Core Value 1. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

My rebuttal argument demonstrates a variety of social and interactive practices. My topic throughout these three arguments was about the pitch clock in the MLB. The rebuttal was an argument in which I knew I was probably going to need a lot of sources and quality ones at that especially since there were not going to be a lot because the rules just started in 2023. I looked up multiple articles and couldn’t really find anything good. The articles were just not giving enough information on the pitch clock and they weren’t displaying any useful information or how defense/pitching was getting better which is what I needed to know. When I finally found a good article about comments players made on the pitch clock I was able to make a good argument. I used Blake Snell’s comments to show how even a player who doesn’t like the rules is actually doing pretty good with them.

Core Value 2. My work demonstrates that I read critically, and that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities. 

My Causal argument showed my core value 2 being used the most. At first I didn’t put quotes at the right spots about the pitch clock and the idea weren’t really flowing at and didn’t create any meanings. When I talked about the rules first then incorporated the quote is when I found success. I was able to show what I wrote about batting routines not being able to be as long might hurt the batter and the quote after that now proved that it could be the case. My argument was able to substantially improve with content after I found the sources I did in this argument. I was able to then use this to connect to my next paragraph and how with batters getting their routines disrupted they might not be ready as a result of that. Those batters needed and liked their routines for a reason, because it helepd them to prepare for the pitcher.

Core Value 3. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

My visual rewrite showed my ability to rhetorically analyze the purpose. The visual rewrite had me really thinking into what I should write down. My visual rewrite was on an ad about pre retirement.I spent a lot of time on just a thirty second ad trying to be as descriptive and as accurate as I could be on what I was seeing. I looked at the ad frame by frame trying to think of all the meaning within each frame. Whether that was based off a characters facial expressions or objects shown on the screen and the meanings all of it had. At one point a monster appeared on the screen and rhetorically I realized if a monster is on screen they are most likely bad and I ended up being correct. I think breaking down the video in rhetoric helped to improve my three arguments on the pitch clock. Those arguments got better as I was able to use a rhetoric type breakdown to really explain my arguments and correct them.

Core Value 4: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

My definition argument helped with core value 4. Throughout this argument I used multiple pieces of evidence that helped to support my ideas. I explained in this argument the different types of players who were struggling or doing good because of the pitch clock. I used multiple sources to help provide evidence in why my argument was correct. I used a article that gave Chris Bassit’s thoughts on the pitch clock and I used that to show how starting pitchers may actually be thinking of new ways to pitch and adapt to the pitch clock and the rules that go along with it. I used another article to show how sluggers aren’t liking the rules including using Aaron Judge’s comments on the matter and how he feels the rules aren’t fair to him and other batters. This evidence supported my ideas that it is actually the batters or sluggers who aren’t doing well but starting pitchers are actually the ones doing better under the pitch clock.

Core Value 5. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation. 

My rebuttal argument showed core value 5 well. The argument against me from a worthy opponent was pitchers are getting worse and defense behind them is also getting worse because of the pitch clock. I fairly and firstly acknowledged that as the argument against my own. I then used multiple examples of how their argument would be wrong. I used stats as no one is really able to argue stats. I also used quotes from players themselves and how they think defense is actually better then it ever has been because they don’t have time to mess around or play in the field while they are waiting. They are always on their toes now because of the pitch clock. I showed responsibility by citing each of these sources I used to prove the other argument wrong in the end of the argument as well as citing them in the argument so that if a reader wanted to make sure I was correct they could view the information as they are reading to make sure I was correct and to understand the argument better.