Putting a Paper Back Together Activity
A great way to use an e.g. paper to work on organization and transitions!
– Print out several copies of an e.g. paper of your choice and cut it up by paragraph.
– Students organize into groups and each group gets a complete cut-up paper.
– Groups spend about 15 minutes putting the paper back together, making notes as they go explaining their choices. What organizational clues are they finding?
– Discuss the Intro/Conclusion
– What should an Intro do? What kind is this? (Acts Of Inquiry pg. 247)
– What should a Conclusion do? What kind is this? (Acts of Inquiry pg. 265)
– Discuss the order of the main paragraphs. Identify the following:
– Minor claims for the paragraph
– How that claim is developed: what kind of evidence is used?
– Map out a reverse outline on the board, considering relationships between minor claims
If you have more time:
– Groups can work on coming up with alternate organizations and discuss advantages and disadvantages of each
– Students can spend some time outlining an upcoming major paper using new skills
– Consider using an e.g. paper that resembles one of your major assignments. My students were working on a comparative rhetorical analysis, so I used “Persuasion for a Better Cause” by 2006-2007 winner Ashley Thoreson.
– I’ve found this assignment can be scaffolded in throughout the quarter. Early on, it serves as an introduction to thinking about organization. Later on, it allows you to address surface-level concerns like transition phrases or the known-new clause.
– You can modify this activity with your own papers! Find a partner and exchange cut-up drafts. Then, try to put each other’s papers back together. Take a look at where you agree/disagree about organization and discuss:
– What transitional cues are missing in my paper that confused my partner?
– What alternate organizations were suggested by this activity? Would rearranging my argument make it more effective?
- 2013-2014 Winner: “The Limits of Applying Ethical Theories to Literary Analysis” by Joanne Kim (1)
- 2012-2013 Winner: “A Defense of the Legalization of Homosexuality in China” by Junmeng Zhu
- 2012-2013 Winner: “Does What You Like Define Who You Are” by Malie Fujii
- 2011-2012 i.e. Winner: “The impact of tangible evidence” by Rebecca Eskildsen
- 2011-2012 Winner: “A Virtual Exchange of Basketball Culture” by Ameen Tabatabai
- Read-Around Groups (4)
- Rhetorical Peer Review
- 2010-11 i.e. Winner: “That’s So Ghetto!” by Pat Origenes
- 2010-11 Winner: “Literal and Metaphorical: Racial Themes in Harry Potter” by Kayhan Nejad (2)
- 2010-11 Selected Essays