is

is

x

..........................

3............................

1............................

.........................

.........................

.........................

.....................................................

.....................................................

.....................................................

5.8: Brainstorming Tool for Response Writing

Ultimately, Eligon points to personal intuition as an aid to individuals in the Black community grappling with these questions. He describes the experience of sociologist Crystal M. Fleming, whose use of lowercase “black” transformed to capitalized “Black” over the course of her career and years of research. Her transition from black to Black is, she says, as much a matter of personal choice as a reasoned conclusion—suggesting that it will be up to Black journalists and academics to determine the conventions of the future. (Note: This last sentence of this summary paragraph focuses on Eligon's conclusion, his implied argument about what should guide the choice of terms.) Eligon's statistical and anecdotal survey of current usage of Black and black covers enough ground to convince us of the trend in favor of capitalization. (Note: This sentence indicates the shift from summary to a positive assessment of the argument's effectiveness.) But the value of Eligon's article lies in the attention it brings both to the convention and the discussion as a way for the Black community to wrestle with history and define itself.  By presenting a variety of past and present opinions from Black leaders, Eligon gives a sense of the richness and relevance of this ongoing debate.  (Note: this part of the assessment emphasizes not just what is effective at convincing readers, but what is most valuable about the argument.) His focus at the end on the opinion of one Black scholar, Crystal Fleming, offers an appealing intuitive approach to these decisions about naming. This idea is more hinted at than developed, leaving us to wonder how many other leaders share Fleming's approach and whether this approach might lead to chaos, as each writer might choose a different way to refer to racial identity. (Note: This last sentence offers a gentle critique of the limits of Eligon's evidence on this last point and the existence of possible counterarguments that are not addressed.) Still, Eligon's ending leaves us hopeful about the positive outcome of continuing the discussion: perhaps decisions about naming can help the Black community find self-definition in the face of historical injustice. We could build on Eligon's analysis to make a further claim about success not just of Black but of other terms that remind us of a shared history of oppression.  Despite the ongoing debates, his evidence suggests that the Black community has gravitated more toward reclaiming negative terms rather than inventing neutral ones.  (Note: The writer suggests a way to draw a new conclusion using Eligon's evidence.) He notes that historically, W.E.B Dubois's push to embrace Negro and transform it into a positive was successful and that the Black Power movement did the same with black. It is true that the term African American has been partially successful, but clearly its relevance is waning: Eligon scarcely considers it necessary to mention this term further as he turns to the discussion of black vs. Black. The Black Lives Matter movement chose Black rather than African American, and this choice continued to feel appropriate when the movement grew dramatically after the killing of George Floyd. (Note: The writer points to ideas that were implied but not emphasized by Eligon.)  Why has the Black community continued to gravitate toward previously negative terms? Perhaps in this time of racial reckoning, in the face of active ongoing injustice, a label that points to the history of oppression is more empowering. It expresses defiance and determination. If so, perhaps it would make sense for The New York Times to adopt Black.  Eligon does not take a side on this issue, perhaps because he is not writing an opinion piece, but it is a short distance from his piece to a piece advocating that the Times follow the lead of the Associated Press and the majority of Black leaders of the moment. (Note: Here, the response claims that a particular stance on a controversial issue follows from Eligon's argument.) Howard Zinn, radical author of A People's History of the United States, writes, “The memory of oppressed people is one thing that cannot be taken away, and for such people, with such memories, revolt is always an inch below the surface.”  Reclaiming an oppressor's name for a people keeps this memory, and this potential for revolt, alive. Ideally, each time we use such a reclaimed term, we remember that inequity still permeates our society, and we recommit ourselves to fighting its many forms. (Note: The essay suggests a way in which this discussion of terms for an oppressed community can inspire us to fight oppression more broadly.) Eligon focuses only on the Black community in America, but it would be interesting to learn more about the appeal of reclaiming negative terms by looking at trends among other marginalized groups. (Note: This passage adds to the conversation by suggesting parallels to groups beyond the Black community.) Which ones have chosen to embrace once-hateful terms, and which have chosen new, more accurate, more inclusive names? Does reclaiming negative terms become more common when oppression is more active? One obvious example lies in the reclaiming of the term "queer." Despite ongoing marginalization of queer people, the reclaimed term never gained dominance.  "LGBTQ" and variations are used more commonly, despite their awkwardness.  Another parallel lies in the debate over the use of Indian vs. Native American vs. indigenous. The term "cholo," too, was initially a slur referring to persons of mixed Amerindian ancestry in Bolivia and Peru, but is now used by some as a badge of indigenous pride and power.  (It has various other meanings in Mexico, the United States, and in other Latin American countries.) Future discussions could analyze the historical trends in terminology and their relation to changing power relations for each of these groups. Perhaps comparing these histories could shed new light on the complex role of names in the struggle for social justice.  

