due M/T Apr 23/4: more meters

By the time this M/T class meets, please complete the two meters begun in last class–the ones for M and LM in 3.4, which we did after completing the first side about 3.1 and 3.2.  Here is the link to the sheet we used in the Th/F class.

Also, please read the first scene of Act 5, making a conscience-meter reading for LM, once you have finished reading this scene.


agenda Th/F Apr 19/20: conscience meters, 4.3 SIB

learning goal: what does the Macduff-Malcolm dialogue tell us about both men and the condition of Scotland under Macbeth’s rule?


conscience-meter exercise

4.3 SIB

(20′ hmwrk reading time for B and D blocks)


due next Poetry Day, W/Th Apr 25/6

  1. Your original fear poem, which got its start from a piece of two-dimensional student art in the halls of Groesbeck or Riley.  The presence of fear emerges from the poem, in either a large or small way.  Ideally, the speaker is someone or something other than you.  Use at least ten lines for this poem.
  2. A CORE Reflection on any of the original poems you have written this, but have not yet reflected on with a PDF.  The list of possible poems for this CORE Reflection includes the fear poem.


For your fear poem, please print one for your Poetry Folder, and submit a copy to TURNITIN.

Please submit the CORE Reflection to TURNITIN.

Both of the poem and reflection are due by the start of Poetry Day (Wed/Thu Apr 25/6).



agenda F/M Apr 13/16: Poetry Day

learning goal: how does concrete imagery help a poem, usually? or how does a metaphor do this, much of the time?

table of contents: Shakespeare, tetrameter, iambic, speaker

lessons from recent student poems, described by the teacher (list these on today’s blank sheet for your poetry folder)

Fear Poems (hunting in the halls) (cf. Macbeth 3.5)

assignment for next poetry day: a finished copy of the fear poem begun in today’s class, and a CORE Reflection on one of your original poems (including today’s fear poem), written for this class, or for some other audience or purpose (ineligible poems are ones for which you have already submitted a PDF)

feedback on Macbeth paragraph explained

As I read your recent paragraphs on Acts 1 and 2, I asked myself these questions: How well does this person understand the basic terms in the exercise–e.g., the term “conscience”? How clearly does the paragraph express a main idea in its response? How convincingly does the writer choose and explain lines form the play that illustrate the main idea?  How well does the writer maintain clear focus on the development of this main idea?  How well does the writer convey an understanding of the basic development of the plot and the characters in the play so far?

I asked other questions, too, but these are the main ones I used to assess the paragraphs.  As benchmark, I used the performance category called “Proficient,” which typically corresponds to a grade in the 80s because, as our rubrics indicate, the strengths outweigh the paragraph’s weakness.  In an “Advanced” paragraph, strengths CLEARLY outweigh weaknesses.  On the other side of the benchmark, the category marked “Developing” indicates that strengths and weaknesses appear in equal amounts, which warrants a score somewhere in the 70s.  The “Beginning” category means the writing is farther from proficiency because its strengths are outweighed by weaknesses.

If you received below a 90 and want to revise the paragraph for a new, averaged score, show me a written plan for revision, based on any marginal notes from me and the questions expressed above in the first paragraph of this announcement.  Once I approve the plan, you’re good to go.  Hand me the revised paragraph, which you staple to the earlier version.

As for the Conscience Meters, the aspects I observed include, but are not limited to, the following: clarity, legibility, thoroughness, line numbers cited, alignment of meter reading and quoted passage.