Learning How To Write (The Correct Way): English 109H: 2015

Friday, December 11, 2015

Reflection on Open Letter Draft

Reflection on Open Letter Draft

Peer review is a great resource to use in order to improve upon one's writing. Below is my reflection on the peer review process and my first draft of the open letter.

I peer reviewed both Aaron West's draft along with Bailey Mattox's draft. Upon reading Aaron's draft I was happy to see that we have a similar length in our letters. He effectively used some great hyperlinks to earlier blog posts which I think might be effective if I added to mine. Aaron had really solid claims but needed to expand a bit more with his analysis which I think is similar to my draft. Contrarily, Bailey's draft was very long and had great depth. That being said I think her draft can be cut down a bit in order to still convey the main messages yet be more concise so the reader does not get bored.

Samdogs, "Christmas Cookies"12/3/08 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

"Revision" Questions:

Did you demonstrate an ability to think about your writing and yourself as a writer?

The revision process helped me recognize how important it is to get a different view on one's writing in order to perfect it. That being said, while I conducted peer review it helped me recognize that writing is really just an interpretation of the world through the writer's eyes. As I continued on with my work it was even more apparent that writing is my expression of myself.

Did you provide analysis of your experiences, writing assignments or concepts you have learned?

Analysis is one of the areas which I always struggle with in my writing. While I feel as though I am capable of putting different facts into a writing assignment I feel as though I find difficulty in analyzing this material appropriately in order to make a unique work that is my own. The revision process helps me to recognize where the analysis is lacking and then determining how to make it a better piece of writing.

Did you provide concrete examples from your own writing (either quotes from your writing or rich descriptions of your writing process)?

For this specific piece of writing I mostly used hyperlinks to refer back to previous blog posts and writings. While at points I did refer to specific quotes I mostly utilized these hyperlinks in order to allow the readers to fully appreciate the entirety of the blog post or deadline assignment.

Did you explain why you made certain choices and whether those choices were effective?

Although usually I have more difficulty with explaining my choices I feel as though the informal letter genre really allowed me to express the reasons behind my choices. It's easy to acknowledge the choices but then takes an extra step to effectively convey to the audience the importance of the decision I made. Revision always allows me recognize how to do this more effectively.

Did you use specific terms and concepts related to writing and the writing process?

By referring to previous blog posts as well as deadlines I was more capable of indicating the important terms and concepts throughout the course. I tried to convey to the audience the terms and concepts which I had the most trouble with and what I was able to improve upon and what I had more difficulty with.

Saturday, December 5, 2015

Draft of Open Letter

Gassen, Chris. "Christmas Spirit" 12/6/14 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

Linked below is my draft of the Open Letter course final. After doing some research on the genre of a semiformal letter I feel as though my conventions are correct but I could be totally wrong. While editing could you please focus on:

Conventions of the genre?
If I covered all the content assigned.
If I have enough references to outside sources?
If the letter is long enough?
In general if it sounds good?

LINK TO MY DRAFT OF OPEN LETTER

THANK YOU!!!

Reflecting More on My Writing Experiences

Reflecting More on My Writing Experiences

Writing experiences are instrumental to helping a person determine what type of writer he or she really is. Below is my analyzation of my writing experiences throughout English 109H.

Travis. "Christmas-Tree-Wallpaper-christmas-8142630-1024-768" 12/7/12 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

What were the biggest challenges you faced this semester, overall.

The biggest challenge which I encountered was working my way out of the classic 5 paragraph type of writing which I was accustomed to and learning how to utilize multiple different genres of writing. That being said, the QRG and public argument were such interesting ways of writing but in order to fully understand and utilize the genres I had to first get over the hill of going out of my comfort zone in the writing process.

What did you learn this semester about your own time management, writing and editorial skills?

In the past I always thought that what I had to say with my writing as well as my editorial comments was somewhat insignificant. During this course I realized that what I have to say is important and that more often than not the comments I have on other people's work is in sync with other peer editors. I realized that what I have to say is just as important as anyone else's and it was exciting to come to the realization that I am more capable at writing in many different genres rather than only being able to convey my ideas and opinions in one way. Additionally, I realized that in order to time manage everything I have going on I can't do any of my work in my dorm room. I realized that I have to get out and about and do my work with lots of different breaks in order to produce my best work.

What do you know about the concept of "genre"? Explain how understanding this concept is central to being a more effective writer.

Throughout projects 1, 2, and 3 I feel like my understanding of "genre", or the type of writing which one does, has increased. I have come to the realization that depending on the genre which someone is writing is will convey a different message to the reader. Understanding this concept is instrumental because knowing the genre which one is writing in will make him or her more capable of effectively conveying the intended message within the writing.

What skills from this course might you use and/or develop further in the next few years of college coursework?

