You'll remember that at the beginning of class on Thursday I asked everyone to write down how they chose the cartoons they did. I was almost as surprised by the uniformity of the reasons as I was at the uniformity of the choices. The overwhelming majority said that they "understood" or "recognized" the cartoon they chose, and not the others. It also seemed surprising how seldom people mentioned whether or not they held beliefs related to the cartoon (about climate change or sexual harassment). It seemed that people assumed their main job was to "explain" the cartoon (and not to run the risk of saying something wrong -- like mis-identifying the US Capitol or the oil derrick).

I was also struck by how many beliefs groups highlighted things that seemed really not to be what I'd think of as beliefs at all. I'm hoping to come back to them after we've spent some time with some other, perhaps more immediate, beliefs.

Today in class

I'm going to set up five groups, each to work with the reflections on one of the stories. If you haven't responded to four of them, you can't participate; you should go and do that.

I'll begin by asking everyone to identify the articles which they feel most strongly about (that is, which involve beliefs that seem important to you, either in agreement or disagreement) on a printed form; I'll set up groups using those forms.

Each group should do two things:

• Read through the responses to their article and create a list of at least three and no more than six fundamental beliefs you see evidence of in people's responses. Each should be a statement which might begin with the phrase "someone might believe that . . . " and be a complete sentence. The opposite of a belief doesn't count as a separate belief. Try to make the beliefs as "fundamental" as possible: not, that is, opinions about the events of the article (you shouldn't teach creationism, you shouldn't let Terry Jones in the country)
• Read through the article again, carefully (each group will have a copy; they are all also on line, on the Forum), and create a list of questions about details that might help us understand it better. These should be factual and immediate questions, about people, events, or terms. For examples:
• Who is Andrew Jones? (creationism)
• What was the 1950 Heman Sweatt decision? (affirmative action)
• Who was organizing the legislature event? (border)
• Who is Glen M. MacDonald? (climate)
• What study was published in 2006? (charity)

Suggestions for proceeding: everybody should read at least four or five responses, initialing as they go, and marking in the margin places where you think we can find a belief. Then everybody should take a number of the responses, and propose a belief for discussion. If you agree that it's a belief statement, and a fundamental one, someone should write it on the form.

When you've done that, everybody should reread the article and write questions in the margin or at the bottom. Discuss them, agree on a list, and someone should write them clearly on the other side of the form. Make sure everybody signs the form.

By then, my guess is that it will be time to go. Leave all the responses on the table, with the form on the top.

For next time

Your group's questions (with, perhaps, some additions) will be available on the English 1006 Web site by this evening. Spend an hour or so between now and Thursday at class time seeing what you can find out about one or more of them. Write a report detailing everything you did to find out, and telling us what you found. Print it out and bring it to class Thursday.