Thanks for bringing up the Rogerian argument, Seth! One of the best writing
courses I ever took in college was an expository writing class that very
well may have used the Wood text. The Rogerian argument works very well in
the classroom at many levels. High school students enjoy the structure
provided without the rigidity of a formal essay. It can be used for topics
as complex as gun control or as humorous as convincing a roommate to leave
the toilet seat down. I would encourage secondary teachers to give it a try!
John
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Katz, Seth <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Geoff--
>
> What you describe here sounds a lot like a Rogerian argument, in which the
> author (A) first explains the position he or she is opposed to (B), without
> criticism of any sort; the author (A) simply shows that they understand
> position (B). Then the author (A) offers non-pejorative critique of position
> (B): 'I see a problem/weakness/issue in position (B) that you (person who
> holds position [B]) have not addressed.' Then the author (A) offers elements
> of their own position on the issue that (A) thinks will help strengthen the
> opposing position (B). Based on the work of psychologist Carl Rogers, this
> type of argument is a mainstay of mediation: it shows that you are actually
> listening to the 'other,' treating their point of view as valid and
> thoughtful; and it presents your own argument not as antagonistic, but as
> potentially useful in helping the opposition achieve a more effective result
> (and one that both sides can possible agree to as a fair compromise). The
> only argumentative writing textbook I know of that has a whole Rogerian
> assignment is Nancy Wood's Essentials of Argument.
>
> I have a copy of They Say/I Say on my shelf--now I'll have to look at it!
> Thanks!
>
> Seth
>
> Dr. Seth Katz
> Assistant Professor
> Department of English
> Bradley University
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Geoffrey
> Layton
> Sent: Sun 8/7/2011 10:13 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Holding their interest
>
>
> Paul,
>
> I think the most valuable part of the T/I Say is the "They say" portion
> because students must be able to identify what they're responding to - and
> why. In other words, they have to ask (and answer) the question what is it
> about the text that makes it interesting. I've had a lot of luck teaching
> "commonplaces" in the context of the following template, "Most (many, the
> author, my parents, etc) seem to think X (the "commonplace"), but a closer
> look reveals Y. It's important to recognize that Y is (just as important,
> preferable, superior to, different from, etc) X because . . ."
>
> Geoff Layton
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 16:46:38 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Holding their interest
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> THis is interesting. Last year, we adopted the They Say/I Say (with
> readings) text for our revised senior English curriculum. This year we'll be
> using it again (first semester only). It's hard to assess yet how successful
> it's been, but so far, it looks like we made a good choice. I'm open to any
> ideas about using this text that any of you have, and I'd love to share them
> with the rest of our senior English team.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul D.
>
> "If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable
> fiction" (_Twelfth Night_ 3.4.127-128).
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sun, August 7, 2011 7:02:58 PM
> Subject: Holding their interest
>
>
> Carol - There are, I think, two ways to look at the problem that I assume
> you're referring to - student lack of engagement in the basic writing class
> (or any other writing/comp course for that matter!). Sometimes, as you
> indicate, the way to approach it is to make the subject matter more
> "interesting" (although what is interesting to one student may not be to
> another) - and the way I've seen that addressed is to focus on current
> events, social issues, and politics (often, of course, they merge into one).
> Unfortunately, tackling "big subjects" (the environment, racism, the budget
> crisis, etc) is tough enough for professional writers, and it's routine to
> see basic writers totally fall to pieces when the subject matter becomes
> "interesting."
>
> Another problem with this approach is that it pretty much leaves the
> grammar to take care of itself, often in "mini-lessons" or "grammar in the
> context in writing" where grammar and mechanical issues are dealt with after
> the fact. The problem here, it seems, is that grammar and mechanics don't
> begin to cover the writing problems of freshman basic writers - even if
> every grammar "error" gets corrected, the writing is still a mess.
>
> The other way to address the problem is to work on the assumption that
> student interest grows along with their command of the subject matter - in
> other words, the more they learn about how to write, the more
> engaged/interested they become in the act of writing. This is the idea
> behind the book "They say/I say: The moves that matter in academic writing"
> by Graff and Birkenstein. Although at first it may seem geared to higher
> level writing class than what you have (the book was written to deal with
> first-year freshman writing problems at UIC), the approach is still a sound
> one - to help students gain control over their writing. As Stanley Fish
> says, "Drill students in the forms that enable meaning . . . What students
> must learn are the forms; the content will follow."
>
> Geoff Layton
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 13:12:00 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> I just re-joined the list after a long time away. I'll be teaching basic
> writing and grammar to freshman community college students. I'd appreciate
> any suggestions and practical exercises for basic writers to make the
> subject more interesting for non-enthusiasts!
> Carol Morrison
>
> --- On Sun, 8/7/11, Jane Mairs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Jane Mairs <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Sunday, August 7, 2011, 3:18 PM
>
>
>
> There are too many argumentative and angry exchanges in this
> listserv and too few productive discussions.
>
> I am leaving.
>
> Jane Mairs
>
>
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brad Johnston
> Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 9:19 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
>
>
>
> For those not set for html, color and graphics by whatever name,
> this will be hard to follow.