English 109H introduced me to a number of different types of writing, especially those which were published publicly. That being said, I think as I continue on with my education I will probably learn more specifics about a few genres of writing that are used especially for my major. This could be some sort of act of public speech or it could be a formal type of writing.

What was your most effective moment from this semester in 109H?

I think my most effective moment from this semester in English 109H was when I published my Public Argument in my blog post, "Publishing Public Argument". I felt as though throughout projects one and two I had really been trying to fully understand not only my topic but also the genre which I was writing in. I believe that the end of project 3 I really had a firm grip on every aspect of the project. It was so exciting to have really taken everyone's revision recommendations and then compile them with my own ideas to create something that I felt really worked well as an actual public argument that could have been published somewhere.

What as your least effective moment from this semester in 109H?

My least effective moment in this semester of English 109H was when I published my project 2 final in my blog post "Project 2: Final Draft". Both projects 1 and 3 felt pretty good to me but for some reason I feel as though I had not accomplished much in project 2. That being said, I don't think that my publication of project 2 was the best.

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Revisiting My Writing Process

Each individual is shaped by his or her own writing process. After having completed all the work for projects 1, 2 and 3 for the course I have decide to revisit what I stated as my writing process at the beginning of the course.

McIntosh, Johnathan. "Xmas Lights DC" 2004 via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution.

In my first blogpost entitled "My Writing Process" I recognized that I used to be "a somewhat procrastinating heavy reviser type of writer". Although this was true in the past I feel as though throughout the course I really focused on attempting to procrastinate less. After the first few deadlines in which I did the majority of the blog posts and assignments in the last two days prior to the de date I realized that I caused to much stress and anxiety to do it that way. From then on I really tried to space out the assignments evenly in each deadline in order to ensure that I wouldn't get overwhelmed.

I also labeled myself as a heavy reviser which I think still mostly holds true. Although this is still true I think I have improved upon this method to make it effective to my writing abilities rather than just being a result of procrastination, as in the past. That being said, I realized that I would create my own first draft all on my own and then following peer feedback as well as much meeting time with the professor I would work to improve upon what I had crafted in my first draft.

As of now, I think my time management skills have improved. I really tired to look at each deadline before the week of it in order to determine how to allot enough time in my schedule to each item on the deadline list. That being said, I think there' always room for improvement with time management and writing processes but I think I that I am starting to get onto the right track with how to deal with the full workload.

Hopefully, based on this course, I will be able to continue to procrastinate less and less with the assignments. I hope to continue to capitalize on both my own thoughts as well as those thoughts of the editor's of my work in order to produce the best work I can both in terms of school work and beyond.

Sunday, November 22, 2015

Reflection on Project 3

After a project is finished it is important to reflect on the project itself, especially the changes between drafts of the project. The following is my reflection on Project 3.

Colwell, Ken. "Running Baby Giraffe" 9/6/11 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

Between my first and second draft I changed up quite a bit of the content of my script for the podcast. I did this in efforts to make my argument more persuasive rather than just informative based on factual information. Additionally, I changed the person who acted as the interviewer in order to make it feel less forced and instead more relaxed.

Point to Global Changes: How did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

I tried to change the sequence of questions in order to create a more logical flow. By doing this I felt that the audience would have a better build up for the argument and could then be more capable of being persuaded as to why genetic engineering is a good thing.

What led to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?

These changes were made specifically because I recognized my first draft seemed to have a purpose of just informing the audience. Instead I knew my purpose was to persuade the audience so I decided to make some global changes.

How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?

Due to the fact that I created a podcast for this project I don't think that the organization of questions affects my credibility as an author. It more reflects on the person who acted as the interviewer in the podcast because they know how to lead an interview in an appropriate direction.

How will these changes better address the audience or venue?

These changes will help the audience to understand on a more basic level and then further open their eyes and ears and understanding to appreciate the emotional appeals which were utilized to help connect with the audience.

Point to Local changes: How did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

From the first to last draft I tried to make my sentence structure less formal and more conversational. I felt that this would be more easily understood by the audience and would help them accept the topic better.

How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

I think that by breaking down the sentence structure the audience will understand the topic on a more personal level and and feel as though the topic is more relatable.

Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?

Due to the fact that I composed a script and then worked that into a podcast I did have to change some of the conventions. When someone reads something he or she gets a completely different take on it than if he or she hears it. For that reason I really tried to make the script have a number of sentences which would really stand out and roll off the tongue well so they would be easily remembered.

Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer.

I think that reflection helps me to understand my strengths and weakness as a writer. Reflection helps me to see what I need to work on and what I was able to do well and that should be used in future writings.

Publishing Public Argument

The following is a link to my final draft of Project 3: Public Argument. Enjoy!

