NameBIB 107DateInstructor Covenant Paper Student Gui.docx

Name
BIB 107
Date
Instructor
Covenant Paper Student Guide Part 1 – Covenant and Scripture
Analysis
Instructions
Use this template to complete the Topic 1 Term Paper Part 1
assignment. In this assignment, you will answer questions about
passages in each of the NT categories.
· The Gospels
· Acts
· Paul’s Epistles
· The General Epistles
· Revelation
Type directly onto this template, and submit it for your
assignment. Do not put quotes of the scripture passages in your
answers to the questions. Instead, summarize and analyze the
passages about each of the covenants. Your answers to the
questions should come from your reading of and reflection on
the biblical texts.
The Gospels
Use a concordance, Bible website (e.g., biblegateway.com), or
Bible software program to search for occurrences of the word
covenant or related words in the Gospels. Related words where
the covenants are implied without using the term may include
words such as the law, Moses, Abraham, Noah, promise, and so
on.
1. From your search, what are the three most significant
passages in the Gospels related to the theme of covenant?

Answer each question below, typing the answer to each question
directly beneath each question. The answers to all three
questions must be 150-200 words combined.
2. What do these passages tell you about God’s relationship
with people through covenants? Which covenants are operative?
3. What are the Gospels teaching about the covenants? Do these
teachings explain the relationship between the covenants?
4. What do the Gospels teach about the New Covenant?
Acts
covenant or related words in Acts. Related words where the
covenants are implied without using the term may include words
such as the law, Moses, Abraham, Gentile, circumcision, and so
on.
passages in Acts related to the theme of covenant?
3. What is Acts teaching about the nature of the covenants? Do
these teachings explain the relationship between the covenants?

4. What does Acts have to say about the Gentiles’ relationship
to the covenants?
Paul’s Epistles
covenant or related words in Paul’s epistles. Related words
where the covenants are implied without using the term may
include words such as the law, Moses, Abraham, Gentile,
circumcision, and so on.
passages in Paul related to the theme of covenant?
3. What are Paul’s epistles teaching about the nature of the
covenants? Do these teachings explain the relationship between
the covenants?
4. What does Paul have to say about the Gentiles’ relationship
to the covenants? How does this factor into his arguments about
the works of the law and circumcision?
The General Epistles

covenant or related words in the General Epistles. Related
words where the covenants are implied without using the term
may include words such as the law, Moses, Abraham, Gentile,
circumcision, and so on.
passages in the General Epistles related to the theme of
covenant?
3. What are the epistles teaching about the nature of the
the covenants?
4. What do the General Epistles have to say about the Gentiles’
relationship to the covenants? How does this factor into his
arguments about the works of the law and circumcision.
Revelation
covenant or related words in Revelation. Related words where
the covenants are implied without using the term may include
words such as the law, Moses, Abraham, Gentile, circumcision,
and so on.
passages in Revelation related to the theme of covenant?

3. What is Revelation’s teaching about the nature of the
the covenants?
3. What does Revelation have to say about the Gentiles’
relationship to the covenants?
Summary
1. What common themes (if any) do these various writings have
to say about the covenants?
2. From your initial survey, how would you explain the biblical
teaching on the covenants? What covenants are operational
today? Have any covenants come to an end? What are
implications for the Christian life?
© 2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Professor Porter
EN 102 !
Quoting, Paraphrasing, & Summarizing
!
Summary: This handout is intended to help you become more

comfortable with the uses of and distinctions
among quotations, paraphrases, and summaries. This handout
compares and contrasts the three terms,
gives some pointers, and includes a short excerpt that you can
use to practice these skills.
What are the differences among quoting, paraphrasing, and
summarizing?
These three ways of incorporating other writers' work into your
own writing differ according to the
closeness of your writing to the source writing.
Quotations must be identical to the original, using a narrow
segment of the source. They must match
the source document word for word and must be attributed to
the original author.
Paraphrasing involves putting a passage from source material
into your own words. A paraphrase
must also be attributed to the original source. Paraphrased
material is usually shorter than the original
passage, taking a somewhat broader segment of the source and
condensing it slightly.
Summarizing involves putting the main idea(s) into your own
words, including only the main
point(s). Once again, it is necessary to attribute summarized
ideas to the original source. Summaries
are significantly shorter than the original and take a broad
overview of the source material.
(See your MU handbook, “Decide When to Quote and When to
Paraphrase,” 56-58.)
Why use quotations, paraphrases, and summaries?
Quotations, paraphrases, and summaries serve many purposes.

You might use them to . . .
• Provide support for claims or add credibility
to your writing
• Refer to work that leads up to the work you
are now doing
• Give examples of several points of view on
a subject
• Call attention to a position that you wish to
agree or disagree with
• Highlight a particularly striking phrase,
sentence, or passage by quoting the
original
• Distance yourself from the original by
quoting it in order to cue readers that the
words are not your own
• Expand the breadth or depth of your writing !!
Writers frequently intertwine summaries, paraphrases, and
quotations. As part of a summary of an
article, a chapter, or a book, a writer might include paraphrases
of various key points blended with
quotations of striking or suggestive phrases as in the following
example:
In his famous and influential work the Interpretation of Dreams,
Sigmund Freud argues
that dreams are the "royal road to the unconscious" (62),
expressing in coded imagery

the dreamer's unfulfilled wishes through a process known as the
"dream-work" (75).
During this process unacceptable desires are censored internally
and subjected to
coding through layers of condensation and displacement before
emerging (Freud 83).
How to use quotations, paraphrases, and summaries
Helpful steps:
• Read the entire text, noting the key points
and main ideas.
• Summarize in your own words what the
single main idea of the essay is.
• Paraphrase important supporting points
that come up in the essay.
• Consider any words, phrases, or brief
passages that you believe should be quoted
directly.
There are several ways to integrate quotations into your text.
Often, a short quotation works well
when integrated into a sentence. Longer quotations (more than
four lines) must be inserted your text
as block quotations. Remember that quoting should be done
only sparingly; be sure that you have a
good reason to include a direct quotation when you decide to do
so. (See MU handbook, “Integrate
Quotations,” 58-59.)

