Whether you think that you can, or that you can’t, you are usually right. -Henry Ford

Take Cornell Notes. The exercises will be numbered Take Cornell Notes. The exercises will be numbered. As we do them, write down your answers. I’ll collect the notes next class.

Outline Exercises for MP # 4 These exercises are based on outlines that were actually submitted for Major Paper # 4.

Remember that outlines should be developed inductively, by grouping and organizing the materials that you want to include in a paper. These exercises are intended to show you your objective in developing an outline. In other words, these exercises involve the logical relationships that are reflected in a good outline.

An outline should indicate the basic structure (skeleton) of your paper. That means that examples (details) should not be in the outline. Subdivisions in an outline should all be the same type of thing. In other words, the sections of an outline should group all the items that logically belong together.

# 1. What is wrong with the following as an outline for Major Paper 4? I. Introduction: Thesis: Carol S. Dweck has done a lot of studies on how children learn and retain information but some of her research may be biased. II. Some of Dweck’s Ideas A. Praising your Child B. Fixed and growth mindsets III. Glenn’s ideas about Dweck and adult growth mindset IV. Disagreeing with Dweck when she states that she loves everything V. Conclusion

# 1 Glenn is basically a reporter. His biases do not need a section of their own. You should be able to express them in your introduction, conclusion, or in the words or phrases that you use as his voice markers. In “Disagreeing with Dweck (“IV”), the writer simply stole my idea, expressed in class. In other words, this writer plagiarized. Where in the paper will the supporting and opposing studies about Dweck’s work be located?

# 2. What is wrong with the following as an outline for Major Paper 4? I. Introduction II. Supporting studies A. Elementary examples B. College examples III. Unsupported studies IV. Positive Outcomes A. Negative feedback V. Conclusion

# 2 No summary of Dweck’s ideas? What are “unsupported studies”? An “A” without a “B”? How can “Negative feedback” be a subdivision of “Positive Outcomes”?

# 3. What is wrong with the following as an outline for Major Paper 4? I. Intro (Thesis: Ms. Dweck believes that preconceived beliefs about how smart you are can affect your behavior and how well you do in school.) II. Praising children for their intelligence A. The three outcomes. III. Study in New Haven IV. Other studies V.Conclusion

# 3 The thesis (“Ms. Dweck believes that preconceived beliefs about how smart you are can affect your behavior and how well you do in school.”) is basically a simple statement of fact. An “A” without a “B” [There are no subdivisions of a Roman number.] Why is “Study in New Haven” separated from “Other studies”?

III. University of Michigan Study (disagree with Dweck) IV. Conclusion # 4. 1. How well does the outline fit the assignment? 2. What is the problem with the thesis and logic of the following outline? I. Intro/Thesis- When it comes to academic performance or regular behavior of an individual, it is safe to say your mindset plays a huge role in the two factors. II. Mindsets A. “Growth” Mindsets B. “Fixed” Mindsets III. University of Michigan Study (disagree with Dweck) IV. Conclusion

# 4 “In the two factors” is confusing. There is no place in the outline for supporters of Dweck. The thesis implies that the writer agrees with Dweck, but the last item in the body of the paper presents the opposing argument.

# 5. What is wrong with the following as an outline for Major Paper 4? I. Introduction/Thesis: Dweck has studied intelligence and performed several studies to test thinking, some of which are questionable while others are worth pursuing. II. Information about Dweck – fixed and malleable intelligence III. Praising children can backfire A. Krakovsky B. Bronson IV. Challenging Studies A. University College London B. University of Michigan C. Temple University V. Conclusion

# 5 Could “III. Praising children can backfire” also be a “Challenging Study”? Organizing sections by sources is better than nothing, but organizing this material by the nature of the objections would surely reflect a more thoughtful writer.

# 6. What is wrong with the following as an outline for Major Paper 4? I. Intro & Thesis- Dweck’s theory on “fixed” and “growth” mindsets is good and is well supported by her research and the research of others. II. Fixed/Growth III. Backing Studies A. Dweck’s studies with academics B. Joshua Aronson’s study with college students IV. Dweck’s study on middle schoolers V. Conclusion

# 6 Why is “IV. Dweck’s study on middle schoolers” where it is? Where will the opposing viewpoints be put?

II. Dweck’s views on praise III. Dweck’s study on fifth graders # 7. What is wrong with the following as an outline for Major Paper 4? (“Bronson Article” refers to an additional source.) I. Intro and thesis II. Dweck’s views on praise III. Dweck’s study on fifth graders IV. Opposing studies A. Temple University Study B. University of Michigan Study V. Bronson Article A. Thomas B. Experiment VI. Conclusion

# 7 “II” and “III” should be an “A” and a “B” under “II Dweck’s ideas.” There are no supporting studies? “V Bronson Article” refers to an additional source, but such sources should not simply be tacked onto the essay.” The information from it should be put (or distributed) where it logically belongs – “supporting” or “opposing.”