PROJECT 3 FINAL

Kent, Carrie Belle. "Screenshot of GarageBand" 11/21/15.

1. Mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience currently stands on the issue (before reading/watcing/hearing your argument) below:

←---------------------------------------X-------------|--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly Totally neutral Strongly

agree disagree

2. Now mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience should be (after they've read/watched/heard your argument) below:

←----------------------------------------------------|-----------------X---------------------------------------->

Strongly Totally neutral Strongly

agree disagree

3. Check one (and only one) of the argument types below for your public argument:

____X___ My public argument etablishes an original pro position on an issue of debate.

_______ My public argument establishes an original con position on an issue of debate.

_______ My public argument clarifies the causes for a problem that is being debated.

_______ My public argument prooposes a solution for a problem that is being debated.

_______ My public argument positively evaluate a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm supporting).

_______ My public argument openly refutes a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm refuting).

4. Briefly explain how your public argument doesn’t simply restate information from other sources, but provides original context and insight into the situation:

My project 3 final draft has factual evidence throughout it but I take this known information and then analyze that which is stated. I tend to throw in my own opinions and use a variety of appeals in order to connect with the audience to help them feel more positively towards the topic. The audience is more capable of connecting with the subject and then understanding the more complicated parts of it and why it is worth it to believe in the cause of genetic engineering.

5. Identify the specific rhetorical appeals you believe you've employedi n your public argument below:

Ethical or credibility-establishing appeals

_____ Telling personal stories that establish a credible point-of-view

__X___ Referring to credible sources (established journalism, credentialed experts, etc.)

_____ Employing carefully chosen key words or phrases that demonstrate you are credible (proper terminology, strong but clear vocabulary, etc.)

__X___ Adopting a tone that is inviting and trustworthy rather than distancing or alienating

_____ Arranging visual elements properly (not employing watermarked images, cropping images carefully, avoiding sloppy presentation)

_____ Establishing your own public image in an inviting way (using an appropriate images of yourself, if you appear on camera dressing in a warm or friendly or professional manner, appearing against a background that’s welcoming or credibility-establishing)

__X___ Sharing any personal expertise you may possess about the subject (your identity as a student in your discipline affords you some authority here)

__X__ Openly acknowledging counterarguments and refuting them intelligently

_____ Appealing openly to the values and beliefs shared by the audience (remember that the website/platform/YouTube channel your argument is designed for helps determine the kind of audience who will encounter your piece)

_____ Other:

Emotional appeals

_____ Telling personal stories that create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

_X____ Telling emotionally compelling narratives drawn from history and/or the current culture

_____ Employing the repetition of key words or phrases that create an appropriate emotional impact

_____ Employing an appropriate level of formality for the subject matter (through appearance, formatting, style of language, etc.)

_____ Appropriate use of humor for subject matter, platform/website, audience

__X___ Use of “shocking” statistics in order to underline a specific point

__X__ Use of imagery to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

_____ Employing an attractive color palette that sets an appropriate emotional tone (no clashing or ‘ugly’ colors, no overuse of too many variant colors, etc.)

_____ Use of music to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

__X___ Use of sound effects to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

__X__ Employing an engaging and appropriate tone of voice for the debate

_____ Other:

Logical or rational appeals

_____ Using historical records from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

__X___ Using statistics from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

_____ Using interviews from stakeholders that help affirm your stance or position

_____ Using expert opinions that help affirm your stance or position

_____ Effective organization of elements, images, text, etc.

_X____ Clear transitions between different sections of the argument (by using title cards, interstitial music, voiceover, etc.)

___X__ Crafted sequencing of images/text/content in order to make linear arguments

_____ Intentional emphasis on specific images/text/content in order to strengthen argument

_____ Careful design of size/color relationships between objects to effectively direct the viewer’s attention/gaze (for visual arguments)

_____ Other:

6. Below, provide us with working hyperlinks to THREE good examples of the genre you've chosen to write in. These examples can come from Blog Post 11.3 or they can be new examples. But they should all come from the same specific website/platform and should demonstrate the conventions for your piece:

Examples 1,2 and 3

*** I could not link to each podcast individually but this is a link to the specific channel on NPR which I would publish my work and the channel has three different examples of what I was going for with my podcast.

Sunday, November 15, 2015

Reflection on Project 3 Draft

Peer revision on a draft is instrumental in becoming the best writer which one can be. Below is my reflection on the reviewing process as well as my project 3 draft.

Peer Reviewed Drafts:

I peer reviewed Stef's Project 3 Draft as well as Alex's Project 3 Draft.

Who Reviewed My Project 2 Draft?

Olivia Wann, Jon Wirtzfeld and Austin See all edited my project 3 draft.

What did you think and/or feel about the feedback you received?

