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. 

My Rhetorical Action Plan

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:
•  "These Advances In Lab-Grown Organs Might Save Your Life One Day"
• "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea Of 'Designer Baby' Ban"
• 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: 
• "Proposed Treatment To Fix Genetic Diseases Raises Ethical Issues"
• "Should we genetically engineer humans?"
• 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

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

Analyzing Context

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. 

Audience and Genre

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

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

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. 

Questions About Controversy

Questions About Controversy 

Prior to crafting a writing of public speech it is important to ask yourself questions regarding the topic. Below are a number of questions to help me figure out what I might still need to know for my controversy.

Geralt, "Board Questions Who What How Why Where" 5/15 via pixabay. Creative Commons Attribution.

• 3 Questions about the WHO involved in the controversy?
• Who was the main person or who was in the main team that was pioneering the field of genetic engineering?
• Are there any specific examples of people who have tried genetic engineering on a real person? 
• What stance has the greater United States Government taken on the controversy?
• 3 Questions about WHAT is up for debate in the controversy? 
• Is the debate specifically about genetic engineering or is it about a subsection of genetic engineering? 
• What point is the concept of genetic engineering at now? (Is it even close to being able to occur on a real person? 
• What is the majority of the proponents and opponents using for evidence in their arguments on the controversy?
• 3 Questions about WHEN the controversy was unfolded? 
• When did the controversy about genetic engineering begin to pick up steam in the world of research? 
• What type of acceptance did the controversy receive at the time when thoughts about genetic engineering began?
• How has the general consensus changed about genetic engineering over time? 
• 3 Questions about WHERE this controversy has unfolded?
• Where is the place that genetic engineering is having the most prominent research done? 
• What is the culture surrounding this controversy in the place of origin? 
• How has the research on the controversy spread over the country of origin and the world? 
• 3 Questions about HOW the controversy has unfolded in the media? 
• What type of coverage has there been on genetic engineering to the general public? 
• Does the popular media usually portray genetic engineering in a positive or negative light?
• What steps has scholarly media taken to help promote the positive ideas about genetic engineering? 

Reflection on Project 2

Reflection on Project 2 

Reflecting on the writing process is instrumental in helping yourself become a better writer. Below is my reflection on project 2.

OUTRAM, RICHARD. "Snowdon Reflection" 12/6/08 via Wikimedia Commons.  Creative Commons Attribution.

• What was specifically revised from one draft to another? 
• My first draft for the rhetorical analysis project had mostly summary and not enough analysis. That being said for the second draft I tried to mainly work on revising the amount of analysis which I had. Additionally, I tried to focus on the logistics of different types of punctuation which was a main focus during project 2. I tried to revise in efforts to use varying sentence structure and implement different tactics at getting the reader interested in the topic at hand. 
• Point to global changes: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization? 
• My original thesis was somewhat dry and boring for a reader to read. In my revision of the thesis I tried to make the two sentences have more fluidity and be more interesting for the reader to read while indicating that the paper would be about something interesting rather than just boring and informational. Additionally, I tried to break up the paper into a number of different paragraphs rather than just a few long one. This made it the writing less boring while splitting it up into number of different topics for the reader. 
• What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose? 
• I decided to make these changes based on the audience that would be reading my writing. Project 2 was supposed to be an informational piece showing a freshman in my subject how to write a rhetorical analysis. That being said, I decided to incorporate more of the rhetorical situation into the writing rather than just analyzing the different types of appeals present in the article. 
• How do these changes affect your credibility as a writer? 
• I think that by revising my writing in order to encompass more of a variety of things shows that I am a more credible writer because I understand the concepts of rhetorical devices more thoroughly and not just on the surface level. Additionally, by adding analysis to the writing I show that I don't just know how to restate what is said in an article but I am able to show understanding of meaning in it. 
• How will these changes better address the audience or venue? 
• Due to the fact that the audience is comprised of freshman in my field I think that by providing more evidence from the article which I analyzed they will have a better understanding of how to craft a work of writing in the field of engineering. 
• Point to local changes: How did you reconsider sentence structure and style? 
• Based off of the various points in punctuation that I have read up on I tried to vary sentence structure in efforts of keeping the reader's attention. I think that by adding different types of sentence structure and style I am better equipped to help them understand the lengths they must go to in their own writing. 
• How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose? 
•  These changes will be more effective in indicating to the reader what is necessary to include when crafting a paper in the field of engineering. By varying the sentence structure it shows the reader how to also keep their future audience involved. 
• Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing? 
• I did not have to reconsider the conventions based on the genre that much. During our first project there were a number of new and foreign conventions which I had not dealt with before but during project two I was more familiar with the various conventions of the essay and understood them from the beginning so I did not have to change much in the revision. 
• Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer? 
• Reflection helps me to recognize my strengths and my weaknesses in writing as I continue on with my various genres of writing. It helps me to understand the different conventions in the genre I am writing in and capitalize on those to take with me into my future writings. 

