Here’s my teacher’s requirements of the essay: We’ve read Linda Brodkey’s “Writi

Here’s my teacher’s requirements of the essay: We’ve read Linda Brodkey’s “Writing on the Bias” as an example of a literacy narrative. In class, we’ve done some informal and verbal close analysis to interpret her essay and its significance, which she conveys both in narrative of her personal experiences with learning and her reflections on them. Our focus thus far have been on how Brodkey encourages the recognition and incorporation of biases in writing to experiment beyond its pre-scriipted rules.
For this assignment, you will write an analytical essay that applies the concepts of Franklin’s Real World of Technology Chapter 1 we’ve read as a “lens” to further interpret Brodkey’s narrative using close reading. We will talk in class about the conceptual metaphor structuring this “lens essay” genre. In short, to borrow from Harvard’s Writing Center, a lens essay uses:
A as a lens through which to view B. Just as looking through a pair of glasses changes the way you see an object, using A as a framework for understanding B changes the way you see B. Lens comparisons are useful for illuminating, critiquing, or challenging the stability of a thing that, before the analysis, seemed perfectly understood.
Or, I’d add, at least understood differently in its original context. The lens enables your analysis to focus on and highlight some aspects of the text you’re looking at, putting new terms to them, while others recede from view. Your essay for this assignment will involve a lens text whose key concepts focuses your analytical attention on some aspect of Brodkey’s narrative you can put in terms of technologies, algorithms, machine learning, neural networks, large language models, data, etc. You will choose either a chapter that we’ve read from Jer Thorp’s Living in Data or Ursula Franklin’s lecture from The Real World of Technology. I am open to you using another conceptual text from the course as a lens (including, e.g., Harding, Ong, or Sommers), but please run that by me first before completing the “Mini Lens Analysis” drafting assignment. Your goal will be to make a claim, relevant to our course theme, that you could not have made through close analysis of either the lens text or Brodkey’s narrative alone.
While we will define and add to these initial guidelines together as you draft, your final essay will ideally have:
an introduction that establishes the grounds/motive of your analysis while introducing the texts involved, leading up to a strong statement of a claim/thesis that interprets one text in terms of the other
We will review how to move from the key observations that provide the motive of your essay (see Harvey) to develop a claim that interprets Brodkey’s narrative in terms of your chosen lens.
Your thesis should be arguable and specific (see Harvey), and it should provide an interpretation of Brodkey’s essay while arguing for the significance of your interpretation. This significance can potentially include how this interpretation encourages a new reading/interpretation/revision of the lens text and its usefulnesses or limits.
some number of body paragraphs, arranged in an order that develops the essay’s core claim in a series of minor claims that incorporate textual evidence
Early in your essay, you will likely have a paragraph or two that orients (see Harvey) your implied reader, who hasn’t necessarily read either of these texts, by providing a selective summary of the lens text in terms of your essay’s project (see Harris).
Your paragraphs should develop your claim, likely in parallel structure with how your claim is developed in the final version of your introductory paragraph. We will discuss how development involves strong transitions that relate paragraphs and also use your analysis of previous evidence to suggest or enable a new claim. You may choose to use subheadings if useful to group sets of paragraphs together.
A starting guideline for how much space you “spend” on the lens text, relative to Brodkey’s essay, is 20% to 80%.
a conclusion that recaps your analysis and, rather than restating what has already been said, uses new ideas or language developed over the course of the essay to revisit your core claim and provide a sense of closure, so the essay doesn’t end abruptly.
Since the ultimate goal of an analysis paper like this is to open further avenues of inquiry with texts rather than come to a single “correct” interpretation of them, the best conclusions open space for further possibilities enabled by the analysis or even explicitly ask further questions.
Word Count: 1500-1750 words (approx. 6-7 double spaced pages in 12 pt. font)
Formatting
For this paper, please follow MLA formatting guidelines, including:
1-inch margins
12-pt Times New Roman Font
double spacing
1/2-inch indented first sentence of each paragraph, block quotes indented by 1/2-inch
Your last name followed by the page number in the upper-right-hand corner
A descriiptive title that’s more than “Lens Essay”
MLA in-text citation practices
a Works Cited in MLA style, with a hanging indent
I already wrote a brief lens analysis as the draft for this essay, I’ll provide the document and here’s my teacher’s feedback: Good work at relating the two texts here Daisy, where I see you starting to put some of the scenes from Brodkey’s text in terms of Franklin’s words and concepts. I have two points of feedback at this stage: * While you do a good job at making connections between the two texts, right now these two analyses seem framed like comparison and contrast essays. For example, I see you say “Like…Franklin, [Brodkey]…” and “Likewise, Brodkey…” What’s missing there for me, currently, is a claim like “Looking at Brodkey’s writing experiences about…in terms of Franklin’s concept of…highlights how…” * I’d like to see more quoted material from the texts in here, especially Brodkey, since that’s the text you’re analyzing. Like we’ve talked about, it’s good to quote in situations when how an author says what they say is important for the reader to see and is the basis for your claim. For example, where does Brodkey argue that writing is used for self-expression? That would help me, as your reader, to see what in that passage makes you think of writing as a technological medium. And even when you’re paraphrasing, I need to see page numbers cited so I know where you are looking in the text—that way, I can go back and look at it in its original context! And I also have a few minor notes: * (Linda) Brodkey and (Ursula) Franklin are both women! * you don’t need to cite the year every time you bring them in—just the first time. It would be different if you were bringing in other works by Franklin or Brodkey and there would be some confusion there. (Reminder that what I do need here, however, are page numbers, so I know from where in the text you are paraphrasing!)
Lastly, I hope that you can expand and rewrite my draft in accordance with the requirements of the essay and my teacher’s feedback thus completing the final essay. I will provide you with Linda Brodkey’s “Writing on the Bias” as well as Franklin’s Real World of Technology Chapter 1 and my draft, thank you. Also, If it’s possible please let writer#347397688 write it, thanks.