Learning Module 1: Explore how different writing products require different approaches
Discussion (Weight: 5%)
Learning Objectives: 1, 3, 5, 6
. 
Review the rubric for this assignment by clicking on this link. . Review the rubric for this assignment by clicking on this link. – Alternative Formats . 

. 
MAIN POST
For this discussion, choose one of the following two readings:

Option 1 .“ Elbow, P. (2014). Freewriting. In G.H. Muller (Ed.), The McGraw-Hill Reader: Issues Across the Disciplines pp. 105-108. New York. NY: McGraw-Hill.. 

p. 108, .”Writing,. Question 4: Writing an Argument: Write [a response] in which you support or discourage the act of freewriting.
Be sure to quote and cite Elbow when writing your response.

Option 2 .“ Martin, S. (2014) Writing is easy. In G.H. Muller (Ed.), The McGraw-Hill Reader: Issues Across the Disciplines pp. 114-117. New York. NY: McGraw-Hill. . 

p. 117, .”Writing,. Question 3: Writing an Argument: Argue for or against the proposition that one must find the ideal place (.”Location, Location, Location,. as Martin calls it) in order to write effectively.
Be sure to quote and cite Martin when writing your response.

First, read the article carefully. Answer the question associated with the reading. (100+ words)
Second, after answering the selected question, identify what the prompt was asking of you as a writer. Using the video above, identify what the best rhetorical mode would be to respond to the prompt. Support your ideas with direct support from each reading. Recall that direct support means using a quote. The quote should be integrated into your own ideas. An example can be found here. Make sure that you provide a proper citation. (100+ words)
Third, we want you to do more than just answer a question. Think about what the author is suggesting you do in your writing. How will you apply these ideas to your own writing process? Give concrete and specific examples. (100+ words)

TIP! – Respond to each of the above questions in its own paragraph.
PEER REPLIES

In 100-150 words, respond to two peers’ main posts. Examine whether the post clearly supports the peer’s ideas about what the chosen prompts are asking, if the chosen rhetorical modes are correct, and if the ideas presented are properly supported.