Closings: Argument

Endings (http://teachers.net/lessons/posts/1122.html)

When closing any paper, writers know the closing should

• tie up loose ends
• leave the reader with something to think about
• not insult the reader by telling him or her what I just wrote
• never end with "the end"

Here are a few options for closing a paper. Some options are better than others depending on the genre, but all can work depending on your lead. For example, in the argument paper I am writing, I started with an anecdote, so I might end with an anecdote for a circular ending. Thus, even though it is an argument paper, it has a narrative feel this way, and I like that because the paper is quite personal. It really depends on the tone you, as the writer, want to take and the mood you want the reader to take up as he or she leaves your paper.

1. Question: Close with a question that that involves the reader. You can answer the question, or leave it to the reader to decide based on what you wrote. Example. It was the worst experience of his life. Andrew decided that it was the last time he would ever go on a roller coaster. Who can blame him? 
2. Strong statement:s Close with a statement that forcefully states your opinion. Example: A criminal, no matter his/her age, should be dealt with according to the crime.  The legal system is too lenient when it comes to juvenile offenders.  Laws need to be rewritten immediately so that no more hard core criminals go free just because they are juveniles. 
3. Summary without repeating: With this more traditional ending, you don't want to insult your reader. The reader is smart enough to  know what they just read if you did a good job laying it out. Thus, avoid writing "I wrote about..." -- Example. As you can see, it is not important to know everything, but it is important to find out the answer. There will not always be a teacher nearby with the answer. you have to learn how to do research, how to dig through sources to find what you need to know. 
4. Personal comment close: This is not the same as an opinion but rather a response or a personal conclusion that you reached, like a lesson you have learned because of the experience you wrote about in your paper. Example: Riding a roller coaster with someone who is a "chicken" is something I will certainly never do again. I should have listened when Sheila told me she did not want to ride it. I should have let her take the "chicken exit." Next time I will know better. 
5. Mystery close: a statement that shows some things will never be resolved. With this closing, I don't want the reader to think I forgot to end the essay. This is probably best for a narrative, but it might work in an argument. For example, "We watched Adam walk down the road until he became just a tiny speck and then disappeared altogether into the dust of the twilight.  Just as he appeared, he was gone.  That was the last time any of us ever saw him."
6. Beginning of a new story: A hint of things to come or the beginnings oa a new story -- a sequel. Example: In my argument paper about my Dad, I might end with a story that gestures at the beginning. Christmas is coming, and because I have not seen or heard from my dad, once again, I knew it was time to reach out: "Dad, how about a cup of coffee?" 
7. Well known quotation famous or not: According to Bob Dole, in order to be a citizen, all Americans must  be able to speak English. in theory, this seems like a good policy; however, what will become of the citizens who never learn to speak English? 
8. Open conclusion: an ending that lets the reader draw his own conclusions: Some statistics show that drivers under the age of 16 are more dangerous. On the other hand, some statistics show that they are no more dangerous than drivers 16-25. Therefore, whether drivers under the age of 16 are more dangerous than those over 16 is still debatable. 

Drafting: Argument

Now that we have brainstormed, planned, and have the lead, we are ready to draft. I start with a thinking about the audience and purpose -- the rhetorical triangle. On the board, I have posters with some sentence stems for the "They Say" and the "I Say" parts of the paper. I also have a sample paper on the board showing students to draft skipping lines so that we can add and revise on the page.

As I write, I am already changing my lead because I want to add some information and also cut out some beause it seems too long.  I know the they say, and the I say. I am anxious to get this paper written, and it comes easily to me. I resist the urge to use "I" or tell my own examples in the "they say," and then reveal it in the "I say" comes in. I also get more personal with the counter argument and refutation. The conclusion is easy because I know my purpose, which is to encourage my readers to think about their parents as human beings with flaws. I don't have answers; it is not about persuading people to think like me or to convince anyone like a persuasive essay is. It is just presenting an argument, working through some logic, and offering a new perspective or making my contribution to the larger conversation known.