I think that peer review is always good because it helps me as a writer see problems that people who don't have as much background on the subject have trouble understanding. It's really hard to recognize all the errors you have if you're the only one ever editing it. I like this but at the same time I sometimes think that different people might contradict one another unintentionally. That being said, I really liked how in depth the revision comments were in this project. I know it's hard to specify what people need to say in every single project revision process but I think it's so helpful when you have a full document in comments rather than just the short comments on the side of the draft. (Not that I don't think that is effective I just feel this is the most effective)

What aspects of Project 3 need most work going forward?

I think to start with I need to mainly focus on making the voice over and then making sure that my script isn't just informational. Then I think I need to work on my argumentation. I think I need to change my script in order to have the interviewer ask me questions rather than just me going on a script based on telling why I think genetic engineering is beneficial because the point of this project isn't to inform by to debunk one of the claims of why genetic engineering is not beneficial.

How are you feeling overall about the direction of your project after peer review and/or instructor conferences this week?

SCARED. After peer review and conferences this week I realized I have quite a bit of work to do on my project and I need to work on really making it the type of argument I want it to be which I think will take quite a bit more time than I expected it to take.

Piascik, Chris. "1204-20121002-WORK-WORK" 2/4/13 via Flickr. Creative commons Attribution.

Sunday, November 8, 2015

Draft of Public Argument

So for Project 3 I am going to be using an auditory form of public argument. As I have continued into this piece more I have sort of transitioned from wanting it to be a podcast sort of interview to potentially a little news segment? Anyways, I provided you all with the script for my audio piece because I think the main persuasion comes from the script but is conveyed through the audio. That being said if you all could please comment on how effective the script is and how well I convey it through the audio that would be great, thank you!

SCRIPT FOR DRAFT OF PUBLIC ARGUMENT

Vlad G. "Genetic engineering" 5/7/10 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

Considering Visual Elements

In a public argument the argument itself is not the only focus but so are the visual elements that go with it. Below is my consideration of visual elements that could be used in my public argument.

Lumu (talk). "Arnold Boecklin Font" 2/9/11via Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain.

Are the different fonts I use complementary, or is the combination distracting?

Due to the fact that I will be creating my public argument in the form of a podcast there will not be that much text. That being said, the only text I think I will have is the title and then possibly a caption on a picture if I include one. I think it would be effective if I made these both the same font and then just the title in a much more pronounced size.

Are the fonts appropriate to the visual-rhetorical tone of my project?

The only visual fonts used in my argument will be for the title and photo caption so I think that they need to be effective in conveying the visual-rhetorical tone of my project. With that in mind I am going to look for a font which will not be too informal but not be too generic in order to be more visually appealing to the audience.

Is the theme or association that the image produces relevant to the theme of the argument?

I think it would be effective it I found a photo which directly relates to my topic of genetic engineering to put right below my embedment of the audio of my podcast. I think this would give the audience a visual depiction of the topic as well as an auditory depiction which could work hand in hand to help the audience relate more.

If the image is a graph or chart, does it clearly support a major point of my argument, or is it superfluous?

This question brought to my attention the idea of using a chart or graph. I think that if I could find a chart or graph that shows how genetic engineering can be effective in helping people based on the past scientific testing and research done then it can support the claim of my argument that genetic engineering leads to extreme scientific innovation.

Do the different visual and textual elements come together persuasively as a whole, or are there elements that seem disconnected or out of place?

I think that if I find the just the correct image then it can work well with the audio evidence which I will have. The image will have to be searched for though because most genetic engineering images are in favor of showing that it is unethical. I think that an image of genes or a graph of data could be effective in persuading the audience further.

If you are writing a multimodal argument, do the visual images help you move from point to point in the argument clearly?

I think that because I am using a multimodal argument the listeners in general will more easily be able to understand genetic engineering in general. My image will not specifically be used to help move the argument from point to point but it will rather be used to encompass the argument as a whole.

If you are calling your audience to take action are the consequences of not taking action and the benefits of taking action clearly expressed?

This is an interesting tactic that was brought to my attention. Due to the fact that I am only using one image I think it will be hard to prove the consequences of not taking an action and the benefits of taking that action. Although I do want my audience to take action to favor genetic engineering I think that I am trying to convey that more through the auditory part of the argument rather than through the visual part.

Project 3 Outline

Outlines are very effective in helping a writer decide what direction he or she wants to take with the work. Below is my outline for project 3.

Kent, Carrie Belle. "Map of Genetic Engineering Argument" 11/8/15 via Coggle.

Introduction Your Public Argument

The goal introduction of my public argument will be to "connect the issue to [my] audience's world view". I want to do this because with genetic engineering and debunking one of the many myths of why it is unethical could potentially affect us all in the future through lineage and science in general. By connecting this topic to my audience's world view they will be better equipped to understand the subject as a whole and connect with the reasons the topic is unethical.

