Counterintuitive Spring 2024

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers.

I took and implemented feedback many time with my writing this semester. I used this feedback to not only rewrite my posts, but also to reconsider and enhance the ideas I put into those posts. Professor feedback was very helpful towards the end of the semester with some of the final essays. I was able to get many good ideas and points to argue that I feel really enhanced my research position.  Also, classmate feedback helped a lot.  With the assignment “help that hurts”, I was able to improve my style of writing, organization, grammar and other things.  I feel I was very open to feedback and criticism in my writing.   Mainly in my Definition rewrite essay, where my original essay was quite weak, I was able to make a much stronger essay with the help of feedback.

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning.

I paid very close attention to the material found in my sources.  I used multiple sources to get a better understanding of the background of the subject I was writing about. This allowed me to get as much information of the subject from multiple sources that I could.  I then found, read and analyzed multiple sources that had biased writing.  I read sources from both prospectives, for and against euthanasia.  This allowed me to gain a stronger sense of what opposing arguments were being made, and also a way to refute them. I also used different sources to strengthen the points I was making in support of my claims. I did this strongly in my Research Position Essay

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers.

The particular audience I had in mind while writing was the professor and the rest of the class reading the blog. This cause my writing style and language to be a bit more on the informative side.  Knowing that most everyone in the class were writing on a different subject, I had to put more background information into my essays.  I felt It was necessary to establish a base to my writing, making sure to put in background information and basic details about the subject before I started to make my claims. The way I made my claims, were to introduce them, explain their relevance to the topic, then use sources to support them. I exemplify this in my Definition rewrite

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material.

Before I started my research, the only claims I had were of my own thinking.  I made claims that I thought made sense and supported my position.  With further research, I was able to develop stronger claims that I could support with evidence, as well as support my original claims with the help of research.  With just my own thoughts, I wasn’t able to make a strong convincing argument. But with the help of research and feedback, I was able to make a much stronger, persuasive argument. I show this in my Causal Rewrite

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically.

I feel my writing was very ethical.  I made honest claims and gave evidence that the claim was logical.  I didn’t make outrageous argument that were there to make my view look right and bash the opposite view. I also feel that my topic was very meaningful.  Euthanasia is a very important topic world wide.  I represented my ideas fairly honestly and logically. I properly sighted and gave credit to the ideas of other that I used to make my arguments.  My strongest case of this is my Research Position

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers. The writing process isn’t something that can be rushed. Good pieces of work take time and effort and the perseverance to continuously improve on previous drafts. It takes many different cycles of discovery and then rediscovery to create a truly great paper. For me, I continued to use the information I found from start to finish, by building off of previous alterations with my drafts, editing, and revision, up to the final draft. And it’s important to take into consideration what others have to say to. Sometimes my classmates and professor can offer good insight and make suggestions about how to make my work better.

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning. At the beginning of the assignment much earlier in the semester, I chose the topic of Bitcoin because I had heard of it before and thought I had a decent knowledge about it. As it turns out, what I knew was barely the tip of the iceberg. There was a ton a information I didn’t know about that came along with it. Source after source brought me new info about not only Bitcoin, but other currencies and even money as just a concept in general. They provided with me with a vast amount of knowledge and my paper benefited from it.

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers. Knowing your audience helps you to make decisions about what information you should include, how you should arrange that information, and what kind of supporting details will be necessary for the reader to understand what you are presenting.It was easy for me to write with my audience in mind because all of the assignments have been the same in that sense. My audience has always been my professor and classmates. I wasn’t sure how much anyone else knew about Bitcoin, so I just tried to explain it with details that weren’t too complicated.

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material. I don’t think its enough to just read sources and regurgitate the information back into a paper. What I try to do is read the articles a few times so that I actually understand what they’re saying. After I have a good understanding of a topic, I find it to be much easier to generate new ideas associated to that topic. Then I can combine some of the text from the article with my new ideas and progress through the paper.

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically. I did my best to present my ideas and opinions in a respectful and professional manner. In addition, I worked on making the information from my sources present in my paper in a way that was relevant to the subject. When using other people’s opinions and criticisms, I referred to them with respect even when I disagreed with them. I was able to use the opinions of others to support my topic.