John Eligon's New York Times article, “A Debate Over Identity and Race Asks, Are African-Americans ‘Black’ or ‘black’?” outlines the ongoing conversation among journalists and academics regarding conventions for writing about race—specifically, whether or not to capitalize the “b” in “black” when referring to African-Americans (itself a term that is going out of style). (Note: The opening sentence introduces the text this essay will respond to and gives a brief summary of the text's content.) Eligon argues that, while it might seem like a minor typographical issue, this small difference speaks to the question of how we think about race in the United States. Are words like “black” or “white” mere adjectives, descriptors of skin color? Or are they proper nouns, indicative of group or ethnic identity? Eligon observes that until recently, with the prominence of the Black Lives Matter movement, many journalistic and scholarly publications tended to use a lowercase “black,” while Black media outlets  typically capitalized “Black.”  He suggests that the balance is now tipping in favor of "Black," but given past changes, usage will probably change again as the rich discussion about naming, identity, and power continues. (Note: The thesis statement includes two related ideas explored by Eligon: the current trend toward using "Black" and the value of the ongoing discussion that leads to changing terms.) Eligon points to a range of evidence that "Black" is becoming the norm, including a recent change by "hundreds of news organizations" including the Associated Press. This comes in the wake of the George Floyd killing, but it also follows a longtime Black press tradition exemplified by newspapers like The New York Amsterdam News. Eligon cites several prominent academics who are also starting to capitalize Black.  However, he also quotes prominent naysayers and describes a variety of counterarguments, like the idea that capitalization gives too much dignity to a category that was made up to oppress people.  (Note: Summary of a counterargument.) Capitalizing Black raises another tricky question: Shouldn't White be likewise capitalized? Eligon points out that the groups most enthusiastic to capitalize White seem to be white supremacists, and news organizations want to avoid this association.    (Note: The choice of "points out" signals that everyone would agree that mostly white supremacist groups capitalize White.)  Eligon's brief history of the debate over racial labels, from “Negro” and “colored” to “African-American” and “person of color,” gives the question of to-capitalize-or-not-to-capitalize a broader context, investing what might seem like a minor quibble for editors with the greater weight of racial identity and its evolution over time. (Note: This paragraph shifts focus from present to past trends and debates.) He outlines similar disagreements over word-choice and racial labels by scholars and activists like Fannie Barrier Williams and W.E.B. Du Bois surrounding now-antiquated terms like “Negro” and “colored.” These leaders debated whether labels with negative connotations should be replaced, or embraced and given a new, positive connotation. (Note: This paragraph summarizes the historical examples Eligon gives. Phrases like "He cites" point out that certain ideas are being used to support a claim.) Eligon observes that today's "black" was once used as a pejorative but was promoted by the Black Power movement starting in the late sixties, much as the word "Negro" was reclaimed as a positive word. (Note: Summary of a historical trend that parallels today's trend.) However, the Reverend Jesse Jackson also had some success in calling for a more neutral term, "African American," in the late eighties.  He thought it more appropriate to emphasize a shared ethnic heritage over color.   (Note: Summary of a historical countertrend based on a counterargument to the idea of reclaiming negative terms.) Eligon suggests that this argument continues to appeal to some today, but that such terms have been found to be inadequate given the diversity of ethnic heritage. “African-American” and the more generalized “people/person of color” do not give accurate or specific enough information.  (Note: Describes a response to the counterargument, a justification of today's trend toward Black.) 

One of the most challenging aspects of the Pandemic for dual-income parents is the school and daycare closures. (Note: Whereas the first support focused on gender roles, the second paragraph focuses on the particular challenges for parents during the Covid-19 epidemic.) These dual-earner parents should find a way to split children’s needs during the shelter-in-place. If they do not balance paid work and child care, both sides will feel the consequences. To emphasize these consequences, Lewis humorously says “Dual-income couples might suddenly be living like their grandparents, one homemaker, and one breadwinner.” (Note: Drawing on evidence from the text, this passage shows how gender roles relate to the challenges of Covid-19 for working parents and families.) Instead of splitting the housework, women take the role of “homemaker” so the author implies here that this regresses gender dynamics two generations backward. It obviously demonstrates that nothing much has changed over time and the mentality remains. While many couples are trying to find a middle way, others think that women have to suck it up and sacrifice their jobs. In reference to school closures, Lewis brings up the Ebola health crisis which occurred in West Africa in the time period of 2014-2016. (Note: The following paragraph cites a historical precedent for the Covid-19 outbreak as a basis for comparison.) According to Lewis, during this outbreak, many African girls lost their chance at education; moreover, many women died during childbirth because of a lack of medical care. Mentioning these elaborations proves once again that not only coronavirus but also many other outbreaks have caused a disaster for feminism. Pandemics, in other words, pile yet another problem on women who always face an uphill battle against patriarchal structures. (Note: This passage ties this observation about the Ebola outbreak in West Africa to a greater observation about Pandemics and gender roles overall.) I started reading her article with a feeling of frustration. While the main topic of the article is feminism, Lewis gives a couple of male examples from the past, such as William Shakespeare and Isaac Newton. (Note: The author makes a personal note here, marking an emotional connection and reaction to the text.) She seems at times to attribute their success to their masculinity. They both lived in times of plague, demonstrating that despite all our progress, the human species is still grappling with the same issues. According to Lewis, neither Newton nor Shakespeare had to worry about childcare or housework. Even though her comparison seemed odd to me, she managed to surprise me that in over 300 years many gender inequities remain the same. This is actually very tragic. It is hard to acknowledge that women are still facing gender inequality in almost every area even 300 years after the time of these great English thinkers. (Note: The author cites historical precedent again: this passage argues that the relationship between plagues and gender roles has not changed much in centuries.) Assuming housework is the natural place of women without asking women if they want to do it is asking for too big a sacrifice. Since couples have the option to split the housework and childcare, why should only women have to shoulder most of the burden? This is a question that I might never be able to answer, even if I search my whole life. It is unacceptable that there is pressure on women to conform to gender roles, such as cultural settings and expectations. (Note: The author uses a rhetorical question to segue into a new supporting argument.) Women should not have to sacrifice their leisure time completing unpaid work. I agree with Lewis when she mentions the “second shift” situation. When we consider women’s first shift as their paid work, the second shift represents the time that they spend working in the home. In this case, there is apparently no shift for leisure time. Lewis also supports this by saying “Across the world, women—including those with jobs—do more housework and have less leisure time than their male partners.” Additionally, it seems like economic recovery is going to be long-lasting because of the Coronavirus. As a solution, if men and women have equal housework responsibilities, women may spend more of their time completing paid work. (Note: The author makes a call to action near the end of the essay.) In this way, they can contribute to the economy while they are socializing. Especially after the Pandemic is over, we will need a greater workforce, so hopefully both men and women can equally participate in the economy. (Note: Much like the first sentence of the essay, the last sentence speaks to a greater, big-picture context: the need for equality in a post-pandemic world.)

Spread Feminism, Not Germs COVID-19 is not the first outbreak in history and probably won’t be the last one. (Note: The opening statement provides the essay's overall context: the effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic.) However, its effects will be long-lasting. (Note: The followup statement introduces the essay's particular focus: the impact of the Pandemic on women.) While the Pandemic has affected everyone’s lives in every aspect, its impacts on women are even more severe. Helen Lewis, the author of “The Coronavirus Is a Disaster for Feminism” explains why feminism cannot survive during the Pandemic. (Note: An outside text is introduced that the essay will engage with.) Lewis starts her article with a complaint by saying “enough already” because, in terms of housework especially for child care, there has been inequality since the past. This inequality has become even more explicit with the coronavirus outbreak. Women have to shoulder not only more housework but also childcare more than ever due to school closures. The Pandemic started as a public health crisis and brought along an economic one. Women are mainly affected by this crisis more than men because women are more likely to take housework and childcare responsibilities while men are expected to work and “bring home the bacon.” (Note: The author provides a clear thesis statement to close the opening (introduction) paragraph).) Each gender has a different role in society. While men are usually seen as breadwinners, women mostly spend their time at home and do housework. (Note: The first supporting argument: the unpaid labor of women under traditional gender roles.) Women also are the primary caregivers for both children and elders. As Lewis mentions, “looking after” duty is on women’s shoulder. Then she adds “ all this looking after—this unpaid caring labor—will fall more heavily on women because of the existing structure of the workforce,” and she includes a provocative question from Clare Wenham, an assistant professor of global health policy at the London School of Economics: “Who is paid less? Who has the flexibility?” The author intentionally uses this quote to express her frustration. At the same time, she implies that this existing structure is based upon the gender pay gap. (Note: The author supports her argument with evidence from the text, and provides analysis to tie that evidence to her argument.) We all are familiar with the reality that “women’s income is less than men’s” so this fact goes a long way towards explaining why women mainly stay at home and take caregiving responsibilities. It is a kind of survival rule that whoever earns less should stay at home. In this case, it seems like couples do not have many options.

In "Spread Feminism, Not Germs," student Gizem Gur summarizes, assesses, and responds to the Atlantic Magazine article "The Coronavirus Is a Disaster for Feminism." Annotations point out how Gur structures the response paper.   Sample response paper "Spread Feminism, Not Germs" in PDF with margin notes     Sample response paper "Spread Feminism, Not Germs" accessible version with notes in parentheses     In "Typography and Identity," Saramanda Swigart summarizes, assesses, and responds to the New York Times article “A Debate Over Identity and Race Asks, Are African-Americans ‘Black’ or ‘black’?” Annotations point out how Swigart structures the response paper. Sample response paper "Typography and Identity" in PDF with margin notes  Sample response paper "Typography and Identity" accessible version with notes in parentheses 

5.7: Sample Response Essays

Introduce alternate claims Instead of _____________, I would argue that _____________. A more accurate claim would be _____________. In actuality, _____________. The idea that _____________ better accounts for  the evidence. We can find a better explanation of _____________ in _____________. As we have seen, it is not true that _____________. Rather, _____________.

Suggest ways to spread the word We could help spread awareness of _____________ by _____________. The idea that _____________ should be taught in _____________ classes. We should all talk to those we know about _____________.

Underscore the importance of an argument X’s claim is important because _____________. This is especially concerning because _____________. We should take note of this since _____________.

Introduce alternative or additional reasons  Better evidence for _____________ lies in _____________. Another reason why _____________ is that _____________. The fact that _____________ provides further support for X’s claim. My own experience has also shown that _____________ , which leads me to agree with X. I have seen firsthand how _____________. In addition to the evidence X gives, it is also worth considering that _____________.

Point to further implications  The idea that _____________ could apply to _____________ as well. Beyond _____________, X’s argument has implications for _____________. This argument shows how important it is that we take action on _____________. If we accept the idea that _____________, as we should, then the time has come to _____________. Given X’s points, shouldn’t we consider _____________?

Suggest a limit to the claim We should recognize that this pattern is limited to cases where _____________. The argument holds true in situations where _____________. It is important to note that this claim only applies to _____________. _____________ is a notable exception because _____________. We should note that this claim is certainly not true of _____________.

Call for support and research Further research on _____________ could show us _____________. A study of _____________ might show whether _____________. Is it really the case that _____________? We need more information about _____________. An investigation of _____________ could help us determine the role of _____________ in _____________.

Call for clarification X should specify whether they mean _____________ or _____________. X should explain what they mean by _____________. X should elaborate on the concept of _____________.

Reframe the issue Instead of focusing on _____________, we should look at the question in the light of _____________. A better way to frame the issue of _____________ would be in terms of _____________. To better understand _____________, we should first ask ourselves _____________.

Suggest an alternate claim that addresses the same issue If we just analyzed an argument we found to be weak, we may already have an opposing argument or an alternate argument in mind. If readers are convinced that the first argument is without merit, they will be looking for a replacement. Our critique puts us in a good position to present an alternate vision.  In the example above, the student Anoush could give her take on where the fashion industry is right now in terms of inclusion. She might argue that the industry needs to represent a greater range of ethnicities and sizes and make sure that diverse models are shown as regular people, not as exotic.   The following phrases introduce alternate claims:  Instead of _____________, I would argue that _____________. A more accurate claim would be _____________. In actuality, _____________. The idea that _____________ better accounts for  the evidence. We can find a better explanation of _____________ in _____________. As we have seen, it is not true that _____________. Rather, _____________.

If we can’t agree with the argument’s main claim, we probably have some ideas of our own on the subject. For example, let’s say a student, let’s call her Anoush, has just read an article that celebrates the fashion industry’s inclusion of multiple ethnicities and body types. Let’s say Anoush is not impressed with the fashion industry’s efforts. She has critiqued the article, but she knows that her readers may not be satisfied if she stops there. If the article was wrong, then what would a better article on the topic look like?   We don’t always have to have a fully formed or researched argument to put our own ideas into a college essay. If our main task is to summarize and assess with just a little response, this part can be tentative and not fully developed.  The idea is to point the reader in a new direction. We may want to qualify or limit our suggestion with words like “perhaps,” “it may be that,” or “The idea that _____________ is worth considering…”  

Sometimes we forget that agreement doesn’t have to be the end of a conversation.  The process of assessing an argument starts us thinking about all the issues it brings up, and primes us to add our own two cents.

