In the second pg where you put in your low res "Auth. - Effectiveness supported", why can you assume that the statements given is the author's belief? The sentences are talking about how studies are showing "stealing thunder" as effective, as well as the corroboration from psychological findings. Does that mean we can assume when the author puts in information about studies supporting something, or suggesting the truth of something, that the author then believes this fact?
@vr2001 The author is the one saying "Studies support X." Unless the author pushes back on those studies, it's fair to say the author thinks X has some support. This doesn't mean she thinks X is proven, just that it has some support.
Kevin's note that we shouldn't be too concerned with speed yet was on point. I was just stressing that I took too long for the previous section's drills.
Wouldn't the main point be more like "Stealing Thunder is effective, but it has some limitations?" Why aren't we including the bottom limitation point?
I believe this is because the limitation isn't the primary focus of the entire passage. The main point is to say that stealing thunder is effective and here's why.
Just wondering if we are doing these new RC lessons and we haven't done the old ones, should we? I wonder if there's any benefit to also doing the old RC section?
How is a single position passage different from spotlight passage? Can't you use the spotlight framework to understand this passage? Let me tell you about this thing (stealing thunder). Here's why it's works (reasons 1,2,3,4).
I can see that framing -- but Spotlight is typically defined by the author focusing on why something is significant, distinctive, or interesting. They also normally don't adopt a persuasive tone. Here, the author is advancing evidence for the view that stealing thunder is effective. That's why I think of it as Single Position.
Is it different in the sense that the main point of a spotlight passage would likely be a summary of all paragraphs whereas the main point of a single position passage most likely would just be the restatement of the original position?
19 comments
@Kevin_Lin
In the second pg where you put in your low res "Auth. - Effectiveness supported", why can you assume that the statements given is the author's belief? The sentences are talking about how studies are showing "stealing thunder" as effective, as well as the corroboration from psychological findings. Does that mean we can assume when the author puts in information about studies supporting something, or suggesting the truth of something, that the author then believes this fact?
@vr2001 The author is the one saying "Studies support X." Unless the author pushes back on those studies, it's fair to say the author thinks X has some support. This doesn't mean she thinks X is proven, just that it has some support.
Kevin's note that we shouldn't be too concerned with speed yet was on point. I was just stressing that I took too long for the previous section's drills.
Does the lack of citations bother anyone else?
@jjjjffff lmao yea right
@jjjjffff brother you got three years of law school for that oh ma gawd
funny how this passage used the concept of stealing thunder by providing negative information in the last paragraph.
So is this the SP framework "Here's some background of X, here's what I think, and why?"
Where:
Background = lawyers believe stealing thunder is effective
What (I) Author thinks = the effectiveness of stealing thunder is supported
Why = Psych Explanations 1-4
#feedback
Yup, looks right to me.
Wouldn't the main point be more like "Stealing Thunder is effective, but it has some limitations?" Why aren't we including the bottom limitation point?
I believe this is because the limitation isn't the primary focus of the entire passage. The main point is to say that stealing thunder is effective and here's why.
GO KEVIN.. WHOOP WHOOP
I was typing up my question about timing right as you got to answering it! Thank you for reading my mind haha!
Just wondering if we are doing these new RC lessons and we haven't done the old ones, should we? I wonder if there's any benefit to also doing the old RC section?
No need -- just work through these new lessons and ignore the old curriculum.
How is a single position passage different from spotlight passage? Can't you use the spotlight framework to understand this passage? Let me tell you about this thing (stealing thunder). Here's why it's works (reasons 1,2,3,4).
I can see that framing -- but Spotlight is typically defined by the author focusing on why something is significant, distinctive, or interesting. They also normally don't adopt a persuasive tone. Here, the author is advancing evidence for the view that stealing thunder is effective. That's why I think of it as Single Position.
Is it different in the sense that the main point of a spotlight passage would likely be a summary of all paragraphs whereas the main point of a single position passage most likely would just be the restatement of the original position?
I think I get it. It's like the difference between a persuasive essay vs book report.