Reflection:

 I read both Chris's reflection as well as Olivia's reflection. I felt like I could really connect to Chris because both of us focused on adding analysis to our writing through the revision process. I think that this is a really important step in the revision process and it was nice to know that others were focusing on the same sorts of things. After reading Olivia's reflection I realized that she had used a number of peer suggestions in her revision process similarly to what I had done. Although I did not use all of the suggested revisions on my writing I feel like I could connect with Olivia because I often find it difficult to find what to revise without the help of others. It was interesting to hear about other's reflections on the drafting and revision process of Project 2. 

Project 2: Final Draft

Project 2: Final Draft 

Here it is, the moment you've all been waiting for. Below is the link for the final draft of the Project 2 rhetorical analysis assignment. Enjoy! 

Flood, Kyle. "Waaah!" 2/20/07 via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution.

LINK FOR PROJECT 2 FINAL DRAFT 

Punctuation, Part 2

Punctuation, Part 2 

Correct punctuation is the key to successful writing. Below is an analyzation of three more areas of punctuation that I feel are necessary for me to focus on in the revision process. 

• Commas
• In my last blog post I focused on unnecessary commas but I think it also important to look at the proper conventions of the comma. There are a number of instances in which a writer should use a comma, on in specific is between a coordinating conjunction joining independent clauses. Many of these conventions are taught to students in grade school but one thing I was surprised by was that a comma should be used between all items in a list or series. I always thought the comma should only be used between everything but the second to last item and the word and but that is incorrect. Additionally, the semicolon and comma combination is an interesting writing tactic that I might try to employ more in my writing.
• The Apostrophe:
• There is much discrepancy about where apostrophes should be placed. The main use of the apostrophe is to show that a noun is possessive. It was interesting to hear the logistics of how apostrophes work specifically. 
• If the noun does not end in s the writer should add -'s
• If the noun is singular or ends in -s or s sound the writer should add -'s 
• If the noun is plural and ends in -s the writer should add only an apostrophe
• Joint possession is shown by -'s added to only the last noun of the joining 
• Compound nouns should have -'s added to the last element
• Other punctuation marks: the dash, parentheses, brackets, the ellipsis mark, the slash:
• All of these other punctuation marks are pretty interesting to me because I rarely use them if I use them at all. I thought it was interesting that the dashes are used to off set something that needs emphasis. Additionally, parentheses should be used around supplemental material that is not imperative to understanding the text while brackets are solely used in quotations around wording or grammar that the author has changed in a quote. The ellipsis is used to show you have deleted words from a word-for-word quotation and the slash is used to separate two or three lines of poetry that have been input into the text. It was exciting to finally understand all the different punctuations. 

McClure, Darin. "Punctuation Saves Lives!"9/30/11 via flickr.  Creative Commons Attribution.

Revision Realizations: 

• "Those who appreciate the genetic engineering ban worry about people beginning to ask for change in physical traits rather than change in internal health traits, the opposite of what should be being resolved with the process of gene manipulation. (Parry)"
• In this quote from my paper that is a paraphrase of some of Parry's ideas I utilized the comma to separate the two independent clauses. This is just one of the many effective ways that a comma can be used in a sentence. Although I used the comma correctly and effectively hear sometimes I think that I still use it incorrectly in other ways that I will be focusing on for the rest of my revision process.
• "The article ends with the question: “How would a ban on the genetic modification of children be enforced, she asked, would all babies be forcibly tested?” leading readers to end off on a note regarding the article and leads them to think about how the topic could be expanded upon."
• This quote from my draft shows my attempt at using a different type of punctuation known as the colon. A writing becomes more interesting to a reader if there's varying sentence structure and the use of different types of punctuation can help to aid that process. That being said I think I want to try to use more variation in punctuation type through my paper in order to keep the reader from getting bored. I could include tactics like the semicolon and comma combination, more colons, or dashes to convey my ideas effectively.

Paragraph Analysis 2

Paragraph Analysis 2 

In order to improve one's writing it is helpful for an author to analyze his or her own work. Below are my thoughts on the paragraphs of my work for project 2. 

McPhee, Nic. "2008-01-26 (Editing a Paper) - 15" 1/26/08 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

Based on this paragraph analysis exercise I learned a number of things about my writing style. I think that one of my strengths is found in transitions and connection between topics. Going in to the final draft for this project I think these are two areas where I will not have to spend so much time. That being said, I think that I will need to focus quite a bit on developing ideas more and using less summary. I don't think I delve into enough deep analysis of the concepts and I spend to much time just going over exactly what the author said. I think this will be a main focus in my revision process going into next week. 

Here is a link for the my paragraph analysis of my work. 

Revised Conclusion

Revised Conclusion 

Revising the conclusion of one's writing is also instrumental in the writing process. Below is my work on revising my original conclusion paragraph. 

Neji. "New" via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution.  

As Bailey noticed in peer revision my original conclusion was pretty much all summary and fit right into the category of a classic high school conclusion paragraph. That being said, after scrapping the whole thing and taking a look at Grace's conclusion paragraph I think I got a better handle on what a conclusion should look like. I tried to rewrite my conclusion in a way which sounds more fluid and less of a summary but I am still a bit worried that it fits into the cliche high school conclusion. 

Original Conclusion: 

An author does not just use rhetorical devices just to appease the readers of the writing. An author specifically utilizes rhetorical devices in order to convince readers of a viewpoint. Similarly, in her article “Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea of ‘Designer Baby’ Ban” Wynne Parry employs numerous different tactics in order to convince readers to become opponents of the genetic engineering ban. Through multiple layers of meaning Parry is not only able to inform the reader of the topic at hand but is able to persuade them into believing that genetic engineering is for the good of society and should be legal. Additionally, the appeals to logic and emotion work to further the audience’s understanding of the topic of genetic engineering. These different devices all work hand in hand to create an effectively persuasive article which has reader’s agreeing with the author by the end. Although at first glance the article may appear to be just an informative piece, after reading through the whole article it becomes obvious that the piece works to persuade the audience to believe in the beneficial factors that come as a result of genetic engineering.

Revised Conclusion: 

Throughout her article “Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea of ‘Designer Baby’ Ban” Wynne Parry works to provide her readers with an understanding of both sides of the controversy of genetic engineering. Through her reference to credible sources as well as acknowledgment of counterargument Parry encourages her readers to think more deeply about the subject at hand. By utilizing not only factual analysis but also that which the reader can connect to on a more personal level allows for more through understanding of the subject at hand. The readers are more capable of connecting with the subject on a more personal level by having both the costs and benefits of genetic engineering shown which allows them to formulate their mostly accepting opinions on the controversy. Although a number of people do favor a ban on genetic engineering in reality their claims are unsubstantial due to the medical advancements which would be reached if genetic engineering pursued. A decrease in genetic ailments far outweighs the small possibility of society being overcome with desire to produce physically favorable children, the reason which the future of genetic engineering is bright.

Revised Introduction

Revised Introduction 

The revision process is one of the most important parts of the writing process. Below is my reworked introduction for the project 2 assignment. 

Cherub, Mad. "Trash bin" 2/28/07 via Wikimedia Commons.  Creative Commons Attribution.

