1. [From 10$/Pg] Lower Order Editing Concerns
[From 10$/Pg] Lower Order Editing Concerns 500 WORDSCRR Week 7: Reading Like a
WriterDescription: Now that you’ve selected your final research topics that you will build
upon for the last 4 weeks of this course, we are going to take a deep dive into research and
source evaluation. To this point, you’ve had experience evaluating other author’s
arguments, sources, logic, and claim types and now it’s your turn to try your hand at
crafting a multidimensional and hybrid argument of your own. The choices we make
surrounding what kinds of source material help us form our arguments are rhetorical
choices. Selecting high quality source material and practicing ethical and sound research is
not only important in the context of academia but can tremendously increase your writerly
ethos when done well. Using research strategies and techniques outlined by our authors
alongside practicing important source annotation techniques will be the first and most vital
step in crafting your final hybrid argument and extended research pa.per.Chapter
Readings:· Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings 11e. Chapter 6: Responding to
Objectives and Alternative Views p. 83-98Additional Readings:· Reid, Shelley. “Ten Ways to
think about Writing.”Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 2, pp. 71-86· Bunn, Mike.
“How to Read like a Writer.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 2, pp. 3-23.· Lamott,
Anne. “Shitty First Drafts.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. Ed. by Paul
Eschholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark. 9th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005: 93-96.·
Elbow, Peter. “Ranking, Evaluating, and Liking: Sorting Out Three Forms of Judgement.”
College English, Feb 1993, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 187-206.Module Objectives: 1. Identifying claim
key claim types in another student’s draft2. Distinguish intended audience for peer hybrid
arguments3. Provide suggestions on strengthening appeals through peer response4.
Identify the difference between higher and lower order concerns5. Demonstrate higher
order peer response using another student’s writing.6. Demonstrate MLA formatting and
lower order editing concerns using another classmates’ draftInstructions:You will need to
post initial responses and peer responses in a timely manner, responding to instructor
discussion threads/prompts or posting uniquely generated content.Initial Post:Instructor
Prompt #1:Shelley Reid and Mike Bunn offer a revisioned way to think about audience,
purpose, and rhetorical intent. The concept of “thinking like a reader” is not a new one is
nascent to this course’s objective to think dialectically and to hone rhetorical awareness. I
want you to imagine you are attending a private lecture with Shelley Reid and Mike Bunn.
Hypothetically reflect on what aspects of writing both scholars would agree upon and what
aspects of writing might they deviate? What would this joint presentation be titled? What
2. questions might you ask them individually or together if you were a student experiencing
this lecture?Instructor Prompt #2:Anne Lamott’s seminal work, “Shitty First Drafts” is
among my favorite to have students read during peer review and revision week. Similarly,
famous expressivist writer and compositionist, Peter Elbow’s seminal work, “Ranking,
Evaluating, and Liking: Sorting Out Three Forms of Judgement” is a staple for teachers of
writing to read during revision week. The audience for each text is different but Lamott and
Elbow share similar conceptions surrounding the writing process and how students should
approach the radical act of revision. In your response, I want you to first describe your
experiences with revision and peer review and then I want you to invite Lamott and Elbow
into your discussion. How do these different texts inform your understanding of the writing
process? What aspects resonate with you?
![[From 10$/Pg] Lower Order Editing Concerns
[From 10$/Pg] Lower Order Editing Concerns 500 WORDSCRR Week 7: Reading Like a
WriterDescription: Now that you’ve selected your final research topics that you will build
upon for the last 4 weeks of this course, we are going to take a deep dive into research and
source evaluation. To this point, you’ve had experience evaluating other author’s
arguments, sources, logic, and claim types and now it’s your turn to try your hand at
crafting a multidimensional and hybrid argument of your own. The choices we make
surrounding what kinds of source material help us form our arguments are rhetorical
choices. Selecting high quality source material and practicing ethical and sound research is
not only important in the context of academia but can tremendously increase your writerly
ethos when done well. Using research strategies and techniques outlined by our authors
alongside practicing important source annotation techniques will be the first and most vital
step in crafting your final hybrid argument and extended research pa.per.Chapter
Readings:· Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings 11e. Chapter 6: Responding to
Objectives and Alternative Views p. 83-98Additional Readings:· Reid, Shelley. “Ten Ways to
think about Writing.”Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 2, pp. 71-86· Bunn, Mike.
“How to Read like a Writer.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 2, pp. 3-23.· Lamott,
Anne. “Shitty First Drafts.” Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. Ed. by Paul
Eschholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark. 9th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005: 93-96.·
Elbow, Peter. “Ranking, Evaluating, and Liking: Sorting Out Three Forms of Judgement.”
College English, Feb 1993, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 187-206.Module Objectives: 1. Identifying claim
key claim types in another student’s draft2. Distinguish intended audience for peer hybrid
arguments3. Provide suggestions on strengthening appeals through peer response4.
Identify the difference between higher and lower order concerns5. Demonstrate higher
order peer response using another student’s writing.6. Demonstrate MLA formatting and
lower order editing concerns using another classmates’ draftInstructions:You will need to
post initial responses and peer responses in a timely manner, responding to instructor
discussion threads/prompts or posting uniquely generated content.Initial Post:Instructor
Prompt #1:Shelley Reid and Mike Bunn offer a revisioned way to think about audience,
purpose, and rhetorical intent. The concept of “thinking like a reader” is not a new one is
nascent to this course’s objective to think dialectically and to hone rhetorical awareness. I
want you to imagine you are attending a private lecture with Shelley Reid and Mike Bunn.
Hypothetically reflect on what aspects of writing both scholars would agree upon and what
aspects of writing might they deviate? What would this joint presentation be titled? What](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/lowerordereditingconcerns-230617102433-795c2612/85/lower-order-editing-concernsdocx-1-320.jpg)
