CR #3 and Focus the Nation

You will have time off this Wednesday to attend one session of FOCUS THE NATION, a day of talks about sustainability and climate change held at the AU Hotel and Conference Center. Please one of the sessions held on Wednesday, then write up your reaction to the session in a 500 word CR, due at your conference.

Here is the schedule:

SCHEDULE FOR FOCUS THE NATION AT AUBURN
JAN 30, 2008
AU Hotel and Conference Center

9:00 – 9:10: Introduction and Context

9:10 – 10:30: Opportunities in Business and Finance
 The Big Picture: Paul Bobrowski, Dean AU College of Business
 Finance and Climate Change: Claire Crutchley, AU Dept of Finance
 Real Estate and Green Building: Harris Hollans, AU Dept of Finance
 Green Business: Peter Stanwick, AU Dept of Management

10:30 – 11:00: Break

11:00 – 12:15: Faith and Climate Change Panel
 Rich Penaskovic, AU Religious Studies
 Michael Friedman, Auburn Jewish Community
 Diana Jordan Allende, Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
 Nick Holler, United Methodist Church
 Libba Stinson, Grace United Methodist
 Nighet Ahmed, Auburn Islamic Center
 Frank Covington, First Presbyterian Church

12:15 – 1:00: Lunch Break

1:00 – 2:00: Spring Break 2050: The Future of the Gulf Coast
 Sea Level Rise in the Gulf of Mexico: Conner Bailey, AU Dept of Ag. Economics and Rural Sociology
 Sea Warming: Ken Halanych, AU Dept of Biological Sciences
 Gulf Coast Real Estate and Development: Michael Robinson, AU School of Architecture

2:00 – 3:15: Understanding Climate Change
 Physics of Climate Change: Steve Knowlton, AU Dept of Physics
 Chemistry of Carbon: Orlando Acevedo, AU Dept of Chemistry
 Climate Change in the Past: Dennis Ruez, AU Dept of Geology and Geography
 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): Matt Williams, AU Sustainability Initiative

3:15 – 4:30: Solutions
 Consumption: Katie Brock, AU Dept of Consumer Affairs
 Energy: Sushil Bhavnani, AU Dept of Mechanical Engineering
 Agriculture: Norbert Wilson, AU Dept of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology
 Architecture: Christian Dagg, AU School of Architecture

Evening:
6:00 – 6:30: Dr. Jay Gogue, President, Auburn University
Address to the Community on AU and Climate Change

6:30 – 7:30: Panel Discussion with Local and State Political Figures and Auburn Students

Panelists: Jim Buston, Joe Turnham, AL Rep. Pebblin Warren, AL Rep. Greg Wren
Auburn Students: Nikki Allen, Anna Czachurski, Rafael Egues, Alexander Pfeiffenberger

Tips for Writing Essay #1

Essay #1 asks you to ANALYZE a written piece for its RHETORICAL SITUATION. Your THESIS should grow out of this analysis, in that the rhetorical tools selected by the author point to a particular trend, train of thought, sympathy, agenda, or motive for writing that piece.

Select a piece that is fairly lengthy. A 1-2 page article is probably not long enough. Editorials would make good choices since the author is at liberty to reveal his or her persona.

Consider ALL of the following when analyzing the piece you've selected:
1) Organization: How is the work organized? Does the author present a simple claim that is later deepened? If so, how is that achieved? What evidence is given first? Last? Why in that order?
2) Purpose, Persona, Audience: The WHY, WHO and FOR WHOM of the piece is important to figure out. Often, your thesis may be derived from answering these questions.
3) Fallacies: This is an argumentative failing. Where does the piece fall short? Why? Do you think it was purposely done?
4) Appeals: How has the author employed LOGOS, ETHOS and PATHOS? Are these used correctly or poorly?
5) Diction: What does the author's word choice say to you? Does he or she reveal any bias?

You must address all of these to some degree in your paper if you are going to fully analyze the rhetorical situation of your selected piece. Essays that don't address all of these in some way can earn no higher than a C. Essays earning an A will speak to the rhetorical situation AS WELL AS defend an original thesis concerning either the selected piece itself, or the sustainability issue being discussed using the selected piece.

Obviously, you must have at least one source which to analyze, but you may use more than one if you'd like, either for comparison/contrast purposes, or as support for sustainability issue you've chosen here.

Critical Response #2: Rhetorical Situation Analysis

Put on your toolbelt! It's rhetorical analysis time!

The two letters distributed to class on Friday are from a book called WRITING TO CHANGE THE WORLD by Mary Pipher. In the book, Pipher describes a meadow in her native Nebraska that is slated to become a motocross park. The two letters are written to the County Board, composed of a group of older, male Nebraska landowners.

For CR #2, determine which is the most effective letter for that particular audience. In making that decision, I want you to do a brief rhetorical analysis of each letter. Decide what the simple claim is, if and how it is deepened in any way, what kind of evidence is being used, who the persona of the letter is, as well as what particular diction (word choice) stands out as persuasive. One of these letters fared far better than the other in the County Board. Use your rhetorical "toolbelt" to decide which one it was.