I think the revised introduction below is the better version of the introduction of my paper because it is less summary than the original one. That being said, I think that my original introduction was somewhat dry and didn't have much opinion or as Bailey said in her peer review "implication". I changed my introduction up by adding words with connotation in order to more thoroughly imply the meaning behind my argument and show with detail, rather than summarize, the article which I analyzed. While I kept the majority of the middle section of the introduction the same I changed the opening of the intro in order to pull the reader in more and changed my thesis in order to make it sound less like a summary. 

• Original Introduction:
• From the color of one’s hair to each individual’s own personality, all traits are created due to the genes which a person has. Each individual gene carries its own attribute and some of these genes are seen as more favorable than others. To some these “favorable” genes are considered ones which carry good health and longevity while to others “favorable” genes are seen as physical characteristics. As technology continues to advance, more opportunities for genetic engineering have been uncovered. This possibility of genetically engineering children leads to the idea of expecting parents possibly being able to pick and choose which traits they want their children to have. In her article from the Washington Post, “Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea of ‘Designer Baby’ Ban”, Wynne Parry investigates the innovation of this genetic engineering and the opportunities that would come with it. Parry’s article works to encourage readers to understand why genetic engineering should be legal. By employing tactics such as direct quotes from credible sources and statistical facts Parry effectively convinces the audience of the  claims she makes.
• Revised Introduction:
• Genes determine who you are. From the color of your hair to your fingerprint genes are the deciding factor in the individual creation of each person in our society. Each individual gene carries its own attribute and some of these genes are seen as more favorable than others. Throughout society there is quite a bit of discrepancy as to what "favorable" genes are. Some take this as long lasting good health while others take it as physically appealing characteristics. As technology continues to advance, more opportunities for genetic engineering have been uncovered. The idea that one day parents could choose their child's hair color, nose size and so much more leads to an unending amount of arguments regarding the subject. On the one hand, the allowance of parents genetically engineer their children could lead to medical advancements and far less patients with genetic ailments. On the other hand, genetic engineering could quickly turn into a way of who could have the "best" child, relatively speaking. By weighing the costs and benefits of genetic engineering in her article "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea of 'Designer Baby' Ban" Wynne Parry encourages readers to understand that these benefits drastically outweigh the costs. Based on the idea that genetic engineering would allow for drastic advancements in the realm of scientific discovery, Parry’s article works to encourage readers to understand that this would be beneficial to all of society. Employing various tactics including quotes rom credible sources and statistical facts allows the readers to connect personally with the topic while simultaneously understand the logistical importance of genetic engineering. 

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

Reflection on Project 2 Draft 

Reflection on previous works of writing is an instrumental part in determining how you feel about writing in general. Below is my reflection on my first draft of work for Project 2.

I read and peer reviewed Aaron's rough draft as well as Bailey's rough draft for project two. Both were very insightful and helped me recognize what I need to do to improve my draft for project 2. 

Burton, Gideon. "Peer Review Monster" 1/1/09 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

• Identifiable Thesis:
• I think I have the basis of a thesis down in my current draft but based off of the insightful comments I got I think it is necessary for me to keep working on it to make it have more connotations rather than just being a summary of ideas. 
• Essay organization? 
• Based on comments on my essay as well as having reread it more I think that the body paragraphs of my essay begin with a central point but then have trouble staying focused on that central point. That being said, I think the overall organization is good but the individual paragraphs could have stronger organization. It has become apparent that often I get really close to having a paragraph which effectively speaks to the prompt of the assignment but then sometimes I will lose sight of that which is something I need to fix. 
• Identification/analyzation of the five elements of rhetorical situation?
• I touch on a number of things throughout my essay. I acknowledge the use of logical and emotional appeals while simultaneously recognizing the position of the author in the text. Additionally, recognition of the role that the audience plays was a big part of my writing but I think I could probably intersperse more of the context of the article into my paper. I was under the impression though that we had discussed in class that we should find the more effective rhetorical devices in the article which we are analyzing and then use those? If that is the case I think that by only analyzing the two most effective types of appeals in my article is somewhat effective in order to convey the overall effect to the reader. 
• How and why were certain rhetorical strategies employed? 
• I employed rhetorical strategies of logical and emotional appeals as well as recognition of the article's author. These seemed like the strongest elements of rhetorical strategies within the article and I feel would be the most effective at bolstering the claims of my paper. These were analyzed through direct quotes as well as summaries and the analysis of the implications these had on the reader. 
• Thoughtfully using evidence in each paragraph? 
• I employ a number of quotes throughout my writing but I think I could get better at using paraphrase and summary as well. Quotes are good to be analyzed but I think there is something to be said about a number of different ways of conveying evidence present within the text. This provides the reader with a wide variety of knowledge on the subject and with analyzation of them presents ideas for the reader to think deeply about.
• Leave your reader wanting more? 
• It became obvious to me through the peer review process that my conclusion paragraph is pretty much just a summary of my paper. That being said, I think I will need to rework it in order to make a more effective conclusion that also  makes readers leave thinking more deeply about the topic and eating more in the "so what" fashion. 

