AP English Language and Composition: All Politics is Language
Ms. Baker
This course is designed to prepare you to be thoughtful, skilled and confident in independent and collaborative collegelevel reading, writing, speaking, listening and researching. We approach these processes as overlapping and recursive—
comprising critical reading and interpreting, refining understanding through testing hypotheses, challenging assumptions
and dialoguing with others, conducting inquiry by developing personally meaningful questions then seeking out and
evaluating new sources, perspectives and layers of answers, adapting approaches to generate insight, and planning,
drafting, revising and reflecting on your articulation of findings for clarity, complexity, effect and implications for future
action.
The Essential Learning Objectives of this course state that you will learn to
 Recognize and apply effective strategies in different writing modes
 Read, analyze and synthesize complex texts and evidence purposefully to generate and support sophisticated, multistage writing tasks
 Produce complex, analytic, persuasive arguments that matter in academic contexts, including examinations
 Develop effective strategies for revising, editing and proofreading your writing to achieve greater depth and clarity of
ideas.
The course’s goal is for you to achieve these objectives at the college level. To do so requires you
 Experiment and explore to hone your ideas and expression in response to others’—peers, writers and instructor
 Engage by preparing for and participating in conversation, collaboration, self- and peer-assessment and application of
what you learn to develop a range of tools, resources and experiences for your future use
 Self-direct your learning—take ownership, initiate problem-solving action, persist in the face of difficulty or confusion
at the level and intensity expected from a college student.
Timeline
Feb 2
Feb 3
Feb 8
Feb 10
Feb 16
Feb 21
Feb 22
March 6
March 7
March 13
March 14
March 20
Apr 10
Apr 11, 12, 13, 14
Apr 18
May 1
May x
May 23
Jun 5
If…: Orwell’s Shooting An Elephant (SpringBoard)
Then… Orwell’s Why I Write
Words Can Break Bones: Orwell’s Politics and the English Language
Truth Can Hurt Me: Orwell’s Appendix to 1984 (available from library)
Orwell Analysis 1 DUE
Orwell Analysis 2 DUE
Conferences on Research for Orwell Synthesis
Orwell Synthesis DUE
Unfitting News!: New York Times Retraction
NYT Analysis DUE
WTI?!: Tompkins’ Indians, Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History
Tompkins Analysis DUE (optional replacement for previous analysis)
Tompkins Evaluation DUE
MIDTERM EXAMINATION
Getting to Know You: Geertz’ Deep Play
Geertz Evaluation DUE
AP Language Exam
Blinded by Science: Science Spoof!
Bohannon/Ionnides Synthesis DUE. UW Portfolio DUE. Final deadline for submitting
complete Portfolio Items for credit is MIDNIGHT on turnitin.com.
Course Grading Formula
Synthesis Essays
Evaluation Essays
Analysis Essays
Midterm Examination
25%
20%
30%
25%
Course Grading Formula—AP-UW Hybrid
Portfolio
70%
Drafts
30%
Grading Rubric
Outstanding (3.7-4.0): Offers a highly proficient, even memorable demonstration of the writing trait(s) including some
appropriate risk-taking and/or creativity.
Strong (3.1-3.6): Offers a proficient demonstration of the writing trait(s) which could be further enhanced with revision.
Good (2.5-3.0): Effectively demonstrates the writing trait(s), but less proficiently; could use revision to demonstrate more
skillful and nuanced command of trait(s).
Acceptable (2.0-2.4): Minimally meets the basic outcome(s) requirement, but the demonstrated writing trait(s) are not fully
realized or well-controlled and would benefit from significant revision.
Inadequate (0.6-1.9): Does not meet the outcome(s) requirement; the writing trait(s) are not adequately demonstrated and
require substantial revision on multiple levels.
Incomplete (no grade but equivalent to 0): Does not meet the minimum standards for evaluation.
Writing Outcomes and Traits
Outcome 1. To demonstrate an awareness of the strategies that writers use in different rhetorical situations:
1.1 Readings recognize and writing employs strategies appropriate to the demands of a particular genre, medium
and/or mode.
1.2 Readings recognize and writing shows a clear understanding of its academic audience and various aspects of
writing (mode of inquiry, content, structure, appeals, diction and word choice) address and are strategically
pitched to that audience.
1.3 Analyses demonstrate the ability to read texts intended for different audiences and contexts.
1.4 The student articulates and assesses the effects of his/her and others’ writing choices.
Outcome 2. To read, analyze, and synthesize complex texts purposefully in order to generate and support writing:
2.1 The writing demonstrates an understanding of the readings/evidence as necessary for the purpose at hand. This
requires that:
a. Readings demonstrate an understanding of a work’s complexity.
b. Readings encompass the richness of a work’s meaning.
c. Readings analyze how that meaning is embodied in literary form.
d. Readings reflect on the social and historical values the work embodies.
