Week 8 · Study guide

Midterm Study Guide · Weeks 1–7 (Objectives 1–4)

English Composition · ENGL 1A Fall 2026 · Prof. Lindgren Fictional sample

Course: English Composition (ENGL 1A) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Lindgren
This is a student-facing review page. Read it, work the fresh self-checks, and follow the dated plan. Then run the paired Exam-Prep Tutorial and take the Practice Exam for active recall. (This guide points to those two — it does not repeat them.)

Integrity note for students. Every practice item on this page is a fresh variant — a new scenario and wording — with a vetted answer, and every example sentence is the instructor's own illustration, attributed to no one (no real author or speech is quoted). None of these are the live midterm questions. Working them builds the skill the midterm tests, the honest way.

What the midterm covers (read this first)


Exam	Midterm — cumulative, Weeks 1–7, Objectives 1–4
Format	20 items, 100 points. Concept- and scenario-based: most items hand you a short situation and ask you to name, classify, or identify — name a rhetorical situation, decide summary vs. response, spot a topic sentence or an arguable thesis, identify an appeal, or name a fallacy. Expect a mix of multiple-choice, a few matching items (the rhetorical situation; the appeals; the fallacies), two "select all that apply," and one true/false. No essay items — your essay-writing is graded by the major essays, not the exam. AI is not permitted on the midterm.
Coverage (where the points are)	Obj 1 = 3 items (the situation & the process) · Obj 2 = 3 items (summary & response) · Obj 3 = 6 items (the paragraph + the thesis/structure) · Obj 4 = 8 items (the modes: narration/exposition, rhetorical analysis, argument — the biggest slice). Study Objective 4 hardest, then Objective 3.
Weight	The midterm is 20% of your course grade.
When it opens / where	Opens in the Week 8 module (the review-and-exam week); window opens at module start and is due 6 days later; one attempt. This guide and the exam-prep tutorial post before the window so you can prepare. There is no weekly quiz, assignment, or writing studio in Week 8 — the midterm replaces them (Discussion 8, the midterm debrief, still runs).
What to bring	A clear grip on the course's classic reversals (revision ≠ editing; summary ≠ analysis ≠ rating; thesis ≠ topic; ethos ≠ logos; showing ≠ piling on adjectives) — that's where the distractors live. Build the one-page concept sheet this guide helps you make.

How to use this guide. Each objective below has the same four parts: (A) the key ideas in plain language, (B) the definitions / terms, (C) the predictable mistakes and their cures, and (D) where to review in the module. After all four objectives come fresh worked examples + self-check questions (with answers), a dated study plan, and how it's graded + test strategy.

Objective 1 — The Rhetorical Situation & the Writing Process (Week 1) · 3 items

(A) Key ideas, plain language

Two ideas the whole course sits on. The rhetorical situation: every act of writing is shaped by who's writing, to whom, why, in what form, and on what occasion. The writing process: strong writers don't nail a clean draft in one pass — they loop through stages, and they keep revision (re-seeing ideas) separate from editing (cleaning up the surface).

(B) Definitions, terms

The rhetorical situation (five parts): writer (you — credibility, stance, voice); audience (who's reading, with their knowledge and expectations); purpose (to inform, persuade, entertain, or reflect); genre (the recognizable form — email, op-ed, lab report — with its conventions); context (the occasion; the need that sets writing in motion is the exigence).
The writing process (recursive): invention/prewriting (finding ideas) → drafting (a rough version to work on) → revision (re-seeing ideas, focus, structure) → editing (sentences, clarity, correctness) → proofreading (typos, spelling) → reflection (so the skill transfers). Recursive = these loop back; drafting can send you to invention, revising can change your thesis.
Revision vs. editing: revision re-sees the big stuff (ideas, focus, organization, evidence); editing/proofreading cleans up the small stuff (sentences, grammar, spelling). The most-tested distinction of the week.

(C) Predictable mistakes → cures

❌ "Revising means fixing grammar and spelling." → ✅ That's editing/proofreading. Revision re-sees ideas and structure.
❌ "The writing process is a straight line." → ✅ It's recursive — looping back is the process working.
❌ "Audience doesn't matter — I just write what I think." → ✅ Audience shapes everything — tone, evidence, how much you explain.
❌ "More formal is always better." → ✅ Formality is matched to the audience, not a virtue. Fit, not fanciness.

(D) Review in the module

Week 1 → Lecture Outline (the five parts; the process; revision vs. editing), Slides (Deck 1), Lecture Tutorial 1, Writing Studio 1 (One Message, Two Readers).