>
>
>
> .br-had.sun.07aug11.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sunday, August 7, 2011 12:17 AM
> Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
>
> Thanks, Brad - now we're getting somewhere! Indeed we are, thanks to
> you! A thousand welcomes. The next step is to analyze the change in meaning
> between the two tenses. Holy cow! Where have YOU been for the last dozen
> years? For example, I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that "there is
> nothing the word 'had' can do for a past tense verb that the verb cannot do
> for itself." A past tense verb, G. The motto doesn't say 'a verb', it says a
> PAST TENSE verb. It seems to me that "had" does something extremely
> important to the past tense verb in this particular piece of writing as the
> simple past which one? would put <Aurek> Janusz in a place where the writer
> doesn't want him. The perfect tense implies that the goodbyes HAD BEEN said
> before Aurek finds himself in his current situation, Indeed they were, but
> not 'had been'. Exactly the point. The past tense of 'to be' is 'was' and
> 'were', not 'had been'. The good-byes were said earlier. Lotsa things
> happened earlier. All Gaul was divided, Teddy Roosevelt stormed San Juan
> Hill. Lotsa things. which it seems to me is exactly the position in which
> the writer wants his character to be.
>
>
>
> All past events were preceded by other past events. That's not what
> the past perfect is for. The past perfect is a specialized device that lets
> us show that by the time something happened, something else had already
> happened. If you like ... "By the time Janusz found himself on the train, he
> had already left home and in doing so, had said his good-byes to his wife."
> A bit back-handed but this is exactly why the past perfect is not just a
> convention. It provides a distinct time-sequence separation. Thanks for the
> push down that road.
>
>
>
> Geoff Layton
>
>
>
> .br-had.sun.07aug11.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 20:41:41 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask] <
> http:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: 22 Britannia Road
> To: [log in to unmask] <
> http:[log in to unmask]>
>
> Brad and Martha,
>
>
>
> Here's a juicy one, from "22 Britannia Road", by Amanda Hodgkinson,
> c.2011, page 24.
>
>
>
> In carriages up and down the train, soldiers were singing and
> sharing jokes but Janusz stayed silent. He prayed Silvana and Aurek would be
> safe. He'd said good-bye casually, as if he were just going out to buy a
> newspaper. He'd told himself it was braver to leave like that. He'd met up
> with his father a few days before and that had been the old man's advice.
>
> "Don't dwell too long on saying your good-byes. Women always
> cry and make a fuss. Make it quick. Good-byes are best kept short. Be strong
> and you'll make a good soldier." His father had looked down then, his hand
> hovering over Janusz's shoulder. "Just make sure you come back in one
> piece."
>
> Now Janusz regretted the way he had left. In truth it hadn't
> been bravery that had made him turn his back so quickly on his wife and
> child. It had been the hot tears that had pushed at his eyes as he'd brushed
> Silvana's cheek with a kiss. His father had been wrong. She'd been the brave
> one, standing there dry-eyed, holding their son tightly in her arms.
>
>
>
> Thirteen 'had's in the quote. Once you get on the Had Highway, it's
> hard to find the exit ramp.
>
>
>
> I have an idea. The first 'had' -- where she writes, 'He'd said
> goodbye casually' -- is a nice example of the Bad Grammar Flashback
> Convention, which the schools of "creative writing" all teach as the way it
> should be done. Let's assume the author wrote, as she should have written,
> "When he left his home, he said goodbye casually", and then take it from
> there. Disregard that first 'had' and consider the last 12. Apply the
> past-tense default to each of them and see what you get. What makes sense?
> What conveys the intent? If the past tense says what it should say, that's
> the one you want. Don't put 'had' in front of it. "There is nothing the word
> 'had' can do for a past tense verb that the verb cannot do for itself."
>
>
>
> For Geoffrey, here's the way it should have been written:
>
>
>
> In carriages up and down the train, soldiers were singing and
> sharing jokes but Janusz stayed silent. He prayed Silvana and Aurek would be
> safe. [When he left his home], he said good-bye casually, as if he were just
> going out to buy a newspaper. He told himself it was braver to leave like
> that. He met up with his father a few days before and that was the old man's
> advice.
>
> "Don't dwell too long on saying your good-byes. Women always
> cry and make a fuss. Make it quick. Good-byes are best kept short. Be strong
> and you'll make a good soldier." His father looked down then, his hand
> hovering over Janusz's shoulder. "Just make sure you come back in one
> piece."
>
> Now Janusz regretted the way he left. In truth it wasn't
> bravery that made him turn his back so quickly on his wife and child. It was
> the hot tears that pushed at his eyes as he brushed Silvana's cheek with a
> kiss. His father was wrong. She was the brave one, standing there dry-eyed,
> holding their son tightly in her arms.
>
>
>
> As you can see, there is nothing the word 'had' can do for a past
> tense verb that the verb cannot do for itself.**
>
>
>
> ** Clear statement of position, for Geoffrey's consideration.
>
>
>
> .br-had.sat.06aug11.
>
> .
>
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select
> "Join or leave the list"
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select
> "Join or leave the list"
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/