ENC 1101: Intro to College Writing
Section: 4405
Instructor: Gary Hink, Dept. of English
Office: Turlington 4411
E-Learning: <http://lss.at.ufl.edu>
Course blog: <http://garyhink.net/gary/S09>
– revised syllabus
Period: 3 (11am – 12:15pm)
Room: CBD 212
Email: ghink@ufl.edu
Office Hours: M&W Period 4 (and after class by appointment)
Email Listserv: Summer-4405-L@lists.ufl.edu (automatic)
Course Description and Goals
In this course, we will cover the essential elements of composing effectively at the level of sentences, paragraphs,
and overall arguments—particularly by focusing on writing clearly, coherently, and concisely. We will develop
rhetorical strategies for writing arguments in different modes, using various types of claims, evidence, and logic. In
all assignments, we will focus especially on two crucial aspects: argumentative thesis statements and audience
persuasion. Overall, we will develop critical thinking through reading and writing independently, as well as through
class discussions and activities. You will learn how to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of arguments, including
your own and your peers’ writing— we will explore how differing conventions, styles, purposes, and audiences
affect composition. Ultimately, you will develop relevant skills for future courses, especially critical reading, effective
research, cogent writing, and integrating sources responsibly, regarding documentation and plagiarism.
Required Texts
Lester Faigley and Jack Selzer, Good Reasons with Contemporary Arguments. 4th Ed. New York: Pearson, 2009.
Lester Faigley, The Brief Penguin Handbook. 3rd edition. New York: Pearson, 2009.
Assignments and Grading
Reading Responses
(2 informal papers; 500 words each; 50 total points)
Rhetorical Analysis Essay
(800-1000 words; 150 points)
Due: 08 July
Analytic Essay: Article Evaluation
(1000-1200 words; 200 points)
Due: 17 July
Rebuttal Argument Essay
(1200-1500 words; 250 points)
Due: 24 July
Project Proposal for Final Essay
(2 informal posts; 50 points)
Due: 27 July
Investigation Essay: Problem Proposal
(2000 words; 300 points)
Due: 07 August
Participation
(recorded daily; 100 points)
ENC 1101-4405 Syllabus - 2 -
Assignments and Grading – Details
– Note: Detailed assignment descriptions will appear on e-Learning.
Reading Responses
(2 @ 400-500 words each; 50 total points)
Due Dates:
First: F 04 July
Second: F 31 July
Informal response papers to topics and readings of particular weeks. The purpose of these short responses is to (1)
develop critical thinking toward articulating arguments while (2) practicing the analytical and rhetorical writing skills
that we will cover. To be submitted on e-learning either as file attachment or discussion entry.
Rhetorical Analysis: Audience
(800-1000 words; 150 points)
Due: 08 July
In this formal essay, present your analysis of a recent article or essay: describe in detail how the author tries to
persuade the implied audience through rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, and logos); additionally, discuss any
positions, values, assumptions, or stereotypes expressed by the rhetoric of the text (whether explicit or implicit).
Analytic Essay: Article Evaluation
(1000-1200 words; 200 points)
Due: 17 July
Using the library resources, you will locate and analyze an article from a subject specific journal, magazine, or
newspaper that addresses a current social, cultural, environmental, or educational issue.
For this essay, present an evaluation argument: first defining argumentative criteria for the issue at hand;
additionally, discussing specifically how this particular article’s argument fulfills this criteria. A specific task will
involve evaluating the article’s effectiveness in relation to its intended audience and rhetorical goals.
Rebuttal Argument
(1200-1500 words; 250 points)
Due: 24 July
Select an article from a newspaper, popular publication, or website; using rhetorical skills, write a rebuttal argument
in the form of a letter, blog entry, or “Op-Ed” essay. Your imagined audience to persuade is a “resistant reader,”
who fundamentally (and automatically) opposes or rejects your positions.
Investigation Essay: Problem Proposal (1800-2000 words; 300 points)
Due: 07 August
For the final paper, you will consider a contemporary problem and argue four main points: (1) what the problem is;
(2) what caused it; (3) why we should considered it a problem; and (4) what can be done about it.
Through logical and rhetorical composition, you will seek to effectively persuade an apathetic and/or unfamiliar
audience to first recognize and ideally to respond, as consequence of reading your essay.
Participation (100 points total)
For class sessions, daily credit will be earned respectively for attending (1 point) and for participating in discussion
and activities (1 point). Additionally, each Twitter entry (8-10 per week) receives 1 point. Other ungraded
assignments (e.g. bringing articles for class, posting proposal online) will receive participation credit.
ENC 1101-4405 Syllabus - 3 -
Assignments and Grading – continued
Grading Standards
Grading for this course will be strict. If a given assignment illustrates disregard for spelling, grammar, citation
guidelines, or a general carelessness in the writing, the assignment will not pass. Do not rely on me for copy-editing,
even on drafts—be sure to edit (“proofread”) and revise thoroughly before submitting your work.
