Reflection on Project 3

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

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. 

   

Reflection on Project 3 Draft

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. 

Draft of Public Argument

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

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

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. 

Analyzing My Genre

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.