Developing Strong Supporting Paragraphs

Major Supporting Arguments:

Genetic Engineering is part of human evolution
If people don't want to use genetic engineering in the future they don't have to
Genetic engineering could allow for vast advancements in sciences and human health

Major Criticisms:

Genetic engineering allows for creation of a new species which is unnatural
Genetic engineering could allow for "designer babies" to become a main focus

Key Support & Rebuttal Points:

Help recognize how this topic could affect practically anyone
Point to timeline of human evolution over the ages (Timeline)
Acknowledge counterargument of designer babies but recognize this would be few and far between

Tentative Topic Sentences:

Due to the fact that my public argument in going to be in the audio form I am going to focus on just having bullet talking points and then expand on them in the interview. These bullet points will include the key support and rebuttal and then specific pieces of evidence which I can use.

Gather Evidence:( I have only included two types of evidence because my video will only have time for about two different pieces of evidence in addition to the opinions)

Timeline
Debunk myths about genetic engineering

Specifically, idea that the public mainly thinks GMOs are unnatural.

Map of Argument

Concluding Strategies

I think that in conclusion of my argument about genetic engineering I will try to specifically point to the future of the debate of the issue. Although this tactic might change I think this would be helpful in pointing to why the topic is so important and how it can affect everyone's lives and why it is important that society continues to think about it in the future.

Reflection:

First I read Grace's Project 3 Outline. Hers was very insightful about her topic and helped me recognize that I need to focus on maybe finding more solid evidence regarding my topic of genetic engineering. It was interesting that we both are trying to connect our audience to the world view of our topics which I think is effective in really helping them look at the bigger picture. I then read Austin's Project 3 Outline. His was also very interesting and in depth. He was trying to decide how to conclude his argument and it was interesting to read the rest of his outline and then give input on what would be effective. He did a great job at assessing not only his side of the argument but also the opposing viewpoint and I think that is logical in indication to the other side that he respects the opposing viewpoint but that his is more reasonable.

Saturday, November 7, 2015

Analyzing My Genre

In order to effectively write in the genre which a writer chooses it is first necessary for him or her to completely understand that genre. Below there are a number of examples of my genre and the analyzation of the genre in general.

Breitenbach, Patrick. "My Podcast Set I" 8/8/08 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

5 Genre Examples:

Example 1

This is an example that shows the sort of interview type of sense which I want to have clear in my podcast.

Example 2

Even though this example doesn't pertain to my subject this is an example of about the length which I want my podcast to be.

Example 3
Example 4

This is an example of a podcast that has the approximate length which I am aiming for and it is potentially a great place to post my podcast.

Example 5

My Genre Details:

Social Context

The genre is usually set in a website which produces different lengths in podcasts. Originally I thought thought that NPR would be an appropriate contextual location for my podcast to be posted but after looking around on the site I realized the majority of those podcasts are upwards of 45 minutes long while mine will only be around two or three minutes long. That being said there are a number of other scientific websites would be appropriate to post a podcast on.
This genre can encompass pretty much any subject as I have found many different topics discussed in these types of podcasts.
A multitude of writers use this sort of genre but generally those who are effective speakers and well versed in the subject. Additionally, those who use this genre are speakers/ writers who think their topic would be conveyed effectively.
This genre is used to more easily convey a point in a different way than just writing an article. Sometimes hearing about an issue by a real voice rather than just reading a long article makes a person connect with the topic more easily and allows them to understand more. This provides the readers with and writers both with a more convenient and direct way of understanding and conveying the information.

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre

Depending on whether questions are being asked or not determines what content is included and excluded in the podcast. If it is an interview attention could be brought to the opposing views of the talker but if not he or she could easily just talk about the positives of the subject.
I think that this genre mostly focuses on pathos and logos. These rhetorical appeals effectively reach to the audience emotions to help them better understand while also explaining logically through logical facts.
For these podcasts there is almost always an introduction to the person talking and the subject which he or she is talking about. They also usually end in a similar way with the person talking coming to some sort of conclusion.
The way in which the writer speaks usually varies in sentence structure and explanation throughout the podcast. Most of these sentences are simple enough for the general reader to understand and stated in the active voice.
Depending on the subject the word choice varies but in general the majority of the word choice is understandable by the general public with some words that may be more easily understood by more educated people. The overall effect is somewhat informal academic because the main jargon is academic but in a sort of conversation between two people.

