My annotations do not appear in the margins of the pages of my copy of Exhalation: Stories because I opted to record my reading notes in my journal, as many of you have.
In your reading for today, Ana Alvarado, Derek Brooks, and the other caregivers in their discussion forum find themselves behind the eight ball as they face a dilemma prompted by the Neuroblast digients’ obsolescence. In class, you will compose a short piece of writing, a minimum of two complete sentences, that explains the technological reason for the obsolescence and quotes the passage that addresses the specific action required for the Neuroblast digients to remain viable. Note that Chapter Eight, your reading for today, presents the dilemma, but the issue that prompts it surfaces earlier in the narrative.
In your writing, you will include a signal phrase that introduces the quotation, followed by the quotation and an MLA-style parenthetical citation.
Bonus Points
You may earn five extra points for your assignment if you continue your writing to include one additional sentence or more that addresses the difference between the Neuroblast digients’ predicament and the obsolescence of the inhabitants of Throwaway Town in Brian Aldiss’s “Supertoys in Other Seasons.” In your additional writing, include a signal phrase that introduces the quotation from Aldiss’s story, followed by the quotation and an MLA-style parenthetical citation.
Developments in Chapters Five, Six, and Seven
As a lead-in to your in-class writing, we will examine a couple of Monday’s collaborative responses to developments in Chapters Five, Six, and Seven. Among the aspects of the writing you will consider are these:
Do the writers provide sufficient context for the quotation?
Do the words that follow the quotation logically connect Chiang’s ideas to the writers’ own or to additional details in the novella?
Do the writers adequately demonstrate their knowledge of the novella’s events?
Sample Annotated Bibliography Entries
Previous class notes include three annotated bibliography entries I drafted as models for you. The class notes for October 29 feature the entry for my starting-point source, Ted Chiang’s novella The Lifecycle of Software Objects; and yesterday’s class notes present drafts of my entries for two peer-reviewed articles. Tomorrow’s class notes will include a fourth entry: one for a student interview.
Next Up
Wordplay Day! To prepare for class, revisit the Merriam-Webster Scrabble Word Finder page, and review your journal notes and the blog posts devoted to Scrabble tips.
This morning, after your Scrabble debriefing, you and two or three of your classmates will compose a short written response to one of the developments in your recent reading in Ted Chiang’s The Lifecycle of Software Objects. The two prompts you will choose from follow.
The Sophonce digient Voyl and his owner, Gerald Hecht, enter the narrative through a conversation the Neuroblast digients Marco and Polo have with Derek Brooks, their caregiver. Why does Ted Chiang introduce Voyl and Hecht into the story, and what may their circumstances indicate about the future of the digients?
Ted Chiang’s depictions of Ana Alvarado and her Neuroblast digient, Jax, show the two interacting in both of their terrains: in the physical world through Jax’s SaruMech robot body, and in the virtual world through Ana’s avatar. Later, Jax tells Ana about witnessing a different attempt to merge digital and biological life. Why does Ted Chiang include that exchange between Jax and Ana, and what may it indicate about the digients’ future?
Ted Chiang, author of The Lifecycle of Software Objects. Illustration by Time; photo credit: Jason LaVeris, FilmMagic/Getty Images.
Continuing Your Research and Writing
After you complete your group exercise, you will have the remainder of the class period to work independently on your annotated bibliography and preface.
Tasks to undertake include these:
Using the HPU Libraries databases to locate an additional source and begin reading that article or book chapter.
Composing or revising an annotation for a source.
Reviewing the sources you have gathered and noting what similarities and differences you can identify among them. Those similarities and differences may serve as additional material for your preface or the commentary paragraphs in your annotations.
Drafting your preface.
Determining a theoretical lens for a larger project that may develop from your final essay and annotated bibliography.
In the last few minutes of class, you will compose a short piece of writing, a minimum of one complete sentence, that notes the particular task, or tasks, that you undertook during class.
Unexpected Finds–Sample Annotation
Last Thursday’s class notes detailed how perusing the works cited list for the peer-reviewed article “The Everyday Life of Artificial Intelligence: The Humanism of Ted Chiang’s The Lifecycle of Software Objects,” by Sunyoung Ahn, led me to three potential sources, one of which I have decided to include in my bibliography as a second peer-reviewed source. You are required to include only one peer-reviewed article or chapter from a university press book, but you are welcome to include more than one.
Tomorrow’s class notes will include a draft of my annotated bibliography entry for my second peer-reviewed source: “Losing Data Earth: Technological Obsolescence and Extinction in The Lifecycle of Software Objects,” by Stina Attebery.
Next Up
On Wednesday, we will examine Chapter Eight of Ted Chiang’s The Lifecycle of Software Objects, and you will have additional time to devote to your research and writing.
