English 1006
Prompt #19
10 October 2013
What matters, and why?

And the winner is . . .

I said last time that there'd be a "winner" of the judgements groups made about which of the preliminary reports on research on Private Lives were most concrete: conveying to us what they found and where they found it.

It won't be a surprise if you've looked at the forms, which are on line here, that the clear winner was Teah Anderson's post, with two firsts and a third. Three folks tied for runner-up: Devan Barrieau with a first and two seconds, Paige Boisvert with two seconds and a third, and Alyssa Youssef with a first and two thirds. If you'd like to see why the groups said they picked those posts (and the others that were picked), you can read them all here. Prizes? Seems to me a round of applause is a nice social gesture.

Today we're going to spend some more time with these reports; this time, with the revised and improved ones. We're going to look at two things: again, the informative thoroughness of the report, and then, second, at which of the reports give us information or ideas we think might affect how we respond to or understand the play when we see it next week.

I've set up some groups again. This time each group will get eight documents to work with, none of which will be their own.

Group 1
Catherine Smith
Cayley Spray
Hannah Anstey
Kennedy Bowden-Welsh
 Group 2
alexandra albert landry
Lindsay Shore
Michelle Savoie
Teah Anderson
 Group 3
Meili Adam-Reimer
Melissa Stewart
Sean Harding
Victoria Judd
 Group 4
Devan Barrieau
Kali Pieters
Luke Mills
Matthew Cripps
Group 5
Lesley Kelly
Margaret Gunter
Paige Boisvert
Rachel Murphy
 Group 6
Elizabeth Hannay
Max Hennick
Mitchell Quondam
Wendy Little
 Group 7
Alex White
Jedediah Wilson
Parise Saulnier
Sarah Thompson

If you're here but didn't post a report, you can either leave and post one, or wait and join a group which has someone missing.

Your first task will be to answer two questions about each of the reports before you. In the space below the posting (or on the back if there is no space below it), answer each of these questions:
  1. Does this revised report tell you where the report was published, who is was written by, and when?
  2. Does this revised report actually tell you what the information or idea that the writer thought important or interesting is, fully enough that you wouldn't have to go read the original to know?
You can answer simply "yes" or "no," or you can provide a more elaborate explanation of your answer.

Having done this, go back to the reports to which you answered question 2 "yes" (or partially yes) and decide which of them tells you something about the play that you think might be useful or interesting, or change the way you view or understand the play. On the form you'll have, indicate the author of the report, and say why you think the information or idea might be relevant to, or affect your experience of, the play.  If you have two reports you think do this, use the No. 2 slot, but be sure the second one is actually one you think tells you something important or valuable. One's plenty.

I'll collect the printouts and the forms when we're done.

Our next task will be to read the play (or at least parts of it). There will be a prompt making that possible later today.

Go to the previous prompt
Go to the next prompt
Go to the list of prompts
Go to the main working site for English 1006G