*Unless your professor instructs otherwise, you must use in-text
citations AND include a Works Cited
page to give credit to outside sources and avoid plagiarism. (See
MU handbook, “Avoiding Plagiarism,”
50-56.) !
Additional Help
In-text citations: MU handbook, 62-63, 66-69
Works Cited: MU handbook, 64-65, 70-94
Sample research paper: MU handbook, 94-105 !
*Lesson adapted from the Purdue OWL
!!
Practice !
(Use your Ethelbert Miller source for this practice exercise.
Make sure to complete each step. I will collect & grade your
work.) !
1. Write a 1-2 sentence summary of your source. You should
avoid using quotes.
Provide in-text citations where necessary. !
2. Choose any 3 consecutive sentences that appear in the source
to paraphrase.
Provide in-text citations where necessary. !
3. Ready for some quotation integration?
• Write out the main idea/thesis of your source in your own
words.
• Find a sentence or part of a sentence within the source that
you can quote to

support the main idea/thesis you just identified.
• In a brief paragraph, use the quote you have chosen as textual
evidence to support
the source’s main idea/thesis. Make sure that you identify the
main idea/thesis, set
up your quote, and finish with your own thoughts (hint:
quotation sandwich!).
You must provide in-text citations. !
4. Write out an MLA citation for your source that would be
included on a Works Cited page. !
Professor Porter
EN 102 !
Model Outline for EN 102 Essays !
Before you start writing any paper in this course, you need to
create an outline that shows what
your paper will embody and how you will organize your points.
!
Think of an outline as your paper’s GPS. If the paper is the
destination, your outline shows the
steps you took to get to your final location. Thus, I should be
able to use your outline to
understand the direction you took to write your paper. If I feel
lost or confused while reading
your paper, I may reference your outline to get clarification.
Your outline should clearly identify
your thesis and supporting evidence, and organize the
discussion of your key points. !
Let’s use the story of Cinderella as an example for writing an
outline. The Grimm’s version, not

the Disney! As per the prompt for Project I, you need to
construct a thesis that deals with theme
and analyzes, not summarizes. How about this:
Thesis: In the fairytale Cinderella, violent images are used to
convey the idea that good will
always triumph over evil. !
Great! You have a thesis, so now let’s construct a working
outline that shows how you will argue
this thesis with supporting evidence. !!! !!
Cinderella Thematic Essay !!
I. Intro !
A. Hook: !
➢ Perhaps Cinderella understood the concept of karma; she
offered kindness and
empathy to others and ultimately found her goodness was
rewarded. Her step-
sisters would also experience this truth but with a far less
appealing outcome.
Their evil, abusive behaviors would be repaid to them with
disturbingly
violent consequences. !
B. Lead-in !
➢ Any background information pertinent to include? Be careful
not to
summarize! !
C. Statement of supports !
➢ images of extreme violence—reserved for “evil” characters

(stepsisters),
➢ binaries—good and evil !
➢ violence as warning to young audience !
D. Thesis statement: !
In the fairytale Cinderella’s, violent images are used to convey
the idea that good will always
triumph over evil. !!!
II. Body I / Support 1: images of violence !
A. Violent images in story !
➢ Bloody heels/toes (stepsisters at shoe fitting), pg. 380 !
➢ Eyes pecked out (stepsisters at wedding), pg. 388
B. Violence associated with evil (evil stepsisters)
images of extreme violence—reserved for “evil” characters,
though readers are aware of underlying abuse/mistreatment of
“good
character” (Cinderella), she is spared from extreme violence !!
!
III. Body II / Support 2: binaries of good and evil / role of
violence !
A. Depictions of good and evil !
➢ Examples throughout of extreme good and extreme evil
➢ To understand what extreme goodness is, we must see a
representation of
extreme evil (the extent of Cinderella goodness is understood
only by viewing
the extent of her step-sisters’ evil counterparts) !

B. Role of violence—punishment for evil
!
➢ Violence befitting consequence for extreme evil !!!
IV. Body IV / Support 3: violence as warning !
A. Violence as warning to reader !
➢ Cautionary tale—consequences of behavior !
B. Effects on the child reader !
➢ Violence especially disturbing for young readers !!
V. Conclusion
A. Restate thesis (not word for word!) !
B. Restate supports !
C. New insight? (Possibilities: (1) examples of extreme violence
strangely may further
the theme of good conquering evil more than the story’s
accounts of extreme
goodness; (2) violent ending shatters the illusion of fairytale
“happy ever after”…or
does it? Is it still happy ever after if the ending is not happy for
all characters?) !!!! ! !!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------
Don’t forget your WC!!! !
Works Cited !!

Grimm, Jacob, and Wilhelm Grimm. “Cinderella.” The Grimm
Reader. Ed: Maria Tatar. New
York: Norton, 2010. 366-389. !
!!
ADVICE
http://chronicle.com.proxymu.wrlc.org/article/Its-Not-
You/46521/
It's Not You
By James M. Lang OCTOBER 23, 2007
When I was an undergraduate, living on the 11th floor of a
high-
rise dormitory with five other students, one of my roommates
came home one late December evening and -- in a fit of drunken
inspiration -- dragged the dorm Christmas tree into the elevator
and set it up in our room. A very short time later, he decided
that
he had made a mistake and wanted to get rid of the evidence.