Give a new reason  Sometimes we may agree with an argument’s claim, but for a different reason.  In that case, we can make an original contribution just by pointing out the alternate reason.  In other cases, we might just want to add one or more reasons to the list already covered by the argument. Maybe we are aware of evidence from another reading or from our own experience, or maybe we see a whole different line of reasoning which also leads us to the same conclusion.  For example, we noted in Section 4.4 that in the argument below, the reason was the same as the claim, so the claim had no support at all (a fallacy called circular reasoning). Anyone born in the United States has a right to citizenship because citizenship here depends on birth, not ethnicity or family history of immigration. As a response to that argument, we could suggest a better reason for the same claim: Anyone born in the United States has a right to citizenship because the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship.

Call for clarification If one of the problems is vagueness or ambiguity, we probably want to call for greater clarity. We can suggest that the writer specify what they mean by a particular word or phrase.  Or we may want to ask that they explain a murky point further.  We can call for clarification with phrases like the following: X should specify whether they mean _____________ or _____________. X should explain what they mean by _____________. X should elaborate on the concept of _____________.

Call for additional support or study The process of analyzing the argument will often lead us to see what it is that we do not know. It may expose areas of uncertainty or contradiction that are intriguing. If we have called into question a reason or an assumption, we may want to recommend further research or support. Perhaps we are not ready to accept something without more evidence. In that case, we might describe the kind of study or investigative journalism that could uncover a reason.  If we have thought of exceptions, then maybe the reason needs more support to show that the exceptions are not common. For example, we might suggest that the writer should present some statistical evidence, like a survey, to show what the norm is, rather than just a few examples. The following sample sentence summarizes and assesses an argument and then moves on to recommend additional support: While Swigart is right that porous borders pose a security risk and that illegal immigration challenges the rule of law, her argument would have been strengthened if she had added statistics linking gang violence to human trafficking across the U.S.-Mexico border.

Maybe, in our assessment of the argument, we found exceptions to it or a whole set of circumstances under which it doesn’t hold up. We can advance the conversation by qualifying or limiting the original argument.  One way to do so is to state that the argument only applies in a certain set of cases.  Another way is to acknowledge one or more individual exceptions to it.  Limiting an argument often helps to defend it against a counterargument.

How would you suggest limiting each of the following arguments?  Can you point out an exception? Does the claim only apply under specific circumstances? People are more comfortable with video meetings now than they were before the pandemic. Education should be free. Love is a force for good. People should not share videos of others without permission.

Social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, etc all encourage responses; we read a post and then add our own comment as we react, reply, share, or retweet. Of course email, texting, messageboards, forums, blogs and some news media also invite original commentary. Practicing academic response writing, then, can enrich our repertoire of responses in everyday life. 

Uses in college, work, and life Many college writing assignments call for responses that go beyond agreeing or disagreeing with an argument. The response can be a place to bring in opinion and personal experience as they relate to the argument. Even if an assessment assignment doesn’t specifically ask for a recommendation, it often makes sense to add one to a conclusion. Whether we agreed or disagreed with the argument, pointing toward a next step for the larger conversation on the issue can give the essay a sense of momentum and purpose. 

A chance to express ourselves Our voices matter.  Much of this book thus far has focused on how to summarize and evaluate other people’s arguments, but those are only first steps.  Other people’s arguments help us develop our own.  Writing summaries and assessments can inspire us to come up with our own original points. Academic writing gives us the chance to join a worldwide conversation about what is true on every subject under the sun. 

individual sentences to make our arguments clearer and more powerful.

establish trust and a sense of connection.

arguments move us

how to recognize and use methods of persuasion that go beyond logic.

We can frame many logical principles in terms of practical templates.

research can lead us to develop an argument of our own.

find and examine multiple sources on a topic

offer something new in response

how to test the strength of the argument and make a judgment about it.

summarize it

It starts with understanding and describing others' arguments, then moves on to assessing those arguments’ strengths and weaknesses and articulating our own points in response.

practical guide to college writing.

Slow thinking doesn’t come easily, even for supposed experts.

Those of us who don’t start out with power can build it by arguing well about the issues that matter to us and our communities. The habits of mind we learn as readers and writers can help us develop our political opinions.

But slow thinking is not just for academic work and professional life.

They enable us to communicate and explain our decisions to colleagues and respond to their questions and critiques.

effort from every student and scholar

It takes mental sweat.  It takes time.  We need each other’s help and input. Reading, writing, and revising help us get clearer about our own ideas and those of others

Often, we are not even conscious of these biases, and only slow thinking and engagement with different perspectives can help us overcome them.

we read a headline without reading the whole article, we decide to click or not click “Like,” we decide to share with friends or not—all based on fast thinking.

It helps us slow down and clarify our ideas.

In all these settings, a professional style of Standard English will boost credibility.

that writing skills will help us succeed in a career.

It’s worth getting good at because we’re going to do it a lot.

process of writing, the process of developing my own arguments, would challenge me even more and become the core practice that stretched my thinking.

readings and discussions.

It implied that college was about training the mind, not just about specific areas of expertise.

“college teaches you to think.”

The point is to make your decision on the basis of a serious attempt to assess the relevant evidence. You did this when you paid attention to probabilities and consequences—you weighed the pros and cons —of going or staying. That is, you weighed the benefits and drawbacks.

Learning to invest prudently, wisely, patiently, with an eye toward long-term growth of capital and income is easy. We can show you how. (Short-term speculation, also known as trading, is difficult and dangerous. We can't help you learn how to do it. Sorry.) Join us on our grand adventure as we learn how to build wealth and, at the same time, help raise the standard of living for everyone on the globe.

Once our readers understand the original text and trust that we understand it, they are in our hands, ready to listen to our assessment.

We will look at problems with the clarity of the claims, the solidity of the reasons, and the validity of the assumptions

(−3𝑒−2𝑥+2)+3(𝑒−2𝑥+2𝑥+3)

21 °C to 85 °C).

Strong backbonders—better known as π-acceptors or π-acids—exhibit strong trans effects.

?? (Exercise ??

The Purposes of Electroplating:

an assessment starts with a summary of the argument.

Try putting the strengths and weaknesses in order from most important to least important.  This may help us decide what to highlight in our thesis. 

make a list of the strengths and weaknesses of the argument that emerged as we checked the argument for clarity, evidence, assumptions, exceptions, and counterarguments

Anderson’s attack on transgender identity does clearly represent the reasoning of those who object to recognizing transgender identity. Thus, it provides opportunities for transgender activitsts to clarify their own positions and correct common misconceptions.

