Assignment #2

In you're in the 8:30 class, read the Cose essay in Speculations.  If you're in the 1:00 class, read the Hacker essay in Speculations.

1.    As you read it, identify in the margin the arguments that you find particularly compelling or that you realize that you'll need to find a way to argue against in your essay.  Also note language that made you particularly trust or distrust the author.

2.    Summarize the essay in less than 100 words.

3.     Represent 3 places in the text that you agree or disagree with.  You'll need first to quote or paraphrase and include an in-text citation.  Then you can explain why you agree or disagree.  You can also explain why you think the author is framing the argument in a way that does or does not make sense.

4.    Identify a place in the text that increased or decreased the trust that you had in the author.

Example Using the Pincus Essay

1.     Summary:  There are three types of discrimination:  individual, institutional, and structural.  Individual simply means one individual discriminating against someone because of race, class, age, sex, or disability.  Institutional means that an institution such as a college, a bank, or realtor intentionally discriminates against someone.  Structural means that the actions of an institution have the effect of discriminating but not the intention.  While institutional discrimination can be fought in the courts, structural discrimination requires creative intervention.  (76 words)

2.    Response:  Pincus admits that "many social scientists and much of the general public" would be uncomfortable with the idea of structural discrimination. He argues that he think structural discrimination is in fact significance because it has effects even if no one is intentionally discriminating. But that isn't much of an argument, even if I agree with him. People who disagree with him are going to say that if institutions aren’t intentionally discriminating then they’re really not doing anything wrong and that when institutions try to solve the problem, then they wind up discriminating against other people (even if it’s white men). I think what he needs to say is that if the effects of discrimination are there, say, when a college admits far more whites than blacks because blacks have lower SAT scores, then we as a society have the responsibility need to address the problem. We might argue about HOW the problem should be solved, but we shouldn’t let those arguments get in the way of agreeing that we want to see more blacks and latinos graduating from college. (179 words).  I just focused on one place, to give you an example.

3.     Rhetoric of trust:  My trust in the author increased when I saw him admit to the fact that some readers would have a problem with his opinion and when he addressed that problem.  This was where he said "Many social scientists...would be reluctant" to use the term "structural discrimination."