Instead of lugging the tree back down to the lobby, however, he
chose to dismantle the fake tree, branch by branch, and toss it
out the window. At the time, however, one of the dorm's
resident
assistants happened to be coming home from a late evening
himself and was almost hit by the tree's metal trunk.
That led authorities pretty directly to our room, but not before
my roommate had the time to plead desperately with all of us to
deny everything. We foolishly acquiesced.
After my roommate finally confessed, the rector called each of
us back into his office to inform us that we would all receive a
massive chunk of community-service hours for the part we had
played in covering up the crime.
"You looked me right in the face," I remember him saying, his
voice shaking with emotion, "and lied to me."
http://chronicle.com.proxymu.wrlc.org/section/Advice/66
That meeting shook me up. I remember feeling as if I had
wronged the rector personally -- and, in a way, I had. The rector
and I had always had a good relationship before that incident;
afterward, I avoided him whenever I could, and my sense of
having screwed up hovered over every encounter we had until I
graduated.

When I became a teacher, and confronted my first student
plagiarist, I remember thinking that I would use the same
strategy my rector had used: Whatever punishment I imposed, I
would make sure that the student understood that his violation
of
academic honesty was also a violation of our personal
relationship.
How effectively I did that, now close to a dozen years later, I
honestly don't remember. But I know that for many years, I
continued to look back at my rector's approach as the model for
treating cases of academic dishonesty: Make certain the student
understands the full moral gravity of the offense by laying down
both the punishment and healthy doses of guilt.
I didn't realize how completely I had changed my mind about
that until an assistant professor at my institution told me about
a
plagiarized paper he had just discovered, four weeks into his
first year on the tenure track. I invited him into my office to
talk
about it, and while he spoke he held in his hand both the
student's paper and a printout of the Web site from which the
paper was copied, word for word in some long stretches.

"I've gotten a lot of advice from people already about this," he
said, shaking his head. "But I'm still not sure what to do."
So I offered him the advice I follow myself in plagiarism cases
(and which I dispensed in this space a few years back): Fail the
student for the assignment, and require him to sign our college's
plagiarism-settlement form. The student acknowledges his
wrongdoing on the form, and it is filed with the dean of
students.
If the student repeats the offense, the existence of that form in
his file leads to more severe punishment, up to expulsion from
the college.
Thinking that my colleague was debating between that sort of
response and a more lenient one, I did my best to convince him
that all cases of plagiarism should be documented, to ensure
that
we are not harboring students who are violating academic
honesty in every course they take.
"Oh no," he said to me, shaking the papers in his hand, "that's
not the issue. Of course I'm going to fail the assignment, and
make him sign the form. There's no question of that. It's just
that
this assignment isn't worth all that much, and so failing him for
it won't hurt his grade all that much. I'm trying to figure out
how
I can ratchet up the punishment."

In that moment, I understood two things: He was angry, as my
rector had been angry and as I used to get angry, at the way a
plagiarized paper can feel like a personal insult; and that,
understandable as that anger may be, acting upon it and showing
it to the student are equally bad ideas.
How and why my perspective has changed over the past dozen
years is not clear to me, but it has. So I did my best to see if my
colleague could let go of his anger and view the situation more
objectively. Here is what I told him:
•
That the last thing on the student's mind, when he made the
poor decision to plagiarize, was his personal relationship
with you. He did it because he was lazy, or he was rushed
for time, or he felt overwhelmed by the assignment. He did
not do it to send any message to you about your worth as a
teacher, or to test your integrity, or to make your life
miserable. He did it for his own reasons and did not expect
to be caught, and hence thought little, or not at all, about
how his actions would affect you.

•
That the student might have plagiarized because he goes
home every day to a dying mother, or works 40 hours a
week, or because he doesn't have the intellectual aptitude to
complete the work. None of those things excuse or mitigate
the offense, but they can explain it. And none of the
possible explanations you might dream up for any given
case of plagiarism will have anything to do with you.
•
That personalizing the academic dishonesties of our
students distorts the relationship we should have with them.
When our spouses lie to us, they do indeed violate a
compact we have made to each other, oftentimes one
formalized in wedding vows. I have not exchanged vows
with any of my students. If I count them as friends (and
occasionally I do), I do so with full awareness that the
friendship must remain a very constrained one; I have
power over their grades, after all, and the unequal balance
of power in our relationship makes true friendship a
practical impossibility.
When my students violate academic honesty, they are not
sinning against me; they are sinning against the standards of an

intellectual community they have agreed to join. The proper
response is to follow the standards that the community has
established for such offenses.
So, no private lectures delivered without a punishment, no slaps
on the wrist. Document the offense, fail the student for that
assignment, and/or require completely new work from the
student. Keep it all on the record in the event of future offenses.
Sure, I still get angry when I discover a plagiarized paper -- I
even get angry at plagiarism cases I hear about secondhand, like
my colleague's. If you feel anger, you feel it. Sometimes that
can't be helped. But feel it and let it go. And don't address
student violators with anger.
After all, it's not about you.
!
I would like to devote a future column to answering the "So
What?" question. Whatever your field, how do you persuade
students to care, beyond the threat of a low grade, about what
your course has to offer?

Especially for those of us who teach general-education courses,
how do you demonstrate to students that your course, and even
individual classes, will offer them valuable skills or knowledge,
or enrich their lives, or make them more humane, wise, or
talented human beings?
I'm looking especially for techniques that we all might adopt.
So
send me your great ideas, but make sure your great idea would
find a home in disciplines outside your own.
James M. Lang is an associate professor of English at
Assumption College and author of Life on the Tenure Track:
Lessons From the First Year (Johns Hopkins University Press,
2005). He writes about teaching in higher education, and his
Web site is http://www.jamesmlang.com. He welcomes reader
mail directed to his attention at [email protected]
- See more at:
http://chronicle.com.proxymu.wrlc.org/article/Its-Not-
You/46521/#sthash.5KND8PDb.dpuf
Learning to Praise
Donald A. Daiker
In A Moveable Feast, Ernest Hemingway recounts his first
meeting with F.
Scott Fitzgerald. One night while Hemingway is sitting with

