Guidelines
for Reading Analysis Presentations 1 & 2
Sign-up
for one reading during Weeks 2-3 and one reading during Weeks 4-6. Make a note
of the article titles and presentation dates that you sign up for below.
Reading analysis 1 article: __________________________ Presentation date: _______________
Reading
analysis 2 article: __________________________ Presentation
date: _______________
You
will be presenting your analysis in class along with two to five of your
classmates. The class will be counting on you to be on top of the article you
are covering, so please be prepared!
This
assignment is worth 40 points – to receive credit, you must participate in the
presentation of your analysis. You will be graded primarily on your written
analysis (breakdown of scoring below), but outstanding presentations will be
rewarded.
Before
you begin your work, examine the Evaluating Arguments handout.
Read
the article you will be analyzing carefully. If possible, read it twice. On
your first reading, just try to identify the main idea(s) and get a feel for
the writer’s approach and the flow of the piece. On your second reading, go
over the text more carefully; notice how the writer constructs his or her
argument. You will probably want to mark up your text and/or take notes.
To prepare your written analysis:
Identify
the author’s name and the title of the article. Answer the following questions.
Put your answers in outline form (see sample analysis on the reverse side of
this sheet).
1. What is the central
claim (or thesis) of the selection? Your answer should be a complete
sentence in your own words. Be as specific as possible, but remember that your
claim should cover the whole article. (12 points)
2. Is the central claim expressed explicitly or implicitly?
The claim is explicit if the writer spells out what it is. The claim is
implicit if the writer only implies the claim but does not state it outright.
(2 points)
3. What reasons link
the evidence to the claim? In other words, why does the evidence support the
claim? Reasons may be presented explicitly or implied. (8 points)
4. What evidence
does the writer present to support his or her claim? Specify and categorize the
evidence (e.g. examples, personal experiences, analogy, authoritative opinion,
facts, statistical data, cause-effect reasoning, results of scientific
experiments, comparison, interviews, etc. – see sample on back). Do not answer this question with detailed
quotes or paraphrases from the article! For additional guidance, see the discussion
of evidence on pp. 91-101 of your textbook Current
Issues. (10 points)
5. Comment briefly on the persuasiveness of the article by
answering one or more of the following questions. (5 points)
·
Is the argument
convincing? Does it rely on emotional, ethical, and/or logical appeals?
·
Are there flaws
in the reasoning of the argument? Does it rely on questionable sources?
·
Does
understanding the argument require knowledge of the historical or cultural
context in which it was written?
·
How do the style,
organization, and/or tone contribute or detract from the persuasiveness of the
argument?
·
What is your
personal reaction to the article?
6. Write two to three discussion questions to ask the class about the article. The best
questions will stimulate interesting discussion about the issues raised in the
article. You may also ask questions that “test” your classmates’ recall and
understanding of the article. (3 points)
SAMPLE ANALYSIS of “Does
Your Language Shape How You Think?” by Guy Deutscher
Central claim:
While our native language may not be able to constrain what we can think, it
influences how we think about and experience the world by compelling us to
develop habitual patterns of thinking about and organizing our perceptions (Explicit).
Reason:
Particularities of specific languages lead native speakers to develop “habits
of mind,” such as specifying the time (verb tense) of an event, assigning
gender to inanimate objects, differentiating shades of color, or using a
particular directional orientation system. These “habits of mind” compel us to
focus, organize, and differentiate our thinking and perceptions in keeping with
the rules and customs of our particular native language.
Evidence:
- Examples of differences in what various languages
oblige speakers to consider, such as a person’s gender and the time of an
event (past, present, future)
- Results of experiments that show gender-related
associations with inanimate objects in speakers of languages that assign
gender to objects
- Results of experiments on that suggest differences in
color perception among speakers of languages that have different words for
colors
- Extended explanation of the Guugu
Yimithirr language’s use of a geographical system for describing
and understanding space
- Comparison with use of our more familiar egocentric
systems
- Related examples and narratives (stories)
illustrating the resulting differences on thinking (perceiving and
experiencing the world), such as the storyteller who made geographically
accurate hand gestures whenever he told the same story and the
hypothetical example comparing geographical and egocentric perception of
the “mirrored” hotel rooms.
- Description of the Matses language’s obligation that
speakers specify how a piece of information is known (directly experienced
vs. inferred vs. conjectured)
Comment: The
argument is very convincing because of its strong logical appeals. Each point
is carefully explained and supported with logical reasoning and relevant
evidence. The author avoids making broad claims and overstating his argument,
which enhances the article’s ethical appeal. Personally, I agree with the
conclusions of the article. When I have spoken other languages, I often felt I
had to think differently, which sometimes felt difficult and unnatural. For
example, when speaking French, I found it hard to remember the genders of
objects; it made no sense to me that a shoe should be feminine and a hat should
be masculine.
Discussion questions: What does the article suggest about the
possibility (or probability) of misunderstandings between people with different
native languages? Which habits of mind might encourage better (or worse)
critical thinking? What did the article suggest about perception of color?
