Course: English Composition (ENGL 1A) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Lindgren
Module: Week 2 of 16 · Fall 2026 · in-person, two 75-minute sessions
Objective covered: Objective 2 — Read critically: summarize a text accurately and respond to it analytically, separating a writer's claim from its support and summary from response.

This file holds two pieces: (A) the Module 2 Overview page ("Start Here") and (B) the Welcome Announcement that drips out when the module opens. Dates below assume a Tuesday/Thursday session pattern with Week 2 meeting Tue Sep 8 and Thu Sep 10, and end-of-week work due Sunday Sep 13, 11:59 p.m. (The week of Sep 7 opens on Labor Day — no class Monday; we meet Tuesday.) Adjust the day-of-week and times to match your section.

(A) Module 2 Overview — Start Here

Welcome to Week 2: Critical Reading — Summary & Response

This is your home base for the week. Read it first, then work the checklist below from top to bottom. Everything you need is linked inside the module.

Last week you wrote to a reader. This week we flip the chair around: you become the reader. Strong writers are strong readers first — and the single move that separates a college reader from a casual one is the ability to do two different jobs and not confuse them: summarize a text fairly (say what it says, neutrally, in your own words) and then respond to it analytically (say what you think about it, with reasons). The whole rest of the course — analysis, argument, research — runs on this one boundary.

The week's big question

"Can I restate fairly what a writer is actually saying — and then, separately, say what I think about it and why?"

By Friday you'll be able to write a one-sentence accurate summary of a paragraph and a one-sentence analytical response to it, and see the line between them — because you can't argue with a text until you can first represent it honestly.

By the end of this week, you can…

Use this as a checklist. If you can do all four out loud, you're ready for the quiz.

• [ ] Read rhetorically and annotate — mark a text as you read (claim, support, turns, questions) instead of just running your eyes over it.
• [ ] Write an accurate summary — neutral, comprehensive, in your own words, with no opinion smuggled in.
• [ ] Write an analytical response — your reasoned evaluation (agree / disagree / complicate), backed by reasons, not "did I like it."
• [ ] Tell a writer's claim from its support — find the main point (thesis) and the evidence and reasons holding it up.

What's due this week, and when

Work these in order — each one gets you ready for the next.

Heads-up on the AI work: this week's AI-critique moment is a sharp one. Ask a chatbot to "summarize" the linked text and watch for two failures — it may sneak its own opinion into the "summary," and if it starts quoting or citing the text, it may invent a line that isn't there. Your job is to catch both against the real text. The tool drafts; the reader verifies.

Late policy reminder: 10% off per day late. If life happens, reach out before the deadline — I'd much rather hear from you early. (Heads-up: the week opens on Labor Day, so plan the reading around the short week.)

How to succeed this week

• Lead with the idea, not the jargon. A summary says what the text says; a response says what you think about it. Keep them in separate rooms.
• Memorize one tiny hook. "Summary = their point, fairly. Response = my reasoned take. Never mix the two in the same sentence."
• Summary is in your own words. Copying the author's sentences (even one) is not summarizing — it's quoting, and an unmarked quote is plagiarism. Say it your way.
• A response is not a rating. "I liked it / it was boring" is a reaction. An analytical response makes a claim about the text — is the reasoning sound? is the evidence enough? what does it overlook? — and gives reasons.
• Be fair before you fight. You haven't earned the right to disagree with a text until you can restate it in a way its author would accept. That's the "they say / I say" move — first their point in good faith, then yours.

You don't need any background for this week — just the linked talk read once, closely, with a pen in hand. Come to class ready to argue about whether you can really disagree with something you can't first summarize fairly. See you Tuesday.

(B) Welcome Announcement — Module 2

Release setting: post on the module's start day (offset = 0 days), i.e., Tue Sep 8, 2026 — the Tuesday after Labor Day — not before. If your platform won't preserve the scheduled date on import, post this as a draft labeled "Release: Tue Sep 8."

Subject: Week 2 — the two jobs of a reader (and why people fail one of them) 📖

Hi everyone — welcome to Week 2 (and to the short week; no class Monday for Labor Day).

Quick scene. You finish an article and a friend asks, "What did it say?" You answer, "Ugh, it was kind of annoying, I didn't really agree." Notice what just happened: you were asked for a summary and you handed back a response. Those are two different jobs, and the number-one stumble in college reading is doing the second when the assignment wanted the first — or blurring them so a "summary" is secretly an argument. This week we pull them apart for good.

This week — Critical Reading: Summary & Response — we tackle the big question: Can I restate fairly what a writer is actually saying — and then, separately, say what I think about it and why? By Friday you'll write a one-sentence accurate summary and a one-sentence analytical response and see the boundary between them.

Our text this week is a real one. We'll read a short, free, widely loved talk — Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's "The Danger of a Single Story" (TED, with a full transcript you can read at ted.com). You'll summarize it accurately and then respond to it analytically. It's the first real text we read closely together.

Four things not to miss:
1. Read the talk first (transcript link is in the Readings page) — once, closely, with a pen. Everything else builds on it.
2. Lecture Tutorial 2 — work through summary vs. response and claim vs. support with one approved chatbot and submit the share link. Due Sun Sep 13.
3. Quiz 2, Discussion 2, and Assignment 2 also close Sun Sep 13 — the discussion is an AI dialogue you summarize and post, so start early and leave time to reply to classmates.
4. Writing Studio 2 — "Say It, Then Judge It" — our weekly workshop. You'll write one accurate summary paragraph and one separate response paragraph, and learn to keep the wall between them.

One promise: once you can summarize fairly and respond with reasons, every assignment after this gets easier — analysis, argument, and the research essay are all just this move, scaled up. And you'll never again confuse "what it said" with "what I thought of it."

Bring the talk (read) and a strong opinion about it to class on Tuesday.

See you soon,
Prof. Lindgren