Ulrich Boser’s “Want to Play Scrabble Like a Pro? Here’s Your Memory Trick?” the Wired magazine article I found through a conversation with ChatGPT.
During last Wednesday’s library session in the 10:40 class, Lauren Ksa, Head of Research and Library Instruction, mentioned that she didn’t know what my policy was regarding students’ use of A.I. for online searches. I am grateful to Lauren for mentioning that because it prompted me to provide you with images of my own A.I.-assisted search for an article, followed by my commentary, as a model for using A.I. ethically in research. Turning to A.I. was a step I took only after I had explored other options thoroughly, and that’s when you should turn to A.I., if you use it at all.
For several years, my students have delivered group presentations on articles devoted to aspects of English 1103, but none of those presentations included an article on Scrabble. That’s because I was unable to find one that was comparable to articles on other aspects of the class. Although I knew of scholarly articles on the subject–and have cited some in my own writing–for the purposes of both the group presentations and a starting point for research, I needed an article written for a general audience.
Last summer, as I was planning for the fall semester, it occurred to me that I might see whether a conversation with ChatGPT would yield what I’d been looking for.
In the screenshot above, you can see ChatGPT’s first recommendation, a Washington Post article that could serve as one of the sources in a bibliography devoted to the cognitive benefits of Scrabble play, but it isn’t what I sought for a presentation article that could also be a starting point for research. I omitted the other two recommendations from the screenshot because they were off base. One was a health system site and the other was a general recommendation for the Washington Post ‘s Brain Matter column, written by Richard Sima, rather a particular column on the subject.
Although I had requested magazine articles, ChatGpt’s initial response included none, but a later reply from the A.I. assistant led me to what I’d sought.
ChatGPT’s number-one find (in the screenshot above) seemed to be precisely what I was looking for. I omitted the three suggestions that followed because the second one, Stefan Fatsis‘s Word Freak, while a valuable source and an engaging read, is a book rather than an article. The third recommendation was a Time magazine article on the history of the game, and the fourth was my own study of Scrabble, which ChatGPT located on my blog–and yes, identified as my own writing.
A.I. Recommended It, Now What?
If I had not been familiar with the magazine Wired, my next step would have been determining whether it’s a reliable and reputable source. Searching for Wired on the HPU Libraries site confirms its credibility. The magazine is cited in sources available through the library and the magazine itself is available through the ProQuest Central database and as an open source on the web.
Takeaways
Turn to A.I. for searches only after you have explored other options thoroughly.
If the conversation leads you to a promising source, determine whether its reliable and reputable and double-check the accuracy of A.I.’s details about the source.
With the second takeaway in mind, look back at the first screenshot in this post. There, the A.I. agent recommends a Washington Post article titled “Want to Reduce Your Risk of Dementia? Play a Board Game.” As you can see in the screenshot that follows, the actual title is “Playing Board Games Can Deal You a Better Hand Against Dementia.”
As you continue your own research and writing, remember that using generative AI to write your bibliography, and/or your preface, and presenting an AI agent’s words as your own violates High Point University’s Honor Code and is grounds for an F. However, using AI ethically, as I do in the model above, can be a useful step.
Sample Bibliography and Preface: “All Hail the King”
This morning in class, after your Scrabble debriefing, you and two or three of your classmates will compose a short assessment of the student bibliography and preface “All Hail the King,” and use the assignment’s guidelines and rubric to determine a letter grade.
Congratulations to Gavin Godfrey-Ryan and Layla Rothberg, for winning copies of Stephen King’s On Writing (pictured above) in Friday’s drawings.
Next Up
In the first half of Wednesday’s class, you will interview a classmate, compose an MLA-style bibliographic entry for that interview, and craft a sentence incorporating a quote from that interview, a sentence you may include in your preface or your annotation for the interview. In the second half of class, you will have time for additional research and writing.
As I noted in class, you do not need to focus on the subject of your October 21 group presentation. Your presentations were only one of the reasons you read Matt Richtel’s, Charlotte Hu’s, Allison Aubrey’s, and Ulrich Boser’s articles. Another reason you read them is for the starting points they provide for research. The fifth presentation, on the first chapter of The Lifecycle of Software Objects, offers another starting point and Isaac Asimov’s “Runaround,” Brian Aldiss‘s “Supertoys Last All Summer Long” offer two more.
If you haven’t already drafted a bibliographic entry for the reading above that serves as your starting point, that should be your next step. The required elements for each bibliographic entry are outlined in your assignment and listed below.
Annotated Bibliographic Entry: Required Elements
A complete MLA-style bibliographic entry for each source. Sample entries for the starting-point sources (listed above) are included on your assignment handout, in the assignment file on Blackboard, and in yesterday’s class notes. As a guide for formatting the entries for your other sources, see Citations by Format and Works Cited: A Quick Guide on the MLA Style Center site. You are welcome to use citation generators, but be aware of their limitations. Some generators will yield entries that lack required elements; others will be flawed by errors of punctuation and/or mechanics. If you use a generator, compare the results with the samples on MLA’s site and edit as needed. Also, if you use a citation generator, be sure to select MLA, not APA, Chicago, or another style.
A one-paragraph summary of the source.
A second paragraph of commentary that elucidates the usefulness of the source to you and others researching your subject. Would it serve as a point of comparison or contrast to another source? Would it support or challenge an idea presented in another source? Is it a secondary source that sheds light on the meaning of a primary source? The last question pertains primarily to bibliographies that focus on one of the writers studied in the course.
A third short paragraph that names the author, his or her profession or job title, and additional publications. Look back at the first paragraph of this post. If the author of your starting-point article has an embedded link in his or her name, the link is for the writer’s official website. On that site, there’s an about page where you can find information to include in your third paragraph. If the author does not maintain his or her own site, you can find the necessary information elsewhere. NPR’s staff pages include one devoted to Allison Aubrey, the Penguin/Random House site’s authors pages include one for Isaac Asimov, and Time magazine’s feature “The 100 Most Influential People in AI” includes a page on Ted Chiang.
As a model for you, I have composed the sample entry included below. If your own starting-point source is Ted Chiang’s The Lifecycle of Software objects, you will draft summary and commentary paragraphs that you will revise after you finish reading the novella. That said, you should avoid including any details that are spoilers. The summary and commentary paragraphs of mine that follow provide specifics, but they do not give away the ending.
Sample Annotated Bibliographic Entry
Chiang, Ted. “The Lifecycle of Software Objects.” Exhalation and Other Stories. 2019. Vintage, 2020. pp. 62-172.
Ted Chiang’s novella The Lifecycle of Software Objects chronicles twenty years in the lives of its protagonists, Ana Alvarado and Derek Brooks, two software firm employees who—because of shifting economic and environmental landscapes—devote their days to jobs that differ markedly from the careers they imagined for themselves. Ana, a zoologist by training, finds herself training digients, short for digital entities, at the start-up company Blue Gamma. Her coworker, animation artist Derek Brooks, designs avatars for the digients that comply with the company’s specifications rather than his own aesthetic preferences. Though initially Ana and Derek’s interactions with the digients are limited to the workplace, as the novella progresses and Blue Gamma folds, the digients enter their personal lives, with Ana and Derek taking on the roles of caregivers.
As a primary source for studies of Chiang’s writing, The Lifecycle of Software Objects presents a possible microcosm of his wider fictional world. In the opening pages of the novella, readers do not meet the one-dimensional characters typical of genre fiction but rather two true-to-life twentysomethings forced to pivot from their life plans. Juxtaposing The Lifecycle of Software Objects with other novellas and stories of Chiang’s enables readers to identify patterns in his fiction and determine whether the verisimilitude of Ana and Derek’s narrative is the exception or the rule.
Ted Chiang is the author of two short story collections: The Stories of Your Life and Others and Exhalation: Stories. He is the recipient of four Hugo Awards, four Nebula Awards, and the Pen/Malamud Award for Short Story Writing. His story “The Story of Your Life” is the basis for the Academy Award-winning film Arrival. In 2023, Time magazine named him to its list of One Hundred Most Influential People in A.I.
My sample annotated bibliographic entry above is 305 words long. If the draft of your first entry is of comparable length, you will have reached one-sixth of the 1,800 minimum word count for your research project.
If you determine you want to use the source you located in the library on Wednesday, compose the bibliographic entry for that source as soon as you can. Building your bibliography piecemeal, one source at a time, will make your project far more manageable.
Next Up
Wordplay Day! To prepare for class, revisit the Merriam-Webster Scrabble Word Finder page, and review your journal notes and the blog posts devoted to Scrabble tips.
Yesterday in class, you and two or three of your classmates wrote about the conflicts and sources of potential conflicts in chapters one and two of Ted Chiang’s The Lifecycle of Software Objects. Those tensions you addressed and lines you quoted are included in the notes that follow.
As our study of Chiang’s novella progresses, return to these notes and consider how and where the moments detailed here seem to anticipate later complications in the narrative.
The differences between Ana Alvarado’s and Derek Brooks’s perceptions of the digients (69-70): You cited Ana’s observation that “it feels like we’re dressing them in circus costumes when we try to make them look like monkeys or pandas” (69) and how Derek, though initially hurt by Ana’s remark “appreciate[s] hearing a different perspective” (70). Though Ana and Derek’s contrasting visions of the digits may not be a source of tension between the two of them–since they seem to respectfully disagree–that lack of consensus could be an issue among other employees at Blue Gamma. It also raises a larger question about the digits: How will the digients’ relationships with their designers, trainers, and owners proceed when those humans are uncertain of the digients’ nature?
Lolly, the lion cub digient, learning an obscenity from Stefan, the Blue Gamma trainer in the Australian office (73-74): You referred to Stefan, “one of the trainers from Blue Gamma’s Australian office” (73), as the person from whom Lolly learned the curse word and mentioned one of Blue Gamma’s cofounders, Mahesh, saying they “can’t sell a digient that says” an obscenity (73). Stefan’s misstep and its consequences–namely Mahesh’s decision to roll back the digients’ memories demonstrate the considerable costs of raising the digients, both the learning loss they suffer and the productivity cost for Blue Gamma. It also highlights the vulnerability of the childlike digients.
Blue Gamma customer Andrew Nguyen’s interactions with his digient (76-77, 79): You noted Derek’s suspicion that “the user hadn’t read Blue Gamma’s recommendations on raising digients” (77) and Andrew’s response to Derek’s recommendations: “The Hell with that. I paid good money for this avatar, and I bought it specifically to wear when I’m on the social continents. I’m not going to stop wearing it for a digient” (79). Andrew’s resistance to Derek’s suggestions illustrates how some owners’ approaches to their digients disregard the company’s guidelines, which can lead to neglect. That negligence on the part of owners may in turn give rise to larger problems.
Jax, the digient with the neo-Victorian robot avatar, “inhabiting” the SaruMech robot body, and SaruMech’s plans to rent the robot bodies, rather than sell them (81-83): You addressed Ana’s comment on Jax’s progress, that “it’s cool to see him that way” (83) and her hope that “[f]or SaruMech’s sake, the experience translates well onto video” (83). You also noted that “[t]here were many reasons Blue Gamma targeted the virtual realm instead of the real one–lower cost, ease of social networking–but one was the risk of property damage” (83). Ana’s comments juxtaposed with SaruMech’s corporate decision to limit the robot bodies to rentals demonstrates the competing interests of Blue Gamma and Sarumech and prompts questions about the effects of Sarumech’s choice. How might Saumech’s rental-only hardware policy affect digient’s who may grow to prefer the experience of virtually inhabiting a body?
Blue Gamma’s design of an alien species, Xenotherians, commissioned by a group of artificial-life hobbyists (87): You cited the hobbyists’ haste, noting the narrator’s observation that “rather than wait for real intelligence to evolve on its own in the biomes, [they] commissioned Blue Gamma to design an intelligent alien life species for them” (87). You also mentioned that the hobbyists “intend to create a new culture from scratch” (87). The hobbyists’ desire to develop an alien digital world in isolation, using a custom dialect of an artificial language, Lojban, that only insiders can comprehend runs counter to what the professionals at Blue Gamma have identified as necessary practices for knowledge building, both for individual digients and their community. If creating a private continent for the Xenotherians is simply an intellectual exercise, will the hobbyists lose interest? If so, what might the Xenotherians do if left to their own devices?
Ted Chiang, author of The Lifecycle of Software Objects. Illustration by Time; photo credit: Jason LaVeris, FilmMagic/Getty Images.
Next Up
Tomorrow we will meet on the lower level of Smith Library in a glass-front room near the tables where we met on September 16, and I will distribute copies of your annotated bibliography and preface assignment. Lauren Ksa, Head of Research and Instructional Services, will lead us through the process of using library databases to locate sources for your bibliography.
This morning, after your Scrabble debriefing, you and two or three of your classmates will compose a short piece of writing that addresses one of the conflicts or sources of potential conflict in the first two chapters of Chiang’s novella. The guidelines for your assignment follow.
Directions
Compose a statement of at least one complete sentence that begins with a signal phrase for a quotation that addresses one of the bulleted items below, follows the quote with a parenthetical citation, and concludes with words that convey the situation’s conflict or indicate its potential for conflict. Do not include the word conflict. Instead, describe the conflict or explain its possibility.
Example
Ana Alvarado, who studied primate communication and “dreamed of following Fossey and Goodall to Africa” (66), and the animator Derek Brooks, whose design work is limited to such tasks as fashioning “a body that manifests the digients’ gestures” (67), both find themselves pursuing careers that differ considerably from the ones they had envisioned for themselves. The discrepancies between their plans and their current circumstances prompt questions about their futures. Will their days at Blue Gamma be marked by satisfaction or resignation, and how will their attitudes affect their relationships with the digients?
The differences between Ana Alvarado’s and Derek Brooks’s perceptions of the digients (69-70).
Lolly, the lion cub digient, learning an obscenity from Stefan, the Blue Gamma trainer in the Australian office (73-74).
Blue Gamma customer Andrew Nguyen’s interactions with his digient (76-77, 79).
Jax, the digient with the neo-Victorian robot avatar, “inhabiting” the SaruMech robot body, and SaruMech’s plans to rent the robot bodies, rather than sell them (81-83).
Blue Gamma’s design of an alien species, Xenotherians, commissioned by a group of artificial-life hobbyists (87).
In the second half of class, we will discuss what you’ve written about the conflicts and potential sources of conflict in chapters one and two. Afterward, I will introduce the annotated bibliography and preface assignment, your third and final major paper assignment for the course.
Scrabble Debriefing, Part II: Viruses You’d Like to Catch
Although viruses are infections to avoid, playing viruses in Scrabble by using all seven of your tiles will earn you fifty bonus points. That was the case in last Friday’s game pictured above. Using a blank for the e, a team played viruses vertically by adding the s to leap for a total of seventy-five points.
Next Up
Wednesday we will meet on the lower level of Smith Library in a glass-front room near the tables where we met on September 16. Lauren Ksa, Head of Research and Instructional Services will lead us through the process of using library databases to locate sources for your bibliography.
As you continue to prepare for your presentation, be mindful of the valuable roles that reading and writing play in the process. Although the final product is your group’s three-to-four-minute oral presentation, your work began with reading and writing: reading the article or chapter that serves as your subject, and writing the plan that you composed in class yesterday.
Have you reread the article or chapter that serves as your subject? If not, turn back to the text itself at least two more times before Wednesday. Chances are, on a second or third reading, you will notice details you didn’t notice before, ones that you may want to add to your presentation.
In addition to recording key words on your notecard, write out your portion of the presentation in your journal. Though you will not be permitted to have your journal in hand during your presentation, the act of writing down your remarks and rewriting them will help you commit them to memory.
Remember that your notes are limited to a three-by-five notecard, not a four-by-six one, or a standard sheet of paper. If you do not have three-by-five index cards of your own, ask for one at the Circulation-Reserves counter near the main entrance of Smith Library.
As you practice delivering your presentation, minimize the time you look down at your notecard. Your ability to limit those glances will be greater if you spend ample time rereading the text and writing and reviewing your remarks in your journal.
Also, consider recording your presentation remarks and listening to them today and tomorrow morning. The picture above features my iPhone with the Voice Recorder app that I use to memorize lines for roles in plays, something I’ve done four times already in 2026–twice in plays in Greensboro and twice in Winston-Salem. Whenever I’m in rehearsal, I spend as much time as I can listening to my voice speaking my lines. I listen to them on my daily walks in my neighborhood, when I’m driving, and when I’m pedaling on a stationary bike at the gym. Hearing myself speak the words over and over enables me to learn the lines more quickly than I could by simply reveiwing them on the page.
Another strategy to try is psychology professor Bennett Schwartz’s retrieval practice, the subject of Ulrich Boser’s article “Want to Play Scrabble Like a Pro? . . . . .” Try turning away from the written page–and away from the sound of your voice if you record it–and simply ask yourself what words and phrases you recall. The more often you ask yourself, the more you will remember. As Boser notes, “Indeed, it appears that at a very basic neurological level, grappling with material in a dedicated way promotes a type of shifting in our neural circuits–and a richer form of expertise” (par. 21). In the words of Schwartz, himself, “If we process things too easily, they do not form in our memories” (qtd. in Boser, par. 21). Memorizing lines is a tedious process, but embracing the process will help you develop into a stronger public speaker.
Next Up
In class tomorrow, you will deliver your group presentation and you will serve as the audience for the other four groups’ presentations. It’s vital that you pay close attention to your classmate’s presentations and take notes on them because you will have a blog comment assignment that will require you to address your own presentation as well as one of the others.
This morning in class, after your Scrabble debriefing, I will distribute your group presentation assignment, and you will have the remainder of the class period to devote to planning the short presentation that you will deliver in class on Wednesday. An additional copy of the assignment is included below.
As an exercise in collaboration and oral communication, you and two or three of your classmates will plan, rehearse, and deliver a concise presentation focusing on a reading that focuses on one of the articles distributed in class last week or on the first chapter of Ted Chiang‘s “The Life Cycle of Software Objects” in Exhalation (62-74).
Presentation Assignment Directions
Plan a presentation of three or four minutes, total, that addresses the most significant points covered in your group’s designated reading. (The lists of group assignments and designated readings are included below.)
Include in your presentation the following elements: (1) an introduction that mentions each group member’s first and last name (each group member may introduce himself or herself, or the group may assign one member the responsibility of introducing everyone), the title and author, or authors, of the reading, and a brief overview of the text, (2) A close examination of two or more points in the reading, and (3)) A conclusion that provides closure without restating the introduction and that invites questions. One strategy to consider for your conclusion is to address the relevance of the practice (the subject of your reading) to your work in English 1103, your work in other courses, and/or your life outside of the classroom.