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers.

My work this semester in Comp II reflects the first time in my whole life in which I’ve ever actually rewritten my own work. By which I mean reworking a document or essay without deleting the entire work and starting again from scratch. Even last semester for History of American Education I wrote a 19-page paper throughout the semester, but there was no rewriting on my part. The paper was written in three sections handed in at separate times for revision, then at the end the final paper was just grammatical revision and a compilation of the parts. Because the paper being divided by a clearly-defined outline with titles and sections there was nothing more to the compilation than cut and paste. This semester there were several occasions where I’ve copied an essay and pasted it in a rewrite submission. At the same time as reading the paper I would rework the words to better suit the task. A good example would be my work for my Visual Rewrite. Compared to my original Visual Response the rewrite has the same chronology and stream of information, however it was rewritten and formatted to enhance the flow making it more appealing to read and more direct with the facts.

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning.

For this goal I’m on the fence on whether or not I’ve actually met preset criteria. I will admit much research put into my papers was mediocre and “tip of the iceberg”. I won’t say I regret anything, however part-way through the semester I pondered what it might have been like for me to have selected a different topic. As interested as I was in massive collaboration, I had severely miscalculated how little data there was out there specifically about the topic and how data subliminally supporting my thesis would take more work than what is conventional to research and redact into my final paper. Much of my researched sources are topics to support a fact, which in turn supports another fact, which may or may not ultimately support my thesis. If there is one thing I could have put more emphasis on this semester it would have been my dedication to research.

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers.

This, in my opinion, is something I’m usually fairly good at. Another thing I say with uncertainty because this is something that I might not be able to tell by reading my own work. Throughout the course I’ve considered the audience of work to Mr. David himself. Taking that into account much have my writing has been lower on the scale of formality (I feel as if the class, maybe from being on a blog/social environment, has a laid-back tone) almost as if it were a conversation I was having with Mr. David. This case is an exclusion because I am assuming the audience to be a board of trustees or a supervisor of sorts. I’ve taken advice from Mr. David whereas many of my rewritten statements are now bold and assertive. Instead of me saying something like “it could be argued”, I actually make the argument. Saying “…it could be argued that…” was just a way of shifting any blame to an anonymous source should it be wrong, however I could reword it as “…scientists confirmed that…” or “…my sources confirm that…”. If anyone makes a rebuttal to the following statements, they wouldn’t debunk my entire work because they wouldn’t blame me for the falsity, they’d blame the “scientists” or “my sources”.

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material.

In my own paper I might not have displayed my full potential of this goal, however I could demonstrate my capacity for such information literacy with an example exercise. In bglunk’s Causal Rewrite I left a comment as an exercise suggesting they refer to the novel (or movie) Fight Club. On top of that I’m flattered seeing that they have used this information in their final paper. I was able to read their argument and take information from that a book that I’ve read four-years ago and make a viable connection between the two.

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically.

Through just my final Research Position it is evident that I display ethical awareness. There is no bias to my paper because all opinions expressed herein are backed by facts and solid evidence clearly displayed by my citations. My sources all back my arguments and defining statements with a clear flow of logic. I don’t make deductions from vague evidence. I hadn’t used my sources in such a way that I bent logic. When I cite Krystek  in the third paragraph I include only the necessary and the sufficient facts which are relevant and supportive to my claims. I don’t use a fact about Elephants to support my claim of oranges not being fruit. Furthermore I recognize a difference between correlation and causation, and nowhere in my paper do I confuse the two. I can compare the almost exactly identical graphs of ‘Us Spending on Science, Space, and Technology’ and ‘Suicides by Hanging, Strangulation, or Suffocation’. Just because the graphs (found here) are nearly exactly the same, it doesn’t go to say that the US researching STEM causes the suicides. This link could be followed to a gallery of similar, some amusing, graphs to demonstrate this.

• Open My Notes
• Build Portfolio
• Conduct “Portfolio Double-check” with Professor
• Confirm Appointment time for WED MAY 06

My Reflective Statement

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers.

