http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/15/justice/michigan-affirmative-action-ban/index.html?hpt=hp_bn1
This article is called "Appeals court strikes down Michigan's affirmative action ban" and, fairly self explanatory, is about our ban on affirmative action being ruling unconstitutional by an appeals court.
Details: The details the author provides appear to create a bias towards the ban, rather than the court's decision. There are more quotes and examples from the side of the ban, and the reader is left hoping the Supreme Court will take the case and rule for the ban. For example, the author includes a quote from Attorney General Schuette, saying "(The ban) embodies the fundamental the premise of what America is all about: equality under the law. Entrance to our great universities must be based upon merit." This quote, along with the fact that it's from the Attorney General, makes the reader feel justified in thinking affirmative action makes equality more difficult, not less. The author also includes details such as the ban passing with "58% voting yes." As humans, most of us want to "fit in" and go with the majority, so including statistics like this one help the reader lean toward supporting the ban.
Diction: The word choice of this piece also shows a bias toward the ban. The author describes how the court "narrowly" overturned the ban, suggesting disappointment with the decision. Later in the article, the author discusses the idea that affirmative action has to be "phased" out as diversity goals are met. This word suggests not an automatic ban throughout the country, but starting to head in that direction, which the ban does.
Syntax: This article is broken up into short, two-to-three line paragraphs. This organization helps keep the reader interested by making the points concise and moving on. Most of these paragraphs are made up of a short sentence followed by a longer one. This puts emphasis on the second, longer sentence, which is where most of the meatier information is. For example, "Efforts over decades to create a diverse classroom have been controversial. The Brown v. Board of Education high court ruling in 1954 ended segregation of public schools, but sparked nationwide protests and disobedience by state who initially refused to integrate." The first sentences introduces the topic and the second sentence provides the evidence, which is what the reader remembers from the paragraph because it's the last thing he reads.
Excellent response Brianna! Your presentation was a little unconventional but I think I like it more than the way I've been doing it because it was easy to see how your categorized your thoughts. Your examples were good and clearly supported your point. You might want to reword "bias towards the ban" to a more specific tone or sentiment from the author because bias could be a little confusing. Overall though I thought this was a really good response and you did everything right.
ReplyDeleteHi Bri,
ReplyDeleteGood job on this response! My question is are we allowed to organize the response like how you did? I agree with Santos in that I like you way much better. Your claims were very clear and your examples supported those claims quite nicely. On the whole, I think you could write about how the details, diction, and syntax contributed to the author's tone and bias. This connection would take your essay a little furthur and provide readers with a greater sense of why the author chose to use those techniques. Overall, great work Bri!
I agree with Santos and Julie that this is a really good way to organize the piece. This was a great response and you did a great job using examples and explaining them. The syntax paragraph was excellent and I felt it was your strongest paragraph. The one thing i would suggest is that you talked about the author's purpose of writing the piece. That would help you explain the tone and bias which Julie recommended. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDelete