1. UNIT 2: BOYD, DIGITAL NATIVES AND DIGITAL LITERACY TUESDAY 9/21/2015

2. 9/21/2015 1.Review of Unit 1/library tutorial. Good job getting Essay #1 in on time. 2.Free-write 3.Pre-reading Boyd. 4.Overview of “project.” Discussion surrounding digital literacy/digital immigrants (videos). 5.Group work/micro-charting (if time allows). 6.Homework. *We will review Essay #2 Prompt on Thursday.

3. FREE-WRITE 1. Reflect on your writing process for the last paper. How did your writing change from your first draft to your second to your final? Was conferencing/the peer review workshop helpful? 2. Describe how technologically advanced or skilled your generation is, providing examples to explain. How do you understand the term digital native? Digital immigrant?

4. PRE-READING THE PRIMARY TEXT It’s Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked Teens. Danah Boyd. Yale University Press, 2014. Ch. 7: “literacy: are today’s youth digital natives?” Consider the image on the front cover, the table of contents, the publishing information, the footnotes, the creative commons license for the electronic version of the text, etc., in order to start a discussion of the authors’ project and intended audience.

5. HEADINGS, SECTION TITLES AND SUB-SECTION TITLES It’s Complicated: the Social Lives of Networked Teens Literacy: are today’s youth digital natives? 1.The Emergence of the Digital Native 2.Youth Need New Literacies 3.The Politics of Algorithms 4.Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production 5.Digital Inequality 6.Beyond Digital Natives

6. BOYD & DIGITAL LITERACY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0k-Rx4sht8  Quick Boyd interview  Discuss main argument in video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WVKBAqjHiE  PBS video  Discuss how it echoes Boyd’s claims/provides context http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en  “Filter Bubbles” video  Discuss how it illustrates/extends Boyd’s argument https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc  ‘thought germs’ video  Discuss how his argument qualifies/extends Boyd’s

7. GROUP WORK Answer “Questions to ask any text before reading” (RWs 100 Reader, pg. 15).

8. MICRO-CHARTING AS A CLASS Micro-charting: do a close reading of the 4 introductory paragraphs (176-177). What do you notice about pronoun use, style, vocabulary, genre, references to past research, footnotes, etc.?

9. HOMEWORK 1. Research the author, her blog, the publisher, context, the license information, and key references in the text. 2. Complete Blackboard Reflection (200 words) and Response (100 words) before next class. 3. Re-read/Review Boyd’s Chapter 7. Remember P.A.C.E.S. 4. Turn in Free-write exercise at the end of class. *make sure I have your peer review from last week so that you receive credit for this in-class work.

10. UNIT 2 CONTINUED Thursday, 9/24

11. 9/24/2015 1.Quiz. 2.Blackboard Reflection/Response discussion. 3.Go over Essay #2 Prompt 4.Illustrate, extend, complicate, challenge OR qualify Boyd’s arguments. 5.Macro-charting in groups (groups present findings). 6.Finding credible resources (a quick guide). 7.Homework.

12. ASSIGNMENT # 2: GATHERING INFORMATION AND MANAGING SOURCES TO ANALYZE BOYD’S ARGUMENT Length: 6-8 pages Final Essay #2 Due 10/15 (150pts) Essay Prompt: For this paper you will select three appropriate (CREDIBLE) outside sources that make arguments that connect with Boyd’s. You will use these outside texts to illustrate, extend, challenge, qualify, or complicate one of the arguments advanced in “literary: are today’s youth digital natives?” Criteria for Evaluation: accurately describe the author’s project and main claim/argument signal the topic and give a clear indication of how the paper will proceed locate claims and/or evidence from (at least) 3 outside sources that connect with Boyd’s argument analyze these claims/evidence in order to show how they illustrate, clarify, extend, or complicate arguments found in Boyd. present evidence that explains in detail how (rhetorical strategies/appeals to specific audiences) these texts illustrate, clarify, extend, or complicate Boyd’s arguments use an effective structure that carefully guides the reader from one idea to the next and is thoroughly edited so that sentences are readable and appropriate for an academic paper

13. BREAKDOWN/ORGANIZATION: WORTH 150PTS Introduction Introduce the topic/establish exigency, significance, or advance a “centrality claim” Introduce the rhetorical context (think Rhetorical Situation: author, text, context, audience, purpose) Briefly introduce Boyd’s topic of interest (project) & argument. Metadiscourse – explain YOUR purpose and project (what your paper will do) State the direction of your analysis and the steps you will take to get there. (For example, “In my analysis of Boyd’s text I will examine [what?] and argue [what?].”) (This orients the reader, but can also be where you reveal your own stance—you may make an evaluative statement here or refrain until your conclusion.) This section may include a brief description of the three outside texts and how the paper will use them to analyze Thompson (can make this part of body section instead if prefer). [INTRO: 20pts]

14. BODY PARAGRAPHS Body State one of Boyd’s sub-claims and briefly describe how she supports the sub-claim. Give a salient example, and nail your example with a quote. Explain the quotation by telling what she is doing (rhetorical strategies/appeals), and delineating the ways it ties back to her argument (main claim). Introduce the outside text/author, and explain how the secondary text can be read as extending, complicating, challenging, illustrating, or qualifying Boyd’s argument. Use quotes and examples from both Boyd & the outside text to support your analysis. Explain and/or discuss the significance of the connection. Consider what this other text does to Boyd’s claims. Consider the strengths/weaknesses, and effectiveness of Boyd’s claims and strategies in light of this outside text’s claims/examples/strategies. [BODY PARAGRAPHS: 100pts] (5 body paragraphs=20pts each)