Do not create a digital component, such as a PowerPoint or Google Slides show. You will not be permitted to use any digital devices during your presentation. Instead, you will rely only on a single three-by-five-inch index card with your notes.
Aim for cohesion. Turning briefly to the previous speaker and addressing him or her by first name, repeating a word or idea of his or hers, and connecting it to your own remarks are ways to unify your presentation. If your presentation seems to be a series of individual talks rather than a single group presentation, it lacks cohesion.
Every group member is not required to speak for the same length of time, but every member is required to deliver a portion of the presentation.
Directions for Rehearsing
In preparation for rehearsing, write your notes on a single three-by-five-inch index card (one card per group member). If your initial notes are written in complete sentences, rewrite them to include only words and short phrases for your key points. If your notes are too detailed, you will risk relying too heavily on them and making minimal eye contact with the audience. Plan to make as much eye contact as possible, and be sure to make eye contact with people throughout the room rather than fixing your eyes on one or two people.
Practice good posture. As you deliver your presentation, your ears should be directly above your shoulders. If you tend to shift your weight from one foot to the other, stand with your feet perpendicular to each other. If you do so, you will not be able to shift your weight from one foot to the other.
Avoid filler words, such as uh, um, like, and you know. If you tend to use filler words, practice pausing at the points where you are likely to use them.
Take turns delivering your portions of the presentation, and offer feedback to your group members. Offer both suggestions for improvement and words of encouragement.
Group Assignments
Section One
“Blogs vs. Term Papers”: Grace Duffy, Claire Jahnke, Kai Jarvis, Sebastian Olander
“Why Writing By Hand is Better for Memory and Learning”: Madison Haugk, Oliver Henderson, Olivia Lavallee, Bridgett Murphy
“A Break from Your SmartphoneCan Reboot Your Mood . . .”: Michael McNamara, Brenna Murphy, Hayden Porter
“Want to Play Scrabble Like a Pro? Here’s Your Memory Trick“: Gavin Godfrey-Ryan, Nicole Halucka, Ryder Pitek, Alexis Zavalishin
“The Lifecycle of Software Objects,” Chapter One (62-74): Will Roberts, Baylee Shattenberg, Madi Stone, Kel Wadley
Section Eight
“Blogs vs. Term Papers”: Avery Broadbent, Parker Davenport, Ariana Foy, Mackenzie Mossa
“Why Writing By Hand is Better for Memory and Learning”: Skylar Bowry, Dev Broomer, Mariah Robinson, Cole Wilhelmsen
“A Break from Your SmartphoneCan Reboot Your Mood . . .”: Devyn Jones, Ryan Lofton, Leslie Mendoza Arreola
“Want to Play Scrabble Like a Pro? Here’s Your Memory Trick“: Rocco Marcello, Lance Morgan, Layla Rothberg, Sophia Stewart
“The Lifecycle of Software Objects,” Chapter One (62-74): Kathleen Barr, Vivian Lalliberte, Marisol Moreno, Zach Roseman
Scrabble Debriefing, Part II
As a follow-up to your Scrabbble games last Friday, consider the plays addressed in commentaries below.
Surf’s Up First, Join Later
On the board pictured above, the first team began the game with the play of surf for fourteen points. Although surf is an acceptable choice, it isn’t a judicious one. Why would the first team have benefited in the long run from playing only three of the letters in surf for a score twelve? Also, consider the play of join. (The s was added later.)
Playing surf uses one of the four s‘s and one of the four u‘s. If the team’s only vowel was the u, and the team did not have the consonants required to play an all-consonant word, then the team would have no choice but to play the u. However, the team could have avoided using both a u and an s by playing fur for twelve points rather than surf fourteen. Although the opening play of fur would earn fewer points, s is a valuable letter, and seasoned Scrabble players advise not playing one unless you can score at least twenty points.
The play of join placed the j on a double-letter score square, earning the second team an admirable score of nineteen points, but the placement of the j gave the opponents the opportunity to score with a triple-word play, likely one that would earn them more than thirty points. If a team played two blanks and a one-point letter to the right of the j, the triple-word score would be twenty-seven. However, it’s more likley that a team would play three letters worth one or more points each, for a total of thirty-three or more. The first team did not take advantage of that opportunity–and may not have had the letters to do so–but the placement of join did enable them to play zoo for thirty-two points. Later, the second team was able to play jean for the triple-word score of thirty-three.
Q Query
Midway through the game pictured below, the second team played quit for a total of twenty-six points. Although that may have been the highest-scoring play the second team could have made at that point in the game, why would they have been well-advised to hold the q and the u for a later turn?