What above Patters reveal about the social context of the genre

The genre mainly includes those that would be interested in listening to podcasts about those specific subjects. That being said, it excludes people who are no interested in looking into finding podcasts.
The genre encourages a more thorough connection between the talker, author, and the reader, listener. That being said this specific podcast genre encourages the reader to engage in active listening which will most likely provide a better basis for them to understand the concepts with.
This genre mainly encourages an open mind to all sides of an argument and to listen effectively and openly to the thoughts discussed about. That being said, it is expected that the users have somewhat of an understanding of the topic discussed and are eager to learn more and hear more points of view of the subject.
It is not completely specific in what content the genre treats as most valuable. This genre comes with all different types of subjects and I found podcasts in many different types of areas. While there are some subjects that are emphasized more highly it doesn't seem as though the podcast genre picks and chooses what topics to focus on.

Reflection:

I read both Gabee's "Analyzing My Genre" blog post as well as Chad's "Analyzing My Genre" blog post. I thought Gabee's genre was very interesting because it was a good mix of opinion and factual evidence with also a good picture depiction for the reader. I liked that her genre spoke to such a large audience and it made me want to figure out a way to speak to a more broad audience in general. I decided to read Chad's blog post because we have a similar topic and a somewhat similar genre. That being said I really liked how his genre adds a bit of humor and or irony because I think it really helps to engage the reader. I also recognized how ours vary in that his speaks to mainly the general public and not really scientists or researchers while mine speaks to less of the general public and more of the scientists and researchers.

Saturday, October 31, 2015

Considering Types

Considering Types

There are a number of different approaches which a writer can take in his or her argument. Below is my consideration of the various arguments that might be suitable for my writing.

Rocket 000. "Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement" 9/5/08 via Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain.

Position Argument:

This would be a logical type of argument to write in due to the fact that a number of the articles which I have read about genetic engineering were in this style. It would be informative to my reader while giving them all the basics in understanding. I think this type of argument would also be very effective if I end up writing a formal article for my audience.

Proposal Argument:

I think this would be an interesting type of argument to use due to the fact that I could really figure out one of the problems in genetic engineering and then go from there in figuring out how it could be fixed through a proposal of cure. By "develop[ing] a proposal" I would really be able to connect with my readers about one specific part of genetic engineering and that problem in able to make them more likely to be in favor of genetic engineering.

Refutation Argument:

I think this might be an interesting type of argument about genetic engineering because I could specifically pinpoint one of the problems of genetic engineering such as how people think it is unethical and try to break that down. By providing a refutation to this notion I would be able to dispel this belief hopefully entirely and convince readers that they should not believe the process is unethical.

Some of the types of arguments I don't think would be effective would be the casual argument and the evaluative argument. While these would be good types of arguments to use in other areas genetic engineering hasn't quite had a burst of successfulness yet and not many policies have been implemented about it so I don't think an evaluative argument would be appropriate. Additionally, the casual argument doesn't really fit genetic engineering because there has not been enough headway with genetic engineering yet to analyze problems it has created. That being said I think the above three specified possible approaches would be most effective in conveying to readers what I want them to understand.

Reflection:

I read Chris's "Considering Types" blog post in relation to his Rhetorical Action Plan. It was interesting to read his thoughts because we both were thinking about the refutation argument. While he did look at this type I think the evaluative argument would be very effective in conveying his ideas either through a video or a scientific option article. I also read Stef's blog post on "Considering Types" in terms of her Rhetorical Action Plan. I really envy the passion she has about her subject and I want to find that for my topic in order to make as effective of an argument. Our topics and type of rhetorical strategy are a little bit different but I think they both work well. After having read a few other rhetorical approaches I have realized that it is a very individual process of determining what approaches are appropriate for one's topic and I think that ones I have come up with speak well to my topic. That being said I plan to keep a open mind going forward in case I realize that another argument would be better suited for my topic.

Friday, October 30, 2015

My Rhetorical Action Plan

A rhetorical action plan is imperative to one's ability to effectively convey an idea or purpose. Below is my rhetorical action plan for my act of public speech.

Appelo, Jurgen. "PDCA-Plan." 3/1/12 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

Audience:

Knowledge: The audience is expected to know the basics of genetic engineering. While my article will go into a little bit of depth about genetic engineering it will only give enough to help them understand how beneficial genetic engineering is rather than being just an in depth informational piece. Although some of the audience may have ideas about genetic engineering already it is unlikely that they will be extremely well versed in their beliefs.
Values: I believe that the general audience will have values that encourage advancements in the sciences as innovation in general. Because of this I am hopeful that they will be more likely to support the idea of genetic engineering.
Standards of Argument: I think that scholarly research will be persuasive for my audience but I also think that more personal stories with less educated notion will be helpful in giving them both parts of genetic engineering. I think I will need to put it in terms that the general public will understand so it won't just be like reading a dry and dull piece.
Visual Elements: I think that with this topic the idea of visual elements is not extremely necessary because it is hard to convey over pictures. While a few graphs or charts might be beneficial it is yet to be determined how helpful they would be.
Purpose: The audience is reading the argument due to the fact that they want to learn more about the genetic engineering controversy as a whole. They will have found my article because they are interested in the topic and want to understand it. I will be trying to expand understanding about genetic engineering while also help encourage support of genetic engineering. I think that if I have a strong argument with much different evidence then it is likely that they will be motivated to look for other sources in efforts to understand further the genetic engineering controversy.

