Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Revisions whoohoo!
Revising work that you've already done can sometimes be very disheartening because you have put lots of time into your finished product. Standing back and looking at the big picture as a whole really helps to see flaws and errors that you may have not noticed while treading through the trenches of writing down the material. Going back over the research may also raise questions that you feel need to be answered to give your reader a better understanding of the point that your trying to get across. In the reading Ballenger talks about a boy who writes an essay on how families deal with alcoholics within the family. The reader was apparently confused about the purpose of the paper stating that it seemed more about outsiders influence rather than the family members themselves (Ballenger). It is very easy to get sidetracked while trying to convey one message and accidentally putting to much information on another aspect of the topic. This is where revision comes in handy. You may even be able to keep some off-topic info as long as it is blended well with your main point. Sometimes within an essay you'll cover one point and three pages later have a paragraph that is associated with the first. By revising you can get everything placed where it needs to be correctly to make more sense. The idea Ballenger gives us to highlight research material one color and our own input another is a great tactic to make sure we are evenly dispersing our thoughts throughout the research to combine both views in an effective manner. It's a little scary thinking about discarding any of the work we've done, but in many instances it is probably necessary to make our draft more complete. I guess we'll see where the revisions take us, won't we.
Last RR
It seems that the main point Ballenger is trying to make is that we should not be afraid to “attack” our draft. To many people, including myself, are afraid to make drastic changes to their essay; for me I think it is because I feel like I have spent days assembling my thoughts and am unwilling to undo all that hard work. But it will be imperative for me revise my paper, so that my ideas and sources flow. Making sure that I am “surrounding” my “sources” with my “own prose and purposes” is something that must be done (Ballenger).
When I recently went back and read my ethnography, first draft, I realized that it could use a lot of changes. It seemed that when I was first writing I was happy with all my hard work and how could I possibly change it for the better. According to Ballenger I was in to tight a relationship with my first draft and that it was time to take a step back.
I really like the idea of using two different highlighters; to highlight my purposes with one color and someone else’s idea with a different color. I am definitely curious as to how much of my paper is just facts or someone else’s idea’s.
Knowing how my leading question changed, from my first writings to present thinking, will give me an ability to begin honing in on revisions and even some rewriting of certain areas. I will have to reread my first draft, now that it has been a while it should be easier to see the actual theme and thesis that is presented. It may be easier as well to see it through the readers eye rather than the writers eye now. Ballenger suggests now is a good time to “get more specific about exactly what you're saying”. This will help me in my revision as it will bring to light what it is that I am actually saying.
I took Ballenger’s advice and had some friends read my paper, it was very helpful because they wrote down on the drafts that I gave them what they thought I was trying to say. I realized that what I meant to say, in some paragraphs, was totally obscure and would need some further explanation to get the point across.
When I recently went back and read my ethnography, first draft, I realized that it could use a lot of changes. It seemed that when I was first writing I was happy with all my hard work and how could I possibly change it for the better. According to Ballenger I was in to tight a relationship with my first draft and that it was time to take a step back.
I really like the idea of using two different highlighters; to highlight my purposes with one color and someone else’s idea with a different color. I am definitely curious as to how much of my paper is just facts or someone else’s idea’s.
Knowing how my leading question changed, from my first writings to present thinking, will give me an ability to begin honing in on revisions and even some rewriting of certain areas. I will have to reread my first draft, now that it has been a while it should be easier to see the actual theme and thesis that is presented. It may be easier as well to see it through the readers eye rather than the writers eye now. Ballenger suggests now is a good time to “get more specific about exactly what you're saying”. This will help me in my revision as it will bring to light what it is that I am actually saying.
I took Ballenger’s advice and had some friends read my paper, it was very helpful because they wrote down on the drafts that I gave them what they thought I was trying to say. I realized that what I meant to say, in some paragraphs, was totally obscure and would need some further explanation to get the point across.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Katy Kahla - CR RR
In this reading, Ballenger suggests different ways to reexamine and revise a paper. He especially emphasizes how we should be revising with a purpose and determining whether our paper’s purpose is clear with the supporting information surrounding it well organized. Ballenger also says that we can’t hold onto our first draft for dear life and say to ourselves that it is set in stone. Instead we have to remember that this is just a draft which requires us to let go of our preconceived notions of what we think our paper is like. Instead we should ask for feedback, whether it be feedback from a teacher or a fellow student, and use their advice to create a more polished paper. This concept sounds really easy, but as Ballenger points out this can sometimes require a major overhaul of your paper.
There are a few different reasons that a paper may need to have extensive revisions. One could be if all the supporting evidence in the paper does not support what your central idea is. In the example that Ballenger gave, a student’s thesis stated one idea yet his paper developed more into a tangent of that idea. Another reason for revision would be if there are too many facts and not enough analysis. Ballenger says that papers need to be a balance of both outside information and your own thoughts on the topic or it dry and boring to read. When examining problems that a paper may have, this can raise new questions that need to be answered which of course can lead to more research. This however is a good thing as it shows how knowledge of a source you are on your own topic.
Ballenger also suggests a few different ways to help revise a paper that I found useful. I really liked the idea of going through a paper with two different colored highlighters to see if there is too much source and not enough analysis or too much analysis and not enough sources. This really allows for me to be able to see where what I am saying could use some more backing or whether I am making side tangents at any point. Ballenger also suggest cutting up, cutting out, and re-stitching your essay. I think that this idea is great for when you don’t know where to go with revisions. This allows for you to do what you can’t do on a computer by allowing you to move around everything easier to create a better essay. Ballenger’s tips will be useful when taking a look at any of my drafts.
There are a few different reasons that a paper may need to have extensive revisions. One could be if all the supporting evidence in the paper does not support what your central idea is. In the example that Ballenger gave, a student’s thesis stated one idea yet his paper developed more into a tangent of that idea. Another reason for revision would be if there are too many facts and not enough analysis. Ballenger says that papers need to be a balance of both outside information and your own thoughts on the topic or it dry and boring to read. When examining problems that a paper may have, this can raise new questions that need to be answered which of course can lead to more research. This however is a good thing as it shows how knowledge of a source you are on your own topic.
Ballenger also suggests a few different ways to help revise a paper that I found useful. I really liked the idea of going through a paper with two different colored highlighters to see if there is too much source and not enough analysis or too much analysis and not enough sources. This really allows for me to be able to see where what I am saying could use some more backing or whether I am making side tangents at any point. Ballenger also suggest cutting up, cutting out, and re-stitching your essay. I think that this idea is great for when you don’t know where to go with revisions. This allows for you to do what you can’t do on a computer by allowing you to move around everything easier to create a better essay. Ballenger’s tips will be useful when taking a look at any of my drafts.
RR CR!!
In this reading Dr. Ballenger poses ways of revising a research paper. These methods seem like they would be very successful is implemented properly. I see that the excesses involving cutting up the paper and examine each paragraph as very effective. This seems like a great way to “cut the fat” from my paper. I know that both my papers need this to happen. My argumentative paper has some places where I’m sure their are wholes and missing data. So if I can do this exercise properly I believe I will have a clear view as to what needs to take place to have a strong paper.
The other activity that is mentioned is having someone else read and examine my writing. This is a very important thing, because it would be impossible for my self to read and scrutinize my own work. My eyes would be impartial to changing my own work. So with that said, I need to get into the writing center and have an upper-division student read what I have and more importantly what I need to change.
The third point that Dr. Ballenger gives that Is very important is that of going back into the library and doing further research. This is key for filling in those whole that may be found in ether activity. Once I have my focus dialed out I should with little difficulty hone in on other sources for my work. As long as I don’t create further issues with the data. As a writer you never want your work to be weak, unfortunately this does happen early in the process. So to combat that issue more data, and sources are needed.
As I side note I liked the part of the reading where Dr. Ballenger discussed the idea of friendly design. Especially giving examples with using things like block quotes, bullet lists, white spaces. This done in a way to make the paper “more inviting”.
kristen kuchay response to curious researcher
Ballenger’s explanation on revision is very clear and uses great examples to prove his points on what he is saying. I especially like how he compared your first draft to a long term relationship. As Ballenger says, you cannot completely re-due or change your entire paper because then your main point or purpose of the paper is abandoned (Ballenger).
