30 (Miller) Salem witch trials 10/28 Mahendra 15. 11/6 (Miller) Witch trials in European history 11/4 Nina and Jessica (separate presentations) 16. 11/8 (Doctorow) Joseph McCarthy 11/6 Angelina 17. 11/13 (Doctorow) HUAC 11/11 Emmett 18. 11/15 (Doctorow) Treason in the USA 11/13 Shan 19. 11/20 (Doctorow) The cold war 11/18 Eilene 20. 11/20 (Doctorow) The Rosenberg trial 11/18 Eliana & Carmelle (2 presentations) 21. 11/27 (Doctorow) The censorship trial of “Howl” 11/25 Natasha 22. 11/29 (Doctorow) Fat Man and Little Boy 11/27 Mitchell 23. 12/4 (Doctorow) J. Robert Oppenheimer 12/2 Genesis 24. 12/6 (Doctorow) 1967 March on the Pentagon 12/4 Jacqueline 25. 12/6 (Doctorow) The Berlin Wall 12/4 Alisha

Assessment: Report on Open Lab --Comprehensive treatment of topic: _____/20 --Appropriate academic research methods (reliable sources,

proper acknowledgement and citation style): _____/20

--Length (1000 words): _____/10 --Clearly organized: _____/10 --Shows signs of revision, editing, and proofreading (is

polished and free of errors): _____/10

Oral presentation --Effective visual aids: _____/20 --Makes clear connection to the assigned reading for the

day: _____/20 --Effectively summarizes the written report on Open Lab:

_____/20 --Length (five minutes): _____/10 --Shows signs of rehearsal, practice (is polished and

confident): _____/10

Additional info: When posting your report to Open Lab, please use Tags (on the right) to help us organize our blog. Tag your report with any of the available tags you think are relevant, or make your own.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 11 Project 1: Oppression Journal // Tuesday, September 4, 2018 (This assignment is worth 15% of your semester grade) This assignment has two major components: (1) an Oppression Journal, which will be a fictional piece you create, written in the first person POV, from the perspective of someone who is oppressed or disenfranchised in ways comparable to Offred’s situation in Atwood’s novel; and (2) an Explication of one of your classmates’ Oppression Journal, which will be an analytical response in which you deconstruct their use of multiple elements of fiction and draw comparisons between their choices and Atwood’s. Your work on this project should help you to develop an understanding of Margaret Atwood’s decision to use a first person narrator for The Handmaid’s Tale, specifically as it relates to the presentation of the theme of oppression. Please read this entire handout, as it outlines all of your responsibilities. You are responsible for all of the scaffolded assignments built into this project (in bold below), even if you are absent on the days they are due. Purpose: The purpose of this assignment is to challenge you to understand Atwood’s artistic decisions through imitation and application. This assignment asks you to apply Atwood’s narrative point of view (first-person) to an original creative text, and then to evaluate another student’s (or other students’) use of that point of view. To successfully complete this assignment, you will have to read The Handmaid’s Tale carefully enough to understand the subtleties of Atwood’s political message, and be able to communicate that understanding both in your emulation of it and in your analysis of it in comparison to a second text. Basic Information (details about each part of the project are available below the due date calendar): 9/4: Paper assigned today. Part I: Create a journal (diary) that has been written in the first-person by someone who is oppressed by actual social, political, or

economic conditions anywhere in the world today. In class, we will brainstorm possible topics; you may find it useful to read news sources for context about the conditions or societies about which you’ll be writing. If you consult any text, you must include it in a Bibliography at the end of your journal.

9/20: Idea page due in class (5 points). Before today’s class, you need to determine which topic you want to focus

on. Choose a topic you can discuss comfortably. If you need to educate yourself about the topic, read recent newspaper articles from the New York Times or Washington Post. Do not use web pages like wikis or personal blogs. By this date, you should have read at least half of The Handmaid’s Tale. Bring to class today one “idea page.” This can be whatever you need it to be: sketch out (with words and phrases) who your character is. Where does he or she live? What does a typical day look like? With whom would your narrator typically interact? What are the structures of power that inform each day?

9/27: Complete rough draft of Oppression Journal due the start of class (10 points). To receive full credit for a

rough draft, you must submit a printed and stapled draft that is at least 900 words long and which represents a good faith effort to complete the assignment. Since this part of the project is creative in nature, it can take whatever form you think is best suited for your own goals as a writer. In class, you’ll work with at least one other student to identify areas of your draft that are working well and areas that may be in need of revision. Be prepared to explain how your text imitates (or challenges) Atwood’s. You’ll complete a peer review handout in class (5 points), which you’ll need to submit to Prof. Mazumdar on 10/9. Class starts at 4:00; arriving after 4:10 because of issues related to computer failure, international shortages of printer ink, or locust plague will mean that you cannot submit your draft or participate in peer review. Plan ahead. Print your draft on 9/26; wake up 15 minutes earlier; take an earlier train.