Punctuation, Part 1

Punctuation, Part 1

Utilization of punctuations is an integral part of the writing process.  Below is the analyzation of three areas of punctuation which I think I need to work on. 

Barrett, Tom. "Punctuation Pyramid" 2/6/08 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

• Unnecessary Commas:
• There are many points in a sentence in which a writer should not use a comma but does anyways. One of these points is "using a comma to set off restrictive or mildly parenthetical elements". In the past I would often use this in order to insert necessary details into the paper. I found it interesting to learn that these modifiers would only be set off if they are not essential to the understanding of the sentence. Another point that surprised me was that a writer should not use a comma "between cumulative adjectives, between adjective and a noun, or between an adverb and an adjective".  In the past I would always use commas to separate the describing words even if I only had two of them. In reality, commas are not appropriate between adjectives that cannot be joined with the word and. 
• The semicolon:
• Another point of writing that always seemed to confuse me was the semicolon. A writer should utilize the semicolon "between closely related independent clauses not joined with a coordinating conjunction". I had learned that a semicolon should be used when there are two independent clauses in one sentence. I found it interesting that this semicolon could be used in between two independent clauses with a transitional expression too in order to make the connection more fluid. 
• Quotation Marks, 
• I always knew that quotation marks were used for direct quotations but upon reading more about them I realized they have a variety of other uses as well. Direct quotations are enclosed by quotation marks but indirect quotations and long quotations do not use the quotation marks. It was interesting to learn that where you put sentence punctuation in relation to quotation marks affects how the sentence is read. If a question mark goes inside a quotation it applies to the question of the quote were as a question mark outside of the quotation marks is taken in account to the whole sentence. It also was interesting to learn that sometimes people misuse quotation marks by putting them around common used slang or expressions which is not appropriate. 

Reflection: 

I read both Bailey's and Aaron's project two rough drafts. Both were pretty good at speaking towards their individual claims regarding their articles but each draft had things that can be improved throughout the revision process. There were a number of unnecessary comma uses and so it was nice to learn that my peers often have the same difficulties I have when determining whether or not to use a comma. The semicolon is used less frequently and so it was hard to determine much about it during the peer editing process. Quotation marks were used quite often and so it was interesting to see where my classmates find problems and difficulties with those. 

The excerpt below can be found in Aaron's rough draft. In this sentence in specific there is a misuse of commas, a topic which I read about for blog post 8.1. There should not be a comma after the word article due to the fact that it is not an independent clause or separating unnecessary details from the subject. Additionally, for this sentence the period at the end should be outside of the quotation marks in order to signify not only the end of the quote but also the end of the sentence as a whole. 

"In the article, New York Times reporter Jenna Wortham interviews Cole Stryker, author of "Epic Win for Anonymous: How 4chan's Army Conquered the Web.""

The following excerpt comes from Bailey's rough draft. It was interesting to see a longer quote used in someone's draft. Based off of the reading I did I believe that this longer quote should not have quotations around it. 

“Question: Do you like to chat with other people?

Koko: fine nipple

Patterson: Nipple rhymes with people, she doesn’t sign people per se, she was trying to do a ‘sounds like…’” (Hu 2).