When you revise your paper, you need to look at it through the reader’s eyes instead of just yours as the writer. As the writer, you need to understand your purpose, which is where Ballenger says is your starting off point, but also look at the purpose as the reader. Would you as a reader understand the purpose of the paper? You need to ask yourself questions when you are revising your paper to make sure your information is correctly in order, but also put together in a way that makes sense and the transition between information is smooth. Ballenger says you need to look at all the information you have after completing your first draft along with the new information you have picked up since then and compare it to when you began your draft and the questions you posed in that paper. Have any of the questions or main points changed? If so, how (Ballenger)?
Ballenger says one of the, if not the, most important thing you can get from the reader (whether it be your teacher or fellow classmates) is feedback and comments. This helps you as the writer go back in your draft and see where things might have been confusing and if you even understand it after reading it. Also, one of the best things to do is re-print your draft and make changes to it yourself after reading the comments left by the readers. This way, you can correct any errors or mistakes you made that maybe the reader didn’t catch but helped you take a closer look at a specific paragraph. Basically, you need to look deeper into your paper and compare the notes you have now on your topic to the notes you had when you first wrote your draft, along with what you had written in your first draft. Re-examine the main purpose or stance you had taken in the beginning of your paper and whether or not things have changed. If not, simply correct the information given and even emphasize more on it to make it more clear to the reader (Ballenger).
When you revise your paper, you need to look at it through the reader’s eyes instead of just yours as the writer. As the writer, you need to understand your purpose, which is where Ballenger says is your starting off point, but also look at the purpose as the reader. Would you as a reader understand the purpose of the paper? You need to ask yourself questions when you are revising your paper to make sure your information is correctly in order, but also put together in a way that makes sense and the transition between information is smooth. Ballenger says you need to look at all the information you have after completing your first draft along with the new information you have picked up since then and compare it to when you began your draft and the questions you posed in that paper. Have any of the questions or main points changed? If so, how (Ballenger)?
Ballenger says one of the, if not the, most important thing you can get from the reader (whether it be your teacher or fellow classmates) is feedback and comments. This helps you as the writer go back in your draft and see where things might have been confusing and if you even understand it after reading it. Also, one of the best things to do is re-print your draft and make changes to it yourself after reading the comments left by the readers. This way, you can correct any errors or mistakes you made that maybe the reader didn’t catch but helped you take a closer look at a specific paragraph. Basically, you need to look deeper into your paper and compare the notes you have now on your topic to the notes you had when you first wrote your draft, along with what you had written in your first draft. Re-examine the main purpose or stance you had taken in the beginning of your paper and whether or not things have changed. If not, simply correct the information given and even emphasize more on it to make it more clear to the reader (Ballenger).
Friday, November 13, 2009
Op-Ed First draft
We didn't do it THEY did!
Truthfully, yes people can be irresponsible with their money. As well as people do make bad borrowing choices, by running up credit. However I respectfully disagree that that is the primary reason for our recession. With all this turmoil you cant ignore the fact that Wall Street has made some of the worst decisions of all. On top of that are the uses of our central banks, and the creation of money that we don’t have.
Due to the bad investment behaviors of Wall Street the FED has had to authorize the creation of billions of dollars in order to bail out the companies that have been deemed “to big to fail.” This is all because we don’t want to see another failed Lehman Brothers. Because the economy couldn’t have handled another failed firm of that magnitude the FED extended an $85 billion credit to AIG. The Economist explained weeks after that this was done because AIG posed a “systemic risk.” Even if the company will own almost 80% of AIG, it is because of poor investment choices that this bail out happened.
The investment tycoon Warren Buffett examined derivatives he called them “financial weapons of mass destruction.” The problem is that these financial companies have their derivatives market to exposed. The Last Resort explains that the failures sounding the sale of derivatives suggests that Wall Street has too much leveraged and too much capital devoted to products of questionable economic utility. So what he have is the sad truth that our financial system is becoming more dependent on the taxpayer. You and Me!
Op-Ed, Michael Mccormick
When the topic “green” is introduced in a conversation most think of recycling or hybrid cars. But, what is the real thinking behind “going green”? Is it just to lower carbon emissions and pollution? Or, is there a deeper purpose?
When we think about saving the planet, what first comes to mind? Is it buying eco-friendly products to save some far away place? I say that the underlying goal should be plant conservation. In a text called “Plants in Indigenous Medicine and Diet” Maurice M. Iwu talks about how food “contains many necessary and useful chemicals which help in the maintenance of optimal health”. The problem therein lies with mass farming and the introduction of less nutritional food. According to Dr. Holcombe, an Oregon based physician, eco-friendly farming produces eight times more nutritional crops then when compared to the same type of crop from a commercial farm. That is not to say that commercial farms cannot be eco-friendly it’s just to say that most are not. The future of Homo sapiens will be determined by the survival of genetic variability and nutritional content in our diet.
With the changes in our planets ecosystems, due to deforestation and the encroachment of indigenous lands, most populations are now suffering from eating a “civilized” diet according to Maurice. The Igbo of Africa are a perfect example of once having an indigenous diet, but who are now suffering with an increase in their health issues. Maurice says this is because first world nations are bringing in processed foods and encouraging them to buy modern varieties of crops. He continues by saying that the Igbo are loosing their traditional uses of wild and domesticated crops and that they have not had thousands of years to adapt to digestively to new chemical compounds found in modern crops and processed foods. I believe that it is critical to conserve plants and peoples use of plants. If we forgo thousands of year’s worth of accumulated knowledge about plants and their conservation we as a species are threatening our very existence.
It is imperative that we expose our kids to the outdoors and teach them about conservation says Dr. Douglas a professor at Boise State University. She continues that it is ignorant to treat plants with the mindset that they don’t affect you or me. Even my textbook Biology talks about how New York City, New York saves billions of dollars each year in water filtration costs. New York City opted for cleaning up and preserving the Catskill Mountains ecosystem, where they get their cities water supply; rather than building huge water filtration facilities to meet the EPA’s new clean water standards.
“Going green”, it appears, is not for the survival of the planet specifically, but for the survival of you and me. Plants have survived for thousands of years and through many dramatic events, is it not possible that they could replenish after the extinction of humans. We need to consider the behaviors of our ancestors, many of who learned how to conserve and live with their ecosystems, and adapt modern ways with ancient practices. What is your part in conservation?
When we think about saving the planet, what first comes to mind? Is it buying eco-friendly products to save some far away place? I say that the underlying goal should be plant conservation. In a text called “Plants in Indigenous Medicine and Diet” Maurice M. Iwu talks about how food “contains many necessary and useful chemicals which help in the maintenance of optimal health”. The problem therein lies with mass farming and the introduction of less nutritional food. According to Dr. Holcombe, an Oregon based physician, eco-friendly farming produces eight times more nutritional crops then when compared to the same type of crop from a commercial farm. That is not to say that commercial farms cannot be eco-friendly it’s just to say that most are not. The future of Homo sapiens will be determined by the survival of genetic variability and nutritional content in our diet.
With the changes in our planets ecosystems, due to deforestation and the encroachment of indigenous lands, most populations are now suffering from eating a “civilized” diet according to Maurice. The Igbo of Africa are a perfect example of once having an indigenous diet, but who are now suffering with an increase in their health issues. Maurice says this is because first world nations are bringing in processed foods and encouraging them to buy modern varieties of crops. He continues by saying that the Igbo are loosing their traditional uses of wild and domesticated crops and that they have not had thousands of years to adapt to digestively to new chemical compounds found in modern crops and processed foods. I believe that it is critical to conserve plants and peoples use of plants. If we forgo thousands of year’s worth of accumulated knowledge about plants and their conservation we as a species are threatening our very existence.
It is imperative that we expose our kids to the outdoors and teach them about conservation says Dr. Douglas a professor at Boise State University. She continues that it is ignorant to treat plants with the mindset that they don’t affect you or me. Even my textbook Biology talks about how New York City, New York saves billions of dollars each year in water filtration costs. New York City opted for cleaning up and preserving the Catskill Mountains ecosystem, where they get their cities water supply; rather than building huge water filtration facilities to meet the EPA’s new clean water standards.
“Going green”, it appears, is not for the survival of the planet specifically, but for the survival of you and me. Plants have survived for thousands of years and through many dramatic events, is it not possible that they could replenish after the extinction of humans. We need to consider the behaviors of our ancestors, many of who learned how to conserve and live with their ecosystems, and adapt modern ways with ancient practices. What is your part in conservation?