10/4: Oppression journal posted to our class blog before 11:59 PM tonight (25 points). Use the tag Project 1

(and any other relevant tags) to help identify your work. Journals must be at least 900 words long. The title of your post should be the title of the text you’ve created, followed by your name: “The Golden Ticket” by Derek Jeter. DO NOT upload as files or documents; post them to the blog by Adding a Post. Copy the text

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 12

into the body of the post; when you’re done, click “Publish.” Any text posted on 10/5 or later will not be graded. These texts will be graded on creativity (5 points), demonstrated understanding of the chosen topic (10 points), and appropriate use of first-person point of view (10 points).

Part II: Write an explication of one of your classmates’ original texts. Your explication should (a) use close-reading techniques to

demonstrate significant uses of at least three elements of fiction in another student’s Oppression Journal, and (b) compare the student’s use of first-person point of view with Atwood’s use of it in The Handmaid’s Tale.

10/9: Annotation due at the start of class (10 points). You must also submit the peer review handouts from Part I

in class today. To complete the annotation, you will need to: 1. Read the entire piece (you may need to read several before you find one you want to work with. 2. Select a passage that you find particularly interesting and/or significant. The quotation you select must be at

least six lines long. You’ll eventually have to write about at least three elements of fiction within this quotation, so keep that in mind while you’re selecting quotations.

3. Copy that quotation into a new Microsoft Word document. Select a line spacing that is at least a multiple of 3.

4. Annotate (which means to mark up or provide notation upon) the passage. This means (yes, I’m serious) defining or providing a synonym for every word in the quotation. Every one. Even “a.” Even “I.” All of them. This page might become messy; that’s OK. Feel free to color code or draw connecting lines among relevant words and phrases as they emerge. See the samples below (starting on page 14). These are from https://englishisgreaterthanmaths.wordpress.com/category/int-2/ and http://trullsenglish.weebly.com/annotating-text.html. You can find more by doing a Google image search for “annotation.”

10/16: Complete draft of Explication due at the start of class (10 points). To receive full credit for a rough draft,

you must submit a printed and stapled draft that is at least 600 words long and which represents a good faith effort to complete the assignment. An explication is a prose piece that is developed from the annotation you completed already. Your explication will explain the passage you’ve analyzed, focusing only on the elements of fiction that are found within that section. You may refer to significant themes that appear in the Oppression Journal as a whole, but you should work hard to avoid broad generalizations that try to analyze the entire journal in a single sentence. Think of your explication as a written-out explanation of the type of analysis you’ve been completing in your quizzes. While you can organize your ideas in whatever manner you think works best for your goals as a writer, one model to consider is as follows:

Epigraph: The quotation you analyzed in your annotation. Paragraph 1: Introduce the Journal by providing a brief (3-4 sentence) summary of the whole

journal. Paragraph 2: Analysis of the use of first person point of view in the quoted passage, quoting specific

words or phrase from the passage itself. Paragraph 3: Analysis of a second element of fiction (your choice). Again, to support your analysis,

quote specific words or phrases from the analyzed quotation. Paragraph 4: Analysis of a third element of fiction (your choice). Again, to support your analysis,

quote specific words or phrases from the analyzed quotation. Paragraph 5: conclude with comparative analysis that evaluates the effect of one of the elements

you’ve analyzed above in relation to Atwood. Treat your classmates’ texts with the same respect you’d want them to give you. Write objectively and analytically. This assignment isn’t asking you to compare a student writer with a professional one; instead, you’re being asked to evaluate discreet and specific artistic decisions in light of their effects on a reader.

In class, you’ll work with at least one other student to identify areas of your draft that are working well and areas that may be in need of revision. You’ll complete a peer review handout in class (5 points), which you’ll need to submit in class by 10/23. Class starts at 4:00; arriving after 4:10 because of issues related to

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 13

printing, transportation, or alien invasions will mean that you cannot submit your draft or participate in peer review. Plan ahead. Print your draft on 10/15; take an earlier bus.