Comp II with Professor Hodges was a unique, new experience. All of the writing assignments are posted online for not only the professor and classmates to read, but anyone who visits “Counterintuitive2015” blog site. Therefore, there’s an added amount of pressure and incentive to produce the best possible work, knowing others could read it too. I’ve barely shared my writings in other classes with people, so the blog layout encouraged me to work even harder on my writings. Professor Hodges dedicates a large portion of his time going through every sentence of all his students’ writings and offers great, detailed advice on how to improve our work. I’ve never had a teacher or professor, spend the amount of time and dedication working with students to improve papers (for our own benefit) and enjoy doing so, as much as Professor Hodges. Although his feedback was never sugarcoated and often harsh, he encouraged his students to produce the best work they could. He wanted his students to succeed and leave his class with a new perspective on writing. He would say “Your first draft is always garbage.” I would read the professor’s advice and improve my papers. I realized there’s always room for improvement, even when you think you have produced the best work you can!

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning.

Professor Hodges encouraged the class to not only think in-depth about the class material we discussed and participate, but to relate it to social topics and personal experiences. Also, the class analyzed the counterintuitive aspects of everything. In one of my favorite assignments “Moving Image,” I analyzed a 30 second advertisement on abuse, without the ad’s sound on. Then, second-by-second and observed the small details and body language of the individuals. This assignment opened my mind to counterintuitively and thinking outside the box. It was much easier for me to view the advertisement on silent, because it forces you to focus on different aspects of the video, instead of mostly on dialog. I enjoyed this assignment and I think it’s useful for upcoming classes.

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers.

Evaluating the audience of your paper is important because it determines the language and persuasive techniques used. Also, I knew my audience (my professor and several classmates) would read my paper I submitted to the blog, which added the extra encouragement to make my paper the best I could. In my opinion, the blog creates a competitive atmosphere because you don’t want to be pointed out anonymously in class and used as an example for doing the assignment the wrong way or not putting enough effort into it. I wanted to be a good example to my fellow classmates if they clicked on my papers. I used persuasion in my paper “Rebuttal Argument” and related to social topics, such as politics, and how Photoshop effects many people’s  memory, understanding and perspectives on various things. I think many younger people can relate to seeing Photoshopped pictures often, especially online. 

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material.

In my “Research Position” paper, I added my own personal experiences with memory and perspective (especially with my father and divorce) combined with a range of outside sources. As a clinical-counseling psychology major, I purposely picked the topic of memory as my counterintuitive topic for my research paper. Although I already had some prior knowledge on memory from my psychology classes, I ventured out to find new and useful sources to help strengthen my viewpoints. Professor Hodges encouraged students to find sources that refute our own arguments and to view the opposite of our positions. In doing so, it ultimately strengthened my views but familiarized me with different and interesting perspectives of others. I’ve gained much more knowledge on the topic by expanding my research and taking time to analyze various sources.

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically.

Throughout the semester in Comp II, I would make sure my writings were meaningful and demonstrated my understanding of the different topics. I would incorporate professor Hodges’ advice into my papers to help strengthen my viewpoints and eliminate grammatical issues. I would also source and give credit to the websites and works of other writers that helped contribute information I used in my papers. In the assignment “Critical Reading” I represented my viewpoint on Mac McClelland’s article, “Is PTSD Contagious?,” in an honest, fair, and logical way. Although I didn’t like how the author used the word “contagious” to describe a mental illness, I expressed my concerns and opinions in a fair and reasonable way, respecting the author.