Objective 2 — Critical Reading: Summary & Response (Week 2) · 3 items

(A) Key ideas, plain language

Before you argue with a text, you have to restate it fairly. Two jobs: a summary reports what a text says (neutrally, in your own words); a response evaluates it (with reasons). Mixing them up is the week's #1 confusion. The order is "they say / I say" — summarize fairly first, then respond.

(B) Definitions, terms

Summary: a neutral, comprehensive (main claim + major support, not one stray detail), own-words restatement of what the text says. Copying the author's sentences is quoting, not summarizing — and unmarked, it's plagiarism.
Response (analytical): your reasoned evaluation of the text's claim or evidence — what do I think, and why? Not a thumbs-up; it gives reasons.
Claim vs. support vs. topic: the topic is what the text is about; the claim is the arguable point the writer makes about it; the support is the evidence/reasons holding the claim up.
Annotation: active reading — tracking the claim, the support, and your own questions as you read, so you have the raw material for both a summary and a response.
"They say / I say": represent a text fairly before responding, so your response argues with what the writer actually said, not a distorted version (a straw man).

(C) Predictable mistakes → cures

❌ "A summary should use the author's best sentences." → ✅ A summary is your own words; quoting unmarked is plagiarism.
❌ "A response means saying whether I liked it." → ✅ A response gives reasons — it evaluates the claim or evidence.
❌ Confuses claim and topic. → ✅ The claim is what the writer says about the topic, not the subject itself.
❌ "I can skip summarizing and go straight to disagreeing." → ✅ Summarize fairly first — or you argue with a straw man.

(D) Review in the module

Week 2 → Lecture Outline (summary vs. response; claim vs. support; "they say / I say"), Slides (Deck 2), Lecture Tutorial 2, Writing Studio 2.

Objective 3 — The Paragraph + the Thesis & Essay Structure (Weeks 3–4) · 6 items — a big slice

(A) Key ideas, plain language

This is where writing gets built. A paragraph needs a topic sentence, unity, coherence, and development. An essay needs an arguable thesis and parts that arrange around it. This is a big slice (6 items) — know it cold.

(B) Definitions, terms

The paragraph (Week 3):
- Topic sentence: states the paragraph's one controlling idea — a claim the paragraph can prove (not a title, not a bare fact).
- Unity: every sentence serves the topic sentence. A sentence that wanders is cut or moved (a revision move). "Same general subject" is too loose.
- Coherence: the sentences flow — logical order, transitions that name the real relationship (however = contrast; as a result = cause/effect; in addition = more), and old-to-new progression.
- Development: evidence + explanation. Back the point and say what the evidence shows. Listing facts is not developing. There is no required sentence count (the five-sentence rule is a myth).

The thesis & structure (Week 4):
- Working thesis: arguable (a reasonable person could disagree), specific (names what is claimed and often why), and revisable. It is not a topic, a fact, a question, or an announcement ("In this essay I will discuss…").
- The parts: introduction (hook → context → thesis); body paragraph (develops one supporting point); transition (bridges ideas by relationship); conclusion (synthesizes — what the points add up to and why the claim matters — not a word-for-word restatement, not a brand-new argument).
- Reverse outline: one phrase per paragraph to test the structure (a revision move).

(C) Predictable mistakes → cures

❌ "A paragraph must be exactly five sentences." → ✅ It runs as long as its one idea needs.
❌ "On-subject = unified." → ✅ Unity is strict: every sentence serves the topic sentence.
❌ "Listing facts is development." → ✅ Development = evidence + explanation.
❌ "A thesis can be a question," or "'In this essay I will discuss…' is a thesis." → ✅ A thesis answers with an arguable claim; an announcement is not a claim.
❌ "The conclusion just restates the thesis." → ✅ A conclusion synthesizes (answers "so what?").
❌ Confuses topic and thesis. → ✅ A topic is a subject; a thesis takes an arguable, specific position.

(D) Review in the module

Week 3 → Lecture Outline (topic sentence, unity, coherence, development), Slides (Deck 3), Lecture Tutorial 3, Writing Studio 3. Week 4 → Lecture Outline (arguable thesis, the parts, synthesis, reverse outline), Slides (Deck 4), Lecture Tutorial 4, Writing Studio 4.

Objective 4 — Composing in Multiple Modes: Narration/Exposition, Rhetorical Analysis & Argument (Weeks 5–7) · 8 items — STUDY HARDEST

(A) Key ideas, plain language

Now you write in modes and analyze how others persuade. Narration/exposition (tell a story with a point vs. explain clearly); rhetorical analysis (how a text persuades — the appeals); and argument (claim/grounds/warrant, counterargument, and the fallacies). This is the largest slice of the exam (8 items); budget the most time here.