Rough "ruff" Draft Dustin
When is congress going to quit giving away money bags to people who couldn't even manage their own bankroll. These large corporations asking for handouts are wicked evil bastards who secretly corrupt and destroy the world's environment and serenity. It sickens my soul to hear about such things as the plastic island that is just floating around in the Pacific Ocean, not to mention all the smog that looms over our cities as a dark cloud foretelling our doom. Nobody wants to take credit for the problem but it seems that we are all probably somewhat responsible for the mess. Why can't we just take the billions of dollars that we're using to bailout failures and use it towards taking care of the planet that provides life for us all. The government needs to grow a spine and rein in these arrogant aces (large corporations) and exile them to the plastic island that they created in their efforts to make huge profits. What day was it when legislature became such pushovers that they allow free-trade with countries that have undervalued currency. This is the kind of behavior that poisons our economy and consumer conduct. The excess of unwanted and unneeded products being shipped to America are just filling our landfills to the point of bursting at the seams. Small businesses and our elected officials need to grab up their lanterns and pitchforks and take a stand against ogre-ish corporations that are killing us slowly like an incurable disease that shuts down our vital organs, vile parasites!!
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Katy Kahla - Op-Ed
Who determines what is beautiful? It sure isn’t the Joe Schmo that sits next to you in class with his greasy hair, acne, and dated clothes. No, who really determines what the beautiful standards are are the people behind the magazines, TV shows, billboards, photo shoots, fashion shows, and anything that displays these “beautiful” people. And these alluring people are all the same really. For women they are tall, slender, with 0% body fat and for men they are tall with very muscular chests and they appear in every advertisement. According to Body Image and Adverting the average person sees over 600 advertisements daily so it is no wonder that with all those images, people of every age and class what to look just like them. Isn’t this why women debate over what shampoo and conditioner to buy? Do they get the product that is shown on TV by the cute girl getting the guy or the generic brand that they know nothing about? What about men? Do they buy Axe which displays guys being swarmed by girls or Bod where women are seen goggling over the men playing basketball? People want to be like them and they will do whatever it takes. Period.
Why is it that a whole generation wants to look like one body type with all the same features and conform themselves to not eating or strict diets? It’s pretty simple. In every sitcom, TV commercial, movie casting, runway show, or music video it is the pretty, thin culturally beautiful person that gets the part. It’s the gorgeous girl that gets the coolest boy in school and no matter what always wins at whatever she does and it’s the rugged guy that has every girl hanging off him and no worries. According to MediaWise.org, TV shows show the skinny girl being praised and idolized by male roles while the overweight character is the butt of all jokes. All of this is encouraging girls to conform to what I like to call the Barbie standards. The blonde bimbo with the unattainable 36-18-33 measurements that would put a normal woman in serious health risks but this is what young girls identify as beautiful. And it encourages boys to idolize the thin while terrorizing the fat. It sets the standards for who is popular in school and how people should act towards others.
This affect encourages men and women into wishing to project the media’s body image onto themselves which can cause serious health risks. The biggest risk is getting an eating disorder. The people that succumb to eating disorders are just normal people who are dissatisfied with how they look because they aren’t the models from the magazines. They are so convinced that they must look like these models that they will put themselves in harm’s way to get it. In a survey done in 2004 by the U.S. Census Bureau, it showed that currently over 10 million women and 1 million men are being affected by an eating disorder and once any person gets a disorder, they are affected by it for life. Eating disorders can drain a person mentally, physically, and financially. These disorders led to preoccupation with food, weight and body, malnutrition, serious heart, kidney and liver damage, depression, low self-esteem, mood swings, “All or nothing” thinking, or even death and can cost over $100,000 per month to treat. Since people suffering from eating disorders must face their problems every day, treatments generally last for two years or more which quickly drains anyone’s pocket book.
So how do we defend ourselves against a multi-billion dollar industry that spreads the “Thin is In” message everyday through every medium? We get informed. We make ourselves realize that every photo, commercial, or ad are edited to make it more appealing to the eye to encourage us to buy whatever they are selling. Whether it be make-up, clothes, or the idea that only thin is beautiful. Instead we should embrace the bodies we were given and realize we can’t conform ourselves to the Barbie standards.
Why is it that a whole generation wants to look like one body type with all the same features and conform themselves to not eating or strict diets? It’s pretty simple. In every sitcom, TV commercial, movie casting, runway show, or music video it is the pretty, thin culturally beautiful person that gets the part. It’s the gorgeous girl that gets the coolest boy in school and no matter what always wins at whatever she does and it’s the rugged guy that has every girl hanging off him and no worries. According to MediaWise.org, TV shows show the skinny girl being praised and idolized by male roles while the overweight character is the butt of all jokes. All of this is encouraging girls to conform to what I like to call the Barbie standards. The blonde bimbo with the unattainable 36-18-33 measurements that would put a normal woman in serious health risks but this is what young girls identify as beautiful. And it encourages boys to idolize the thin while terrorizing the fat. It sets the standards for who is popular in school and how people should act towards others.
This affect encourages men and women into wishing to project the media’s body image onto themselves which can cause serious health risks. The biggest risk is getting an eating disorder. The people that succumb to eating disorders are just normal people who are dissatisfied with how they look because they aren’t the models from the magazines. They are so convinced that they must look like these models that they will put themselves in harm’s way to get it. In a survey done in 2004 by the U.S. Census Bureau, it showed that currently over 10 million women and 1 million men are being affected by an eating disorder and once any person gets a disorder, they are affected by it for life. Eating disorders can drain a person mentally, physically, and financially. These disorders led to preoccupation with food, weight and body, malnutrition, serious heart, kidney and liver damage, depression, low self-esteem, mood swings, “All or nothing” thinking, or even death and can cost over $100,000 per month to treat. Since people suffering from eating disorders must face their problems every day, treatments generally last for two years or more which quickly drains anyone’s pocket book.
So how do we defend ourselves against a multi-billion dollar industry that spreads the “Thin is In” message everyday through every medium? We get informed. We make ourselves realize that every photo, commercial, or ad are edited to make it more appealing to the eye to encourage us to buy whatever they are selling. Whether it be make-up, clothes, or the idea that only thin is beautiful. Instead we should embrace the bodies we were given and realize we can’t conform ourselves to the Barbie standards.
Kristen Kuchay's Op-Ed
Many people do not realize the struggles that special educators face today. They think that because they get paid more than a general educator, that it must be somewhat easy to only have to teach a couple kids at a time. This is a big misconception.
In today’s society, more and more children are being diagnosed with learning disabilities and special needs. Because of this, the demand for special education teachers as gone up significantly. But yet there are fewer and fewer special educators each year in school districts. Why is this? Because there is not enough money to keep special educators and the special education programs going. The cause of this problem? Government Funding. Or should I say lack of. According to Special Education Professor Jack Hourcade at Boise State University, the Federal Government promised 40% funding to the special education programs. This was in 1975. Today, special education programs are lucky if they see 20% funding from the Federal Government. Because of this money issue, special education programs have to shut down because they do not have the money to keep them running or enough money to recruit any new teachers. How can this be resolved you might ask. A few things have been tried by the school districts and school officials, but nothing has been successful.
The most that the school districts and officials can do is contact their local and even Federal Government and try to encourage parents of special needs children to do the same. This kind of planning takes a good amount of time; time in which these teachers and working parents do not have.
This sort of situation caused a chain reaction. Because the promised government funding at not been met, the special education programs do not have the money to keep their programs going and cannot hire new teachers. The few teachers that do work in the programs have money struggles because they need to pay for the things for their classroom and individual students who may need specific learning utensils out of their own pocket. This causes teachers to look for another job or a second job. Because teachers are leaving and programs are shutting down, these children do not get the help they need. Putting them in general education classrooms can be harmful because they are very far behind or cannot understand. Parents cannot teach their children because they are working to help support their family and pay the extra hospital, doctor and medication bills.
Do you see how one thing that may seem small can have a huge impact on thousands of people? If the Federal Government had actually kept their promise of 40% since 1975, more special education programs might still be open. Who knows the kind of effect this could have had. But it would have been a positive one. Maybe if the Government focused more on our country’s education for our children instead of other countries, this issue might not even exist.