Sometimes we see value not in the content of the argument but in the focus it brings to a topic.

straw man fallacy

If it falls, this boulder will not roll far; the slope is not slippery

The red herring fallacy gets its name from the actual fish. When herring are smoked, they turn red and are quite pungent. Stinky things can be used to distract hunting dogs, who of course follow the trail of their quarry by scent; if you pass over that trail with a stinky fish and run off in a different direction, the hound may be distracted and follow the wrong trail

We will need to identify these assumptions on our own.

By first recognizing and then changing our assumptions, we can, to use a common phrase, “think outside the box.”

find out what assumptions it makes and check those assumptions

An assessment could note that at the very least the argument should have mentioned this later apology when it quoted Spitzer.

variety of kinds of evidence

we need to know whether that institution is credible.

negative stereotypes

a writer may end up summarizing that belief again in a different way. Other times the writer may knowingly perform this sleight of hand, hoping the reader will not notice.

We should all support reproductive justice

object-oriented data models

The argument presents only two possibilities

The original argument does not mention any of these exceptions.  By pointing this out, we can show that the argument as expressed is invalid.

forumlas

A1

The first step to images with more impact and general appeal is an evaluation of both the brightness and the color in a clip. Brightness in video terms is called Luminance or shortened to Luma and is the “black-and-white” aspect of the image that defines the shape and lighting of the person or scene being photographed. Color, called Chrominance by video technicians and colorists, refers to all the color information, mixed from the primary channels of Red, Green and Blue (RGB) that are applied to an image.

When adding full-screen photos or images to your video, try to make sure that their resolution matches that of your video resolution. Also, if you plan to scale any images in your editor, you’ll need images that match the size you plan to “zoom” in on them. For example, if you plan to add a full screen photo to an UHD sequence, use images with a resolution of 3840 x 2160 or greater. If you further wanted to “zoom in” or scale up this photo by 200% - your photo resolution should also be 2x the size to display the best quality. While it’s not always possible to find the perfect graphic assets in the resolution you need, in a professional setting scaling more than 115-120% is generally not permissible.

In the timeline select the “wrench” icon and select > Show Duplicate Frame Markers [Premiere will display matching colors for any duplicate frames - works for both audio and video] Also in Premiere Pro you can right-click on the header row in listview and choose “Metadata display...” Use the disclosure triangle to view items in the first top option, Premiere Pro Project Metadata. Place a checkmark on the metadata columns “Video Usage” and “Audio Usage”. [Premiere will now how many times a clip has been used and at what timecode - works for both audio and video]

or “extra”

Check on the clip with the lack of footage (at the head or tail, the beginning or end of the clip and consider adding footage by using a slip edit. A slip edit will retain the In and Out markers and its position in the timeline but allow you to “scroll” and review the available footage in the clip. This is often a fast fix, but won’t work if you need won’t work if you need the head or tail in the transition. Another option is to move the offending clip to another track, usually above the edit. Sometimes this helps fix an issue as you can now more freely move the clip on the upper track.

Blackmagicdesign’s Resolve

and in professional work and crucial

a

e its fair share of immigration and emigration as developing males leave their mothers to seek out a new pride with genetically unrelated females. T

The greater the hereditability of a population’s phenotypic variation, the more susceptible it is to the evolutionary forces that act on heritable variation.

is the fraction of phenotype variation that can be attributed to genetic differences, or genetic variance, among individuals in a population.

b. Read over the prompts and let them sink in for a week or so. You’ll still have one more week to finish the assignment, right?

many-to-many relationship

CnH2n+2(assuming non-cyclic structures) as shown in hexane (C6H14) below.

Such a description is called a summary, and it forms part of most college writing assignments. In some cases, the summary will be the entire essay.

Thus the process of writing a summary helps us get even clearer about the writer’s intentions and implications than we would in mapping out an argument.

Negative claims of value The author criticizes_____________. She deplores____________. He finds fault in_____________. They regret that_____________. They complain that_____________. The authors are disappointed in_____________.

Positive claims of value  They praise_____________. He celebrates_____________. She applauds the notion that_____________. They endorse_____________. He admires_____________. She finds value in_____________. They rave about_____________.

Widely accepted claims of fact He informs us of _____________. She describes_____________. They note that _____________. He observes that _____________. She explains that _____________. The writer points out the way in which_____________.

Controversial claims of fact They argue that _____________. She maintains that _____________. He contends that _____________. They assert that _____________. She holds that _____________. He insists that _____________. She thinks_____________. They believe that_____________.

Introducing the argument In an article for _____________, writer _____________ discusses _____________. The recent account of _____________ by _____________ focuses on _____________. Writing in the journal _____________, the scholar _____________ argues that _____________.

More importantly, the two approaches to immigration might not be in such dramatic conflict as the authors would have us believe. A policy that expands legal immigration to families in desperate need, for instance, while still cracking down on illegal immigration could potentially satisfy both sides of the argument. This is the problem with many partisan issues today. While we spill ink proving the other wrong, we miss opportunities to find common ground on which to build. (Note: In the conclusion, the comparison between the two essays leads to a proposal for a way to satisfy the demands of both.)

In recent years, illegal immigration into the United States at the U.S.-Mexico border has become a divisive political topic, resulting in a widening partisan divide as to whose priorities we should privilege: the immigrants’ or the nation’s. (Note: The author establishes a frame of reference in the first sentence, referencing the cultural context surrounding illegal immigration.) Are we global citizens or American citizens first? Anna Mills’ “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?” and Saramanda Swigart's “The Weight of the World” offer opposing views on this controversial issue. (Note: Here are our grounds for comparison, wherein the author briefly summarizes the two stances on immigration.)While Mills considers us global citizens, arguing for compassion toward suffering in our reevaluation of immigration policies and practices, Swigart believes we must be American citizens first, pointing out the necessity for a nation to secure its borders and enforce its laws. (Note: Essay thesis)

The essay "Contested Territory" compares and contrasts two arguments on immigration: "Wouldn't We All Cross the Border" by Anna Mills and "The Weight of the World" by Saramanda Swigart. Annotations point out how the author structures the comparison.