2.2 Readings/evidence are used in strategic, focused ways (for example: summarized, cited, applied, challenged, recontextualized) to support the goals of the writing.
2.3 The writing is intertextual, meaning that a "conversation" between texts and ideas is created in support of the
writer's goals. (AP refers to this as “synthesis.”)
2.4 The writer utilizes multiple kinds of evidence gathered from various sources (for example: primary, secondary,
textual and multimedia) in support of the writer’s goals.
Outcome 3. To produce complex, analytic, persuasive arguments that matter in formal academic contexts:
3.1 The argument is appropriately complex, based in a claim that emerges from and explores a line of inquiry.
3.2 The stakes of the argument, why what is being argued matters, are articulated and persuasive.
3.3 The argument involves analysis, which is the close scrutiny and examination of evidence and assumptions in
support of a larger set of ideas.
3.4 The argument is persuasive, taking into consideration counterclaims and multiple points of view as it generates its
own perspective and position.
Outcome 4. To develop effective strategies for planning, drafting, revising, editing, and proofreading writing:
4.1 The writing demonstrates successful revision, resulting in work that meets CCSS standards in language, conventions
and style and is characterized by the following (from AP):
 Wide-ranging vocabulary used with denotative accuracy and connotative resourcefulness.
 Variety of sentence structures including appropriate use of subordinate and coordinate constructions.
 Logical organization enhanced by specific techniques of coherence (such as repetition, transitions,
emphasis).
 Balance of generalization with specific, illustrative detail.
 Effective use of rhetoric including controlled tone and consistent voice.
4.2 The writing demonstrates responsible use of the MLA system of documenting sources.
Grading Scale
JHS Honors Scale
3.3-4.0
3.0-3.2
2.7-2.9
2.3-2.6
2.0-2.2
1.8-1.9
1.4-1.7
1.1-1.3
0.9-1.0
0.7-0.8
0.0-0.6
Transcript Grade
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
CD+
D
F
Major Assignments
Cruelty to Humans (Orwell Analysis 1)
Produce an explication of Orwell’s use of elements of narrative structure and style for communicating meaning in Shooting
An Elephant using Why I Write as background information for author’s purpose and context.
Respond to the prompt: In Why I Write Orwell critiques the relationship between motivations and strategies of authors.
Orwell himself made particular choices in composing Shooting An Elephant. Carefully consider each text in relation to the
other. Then, argue how an analysis of Shooting An Elephant adds complexity, depth and/or richness to the argument of
Why I Write. Avoid mere comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating arguments and evidence
from both texts
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of Shooting’s structural and stylistic elements/ strategies relevant to your thesis
 lay out a close reading of passages elucidating Why I Write’s claims/concepts relevant to your thesis
 accurately apply the class definitions for strategies, elements of literature and devices
 analyze a variety/range of connections within and between the two readings, including both convergence and
divergence
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
This Better Be Doubleplusgood! (Orwell Analysis 2)
Produce an explication of Orwell’s use of different stylistic techniques to achieve the shared purpose of Politics and the
English Language and Appendix of 1984.
Respond to the prompt: In Politics Orwell evaluates the real-world effect of language choices by politicians and those with
political motives. As part of his dystopic novel 1984, Orwell made the choice to include an appendix (footnoted at the very
beginning of the book). Carefully compare the purpose and style (wording, tone, devices) of each text. Then, argue how
an analysis of the style of Appendix adds complexity, depth and/or richness to the arguments of Politics. Avoid mere
comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating arguments and evidence
from both texts
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of Appendix’ stylistic elements/strategies relevant to your thesis
 lay out a close reading of passages elucidating Politics’ claims/concepts relevant to your thesis
 accurately apply the class definitions for strategies, elements of literature and devices
 analyze a variety/range of connections within and between the two readings, including both convergence and
divergence
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
Triplespeak (Orwell Synthesis)
Compose an original, formal, research essay developed from re-thinking Orwell and close reading and rhetorical analysis
of sources you independently research. Synthesize selected evidence from 3 primary sources related to a political conflict
you select with evidence from Orwell to add complexity, depth and/or richness to an academic audience’s existing
understanding of that conflict.