Grading Scale
A
AB+
B
BC+
4.0
3.67
3.33
3.0
2.67
2.33
93-100
90-92
87-89
83-86
80-82
77-79
C
CD+
D
DE
2.0 73-76
1.67 70-72
1.33 67-69
1.0 63-66
0.67 60-62
0.00 0-59
General Education Learning Outcomes
You must pass this course with a grade of “C” or better to receive the 6,000 University Writing Requirement credit
(E6). You must turn in all papers to receive credit for writing 6,000 words. You must pass with a “C” or
better for this course to satisfy the CLAS requirement of a second Composition (C) course. If you are not in CLAS,
check the catalog or with your advisor to see if your college has other writing requirements.
Note: “C-” grade will not satisfy the University Writing Requirement or the CLAS Composition credit (C).
Academic Honesty
University of Florida students are responsible for reading, understanding, and abiding by the entire Student Honor
Code: <http://www.dso.ufl.edu/judicial/honorcode.php>. The Honor Code requires Florida students to
neither give nor receive unauthorized aid in completing all assignments.
Plagiarism is a serious violation of the Student Honor Code; consequently, any plagiarism will result in the failure of
the assignment at minimum, and evidence of willful plagiarism will result in failure of the entire class. Plagiarism
means to present the ideas and/or words of someone else as one’s own, as derived from any source or document.
The Honor Code prohibits and defines plagiarism as follows:
6. Plagiarism. A student shall not represent as the student’s own work all or any portion of the work of
another. Plagiarism includes (but is not limited to):
a.) Quoting oral or written materials, whether published or unpublished, without proper attribution.
b.) Submitting a document or assignment which in whole or in part is identical or substantially identical to a
document or assignment not authored by the student. (Univ of Florida, Student Honor Code, 15 Aug 2007)
Important: You should never copy and paste something from a document, especially from the Internet/Web; also,
never present information without providing the exact source (“location”) from which it came.
ENC 1101-4405 Syllabus - 4 -
Course Policies
Attendance
Attendance is required. The policy of the University Writing Program is that if you miss more than three periods
during the term, you will fail the entire course. The UWP exempts from this policy only those absences involving
university-sponsored events, such as athletics and band, and religious holidays. Absences related to universitysponsored events must be discussed with the instructor prior to the absence.
– Note: You are responsible for knowing due dates and for submitting assignments on time, even when absent.
Participation
Participation is a crucial part of your success in this class: in order to fully participate in class, students are expected
to complete all reading and assignments before class. You will be expected to work in small groups, participate in
group discussions, and complete various other activities. Writing workshops require that you provide constructive
feedback about your peers’ writing. In general, you are expected to contribute constructively to each class session.
Specifically, “participating” means contributing to class or group discussion without being called on—I record
participation credit daily.
Tardiness: Please do not arrive late. If you arrive after the period begins, you are late – do not assume otherwise.
– Note: tardiness lowers daily participation credit. Finally, three tardies will equate to one absence.
Class Preparation
Assignments are due at the beginning of class—especially drafts for peer review sessions. You must be present for
all in-class writings and workshops to receive credit for them. In-class work cannot be made up.
Note: Late papers will not be accepted. Also, technological excuses are not acceptable – correct and operative files
must be uploaded to e-Learning, as attachments. Files must be .doc or .rtf. Essay formatting: all formal papers must
be in 10- or 12-point Times New Roman font, double-spaced with 1-inch margins.
Be sure to fasten final and rough drafts before submitting print copies, (e.g. paper clip, please).
– Electronic communication: Be sure to check your UF email frequently, for class updates by listserv.
Also, I strongly suggest corresponding with me by email (UF only), especially about absences and assignments.
Class Conduct
The environment of this class will be supportive of learning and the respectful exchange of ideas. Behavior that
disrupts this environment will not be tolerated: e.g. offensive language, personal attacks, or any derogatory
statements. Students are expected to show respect for diverse opinions during class discussions and in their writing;
please keep in mind that students come from diverse cultural, economic, and ethnic backgrounds. Additionally,
students who disrupt discussion or activities will be asked to leave and counted absent for that day.
– Note: cell phones must be turned off at the start of class—I expect full attention, free from electronic distraction
Students with Disabilities
The University of Florida complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Students requesting accommodation
should contact the Students with Disabilities Office, Peabody 202. That office will provide documentation to the
student, who must then provide this documentation to the instructor when requesting accommodation.
ENC 1101-4405 Syllabus - 5 -
Course Schedule
Subject to change – always follow updates from class and email.
Week 1:
Revised: 28 June 2009
29 June – 03 July
M
Introduction
T
Read for class discussion:
Danah Boyd, “Facebook's 'Privacy Trainwreck': Exposure, Invasion, and Drama.” Good Reasons 595-602
John Seigenthaler, “A False Wikipedia ‘Biography’.” GR pp. 579-82
Penguin: Chp 1 (1-6) & Chp 18 Evaluate Web Sources (189-99)
W
Due:
Diagnostic Essay (ungraded)
Read:
Good Reasons, pp. 5-29 (Arguments)
Penguin Chp 5 “Critical Reading” (47-54)
– logical fallacies
– Discuss: Ethos, Pathos, Logos appeals; logical fallacies; rhetorical analysis
R
Read:
Good Reasons, pp. 77-102 (Analyzing Written Arguments)
Penguin Chp 6 (55-60 Rhet. Analysis)
– Discuss: Rhetorical Analysis Assignment (Introduction) – select article over weekend.