Draft of Rhetorical Analysis

Draft of Rhetorical Analysis

The revision process is one of the most important steps in a writing process. Below are my thoughts about my first draft for the rhetorical analysis project and parts of my writing that I would appreciate feedback on. 

Reneman. "DRAFT ICON" 2/24/13 via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution.

I had a bit of trouble writing this draft at first. Whether it was due to PTSD from high school writing or something else, I decided to jump around between different parts of it. That being said I am a bit worried that it might be choppy and or repetitive. Below are a few things that I would appreciate you all focusing on as you're reading through the draft: 

• The flow of the writing-does it go together well and is understandable?
• Is the text convincing? (Does it have a good quote:analysis ratio)
• Are the rhetorical strategies emphasized effective in conveying to the reader what is important? 
• Does the analysis on the topics make sense? 
• Is the paper long enough? 
• Does it speak to what the prompt is asking? 

Thanks for all the help! 

You can find the link to my draft here.

Practicing Summary & Paraphrase

Practicing Summary & Paraphrase 

Whenever a writer uses another author's ideas or words it is important that they are attributed correctly. An author can quote, summarize or paraphrase another author's words and ideas. Below is my practice exercise regarding summary and paraphrase. 

Jobadge. "#4IPC2010_wordle_tweets" 6/25/10 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution

Original Source:

"The increasing power and accessibility of genetic technology may one day give parents the option of modifying their unborn children, in order to spare offspring from disease or, conceivably, make them tall, well muscled, intelligent or otherwise blessed with desirable traits."

My Paraphrase of Original Source:

In her article, "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea of 'Designer Baby' Ban", Wynne Parry delves into the idea regarding the progression of time and advancement of science medicine relating to reproduction. She references that as this technology continues to improve and spread around the globe there will be a greater opportunity for expecting parents to manipulate their children's genes in order to make them genetically favorable through physical attributions as well as overall health. (Parry)

My Summary of Original Source: 

Genetic engineering will one day allow parents to choose which favorable traits they would like their children to have. 

Project 2 Outline

Project 2 Outline

A good way for a writer to organize his or her ideas is to start by making an outline of the material he or she will be writing about. Below is my outline for project two. 

Reynolds, Leo. "Q Why are all dinosaur jokes so bad?" 2/9/13 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

There are a number of things I found helpful from reading the excerpt from Writing Public Lives. The reading gave me a more clear idea of what the rhetorical analysis writing should be about and how it should be written. The introduction section of the reading stated that "Not all rhetorical analyses begin the same way... it is more important to shape your introduction in a way that helps you achieve the goal or purpose of your analysis" (122). This really helped me understand the introduction because it isn't one specific structure that is necessary to follow for the genre. This gave me a variety of ways in which to think about the introduction and in turn made me think more deeply about all the different ways which I can craft my introduction. The introduction section also stated that in order to craft an appropriate these the writer must think about "what do [you] understand about the ways it tries to persuade it's audience?" (122) This also got me thinking about my thesis because I have been in the habit of just resorting back to high school ways with a generic thesis but this gave me insight in how I should think more deeply about it and convince the reader with this sentence or couple of sentences about what the author is doing to convince them of something deeper in the text. In the developing an analytical claim section I feel I learned the most important things to make a claim substantial and sufficient. That being said, having a claim that is both debatable and supportable is important because it allows the author to show thither is acknowledgment of the other side of the idea and also gives evidence to support his or her claim, which is very important to convince the reader. When the book stated "In this sense, your reason explains how your text does what you are saying it does" (123). it becomes clear that in order to back up your claim you need reasons that will convince the audience of the point. The body section of the the text stated that "Body paragraphs in a rhetorical analysis are focused upon a specific aspect of the text that you are analyzing and they serve as evidence to support your reading or analysis of the text" (124). I think this notion is important because it is clear that the author doesn't have to focus on every single rhetorical device but rather the most important that support the original claim made. The conclusion part of the excerpt was probably the most important to me due to the fact that usually by that point in writing I am tired and just go over what I had written earlier on for the assignment. The fact that the conclusion is an opportunity "to think about the implications of [one's] analysis"(125) gave me insight on how the conclusion is so much more than just a summary of the previous writing. The conclusion is an opportunity to basically say why this matters and why the text is "persuasive or not" (125).

