Ethnic and Third World Literature
Ethnic and Third World Literature

Megan Eatman


Contact

Courses


RHE 309S • Crit Read And Persuasive Writ

45060 • Spring 2014
Meets MW 2:00PM-3:30PM FAC 9

RHE 309S, Critical Reading and Persuasive Writing, is a Writing Flag designated course in argumentation designed for, but not limited to, students who have earned placement credit for RHE 306, Rhetoric and Composition.  Like RHE 306, RHE 309S teaches students how to analyze and write arguments, but it also introduces students to rhetoric as a civic art, one that prepares them to write to and for the public.  The aims of RHE 309S are to teach students:

•     to identify, evaluate, construct, and organize effective arguments;

•     to read texts and images critically;

•     to understand public writing;

•     to conduct library research and document sources;

•     to produce a clear and supple style adaptable to various rhetorical situa­tions;

•     to edit and proofread their own and others’ prose.

 Individual sections of RHE 309S will vary in emphasis and outlook, but classes will share the following pedagogical methods and goals: 

•     Students should write three major arguments focusing on different themes or subjects dealing with public issues and affairs. At least one of these papers should entail library research and significant practice in documen­tation. 

•     Students should be guided through a process of writing, preparing drafts of most assignments.

•     Students should participate in rough-draft workshops or showcases of their work.

•     Students should practice editing and proofreading their papers care­fully to eliminate errors in grammar, mechanics, and usage.

RHE 310 • Intermed Expository Writing

44207 • Fall 2012
Meets MW 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 6

RHE 310 is an intermediate-level workshop in writing and editing designed for students who have started to get serious about learning how to make their prose sing. The emphasis is on the nuts and bolts of style, specifically, readability.  The course teaches you to identify what makes for good (and bad) prose and how to apply that knowledge when editing your own and others’ writing.

Students will write several short pieces for class, some of them essays, others more offbeat, and then get to see these pieces carefully edited by both your instructor and your classmates.  Although 310 offers help with the entire writing process, editing is the chief focus of most class meetings. Different students will volunteer every two weeks to showcase their latest work, that is, they’ll distribute copies of it, and read it aloud for immediate feedback, both oral and written, by the class.  All the remaining papers, meanwhile, are read outside of class, with each class member being responsible for line-editing about one-third of them, a different third, each set.  To ensure systematic coverage of mechanics, about 20 minutes of instruction each class is set aside for tips on how to identify and fix common problems of grammar, punctuation, and usage.

Grading:

This course uses the Learning Record Online for assessment, where students compile a portfolio of work throughout the semester and use this portfolio as evidence for learning.

You can read more about The Learning Record at http://www.learningrecord.org/

Textbooks:

Writing in the Works, Susan Blau and Kathryn Burak

Other texts TBD

E 314L • Banned Books And Novel Ideas

34540 • Fall 2011
Meets TTH 3:30PM-5:00PM BEN 1.124

Prerequisites: E 603A, RHE 306, 306Q, or T C 603A.

Description: According to the Miller Test, a series of guidelines for determining legal obscenity in the United States, obscene material must lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” In other words, the First Amendment protects offensive works as long as they have one of these redeeming qualities. While seemingly straightforward, this standard raises questions. Who determines what constitutes “serious” literary value? Who determines what constitutes “offense?” In this class, we will discuss works that exist at the intersection of these two realms. These works have been banned, challenged, or otherwise critiqued on the grounds that they violated contemporary standards of decency, but many audiences consider them great literature in spite of (or, perhaps, because of) the boundaries they break. We will consider how each text operates in different historical contexts and use the works themselves and the debates that surround them to engage with questions of censorship, obscenity and artistic merit.

This course helps students prepare for upper-division English classes (as well as a wide range of upper-division courses in other UT programs and departments) by focusing on close reading and critical writing, and by introducing formal, historical, and cultural approaches to literary texts. Students will learn how to use the online Oxford English Dictionary as well as other resources essential to literary study.

Possible texts include: The Awakening, Kate Chopin; Lolita, Vladimir Nabokov; Beloved, Toni Morrison; Howl, Allen Ginsberg. Additional readings will be provided in a course reader.

Requirements & Grading: 3 critical essays (2-4 pages)—30%; 1 research paper and revision (5-8 pages)—30%; reading journals—20%; homework, classwork, quizzes—10%; presentation—10%.

RHE F306 • Rhetoric And Writing

87965 • Summer 2011
Meets MTWTHF 11:30AM-1:00PM PAR 310

Multiple meeting times and sections. Please consult the Course Schedule for unique numbers.

This does NOT meet the Writing Flag requirement.

