Kassandra Sanchez

ENG 101-108
Zack DePiero
11/18/2016
WP2
Freedom of.. Wait.. What is Freedom Again?
America the land of the free and home of the scared ? AP US History has been put on the
chopping board in Oklahoma by state officials and patriots. Whom view it as a untrue and
fabricated version of American history that should not be taught to children because itll
change their outlook on the country they call home. But in opposition are academically
certified teachers and historians like Liana Heitin ( a special education teacher) and Randi
Weingarten ( historian and writer for nbc). Although they are of different professional positions
it is only natural for them to express and see things differently in their writing. Yet theyve seem
to come to a standstill in agreement on this topic. The class is simply an outline and review of
events that happened in our history in detail. Why is it a bad thing? Its the story of the forming

Commented [1]: Kassy, I really like you're opening

sentence, but I don't see how this second sentence
builds off of it. We went from America/freedom to AP
History -- what's the connection?
Commented [2]: A few thoughts
-You're using a lot of "scare quotes" which is OK, but
*in moderation* (like italics!)
-You don't want a "whom" here. I'd suggest not using
"whom" unless you know you're getting it right. (I very
rarely do!)
-This isn't a complete sentence. (If you tacked it onto
the sentence before it, it could be.)
Commented [3]: The way you're built this sentence,
here, it sounds like they're BOTH "academically
certified teachers and historians."
Commented [4]: What class? (You haven't really
clearly established what your paper is about.)

of our country and beliefs in exact detail. People tend to take small situations like these and blow
them way out of proportion even when it isn't necessary. AP US History does not hinder or alter
the views of a student instead it unravels and retells the truths and origins of our beloved country.
Why should we be afraid of what really happened in our past?

Randi Weingarten in his article Why we cant allow the GOP to whitewash AP US
History -even in his title- is confidently vocal about his views on the banning of AP US History.
And also on how it is mainly caucasian women and men who are protesting and concentrating
on such a small problem instead of focusing on problems like the Syrian Refugee Crisis or The

Commented [5]: Hmmm... this sounds like a paper

about "the role of AP US History in public education."
That's not what this paper/assignments calls for -- this
paper is asking you to examine how people *WRITE
ABOUT the role of AP US History in public education*
in different ways.
Commented [6]: Also, if/when you re-frame your
argument so it fits in with what we're doing in 101-108, I
need you to give me more specifics -- what, exactly,
will you be basing your argument on?
Genres/conventions? Moves? Ethos, logos, pathos?
Etc.
(Also, if you aren't using our course concepts/vocab,
you're going to have a hard time analyzing *their
writing* in this paper...)

Black Lives Matter Movement or even The Standing Rock Protest. And his use of the word
whitewashing traps the reader in a sort of His vocabulary and way of organizing his words are

Commented [7]: What happened to this sentence?

very formal and academic. He uses his own experiences and opinions within his writing. And
this gives the author credibility.
Yet he also finds reason to mention how this banning will and can affect students in
highschool who depend on this AP class for college credit. AP courses allow our students to

Commented [8]: I need more evidence for this. It also

seems like you're squooshing too many ideas into this
1 paragraph.
Could you devote a whole paragraph to his cred? To
his experiences? To his word choice/stye?

higher education out of reach for many, we can ill afford to close pathways to higher education.

Commented [9]: Hmmm.... this sounds like the

opening sentence for a paper from a different class.
Not saying that it is -- just mean that this topic sentence
doesn't make me feel "cool, this paragraph is going to
about evidence, or moves, or diction" or whatever.

This detail allows the reader to consider what exactly would happen if this banning would be

Remember: we're studying people's decisions as

writers. That's it.

earn college credit while still in high school. At a time when rising tuition is driving the cost of

passed? One of his moves are his uses of historical mentions like Jim Crow South, The Great
Depression,Nazi Germany and Auschwitz in order to communicate the importance of these
historical events and what it means if we were to deny them. This move is extremely smart and is

Commented [10]: Armadillo Roadkill.

Commented [11]: Worth defining/describing what you
mean by moves here? Also, this is the first time that
"moves" has come up in your paper... (Shouldn't the
introduction help me anticipate what's coming up in
your paper?)
Commented [12]: Why?

made many times within his writing. At certain times it feels a little unnecessary to be very
repetitive almost like our reading from class Annoying Ways People Use Sources by Kyle D.
Stedman. Some of his examples and quotations are inserted into the text randomly; which to

Commented [13]: This is nice to know but:

Stedman would be referred to as The Annoyances.Although statistics and different kinds of

1, How is this related to your main argument? (What

*IS* your main argument?)

evidence he provides us with is great. Its quite the Uncle Barry (Kyle D. Stedman, pg:247)

2, What is this paragraph ultimately about? You seem

to be jumping around a bit too much...

Separating quotes/statistics and using great transitions could help keep the attention of the reader.
Yet his message still stays intact. In shorter terms, AP US History should not be banned.
I was one of the 58 college teachers from across the country who participated in the
detailed focus-group discussions for the College Board in the fall of 2010. My feedback on the
new design was mixed,but generally positive with regards to the overarching goal Liana Heitin
a former teacher, just like uses experience in her writing consistently just like Weingarten but

Commented [14]: Spiderman? We just got done

reading about this! I want you to take a step back and
re-think how you're using sources in this paper.

unlike him she also looks at the opposing side's arguments. I think there's a fair amount of self-

Commented [15]: OK, is this significant? Could this be

a major part of your argument?

righteous posturing among both the defenders and critics of the bill. I know almost nothing about
Reverend Fisher, and I am willing to believe that his motives are entirely honorable yet she
refutes I think his public pronouncements, if quoted accurately, have been less than balanced.
Shes very calm and kind rather than aggressive like Weingarten when debunking an argument.
And her use of statistics and polls really shows her logos. The use of vocabulary is very straight
to the point and casual especially when she speaks on her own views. It is the defiant opposite of

Commented [16]: What kinds of statistics and polls?