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers.  The first example for meeting the recursive and social process of the writing would be my post Je Suis Charlie.  My first draft of the assignment was not perfect as no first drafts are.  After some time I requested feedback on the assignment.  Professor Hodges obliged and gave a healthy does of constructive criticisms in the form of global and local comments on the paper.  After reading and understanding the problems with the paper using the comments as a guide, I was able to make my second draft which was considerably better than the first.  The second example for writing being a social and recursive process is the Visual Rhetoric Rewrite.  Similarly to the first example, the visual rhetoric was not a perfect first draft, in fact I had some difficulty keeping it strictly visual until I listened to music while watching the video.  After asking for feedback Professor Hodges gave plenty of extensive criticism and suggested corrections to the paper.  Instead of revising the paper, which had a myriad of problems with formatting and content, I rewrote the paper using the guidelines provided by the professor.  The new paper adhered to the assignment requirements far better than the first and I in turn asked for feedback again.  The second round of comments from the professor were far fewer because of the increased quality of the paper.  Upon following the final comments on the paper and fixing my conclusion to the assignment, I finished and put it into my portfolio as a final draft.  The recursive process of writing is demonstrated by numerous revisions of an assignment to achieve the best product.  The social aspect of writing is demonstrated by the comments for revisions provided by the professor which contributed to my revisions.

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning.  Several of the works that we have completed this semester have created meaning in discussions and topics that we have been researching.  For instance, my Research Position Paper is about how happiness cannot be absolutely achieved by following a set of instructions.  My paper has added information and opinions to that topic of happiness.  Whether or not people agree with my findings or opinion, it is shaping the way that they would think about the topic.  Some researchers believe that research findings prove happiness can be achieved if you adopt a certain set of habits or a certain lifestyle.  I chose the position that research cannot do so, and regardless of whether or not I am correct, I have successfully added meaning to the topic.  People can read my paper and have a new outlook on the topic or it may strengthen their own opinions on the subject, either way, the text has created meaning.  We also evaluated claims made by other people in the Critical Reading assignment.  In it, we evaluated claims made by an author who was contributing information to a topic about PTSD being contagious.  While the author introduced meaning to the argument by writing the article, we contributed meaning by evaluating the quality of the claims made.  Giving readers of the article our evaluation on the quality of the information the author was contributing.  In both cases, our writing contributed meaning to conversations about PTSD and in my case, happiness.

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers. Every piece of text has an audience whether it be a diary meant for oneself or a speech meant for thousands and this semester was no exception.  My Research Position Paper was written with the understanding that my audience would be people who are looking for happiness in self-help books and researchers who write the source material for those books.  My message to the audience being that they should take what they read with a grain of salt because there is not a cure all solution to being unhappy.  Without that audience in mind, my paper would have been written very differently, depending on who the new audience is.  Another piece that highlights the audience aspect of writing is the Critical Reading assignment.  Our critical reading assignments were about evaluating the claims made in the Contagious PTSD argument.  Consequently our audience would be peers, readers or potential readers of the article we were evaluating.  Every text has an audience and it shapes the way we write.

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material. The greatest example from this semester was my Research Position Paper.  My topic was about how happiness is not achieved by following a specific set of steps, despite most of my research and sources were about authors claiming they had.  I chose a fairly original topic in which I could not find much direct support for my hypothesis, therefore I took a different approach.  I instead chose to disprove the claims made by my sources to support my thesis that happiness cannot be proven.  Originally I had chosen the topic that would have put me side by side with the researchers claiming that happiness is abstract but can generally be achieved with a certain lifestyle.  Upon realizing that the paper would have far less value supporting claims that were readily available, I decided to contrast them with the opposing argument.  In using good source material I was able to synthesize my own opinions and insights through my Research Position Paper.

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically. One of the best examples for ethical writing would be the Safer Saws assignment.  There are countless points of view for the topic presented and each has their own take on the issue.  It is up to ethical writers to display each of their views effectively and responsibly.  As far as my personal example for ethical writing, I would choose my Rebuttal Rewrite.  The purpose of my rebuttal was not to bash and misrepresent my counterargument, it was to logically explain why my views on the topic were superior.  For my specific topic, I chose to explain logically why their points and arguments were false or did not provide enough support for their claims.  I did so ethically and responsibly to ensure that the reader not only received the best form of the argument, but the most accurate positions on the argument.

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers.