friends at
the Dingo Bar in Paris, Fitzgerald unexpectedly walks in,
introduces him-
self, and proceeds to talk nonstop about Hemingway's writing,
especial-
ly "how great it was." Hemingway reports that he was
embarrassed by
Fitzgerald's lavish compliments-not because he felt flattered by
them,
but because he and his fellow expatriates "still went under the
system,
then, that praise to the face was open disgrace" (150).
The distrust of praise among American writers abroad seems to
have
rubbed off on composition teachers at home. In a 1985 study at
Texas
A&:MUniversity, Sam Dragga analyzed forty freshman essays
that had
been graded and marked by four randomly chosen and
traditionally
trained teaching assistants. They wrote a total of 864 comments
on the
essays, but only 51 of them were comments of praise. This
means that
94%of the comments focused on what students had done poorly
or incor-
rectly, only 6% on what had been done well. The same pattern
apparent-
ly prevails in high school as well. A study of responses by
thirty-six sec-
ondary English teachers revealed that although 40% of their
end-of-paper
comments were positive, the percentage of positive marginal
comments
was a meager .007% (Harris).

The conclusion that college composition teachers find error
more
attractive than excellence is consistent with a pilot study of my
own con-
ducted in 1982 at Miami University (Daiker). I asked twenty-
four col-
leagues to grade and comment on "Easy Street," a student essay
chosen
because it combines strength with weakness in both content and
style. I
asked my colleagues to mark the essay as if it had been
submitted in their
freshman composition course. They made a total of 378 separate
mark-
ings or comments on the student essay: 338, or 89.4%, of them
cited error
or found fault; only 40, or 10.6%,of them were comments of
praise. What
may make the predominance of correction over commendation
even
more significant is that during the previous month, a
departmental mem-
orandum reported scholarly consensus on two matters of
grading: (1) an
instructor should not mark every writing error, because students
cannot
psychologically cope with a deluge of deficiencies; and (2) an
instructor
should use praise and positive reinforcement as a major
teaching strategy.
154
DAIKER

LEARNING TO PRAISE 155
. Scholars~ip notwithstanding, composition teachers have
traditionally
~thh~ld ~raISefrom papers they have considered less than
perfect.Acase
m pomt IS the ~ell.-known "Evaluating a Theme," published in
the
News,letter of the MIchIgan Council of Teachers of English
(Stevens).The issue
consists of twenty-five resp~nses-twenty-one by college
teachers, four by
s~nda.ry teachers-:-to a sl~gl~ composition, and the issue's
popularity
~amed It.t~r:oughslXt~n ~nntings. According to my figures, the
proper-
ti~n o~cnti~sm to p~al~eISroughly the same as in the
TexasA&M and
Miaml.studies; the Michigan teachers identified nine errors or
problems for
every mstance of praiseworthy writing. Just as important,
fifteen of the
twenty-five te~chers found nothing in the paper deserving of
praise. In
th~ of those mstances, collegeprofessors sufficiently skilled to
ferret out
thirty flaws apiece in abriefessay could not-or would not-
identify a sin-
gle source of strength. Their wholly negative comments
reminded me ofa
~rade-a~peal procedure in which Iwas asked to evaluate eight
composi-
~ons ~ntten for a colleague's freshman English class. I read the
composi-
~ons Inor~er,paper one through paper eight, and Iread them

with increas-
mg des~aIr-not because of what the student had written, but
because in
respondmg to a semester's worth ofwriting, my colleague had
offerednot
a single word of praise. Not an idea, not an example, not a
sentence or
cJ~useorphrase orpunctuation mark-nothing, apparently, merited
acom-
pliment, I ~~an to wonder why the student was appealing only a
grade,
and I had VISionsofBartIeby the scrivener at work in a dead-
letter office.
Francis Christensen observed a quarter century ago that there
are
two sharply contrasting points of view toward the teaching of
English
(Christensen 1962).The first he calls the "school" tradition the
second the
"scholarly" tradition. The school tradition, nourished by'a view
of lan-
~age that regards all change as decay and degeneration,
encourages
mst~c~ors to respond to student writing primarily by identifying
and
penahzmg error. Because of the school tradition, it has long
been com-
mon to speak of "correcting" themes. There is no clearer
embodiment of
the negative and narrowly conformist values of the school
tradition than
the po~ular corr~ction chart. The 1985 "Harbrace College
Handbook
Correction Char~, to take a recent example of the species,
provides sev-

enty-one correction symbols for instructors to use and students
to inter-
pr:t. .Why are correction symbols needed? Why write "d" rather
than
.diction," or "frag" rather than "This is not a complete sentence
because
It lacks a verb"? Presumably because instructors find so many
errors to
mark that not enough time remains for them touse whole words
or com-
plete ~entenc~s themselves. Significantly, what the correction
charts
never mclude ISa symbol for approval or praise.
To become teachers of English in a "positive, joyous, creative,
and
responsible sense," Christensen urges us to replace the inert,
rule-encum-
bered school tradition with more enlightened scholarly views.
For sever-
al decades now, composition scholars have reported the value
ofprais~ in
improving student writing. Paul B.Diederich, senior. research
a~sOClate
for the Educational Testing Service, concluded from
hISresearch m eval-
uation that "noticing and praising whatever a student does well
improves writing more than any kind or amount of correction of
wh~t he
does badly, and that it is especially important for the less able
wnters
who need all the encouragement they can get" ("Measuring" 20).
Since writing is an act of confidence, as Mina Sha~g.hnessy
remi~ds
us (85), it is not surprising that the scholarly tradition