When the second team played quit in the game pictured above, none of the other three u’s and neither of the blanks had been played, making it very likely that the first team would be able to make a triple-word score play with the q.
Initially, the first team did not have the letters for a triple-word play using the second team’s q. However, a couple of turns later, the first team used a blank for an e to play pique for forty-eight points.
Next Up
In class on Wednesday, you will deliver your group presentations. Afterward, in the second half of class, we will discuss the five readings and consider each as a possible starting point for the research you will conduct in the second half of the semester.
This morning in class, we will reveiw “One Mississippi,” the student analysis that you read and annotated for today, and we will also examine excerpts from midterm reflections and possibly a second sample analysis: “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec.”
Before we turn to “One Mississippi,” you will read and annotate three passages from midterm reflections, each of which includes the required quotation from Dan Rockmore’s essay “Should the Classroom Be More Like the Gym?” In your annotations, you will address these questions:
Does the writer demonstrate the relevance of Rockmore’s words to his or her experience in English 1103?
Does the writer provide sufficient context for the quotation?
Do the words that follow the quotation logically connect Rockmore’s ideas to the writer’s own?
As you prepare to write your analysis reflection, which you will compose in class on Wednesday, ask similar questions of the reflection passage that you draft in your journal.
After our discussion of the midterm reflection excerpts, we will read the opening paragraphs of Michael Lewis‘s “Back Story” as a lead-in to our paragraph-by-paragraph study of the student analysis “One Mississippi.
Time permitting, we will examine “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec,” an analysis I wrote as a model for my students in a previous semester. If we do not have time to address that essay in class, read it on your own. Make note of where I turn from the summary to my thesis in the opening paragraph. Also, consider which of strategies for conclusions I employ in the last paragraph. (See the list below.)
Strategies for Conclusions
Offer an insight about the text or an additional quotation
Revisit the thesis without stating it verbatim
Point to the broader implications of the analysis
Model Analysis
The October 1 class notes include the introduction and a body paragraph of an analysis of mine in progress. The full text of that analysis, which I completed over fall break, appears below.
Bots in Shining Armor
At first glance, the covers of the early editions of Isaac Asimov’s short story collection I, Robot seem to reveal nothing about “Runaround,” the story that introduces the Three Laws of Robotics. The landscapes of the book jackets could be any planets—no detail designates the setting as Mercury—and the robots that stand guard on the book jackets offer no inkling of the narrative that unfolds: An account of astronauts Gregory Powell and Mike Donovan finding their lives in jeopardy when the photo-cell banks on their life support shields begin to fail. To repair the shields, their robot, Speedy, must retrieve selenium from the planet’s Sunside, a place humans cannot withstand. But rather than completing his mission, Speedy circles the selenium pool, leaving Powell and Donovan in danger of burning alive. The covers illustrate none of that. Yet despite their apparent lack of connection to Speedy’s story, their mechanical men serve as meaningful representations of Asimov’s themes as figures that bear a striking resemblance to medieval knights. That design might seem a mere marketing ploy, drawing on a centuries-old figure evoking Arthurian legend to appeal to potential customers of science fiction. However, a close look at Asimov’s narrative uncovers a notable link between the Mercury mission and its Laws of Robotics and the quests of King Arthur’s knights and their chivalric code.
The word chivalry derives from the Old French word chevalerie (and French chevalier), meaning horse soldier or horseman, and notably, images of the astronauts as ersatz horsemen enter Asimov’s story after Powell summons one of the older robots, from the first Mercury expedition, to find Speedy. In reply, the machine says it cannot proceed with its mission yet because Powell “must mount first” (44). Donovan solidifies the analogy when he responds incredulously, “‘We got to ride him? Like a horse?’” (44). Asimov returns to the image of the chevalerie, or horseman, when Powell spots Speedy in the distance and urges his robot forward, saying, “‘Giddy-up!’” and “thump[ing] his heels spur fashion” (48).
As Powell and Donovan move closer to Speedy, the narration indicates Speedy’s own knight-like quality with a nod to Arthurian legend: “The distance between the men and the errant robot was being cut down momentarily—more by the efforts of Speedy than the slow plodding of the fifty-year-old antique mounts of Donovan and Powell” (48). The word errant, which Asimov uses to describe Speedy, figures frequently in Le Morte d’ Arthur as a descriptor of the knights who wander in search of opportunities to prove their chivalry. As Launcelot says to Sir Tristram, “I am a knight errant . . . that rideth to seek many adventures” (Malory, vol. 2, bk. 10, ch. 86).
For Speedy, Powell, and Donovan, the holy grail is the selenium essential to the astronauts’ survival. Speedy’s initial inability to secure the selenium is not a violation of his chivalric code (the Three Laws of Robotics), but rather the result of his unfailing fidelity to the two Laws in conflict: He cannot obey his orders and protect his existence with the looming danger of volcanic action.