Respond to the prompt: Orwell’s works argue in varied ways that the use of language often has political motives and
political consequences. Consider them carefully, then apply their most significant, relevant arguments to primary sources
representative of a recent/current political conflict to articulate your own insight, challenge, exploration or examination of
Orwell’s ideas and their applicability to political language today. Avoid mere summary or comparison/ contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >1,000 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating evidence from sources
and readings
 rhetorically analyze relevant passages/material from 3 primary sources representing “official” communications of
involved parties related to one political conflict—for example, one source could be governmental (such as agency,
police chief, etc), one opposition (such as protestor, rebel, etc), and one third party (such as outside organizations—
UN, Amnesty International, etc) NO news reporting
 close read credible secondary source material to corroborate details of conflict (YES news reporting)
 contextualize the relationship of primary sources to each other and to secondary source material for relevant details
in a literature review
 close read relevant passages encompassing at least one major COMPLEX claim from each of Orwell’s works
 analyze a variety/range of connections within and between the readings and sources, including both convergences
and divergences
 include support source material and/or tertiary sources for establishing the credibility, authorship and/or context of
sources
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with correct MLA in-text and works cited format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
Erratum (New York Times Analysis)
Produce an explication of the New York Times’ editors’ use of elements of expository structure and style for
communicating meaning/purpose in an official retraction by The New York Times using at least 2 professional secondary
sources as background information for authors’ purpose and context.
Respond to the prompt: In its official retraction of its writer’s journalism, the editors of the New York Times had multiple
and even competing purposes and audiences. After informing yourself about the Blair case by reading other sources,
argue how an analysis of the strategies the editors use in this text adds complexity, depth and/or richness to the argument
being made, including how manipulation by the editors may not succeed with some audiences. Avoid mere summary.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating arguments and evidence
from the text and other sources
 lay out a close reading of passages elucidating the text’s claims/concepts
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of the text’s structural and stylistic elements/strategies
 accurately apply the class definitions for strategies, elements of literature and devices
 include support source material and/or tertiary sources for establishing an understanding of content, audience,
purpose and context of the text
 analyze a variety/range of audiences, effects and strategies, including contradictions or oppositions
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text and works cited format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
Believe Half of What You See (Optional Tompkins Analysis)
Produce an explication of Tompkins’ use of elements of argumentative structure and style pitched for her specific
audience, purpose and context for communicating meaning in Indians.
Respond to the prompt: In Indians Tompkins critically reads works from different authors on her subject. Tompkins herself
made particular choices in her treatment of the subject. Carefully read both her and her cited works’ treatment of the
subject. Then, argue how an analysis of Tompkins’ strategies as a writer adds complexity, depth and/or richness to the
argument of Indians. Avoid mere summary or comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating analysis of the main and
cited texts
 lay out a close reading of passages elucidating Indians’ claims/concepts
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of Indians’ structural and stylistic strategies
 accurately apply the class definitions for strategies, elements of literature and devices
 analyze a variety/range of connections between the main text and cited texts, including both convergence and
divergence
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline.
Believe None of What You Read (Tompkins Evaluation)
Produce an evaluation of Tompkins’ essay’s success as a challenge to the “canon” (structuralism) governing the genre,
subject and disposition of an academic research essay in the field of history prior to her writing.
Respond to the prompt: In Indians Tompkins took up an ideological stance toward data and methods she would use to
discuss her subject. After informing yourself about poststructuralism by reading other sources, argue how an analysis of
Tompkins’ evidence and approach adds complexity, depth and/or richness to an academic audience’s understanding of
poststructuralism as a critical theory. Avoid mere summary or comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating analysis of the reading
with information from sources
 lay out a close reading of passages discussing Indians’ evidence
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of Indians’ argumentative strategies
 analyze a variety/range of connections between the ideology of poststructuralism and the text, including both
convergence and divergence
 include support source material and/or tertiary sources for establishing an understanding of the ideological context
of the author and text
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text and works cited format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
Chicken! (Geertz Evaluation)
Produce an evaluation of Geertz’ Deep Play as a challenge to the “canon” (scientism) governing the genre, subject and
disposition of an academic research essay in the field of anthropology prior to his writing.