After five years in the United States I am still learning the English language. A consequence of not being an English native speaker is the confusion between languages during the writing process. Most of my papers are hard to understand on the first draft; I come with fabulous ideas, but my grammatical errors and sentence structure always confuse my readers. Luckily, professor Hodges always came with helpful comments that contributed in the development of my assignments. For instance, my first assignment “Je Suis – Albert,” which was designed to find out how well the class argued and write by writing a “personal, evaluative, analytical, narrative, argumentative, persuasive, categorical, or reflective response” towards the Charlie Hebdo massacre in France. One of the comments of professor Hodges on my first draft of my Je Suis – Albert assignment was “Albert, I find your essay difficult to understand” or “I’m not being facetious when I say I truly don’t know what that means.” Moreover following the feedback from professor Hodges, like that my material was hard to understand  ” because of your attempt to “sound academic,”my work started to look “much better.”

I still face clarification problems when I write; however, with the help of feedback, I show that writing is a multi-stage process.

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning.

One of the steps to come with great ideas is being able to analyze the material closely. I had the opportunity of coming with fascinating ideas during my Visual Rhetoric, “Moving Visual – Albert“, which was a visual analysis of a 30 second public announcement. The Visual Rhetoric required me to watch an announcement in mute and come with my own version of what was going on in the 30 second clip, in order to eliminate the bias that sound could play in our judgement of the video. Then, I was required to watch the announcement with sound and come with a final analysis of the video.

I had to analyze every action because in the 30 second announcement every second was significantly important. For example, Moving Visual – Albert was based on the “Fatherhood Involvement,” but without the sound of the video I was unable to be sure that the characters in the video, “Father Involvement“, were actual fathers. For instance,  I wouldn’t be able say that one of the father, who was pretending to be a ballerina, might have been homosexual because he “started imitating a ballerina when he was with his son” and “Being part of a tea party, nail panting or even dressing as a princess are sacrifices of a father with a daughter. However, when fathers spend time with their sons behaving like a girl is unusual. Therefore, I assume that the well-dressed father might be homosexual,”without analytical thinking and close attention to detail.

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers.

The purpose of having a class on an online blog facilitated not only my professor to see my work, but anyone who had access to the blog. Therefore, I had to be able to communicate my ideas in a clear way, which helped my readers understand and at the same time believe in my ideas. For instance, in my Causal Argument, “Causal Argument- Albert“, I started with a clear and concise sentence that informed my readers of my position; in addition, the clarity of the work helped my readers to believe my position, as professor Hodges commented, because I ” “get down to business” in your first paragraph, Albert. You waste no time naming the cause (a single sentence in a law) . . . That’s a lot to accomplish in a short paragraph, and you do it well,” when I initiated my argument by explaining that “With a single sentence in the law TC 168-13, the Dominican Republic has taken away the nationality of Dominicans of undocumented parents, depriving thousands of Haitians of citizenship.”

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material.

During the course of the class I was able to incorporate life experience examples and use outside sources in order to support my ideas. Being born and raised in the Caribbean cooperates in my knowledge of lower economies, different to the United States, and different cultural  ideals. For instance, during my assignment “Stone Money- Albert“, which was a reflective statement about the concept of money, I used some of my personal experience to support how Brazil has one of the best economies in the world after having a 80% inflation. Using a fake money with higher value called URV helped the Brazilians to feel with the power of the economy; I came with such an idea because I knew that “in some countries people might not pay the same price calculated in dollars for an item, nonetheless, having the same value in dollars would make people buy such items because the dollar has more value than their money.” Another life experience I provided was the difference of groups in the United States compared to some other countries. For instance, in my “Definition Essay- Albert” , I compared how in the United States Blacks are mostly called African- Americans because the ancestors of the majority of Blacks come from Africa. However, even though Cubans”, which mostly are composed of people of ancestry from Europe and Africa” are not called “Cubans of African decent or Cubans of European decent, but Cubans.”

Additionally, I provided support from outside sources in order to support my ideas. As an illustration, I can use one example from “Stone Money- Albert” where “The uselessness of a fie [a limestone stone that with a round shape and a hole in the center is the monetary symbol of the Yaps from the Yap island] made acceptable the idea of not needing to have the possession of the fie.” In order to support my idea I used Milton Friedman article “Stone Money” to saying that after ” “a violent storm arose, and the party, to save their lives, were obligated to cut the raft adrift, and the stone [fie] sank out of sight,” there was any problem accepting the owner’s power of the unseen fie because “it was all chipped out in proper form”.” 