While illegal immigrants crossing the border to the United States may come from desperate circumstances, it is unjust, impractical, and unrealistic for one nation to solve the problems of so many non-citizens. Illegal immigration challenges the rule of law. If laws can be broken simply because lawbreakers had good intentions, this suggests that obeying the law is merely optional—that the law is something to be obeyed only when it is convenient to do so. It is understandable that plenty of people who break the law do so with good intentions, but enforcement of the law cannot be reduced to investigations of intentions—it must ultimately spring from concrete actions. The truth is that illegal immigration presents a security risk. Because illegal immigrants are not tracked by any immigration agency and thus remain largely anonymous, it is impossible to verify which immigrants come in search of a new life and plan to abide by the laws of their host country and which do not. A porous border may allow for waves of well-meaning immigrants and their families to seek new lives in a new country, but no country should be blamed for wanting to secure its borders or its territory. An influx of immigration also strains a nation's resources. Understandably, in many cases, immigrants seeking shelter in the United States have left desperate circumstances and arrive seeking support. In a perfect world, this would not be a problem; however, because a nation's resources are finite, this means that the financial and material burden of taking care of incoming immigrants falls on their host county. In small, manageable numbers this isn’t a problem (this is what legal immigration is for) but one can see how a nation tasked with taking care of immigrants from around the world would be burdened beyond its resources if it must solve the whole world's humanitarian problems. Ultimately, we shouldn’t increase our tolerance of illegal border crossings. In order to address the plight of immigrants, maintain national security, and manage internal resources, all policy changes should involve balancing the needs of non-citizens with the needs of citizens before carefully and thoughtfully expanding legal immigration.

Typography and Identity John Eligon's New York Times article, “A Debate Over Identity and Race Asks, Are African-Americans ‘Black’ or ‘black’?” outlines the ongoing conversation among journalists and academics regarding conventions for writing about race—specifically, whether or not to capitalize the “b” in “black” when referring to African-Americans (itself a term that is going out of style). (Note: The opening sentence introduces the text this essay will respond to and gives a brief summary of the text's content.) Eligon argues that, while it might seem like a minor typographical issue, this small difference speaks to the question of how we think about race in the United States. Are words like “black” or “white” mere adjectives, descriptors of skin color? Or are they proper nouns, indicative of group or ethnic identity? Eligon observes that until recently, with the prominence of the Black Lives Matter movement, many journalistic and scholarly publications tended to use a lowercase “black,” while Black media outlets  typically capitalized “Black.”  He suggests that the balance is now tipping in favor of "Black," but given past changes, usage will probably change again as the rich discussion about naming, identity, and power continues. (Note: The thesis statement includes two related ideas explored by Eligon: the current trend toward using "Black" and the value of the ongoing discussion that leads to changing terms.) Eligon points to a range of evidence that "Black" is becoming the norm, including a recent change by "hundreds of news organizations" including the Associated Press. This comes in the wake of the George Floyd killing, but it also follows a longtime Black press tradition exemplified by newspapers like The New York Amsterdam News. Eligon cites several prominent academics who are also starting to capitalize Black.  However, he also quotes prominent naysayers and describes a variety of counterarguments, like the idea that capitalization gives too much dignity to a category that was made up to oppress people.  (Note: Summary of a counterargument.) Capitalizing Black raises another tricky question: Shouldn't White be likewise capitalized? Eligon points out that the groups most enthusiastic to capitalize White seem to be white supremacists, and news organizations want to avoid this association.    (Note: The choice of "points out" signals that everyone would agree that mostly white supremacist groups capitalize White.)  Eligon's brief history of the debate over racial labels, from “Negro” and “colored” to “African-American” and “person of color,” gives the question of to-capitalize-or-not-to-capitalize a broader context, investing what might seem like a minor quibble for editors with the greater weight of racial identity and its evolution over time. (Note: This paragraph shifts focus from present to past trends and debates.) He outlines similar disagreements over word-choice and racial labels by scholars and activists like Fannie Barrier Williams and W.E.B. Du Bois surrounding now-antiquated terms like “Negro” and “colored.” These leaders debated whether labels with negative connotations should be replaced, or embraced and given a new, positive connotation. (Note: This paragraph summarizes the historical examples Eligon gives. Phrases like "He cites" point out that certain ideas are being used to support a claim.) Eligon observes that today's "black" was once used as a pejorative but was promoted by the Black Power movement starting in the late sixties, much as the word "Negro" was reclaimed as a positive word. (Note: Summary of a historical trend that parallels today's trend.) However, the Reverend Jesse Jackson also had some success in calling for a more neutral term, "African American," in the late eighties.  He thought it more appropriate to emphasize a shared ethnic heritage over color.   (Note: Summary of a historical countertrend based on a counterargument to the idea of reclaiming negative terms.) Eligon suggests that this argument continues to appeal to some today, but that such terms have been found to be inadequate given the diversity of ethnic heritage. “African-American” and the more generalized “people/person of color” do not give accurate or specific enough information.  (Note: Describes a response to the counterargument, a justification of today's trend toward Black.)  Ultimately, Eligon points to personal intuition as an aid to individuals in the Black community grappling with these questions. He describes the experience of sociologist Crystal M. Fleming, whose use of lowercase “black” transformed to capitalized “Black” over the course of her career and years of research. Her transition from black to Black is, she says, as much a matter of personal choice as a reasoned conclusion—suggesting that it will be up to Black journalists and academics to determine the conventions of the future. (Note: This last sentence of this summary paragraph focuses on Eligon's conclusion, his implied argument about what should guide the choice of terms.

