Department of English, Foreign Languages, and Journalism
School of Liberal Arts and
Sciences
Missouri Western State College
English 210: Approaches to
Literature
Spring,
2005
Professor:
Dr. Mike Cadden
Class
Time and Place: 9:30 T, Th in SS/C 210
Office: 222-F Eder Hall (SS/C)
Office
Hours: 9:00 am – 2:00 pm W; and by appointment.
Office Phone: 271-4576
E-mail:
cadden@missouriwestern.edu
URL:
http://www.missouriwestern.edu/eflj/faculty/cadden.asp (This syllabus is on
my website)
Course
Description:
ENG
210, a general studies course, is a sophomore level literature course that
introduces students to different literary genres. This section of ENG 210
focuses on versions of three basic stories: “Beauty and the Beast,”
“Cinderella,” and “Little Red Riding Hood.”
We’ll read different folk tale versions of each tale, discuss films,
read novel versions, consider poetry based on the story, look at children’s
picture book versions, and try to figure out what each version does to, with,
for, and against (in the case of parody) the basic story we have in our heads
as members of this culture. I look forward to exploring these three familiar
tales with you this semester.
Course
Objectives: http://www.missouriwestern.edu/EFLJ/eng210.asp#Objectives
Required
Texts:
Levine,
Gail Carson. Ella Enchanted.
Lowry,
Lois. Number the Stars.
McKinley,
Robin. Beauty.
Tatar,
Maria, ed. The Classic Fairy Tales.
Evaluation:
General
Class Participation: 10%
Presentation
and Report: 20%
Three
Unit Exams: 70%
Attendance:
The MWSC Policy
Guide states that “each instructor will determine and make known to the
class the requirement for attendance” (45). If you don’t come to class you will
obviously jeopardize your class participation grade. I will not quantify how
much presence equals what grade. I will be judging your total participation
performance, not just your presence. I can also tell you that the exams draw
heavily from class work. Also, since you are responsible for all announcements
in class, you run the risk of missing important information regarding other
assignments; I will not accept absence as an excuse for ignorance. In short, if
you’re not here, you’re going to suffer through other assignments directly and
indirectly.
Academic Dishonesty: All cases in which students pass off others’ work as their own will be
referred to the Dean of Student Affairs. Students run the risk of failing the
assignment as well as the course, depending on the magnitude and nature of the
offense. If you are unsure about how you are using sources, please check with
me.
Policy on
Students with Disabilities: Any
student in this course who has a disability which requires different contexts
for either evaluation or expression should contact me in the first few weeks of
the course so that those needs can be considered.
Calendar (Subject to Constant and Inexplicable Change):
Jan. 18 T- Introduction to the
course; Arlene Sardine--an example of textual play.
20 H- Beaumont’s "Beauty & the Beast" (Tatar 32) and
visual images; Disney’s Beauty and the Beast.
25
T- Angela Carter’s “The Tiger’s Bride” (Tatar 50) and “Urashima the Fisherman”
(Tatar 66).
27 H- Grimms’ “The Frog King” (Tatar 47) and one other from Tatar of
your choice.
Feb. 1 T- Robin McKinley’s Beauty.
3 H- Beauty.
8 T- Poetry and children’s
versions.
10 H- Test #1.
15 T- Grimm’s “Cinderella” (Tatar 117), “Yeh-hsien”
(Tatar 107), images.
17 H- Perrault’s “Donkeyskin”
(Tatar 109); Jacobs’ “Catskin” (Tatar 122), “The Story of the Black Cow”
(Tatar 125).
22 T- Ella Enchanted.
24 H- Ella Enchanted.
March 1 T- Poetry.
3 H- Disney films to be viewed
by today: Cinderella and Cinderella II: Dreams Do Come True.
8 T- Children’s picture book versions.
10 H- Test #2.
Spring Break
22
T- Grimms’ “Little Red Cap” (Tatar 13) and Perrault’s “Little Red Riding Hood”
(Tatar 11).
24 H- “The Story of Grandmother” (Tatar
10) and brief tales by Thurber and Calvino (Tatar);
29 T-
Angela Carter: Handouts of “The Werewolf” and “In the Company of Wolves.”
31 H- No Class: Conference.
April 5 T- Number the Stars.
7 H- Number
the Stars.
12 T-
Children’s picture books.
14 H- Test #3.
19 T- Presentations.
21 H- Presentations.
26 T- Presentations.
28 H-
Presentations.
Presentation Report Due: Thursday, May 5, 8:30-10:20
AM in SS/C 210
Participation (10%): This will include a few things and will be assessed at the end of the
semester. “To participate” is not the same thing as “to show up.” While
attendance is necessary for participation, it isn’t enough by itself. Nor is
participation the same thing as constant talking; one might talk constantly and
actually detract from the course. There are ways to participate in such a way
that the course is worthwhile for everyone:
Exams
(70%): You’ll have three exams.