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically.

I believe that I have to respect the ideas of others as I like my ideas to be respected. In every argument there is more than one point of view, which most of the time contradict each other. Nonetheless, I have been able to respect the perception of other writers even if I am not in agreement. For example, in my Rebuttal Argument- Albert, I acknowledge Fabian Del Orbe opinion that ” “ ignoring an existing law, does not free the duty and obligation to fulfill it.”;” however, I also justify that “the government is responsible that the constitution is not being neglected.”

Another important way to respect the work of others is to acknowledge their work by quoting, paraphrasing, and citing their ideas. I accomplished the goal of academic integrity by writing a work cited after my assignments and making sure that every opinion from someone else was pointed to not be mine. For instance, in my Causal Rewrite- Albert , I quoted the statement given by the director of migration of the Dominican Republic, Jose Ricardo Taveras, regarding the deportation process in the Dominican Republic. Taveras stated that, “First the foreigners of other nationality in the country to leave voluntarily; then, who does not leave voluntarily, through various mechanisms established by law, will be referred to their country of origin.”

The ad I chose to analyze was an ad for cyber bullying. Cyber bullying is a very large issue in todays society and needs to come to an end.

—As the ad starts out you WE (fix these throughout your portfolio) see a stage and a crowd of small children, probably an elementary school auditorium.
—A teacher figure appears on stage, she is well dressed and introduces the first speaker, Lynsey.
—The camera moves to the crowd showing all the children sitting down, they clap as the speaker walks on to the stage.
—The crowd is very diverse showing how there are many different kinds of people in the world but we are all of equal importance.
—The camera moves the the young girl Lynsey. She is pretty, well dressed, with short curly hair.
—She informs the crowd that today she will be talking about Patty.
—The camera flashes to another girl who we assume is Patty, she smiles faintly.
—Patty wears glasses, she has red straight hair that lays very flat.
her ears are somewhat large for her small head.
—The camera flashes back to Lynsey, she starts to talk about Patty and how she is stupid.
—She goes on and on to say all the reasons Patty is stupid
the camera flashes to the faces of various kids in the audience.
—They all have looks of disbelief and shock on their faces.
—She goes on to talk about Patty again and how she has greasy hair and dirty fingernails,
—The camera is now on Patty and she just looks very upset and distraught.
—The camera is back on Lynsey and she is still going on about Patty,
now she is describing to the crowd how Patty’s dad doesn’t work which is why she wears the same pink sweater.
—All the while this is going on the camera is flashing from Patty to Lynsey to the shocked children in the audience.
—At the end of the ad Lynsey tells Patty to get a life and walks off stage.
—The words flash across the screen “If you wouldn’t say it in person, don’t say it online.”

When I initially watched this ad I didn’t pick up on the small things that can have such a large impact such as the faces of the others in the crowd, and the fact that the scene is set at a talent show and ironically she is telling everything Patty everything that is wrong about her. Small things can have a large impact on the world around us and sometimes you need a visual to portray that. This ad shows how wrong cyber bullying is and how their is no tolerance for hurting someone else over the internet.

GOAL 1: I used a multi-stage, recursive, and social process for my writing and took into consideration feedback from my instructor, classmates, and other readers.

When I use to write a paper I would only write a first draft and that would end up being my final draft. I use to think that this worked well until I got to this class. When I wrote my first post, Je Suis Charlie, I thought it was pretty good and forgot about it. Later when I asked for feedback I realized how wrong I was and how much I needed to improve. What I thought were my strongest points were my weakest. My ideas were not clear and Professor Hodges said that he was unsure in what my argument was actually saying. I had a very weak argument and didn’t back up my claims in the correct way. I liked that part about the blog, the fact that we could receive feedback and also see the feedback that others received on their work. When I was writing my Rebuttal Argument, I wasn’t sure how to write it. I felt like I was just repeating what I had said in previous assignments and just applying it to this one. When I requested feedback I was able to understand what I did wrong and correct it and make my research paper stronger. When we had to do rewrites of our work I felt that it helped me see where I could make improvements and see the importance of going back and rewriting and making changes to my work.