10/18: Explication posted to Open Lab as a comment by midnight tonight. Explications should be at least 600

words long (30 points). Please refer to the paper rubric in your syllabus for information about how this explication will be evaluated. Post your explication AS A COMMENT on the original post containing the text you analyzed. DO NOT CREATE A NEW POST; DO NOT ADD NEW MEDIA, FILES, OR DOCUMENTS. Click “Add Comment” and paste your paper into the comment field; then click publish. Your comment may not appear right away, especially if you haven’t posted to Open Lab yet this semester. If your screen name isn’t your actual name, you must sign your comment so that I and the class know who’s writing. If I can’t identify you, you won’t get credit for this part of the project. Follow MLA format for citations; however, you should only be quoting, paraphrasing, summarizing, or citing two texts: Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and the student-produced piece. Analysis papers will be graded using the formal paper rubric distributed on the first day of class. Any comments posted on 10/19 or later will not be graded.

10/23: Peer review work submitted in class. Reminder about Academic Integrity: Responsible scholarship requires you to submit work that is entirely your own, and that properly cites and acknowledges any source material. Acts of plagiarism will result in a zero (0) for this assignment, and may result in further penalty. This assignment does not call for any research or “outside sources.” Please ask if you have any questions. Advice: Start now, and be creative. Take risks. Work on the project a little bit every day, even if that work is just reading Atwood’s novel. For Part I, select a setting that allows you to generate sympathy for and interest /in your narrator. Which of Atwood’s decisions about Offred will you imitate? Which will you ignore in favor of something different? How would Atwood’s text have been different had it been written entirely in third person? Remember to seek out any assistance you need: use the resources on campus or visit my office hours if you have questions about your progress or goals for this assignment. I’m happy to read drafts if you give them to me in advance. I’m always happy to discuss your progress on any assignment, at any stage. You cannot successfully complete this assignment by reading summaries of The Handmaid’s Tale online or by watching the recent TV adaptation. This assignment isn’t about memorizing content or knowing “what happens in the book”; it’s about understanding the way literature affects us. This is work you have to do yourself, and using a different version will result in misspent energy.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 14

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 15

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 26 9/27/18 // Peer Review for Project 1, Oppression Journal

Working in groups of 3, review each other’s drafts and provide feedback that can contribute toward revision. For this workshop, don’t make any marks on anyone’s draft, including your own. Everything you write down should be written on this handout. You’ll need to turn in this handout in class by 10/9/18 to get credit for peer review (5 points). Make sure your name is at the top of this handout. Time is of the essence for this workshop, so please follow the schedule noted here. Start by sitting in a tight circle facing each other, and pass your draft to the person sitting to your left. Paper 1, 15 mins (Author: ___________________________________________________________________________) Read this draft carefully. Do not make any grammatical or editorial corrections on the paper; that is the author’s job, not yours. You may need to read it twice in order to provide thoughtful responses to the following questions:

1. What did you like best about this paper? Why?

2. How is the narrator being oppressed? Was it clear to you which power structure has disenfranchised the main character?

3. Provide one example of the narrator’s disenfranchisement.

4. Was the narrator a sympathetic character?

5. Was the narrator believable? In other words, did the author make choices that produce a reasonable and realistic fictional person?

6. Did the author use first person narration effectively?

7. What was one area or idea that you wish the author would develop more?

8. What, if any, was the most noticeable type of grammar mistake? Circle one or write in something else: run-on sentences // incomplete sentences // subject-verb disagreement // misused words // errors with prepositions // errors with articles // other: _____________________________

Paper 2, 15 mins (Author: ___________________________________________________________________________) Pass the drafts to the left again. Read this new draft carefully. Do not make any grammatical or editorial corrections on the paper; that is the author’s job, not yours. You may need to read it twice in order to provide thoughtful responses to the following questions:


2. How is the narrator being oppressed? Was it clear to you which power structure has disenfranchised the main character?

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 27


4. Was the narrator a sympathetic character?

5. Was the narrator believable? In other words, did the author make choices that produce a reasonable and realistic fictional person?

6. Did the author use first person narration effectively?

7. What was one area or idea that you wish the author would develop more?


Paper 3, 15 mins (your own draft) Pass the papers to the left once more. You’re now looking at your own draft again. Now that you’ve seen how others have approached this assignment, take another look at your own paper. Really read it as if it were someone else’s. Make notes here to prepare for discussion with your readers.


2. How is the narrator being oppressed? Which power structure has disenfranchised the main character?


4. What did you do to make the narrator a sympathetic character?

5. What was one area or idea that you want to develop more?

6. What, if any, do you think is your most frequent type of grammar mistake? Circle one or write in something else: run-on sentences // incomplete sentences // subject-verb disagreement // misused words // errors with prepositions // errors with articles // other: _____________________________

7. Write down two questions you have for your readers:

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 28 Discussion: 15 mins. Spend this time discussing each paper in turn. Do not simply exchange handouts! Talk with each other about what worked best and what needs attention in each draft. Use the notes you’ve made in response to the questions on the handout. As your readers discuss your paper, be sure to get responses to the questions you wrote for #7. Use this space to make notes on the other things they say.