(Seriously -- that's a real q.) What insights can you get
-- based on these stats/polls -- about what she values?
How she sees this issue? What she thinks is
important?

an Annoyance. Her point is short, sweet and meaningful.

Its almost as if you're speaking to a very very educated friend. Her writing is catered to

Commented [17]: What does "it" refer to here?

a more laid back informal group. Yet it still relays a very vocal message. And her moves like
introducing religious and political standpoints are constant in the writing. As a reader you don't
really get to see many people use preachers as a source and she did The new guidelines
emphasize what is bad about America the Baptist preacher said in a committee hearing. This
is a very interesting source that she has uses. But her sources don't stop there as she quotes
historians, teaches, politics and state legislators.

This AP test is something that sparks controversy whenever its mentioned. Both authors
have explained exactly why that happens in their own ways; As a society, pretty much the only
time that we pay attention to American history is when it is used as ammunition in contemporary
political debates. This instance is no exception says Liana Heitin. Randi Weingartens view is
simply the same. In comparison they both also mention College Board and how different
teachers are chosen to be apart of the decision makings on the new AP US History test. They
mention how the test was passed like it is every year yet, how many people and state officials
become dissatisfied and uncomfortable at the topics. Segregation, Slavery and Jim Crow are

Commented [18]: Why? And how/why does this relate

back to your larger argument?

some of the subjects that the test covers yet people tend to feel very touchy about it since most of
these events are usually glossed over during a normal history teaching. Both authors have made
it a point to speak about the different events and how they affect us. They communicate the same
meaning and deliver the same views. Yet I still prefer Heitins article over Weingartens. Its
strange how as a reader I feel as though she has created a bond with me and is not shouting or
barking her views and opinions on the subject. Instead she hums it almost like a mother hums to
her child. All while refuting and defending her beliefs. Unlike Weingarten who in his loudest
voice tells you what he thinks. His writing just drags on constantly. I don't mean to sound rude
about it but its just uninteresting to me. His type of writing caters to another crowd. But in the
end both writers do communicate the same meaning.

In conclusion, the AP US History test has caused a lot of controversy. A very

unnecessary controversy actually. As a former AP History student my eyes have opened ;it has
come to prove just how far we as a country have come just to deny everything that has ever
happened to us. People are extremely ignorant to the fact that racism still exists. Both authors in
their professional views and standpoints have plenty of similarities and differences . Yet both see
that this banning has a lot to do with the taboo subjects of America's past. And the constant
denial of each and every event that did take place. Weingarten and Heitin; with different tones,
views, moves, sources and professional backgrounds have both made it pretty clear that AP US
History is a simple class that children can take for college credit. Their writing is not only
compelling to different groups of people but they also make great points and statements in their
arguments that's completely legible and follows our argumentative criteria ria (when you can
put no before the thesis statement to make it arguable in two ways). So why is there a problem
with children being taught the truth. History is of the past. Why do people still fear it ? There is

Commented [19]: OK -- is this the main argument

you're trying to get across in this paper? If so, based
on what, exactly? (That could be your thesis statement
+ claims)

nothing hindering about this class and test it is simply a retelling of America. So let me ask
again. Are you afraid?

Work Cited Page

Weingarten, Randy, and I. Weingarten. "Why We Can't Allow the GOP to Whitewash
AP US History." Msnbc.com. NBC News Digital, 2015. Web. 23 Nov. 2016.
Heitin, Liana. "SHOULD ADVANCED PLACEMENT U. S. HISTORY BE
BANNED?" Faith and History. Faith and History.com, 2015. Web. 23 Nov. 2016.

ENG 101-108 Feedback Matrix for WP2

Table of Textual Features and Qualities

Did Not
Meet

Expectations

Expectations
Thesis Statement

Use of Textual Evidence

from Genres
Use of Course Readings

Met

Exceed
ed
Expectations

Analysis

Organization/Structure

Attention to

Genre/Conventions and Rhetorical

Factors
Exploration of Disciplinarity

X-

(Different Perspectives)
Sentence-level Clarity,

Mechanics, Flow

Comments and Grade

Kassy,

The most important thing I can say after reading

this is: remember, this isnt a course on gun violence, or
abortion, or controversial public school curriculumits
a class on WRITING. Were studying documents as
pieces of writing, based on peoples different
perspectives. I think you missed the mark here in your
paperyou drifted off many times between making an
argument the importance of this AP US History course,
when thats not really what were doing here. Were
analyzing how other people have written about this topic

in different ways. That said, there are certainly many

aspects of this paper that youll be able to use, but please
know that you may need to revise this paper quite
extensively. Please read through my comments multiple
times. On top of them, here are some suggestions:

-I want you to be super-clear from the start about

what it is, exactly, that youre arguingand it needs to
based on studying their writing. What are you trying to
persuade me of? I need a crisp, clear thesis statement.
You included a lot of interesting ideas, and made use of
textual evidence (quotes), but there were times when I
didnt know why I was reading what I was reading.

-Here and there, I need you to cut the fluff/fat.

Get right to it. Tell me whats on the line.

-I need you to think hard about HOW youre

using sources in your papers. Try to integrate citations
smoothly into your sentences. Revisit some of what we
read about in that Stedman piece.

-I think your paper could benefit from

incorporating the course readings more extensivelyI

saw 1, maybe 2 connections.

Please dont get too discouraged. Use your

revised WP2 as an opportunity to show me that you can
re-focus your paper and that you understand all this
writing about writing business. Im expecting you to
do very well on the WP2 revision.

Z
13/20