GOAL 2: I read source materials closely and analyzed them critically to learn how and why texts create meaning.

When we had to get information for our papers I thought it was going to be easy to find. Once I started looking I realized that a lot more went into researching a topic then just finding a few articles on it. Whenever I was searching for sources I would read the source a few times in order to establish the point of view the author is coming from and how they feel about the topic. Then I had to think if there was any benefit in using the article for my argument. After reading many articles I pick the ones I thought were best. When looking for sources for the Proposal +10 I had to think about something besides articles about heroin to support my side. After reading the feedback given I thought of other types of things that relate loosely to heroin clinics, like legalizing marijuana and the positives that came from it.

GOAL 3: I wrote with a particular audience in mind, allowing my purpose to shape the language and methods I used not just to communicate information but to persuade readers.

Knowing the audience thats being targeted in the paper is important and is what shapes the way the paper comes together. I had to make sure I’m writing for the right audience in my paper or else I’m just wasting my time. When I found my audience I would work my paper around them. I would make sure it had the proper text and grammar that the audience would expect to see. This way the paper didn’t turn out too formal or not formal enough. I had to make sure the articles and sources I picked were suitable for my audience as well. If they were for the same audience as mine it made my argument easier and stronger. I learned that knowing your audience is one of the most important things that goes into writing a good paper.

GOAL 4: I demonstrated my information literacy by synthesizing my own experience with new insights and information from a range of outside sources to produce new material.

I did this in my Research Position when I talked about methadone. I personally have never used heroin but I do know a few people who have used or been addicted to heroin before. One of them is currently using the treatment methadone. As I mentioned in my paper with this method of treatment, you are just going from being hooked on one drug to being hooked onto another, which is what has happened to him. I was able to use this to back up my previous claims about the heroin clinic in Vancouver. Being able to have a basic knowledge of the topic, made me feel more confident in being able to write a decent paper by adding some of my personal knowledge. Adding personal knowledge or experience along with reliable sources, only adds to the strength of the paper.

GOAL 5: My writing is ethical. Writing about meaningful topics, I have engaged responsibly with them and represented my ideas and the ideas of others honestly, fairly, and logically.

It’s easy to write a paper that makes your argument seem the strongest by manipulating the information you found. However, by making the paper honest and representing the information you found correctly can make for an even stronger paper. When there is valid evidence to back up the argument, the paper is more solid and creates a stronger argument. Like Professor Hodges said, offering evidence from both sides of the argument as long as you can refute it will make your paper stronger. Like we did in the Rebuttal Argument, taking a strong opposite side from yours and refuting it can only make your side look better and make your argument on the topic stronger. I said that heroin use will lead to crime, which is true, but the heroin clinic won’t contribute to the crime levels but in fact reduce them.  Professor Hodges told us that you can leave the weak link in your argument out and hope that no one notices but if you attack it head on you’ll have a better paper.

Core value I: Understand that writing is a practice, which involves a multi- stage, recursive and social process.

Throughout this course I have come to realize and understand how writing is a practice, which involves a multi-stage, recursive and social process. When writing in this class we had to go through different stages in order to write a strong argument. Not only did we need to gain knowledge about the topic but we also had to apply it to the world socially and chose an opinion. When writing the paper there were certain steps that had to be taken such as reading, then drafting, reviewing and reflecting, responding to feedback, rereading, rewriting, revising, and editing before the final task of completing the paper. Without this multi-stage, recursive and social process the essay at hand would not be fitting as a strong argument. By finding and reading arguments, creating smaller arguments to support my larger overall idea, and writing a draft the first part of this process is complete. Next we must edit and use useful feedback to try to create a better paper. After that a final perfected draft is handed in to be graded. Many of my arguments had second and third drafts written. For example the definition and causal re writes both helped me increase my skills and accuracy. Not only did this better my work but made me that much more equipped as a writer.

Core value II: Understand that close and critical reading/ analysis allows writers to understand how and why texts create meaning.

