From Dennis J. Sumara EWC Unit 1: Intertextuality
Intertextuality Writing Assignment
“Intertextuality is a term coined by Julia Kristeva to designate the various relationships that a given text may have with other texts. These intertextual relationships include anagram, allusion, adaptation, translation, parody, pastiche, imitation and other kinds of transformation” (from The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms).
I. The quick writes
During class, we completed quick writes:
1. The picture books “Wilfred Gordon McDonald Partridge” by Mem Fox, and “Something from Nothing” by Phoebe Gilman”
2. The poems “Light” and “Her House” by Michael Ondaatje
3. The shoes
4. New insights
There are a number of purposes to these quick writes. I would like you to learn that…
1. a reader’s understanding of a text changes every time it is read;
2. sometimes a reader’s understanding of him/herself also changes with the reading of the traces (notes written about the reading);
3. the understanding and connections with the text becomes more complex with each reading;
4. and timed writings can be liberating to the writer’s imagination.
II. Writing the draft
a. Revisit your quick writes and pick three or so images or ideas that really stand out. There should be one image/idea from a picture book, one from a poem, and one from the shoe activity.
On a fresh piece of paper, write each image/idea. Now, you need to think about what relationships could exist among these three ideas. This is “intertextual chaining.”
b. Your task is to create a piece of writing that includes the three ideas that emerged from your quick writes. It’s up to you how you’ll incorporate your three ideas into one coherent piece of writing.
c. Select any form/genre (ie, character sketch, dialogue, short story). Your piece of writing must have a beginning and an end. Note -- do NOT (I repeat DO NOT) end with “…and it was all a dream…” or “To be continued…” These are NOT appropriate endings!
d. In your draft, highlight or underline or write in the margin your three ideas.
e. You’ll read a portion of your draft to the class (ack! J).
Length of draft: 2 pages (approx 600 words) Due date: ______
III. The reading! (Same day the draft is due)
Choose a short section (max ½ page) of your intertextual chaining piece to read to the class. For each reading, a number of students will write a brief written response about the associations and connections that the reading instilled in them. These will be given to the writer. These responses should not be criticisms or congratulations about the writing (ie, “It was really good!” – that’s not overly helpful because it’s not specific). Material from these reactions may be added into the final draft of your piece
IV. Peer editing (done in class the day after the readings)
Print off at least 2 copies of your draft. These will be distributed to the members of your writing circle to peer edit. Use any edits to polish your draft into a final copy. Smid will give you a peer editing sheet on this day.
V. Final copy:
Length of final draft: 2 pages (approx 600 words) Due date: ______
There is always a 50 word buffer (either over or under)
When you hand everything in, please have it bound (stapled, duotang, etc) in this order:
1) Your good copy: make sure you highlight, underline or identify in the margin your three ideas
2) Your metacognition reflection paragraph (see #VI below)
3) at least two of your drafts with your writing circles’ edits
4) your peers’ responses from the reading day (on the slips of paper)
5) your four quick writes
6) The rubric below
VI. Metacognition/Reflection:
The final strand in Writer’s Craft is the idea of metacognition, which means reflecting on your own strengths and areas in which you’d like to improve or grow as a writer.
After you have written your final draft, please write a paragraph reflection (approx 100 words) that answers only ONE of the following prompts:
1) Identify and explain any specific creative choices you made throughout the intertextual writing process.
OR
2) Explain how your own beliefs or values or experiences are revealed in your final draft.
Intertextuality Writing Assignment
Insufficient / Level 11- 1 1+ / Level 2
2- 2 2+ / Level 3
3- 3 3+ / Level 4
4- 4 4+
B1. Exploring Ideas, Forms, & Styles
- the quick writes / Not submitted; very short / A few quick writes present; or quite short / Most quick writes present but not thorough / All quick writes present with evidence of effort / All quick writes present, thorough, with evidence of artistry/experimentation
B2. Drafting & Revising
2.1 Focus on Content
- your three ideas and how your piece flows
2.2 Focus on Style
-use of diction (word choice) / The ideas are not present or do not add to the content
Diction errors impede the finished piece / - Only two ideas are present and/or
ideas disconnected
Diction choices detract from the finished piece / - Your three ideas are present, yet limited in how they add to the content
Some awkward diction which detracts from the finished piece / - Your three ideas clearly add to content
Strong diction which suits the finished piece / - Your three (or more) ideas are seamlessly & artistically woven into your writing
Sophisticated diction enhances the finished piece
B3. Editing, Proofreading, & Publishing
- mechanics; revision / Rough work not submitted; no evidence of editing / revision / Errors reduce clarity significantly; limited revision / Mistakes present: careful editing needed for mechanics; some / uneven revision / Few errors; Evidence of useful editing and revision / Virtually error-free; Evidence of careful and thorough editing and revision
B4. Collaborative Writing
- from peer editing day / No peer editing completed; very vague comments / suggestions / You have only completed one peer edit; two with limited / superficial comments / suggestions / You have completed two peer edits with some comments / suggestions / You have completed two clear peer edits with useful comments / suggestions / You have thoroughly completed two peer edits, providing insightful comments / suggestions
C1. Metacognition
-The reflection paragraph / Not submitted; feels rushed / does not match content of piece / Refl. paragraph present, but surface quality; feels rushed / Reflection paragraph is present but uneven in depth / Reflection paragraph is clear / Reflection paragraph is thorough and sophisticated