bluepaper

* I assign 4 different readings. This year it was Williams' Life on the Color Line, Marable's "What We Talk About When We Talk About Race", Lopez's "White byLaw," and William Upski Wimsatt's Bomb the Suburbs. I divide the class in 3 groups, and assign each group a particular text to focus on, and "be ready to present a 10 minute summary/analysis to the class".

* In the next class, I say, "Okay, forget about the presentations." I divide the class into fours again, only this time constituted of one "expert" on each one of the readings.

* Then I tell them to create a short, one act play in which the four authors of the text are engaged in some sort of discussion. What we don't want are four monologues--we want the authors to respond to one another's points, even clown on one another. We're looking for conflict. This skit must also include a fifth character--this character must enter the conversation halfway through, and must also be given the last line.

* These skits aren't only to be written--they're performed, in class. Each member plays the author that they are an "expert" on, and I will play the fifth character. Anything else goes--time, place, bad jokes about my beard, whatever.

* We have a lot of fun presenting these, but after the last one is done, I drop this on them: We've just enacted the precise way you should interact with sources in your papers. You ARE the fifth character--you come in to an already existing conversation, listen to the disparate views, and make the final judgment.

This activity is a lot of fun--they can be goofy, laugh at one another (and, most importantly, at me), but they also come up with some great insights into how sources would interact. It takes up a full class period, but it's always been worth it.