In today’s society, more and more children are being diagnosed with learning disabilities and special needs. Because of this, the demand for special education teachers as gone up significantly. But yet there are fewer and fewer special educators each year in school districts. Why is this? Because there is not enough money to keep special educators and the special education programs going. The cause of this problem? Government Funding. Or should I say lack of. According to Special Education Professor Jack Hourcade at Boise State University, the Federal Government promised 40% funding to the special education programs. This was in 1975. Today, special education programs are lucky if they see 20% funding from the Federal Government. Because of this money issue, special education programs have to shut down because they do not have the money to keep them running or enough money to recruit any new teachers. How can this be resolved you might ask. A few things have been tried by the school districts and school officials, but nothing has been successful.
The most that the school districts and officials can do is contact their local and even Federal Government and try to encourage parents of special needs children to do the same. This kind of planning takes a good amount of time; time in which these teachers and working parents do not have.
This sort of situation caused a chain reaction. Because the promised government funding at not been met, the special education programs do not have the money to keep their programs going and cannot hire new teachers. The few teachers that do work in the programs have money struggles because they need to pay for the things for their classroom and individual students who may need specific learning utensils out of their own pocket. This causes teachers to look for another job or a second job. Because teachers are leaving and programs are shutting down, these children do not get the help they need. Putting them in general education classrooms can be harmful because they are very far behind or cannot understand. Parents cannot teach their children because they are working to help support their family and pay the extra hospital, doctor and medication bills.
Do you see how one thing that may seem small can have a huge impact on thousands of people? If the Federal Government had actually kept their promise of 40% since 1975, more special education programs might still be open. Who knows the kind of effect this could have had. But it would have been a positive one. Maybe if the Government focused more on our country’s education for our children instead of other countries, this issue might not even exist.
Op-ed
Musical education has become a little less encouraged to many these days. For many reasons some people may think it looks useless to go to college for music education because there isn’t much you can do with it afterwards and not much requires you to have it. Music education is important and it should be more useful in getting students jobs that require a music degree. Amy Tompkins, a sophomore at Boise State University in Viola Performance share with us what professional orchestras think of music education when in the hiring process “…it's more about your ability than it is your education. If you can play well, then they don't care about how you learned”. In the performance side of things, musical education is not required. Being hired in a professional orchestra is all about how well you can play and pretty much nothing else.
But music is important for getting a job in other ways. For example you wouldn’t be able to get a job at a school, teaching music if you did not have a degree for this field. It also depends on the level of education you want to teach for the level of degree you’d need to have. Elementary through high school would only require a Bachelors degree. College would require at least a Masters if not a Doctorate. So having a Music Education degree is important in this field.
Music education has benefits to us in other ways. In a video from Youtube.com Jack Stamp talks about how the brain is working when kids are playing music. The left side of our brain computes all the technical things like what note is on the paper and how to play it, along with doing the math of how long to hold the note. The right side helps us to put the emotion into the music. This part of our brain is what makes us feel something when we hear or play music. Nothing in schools is able to connect both sides of our brain like music does, yet music education is still not recognized as being important.
Shelly Schwartz, who is a writer for CNBC and has reviewed many job and money related topics tells us how one with a music degree can get a job as a secretary, a teacher of elementary school, and a sales occupation including retail. How many of these jobs can someone without a college degree obtain? Why do places like this appreciate that you’ve graduated from college and yet a musical occupation doesn’t even take it into account? This seems a little wrong to me. We might have an easier time obtaining a secretary position with a college degree than someone with out it, yet we have a slim chance getting a job in which we use what we’ve actually learned from that degree.
Musical occupations should be making education a bigger deal and thus encouraging more students to go earn a degree in music rather than try to do music on their own. If the importance level of musical education stays where it is, eventually there will become no need to have it and less and less students will desire to earn it.
But music is important for getting a job in other ways. For example you wouldn’t be able to get a job at a school, teaching music if you did not have a degree for this field. It also depends on the level of education you want to teach for the level of degree you’d need to have. Elementary through high school would only require a Bachelors degree. College would require at least a Masters if not a Doctorate. So having a Music Education degree is important in this field.
Music education has benefits to us in other ways. In a video from Youtube.com Jack Stamp talks about how the brain is working when kids are playing music. The left side of our brain computes all the technical things like what note is on the paper and how to play it, along with doing the math of how long to hold the note. The right side helps us to put the emotion into the music. This part of our brain is what makes us feel something when we hear or play music. Nothing in schools is able to connect both sides of our brain like music does, yet music education is still not recognized as being important.
Shelly Schwartz, who is a writer for CNBC and has reviewed many job and money related topics tells us how one with a music degree can get a job as a secretary, a teacher of elementary school, and a sales occupation including retail. How many of these jobs can someone without a college degree obtain? Why do places like this appreciate that you’ve graduated from college and yet a musical occupation doesn’t even take it into account? This seems a little wrong to me. We might have an easier time obtaining a secretary position with a college degree than someone with out it, yet we have a slim chance getting a job in which we use what we’ve actually learned from that degree.
Musical occupations should be making education a bigger deal and thus encouraging more students to go earn a degree in music rather than try to do music on their own. If the importance level of musical education stays where it is, eventually there will become no need to have it and less and less students will desire to earn it.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
CR reading response.
The first part of the reading addresses how to two different sides of an argument in the same paper or which information to use. If you have two reliable sources on your topic but each talks about the opposite side of the argument which do you choose to use? I think since we’ve talked about that we should address both sides of the argument why not use both sources. It would be a great way of introducing the opposite side of your argument if you had a great source with firm information that the reader could take seriously. You may use it and then contradict it with your argument or “politely disagree” with your source you’ve just used. Just because they’re a source doesn’t mean you have to agree with what it says. In fact this may be the reason you choose to use it is to have the reader understand what you’re apposing and why you’re doing so.
The second half of the reading deals with starting your draft and what approach to take on it. There are many ways to do that and as he says it’s probably the hardest part of the whole paper. After completing the opening you’ve finished 90% of your paper. It is after you think about it sort of true because if our opening is supposed to inform the reader of where the paper is going you almost have an outline for yourself after writing the introduction. But it also starts out your writing voice as Ballenger states we need to have. So thinking about it the introduction truly is the most important part of your paper but I try not to think about it otherwise I’m scared to start writing. I just have to start by putting words on the page and then gather my thoughts from there and brush them up to make my point clearer. After I write my intro it’s so much easier to write the next few paragraphs because I’ve started a direction for my paper and I try to stick with that part of my topic till I’ve run out of things to say on it. Then I move to the next point. He also reminds us that we shouldn’t just plop down the facts of our paper and exactly everything we will say right at the beginning of the paper because then there’s no more imagination for the reader. I like his examples of the whale story and how the first one says here’s what I will say, and the second one tells a story that inquires your curiosity for resolution to the problem. Think about the color you want your paper to paint in the readers mind and how you will convey that through your intro before you just write an announcement type intro.
The second half of the reading deals with starting your draft and what approach to take on it. There are many ways to do that and as he says it’s probably the hardest part of the whole paper. After completing the opening you’ve finished 90% of your paper. It is after you think about it sort of true because if our opening is supposed to inform the reader of where the paper is going you almost have an outline for yourself after writing the introduction. But it also starts out your writing voice as Ballenger states we need to have. So thinking about it the introduction truly is the most important part of your paper but I try not to think about it otherwise I’m scared to start writing. I just have to start by putting words on the page and then gather my thoughts from there and brush them up to make my point clearer. After I write my intro it’s so much easier to write the next few paragraphs because I’ve started a direction for my paper and I try to stick with that part of my topic till I’ve run out of things to say on it. Then I move to the next point. He also reminds us that we shouldn’t just plop down the facts of our paper and exactly everything we will say right at the beginning of the paper because then there’s no more imagination for the reader. I like his examples of the whale story and how the first one says here’s what I will say, and the second one tells a story that inquires your curiosity for resolution to the problem. Think about the color you want your paper to paint in the readers mind and how you will convey that through your intro before you just write an announcement type intro.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Well this is what I say!!