This composition course provides instruction in the gathering and evaluation of information and its presentation in well-organized expository prose. Students ordinarily write and revise four papers. The course includes instruction in invention, arrangement, logic, style, revision, and strategies of research.

Course centered around the First-Year Forum (FYF) selected readings. Students focus on the foundational knowledge and skills needed for college writing. In addition, they are introduced to basic rhetoric terms and learn to rhetorically analyze positions within controversies surrounding the FYF readings.

RHE 306 is required of all UT students. Contact the Measurement and Evaluation Center, 2616 Wichita (471-3032) to petition for RHE 306 credit.

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Tragedy

44700 • Spring 2011
Meets MW 2:00PM-3:30PM PAR 6

Tragedy often leaves us with questions: why did this event happen? How should we respond? Who, if anyone, should we blame? Conventional wisdom suggests that if we do not learn something from a tragedy -- in other words, if we do not construct meaning in the tragedy’s wake -- then we do an injustice to the deceased. Tragedies pose questions and demand answers, and public responses to tragedy suggest answers by addressing how affected parties should understand and respond to specific tragic events. These responses can vary immensely even within discourse on a single tragedy. While some post-tragedy debates loom larger in public memory than others (for example, the debates concerning the proper response to 9/11), all tragedies, from the earthquake in Haiti to Michael Jackson’s death, are sites of contestation.

In this class, we will examine tragedies as occasions for making meaning, treating each response to tragedy as an argument for a particular understanding of the event. For the purposes of this class, we will think of “tragedy” not as an event, but as a post-event construction; in other words, any event that is presented as a tragedy in public discourse is open for examination. We will analyze written and spoken responses to tragedies, identifying and analyzing the various strategies authors use to persuade their particular audiences to feel, believe, or act a certain way in relation to a tragic event. We will also discuss these arguments in relation to the larger public construction of the event by taking an analytic approach to “objective” news coverage, discussing this coverage (what is included, what is highlighted, what is omitted) as an argument as well. In the last unit, we will focus on images as arguments, engaging with a wide variety of relevant visual texts.

Required Texts

Everything’s an Argument, Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz
The World is a Text, Silverman and Rader
The 9/11 Commission Report: A Graphic Adaptation, Jacobson and Colon
Assorted handouts

Grading Criteria

Paper 1.1: Advisory
Paper 1.2: 10%
Paper 2.1: 10%
Paper 2.2: 20%
Paper 3.1: 10%
Paper 3.2: 20%
Five short writing assignments: 15%
In-class assignments and forum posts: 10%
SPURS participation and peer review: 5%
Peer Review: Mandatory

RHE 309K • Rhetoric Of Tragedy

44020 • Fall 2010
Meets MW 12:30PM-2:00PM FAC 9

Tragedy often leaves us with questions: why did this event happen? How should we respond? Who, if anyone, should we blame? Conventional wisdom suggests that if we do not learn something from a tragedy -- in other words, if we do not construct meaning in the tragedy’s wake -- then we do an injustice to the deceased. Tragedies pose questions and demand answers, and public responses to tragedy suggest answers by addressing how affected parties should understand and respond to specific tragic events. These responses can vary immensely even within discourse on a single tragedy. While some post-tragedy debates loom larger in public memory than others (for example, the debates concerning the proper response to 9/11), all tragedies, from the earthquake in Haiti to Michael Jackson’s death, are sites of contestation.

In this class, we will examine tragedies as occasions for making meaning, treating each response to tragedy as an argument for a particular understanding of the event. For the purposes of this class, we will think of “tragedy” not as an event, but as a post-event construction; in other words, any event that is presented as a tragedy in public discourse is open for examination. We will analyze written and spoken responses to tragedies, identifying and analyzing the various strategies authors use to persuade their particular audiences to feel, believe, or act a certain way in relation to a tragic event. We will also discuss these arguments in relation to the larger public construction of the event by taking an analytic approach to “objective” news coverage, discussing this coverage (what is included, what is highlighted, what is omitted) as an argument as well. In the last unit, we will focus on images as arguments, engaging with a wide variety of relevant visual texts.

Required Texts
Everything’s an Argument, Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz
Easy Writer, Lunsford
The 9/11 Commission Report: A Graphic Adaptation, Jacobson and Colon
Assorted handouts

Grading Criteria
Paper 1.1: Advisory
Paper 1.2: 10%
Paper 2.1: 10%
Paper 2.2: 20%
Paper 3.1: 10%
Paper 3.2: 20%
Five short writing assignments: 15%
In-class assignments and forum posts: 10%
SPURS participation and peer review: 5%
Peer Review: Mandatory

Profile Pages