emphasizes
responding with encouragement. Ken Macrorie recommends that
we
"encourage and encourage, but never falsely" (688).,~. D.
Hirsch, ~ho
believes that written comments may turn out to be the most
effective
teaching device of all" (159),~grees that "th~ ?est results are
li~;ly to be
produced by encouragement' (161).For WIllIam F. Jrm~cher, the
psy-
chology of positive reinforcement ... should be the major
resource for
every writing teacher" (150).All of these individuals would
support
Diederich's statement that "The art of the teacher-at its best-is
the rein-
forcement of good things" ("Praise" 58). ". .
Praise may be especially important for students who hav: ~own
lit-
tle encouragement and, in part for that reason, suffer fro~
wnting appre-
hension. Writing apprehension is a measure of anxiety
estabhshed
through the research ofJohn Daly and Michael Miller.According
to t~ese
researchers, the highly apprehensive writer is one for whom
anxiety
about writing outweighs the projectionofgain fromwriting.
Because th:y
fear writing and its consequences, "high apprehensives" seek to
avoid
writing situations: they are reluctant ~otake .cour~~ in writ~g,
and t~ey
choose academic majors and occupations Withminimal wnting

reqUIre-
ments. When they do write, they use language that is
significantly less
intense than people with low writing apprehension; that is, they
are more
reluctant to take a stand or to commit themselves to a position.
They try
to play it safe not only by embracing neutrality, but by saying
less: in
response to the same assignment, high apprehensives write
fewer words
and make fewer statements than low apprehensives (Daly and
Miller
"Apprehension"; Daly "Effects";Dalyand Shamo;Holland). !~e
problem
for highly apprehensive writers is circular.Because they
antICl~~tenega-
tive consequences, they avoid writing. Yetthe avoidance of
wnting-the
lack of practice-leads to further negative consequences: writing
of poor
quality that receives low grades and unfavorable comments.
156
DAIKER
One's attitude toward the act of writing, Daly concludes, clear]
affects not only how one writes and how often one writes, but
even h y
~thers evaluate that writing (Daly "Effects"). What may be eq
~;V
Importa.nt-sin~e w?ting is a powerful and perhaps even unique
~~~
o~Ieaming (Em~g)-Is that by systematically avoiding writing

situations
high apprehenslVes clos~ ?ff opportunities for learning and
discovery. '
B.ut the cause of wnting apprehension may suggest its cure-or
at
least Its trea~ment. A ma~r caus~ of writing apprehension is
past failure
or a ~rception ?f ~a.st fatlure; high apprehensives perceive their
writing
expenences as slgmficantly less successful than low
apprehensives Daly
says !hat the "highly apprehensive writer expects, due to a
hist~ry of
aversIVe. responses, negative evaluations for writing attempts.
This
expectation hkely becomes self-fulfilling" ("Effects" 571) Th " .
". I . ese aversive
responses InCu~e ne~a.tive comments on assignments and low
grades
on papers. and In wnting courses. The connection between
writing
apprehension and teacher response is supported by the research
of
Thomas Gee. Working with 139 eleventh graders, Gee found
that stu-
dents whose compositions received either criticism alone or no
commen-
tary at aJldeveloped significantly more negative attitudes
toward writing
~han students whose compositions received only praise.
Moreover, after
Just four wee~, .students who received only negative comments
or none
at all were wnting papers significantly shorter than those of

students
who were praised.
Since positive reinforcement, or its lack, is so crucial to a
student's
~evel ~f writing app~ehe~sion (Daly. and Miller "Studies"), one
way of
~UCIn~ .apprehenslon IS by allowing students to experience
success
WI~~w~lhng '. They will experience success, of course,
whenever their
wntIng ISpratsed. For s~dents who do not share their writing
with oth-
ers-and h.lg~ apprehenslves fear negative responses from their
peers as
well as their I.nstructors-the writing teacher is likely their only
potential
source of praise.
B~t praise, however beneficial as a remedy for apprehension
and as
~motivator of student writing, is more easily enjoined than put
into prac-
tice, Dra.gga ~otes ~nhis study, for instance, that the four
teaching assts-
!ants trained I~ I,>ralseworthy grading all experienced
"difficulty in label-
~ng,~nd explatntng the desirable characteristics of their
students' writ-
mg. ~e concludes that teacher training must emphasize explicit
criteria
for pralsewor~hy grading. The title of this article implies that
praise does
not flow readily from the marking pens of writing teachers; it
must be
learned.

leARNING 1'0 PRAISE 157
Still an instructor's conscious decision to praise the work of
students
is a promising starting point. Sometimes all that's needed is a
gimmick.
My own method is to allow myself nothing. but positive
co~ments dur-
ing an initial reading of a student paper; .1hft my pen to ~nte
words of
praise only. Another practice is to ask, Just before moving to
another
essay, "Have 1 told Melissa two or three things about her paper
that I
like?" R. W. Reising's technique is even more effective: he has
developed
a grading form that requires him to write one to three positive
comments
before he even considers noting a weakness (43).
But sometimes what we need is not a gimmick but
understanding.
We need to understand that what deserves praise is, for a
teacher of writ-
ing, a relative and not an absolute questi~n. As ~n Jon.son
says,. ''I ,,?ll
like and praise some things in a young ~ter which yet, !f he
co~tInue In,
I cannot but justly hate him for the same' (617). Foll?wI~g
rela~~e stan-
dards we are in no sense dishonest or condescending In pralsmg
one
writer for what we might ignore or criticize in another-even
within the
same class. Diederich urges us to praise everything a student

has done
that is "even a little bit above his usual standard" ("Measuring"
20).
After all, we follow relative standards in most of the teaching
we do
outside the classroom. In helping children learn how to talk or
how to color
or how to swim, we don't hold them up to the absolute standards
of
Demosthenes, van Gogh, or Mark Spitz; we don't even expect
them to
match their older friends or siblings. In fact, we praise them for
the most
modest achievements. I still remember trying to help my six-
year-old
daughter Pam learn how to hit a softball in our backyard on
Wi~hrow
Avenue. Although I pitched the ball as gently as I knew how,
trying to
make it eminently hittable, Pam just could not get her bat on the