15. Conclusion: This is the “so what, who cares?” part of your essay. Restate the main points of your essay (As a whole, what do the other texts do to Boyd’s argument? If you have not made an evaluative statement yet, you should explicitly do so here). Comment on how this argument has affected you as an individual and/or how it might affect other viewers. Discuss where this analysis leads you – what position do you now have on the issue? [CONCLUSION: 15pts] Mechanics/Formatting: Maintains focus, keeps cohesion tight, ideas are fully developed, transitions guide reader (See good language for analysis document and transitions document on BB). - maintains focus within paragraphs - transitions clearly between ideas/sections - creates coherence within sentences and paragraphs - Carefully edited for grammatical errors as well as typos. (Each typo or new grammatical error will result in the loss of one point, not to exceed 5 points). - Paper/Works Cited properly formatted. [MECHANICS/FORMATTING: 15pts]

16. USING OUTSIDE TEXTS TO ANALYZE BOYD (OR BRAIN BREAK) http://www.nationofchange.org/open-systems-and-glass-ceilings-1397223100  Inequality of Digital Literacy. Discuss how this article complicates or extends Boyd’s argument. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc  ‘thought germs’ video  Discuss how his argument qualifies/extends Boyd’s OR Brain Break: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoVxOLew_cU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSSDeesUUsU

17. 6 GROUPS ORGANIZED BY SUB-HEADINGS (5 GROUPS OF 4, 1 GROUP OF 5) 1.The Emergence of the Digital Native (pg. 177-180) 2.Youth Need New Literacies (pg. 180-183) 3.The Politics of Algorithms (pg. 183-186) 4.Wikipedia as a Site of Knowledge Production (pg. 187-192) 5.Digital Inequality (pg. 192-196) 6.Beyond Digital Natives (pg. 196-198) *Write down your group’s subheading and page #s.

18. MACRO-CHARTING (GROUP WORK) On a sheet of paper record your group’s names and answer all questions: 1.What, in your words, is the main argument of the text? 2.Identify what subclaim(s) are being addressed in your section. Where? How does the sub- claim/claims relate to the overall argument? 3.What evidence is provided to back up the claim/sub-claims? List and name all the different types of evidence (i.e. evidence, expert opinion, field study, example, fact, data, stat., personal narrative, interview) and rhetorical strategies/appeals in your group’s section of reading (i.e. ethos, logos, pathos, prolepsis, “big names,” metadiscourse, tone, rhetorical questions, structure and organization—see pages 28-31 in Reader). 4.Analyze the effectiveness of the examples. Formulate an original argument—Is there weaknesses in her argument? Is the overall argument important? Why? 5.What assumptions does Boyd make? (i.e. cultural values, general principles, widely held values, commonly accepted beliefs, underlying logic, unstated premises). 6.How does Boyd appeal to her SPECIFIC audience?

19. “IN THE CONTEXT OF WEB CONTEXT: HOW TO CHECK OUT ANY WEB PAGE” BY SCOTT ROSENBERG 1.How old or new is the registration? If the site just suddenly appeared out of nowhere that can be another indication of mischief afoot. 2.Look up the site in the Internet Archive. Did it used to be something else? How has it changed over the years? Did it once reveal information that it now hides?the Internet Archive 3.Look at the source code. Is there anything unusual or suspicious that you can see when you “view source”? (If you’re not up to this, technically, ask a friend who is.) 4.Check out the ads. Do they seem to be the main purpose of the site? Do they relate to the content or not? 5.Does the site tell you who runs it — in an about page, or a footer, or anywhere else? Is someone taking responsibility for what’s being published? If so, obviously you can begin this whole investigation again with that person or company’s name, if you need to dig deeper. 6.Is there a feedback option? Email address, contact form, public comments — any kind of feedback loop suggests there’s someone responsible at home. 7.What shape are the comments in? If they’re full of spam it may mean that nobody’s home. If people are posting critical comments and no one ever replies, that could also mean that the site owner has gone AWOL. (He might also be shy or uninterested in tangling with people.) 8.Is the content original and unique? Grab a chunk of text (a sentence or so), put it in quotes, and plug it into Google to see whether there are multiple versions of the text you’re reading. If so, which appears to be the original? Keep in mind that the original author might or might not be responsible for these multiple versions. 9.Does the article make reference to many specific sources or just a few? And are the references linked? More is usually a good sign, unless they appear to be assembled by script rather than by a human hand. 10.Links in are as important a clue as links out. If your hunt for links turns up a ton of references from dubious sites, your article may be part of a Google-gaming effort. If you see lots of inbound links from sites that seem reputable to you, that’s a better sign. 11.Google the URL. Google the domain. Google the company name. Poke around if you have any doubts or questions. Then, of course, remember that every single question we’ve been applying here can be asked about every page Google points you to, as well. *Check out this website on understanding URLs: http://www.writingcommons.org/open-text/information-literacy/library-and-internet-research/1175-understanding-urls or this chart for judging quality weblinks: http://digitallyspeaking.pbworks.com/f/Handout_JudgingWeblinks.pdfhttp://www.writingcommons.org/open-text/information-literacy/library-and-internet-research/1175-understanding-urlshttp://digitallyspeaking.pbworks.com/f/Handout_JudgingWeblinks.pdf

20. HOMEWORK 1.Read Chapter 3 (pg. 42-51) in They Say/I Say. 2.Begin researching outside sources on digital immigrant/natives. Bring TWO outside sources that illustrate, extend, complicate, challenge or quality Boyd’s argument to class for Tuesday, 9/29 (printed out). *We will go over how to compose an Annotated Bibliography next week.