CR #2 is due Wednesday.

Essay #1: Analyzing an Argument

ENGL 1120 Spring 2008
Essay 1: Analyzing an Argument

The Set-Up: In the first few weeks of class we will have read Henry David Thoreau’s “Where I Lived and What I Lived For,” as well as Edward Abbey's "The First Morning." Both authors offer different approaches to defining nature. Thoreau seems to argue for simplicity, suggesting the following: “Let us spend one day as deliberately as Nature, and not be thrown off the track by every nutshell and mosquito’s wing that falls on the rails.” Thoreau believed in a hands-on approach to living in and preserving the natural world.

Meanwhile, Abbey suggests that nature is best defined by "suppressing the personification of the natural." He argues that nature should be "devoid of all humanly ascribed qualities." For Abbey, the preferred method was "hands-off."

Now, think about the sustainability issue you’ve chosen. How have different groups or individuals attempted to make change regarding that issue? What rhetorical method are they using? What kind of audience do those methods address? What is their purpose? What kind of persona do they present to the world? Do they appeal to passion, authority, or logic in making their claims?


Prompt: Essay 1 asks you to search the library database for popular media sources related to the sustainability issue of your choice, then identify a source on which you'd like to focus. From there, you evaluate and analyze the argument and write an essay that discusses the rhetorical strategies used. If you find fault with the argument, you may propose a more effective method of argument for the sustainability issue you’ve chosen.


Example: Imagine you have chosen to research the fur industry. You might compose an essay that evaluates an article in TIME Magazine called "Fur Passion" about the organization PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and the way in which they conduct their campaigns. What are the strengths of that essay? The weaknesses? You would decide the purpose, audience, and persona used in the essay, as well as the various appeals used. You might note any language which betrays bias or gives clues about the rhetorical tools being used. After analyzing the source, you might decide that the rhetorical tools used seem to suggest a kind of sympathy towards PETA. Once you determine HOW that sympathy is revealed, and determine WHY it might exist, you'll find you have a good, working thesis.

Criteria: You will need to search electronic databases for popular media sources related to your topic. Identify ONE source on which you’d like to focus, and develop your own analysis and evaluation in a four to five page paper. Your paper will need an original thesis that is thoroughly defended using at least one source. You should use MLA style, Times Roman or Courier 12 pt. font, 1 inch margins. Your paper should have a proper Works Cited page. A rough draft of the paper is due Monday, January 28th. The final draft is due Wednesday, February 6th.

Edward Abbey's "First Morning"

Monday we will discuss Edward Abbey's "First Morning" (e-text here for those without a book). Please read, in addition, this interview with Edward Abbey. I think you'll have a clearer picture of who this writer was after reading the interview.

Seven Generations from Now

“Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
– Washington State Department of Ecology

While a themed course in composition may feel a bit limiting to begin with, a wide range of scholarship is crucial to sustainability studies. The varieties of interests and majors in this class will serve to strengthen our discussions and deepen our understanding of sustainability.

Students from last semester researched some of these topics:
Eco-fashion
BP's "green" marketing campaign
Elephant conservation
Wild Mustang preservation
Sustainable food systems
Hybrid vehicles
Emotions in Great Apes
Radicalism in the Environmental Movement
Overfishing
California Desert Protection Act
Greenwashing
Green business strategies
Things Fall Apart and the Sustainability of African Tradition
"Selling" Climate Change
The Benefits of Building Green
Small Town Alabama and Sustainability
Sustainable Art
...and many, many more. No two students had the same idea!

Writing and rhetoric cannot be separated from place and environment. So, perhaps it is best to begin at home. What are the places you identify with? The Iroquois Indians anticipate the impact of their decisions seven generations into the future. What will the places you come from look like seven generations from now? How about your chosen field of study? Can the practices in your field be sustained at this rate?

Senegalese ecologist Baba Dioum says that “In the end, we will conserve only what we love; we will love only what we understand; and we will understand only what we have been taught.” When considering research topics, think about the things you love and wish to conserve. That's a good place to begin.

For our first CR, we've asked you to bring a picture of a place that defines nature for you. In 500-600 words, describe this place and why it resonates with you. You may decide the place is beautiful, or sad, or invigorating, or hilarious. You might tell the story of that place, or discuss what the future of that place might be. The possibilities of this are open to you, so have at it. CR #1 is due on Monday, January 14. Please single space your CR and attach your photograph with a paper clip.

Before you begin, figure out your ecological footprint here. Surprised at what you find?

The Louise Kreher Forest Ecology Preserve off of HWY 147 North in Auburn.

As we get ready to start discussing sustainability and potential research topics within that framework, we must first DEFINE sustainability. Sustainable Washington has organized a set of definitions here. Read them carefully for class on Monday, and ask yourself which one resonates the most with you? Why?

On Friday we will discuss the sustainability initiative on Auburn's campus, as well as brainstorm potential topics for your first paper. We will be meeting in HC 3143.