Lead: Argument

Today, I wanted to be "Sarah the Writer" and show how I start my paper. I start with a blank page and put four bullet points: question, story(anecdote), fact, and quote. I try to come up with a lead for each one and then talk through which would be most appealing to my audience. I ask myself which makes people want to read my paper and know more. I decided on the story and then started drafting this.

Planning: Argument

Now that we have brainstormed some arguable topics for our argument essay, it is time to plan out the argument. I started with a blank page and began the planning in the middle with the larger conversation that I am entering. What does this mean? In any argument, there is a larger conversation that we are entering, and we have to start with a generalizable argument of sorts to appeal to readers.  For this, I use a sentence stem..."Some may argue..." or "On one hand, some argue..." This is what I call the "they say" of the paper where we have to talk about what others say on this topic before we, or the writer, enters the conversation.

For my argument about my father, I wanted to plan my argument before writing it. For planning, I went to my paper where I started in the middle and just wrote the following: "on one hand, some say 'honor thy father and mother," followed by a few bullet points about why. Then I move down the page and write "on the other hand, some say there are some very good reasons to break up with your parents" and add a few bullet points.  I move down the page a bit more and write the "I say" as an answer to that question. I start with "while those to perspectives are understandable, I say..." and add my position on this topic, which is to "honor thy father" but in a new way, which is to think of the father as a person with flaws.  Then, I went down a little further and wrote "counterargument and refutation" and wrote what I can hear my siblings saying to this, which is similar to one of the arguments above, and write my refutation or answer to their question or counterargument. And, then I leave the closing open...but basically write that my closing will be about seeing parents as people with flaws.

Here is my plan:

Brainstorming for an argument

In the writing workshop, we begin with the teacher being the writer, so I became "Sarah" and sat down to talk my way through coming up with an idea for an argument paper (one that does not require research).

I started with a blank page on the Elmo and began drawing picture of places I spend my time -- to see if I can find an argument in any of those places. As I talked my way through my home, school, the volleyball court, and my second school (UIC/DePaul), I talked about things I am wondering about and problems I am having that I really need to come to a decision on.  For example, at home, I have to make a decision about my relationship with my dad. At school. we are learning about poetry, and I want students to bring in lyrics to songs, but many of the songs have profanity. Thus, I am wondering about the issue of censoring the lyrics - -the poets are artists after all, and if you need a certain word, you need a certain word for expression, but I could argue that some artist abuse the language or do it for consumeristic reasons. . After doing my brainstorm, I used process of elimination to decide on my topic. I wanted to topic to be 1) something I am truly contemplating, 2) something I can argue or that has two sides, 3) something that is generalizable, and by this I mean that I can say there is a larger issue or conversation about this that readers can relate to, and 4) something that I want to spend time on. I picked the volleyball topic -- if I should start training again -- but the kids really wanted to hear about my dad. We talked about why that was interesting, and they said because it is personal, so I agreed even though I knew it would be tough, and told them that I hoped they, too would choose such a topic.

Below is a picture of my notes:

Is it arguable?

Trying out Jennifer Berne's writing workshop routine while incorporating Peter Elbow's curriculum about writing and the media. This is a little tricky, but I want to integrate the critical viewing and the content with the modeling and guided practice of Dr. Berne's routine.

Writing as a Way of Being: Yagelski

In Writing as a Way of Being, Yagelski explores what anyone who has ever written something they believed at the time was important already knows: that the actual experience of writing is actually quite separate from the text. And this is why, once the piece of text is "finished" that a writer feels separate from that text, even distanced, and, I would go so far as to say somewhat depressed realizing that the "finishing" of the text was nowhere near as exhilarating as the writing itself.

