Due: Ex 2-2 (Peer Reviews) (posted 29 November 2004)
Originally scheduled for Nov 22, but delayed along with all the other paper-related activities.
As several students mentioned in class during the Nov. 17 draft workshop, we have no shortage of good ideas in this class. Getting good ideas down in writing is no easy task, but I've been happy with the results I've seen so far.
The revised draft of Paper 2 is still due Dec. 6.
For Exercise 2-2:
1) Read and comment on a classmate's most recent draft of paper 2. Photocopy the commented paper and bring both copies to class. (I will collect one copy to use in order to evaluate your grade on this exercises, and pass one copy on to the student whose paper you critiqued.)
2) Write a one-page response to your peer's paper, in which you focus on alternate viewpoints that you feel your classmate successfully addressed, and/or alternate viewpoints that your classmate did not address. Again, please produce two copies -- give them both to me, and I will pass one on to the student author.
a) Watch especially for uncited references to what "some people" say; extreme claims that use words such as "all", "every," "none," and "never"; and unsupported comparisons -- especially references to "the best" or "the most" or "the least" (since such comparisons imply that you have compared at least three items -- e.g., one that is "good," one that is "better," and one that is "best").
b) In most such cases, the student simply needs to rephrase... instead of saying "The best way to explain X is Y," it is more accurate to say, "A productive way of explaining X is Y..." or "If we assume that Y is an acceptable explanation of X, then we must also consider the effects of A, B, and C." These sort of complex logical relationships are the signs of advanced critical thinking.