Make no mistake, I enjoy writing this blog. It's a cathartic attempt at tracking what I do in a way that will be helpful to me in the future. At the same time, I wouldn't do this if I didn't think it was helpful to students. This is a two-way street, though, folks. In attempting to create a dialogue, I feel like I'm shouting at nothing, screaming into a void where sound is never returned my way.
If someone feels uncomfortable speaking in class, this should be the avenue to make your voice heard. A few people have made some jokes in class that I'm desperate for blog attention, but that's only partially true; ideally, I would like to see some activity on here that hasn't come as a result of bonus point bribes from yours truly. And then...THEN! I didn't even get one person making a single attempt at tackling a 15 point bonus opportunity despite having the window open for almost a week.
The blog will continue so ignore my existential online crisis. Getting more than the four people who have already made their voices heard to speak up would be ideal, though.
Wednesday, you took a quiz on The Most Dangerous Game, worked on your map for the story of the same name and then took some notes on the Elements of Character.
Thursday, we continued taking notes on the Elements of Character. I need to revisit some of these notes and streamline them because some of the slides are very redundant. Your focus should be on knowing the difference between three pairs of ideas: direct and indirect characterization; static and dynamic characters; and flat and round characters. If you can demonstrate the difference between those three pairs of ideas, then we'll be cool.
Friday, we moved forward.
Today, we're going to finish the character notes and begin reading the Cask of Amontillado. You'll be using an inference chart that you'll create on a sheet of paper to characterize Montresor. The chart has five categories: Appearance, What Fortunato says, What Montresor says, Montresor's actions, and Montresor's thoughts. You'll find a quote for each of these categories and then make an inference about the character based on the quote. Finally, you'll state whether the quote qualifies as direct or indirect characterization in parenthesis after your inference.
Discussing the fallacies seems to have gone well, and many people seemed to have a grasp on them by the time we finished our lesson on Wednesday. We read one of the letters to the editor together as a class, at which point you then began working on finding the fallacies in their reasoning, as well as ethos, pathos and logos arguments.
Thursday was your first writing day for the lit project. You'll take that Timed Writing home and revise it into the most perfect piece of writing you possibly can and turn it in Tuesday, September 28. You also turned in your books for the first annotation check and gave me your first Article Selection assignment.
Friday, you received more time to work on the Op-Ed piece assignment and received a copy of my comment key. Sixth period had a few more questions about the comment key, so they received the weekend to finish off the Op-Ed assignment. Fifth period turned it in at the end of the class.
Today, we'll be watching a documentary presentation of Naomi Klein's book, No Logo. You will be finding one example each of Naomi Klein using a(n) ethos, pathos, and logos argument in attempting to make her point. You'll also find one use of a corporation using a logical fallacy to further its agenda. Explain the fallacy, who uses it and how it's used.