The repeated image in Johannes Regn’s Doubleday cover for I, Robot (1963) seems to pay homage to Edd Cartier’s first-edition jacket (Gnome, Grossett & Dulap 1950) with its solitary robot gazing out from the cover. The silhouettes that span Regn’s cover, in alternating shades of lavender, lead to a pen-and-ink version of the machines at its side. From the indeterminate figures emerges a clearly defined image of the future that evokes soldiers of the past, seen both in the distant past of the Middle Ages and the then-recent past of I, Robot’s first book jackets. The metal body Cartier renders with his paintbrush accentuates the articulated joint guards of medieval armor—pauldrons at the shoulders, couters at the elbows, poleynes at the knees—details that define the iron and steel suits worn by mounted soldiers whose chivalric code informs Asimov’s fictional world. The similarities between the narratives of Arthurian legend and “Runaround”—seen both in the story itself and in Cartier and Regn’s covers—may speak to a basic need in the shadow of A.I. Lifting the visor of a knight’s helmet revealed the windows to the soul. When we examine artificial intelligence, we see no face in the cloud, no soldier in our service sworn to bring us no harm.
Works Cited
Asimov, Isaac. “Runaround.” I, Robot. 1950. Doubleday, 1963, pp. 40-58.
Malory, Thomas. Le Morte d’ Arthur. 1485. Project Gutenberg, https://www.gutenberg.org/ files/1252/1252-h/1252-h.htm#chap88.
Next Up
In class on Wednesday, you will compose a reflective essay that documents the process of planning, drafting, and revising your analysis. In your reflection, you will include one quotation, which you will introduce with a signal phrase and follow with a parenthetical citation.
To comply with the requirements for your reflection assignment, you will need to complete the planning exercise in tomorrow’s class notes. In class, you will not be permitted to refer to my blog or any other online resources. You will need to have all the necessary information written longhand in your journal.
This morning, I will return your drafts with my notes, and you will have the remainder of the class period to begin revising your analyses on your laptops. Because next week is fall break, you will have two additional weeks to continue your revision work before you submit the assignment to Blackboard and publish it as a WordPress blog entry. The due date is Wednesday, October 14 (before class). The hard deadline is Friday, October 16 (before class).
Analysis Draft Notes
Along with my handwritten notes on your draft, today you will receive a handout of general notes to review before you begin your revision work. An additional copy of those notes is included in yesterday’s blog post.
Early editions of I, Robot (top row, l-r): 1950 1st edition hardcover by Gnome Press; 1950 dust jacket of 1st edition hardcover by Grosset & Dunlap; 1950 1st book club edition by Doubleday; 1952 1st UK edition by Grayson & Grayson; 1956 Signet cover; (bottom row, l-r): 1958 Digit Books; 1961 Signet 3rd printing; 1968 Signet 6th printing; 1970 Fawcett Crest; 1968 Panther Science Fiction.
Model Analysis in Progress
As a model for you, I am composing an analysis of Isaac Asimov’s “Runaround” that considers the story in relation to some of the early cover art for I, Robot (pictured above). Tomorrow’s blog post will include excerpts from the second draft, along with my commentary on the writing.
After fall break, we will examine “The Strange Fruit of Sosnowiec,” an earlier analysis of mine, as well as the student analysis “One Mississippi.”
The Writing Center
As you continue to revise your analysis, consider visiting the Writing Center. If you do so, you will earn five bonus points for the assignment.
To schedule an appointment, register online here, email the Writing Center’s director, Professor Justin Cook, at jcook3@highpoint.edu, or scan the QR code below. To earn bonus points for your analysis, consult with a Writing Center tutor no later than Thursday, October 15.
On Friday, October 16, Professor Cook will send me a list of the students who met with Writing Center consultants to discuss their analysis drafts. That record of Writing Center visits will provide the documentation needed for students’ bonus points.
Writing Center Consultations for Literacy Narratives
Section 1: 3 of 19 students, 15.7%
Section 8: 3 of 19 students, 15.7%
If you are one of the students who did not take advantage of the Writing Center when you were composing your literacy narrative, do not miss the opportunity to receive that guidance–and those bonus points–for your analysis, and later for your final essay and annotated bibliography.
Next Up
Wordplay Day! To prepare for class, revisit the Merriam-Webster Scrabble Word Finder page, and review your journal notes and the blog posts devoted to Scrabble tips.
After Fall Break
After fall break, we will examine the student sample analysis “One Mississippi,” which I will distribute in class today. Before class on Monday, October 12, read and annotate “One Mississippi” and complete the journal exercise I will distribute along with it.