ball. We
tried all sorts of minor adjustments in her batting stance-hands
held clos-
er together, feet placed further apart, head turned at a more a~te
angle-:-
but Pam kept missing. Despite my encouragement, she was
losing heart In
the enterprise. Finally, on perhaps the thirtieth pitch, Pam did
hit the ball-
nothing like solid contact, but still a distinctly audible foul tip.
Of course, I
jumped up and down; <?fcourse, I shouted, ''Way to go,
Pammy,'''; and of
course, she smiled. I praised her lots more when she managed
first a foul

pop, then a dribbler to the mound, and then a genuine ~round
ball. As a
high school student, Pam started at first base. for the varst~
~ftba~l team.
Even with relative standards, a commitment to positive
reinforce-
ment, and perhaps a gimmick or two, most of us ~ould benefit
f~m some
practice in praise. For that purpose, let's work WIth an essay
wntten sev-
eral years ago by a Miami University freshman in response to an
open
assignment.
158 OAtKER
Easy Street
The crowd screams and chants, as a bewildered contestant ner-
vously jumps up and down in search of help. Excitedly, Monty
Hall
comments on the washer and dryer behind box number two in
trade
for the big curtain where Carol Marroll is standing. The
contestant,
with glamour and greed in her eyes; wildly picks the curtain.
But
when raised there stands a 300 pound cow munching on a bail of
hay.
Embarrassed and sad, the woman slowly sits down.
The old American ideal of hard work and get ahead had tradi-
tionally been one followed by many men. But with the arrival of

the
twentieth century, their seems to be a new way to get ahead.
The new
American ideal of something for nothing. It seems to have taken
the
place of honest work. In our popular television game shows, the
idea
of being able to win prizes and cash by just answering a few
simple
questions seems to thrill the average American. It is so popular
and
fascinating that the morning hours are consumed with five to six
hours of the programs. The viewer is thrown into a wonderland
where
everything is free for the taking. The reason for such interest in
these
programs is that they show life as most of us really wish it be to
be-soft, easy, free. Our society now enjoys the simplicities of
life,
and our television game shows exemplify that.
One of the newest of all American dreams is to win a state
lottery.
What easier way is there to become a millionaire with such a
small
investment? The state makes it as easy as just reading a couple
of
numbers off a card, or scratching away a secret spot. Who hasn't
at
least once in their life, dreamed of hitting the big one, and
living off
the fat the rest of their life; without ever having to work again?
Our
country clubs, local junior football teams, even our churches
have
lotteries now thriving on that dream.

In our whole vocabulary their is no word that can command as
much attention as the word "free." It sums up our modern
culture and
feelings. Advertisers use the word as frequently as possible
knowing
its strong effect on the public. The idea of giving something
away
without the consumer having to pay for it has made many a
compa-
ny successful.
The old American ideal seems to have moved over for the new.
No
longer does a man have to work late or get up early. By just
guessing
the right tune in five notes; he could be ordering caviar in the
morn-
ing rather than toast.
When "Easy Street" was evaluated by college instructors, grades
ranged from B to F,with C and C- by far the most common. But
my col-
leagues found much to praise even in an essay they rated
average or
slightly below average in quality. Their comments of praise are
catego-
rized below, according to the four levels Nina Ziv used in her
study of
teacher response: conceptual, structural, sentential, and lexical.
A. Conceptual level.
1. "Your thesis-that the new American ideal is 'something for

nothing'-is strong and clear."
2. ."Your thesis is interesting and clear, and your use of
particular,
graphic details to support the thesis greatly aids your reader's
understanding. The conversational tone of your paper also
helps the reader understand you."
3. "The content of this paper is interesting & to the point, the
essay
is fairly well unified, and you show the ability to use effective
details."
4. ''There is much that is strong here; your sense of detail is
good
and your ideas are insightful."
5. "Youhave provided some excellent examples which capture
the
essence of the 'new' American ideal."
6. "Your ideas are brilliant, and the way you have argued your
point is convincing. Keep up with original and thought-provok-
ing ways of looking at life, around you."
7. "I like the scope ofyour commentary, which moves from the
ini-
tial, interest-provoking example, to the statement of American
ideals in paragraph #2, to the further example--of the state lot-
tery-in paragraph #3."
8. "You come across as being perceptive and as concerned about
an important trend in our culture."
9. .''Your ideas here are strong and clear" (refers to second
para-

graph).
10. ''Your paper has fine unity and some precise illustrations."
B.Structural level.
1. ''The paper is well-organized and well-focused, with some
nice
paragraph transitions."
160
DAIKER
2. "Good d~tails" (refers to next-to-last sentence of first
paragraph
and to middle sentence of third paragraph).
"An effective opening paragraph-good detaill"
"Wellput, effective use of specific detail" (refers to last
sentence
of third paragraph).
"A superb. ~hoice of topic-and a good natural organization
from specific to general-from private to public-and from
analysis to significance."
"Effec~ve introduction-your detailed description gets the
reader interested and draws him into your analysis."
"Good strategy for your opening: you caught my attention."

"Good details here" (refers to opening sentences of third prgh).
"I like this" (refers to the whole of first paragraph).
"I got ~ good first impression of this paper. You've started off
well Withan anecdote that gives the reader a good visual picture
and gets her into your thesis."
C. Sentential level.
Although these positive comments show that "Easy Street" has
much
to praise, instructors marking the paper more readily recognized
error
than they identified strengths, especially on the sentential and
lexical lev-
els. For example, many instructors pointed out the dangling
modifier in
the next-to-last sentence of the first paragraph ("But when
raised"), but
no one applauded the effective use of appositive adjectives
("Embarrassed and sad") as modifiers in the following sentence.