(B) Definitions, terms

Narration & exposition (Week 5):
- Narration = telling a true story to make a point; exposition = explaining/informing (a process, an idea, information).
- Showing vs. telling: showing gives concrete, sensory evidence so the reader feels it; telling names the feeling ("I was nervous") and asks you to take the writer's word. Showing is not more adjectives — it's selective concrete detail. Concrete = a camera/mic could catch it (the screen door banging); abstract = an idea (freedom, success).
- Significance: a narrative needs a point / "so what?" (it can be implied). A story with no point is a diary entry, not an essay.

Rhetorical analysis (Week 6):
- What it is: explaining how a text persuades — its strategies and their effects. Not summary (what it says), not agreement (your stance on the issue).
- The appeals: ethos (the speaker's credibility/character — trust me); pathos (the audience's emotions); logos (logic, evidence, reasoning); kairos (the timeliness of the moment/occasion).
- Label isn't analysis: "the author uses pathos" is step one of three — add the how (which move) and the effect (on which audience). A device like anaphora = repetition at the start of successive clauses.

Argument (Week 7):
- Toulmin: claim (the arguable position) · grounds/evidence (the support) · warrant (the often-unstated assumption that links the evidence to the claim) — plus optional backing, qualifier, rebuttal.
- Counterargument + rebuttal: state the strongest opposing view fairly (steel-man), then answer it. This builds ethos.
- Logical fallacies (the standard definitions): straw man (distort the opponent's view, attack the distortion); slippery slope (an unfounded chain to an extreme); false dilemma / either-or (only two options when more exist); ad hominem (attack the person, not the argument); hasty generalization (a broad conclusion from too little evidence).

(C) Predictable mistakes → cures

❌ "Showing means adding more adjectives." → ✅ Showing = concrete sensory evidence.
❌ "A narrative is just a record of events." → ✅ It needs a point/significance.
❌ "Rhetorical analysis = saying whether I agree." → ✅ Analysis explains how a text persuades.
❌ Confuses ethos and logos. → ✅ Ethos = trust the speaker; logos = the reasoning.
❌ "A bare label is analysis." → ✅ Add the how and the effect.
❌ Confuses the warrant with the grounds. → ✅ The warrant links evidence to claim; the grounds are the evidence.
❌ "A strong argument hides the other side." → ✅ It steel-mans and answers the opposition.
❌ "A straw man is any weak argument." → ✅ A straw man specifically distorts the opponent's view.

(D) Review in the module

Week 5 → Lecture Outline (narration/exposition, showing vs. telling, significance), Slides (Deck 5), Lecture Tutorial 5, Writing Studio 5. Week 6 → Lecture Outline (the appeals; analysis vs. summary vs. agreement), Slides (Deck 6), Lecture Tutorial 6, Writing Studio 6. Week 7 → Lecture Outline (claim/grounds/warrant; counterargument; fallacies), Slides (Deck 7), Lecture Tutorial 7, Writing Studio 7.

Representative practice (all fresh — vetted answers)

None of these are live midterm items. New scenarios, new wording, all the instructor's own illustrations. Each answer is vetted; the one-line why names the idea it tests. Cover the answers, work each one, then check.

Objective 1 practice

Worked example 1 — the situation + revision vs. editing.
You're emailing a landlord to dispute a charge, then later you reread your draft.
- (a) Name the five parts of the rhetorical situation for that email. (b) You first reorganize your reasons and sharpen your main request, then later fix typos. Which pass is revision, which is editing?
Answer. (a) Writer = you (a tenant making a fair case); audience = the landlord; purpose = to get the charge reversed; genre = a formal email; context = a billing dispute, in writing as a record. (b) Reorganizing reasons and sharpening the request = revision; fixing typos = editing. Why: revision re-sees ideas/structure; editing cleans the surface.

Self-check (Obj 1).
1. True/false: the writing process is a straight line from first sentence to final draft. → False — it's recursive.
2. Which stage is freewriting and listing? → Invention/prewriting.
3. Fixing comma splices and spelling is — → editing/proofreading, not revision.
4. Name the part of the situation that is "the form" (email, op-ed, text). → Genre.

Objective 2 practice

Worked example 1 — summary vs. response.
A classmate reads an essay arguing that cities should cap rideshare cars downtown.
- (a) Write a one-sentence summary of that claim. (b) Turn this into a response: "The essay leans entirely on one city's traffic data."
Answer. (a) Summary: "The essay argues that cities should cap the number of rideshare cars allowed downtown to ease congestion." (b) Response: "That argument is shaky, because it leans on a single city's data and never addresses cost" — it evaluates and gives a reason. Why: summary reports neutrally; response judges with reasons.