In essence what I took from They say I say was the necessity for good explanation. It references an earlier readings that emphasized the need for using good language that everyone can understand. As well as language that is relevant. This piece expounds on that; giving illustrations on how to present information. It gives a few templets on how this can be done. I feel this is very important for a writer to build a well rounded argumentative paper. When you introduce the opposing view of the topic, you can as the reading says, you agree but with a difference. Now once done properly the context although it may be the opposition it will build on to your own topic. For example if I were arguing a music group and their popularity I might just say, Coldplay an alternative rock band is a popular band even if not everyone likes them. Now to me that is a week statement. I feel that by saying, although Coldplay may not be the most popular band around they have lead the alternative rock genre of music for many years and have gathered a huge fan base. Both statement are true and both contain the same information but by introducing the opposition and then showing the writers view makes for a much better statement. The other point to showing both sides of an argument that I find to be very valuable is to show the opposition first then your own stance. My reasoning behind this is you make a point a lot quicker then having to go “full circle.” Also the reader will remember the last things said. Now the issue this piece does give is that the techniques presented are wrote, and repetitive. Now because they are templates they should be switched up often. That is what I plan to do, use them but only to the point where they do not become repetitive. I will have to force myself to figure out my own way to present the information at hand.
They say reading response.
I love the way that this reading approaches the way we agree or disagree with other’s thoughts. It talks about how you shouldn’t just say “I agree, or disagree with…” this leaves no explanation as to why. It doesn’t give the reader any signs of you’re actually thinking for yourself. This could just be your easy way out of not thinking much. I love how the writer ties this into the quoting reading we had by Orwell. It acts just like quoting. You can’t just state your opinion and run off thinking that was good enough. You need to expand on it and tell why or how you came to this conclusion in the first place. Make exactly clear why you have the opinion you do. Then tell of what the other side of your argument is to show why you need your opinion. I guess what I’m saying is to state the problem on the topic you’re speaking of. Since my ethnography was on musical occupations and how to get them I’m going to argue that musical education should be more valued in getting a job in this field. But I have to say why I’ve come to this opinion and why the problem needs to be opposed.
We also need to have some backing behind why we’ve come up with our opinion and show that others have come to the same conclusion. If we can we should find someone else who thinks the same as we do so that, as the writer states, we don’t just make an opinion from come out of the blue. But don’t rely on other’s quotes too heavily and lose sight of what opinion you came up with before you started the paper. This is probably another important point. Sticking to your guns and keeping with the argument you stated at the beginning of the paper. Don’t lose track down the line and make your argument sound hesitant.
Then he has given us starting points for stating our agreement or disagreement or even doing both at the same time. These of course are just as I stated them, starting points for giving us help or ideas in how we approach stating our opinion.
We also need to have some backing behind why we’ve come up with our opinion and show that others have come to the same conclusion. If we can we should find someone else who thinks the same as we do so that, as the writer states, we don’t just make an opinion from come out of the blue. But don’t rely on other’s quotes too heavily and lose sight of what opinion you came up with before you started the paper. This is probably another important point. Sticking to your guns and keeping with the argument you stated at the beginning of the paper. Don’t lose track down the line and make your argument sound hesitant.
Then he has given us starting points for stating our agreement or disagreement or even doing both at the same time. These of course are just as I stated them, starting points for giving us help or ideas in how we approach stating our opinion.
Michael's RR to "They Say"
“They Say” is an essay that promotes educating your audience before you begin arguing. What I mean is that to many people assume that the audience they are arguing a point to already know the other side of the argument. For instance “we could only wonder why he was going on and on about X”. It seems that in order to keep an audience captivated you need to provide the other side of the argument, that way you give a reason to those listening or reading why they should bother with what you have to say.
It appears that most prefer conflict in a situation in order to maintain any type of interest and not have the label boring slapped to it. Any thing we do as a society seems to be this way. Such as sports, political speeches, the news, books you get the point. Who cares about listening to something that we all agree with all ready and that has no opposing side to the issue.
“Yes / No / Okay, But” talks about being clear with your points. In other words present your side of the argument early on, “readers get frustrated, wondering, is this guy agreeing or disagreeing?”. Another clear way of demonstrating your side clearly is by using this: “ I think X is mistaken because she overlooks ...”. This style shows how to clearly present why you disagree.
It will be critical in my paper to establish who is arguing against the conservation of plants, the “they say” part. First off most would think that no one really disagrees openly with conservation, and I agree. But when people with their actions do something to impede upon they stability of an ecosystem there is tremendous consequences. It will also be very important to show both side of the story such as why people did this or why we should stop that.
It appears that most prefer conflict in a situation in order to maintain any type of interest and not have the label boring slapped to it. Any thing we do as a society seems to be this way. Such as sports, political speeches, the news, books you get the point. Who cares about listening to something that we all agree with all ready and that has no opposing side to the issue.
“Yes / No / Okay, But” talks about being clear with your points. In other words present your side of the argument early on, “readers get frustrated, wondering, is this guy agreeing or disagreeing?”. Another clear way of demonstrating your side clearly is by using this: “ I think X is mistaken because she overlooks ...”. This style shows how to clearly present why you disagree.
It will be critical in my paper to establish who is arguing against the conservation of plants, the “they say” part. First off most would think that no one really disagrees openly with conservation, and I agree. But when people with their actions do something to impede upon they stability of an ecosystem there is tremendous consequences. It will also be very important to show both side of the story such as why people did this or why we should stop that.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Katy Kahla - "They Say, I Say"
There are many different ways of constructing an argument paper. In the "They Say, I Say" reading, they offer a few different effective ways of construction a credible argument. They do this by encouraging writers to state what their opposition thinks on the topic and what you think about the topic and why. As the reading shows, one of the most effective ways of showing that you know what you are talking about is stating what the critics of your topic think too. This allows for your audience to know that you not only researched what you believe about it but what you opposition believes about it as well, giving more weight to your opinion. By doing this, it allows you to return to what the critics say and refute it throughout your argument with your own examples on why it isn't true. Using this idea, it allows for you to be able to persuade your readers into thinking as you wish them to think.
As the reading points out though, you can't just state what the opposition thinks. You must also stat your opinion clearly and concisely. You can't leave your audience guessing about how you feel. As the reading says, you can do this by agreeing with a stance, disagreeing, or agreeing but disagreeing as well. By stating your own opinions, you are allowing for your audience to understand how you feel about a topic. For argument papers this is very important because if you don't take a stance that is clear and upfront, you aren't really arguing anything. Instead you are just giving facts about an issues which can lead to the question for the audience "why should we even care about this?"
This reading offers some insights as how I might structure my own paper. I believe that it will be most effective to, as the reading suggests, state my opinion in the opening paragraph and then immediately afterwards, state how my opposition feels about this topic. This allows for me to argue throughout my paper about why the opposition is wrong and what should be done about it. I also think that this will lead to a stronger argument because I will be able to prove my points by disproving what some in my audience may already believe.
As the reading points out though, you can't just state what the opposition thinks. You must also stat your opinion clearly and concisely. You can't leave your audience guessing about how you feel. As the reading says, you can do this by agreeing with a stance, disagreeing, or agreeing but disagreeing as well. By stating your own opinions, you are allowing for your audience to understand how you feel about a topic. For argument papers this is very important because if you don't take a stance that is clear and upfront, you aren't really arguing anything. Instead you are just giving facts about an issues which can lead to the question for the audience "why should we even care about this?"
This reading offers some insights as how I might structure my own paper. I believe that it will be most effective to, as the reading suggests, state my opinion in the opening paragraph and then immediately afterwards, state how my opposition feels about this topic. This allows for me to argue throughout my paper about why the opposition is wrong and what should be done about it. I also think that this will lead to a stronger argument because I will be able to prove my points by disproving what some in my audience may already believe.
Dustin Elison "Well I Say" (Foghorn Leghorn)
This piece was another great eye opener to some of the tactics that will be helpful in writing our own argument. I think we should all agree to disagree and everybody would get along great. Actually, the idea to give props to the opposing side is something I'll have to do on my topic because I'm very much guilty of supporting the enemy. I'm ousting big corporations in favor of small businesses and their owners, but I've been known to frequent some of the rather large department stores in the valley. I will not use their names to protect their identity, whateva, who doesn't streak Wal*Mart in the middle of the night for the random necessities? Usually there are pros and cons to every side of the story and by comparing them side to side it will show which one is stronger in the end. Even if there is nothing positive about the other side, statistics and truths about it will ultimately give support to why your point of view should be accepted as the correct stance. The author tells us that we should most definitely state our position on the issue in the text and preferably before we get too far into the writing so we don't leave the readers wondering where the heck we're going with the whole thing. Opening up a larger conversation rather than just the thesis is also great advice. It gives you somewhere to go with all your thoughts throughout your writing, arguing back and forth between the views, but all the while proving your point. The template examples are going to be a great resource later, I plan on borrowing a few of those for sure. I found it interesting when the author talked about people's reluctance to disagree, it's rather true for most except those few unique individuals. It goes on to say that suppressing disagreements doesn't make them go away but only fester. Everybody has probably learned that lesson the hard way but many of us continue to make the same blunder time and time again.