It seems
clear that we have been better trained to spot comma splices and
frag-
ments and other syntactic slips than to notice when students
take risks:
Only one of two dozen evaluators commended the student for
"soft, easy,
free," a notable instance of series variation with the
coordinating con-
junction eliminated. Instructors routinely called attention to the
misused
semicolon in "By just guessing the right tune in five notes; he
could be
ordering caviar in the morning rather than toast." Far fewer
heard the

interesting sentence rhythms created by the sophisticated use
ofrepetition.
So perhaps we need to go back to school ourselves to learn how
to
recognize what merits praise in student writing. A good starting
point for
syntax are the chapters on free modifiers in Notes toward a New
Rhetoric
(Christensen and Christensen) and in The Writer's Options
(Daiker, Kerek,
and Morenberg), and the articles on coordination by Winston
Weathers
and Robert L. Walker. But probably even more useful are
sessions at con-
ferences, at department meetings, and at workshops for teaching
assis-
tants in which we help each other learn what to praise and how
to praise.
But, if we listen to students, the "how" may not be all that
important. At
the same time that students tell us that criticism must be
specific to
work-a comment like "diction" or "logic" or "awkward" is
almost
always misunderstood unless explained in detail-they receive
even
vague compliments like "nice" and "good" and "well written"
with grat-
itude and thanksgiving (Hayes and Daiker). Don Murray once
casually
remarked at a Wyoming Conference on Freshman and
Sophomore
English that one of his favorite responses to student writing
begins with
the five words '1like the way you." He told us we could

complete the
sentence in any way we chose: "I like the way you use dialogue
here" or
"1 like the way you started your paper with a story" or "I like
the way
you repeated the key word animal in this paragraph."
In his preface to John Gardner's On Becoming a Novelist,
Raymond
Carver recalls his experience as a college freshman in Gardner's
creative
writing class at Chico State College. Carver remembers, above
all, that
Gardner lavished more attention and care on his work than any
student had
a right to expect. Although Gardner would cross out what he
found unac-
ceptable in Carver's stories and add words and even sentences
of his own,
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1. "Good sentences" (refers to middle sentences of second

prgh),
2. "Good parallelism" (refers to third sentence of third
paragraph
and to first two sentences of last paragraph).
3. "Very nice pair of sentences-clear and concise" (refers to
first
two sentences of fourth paragraph).
4. "Effective closing image. Good!"
5. "Nice structure" (refers to last sentence offourthparagraph).
D. Lexical level.
1. "Good---i!ffective word choice here" (refers to "chants, as a
bewildered contestant").
"Youhave a vigorous and full vocabulary."
"Nice title."
"Nice series-good climax" (refers to "soft, easy, free" of second
paragraph).
"Nice phrase" (refers to "with glamour and greed in her eyes").
2.
3.
4.
5.

162
DAIKER
he was always looking to find something to praise. When there
was a sentence, a line of dialogue, or a narrative passage that he
liked, something that he thought "worked" and moved the story
along in some pleasant or unexpected way, he'd write ''Nice'' in
the margin or else "Good!" And seeing these comments, my
heart would lift. (xvt-xvn)
Diederich, Paul B.Measuring Growth in English. Urbana: NcrE,
1974.
Dragga, Sam. ''Praiseworthy Grading: A Teacher's Alternative
to Editing Error."
Paper presented at the Conference on College Composition and
Communi-
cation, New Orleans, 1986.
Emig, Janet. "Writing as a Mode of Learning." College
Composition and Communi-
cation 28 (1977): 122-28.
Gee, Thomas C. "Students' Responses to Teacher Comments."
Resetlrch in the
Teaching of English 6 (1972):212-21.
Harris, Winifred Hall. "reacher Response to Student Writing: A
Study of the
Response Pattern of High School Teachers to Determine the
Basis for Teacher
Judgment of Student Writing." Research in the Teaching of
English 11 (1977):
175-85.

Hayes, Mary F., and Donald A. Daiker. "Using Protocol
Analysis in Evaluating
Responses to Student Writing." Freshman English News 13
(1984): 1-4, 10.
Hemingway, Ernest. A Moveable Feast. New York: Scribners,
1964.
Hirsch, E. D., Jr. The Philosophy of Composition. Chicago:
University of Chicago
Press, 1977.
Holland, M. "The State of the Art: The Psychology of Writing."
Paper presented
at the Inland Area Writing Project's Summer Writing
Conference, University
of California at Riverside, 1980.
Irmscher, William F. Teaching Expository Writing. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston, 1979.
Jonson, Ben. ''Timber, or Discoveries." Ben Jonson, vol. 8. Ed.
C.H. Herford Percy
and E. Simpson. Oxford, England: Clarendon, 1947.
Macrorie, Ken. "To Be Read." English Journal 57 (1968): 688-
92.
Reising, R. W. "Controlling the Bleeding." CollegeComposition
and Communication
24 (1973): 43-44.
Shaughnessy, Mina. Errors and Expectations: A Guide for the
Teacherof Basic Writing.

New York: Oxford Up, 1977.
Stevens, A. K., ed. "Evaluating a Theme." Newsletter of the
Michigan Council of
Teachersof English 5 (1958): 6.
Walker, Robert L. "The Common Writer: A Case for Parallel
Structure." College
Composition and Communication 21 (1970):373-79.
Weathers, Winston. "The Rhetoric of the Series." College
Composition and Com-
munication 17 (1966): 217-22.
Ziv, Nina. D. "The Effect of Teacher Comments on the Writing
of Four College
Freshmen." New Directions in Composition Research. Ed.
Richard Beach and
Lillian S. Bridwell, 362-80. New York: Guilford, 1984.
It's a good bet that genuine praise can lift the hearts, as well as
the
pens, of the writers who sit in our own classrooms, too.
Works Cited
Carver, Raymond. Preface to John Gardner's On Becoming a
Novelist, xvi-xvii. New
York: Harper, 1983.
Christensen, Francis. "Between Two Worlds." Paper delivered
to the California
Association of Teachers of English, San Diego, 1962. Rpt.
Notes toward a New
Rhetoric. Ed. Bonniejean Christensen. New York: Harper and
Row, 1967, 1978.

Christensen, Francis. Notes toward a New Rhetoric: Nine
Essays for Teachers 2nd ed.
Ed. Bonniejean Christensen. New York: Harper and Row, 1967,
1978.
Daiker, Donald A. "The Teacher's Options in Responding to
Student Writing."
Paper presented at the annual Conference on College
Composition and
Communication, Washington, D.C., 1983.