COVID-19 is not the first outbreak in history and probably won’t be the last one. (Note: The opening statement provides the essay's overall context: the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.) However, its effects will be long-lasting. While the pandemic has affected everyone’s lives in every aspect, its impacts on women are even more severe. (Note: The followup statement introduces the essay's particular focus: the impact of the pandemic on women.) Helen Lewis, the author of the Atlantic Magazine article “The Coronavirus Is a Disaster for Feminism,” explains why the pandemic threatens feminism. (Note: Early on, the summary names the author, title, and magazine that published the argument summarized.) Lewis starts her article with a complaint by saying “enough already” because, in terms of housework especially for child care, there has been an inequality since the past. This inequality has become even more explicit with the coronavirus outbreak. Women have to shoulder not only more housework but also childcare more than ever due to school closures. The pandemic started as a public health crisis and brought along an economic one. Lewis argues that the crisis affects women more than men because women are more likely to assume housework and childcare responsibilities while men are expected to work and “bring home the bacon.” (Note: The author provides a thesis at the end of the introduction with a clear overview of the main claim of the argument summarized.)

In "Spread Feminism, Not Germs," student Gizem Gur summarizes the Atlantic Magazine article "The Coronavirus Is a Disaster for Feminism." Annotations point out the structure of the summary and the strategies Gur uses. Sample summary "Spread Feminism, Not Germs" in PDF with margin notes     Sample summary "Spread Feminism, Not Germs" accessible version with notes in parentheses     In "Typography and Identity," Saramanda Swigart summarizes the New York Times article “A Debate Over Identity and Race Asks, Are African-Americans ‘Black’ or ‘black’?” Annotations point out the structure of the summary and the strategies Swigart uses. Sample summary "Typography and Identity" in PDF with margin notes  Sample summary "Typography and Identity" accessible version with notes in parentheses

The article might describe a number of different kinds of products people can buy with BitCoin and tell stories of individuals who used BitCoin for different purposes or invested in BitCoin and made a profit. Depending on how long our summary is supposed to be, we can represent those parts of the argument in more or less detail. If we need to summarize the article in a sentence, we might simply refer to all of this supporting evidence with a couple of words like "variety" and "profit."

In her 2019 article “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?”, Anna Mills urges readers to seek a new border policy that helps desperate undocumented migrants rather than criminalizing them. She calls for a shift toward respect and empathy, questioning the very idea that crossing illegally is wrong. Mills argues that any parent in a desperate position would consider it right to cross for their child’s sake; therefore, no person should condemn that action in another. Since we cannot justify our current walls and detention centers, we must get rid of them. She acknowledges that opening the borders completely would compromise security, but believes that we can still “regulate” our borders without blocking or imprisoning migrants.

In the case of the border argument, the writer responds to the counterargument about security by clarifying that she does not advocate completely open borders. The sample summary already refers to this when it describes her desire to “regulate” those borders. In addition, when it paraphrases her claims and reasons, it uses the phrases “desperate” and “in a desperate position” to limit the focus to migrants who are fleeing an awful situation.

Note the choice here to quote the one word “regulate” instead of paraphrasing or using the word without quotation marks. The quotation marks draw attention to the author's original word choice and suggest there may be a problem or question about this word choice. In this case, the summary might observe that the writer does not specify what kind of regulation she means.

Mills acknowledges that opening the borders completely would compromise security, but she believes that we can “regulate” our borders without blocking or imprisoning migrants.

Our border argument map shows a chain of three reasons leading to the main claim, so our summary can describe that chain.

In her 2019 article “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?”, Anna Mills urges us to seek a new border policy that helps desperate undocumented migrants rather than criminalizing them. She calls for a shift toward respect and empathy, questioning the very idea that crossing illegally is wrong. She argues that any parent in a desperate position would consider it right to cross for their child’s sake; therefore, no person should condemn that action in another. Since we cannot justify our current walls and detention centers, we must get rid of them.

Elaborating on the Main Claim Depending on the length of the summary we are writing, we may add in additional sentences to further clarify the argument’s main claim. In the border argument example, the summary we have thus far focuses on the idea of helping migrants, but the argument itself has another, related dimension which focuses on the attitudes we should take toward migrants. If we are asked to write only a very short summary, we might leave the explanation of the main claim as it is. If we have a little more leeway, we might add to it to reflect this nuance thus: In her 2019 article “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?”, Anna Mills urges us to seek a new border policy that helps desperate undocumented migrants rather than criminalizing them. She calls for a shift away from blame toward respect and empathy, questioning the very idea that crossing illegally is wrong. Of course, the border argument is short, and we have given an even briefer summary of it. College courses will also ask us to summarize longer, multi-part arguments or even a whole book. In that case, we will need to summarize each sub-section of the argument as its own claim.

If, as in the case of our sample argument, the author wants to push for some kind of action, then we can signal to the reader how sure the writer seems of the recommendation and how much urgency they feel. Since the border argument uses words like “must” and “justice” in its final paragraph, we will want to convey that sense of moral conviction if we can, with a verb like “urges.” Here is one possible first sentence of a summary of that argument: In her 2019 article “Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?”, Anna Mills urges us to seek a new border policy that helps desperate migrants rather than criminalizing them. If we think there should be even more sense of urgency, we might choose the verb “demands.” “Demands” would make Mills seem more insistent, possibly pushy. Is she that insistent? We will want to glance back at the original, probably many times, to double-check that our word choice fits. If the border argument ended with a more restrained tone, as if to convey politeness and humility or even uncertainty, we might summarize it with a sentence like the following: In her 2019 article 'Wouldn’t We All Cross the Border?', Anna Mills asks us to consider how we can change border policy to help desperate undocumented migrants rather than criminalizing them.

If the argument’s main purpose is to convince us that something is bad or good or of mixed value, we can signal that evaluation to the reader right off the bat. How dramatic is the claim about its praise or critique? We can ask ourselves how many stars the argument is giving the thing it evaluates. A five-star rating “celebrates” or “applauds” its subject while a four-star rating might be said to “endorse it with some reservations.”

If the argument’s main purpose is to describe reality in some way, we will want to let readers know if it is controversial or not. Is the writer defending their idea against obvious objections or counterarguments, or are they aiming to inform us about something we may not be aware of?

VO22+ + 2H+ +e−⇌⇌\rightleftharpoons VO2+ + H2O(l)

Absence of evidence can sometimes tell us something useful. It may be a reason to doubt the conclusion even if it doesn't disprove it.

We can look for exceptions with any argument, but there are two particular patterns worth learning about so we can spot them quickly.  These patterns are known as the false dilemma fallacy and the loaded question fallacy. 