F
Due:
Week 2:
M
Read:
Response (1) to online articles
No Class – Holiday
06 July – 10 July
Good Reasons, pp. 52-65 (Drafting and Revising Arguments)
Penguin Chp 2. Plan/Draft (7-19); Chp 3. Organization (21-37)
– In-class exercise: Article Analysis – rhetoric, audience, ideology
T
Due:
Draft of Rhetorical Analysis Essay – Peer Review
– In-class exercise: developing thesis (review Penguin pp. 14-7)
W
Due:
Rhetorical Analysis Essay
R
Good Reasons, pp. 153-168 (Evaluation Arguments)
F
Discuss: Evaluation Arguments (Assignment)
– In-class: find / select article to analyze.
ENC 1101-4405 Syllabus - 6 -
Week 3:
M
13 July – 17 July
Todd Gitlin, “Under the Sign of Mickey Mouse & Co.” Good Reasons pp. 415-9
Laura Carlsen, “Wal-Mart vs. Pyramids” Good Reasons, pp. 422-3
– Discuss / In-class exercise: evaluation of Gitlin and Carlsen essays.
T
Read (and bring for in-class exercise): Article selected for Evaluation Essay.
Penguin Chp 33. Fragments & Run-on Sentences (404-13)
W
Penguin: Chp 4. Revising & Peer Review (37-45).
Penguin Chp 27. Write with Power (359-64) and Chp. 29 Emphasis 371-8
– Discuss / In-class exercise: Effective style / composition
R
Due:
Evaluation Essay – Peer Review
F
Due:
Evaluation Essay
Week 4:
M
20 July – 24 July
Good Reasons, pp. 30-51 (Finding Arguments) & pp. 183-190 (Rebuttal Arguments)
Penguin: Chp 9 Position Arg (incl. “arguable claim”) 85-92; Proposal Arg 97-9
– Discuss: Rebuttal Argument (Assignment)
T
— Read description over weekend.
Thomas Homer-Dixon and S. Julio Friedmann, “Coal in a Nice Shade of Green.” Good Reasons, pp. 215-7
Alex Williams, “Buying into the Green Movement.” Good Reasons, pp. 345-61
Penguin Chp 28. Writing Concisely (365-71)
– Discuss / In-class exercise: diction, concise (re)phrasing, summary of essay.
W
Read / Bring: Article or editorial to respond (rebuttal)
Penguin Chp 30. “Finding the Right Words” (379-86) & Chp 31. Inclusive Lang. (386-92)
– Discuss / In-class exercise: rhetorical & persuasive strategies (“resistant readers”)
R
Due:
Draft of Rebuttal Argument Essay – Peer Review
F
Due:
Rebuttal Argument
ENC 1101-4405 Syllabus - 7 -
Week 5:
M
27 July – 31 July
Due:
Project Proposal: final essay (informal) – essay topic, description, potential argument, etc.
Read:
Good Reasons, pp. 197-203 (Proposal Arguments)
Rachel Carson, “The Obligation to Endure” Good Reasons, pp. 19-21
– Discuss: Proposal / Problem Assignment
T
— Read description over weekend.
David Engber, “Global Swarming” <http://www.slate.com/id/2173458/pagenum/all/> 10 Sep 2007
Penguin, Chp 16 Plan Your Research (165-79)
– Discuss / In-class exercise: research & develop Proposal Argument topics
W
Due:
Final Essay Proposal (revised / updated)
Read:
Barron YoungSmith, “The Environmental Case Against Long-distance Relationships”
< http://www.slate.com/id/2202431/pagenum/all/> 04 Feb 2009
Penguin: Chp 17 Finding sources” (180-85)
R
Penguin Chp 22 Write and Revise the Research Project (225-36)
– Discuss / In-class exercise: developing Proposal Argument topics with sources.
F
Due:
Week 6:
M
Response (2) to Engber or YoungSmith
03 August – 07 August
Good Reasons, pp. 29-48 (Citation Basics)
Penguin Chp 21 Plagiarism (218-24) & Integrating Sources (213-7 + 22d: pp.228-33)
– Discuss / In-class exercise: integrating sources as support.
T
Penguin Documentation pp.237-44; APA style (297-318) or MLA style (245-81)
– In-class exercise: revision (macro- and micro-level organization)
W
Due: Draft of Proposal Argument Essay – Peer Review
R
Due: Extra Credit assignment (optional)
Discuss: course wrap-up & evaluations
F
Due: Proposal Essay
Note: bring essay outline.
– Penguin p.234