Each exam will have a writing component; they will not be multiple choice
tests. I will provide you passages from our readings for you to comment on and
choices of questions for paragraph-length (or longer) responses. You should
therefore take notes that aren’t limited to data or facts but record the nature
of our discussions and issues that we try to tackle. There may be, in addition
to the written portion, some short answer questions. In any case, since the
tests don’t simply quiz on terms or on matters of plot and character, it will
be very difficult to do well on the exams if you are not in class.
Presentation
and brief accompanying report (20%): You
will prepare a report that examines an example of some form of textual play and
present those findings to the rest of us at the end of the term.
Your
first job is to identify a likely candidate for a report. Perhaps you've
stumbled upon a collection by Alan Garner called Politically Correct Bedtime
Stories: Modern Tales for Our Life & Times. You notice that it
"updates" many old fairy tales in politically correct ways. After
determining that Garner isn't actually serious, you decide to discuss this text
as an example of intertextual play. Or perhaps you've seen a film recently
that, you are told, is "really" a sequel to another film--or
book—that you hadn’t experienced, but you enjoyed it anyway. Why? Shouldn't you have been confused? Was it really a "sequel," after
all? You decide to examine that
question. Perhaps you notice an advertisement that alludes to a text you know,
but the ad's allusion to that other text is rather subtle. Did it really have
to connect with the audience? Why or
why not? Perhaps you see a film version
of a book you've read--or a printed version of a film you've seen. You notice
that the experience is principally different, even though you think they are
pretty true to each other in many ways?
Why does that change of "genre" so affect your reception? Perhaps you see a version of a tale for one
audience remade for another; how has that been accomplished if it is
successful? How has it failed if it
has? You get the point. In any case,
you might find an instance of genre crossing, parody, imitation, allusion, or
serialization. Your job will be to share it with us and explain it as well as
you can.
This
report will be divided between an explanation or account or summary of
the text in question (what is it?), the analysis of the textual play at
work (how does it work in relation to another text?), and a brief discussion of
significance (why is it interesting or important?). To paraphrase, the
report will be divided between what, how, and “so what?” I
want you to make this division clear in the written version.
I. Summary:
As briefly as you can, explain what you have found, exactly. Provide
information that helps us understand what you’ve examined and what texts are
involved. Who authored the texts? Where
were they found? (A word or two of how
you stumbled on this might be interesting.) What sorts of texts are they?
II. Analysis:
Explain what it is that you think is going on with the texts in question. Make
clear whether the texts work off of each other in one of three general ways:
imitation (the version is ultimately not different in any important way),
alternation (the new version takes the subtext in a new direction because of
changes or redirects the same thing for a new audience context), opposition
(the new version denies or mocks or challenges the original through its
changes). In other words, make your
thesis crystal clear. Once you’ve established a general relationship,
provide very specific examples or arguments for that. What are you claiming is
the relationship between the texts and what specific features can you point to
in order to support this claim; in other words, marshall your evidence for what
amounts to an argument here.
III. Significance:
So What? What implications are there
for the way we might respond to anything else?
Does your example imply something about how ads work on us? How movies get more bang for the buck? How audience is determined? How different genres are limited in what
they can do? What conclusions can you
draw from what you've discovered across/between/in the two texts?
The
written portion of the report will be about three pages. The in-class
portion will be 8-10 minutes (Don’t go over ten minutes; practice this at
home). How do you present your findings to the class? You should use the three-part structure above as your guide. All
media are welcome, from videotape to film to overhead to handouts to audio tape
to web sites, etc. Consider what will make your job easier in the time you have
allotted to you--an issue to be discussed later.
Let me
know if you want to discuss what you're finding; come on by the office. I am
quite interested in hearing about the possibilities for your report! I strongly discourage folks from waiting
until Thanksgiving to start looking and thinking about options. I want you to
collect a number of possibilities so that you might make a good, thoughtful
decision.
Grading Criteria for Writing in
Dr. Cadden’s English Courses:
A: 90-100 pts.
B: 80-89 pts.
C: 70-79 pts.
D: 60-69 pts.
F: 59 pts. and below
The
high end of each range (~7-10) should be considered “plus”; for example, 88 is
in the B+ range.
The middle of each range (~4-6) should be
considered a solid letter grade; for example, 75 is a solid C.
The
low end of each range (~0-3) should be considered “minus”; for example, 92 is
in the A- range.
“A”:
General Qualitative Description: Excellent, Superior, Outstanding.
Conception: Your idea should contain
some new, perhaps surprising, element, some angle that is uncommonly thoughtful
and insightful. You are not rehearsing other people's ideas, and you are going
beyond an average reading. You expose and challenge the explicit and implicit
assumptions of the text. If you are incorporating research, you will have WORKED
your sources--using what supports your argument, and acknowledging and dealing
with what challenges it.
Organization: Your organization should be flawless and should match your content.
You should anticipate, address, and work through opposition to your argument
and build a strong case for your own. You should employ evidence with
regularity and in appropriate circumstances. If you are incorporating research,
you will spend some time positioning your argument in the context of the larger
conversation.