Daiker, Donald A., Andrew Kerek, and Max Morenberg. The
Writer's Options:
Combining to Composing, 3rd ed. New York: Harper, 1986.
Daly, John.A. "The Effects of Writing Apprehension on
Message Encoding."
lournalism Quarterly 54 (1977):566-72.
Daly, John A., and Michael D. Miller. "Apprehension of
Writing as a Predictor of
Message Intensity," The Journal of Psychology 89 (1975): 175-
77.
Daly, John A., and Michael D. MiJIer. ''The Empirical
Development of an
Instrument to Measure Writing Apprehension." Research in the
Teaching of
English 9 (1975): 242-49.
Daly, John A., and Michael D. Miller. "Further Studies on
Writing Apprehension:
SAT Scores, Success Expectations, Willingness to Take
Advanced Courses
and Sex Differences." Research in the Teachingof English 9

(1975): 250-56.
Daly, John A., and Wayne Shamo. IIAcademic Decisions as a
Function of Writing
Apprehension." Research in the Teachingof English 12 (1978):
119-26.
Diederich, Paul B. "In Praise of Praise." NEA Journal 52
(1963): 58-59.
Project II: Position Essay on Student Source Use in the
Academy
(using class readings)
Second Essay Assignment –Student source use, 3-4 pages !
Materials:
Research articles (Lamott, Lang, and Daiker )
Article annotations & responses
A previous research paper you have written (preferably a
research paper written for EN 101, or the most recent
English class you were in prior to EN 102)
Purpose:
Before we turn to the research portion of the class, we'll read,
write, and reflect on college-level research practices.
This assignment will, ideally, help you approach your own
research with a greater understanding of academic
research and source use. It also helps you to learn how to read
academic articles (the kinds you will locate in your
own research). Be sure to complete your reading responses for
each article assigned for this project. Finally, this
essay asks you to reference sources in your essay that your
instructor and fellow classmates know well, which means
that they can help you master citation and paraphrase skills

during the drafting and revision process. Your references
to articles will be largely made to help you understand your own
writing and research process as you will be citing
examples from one of your own previously written research
papers
Assignment:
We’ve read Annie Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts,” James Lang’s
“It’s Not You,” and Donald Daiker’s “Learning to
Praise,” and we’ve reflected on our own source use and research
in college in the article responses and class
discussions.
This assignment asks you to argue a position on student source
use in the academy using at least two of the above
readings and your own experience as a college writer. This
"position" doesn't need to offer a solution or take a
definitive stance; it may, for example, argue for the two main
challenges to students finding and using quality
sources or for the central dilemma in student plagiarism. Once
you articulate your position you will need to
reference two of the articles and one of your own papers to
provide support for your assertion.
Requirements:
The essay needs to be 3-4 pages and follow formal paper
formatting guidelines (see syllabus). It will need to
correctly cite any paraphrased or quoted passages from the texts
with internal citations and include a Works Cited
page in correct MLA form. Use your handout on citing, quoting,
and paraphrasing to ensure that you are correctly
referencing outside sources. Your paper must refer to articles by
two of the following writers: Anne Lamott, James
Lang, and Donald Daiker. This essay should also include
personal experience and reference one of your previously
written research papers.
Process:
Look over your articles responses and consider your experiences
as a student writer and researcher. Think of a theme

or thesis that argues a position about student source use in the
academy. Use two articles from the three we read and
one of your previous papers to support your position. Once you
have written your first draft, participate in the peer
review workshop. Revise your essay using instructor and peer
feedback and your own ideas. !!
Grading Criteria:
A passing essay must:
Content
▪ Turn in your completed article responses (all three) with your
first draft. Each missing or incomplete
response will result in a 5 point deduction.
▪ Include a well-organized outline (papers submitted without
outlines will drop one full letter grade
which carries through to revision grade).
▪ Have a clear, focused, arguable thesis that argues a nuanced
position on student source use in the academy.
▪ Develop this theme thoroughly using voices of scholars and
examples from your own writing and research
experience.
▪ Cite at least two of the following writers: Anne Lamott, James
Lang, and Donald Daiker.
▪ Understand the writers you include (use your article
responses, notes, and the article itself).
▪ Include correct parenthetical citations for all sources. Failure
to do so may result in failing grade.
▪ Contain adequate paraphrases of the secondary sources (i.e. in
your own words). Failure to do so may

result in a failing grade.
▪ Quote accurately.
▪ Integrate supporting quotes and paraphrases smoothly.
▪ Demonstrate revision (there should be substantial differences
between the first and final draft).
Organization
▪ Have an introduction that adequately introduces the argument.
▪ Have a conclusion that adequately concludes the essay.
▪ As a whole, be logically organized into well-developed, well-
organized paragraphs.
▪ Use transitions between paragraphs to make paper
organization clear for readers.
▪ Use transitions between sentences to make paragraph
organization clear to readers.
▪ Avoid unnecessary repetition.
Style
▪ Be clean stylistically, using concise and clear sentences,
strong verbs and active voice, and sentence
variety.
▪ Be grammatically correct, proofread.
▪ Employ a voice and tone appropriate for academic discourse.
▪ Demonstrate conscientious word choice and diction.
▪ Be formatted correctly.
▪ Include internal citations and a Works Cited page, in correct
MLA format.

NameBIB 107DateInstructor Covenant Paper Student Gui.docx

NameBIB 107DateInstructor Covenant Paper Student Gui.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to NameBIB 107DateInstructor Covenant Paper Student Gui.docx

Similar to NameBIB 107DateInstructor Covenant Paper Student Gui.docx (20)

More from rosemarybdodson23141

More from rosemarybdodson23141 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

NameBIB 107DateInstructor Covenant Paper Student Gui.docx