Kristen Kuchay's Response to "They Say"
In this reading, they explain how to intertwine the opinions of researchers on your topic, along with your opinion. They are not necessarily saying that you need to give an example of each researcher's opinion on your topic that has ever written on your topic and argument, but just some facts to show the reader you know what you are talking about. Showing a well-known researcher's opinion along with your own shows that you have researched the argument on which you are stating and draws the reader in a little more because you may have a more knowledgeable approach on a topic of one of their interests. The writer needs to be clear on the stance they are taking with this argument; if they are against it, agreeing with it or both. The reader needs to understand, through the writing, what the writer's stance is and why they are taking this stance. You cannot start an argument paper off by talking about the topic and about some people's views on it and then half way through the paper begin taking a totally different approach. The writer gets thrown off and is confused on your stance compared to the other people mentioned in the paper. They explain that the best type of writing is somewhat complex writing because the reader sits there and tries to comprehend it more and becomes more interested. The writer needs to take a strong stance so they seem passionate about the topic they are either against, for or both. Regardless if you are against, for or both, you need to explain why you are choosing this stance. For example, you cannot say you are for the war in Iraq and not explain why. The reader wants to see why you take this stance and what brought you to this conclusion. The writer needs to be clear on whatever it is they are trying to stress to the reader. They need to take a clear stance, explain why and show their knowledge on the topic.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Michael McCormick's RR of "Politics and the English Language"
At first it seemed that the writer himself was falling into the same vice as he was describing, the misuse of words. But as you read on you begin to understand his point. When you read the examples he provides it becomes quite clear how people were not only misusing words but were doing it to a point that all description of what they are talking about is lost.
This became most evident in his translation of the Ecclesiastes verse. The first translation was understandable and had a definite structure to the sentence. Including a conclusion to the sentence: “but time and chance happeneth to them all” (Orwell). If you read the then modern english version you just get lost in all the big words that end up disintegrating the meaning. For instance the conclusion of the sentence shows how big words, in my opinion, expressionism for the sake of being impressive, just muddies the water. Does this concluding remark hit home as well as the first translation: “but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account” (Orwell). To me it seems that being simple and to the point, with each word, rather than being long and big strikes a little deeper to the point.
I feel like the authors main point is to show how we in the use of the english language are lazy; as well as followers of the misuse of english words, because at the time it is a popular word to misuse. The quote “attraction of this way of writing is that it is easy” shows how people will use words that have gained popularity in use but the true meaning has an entirely different definition (Orwell).
Today though it seems that the same sort of misuse of words is still a problem. However I would say that using many of the words that we use today, which were not originally english words, have been so blended in that they cannot now be separated from every day use. For example the foreign word “cul de sac” will probably not stop being used (Orwell).
For the use of this argument in our paper I think that we should refrain from using such words as “gay” or “that was totally sick” as the true meaning would denote the exact opposite of what we are arguing. Unless of course the use of these words are in a direct quote from an interview or something.
This became most evident in his translation of the Ecclesiastes verse. The first translation was understandable and had a definite structure to the sentence. Including a conclusion to the sentence: “but time and chance happeneth to them all” (Orwell). If you read the then modern english version you just get lost in all the big words that end up disintegrating the meaning. For instance the conclusion of the sentence shows how big words, in my opinion, expressionism for the sake of being impressive, just muddies the water. Does this concluding remark hit home as well as the first translation: “but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account” (Orwell). To me it seems that being simple and to the point, with each word, rather than being long and big strikes a little deeper to the point.
I feel like the authors main point is to show how we in the use of the english language are lazy; as well as followers of the misuse of english words, because at the time it is a popular word to misuse. The quote “attraction of this way of writing is that it is easy” shows how people will use words that have gained popularity in use but the true meaning has an entirely different definition (Orwell).
Today though it seems that the same sort of misuse of words is still a problem. However I would say that using many of the words that we use today, which were not originally english words, have been so blended in that they cannot now be separated from every day use. For example the foreign word “cul de sac” will probably not stop being used (Orwell).
For the use of this argument in our paper I think that we should refrain from using such words as “gay” or “that was totally sick” as the true meaning would denote the exact opposite of what we are arguing. Unless of course the use of these words are in a direct quote from an interview or something.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Katy Kahla - Politics and the English Language
People using the English language are lazy. This is what George Orwell is telling us in Politics and the English Language. Orwell feels that people no longer want to express exactly how they feel about a topic so everyone understands and instead have fallen into the norm of saying everything but saying nothing at all. People are over using metaphors, similes, complex wordings, foreign phrases, scientific words, jargon, long words, and other in order to make themselves seem more credible. To make themselves seem like they are saying so much with their writing but in reality they are just confusing everyone who is reading their work. All of this leads to writers and orators becoming lazy within such a powerful language. Words have the power to start wars and build nations and instead of using it to its full extent to create new ways to write and speak, society has fallen into using broad terms and irrelevant material because it is easy. All of these ideas that Orwell says, I have seen.
Everyday I have seen someone use one of Orwell fallacies. This was especially true during the last presidential election. My government class was asked to watch debates from state representatives to national representatives, and one thing every person noticed was that the farther up a politician aspired, the more obscure their answers to questions. Instead of just answering the question flat out with no round abouts, the national representative candidates would answer everything in circles. They did this so they would gain the most vote base because if they never really answered the question, who could disagree with them? But this idea of everyone agreeing because they don't know what to disagree with, just left the audience confused and unwilling to support the ideas of the person persuading them.
The ideas Orwell presents will be very helpful to our argument or really any paper that we write. Instead of trying to fill our paper with fluff so we can meet a page requirement, we should be concise about what we wish to say. This may seem like it will take up less room in the paper, but if we know what we want to say in a precise manner, it allows for better discussion and analysis of our ideas. It also encourages us to talk with meaning and not use premade ideas that have become the “norm” of society. We should return to just say “I think” instead of “In my opinion it is not an unjustifiable…” even though it is not as poetic and sophisticated because no matter what, everyone will know exactly what you think with no guess work.
Everyday I have seen someone use one of Orwell fallacies. This was especially true during the last presidential election. My government class was asked to watch debates from state representatives to national representatives, and one thing every person noticed was that the farther up a politician aspired, the more obscure their answers to questions. Instead of just answering the question flat out with no round abouts, the national representative candidates would answer everything in circles. They did this so they would gain the most vote base because if they never really answered the question, who could disagree with them? But this idea of everyone agreeing because they don't know what to disagree with, just left the audience confused and unwilling to support the ideas of the person persuading them.
The ideas Orwell presents will be very helpful to our argument or really any paper that we write. Instead of trying to fill our paper with fluff so we can meet a page requirement, we should be concise about what we wish to say. This may seem like it will take up less room in the paper, but if we know what we want to say in a precise manner, it allows for better discussion and analysis of our ideas. It also encourages us to talk with meaning and not use premade ideas that have become the “norm” of society. We should return to just say “I think” instead of “In my opinion it is not an unjustifiable…” even though it is not as poetic and sophisticated because no matter what, everyone will know exactly what you think with no guess work.