Genre 1: Article written for The Huffington Post

Examples:

The function of this genre is to help further the audience's understanding about genetic engineering through somewhat scholarly writing. This Huffington Post is a pretty popular site for online publication of scholarly research so I think it would be appropriate to publish here so that a majority of society would see it.
The setting of the genre is in the Huffington Post.
In my article I think that I will use a mix of the rhetorical appeals we have studied in order to connect with my audience. The most effective articles that I have read have used a combination of the different rhetorical appeals so I think I will employ that tactic to make an effective argument.
This type of genre doesn't include visual elements so I don't think I will use any.
The style of this genre would be somewhat formal with a mix between conversational and academic. While it is not going to be published in a scholarly journal it still needs to sound educated and formal enough to provide the readers with my character's credibility.

Genre 2: Podcast interview about genetic engineering

Examples:

The genre provides readers with an opportunity to listen to interviews and podcasts regarding genetic engineering rather than having to read through an article. There are a number of locations where this could be published were many readers would be able to listen to it. It would be effective in helping readers understand the concepts on a more relatable level in a talked out way.
The setting of the genre could be any place which publishes podcasts, hopefully a well known location such as NPR or something of the sort.
For this genre I would focus mostly on logos and ethos due to the fact that my credibility will have already been proven because I was able to make it on to a podcast in general.
This genre doesn't use visual elements because it is all auditory.
The sale of this will be formal conversational. It will need to be appropriate to be publicly published but I will be partaking in a conversation with the person asking questions regarding the topic.

Responses/Actions:

Positive Reactions:

Increased interest in genetic engineering
Rise in support of genetic engineering
Recognition of and accreditation to importance of scientific advancement
Explain to people how the topic could relate to them in the future

Negative Rebuttals:

People recognize they don't believe in it after reading further about unsuccessful attempts

Although some failures, there is much room for improvement still being made

Continued rebuttal from the "unethical" standpoint of genetic engineering

Show how benefits of scientific advancements far outweigh the costs of the possibility of being unethical

Increased worry in potentially becoming a society based solely on designer babies

Recognition of how there may be some of this but very much of it is unlikely

Analyzing Purpose

Kent, Carrie Belle. "Screenshot of Coggle on Expansion on Genetic Engineering" 10/30/15 via Coggle.

Analyzing purpose is key to a writer's success. By analyzing purpose an author is more equipped to not just reiterate what other writers have already said but develop his or her ideas more fully. I made a Coggle analyzing the purpose of my public argument. The link for it can be found here

Thursday, October 29, 2015

Analyzing Context

In order for a writer to craft a work that speaks to readers it is necessary to determine the appropriate context of the subject. Below is my analyzation of the context of my writing on genetic engineering.

Live Life Happy. "The purpose of an argument, should not be victory, but progress." 4/15/12 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

Key perspectives/schools of thought on genetic engineering?

Those in favor of genetic engineering believe that it will further science and allow doctors to make drastic innovations in the world of medicine while enabling parents to procreate with the confidence that their children will be health in terms of their genes.
Those against genetic engineering believe that it is not natural, pointing specifically to mother nature choosing the genes which are favorable for people to inherit. Additionally, those against genetic engineering believe that the system will be taken advantage of and not used in the appropriate ways it was meant to be used for.

Points of Contention:

One major point of contention in the genetic engineering argument is in terms of genetics and is that those in favor of it believe that the possibility will allow parents to ensure that their offspring inherit genes that are the most healthy rather than passing on their own genes if they could lead to complications. Others counter this argument by saying that the system will be taken advantage of and just used to create designer babies.

Common Ground:

Both sides of the argument agree on the fact that genetic engineering could drastically advance the science community, as already seen in genetic screening.

Idealogical Differences:

As stated above, many of those against genetic engineering believe that it goes against mother nature in manipulating one's gene sequence. Contrary to that, it can be seen that humans have been implementing gene manipulation for thousands of years.

Specific Actions:

People in favor of genetic engineering ask people to believe in a world in which the majority of society will not take for granted a system of genetic engineering and instead use if for appropriate reasons such as ensuring good health and for the name of science. Those against genetic engineering request that people look at past food mishaps with various GMOs and focus on the fact that people are made the way they are for a reason.