Respond to the prompt: In Deep Play Geertz took up an ideological stance toward data and methods he would use to
discuss his subject. After informing yourself about thick description by reading other sources, argue how an analysis of
Geertz’ evidence and approach adds complexity, depth and/or richness to an academic audience’s understanding of thick
description as a critical theory. Avoid mere summary or comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating analysis of the reading
with information from sources
 lay out a close reading of passages discussing Deep Play’s evidence
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of Deep Play’s argumentative strategies
 analyze a variety/range of connections between the ideology of thick description and the text, including both
convergence and divergence
 include support source material and/or tertiary sources for establishing an understanding of the ideological context
of the author and text
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text and works cited format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
Plays Well With Others (Bohannon/Ionnides Synthesis)
Produce a critical synthesis of the argument promulgated by Bohannon and the methodology/analysis of evidence in
contemporary, real-world academic texts. This will require you to develop a complex, original line of inquiry through close
reading, rhetorical analysis and intertextual conversation to articulate your own insight, challenge, exploration or
examination of Bohannon’s ideas and their applicability to different areas of research. To meet the minimum standards for
credit you must:
Compose an original, formal, research essay developed from close reading Bohannon and Ionnides and close reading
and rhetorical analysis of sources you independently research. Synthesize selected evidence from 3 academic research
articles related to one topic you select with evidence from Bohannon and Ionnides to add complexity, depth and/or
richness to an academic audience’s understanding of issues of credibility, persuasiveness, value and quality of academic
research.
Respond to the prompt: Bohannon and Ionnides argue that there are systemic problems with the validity of current
academic research methods and application. Consider their reasoning and evidence carefully, then apply their most
significant, relevant arguments to sources representative of academic research on a single topic of your choice to
articulate your own insight, challenge, exploration or examination of Bohannon’s and Ionnides’ findings and their
applicability to research in the future. Avoid mere summary or comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >1,000 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating evidence from sources
and readings
 rhetorically analyze relevant passages/material from 3 sources representing peer-reviewed academic research on a
single topic
 contextualize the relationship of research sources’ data, methods, findings and publication to each other in a
literature review
 close read relevant passages encompassing at least one major COMPLEX claim from Bohannon and from Ionnides
 analyze a variety/range of connections within and between the readings and sources, including both convergences
and divergences
 include support source material and/or tertiary sources for establishing the production, authorship and/or context of
sources
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with correct MLA in-text and works cited format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.
AP-UW Portfolio
Must contain the following items for credit:
1. Selected, final Analysis Essay meeting minimum standards
2. Selected, final Evaluation Essay meeting minimum standards
3. Selected, final Synthesis Essay meeting minimum standards
4. Final Evaluation meeting minimum standards
Must be submitted to turnitin.com by final deadline for credit
AP-UW Final Evaluation
Compose a formal letter addressed to your “13th year” organization/school/program, in which you

summarize the process you developed for researching and writing during this course

evaluate your Portfolio’s strengths and weaknesses for each course outcome

lay out next steps for addressing weaknesses relevant to researching and writing in your chosen discipline.
Daily Class Activities and Notes
February 2
Ready to s t r e t c h your skills and knowledge from Fall?
Matthew Arnold, an eminent literary critic, says in Culture and Anarchy,
…culture is "the disinterested and active use of reading, reflection and observation…[true culture] consists in becoming
something rather than in having something, an inward condition of the mind and spirit [whose aim is a] perfection in which
characters of beauty and intelligence are both present, which unites 'the two noblest things,' sweetness and light." (qtd in
Appiah "Racial Identities" 53)
We start this semester with a piece of nonfiction that, unlike Rodriguez, Anzaldúa and Baldwin, incorporates all the
structural AND stylistic elements of literature you would find for fiction—you know, your favs:
Setting
Characterization
Plot Structure
Theme
Narration/Point of View
Style
Tone
Literary Devices.
Considering the effect on meaning of ALL of these in nonfiction, where they are applicable, adds richness and depth
to…wait for it…
Close Reading at the College Level
This isn’t only reading—it’s writing and thinking, too. To complete a close reading you follow these steps:
1. Decode the text to “get” its meaning (look up interfering “known unknowns”).
2. State a hypothesis: ____ is the significant idea this text argues is true/should be accepted. This should be the overall
theme/purpose*
3. Cite the location of necessary data from the text using MLA to clearly, honestly and comprehensively capture
where/how this argument shows up in the text—explicitly and implicitly, agreeable to you and not.
4. Justify how the details in your cited data MEAN what you SAY is the argument of the text, by themselves and in
context of the whole work (this is taking your interpretation hypothesis…and adding data analysis to back it up)—where
elements of literature are used, this is literary analysis of those elements.
5. Draw its implications: __ is how this text’s argument likely relates to argument(s) above and beyond it that I think are
worth pursuing.
* The operational definition of the term “meaning” for AP is complex. That is, it…ahem…means different things:
 the connotations and denotations of the words in the text (what it actually says implicitly and explicitly) AND/OR
 the argument or theme of the work (what if taken together the text proves/tests for the reader) AND/OR
 the author’s purpose for writing the work (what the work was intended to do/cause/be in the real world of the
author)—this is sometimes close to its theme/argument but, logically, always broader. Think: why write this work
this way at this time for this audience—instead of other ways/works/times/audiences.