Outline: 

• Introduction:
• Begin with a clear grabber sentence that will make the reader want to continue reading the rest of my writing
• The name of the article, name of the author and the logistics of the article I am analyzing will also be specified in this paragraph
• Thesis will come at the end of this paragraph (most likely) 
• Either one of the drafted theses or a new one that is reworked but with same ideas 
• Body Paragraphs:
• Message and purpose of the text (Rhetorical Situation)
• Layers of message and purpose to convince reader 
• Analytical Claim: The author intentionally creates varying levels of meaning within the text in order to appear to be just writing an informational text while meanwhile encouraging the belief that genetic engineering should be legal.
• Support: Delve into fact that the author puts more emphasis on the con side of having a ban on genetic engineering as well as the fact she gives many more facts about how genetic engineering could be helpful to the entire population with individual beliefs inserted intermittently. 
• Recognition of use of logos and some pathos (Rhetorical Strategies) 
• Develop focus utilizing the author's use of logos and pathos 
• Analytical Claim: Parry's implementation of vast amounts of logos and pathos display her intention to help the readers understand the topic at hand and realize why genetic engineering could help advance society. 
• Support: Direct quotes from the text that display the references to credible sources which builds up the credibility of the author. Additionally, direct quotes from the use of logos throughout the writing, including interviews, expert opinions and organization throughout the text. 
• Conclusion:
• Convince readers why the above tactics influence the reader to be more of a proponent of genetic engineering 
• How persuasive the text is and what it makes the reader think 
• NO added analysis, NO summary of body, just recognition of what the implications of the tactics are 

Reflection: 

I read both Stef's  and Grace's project two outlines. Stef went extremely in depth with hers which I think will be helpful when actually writing. Based off of her outline I think I might need to work on ensuring that I have a through understand of my topics and how they relate to rhetorical situation as well as rhetorical strategies. Although in depth I also think Stef could still use some more support for her claims in her writing. Grace's outline was also through and visually appealing. I think she had many great points but it will be important for her to make sure that she doesn't over analyze too many points to ensure that she has sufficient evidence to back up all the claims she is making. 

Draft Thesis Statement

Draft Thesis Statement

It can be argued that an author's thesis is the most important part of his or her piece of writing. Below are a few sample theses which I could use in my rhetorical analysis. 

• In her article, "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea Of 'Designer Baby' Ban", Wynne Parry uses concrete facts and references to credible sources in order to connect with readers. The concrete facts and references to credible sources increase likelihood of audience support for genetic engineering, a notion which Parry is aiming for. 
• I think that this thesis works well at intertwining description of multiple types of appeals but I also think it could use development of word choice, grammar and meaning. I think this helps me have an understanding of what the paper will be about because this thesis works as a sort of outline. 
• Wynne Parry's article "Genetically Engineered Babies? Experts Debate Idea Of 'Designer Baby' Ban" works to encourage readers to understand why genetic engineering should be legal. By employing tactics such as direct quotes from credible sources and statistical facts Parry effectively convinces the audience of the  claims she makes. 
• This thesis is a bit more wordy than the first thesis which I wrote but I still think it gets the point across. I think this thesis could be worked on in terms of making it less wordy and ensuring that the main message is conveyed to the reader. From here I think I understand the main points of the rest of my writing but I think I will just have to analyze more in depth. 

Koslowski, Roger. "Typeface-thesis" 12/06 via Wikimedia Commons. Creative Commons Attribution

Reflection:
I read Zayla's thesis blog post as well as Austin's thesis blog post. All of the theses I read seemed to have pretty solid ideas and made me realize that I think mine could be made stronger by using different word choice. I feel like their theses go more in depth which is something I could work on with mine. All of the theses I read were pretty good some could just use some rewording and grammatical changes. Additionally, I think it is good to specify the author and or the article in the thesis to allow the reader to have a better understanding.