Self-check (Obj 2).
1. Is "The author claims later start times improve teen health" summary or response? → Summary (neutral report).
2. Is "That's unconvincing — one anecdote, no data" summary or response? → Response (evaluates with a reason).
3. A summary should be built mostly from the author's own best sentences. T/F → False (your own words).
4. The reading's topic is "homework"; the claim is "homework rarely helps in elementary school." Which goes in a summary? → The claim (not just the topic).

Objective 3 practice — big slice; work all of these

Worked example 1 — the paragraph (unity + development).
A paragraph's topic sentence is "Cooking at home saved me money this year."
- (a) Which sentence breaks unity: "I cut my takeout spending in half" or "My roommate is a much better cook than I am"? (b) The paragraph then says only: "I bought groceries. I made a meal plan." What's missing?
Answer. (a) "My roommate is a better cook" breaks unity — it wanders off the money point (cut it or move it; that's revision). (b) Explanation — how groceries and a meal plan saved money. It lists and stops (under-developed). Why: unity = every sentence serves the topic sentence; development = evidence + explanation.

Worked example 2 — thesis vs. impostor.
A student writes: "In this essay, I will discuss the effects of social media on sleep."
- (a) Why isn't this a thesis? (b) Rewrite it as an arguable, specific thesis.
Answer. (a) It announces a plan and takes no side — no arguable claim. (b) "Social media harms teenagers' sleep more than their self-esteem, so schools should address the sleep problem first" — arguable and specific. Why: a thesis takes a contestable, specific position; an announcement doesn't.

Self-check (Obj 3).
1. Real topic sentence or bare fact: "I moved in August"? → Bare fact.
2. However, as a result, in addition — which signals contrast? → However.
3. A conclusion should mainly — restate the thesis, or synthesize? → Synthesize ("so what?").
4. Can a thesis be a question? → No — a thesis answers with a claim.
5. "A paragraph must be five sentences." T/F → False.
6. Development = evidence + ___ ? → Explanation.

Objective 4 practice — largest section; work all of these

Worked example 1 — narration/exposition + showing/telling.
- (a) Mode of "To reset the router, hold the back button for ten seconds"? (b) Rewrite the telling sentence "I was furious" so it shows.
Answer. (a) Exposition (it explains a process). (b) Showing: "I read the email twice, set the phone face-down, and realized my jaw was clenched." — concrete, sensory; the reader infers "furious." Why: exposition explains; showing gives sensory evidence, not a label.

Worked example 2 — the appeals.
Label the appeal in each move (all my own illustrations):
- (a) "As a teacher for thirty years, I've seen what large classes do to kids." (b) "Imagine your own child as the one who can't get a seat." (c) A tutoring service advertises the week before final exams.
Answer. (a) Ethos (credibility). (b) Pathos (emotion). (c) Kairos (timing). Why: ethos = trust the speaker; pathos = feeling; kairos = the right moment.

Worked example 3 — argument (claim/grounds/warrant) + a fallacy.
"The city should add bike lanes downtown, because dozens of cyclists are hit there every year."
- (a) Name the claim, the grounds, and the unstated warrant. (b) Name the fallacy: "Either we add bike lanes, or we admit we don't care about human life."
Answer. (a) Claim = the city should add bike lanes; grounds = dozens of cyclists are hit there yearly; warrant (unstated) = a city should make its streets safe for cyclists who use them. (b) False dilemma (only two options when more exist). Why: the warrant links evidence to claim; a false dilemma reduces a complex issue to two choices.

Self-check (Obj 4).
1. Showing or telling: "It was a very tense morning"? → Telling.
2. Concrete or abstract: "the screen door banging"? → Concrete.
3. "The author uses pathos" — complete analysis? → No — add the how and the effect.
4. Ethos vs. logos: which is "trust the speaker"? → Ethos.
5. In Toulmin, the assumption linking evidence to claim is the — → Warrant.
6. A strong argument ignores the other side. T/F → False (steel-man and answer it).
7. "Distort the opponent's view, then attack the distortion" is which fallacy? → Straw man.
8. "One small step will inevitably lead to disaster, no evidence for the steps" is — → Slippery slope.

Study plan — a dated countdown (sized to 2 sessions/week)

Built for the Week 8 midterm. Adjust the exact dates to your section's posted exam day; the rhythm is what matters. Do a little across several days rather than one long cram (spacing beats massing — and it lines up with how memory actually works).