Blowing Smoke by Dustin Elison
This is the best and worst piece of literature I have ever read. Mr. Orwell totally rips on the nerdy people who have a lot to say, but in the end have nothing to say. I think that is why he relates the topic to politics even in the title. When it comes to "Blowing Smoke," nobody does it like a "Suit." Using big words within your writing does not set you apart as an intellectual. Most often it is a clear display of concealment or lack of knowledge. Mr. Orwell seems to be skilled in writing both simple terms and what he refers to as "modern english" (orwell 1). He dislikes the path that english tends to be taking lately, but he does think that it can be reversed if enough people decide to change it. Clearer communication will bring about clearer thoughts (orwell 1). When too much jargon is used the point is totally missed. The author totally hits it on the head when he compares the number of words to the number of syllables (orwell 4). They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, right? Even with an extra amount of syllables if your using less words your probably getting less of the picture. Just using simple words to try and get the point across is also universal, more people will be able to understand what it is your trying to say. Some of the phrases that the author picks on I actually kinda like and others I've never heard of such as "Bloodstained Tyranny," which is not something I hear or see very often. Maybe it is more popular than I know. The likeness of the public speaker who turns into a machine was accurate (orwell 5). How many times have we all witnessed that one, the brainless scarecrow. Though it was confusing the article made a very good point in a very convincing way by incorporating the issue at hand into the writing. Mr. Orwell gives some really good tips about questions to ask yourself when writing to help avoid being a mindless writer. I'm totally glad this reading was an assignment or I never would have gotten past the first page. In the end that was the learning lesson, keep it simple keep my attention.
Kristen Kuchay's Response to Politics and the English Language
George Orwell writes somewhat in a confusing manor, but I think that shows his point for the entire reading. Orwell speaks about society as a whole effecting the English language and how one person can start a "trend" and then others follow and so on and so on. Writing intelligently has become scarce in today's world. Many people write words such as "omg" and "ttyl" instead of writing out each word correctly like one is supposed to do. They call this the "texting generation," where everyone not only talks like this in texting but also on papers and assignments to the point where teachers even have to tell their students to write correctly and do not use texting language. For example, my psychology teacher always puts in her assignments to write in the proper English manor and not like we are texting our friends. Because writing in anything besides the correct English form is going on, society's intelligence as a whole is decreasing. If someone were to read an old passage from the 18th century, many people would not understand what is being said or why they wrote so "proper" and if it was even necessary. This is Orwell's point. Over time, people's writing starting changing for the worse and it started to catch on to everyone to the point where there are only rare cases where you see a person write properly. It's even odd when you see a student taking an English class write properly with good intellect, but then see how they talk and write outside of the classroom and they refer back to the "new" way of talking and writing. Clearly society can still write this way but choose not to because shortening words and sentences without proper English does not take as much time as writing in correct form. Even in some cases where people do not know how to write properly, they try throwing words in there that have to relevance to the topic or are simply meaningless. As a whole, we need to encourage the use of proper English writing in every classroom, not just English or writing class. I believe if we can start this "old trend" back up, within time people will start writing and speaking with proper English again. If we can get to this point of improper use of the English Language, then I believe we can get back to where we were before this happened.
politics and the English Language.
I had a hard time understanding what I was reading. But I guess that was Orwell’s point. He talked about how the English Language was becoming more and more depleted in intelligence. I can understand why he said this. People are not very good at speaking properly these days and we keep making more and more combined words like aren’t, and didn’t. We have created our own new type of English. Consider the language of texting or Instant Messaging. I can definitely see what he means about that part but I have to disagree with him a little bit. I do believe that our language should change with how we change. This is how English has evolved throughout the years in the first place. No body in today’s day and age would understand say the King James version of the bible written in old English. This is why they keep revising it to make it more understandable to a larger audience. There’s a difference between talking and writing the English Language intelligently and demining it. He talks about how we sometimes use metaphors we might not be completely familiar with. We might not know the real reason behind why it is used the way it is and we may use it in a sentence that won’t make sense to someone who knows what is actually meant by it. This is helpful to remind us how to make our writing more complex yet better explained. Using more words is not always the best way of getting across what we mean. You may be able to find a word that says everything you want it to in a cleaner more concise way. So as we get ready to write our papers we should take the time to make sure we get our ideas perfectly clear to our audience we’re targeting.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Katy's Reading Response
Every day we participate in arguments. They may not always be world altering arguments but nonetheless we are participating in a debate with someone about something. There are many types of arguments as Bruce Ballenger points out in the Curious Writer and all types need effective evidence to be convincing. Some arguments are used to persuade others to join their sides and some are used in exploration of a subject in order to gain a strong opinion about something. All of these arguments need to be well supported to be able to hold any weight and have any chance of swaying people. How many times have we watched or been the person who failed to persuade someone to our way of thinking? Ballenger points out that if we are unable to support our ideas effectively, that no one will tend to believe them. I think that is what Ballenger is trying to teach us. No matter how much we believe our point of view is correct, unless we can back it up with convincing facts, no one will be persuaded to listen to us leaving our argument ineffective. We also need to pay homage to the other side.
A debater is seen as more credible if they can prove they know both sides to an argument. They have shown that they have taken the time to not only research how they feel about an issue but how the opposition feels about an issue. This is one of the reasons that politicians not only research their side of the argument but their opponents as well. It allows them to influence the opposing side’s supporters because they know how they feel about an issue and can influence it to change to what they want them to feel about it.
All of these tips are very helpful when it comes to writing our own argument papers. We need to be well educated in our topic, both pros and cons, so that we can not only use our evidence purposefully but so we can express our opinions in a knowledgeable way. If we are able to prove that we not only know our side of an argument but the oppositions as well, we will have more credit to our opinions and hopefully, we shall be able to convince people to join our side. I also learned that everything I use needs to not only be well sourced, but very credible. Who is going to believe what I think if I only use Wikipedia or my dad as a source? Instead, credible sources that many people have edited or commented on are better. All of this will allow me to better craft my argument on how the media has influenced us to believe an unrealistic idea of how our bodies should look.
A debater is seen as more credible if they can prove they know both sides to an argument. They have shown that they have taken the time to not only research how they feel about an issue but how the opposition feels about an issue. This is one of the reasons that politicians not only research their side of the argument but their opponents as well. It allows them to influence the opposing side’s supporters because they know how they feel about an issue and can influence it to change to what they want them to feel about it.
All of these tips are very helpful when it comes to writing our own argument papers. We need to be well educated in our topic, both pros and cons, so that we can not only use our evidence purposefully but so we can express our opinions in a knowledgeable way. If we are able to prove that we not only know our side of an argument but the oppositions as well, we will have more credit to our opinions and hopefully, we shall be able to convince people to join our side. I also learned that everything I use needs to not only be well sourced, but very credible. Who is going to believe what I think if I only use Wikipedia or my dad as a source? Instead, credible sources that many people have edited or commented on are better. All of this will allow me to better craft my argument on how the media has influenced us to believe an unrealistic idea of how our bodies should look.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Skyler Harris Reading Response 6
Argumentative papers seem to be the most challenging for me to write. The main reason for that is I sometimes have a difficult time keeping my biased view out of the picture. Yes it is important to take a stance, as well as very necessary. Because unless a stance is taken then an argumentative paper will look more like a week attempt to make a point. In the reading it discuses the point of arguing in academia, which is to challenge knowledge as we have it. I would purpose that arguing not only will challenge knowledge but also the status quo. Unless we use our minds and come up with our own conclusions on how life is then nothing would ever change for the better. Thus argumentative writing is an essential part of academia.
Now I mentioned how I have a difficult time keeping my bias out of my work. The way that I feel that this can be overcome is by simply showing all sides of the subject. Now i’m not implying that I should argue all the sides, because if I did then it would be weak to say the least. However showing both sides is a good thing for the author. The reason behind this is a person can use the info that could support a different view and use it to support their own view. This can be difficult if the writer is not careful. If the view is positioned in a way that the author ends up mocking the view or out right calling it stupid, I feel it will discredit the rest of their paper. Basically it will make the author look foolish and like a bad writer. This is why I hope to polish my techniques when I look at other points to my argument.
Moving on to the op-ed portion of the assignment, this is the most exciting for me. I have never argued the opposed position in one of my own papers before. I feel that with my subject I really could argue ether side because of this the op-ed gives me an opportunity to give my input on both fronts. I have to say sometimes I enjoy playing the Devils advocate, so it will be exciting to see how it plays out. What is very interesting to me is the lack of sources. I know if I were to send in on op-ed to the local news paper I would include at least one source even if it was the name of the article or person I was quoting. So that aspect of the paper if very different to me. As I have began my argumentative paper I have also started to think about what I will formulate in my op-ed, It will be a nice way to end the writing process for the class.
Dustin's P.O.V. (point of view)
This was a great selection to read just before writing our own argument papers. It definitely pointed out a few things to keep in mind that will be helpful in sustaining good focus. Without it your readers will either get bored with your piece or realize that it is written close mindedly and lacks real knowledge of your topic. The difference between argument and inquiry is quite substantial when choosing an angle to take in our writing, it can have huge influence on your audiences perception. Argument is a closed process (Ballenger 203). Inquiry on the other hand is open to many possibilities, you may even find yourself debating over your initial stance on an issue. When we question things and use the method of trial and error eventually we come up with better conclusions or solutions to our problems.
