In his article "Writing Assignments: Where Writing Begins," David Bartholomea quotes Ann Bertoff, citing her assertion that writing "is understood as a nonlinear, dialectical process in which the writer continually circles back, reviewing and rewriting: certainly the way to learn to do that is to practice doing just that."
The Free Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary defines dialectical in terms of dialect: "discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation; specifically : the Socratic techniques of exposing false beliefs and eliciting truth."
Therefore, it is time to engage in a discourse - a dialogue - with your paper, to ferret out your truths, but it will require some creativity and imagination to do so.
The Free Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary defines dialectical in terms of dialect: "discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation; specifically : the Socratic techniques of exposing false beliefs and eliciting truth."
Therefore, it is time to engage in a discourse - a dialogue - with your paper, to ferret out your truths, but it will require some creativity and imagination to do so.
To help get you started, I would like you to imagine a sassy counter-opinion to whatever it is you have to say. Give your dialectical dueler a personality, some attitude, and get ready to engage that character in some fierce argumentation. He or she doesn't believe a thing you have to say and is not going to be nice about it.(If you are a somber sort of a person and would really rather not deal with sass, you may design a witty, dry professorial sort to argue with instead. Or anyone, really.)
Now, one paragraph at a time, imagine someone countering what you have to say. You can paraphrase what your paragraph is about, pick a topic sentence, or just one thought that summarizes the main argument of that paragraph. Now imagine the argument your sassy, dialectic foil would present to counter it.
For example, in my first paragraph I wrote: Grammar
evokes strong emotions.
My sassy counterpoint disagrees. Grammar Gorilla says "grammar is as dry as old toast." How will I prove she is wrong? What arguments or evidence do I have to refute her claim?
Continue through your paper, one paragraph at a time, summarizing your primary argument within that paragraph and then entering into a dialogue with an imaginary and very sassy (or erudite) someone who disagrees with you. Can you refute a contrary view? If you have already written in a counter view, then your foil has to support it and you get to contradict him or her. Read things aloud if it helps. It's a good way to truly dialogue with your work.
If you have paragraphs that are strictly examples (as I do in my paper), your foil can be confused. "I don't get it." Have you explained your concept thoroughly - so that your audience is able to fully grasp your information? Can you clarify it further? Your ability to succinctly summarize a paragraph's main point "conversationally" will help you know if you have clearly expressed your point - or not.
In the Socratic tradition of dialectic, you are exposing your truths, or lack thereof. You should be able to convince your counterpart that you have valid things to say. Basically you are reading your paper aloud, in conversation with an imaginary other, critical self, finding your weak points, which often show up more clearly when you vocalize them.
If you start to run out of time in our half-hour assignment, just look at the paragraphs you think are critical to your paper (the one containing your thesis, for example) or paragraphs you think (or have been told) might be weak.
If you start to run out of time in our half-hour assignment, just look at the paragraphs you think are critical to your paper (the one containing your thesis, for example) or paragraphs you think (or have been told) might be weak.
Try posting some of your arguments and counter-arguments, or further clarifications if you made them. Where you able to support your arguments? Did your dialectical dual divine some truths in what you have written? Did your paper stand up to the scathing review, or did your foil poke giant holes in it?
Did you have fun? I hope so. Class dismissed.
I will be doing this writing assignment. (Sounds like fun!)
ReplyDeleteWas what the assignment asked you to do clear? Yes. The directions were clear and well written. I knew what I was getting into.
ReplyDeleteDid the assignment really ask 30 minutes of work? If not, what made the assignment go over? It took right about 30 minutes. My paper was long enough for it to hit at the 30 minute mark. However, my paper is not done. So, the longer it get the longer the arguing will take.
What did you learn from carrying out the assignment? That is, did your learning match up with the goals/outcomes of the assignment? I really enjoyed this assignment. I learned what the opposition of my argument thinks about my paper. It made me see if the sides of revision that I wasn’t addressing.
Was what you learned useful to you, given where you are with your paper? Yes! Very! I was struggling with addressing the opposition and now I have a more clear understanding of where my weak points are and what can be done to strengthen them.
What recommendations can you offer the assignment writer for how this assignment could be shaped to better achieve its goals/outcomes, or be clearer, or be of more assistance to writers at your stage of the writing process? I thought this was very well thought out. I wasn’t sure of exactly what the outcomes were as they weren’t explicitly stated, but I think I understood. I’d perhaps like a bit more rationale at the beginning so I know what I’m striving for.
I will be doing this assignment as well.
ReplyDeleteHey Pam, loved the assignment. I really appreciate the depth that you gave to the assignment, and you were very clear in your requests. I will say that I got absorbed in the process of the assignment, and spent closer to an hour to complete it. I have no qualms with the assignment, but in my opinion it requests a little more than half an hour of thinking ;). I loved the mini-lesson on the Socratic definition of Dialectics, and the emphasis on how we rhetorically construct our arguments. My assignment touched on a similar subject. Like Hayley before me, this assignment drove me not only to examine the counterpoints to my argument, but also to reexamine the points I had already made. In my rush to incorporate all the other elements we have discussed this semester, I forgot to balance my fervor with a healthy dose of perspective. By examining (and researching) some of the opposing views to education and videogames I actually feel like I have a better idea of how to persuasively structure my argument. Specifically, I hope to address the varying types of learning and how individuals benefit differently from each (with a positive twist). I believe this assignment can be very beneficial in the drafting stage. It helped me to hone my argument by filling the role of the disapproving audience member. I do think it could be focused and reduced to a less time consuming exercise, but that would only be necessary because of the 30 minute deadline.
ReplyDeleteThanks so much for your input, Andrew. I'm glad my assignment helped you with your paper. I worried that it might be too lengthly, so I'm not too surprised it ran over for you. I hope that wasn't too painful!
Delete