Thus, when teachers talk about writing as having the potential to change things, they often overlook that it is the experience of writing that often has greater potential to move the writer to a place of greater understanding of himself and the world rather than the information in the text or the information that is communicated when someone else reads it. With an emphasis on skill-based learning and correct text production in the writing classroom, teachers and students are missing out on this, Yagelski's ontological argument.  He emphasis a pedagogy that focuses on the "writer writing" rather than the "writer's writing":

The text does not appear in this pedagogy, but rather than being the focus of writing instruction, it becomes a component of the process of inquiry into self and world that the act of writing can be.  In this way, the text becomes part of a larger act of inquiry through writing, which in turn becomes a vehicle for truth-seeking, in Couture's sense of that term. In other words, we write as a way of being together in the world -- as a way to understand ourselves and our connection to what is around us; in this formulation, we write with the text rather than to produce a text. (8)

As an answer to the thin pedagogy of skill-based pedagogy and learning correct writing, this type of pedagogy is what Yagelski calls a "pedagogy of community," and as I argue elsewhere, closer to the type of democracy we should be practicing -- inclusivity, critical engagement and participation. To make education about "rightness" or "correctness" is to narrow the purpose of education, which should be about enabling us to imagine a better more sustainable future. It requires innovation and imagination, but it also requires a connectedness with each other and our world.  It is such a limited goal to make writing about communication and being academically successful. Yet, I will admit that I have to deliberately conscious resisting such rhetoric in my teaching. If our goal is to prepare them for workplaces defined by economic globalization, we are perpetuating the status quo that has caused this crisis of sustainability (139).  It is a Western value that oppressed the "other" and exploits resources, so it is less about creating a better world and more about merely participating in a world that is already constructed for our students, a world unsustainable.

If you have ever allowed your class enough time to settle into writing, you can see the beauty of the act of writing.

Yagelski also criticized the progressive pedagogies -- which I tend to practice -- by saying that writing as political action or community service is still focused on the product and not the act. He argues that even the process movement "has effected little change when it comes to where we cast our collective gaze in our efforts to understand and teach writing: Our eyes remain fixed on the text" (144).  The cautionary message here is that if writing is reduced to writing as a skill," it is distancing the act of writing from living in all its complexity."  In other words, it limits it to an activity rather than its potential for being.  The challenge then is to teach students to learn from the and through the act of writing rather than write in the service of learning or to produce.

In line with my argument for doing inquiry, Yagelski cites Bartholomae's overarching purpose in writing as a "critical project" to cultivate a critical perspective of the world and "to help them develop a set of intellectual skills to interrogate the texts they encounter, including their own" (152).  Because Batholomae's focus in on critical academic skills, Yagelski argues that it is too narrow. That said, the part that is consistent with writing as a way of being is that " the goal isn't simply to make a better text but to provoke genuine inquiry that can lead to insight into and understanding of the issues that emerge from the writing" (152). Bartholomae's pedagogy wants to expose the master narrative that is in the essays students write and seeks to trouble the frames for producing, revising and evaluating texts -- all frames of a master narrative.  Thus, mainstream instruction that emphasized writing "good texts"  fails to interrupt the master narrative and cultural values that have produced the society that we have, the one that exploits and oppresses.

As students revise or work on drafts of any writing, Yagelski suggests a pedagogy that asks about the experience that was the focus of writing (not the text). Teaching writing is engaging in writing as an act of inquiry into their own experience of the world. Writing is participating in the world and who they are in this world.  Peer response is valuable in this pedagogy because it is an act of community building and shared meaning making and because it is not limited to improving texts.  The other side to this is that writing is individual and social. Thomas Kent wrote that there can be no meaning without the other; writing itself acknowledges the other; an individual contains many voices.

The challenge of schools, therefore, is to cultivate curricula and pedagogies that take into account the complexities of human learning and human life that is part of distinct and overlapping global communities (163). The narrow curriculum that is prescriptive and measurable is an attempt to control such complexity.

Teaching how to produce texts has not achieved the goal of teaching students how to do school nor do they use it in the workplace. But, Yagelski argues that what if we would have taught these kids writing as a way of being. Might it have "opened up a capacity of writing to understand anew their experience of themselves in the world...What might the communities they created look like?"