January 29

Returning to Problem
OK, we've done a good job looking at the various problems at play in Pollan and the Monsanto response, as well as the solutions that Pollan and Angell have proposed. Lori, JLBD1250, and riverranch point out the problems that are confronting food supply as well as the problems Angell has with Pollan's essay. Sazzu gets us started thinking about proposed solutions. Azhelen and Talichka help us think about Pollan's essay in terms of problem/solution. Realize that each of these problems and solutions represents critical thinking. When confronted with the coming problems of food supply and conventional agriculture, Monsanto thought about the problem and moved to the solution of New Leaf Potatoes. Pollan sees these potatoes as a problem as well, and so his essay records the process of his own critical thinking.

Problems are never simple. Now you need to think through the problem, using what both authors have said. That's what you'll be doing in your first paper.

From Problem to Project
Traditionally, the 101 paper was centrally concerned with argument, but we've come to realize that arguments are futile. The problem with agrument is that you end up trying to prove one text or another wrong (so, you would support Angell and prove Pollan wrong, or vice-versa). In the end, that's useless--it leaves you trapped in the texts and leaves the larger issue/problem untouched. In the real world, you won't be trying to prove Author A or B right or wrong--you'll be critically thinking through a problem.

That's why we're moving to a new model in 101, one based on project. Simply put, your project is what you want to accomplish in the paper. In many ways, then, it's similar to an argument: you still want to state it clearly in your introduction and you still want to support it with direct work with the texts. But a project is larger than an argument, because it asks you to contribute to the conversation around the problem. It asks you to connect, not simply Pollan and Angell, but Pollan and Angell and your own thinking.

To find a project for your paper, you need to start with the essays. After all, you don't join in a conversation until you know what's been said so far. As you read and re-read the essays, you want to be looking for the problems you see. That's already a form of critical thinking, because it means that you're not just reading, you're evaluating as you read. You'll want to mark in the margins those places where you see problems, because those are passages and quotations you can use in your paper, as you record for us your own critical thinking.

Moreover, you'll want to use the ideas from the essays to help you in this process. In other words, as you read Angell, you want to keep everything Pollan has said in mind. You want to be thinking something like this, "Given the ideas and concepts I've learned from Pollan, what problems can I see with what's being said here?"--this is a method that will help you build connections between the ideas of the two essays.

Once you've gone through this thinking/reading process, step back and look at what you've discovered. Given all that's been said, by both authors, what problems do you see? What has Pollan said that raises problems with Angell? What concepts does Angell provide that will raise problems in Pollan? What do you see out of, between, and through both essays? Once you figure that out, once you're able to locate a centralized issue that acts as an umbrella for the problems you see, then you have a project for your paper.

Looking at the Assignment
Let's think about this in terms of the assignment for paper one. First off, some tips on reading my assignments. I try to spend the first part of the assignment introducing a central issue for you to explore, but the bold part is always the core of the assignment--it's the central question and concern.

The assignment starts out by pointing to an obvious problem: both Angell and Pollan make convincing points, but they can't BOTH be right, not if we want to decide on a course of action for biotech. The assignment then goes on to recast the problem in terms of knowledge. It seems like what counts as knowledge, what's valid, is different for the authors.

The first step, then, is to figure out what these standards of knowledge are for Pollan and Angell. Look at how they come to their conclusions, look at what KIND of evidence each uses and what KIND of evidence each dismisses or discredits.

Then, the assignment directs you to a somewhat specific project: identify these standards of knowledge and then propose the standard we should be using for biotechnology decisions. This means you'll need to first use the texts of one or the other or both authors to abstract a standard of knowldge (example: "Angell's essay suggests that credible knowledge is verifiable and repeatedable). Then test that standard using the essays (example: Given that biotechnology involves decisions that will affect many people, this standard is useful and, when applied to Pollan's essay, can resolve the problems he sees with New Leaf potatoes"). It doesn't mean to just support Angell or Pollan, and it most definitely does not mean to compare and contrast the two. You may end up synthesizing what each has to say into a more complete standard for knowledge.

That's how you move from problem to project.

From Project to Action Horizon
Once you locate a project, you want to think through the texts to an action horizon. "Action horizon," like project, is a relatively new concept for 101. The "action horizon" is a proposed solution. The best action horizons work through the essays to develop a solution. For example, anyone could say, "Well, the solution is to stop using New Leafs." OK, but remember that simple solutions never satisfy. After all, that solution ignores the very real problems with agriculture that Angell discusses. A better solution will work through what both authors say. It's a way of being textually responsible.

"Textual responsibility" is one more important term. Basically, it means that whatever claims you want to make should take into account what's said in the essays. For example, just using Pollan's quote from Angell about Monsanto's job being just to sell potatoes is textually irresponsible because Angell offers an explanation of what he meant.

The Shape of a 101 Paper
OK. I know that's a lot to absorb, what with projects and action horizons and textual responsibility and also argument and connections. Don't worry about mastering these concepts now--that's what 101 is for, to help you acquire them. For now, just write a paper that addresses the assignment, has a central and original point, and uses the texts to support that point.

If you want a better sense of a 101 paper, check out the Gradatorium and the Tutorama on the 101 course homepage. The Tutorama has week-by-week tutorials, and the Gradatorium has sample papers.

Here are some more tips for making your paper:

• Keep in mind that an introduction should introduce; that means you should have the full title of each essay, the full name of each author, and a clear statement of your project in the introduction.
• Outline before and after. Organization is central to pursuing a project--each paragraph needs to prove one part of your project, so break down your point into pieces and then focus each paragraph on a piece, clearly showing how it relates to the whole (example: first para: "Before applying this standard of knowledge, we need to understand it. Pollan provides a model for how this kind of knowledge works"). An outline before will give you a good map to follow, but once you've done your draft outline it again--that will let you know whether or not you stuck to the plan.
• Engage. And do so responsbily. You don't need a set number of quotations in each paragraph, but you do need to refer to the text. That's because textual support helps us see your critical thinking even as it helps you prove your project. Keep in mind that you shouldn't try to force the essays into your project. Sometimes it's tempting to ignore or "forget" some piece of text that contradicts what you want to say. But that's a real opportunity. If you find a piece of text that goes againt what you say, take it into account. That makes your point stronger.
• Use 1" margins on all sides, double-space, use a normal sized font like Times New Roman or Arial.

OK, that's about it for starters. Hope that helps.

To Do for Thursday, January 31
Here's what's due for next class:

1. Catch up on required postings. I'm forgiving people who did not do the 1/24 postings on knowledge and Pollan, but make sure you do the 1/29 posting.
2. Write your paper. If you can't hit 3 pages, OK, but that just puts you at a greater disadvantage for next class. Better to write something, as much as you can, than have nothing at all.
3. Email your rough draft to me by Thursday (anytime on Thursday will do). I'll be commenting on these using Adobe's Acrobat, so make sure you have the free Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in. I'll have all drafts returned to you by Tuesday, 2:30. Be sure to use Microsoft Word or RTF format. If you're using a Mac, please be sure to add the file extension ".rtf" and if you need help with RTF, see Tech Help.
4. Post your rough draft on the forum in the "Thu, Jan 31 class: drafts go here" thread by Thursday night. If you need help uploading the file, see Tech Help.

Next class we'll be doing peer revision. I'll explain what it is and how to do it and why it helps. I'll also make peer revision pairings, so it's vital you have your paper up by Thursday night, because someone is counting on you. By Friday moring you'll have to come back to the forum to download your peer's paper and then you'll need to post it back up by Saturday night. Don't worry, I will explain all in the next class.