When getting ready to write a paper we first had to read and understand articles that supported our argument. This allows us as writers to understand how the articles and counterintuitive’s have meaning. While reading I would pick out key points in each article that were relevant to the topic discussed in my paper, utilizing all the information it gave me in order to write a solid argument. This process allows us to see why and how the texts create meaning because by critically reading we gain a sense of if we agree or disagree with the argument at hand. Not only do we pick a side in the argument but it is understood why the text is being written, what purpose it serves the world and the people around us, and if we would like to dispute it, showing our argument and the way we think as opposed to the article at hand creating our own meaning and bringing new counterintuitive ideas to the table. In my proposal +10 I found sources that were credible and intellectual and gave short summaries and explanations of how i would use these sources in my final paper. Throughout my small arguments leading up to my big paper I incorporated each of these sources in one way or the other. Without the critical reading and understanding these sources by analyzation the reader would not understand why the text had meaning. Another example of this would be the critical reading activity on PTSD.

Core value III: Understand that writing is shaped by audience, purpose, and context.

Writing is shaped by audience, purpose, and context. When I was writing I had to think about the multiple factors that would lead me to a solid paper. I had to find my audience, the people I was trying to get my point across to, and make sure I was being clear enough for them to understand. Next I looked at the main purpose, why am I writing and what is its purpose to the world. Looking at the multiple arguments and deciding whether or not they relate to the topic can also help to develop purpose. When reading what the authors had to say I would decide if I agreed or disagreed with the point they were trying to make. If I agreed the purpose of my essay would be the build on this already strong counterintuitive many other authors have been involved in creating. If I disagreed the purpose of my essay would be trying to dispute the multiple arguments, looking at the counterintuitive from my own perspective. Using social connections I gave each paper a purpose, which was to win my argument by connecting it to the outside world and how it can relate to others. Finally the context is the last thing that shaped my writing, through reading the articles I had to reflect on ideas throughout it building on theses ideas to create an argument of my own. Your writing is shaped by the audience you approach along with purpose and context. This means the argument has to have a strong relatable purpose, content to back it up, and also be accessible and relatable to a specific audience. My definition and rebuttal argument incorporate all of these aspects. Both have strong purpose, to back up and ultimately win an argument. They also have content and sources that support it and different audiences that are being addressed or convinced. Without all of that the argument would not be possible to achieve.

Core value IV: Understand the role of information literacy in the practice of writing.

I utilized this core value by understanding that within each argument I could form my own argument and expand my ideas creating depth to my paper and my counterintuitive idea. I located the information online using things such as peer review journals. When reading each article, evaluated and selected my own opinion, and incorporated information that I found to be useful in my writing in order to expand the counterintuitive. There are all different ways to use the information being accessed and many different ways to find it. Within each article I read I found something I could either agree or disagree with. After finding that I could use the specific article in my essay as either support with quotes and statements, or to dispute a point. When disputing a point I would show the point the author way trying to make by quoting them, then I would disagree with that point and state my opinion. I would use facts and support from other authors to show why this was correct. This is an efficient way to understand the role of literacy in the practice of writing. Without it, there would be no way to have support of a disputing argument to help a person get their point across in a way that expresses exactly what is trying to be proven. One specific assignment I utilized this core value in would be my causal argument. Along with definitions and facts I was able to express my ideas and opinions and their relations to others.

Core value V: Understand the ethical dimensions of writing.

When writing, I understood the ethical dimensions, meaning I understood what is correct and incorrect to do within a paper. When writing it was necessary to evaluate the information in front of me and use it to build on with my own thoughts. By doing this not only did I have to cite and find ways to integrate the author into my paper but I also had to make sure my thoughts kept on the same track. My writing has been personal, public, and social. My personal opinions and thoughts are represented on the page, the public and how they will respond is kept in mind, thinking back to the articles the paper is based off of, and the social aspect comes into play when I discuss of argue how my point meshes with society and the ethics that surround us as people.An example of this would be my research position paper. After having a full semester to utilize feedback and learn to do’s and dont’s my research paper was completely ethical. It is a mixture of my thoughts and beliefs and the exemplary sources that back them up, keeping it fresh and on track.