Author’s purpose is, by definition, logically related to what you were taught for creative literature as a work’s theme. Many
analysts have difficulty differentiating them from each other. Try this to help YOU do it:
Theme is the message to the reader the author communicates through his/her story’s argument.
Purpose is the MOTIVATION the author has to create THAT story when, where, for whom and how he/she did.
Thus, theme is an outcome. The author’s motivation to achieve__( goal)__ CAUSES him/her to create a story that shows
_(a specific argument) for his/her intended readers and contemporary context. This CAUSE in the real world leads to the
outcome that appears in the form of the story.
Today, decode Shooting An Elephant (in the SpringBoard books), gathering data that will make it possible for you to,
ultimately, explicate it.
Spoiler…
What’s an explication? It’s the official name for the formal analysis in any discipline (you can explicate a building design, a
grant proposal, a piece of art, a patient’s treatment plan, etc). For literary analysis, it proves you’re right about
WHAT the elements of a literary work are [you accurately applied the definition],
HOW they work together [you accurately traced shared relationships/ overlapping patterns]
and
WHY they have an impact on the meaning of the work [you logically laid out the steps of cause to effect]
Explication logically proves default claims about a narrative’s structural elements (we’ll be adding stylistic elements later):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The use of A, B, C setting(s) accomplishes ___ in the work
The use of A, B, C characterization accomplishes ___ in the work
The use of A, B, C plot structure accomplishes ___ in the work
The use of A, B, C aspects of narration accomplishes ___ in the work.
X theme is the best definition of the work’s message to the reader communicated by the use of A, B, C elements
in the work
February 3
Judith Butler, pioneer gender theorist and literary critic says,
We [must] submit ourselves to a process of cultural translation. The point is not to assimilate foreign or unfamiliar notions
of humanness into our own as if it is simply a matter of incorporating alienness into an established lexicon. Cultural
translation is also a process of yielding our most fundamental categories, that is, seeing how and why they break up,
require resignification when they encounter the limits of an available episteme: what is unknown or not yet known. It is
crucial to recognize that the notion of the human will only be built over time in and by the process of cultural translation,
where it is not a translation between two languages that stay enclosed, distinct, unified. But rather, translation will compel
each language to change in order to apprehend the other, and this apprehension, at the limit of what is familiar, parochial,
and already known, will be the occasion for both an ethical and social transformation. It will constitute a loss, a
disorientation, but one in which the human stands a chance of coming into being anew. ("Beside Oneself" 130-1)
Which just might be the best segue ever between Shooting An Elephant and another piece by Orwell, this one less
“literary” more “expository” nonfiction: Why I Write.
Close read the argument and choices about how to make it in this text (handouts) as if you were answering the default AP
exam text prompt*:
In a well-supported essay, analyze the techniques the author uses to communicate his/her argument in this text. Avoid
mere summary.
*This is also explication, just not of literary elements (instead it’s rhetorical and argumentative elements)!
Hint: If you’re struggling to see “choices”/ “techniques” of an author—EVEN AFTER REVIEWING my Methods of Argument
and Literary Devices glossary online—consider how different the approach to the audience (wording, organization, tone,
etc) and “proof” of theme (types of “evidence,” assumptions about the audience’s sympathies/politics, etc) are in this from
the narration of Shooting an Elephant.
February 5
Review what you are going to USE these readings for:
Cruelty to Humans (Orwell Analysis 1)
Produce an explication of Orwell’s use of elements of narrative structure and style for communicating meaning in Shooting
An Elephant using Why I Write as background information for author’s purpose and context.
Respond to the prompt: In Why I Write Orwell critiques the relationship between motivations and strategies of authors.
Orwell himself made particular choices in composing Shooting An Elephant. Carefully consider each text in relation to the
other. Then, argue how an analysis of Shooting An Elephant adds complexity, depth and/or richness to the argument of
Why I Write. Avoid mere comparison/contrast.
To meet the minimum AP standard you must:
 meet length requirement of >500 words
 meet CCSS language, conventions and style standards
 support a clear, complex, significant and manageable argumentative thesis by integrating arguments and evidence
from both texts
 lay out a rhetorical analysis of Shooting’s structural and stylistic elements/ strategies relevant to your thesis
 lay out a close reading of passages elucidating Why I Write’s claims/concepts relevant to your thesis
 accurately apply the class definitions for strategies, elements of literature and devices
 analyze a variety/range of connections within and between the two readings, including both convergence and
divergence
 cite paraphrases, quotations and/or other material used with applicable MLA in-text format
 submit to turnitin.com by deadline or lose .2 per calendar day from grade.