1. The things my readers liked best about my draft are…

2. Did they understand the role of oppression in my story? Jot down some notes about what worked and what might need to be changed.

3. Here’s what they said about my narrator:

4. They wanted me to say more about (or develop) the following area(s):

5. When I edit, I need to pay attention to the following grammatical issue(s):

6. Here are their responses to my own questions:

Revision strategy: 5 mins

1. The first thing I need to do when I start to revise is:

2. Other things I need to fix or finish are:

3. To make my paper a polished and smooth read, I’ll edit with an eye for:

4. My personal goal for this assignment is:

5. How long will it take you to finish the Oppression Journal? ___________________________

6. When can fit that work into your schedule? _______________________________________________ (Add it to your calendar now)

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 42 10/16/18 // Explication Peer Review

Your name: ________________________________________________

Your partner’s name: _________________________________________

Please make sure you hold on to this sheet and submit it on October 23. Do not make marks on your partner’s

paper unless specifically directed to do so by a question below.

1. What was your favorite part of the paper? What do you think worked really well?

2. Does the paper appear to be complete? Do you think it meets the basic requirements of the assignment?

3. Does the explication follow a logical progression (in other words, is it organized sensibly, transitioning from

idea to idea in ways that make sense or are clearly explained)?

4. Does the author make a clear connection between the Oppression Journal and Atwood’s novel?

5. Does the author’s “evaluative maneuver” succeed? In other words, do you have a clear sense of the author’s

opinion on a specific aspect of the two texts?

6. What do you wish the author had said more about? What needs to be expanded or explained?

7. Did you notice any significant sentence-level issues that made it hard to understand the author’s ideas? Which

of the following should the author look for when proofreading and editing the paper?

Subject-verb agreement // Run-on sentences // Sentence fragments // Unclear wording or phrasing // Using

“you” to address the reader // Other (explain):

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 51 Project 2: Podcasting The Crucible // November 8, 2018 (20% of your semester grade) Create a podcast that focuses on one of the characters in Miller’s play. Using the investigative methods that Paul McNally employed in Alibi, tell “the untold story” of John Proctor, Abigail Williams, Elizabeth Proctor, Reverend Hale, Mary Warren, Giles Corey, Rebecca Nurse, or Reverend Parris. You are only required to write the script, but if you want to record it you can earn extra credit. Because this project can be as vast as one’s imagination allows, I’m permitting you to work in pairs or groups (of up to 4); the script must be at least 1200 words long (4 pages) per person in your group. Your work on this project should help you to understand basic investigative techniques and how their application can help us better understand the characters in Miller’s play (and, thereby, Miller’s lessons about the cyclicality of history). Timeline: 11/8/18: Paper assigned today. 11/13: Idea page due in class (5 points). You are responsible for this work even if you miss class on this day. Your idea page

can look like whatever you want, but it must include the following information: the name of the character you’ll study; at least three of McNally’s methods that you’ll use to tell his or her story. Just to remind you, some of those methods were interviews, visiting relevant locations (the Checkers, the courthouse in Johannesburg), talking with experts, tracking down witnesses, reviewing court documents, and exposing contradictions. What else? If you choose to work in a group, please see me to discuss grading procedures and workload management.

11/15: Annotated outline of podcast (5 points). You are responsible for this work even if you miss class on this day. Your

annotated outline should resemble the skeleton of a script. What elements will you include in your podcast? Whom will you interview? Which locations must you “visit”? What “evidence” will you share or interpret? Write a brief description of each section of your outline, indicating about how long it will be, and (if you’re working in a group) who will be responsible for each section. You should plan on including at least two quotations from The Crucible in your final podcast, so your outline should also indicate where quotations would work best. Class starts at 4:00; plan ahead. Print your outline on 11/12; wake up 15 minutes earlier.

11/20: Draft of podcast script due at the start of class (20 points); peer review (10 points). You are responsible for this

work even if you miss class on this day. Your draft should represent a good faith effort to complete the assignment; therefore, it should be at least 1200 words long per author. Some elements will be more creative than others. For example, should you choose to “interview” John Proctor’s neighbors, you’ll be inventing the entire interview. Should you choose to “visit” the courthouse in Salem, you might want to do some light research to learn about its appearance and procedures. Any sources must be cited in MLA format. A classmate will review your draft and fill out a peer review sheet. Every author needs a copy of the draft, even if they’re working in a group. Be on time.