When	Do this (≈45–75 min)
~7 days out (Week 7, after class)	Read this guide's Objectives 1 & 2 sections. Work the Obj 1 & 2 practice and self-checks. Build your one-page concept sheet (the five parts of the situation; revision vs. editing; summary vs. response; the "they say / I say" order).
~5 days out	Read Objective 3 carefully (it's 6 of 20 items). Work the Obj 3 practice — drill topic-sentence vs. fact, the unity test, development = evidence + explanation, and thesis vs. the four impostors. Re-do any you missed.
~3 days out	Work all of the Obj 4 practice (narration/exposition, showing/telling, the four appeals, claim/grounds/warrant, the fallacies) — the largest slice, 8 items. Then run the paired Exam-Prep Tutorial (`N-exam-prep-tutorial-week-08`) in an approved chatbot (Gemini / Claude / ChatGPT) — it diagnoses your weak spots across the whole midterm and drills them with fresh items.
~2 days out	Take the Practice Exam (the paired `O-practice-exam-week-08`) under timed, closed-note conditions. Score it; list every concept you missed.
~1 day out	Re-teach only the topics you missed on the practice exam (use this guide's mistake-cures and the relevant Lecture Tutorial). Re-do those specific self-checks. Sleep — memory consolidates overnight.
Exam day	Skim your one-page concept sheet (and the classic reversals). Arrive early. Read each item twice and answer the question actually asked. AI is not permitted — bring your understanding.

Two paired tools — use both (don't skip):
- Exam-Prep Tutorial (N-exam-prep-tutorial-week-08) — a copy/paste chatbot tutor that diagnoses, re-teaches, and drills you across all of Objectives 1–4, ending with a readiness summary. Best for active recall and shoring up weak spots.
- Practice Exam (O-practice-exam-week-08) — a full, fresh, mirror-format run. Best for pacing and a final readiness check.

(This guide points to both on purpose — it doesn't duplicate them.)

How the midterm is graded + test-taking strategy

How it's graded.
- 100 points across 20 items, 5 points each, weighted toward application (read a scenario; name, classify, or identify) rather than bare recitation. The matching and "select all that apply" items are scored per correct pairing/selection.
- The midterm is 20% of your course grade. It replaces Week 8's quiz, assignment, and writing studio (the midterm-debrief Discussion 8 still runs). One attempt; AI not permitted.
- Coverage matches this guide: Obj 1 = 3 · Obj 2 = 3 · Obj 3 = 6 · Obj 4 = 8. Time is dominated by Objective 4 (the modes/argument) and Objective 3 (paragraph/thesis), so practice those until they're automatic.

Honest test-taking strategies for this material.
1. Translate each scenario into its concept first. Underline cue words — re-see / clean up, report / judge, claim / topic, trust the speaker / the reasoning, one step → disaster — then match to the term.
2. Run the classic reversals deliberately. Revision ≠ editing; summary ≠ analysis ≠ rating; thesis ≠ topic; ethos ≠ logos; showing ≠ adjectives; a straw man distorts the other side. The distractors are built on exactly these.
3. For "is this summary or response?" ask: does the sentence report (summary) or evaluate with a reason (response)?
4. For thesis items, run the four impostors — is it a topic, a fact, a question, or an announcement? A real thesis is arguable and specific.
5. For paragraph items, test unity and development — does every sentence serve the topic sentence, and is each point explained, not just listed?
6. For the appeals, name the source of the pull — the speaker (ethos), the feeling (pathos), the reasoning (logos), the moment (kairos) — and remember a label isn't analysis.
7. For argument items, find claim → grounds → warrant, and for fallacies, name the move (distort? two-options-only? attack the person? unfounded chain? too little evidence?).
8. On "select all that apply," judge each option independently — the false one is usually a famous misconception (a summary should quote the author's best lines; showing means more adjectives).
9. Do the easy items first, flag the hard ones, and budget time — 20 items means a few minutes each. Don't sink ten minutes into one item while quick ones wait.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object   = Page
title           = "Midterm Study Guide — Weeks 1–7 (Objectives 1–4)"
module          = "Week 8 — Midterm Review & Exam"
grading_type    = not_graded
available_from  = 2026-10-17      # posts before the Week 8 exam window opens
published       = true
provenance      = "~ Prof. Lindgren's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

Term-update note: each term's $39 update regenerates fresh practice variants from this same scope — the live midterm is never reproduced here.

The per-term $39 update (fresh assessment variants, re-paced to your next calendar) referenced above is on the roadmap — coming soon. Today's download is yours to keep, but it doesn't refresh itself.

~ Prof. Lindgren's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com