1. Honor Code Read the first two paragraphs Of the text.
What predictions can you make about the text based on the opening two paragraphs?
2) What questions do those paragraphs raise for you that you hope the reading will answer?

2. Honor Code: A little background
This text alludes to a historical play called Henry V written by William Shakespeare. Henry V was known as a wild, rebellious, undisciplined man in his youth. He went on to become the king to not only England, but also France following the Hundred Years’ War.

3. Read with a Pencil
Read David Brooks’s article “Honor Code” silently, annotating any particular points of interest or noting any places that need
clarification; then answer the following questions about it:
What surprised you?
What, if anything about this piece, do you find confusing?
Write a single sentence in your own words that states Brooks’s argument.

4. Author Bios: Before we analyze rhetorical appeals, here is a little information about the authors.
David Brooks has a degree in history from the Univ. of Chicago and later taught at Duke University. He is a political and cultural commentator and columnist for the New York Times and has published numerous books.
Deborah Tannen earned a PhD in Linguistics from UC Berkeley and is a Professor of Linguistics at Georgetown University. She is the author of many books and articles about how language affects relationships, including her book You Just Don’t Understand, which was a New York Times bestseller for four years. She appears on TV and radio regularly as an expert in her field.

5. Jigsaw: Rhetorical Appeals
Each team will receive a set of 5 questions to answer.
Your responses must include your assertion/ claim and evidence from the text
Write your answer along with the evidence/quote
You do not have to write your CM, but you must be prepared to discuss it as you present to the class
Elmo team presentations

6. Brooks: Rhetorical Appeals Logos I
At what point does Brooks begin using evidence? How does he use that evidence?
How relevant and valid do you think the evidence is?
What is the MOST logical argument made by Brooks? Why?

7. Brooks: Rhetorical Appeals Logos II
4. What function does the Hal story serve in Brook’s argument? 5. What counterarguments has Brooks addressed? 6. How does the author develop his ideas over the course of the text?

8. Brooks: Rhetorical Appeals Ethos
7. What can you infer about Brooks? 8. Why does he use a character from Shakespeare to make his point? 9. Does he have the appropriate background to speak with authority on his subjecte? How does he develop credibility?

9. Brooks: Rhetorical Appeals Pathos
10. Do you think Brooks is trying to manipulate the reader’s emotions? In what ways? Where? 11. How does this author use irony or humor in his text? How does this affect you as a reader? 12. What is the MOST emotional argument made by Brooks? Why?

10. Ticket Out the Door! On a slip of paper:
Describe one thing from our readings so far (Tannen, Butler and Brooks) that is still unclear or confusing.
Turn the paper over and describe one thing that you understand quite clearly.
Hand the card to me before you leave!