Style: Your presentation should be artful. You have obviously paid attention
to the way your language sounds as well as what it says. You have found a way
to make your presentation style match the content of your paper (other than a
groovy font style!), perhaps through a sustained metaphor, or a particularly
apt example that you carry through and refer to in the entire paper.
Grammar and Mechanics: Your paper should be absolutely clean and free of grammatical and
mechanical errors of a rudimentary nature, though you may have a few problems
with complex functions of grammar. You should never avoid complex language in
order to avoid errors, in other words.
“B”:
General Qualitative Description: Above average, Good, Commendable.
Conception: Your idea will be better than average, but you may have overlooked or
not
acknowledged or interrogated the assumptions
that inform it. The claim/idea is ambitious and, for that reason, may have gotten
away from you. You will be rewarded for being ambitious even if you fall a bit
short.
Organization: Your organization will be strong, but the signaling might still be a
bit
Awkward; you may find yourself
using a lot of directional phrases because your argument doesn't flow
naturally. (Ex. "As I said earlier..." "Firstly, secondly,
thirdly...") Here too the
organization will match the content rather than being formulaic.
Style: It's clean, readable, there's a consistent sense of voice, and there
aren't any places
where a reader has to go back and
reread a sentence just to understand its structure.
Grammar/Mechanics: Very few (almost no) errors of a rudimentary nature.
“ C”:
General Qualitative Description: Competent, Average, Fine.
Conception: Your idea for
your paper should reflect that you have read, thought about, and paid attention
to the way we have talked in class about similar issues. Your main point should
be clearly stated and defended with appropriate evidence. You should remain focused
on your topic throughout your paper, and you should have thoroughly examined
the aspects of your topic from your perspective. Your ideas should be
internally consistent. There won’t be anything terribly surprising, daring, or
unusual here.
Organization: Your paper should have a logical, clearly identifiable organization.
Each
paragraph should address only one
aspect of your topic, and when you change aspects, you start a new paragraph.
Transitions between paragraphs should be competently handled. Your strategy,
that is, how you manage the interweaving of your idea and your organization,
should be standard and straightforward. For instance, if you follow a
traditional pattern of an introduction that includes a flagged thesis statement
("in this paper I will..."), then proceed with evidence and close
with a restatement of the initial problem. That's a standard, straightforward
organization--a C strategy.
Style: Your style should be clear and readable.
Grammar and Mechanics: Your paper should not contain many distracting errors in grammar or
mechanics. Minimally, you should have run a spell-check program, and you should
know the difference between a complete sentence, a fragment, and a run-on.
“D”:
General Qualitative Description: Incompetent, Inadequate, Below Average.
Conception: Your idea will be immediately obvious to a
casual reader--a no-brainer—yet it will be presented as news. It will likely
also be not quite clear what it is that you are really saying. Split focus on
more than one thesis or issue is likely.
Organization: Perhaps you
split your focus (which means you start out talking about one thing and shift
to another) which means that you are covering several or many issues in short
paragraphs. You jump from one idea to the next with no logical strategy or
transitions. If there is no plan, or if you don't stick to the plan, this is
faulty organization. It may be evident that there wasn’t ever really a
structural strategy at all.
Style: Unclear language, usually. This may also be a matter of using the
wrong words for your ideas. Simply put, the language is in bad shape.
Grammar/Mechanics: Consistent problems in sentence structure with little sign of
proof-reading.
“F”:
General Qualitative Description: Unacceptable.
(The most common cause of an F is
a failure to adequately address the assignment. For instance, if I specify that
this assignment is to be researched, or if it is to address a certain topic in
a certain way, you have to at least complete the assignment.)
Conception: No clear idea governs the words on the page.
Organization: No plan is evident, much less achieved.
Style: Incomprehensible most or all of the time.
Grammar/Mechanics: Consistent problems with rudimentary mechanical matters.
*******************
The four major areas
of concern discussed above (conception, organization, style, and mechanics)
will be considered separately, when that is possible. I may find that it is
difficult or even impossible to assess conception if the style and mechanics
are at the “F” or “D” levels. It may well be the case that your organization is
a real problem while conception, style, and mechanics are all quite good. The
ultimate assessment, then, will be the combined consideration of all four
areas. Any challenges to my assessments need to employ the above issues in
those challenges.
I cannot assess
effort. Note that I do not say that I will
not assess effort; nobody can assess effort unless, perhaps, he or she is there
watching you work. I assume that you all
work very hard on your writing. I can only assess the final product.
I do not give grades
based on your perceived needs. If you need a “B” in the course to keep your GPA
up for a scholarship, loans, or admittance into a program, then be sure you
perform at a “B” level.
I do not give grades
on the basis of your sense of identity or personal academic history. I assess
each piece of work on its own merits. Just because you consider yourself an “A”
student does not mean that you will do “A” work each time; just because you
consider yourself a “C” student doesn’t mean that you won’t do “A” work. Try to
separate your performance from your identity.