Useful perspectives for my argument:

The abilities which genetic engineering would give science.
Humans have been using genetic engineering for a very long time.
Progress has been made and will continue to be made in the way of creating safe and effective way of genetically modifying offspring.
I think the above perspectives are the most beneficial and sound for my argument in genetic engineering and for helping me convey to readers what is so important about legalizing it.

Greatest threats:

I think greatest threats will be that society could take advantage of genetic engineering and not use it in the correct ways. I also think that my argument could be countered with the fact that it is not advanced enough and humans should just live with what they are born with naturally.

Reflection:

I read Olivia's blog post and Joy's blog post pertaining to analyzing context. After reading Olivia's blog post I really got a better perspective on the debate about artificial sweeteners and I could understand her side more. I think it made me realize that I need to bolster my argument to make it more sound proof. After reading Joy's blog post I was able to understand the importance of finding what your counterarguments regarding the topic you are writing about. Together I realized that I might need to work on developing my topic more before I begin crafting my argument about genetic engineering.

Saturday, October 24, 2015

Audience and Genre

Prior to beginning to write it is very important for an author to think about his or her audience for the genre he or she is writing in. This will help the writer craft a better work that speaks specifically to the readers. Below is my analyzation of audience in the genre I will be writing in.

Nhenze, "MobileHCI 2008 Audience" 9/3/08 via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution.

Audience 1: Future Parents

Future parents, specifically those that are currently in their 20s or 30s, will be interested in my writing because genetic engineering could potentially affect them when they decide to have children. If genetic engineering is possible by the time that they have children it could make a vast difference in how healthy the child or children they conceive is or are. For that reason, they will care greatly about the type of research in by work of writing.
Potential place of publication: Online newspaper column

Quite a few people read online newspaper columns and by publishing my research there the majority of my audience would most likely see it. Due to the fact that the audience could be in their 20s or 30s they most likely are pretty up to date on the worldly news and by posting my research in an online newspaper they would be kept up to date on the logistics of genetic engineering.
Linked example: The Huffington Post
Linked example: The New York Times

Potential Place of Publication: Social Media Site

In today's world, social media is picking up more and more steam. One way to help future parents get a look at my research on genetic engineering is to post an interactive video or article on a social media site. If it were posted here then it would likely be seen by a number of different potential readers.
Linked example: Facebook
Linked example: Pinterest

Audience 2: Researchers & Scientists in the field of genetic engineering

I think that when my research is posted it would make sense that other scientists in the field of genetic engineering would want to know my findings. It would make sense that they would be interested in seeing what other researchers had found on the topic.
Potential Place of Publication: Scholarly Journal

Due to the fact that the audience will be comprised of these researchers and scientists I think it would be logical that they will mostly be focused on reading different scholarly journals in which other scientific findings are published.
Linked Example: JSTOR
Linked Example: Oxford Journals

Potential Place of Publication: Major University Website

Research is not only published in scholarly or academic journals but can also be found at institutions that have a prominent standing in the subject. A potential place of publication of research for genetic engineering could be on a university's website that has pioneered quite a bit of discovery and research on the topic. This would allow researchers that are directly focusing on genetic engineering at the university to easily access the information and use it to see what other researchers have found about the subject.

Linked Example: Princeton Department of Molecular Biology
Linked Example: University of California Los Angeles Bioengineering

Extended Annotated Bibliography

When researching a topic it is important to determine what articles will be helpful to a writer. Below is a link to my extended annotated bibliography notating the reasons why I think the chosen articles will be helpful to me when I craft my public argument.

Faxton, Boston. "Bulletin of Bibliography Vol 1 Title Page" 7/1899 via Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain.

LINK TO MY EXTENDED ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Narrowing My Focus

After determining what one's focus is in a more broad sense it is necessary to then narrow the focus to pinpoint what he or she really wants to focus on for the majority of the writing. Below is my narrowed list of questions pertaining to the genetic engineering controversy.

Denelson83. "Circle-question-purple" 12/16/12 via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution.

What point is genetic engineering at today?

I think this is an important question because it is necessary to know how close the population is to being capable of genetically engineering a real human child. That being said, I think this question will help me as a writer better understand the supporting and opposing sides of the argument in a better light.

What is the general consensus about genetic engineering?

From the time it was first thought about to today I am sure that the ideas of genetic engineering have changed. I think as a writer it would be convenient to know this in order to see what the majority of the population has started to think, including the general public, researchers and scientists.

What type of light has media shown genetic engineering in?

I can imagine that genetic engineering is probably shown in different light depending on whether the publication is from a popular news source or if it is from a scholarly news source. That being said I am interested in learning how the controversy is portrayed and what type of evidence each individual news source uses to bolster their claims.