The key to managing your time effectively is consistency.

it’s difficult to catch up once you’ve fallen behind

His counselor explains that if Kai sets aside a specific time to study every day—rather than simply studying when he feels like he has the time—his study habits will become more regular, which will improve Kai's learning.

(p+3)(p−1)=

Figure 2.3.1.3

and point out the strengths and weaknesses of their argumen

An argument is a swarming cluster of words.

This is in some ways similar to a movie review: a reviewer has to give some picture of what the movie is like before praising or panning it

Since our goal in an assessment is to decide how effective we think the argument will be at getting its point across, any charge of vagueness implies some failure to communicate that point. This becomes a critique

Geometric Isomers

For example, the (NO−2NO2−\ce{NO2^{-}}) ion is a ligand that can bind to the central atom through the nitrogen or the oxygen atom, but cannot bind to the central atom with both oxygen and nitrogen at once, in which case it would be called a polydentate ligand rather than an ambidentate ligand.

The ligand(s) must have more than one donor atom, but bind to ion in only one place.

A hydrate isomer is a specific kind of ionization isomer where a water molecule is one of the molecules that exchanges places.

Ionization isomers occur when a ligand that is bound to the metal center exchanges places with an anion or neutral molecule that was originally outside the coordination complex.

interchange of some ligands from the cation to the anion.

During transcription, a strand of mRNA is made that is complementary to a strand of DNA

Transcription takes place in the cytoplasm in prokaryotes and in nucleus in eukaryotes.

kilograms

Claims

Limits the group of immigrants we are talking about to those who are desperate. This is an argument about refugees of one kind or another, not about people who just feel they would be happier or more successful in the U.S. So maybe the author would still consider it fine to criminalize those who cross illegally because they prefer to live in the U.S. if they are not currently in dire straits.

In the border argument example, the writer concedes that the counterargument does have merit: "I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk." Immediately, the writer responds, "But surely there are ways to regulate the border without criminalizing people who are driven by need and good intentions." The word “but” signals the transition from concession back to the writer's own side. In the map, we can put the rebuttal below the counterargument and use the arrow to show it supporting the main claim.

In the border argument example, the writer never directly mentions other writers who disagree. Instead, they signal with the phrase “I admit” that they are going to summarize a valid point which goes against their own main argument: "I admit that completely open borders would put our security at risk." We could add this to our map as follows, with the counterargument in red to show it goes against the rest of the argument:

“If most of us, under desperate circumstances, would cross the border without permission and feel no moral qualms about doing so, then we must recognize this crossing as an ethical, reasonable act.”

In the last paragraph, we learn what these ways might involve. Three different claims of policy emerge: “... We must recognize this crossing as an ethical, reasonable act.” "How can either a wall or a detention center be on the side of justice?" (The implication, of course, is that they cannot be.) “ We must find a policy that treats migrants as we would want to be treated--with empathy, respect, and offers of help.”

If I were raising children in an impoverished third-world community plagued by violence, and if I had a chance to get my family to the U.S., I would take it. I would try to cross a border illegally so my children would get enough to eat and would have a more stable childhood and a chance at a better education and a better career. What parent would sit on their hands and tell themself, “I want to give my child a better life, but oh well. If I don’t have the papers, I guess it would be wrong”?

It is easier to grow up biracial in Hawaii than in any other part of the United States.

)

It seems crazy to think but someone who died thousands of years ago still influences what we consider literature today!

A literary critic is a person who studies and analyzes literature. A literary critic produces scholarship called literary criticism. An example of this would be Aristotle’s Poetics, in which he identifies the defining qualities of a “good” Tragedy. Aristotle’s analysis of Tragedy was so influential that it is still used today, over two thousand years later!

The second stage of the listening model is understanding, or the ability to comprehend or decode the source’s message.

interaction with another person without really intending to listening to what they have to say, we may end up being a passive listener who does nothing more than hear and nod our heads.

positive voltage.

We call this bond “identification.”

9.314

capsules pop open when dry,

Achene fruits on the surface of a strawberry

no longer produce seeds. The brown specks you see inside a banana are unfertilized ovules. Wild bananas still produce seeds because their flowers get pollinated.

They believed that one part, the ka, was a person’s lifeforce and that it separated from the body after death. The Egyptians carried out their elaborate preservation of mummies and made small tomb statues to house their ka after death. The ba, another part of the soul,was the unique character of the individual, which could move between the worlds of the living and the dead. They believed that after death, if rituals were carried out correctly, their ka and ba would reunite to reanimate their akh, or spirit. If they observed the proper rituals and successfully passed through Final Judgment (where they recited the 42 “Negative Confessions” and the god Osiris weighed their hearts against a feather), Egyptians believed that their resurrected spirit, their akh, would enter the afterlife.

an optional argument called na.rm, which is shorthand for “remove NA values”. By default, na.rm = FALSE, so R does nothing about the missing data problem. Let’s try setting na.rm = TRUE and see what happens: When calculating sums and means when missing data are present (i.e., when there are NA values) there’s actually an additional argument to the function that you should be aware of. This argument is called na.rm, and is a logical value indicating whether R should ignore (or “remove”) the missing data for the purposes of doing the calculations. By default, R assumes that you want to keep the missing values, so unless you say otherwise it will set na.rm = FALSE.

Table ??.

Section ?? w

## Error in Ops.factor(group, gender): level sets of factors are different

a paper by Ioannidis

RStudio is free software

<

desiccation

the θθ\theta-equation, which involves the azimuthal angle Θ

There is a special name for this column, which is basic solution.

KOH+H3PO4→K3PO4+H2OKOH+H3PO4→K3PO4+H2OKOH+H_{3}PO_{4}\rightarrow K_{3}PO_{4}+H_{2}O\nonumber

consistent

This is very cumbersome because it depends on seven variables. Also, it is likely that without much care, a change in the units such as going from meters to feet would result in an incorrect value for 𝑙ll. The way to get around this problem is to look for 𝑙ll as a function of dimensionless variables multiplied by something which has units of force. It is helpful because first of all, you will likely have fewer independent variables and secondly, you could expect the formula to hold independent of the way of specifying length, mass and so forth.

Every matrix 𝐴AA is equivalent to a unique matrix in reduced row-echelon form.