It was interesting to see how Ballenger compared Eastern and Western cultures showing the differences in how we argue and conduct ourselves in heated or tense situations. There are quite noticebly, even within the cultures themselves, different levels and types of people who enjoy conflict. Let's face it, who doesn't like to play devil's advocate every once in a while? I don't mind partaking in a casual public debate in the classroom or at work, but I undoubtedly hate friction when it comes to intimate relationships. Sometimes it is necessary though to get to the root of a problem, the only place a problem can really be dealt with!
If the argument is public and especially if it's personal, make sure that you have enough evidence and ammunition to back yo a$$ up. There is nothing more convincing than: stats, polls, studies, surveys, majorities, expert opinions, and best of all stories from the horse's mouth! Good avid research and sound facts are what will help us all to find a solid stance for the foundation of our paper. Each side of a coin is still worth the same amount, with enough conviction your side of the story may gain an escalated value.
It was interesting to see how Ballenger compared Eastern and Western cultures showing the differences in how we argue and conduct ourselves in heated or tense situations. There are quite noticebly, even within the cultures themselves, different levels and types of people who enjoy conflict. Let's face it, who doesn't like to play devil's advocate every once in a while? I don't mind partaking in a casual public debate in the classroom or at work, but I undoubtedly hate friction when it comes to intimate relationships. Sometimes it is necessary though to get to the root of a problem, the only place a problem can really be dealt with!
If the argument is public and especially if it's personal, make sure that you have enough evidence and ammunition to back yo a$$ up. There is nothing more convincing than: stats, polls, studies, surveys, majorities, expert opinions, and best of all stories from the horse's mouth! Good avid research and sound facts are what will help us all to find a solid stance for the foundation of our paper. Each side of a coin is still worth the same amount, with enough conviction your side of the story may gain an escalated value.
Michael's RR
Argument is not to be something we are suppose to be afraid of in America. Understandably some cultures do not argue and that is okay. But in America people sometimes make it more than it really is. For instance when a person disagrees with somebody they are afraid to stand up for themselves, these people are sometimes referred to as pushovers. So the cycle continues until some brave soul stands up and defeats the bully. Metaphorically, this would be considered a close-ended argument, and is not what our argument paper should look like.
This is not what Bruce Ballenger is portraying in his essay at all. In fact I would go so far as to say that Bruce is referring to everyday things, an argument with an open-ended ending. I am talking about things like: when a person might come to BSU wearing a Vandals logo. He would be arguing that in some way the Vandals are better than the Broncos. I am not just referencing scores at a sports game, but that the Broncos are not good enough for his money or advertising space. Ultimately the Vandals just mean more to that person.
I began to realize that anything and everything we do is an argument. This Vandals vs. BSU could be more of an open-ended argument if based on Ballenger’s open model process. However, we would have to start the argument without any initial opinion or belief.
I learned that we must dig deeper into our argument and show both sides rather than just being set in our opinions. I really liked Ballenger’s example of Huckleberry Finn. I believe this example will help me to create evidence based reasons for either traditional medicine or modern medicine for that portion of my paper.
“To argue well is an act of imagination, not a picking of sides.” - Ballenger. Indeed I must look at my arguments through a variety of angles, but without losing my claims. I think I might tell a story to demonstrate the effectiveness of traditional medicine while still using evidence from a scientific article to back this treatment.
Callie Watson reading response - Argument reading.
This reading segment starts out by talking about the way different cultures view argument. It was so interesting to think about it for just a minute. How do I view argument? I can say that every movie I’ve ever seen cannot have a story without conflict or an argument. I remember one time I was playing Barbie’s with a friend and just wanted it to be a happy time but she wanted us to fight because being nice was not interesting. There is just something about having an argument that makes you intrigued about what is going to happen in the end. Argument is just something that keeps life interesting. I do also agree with the fact that he says argument is a big part of relationships whether it be family, friends, or intimate relationships all of them come with conflict.
The author also talks about there are different ways of starting an argument. You can start out with an opinion and then find the evidence to back it up. Or you can do research and gain an opinion by coming to conclusions on your search. Either way is a great start to writing a paper. But don’t just think that you can write a whole paper on the opinion you’ve come up with. You also need to show the evidence and what the other side of the argument might be. This may also help you to claim your opinion and in the end make a great conclusion about why you believe what you do on that subject.
All of this is a very helpful way to give you ideas about how you want to approach your paper in this class. Do you want to go the route of discovering your opinion as you go along in the paper or do you want to have an opinion and stick to it throughout the paper? Either way it’ll be a great paper. But these are just a few ways to get your paper started and to give you a view on what your paper will be trying to say.
Kristen Kuchay's Reading Response - Curious Researcher
For the reading from the Curious Researcher, Bruce Ballenger talks about the many sides and work put into an argument paper. An argument paper is not just the writer’s opinion on the topic or the supporting facts for his opinion, it is both sides to the topic. The writer can include his or her opinion, but needs to support it with facts and research; along with the other side of the argument and facts on why that particular argument is introduced. The writer needs to introduce the topic and the argument in an interesting yet educational way to grab the reader’s attention. Anyone can simply write their opinion and their topic and begin right off the bat with it. Ballenger explains how this is crucial to a paper because if the introduction is not interesting enough for the reader, then what was the point of the argument paper?
He next goes on to say that you should do a closed model of the argument by starting off with your pre-existing opinion, being followed by gathered evidence that supports this opinion and then finally your argument with your pre-existing belief and the research behind it (Ballenger). This is an effective method because it helps the writer see where he stands on his topic and put all of his evidence and research in an organized fashion, which will later help in the writing of the argument paper. The next type of model Ballenger suggests is the inquiry-based argumentation model, where you begin your argument paper opinion free, begin exploring, explaining, evaluating and reflecting, followed by your opinion or hypothesis which you can test against evidence. This helps because the writer can then see all of the evidence in front of his and decide whether or not to change is created opinion/hypothesis (Ballenger). This normally works for the writer when they are interested in a topic but do not have an opinion either way. Normally people write their argument papers on topics they are interested or passionate about and already have a formed opinion.
This is very helpful for writing our argument paper for the classes because it gives you methods to help in your research and even change your opinion on evidence. Not only do you research the topic with your opinion in mind, but you get to research the other side and other opinions from people on the topic. You get all the information on your topic without really knowing it. I always felt argument papers were a strong point for me because the question or opinion I base my argument paper on is normally something I am very passionate about and want to educate people on with my views. At the same time, I get to see why other people feel the way they feel and eliminate any biases I may have. It helps you to create an introduction where even you as a writer would be interested in reading this paper if you came across it. You want to make it interesting enough where it can grab most, if not all of the people’s attention.
He next goes on to say that you should do a closed model of the argument by starting off with your pre-existing opinion, being followed by gathered evidence that supports this opinion and then finally your argument with your pre-existing belief and the research behind it (Ballenger). This is an effective method because it helps the writer see where he stands on his topic and put all of his evidence and research in an organized fashion, which will later help in the writing of the argument paper. The next type of model Ballenger suggests is the inquiry-based argumentation model, where you begin your argument paper opinion free, begin exploring, explaining, evaluating and reflecting, followed by your opinion or hypothesis which you can test against evidence. This helps because the writer can then see all of the evidence in front of his and decide whether or not to change is created opinion/hypothesis (Ballenger). This normally works for the writer when they are interested in a topic but do not have an opinion either way. Normally people write their argument papers on topics they are interested or passionate about and already have a formed opinion.
This is very helpful for writing our argument paper for the classes because it gives you methods to help in your research and even change your opinion on evidence. Not only do you research the topic with your opinion in mind, but you get to research the other side and other opinions from people on the topic. You get all the information on your topic without really knowing it. I always felt argument papers were a strong point for me because the question or opinion I base my argument paper on is normally something I am very passionate about and want to educate people on with my views. At the same time, I get to see why other people feel the way they feel and eliminate any biases I may have. It helps you to create an introduction where even you as a writer would be interested in reading this paper if you came across it. You want to make it interesting enough where it can grab most, if not all of the people’s attention.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)