11/29: Podcast due at the start of class (60 points). You are responsible for this work even if you miss class on this day.

Required elements: (1) Your podcast should include at least two quotations from Miller’s play, which should be interpreted and analyzed using the IQIAA method. (2) The podcast must use at least three of McNally’s investigative techniques. (3) Be clear, either in the introduction or conclusion, about the nature of the injustice (if any) against this character. (4) Your conclusion should articulate the social, political, and/or legal lessons we can learn from this character.

12/6: Optional recording of podcast due to Prof. Mazumdar by midnight (+10 extra credit) Reminder about Academic Integrity: Responsible scholarship requires you to submit work that is entirely your own, and that properly cites and acknowledges source material. Acts of plagiarism will result in a zero (0) for this assignment, and may result in further penalty. This assignment may require light research (internet or library databases). Please ask if you have questions. You cannot successfully complete this assignment by reading summaries of The Crucible online. This assignment isn’t about memorizing content; it’s about understanding art. This is work you have to do yourself.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 52

Introduce: Use transitional phrases to inform your reader that you’re about to use someone else’s words.

Quote: Include words or images from another source. When you quote someone, you are obligated to represent

them accurately. This means avoiding typos and mistakes, and it means providing accurate citations that tell your

reader what source provided the words or images.

Interpret: If a quotation can stand on its own, then your reader doesn’t need to read your paper. After using a

quotation, explain it to your reader. Put that quotation into your own words, or into a language or discourse that

your audience can better understand. Consider starting sentences after quotations with phrases like, “In other

words, . . . .”

Analyze: Interpretation translates the original author’s words into a language your audience will

understand. Analysis tells your reader why that quotation was so important. It highlights the significance of an

author’s word choice, argument, example, or logic. Analysis goes beyond the obvious, telling the reader what they

may have missed if they didn’t read closely enough.

Apply: Each time you use a quotation, make it clear to your reader how it supports your argument. You can do

that by applying your analysis to your thesis statement. Remind your reader of your purpose for writing, and tell

them how this quotation, and your analysis of it, helps you support your argument.

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 53

New schedule as of 11/13/18

Mtg #




21 11/13 Finish Miller Idea page due in class. Discuss IQIAA method

(17) HUAC

22 11/15 Doctorow, pp 1-30 Annotated outline due in class.

Introduction to Book of Daniel (Prezi: Making Sense)

(18) Treason in the USA

23 11/20 Draft of podcast script due at the start of class (arriving after 4:10 pm means you cannot participate in peer review)

Peer Review

(19) The cold war; (20) The Rosenberg trial

24 11/27 Doctorow pp 30-70

Focus on characterization in Doctorow

(21) The censorship trial of “Howl”

25 11/29 Doctorow, pp 70-90 Podcast due at the start of class.

Thematic analysis: The Individual in Society (Prezi); Focus on POV in Doctorow

(22) Fat Man and Little Boy

26 12/4 Doctorow, pp 90-120

Focus on plot in Doctorow

(23) J. Robert Oppenheimer

27 12/6 Doctorow, pp 120-150 Optional recording of podcast due by midnight.

Focus on style in Doctorow

(24) 1967 March on the Pentagon; (25) The Berlin Wall

28 12/11 Doctorow, 150-180

Last day to submit any extra credit assignments

Focus on setting (domesticity) in Doctorow (Prezi)

29 12/18 Doctorow, finish

Reviewing for the final exam

30 12/20 Final Exam

Final Exam Final Exam Final Exam

ENG 3401 / D614 F2018 Mazumdar 71 11/20/18 // Project Two Peer Review.

1. Does the draft appear to be complete? Would you call this a “good faith effort” to produce a complete

draft?

2. Which three investigative techniques do you see in the draft?

3. Which technique is most convincing? Why?

4. Which technique is least convincing? Why?

5. Did the author use a quotation from Miller? a. Was the quotation integrated into the podcast effectively?

b. Was the quotation appropriate to the purpose for which it was used?

c. Was there analysis of the quotation? If so, did the analysis draw your attention to an idea you hadn’t thought about before? d. Did the author apply the quotation back to a thesis in an understandable way?

6. Were the investigative techniques included in a logical order, progressing from one to the next in ways that made sense?

7. What was your favorite part of the paper? Put a star in the margin to indicate its location, and explain here what you liked about it.

8. Did any area need development? Put a question mark in the margin, and explain here what you’d like to know more about.


mazumdar wi certification portfolio 1 15 april 2019 dear

Documents