Scholary Article Post

The scholary article I chose to use for my paper is about a new planet discovered that scientists say could support life. It is written by a collaboration of several astronomers from the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington D.C. The link is: http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.5733
The public article that I have chosen to accompany it is one from National Geographic talking about the same planet. The link is: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/100930-new-planet-discovered-first-habitable-earthike-water-gliese-581g-science-goldilocks/
Some concerns I have for this paper is just being able to understand the language of the scholarly article enough to explain the differences between that and the public article. As most scholary articles are, my article is short, but very detailed and is almost completely written in scientific terms. So, I just hope that I can get a grasp on what is being expressed in the article. I plan to look up the terms talked about if I dont' understand them so I can be as accurate as possible. I am also worried about making sure I do not just discuss the differences in the articles, but go in detail as to why the differences exist. I think that will be difficult to focus on, instead of getting caught up in just listing and explaining the differences themselves. I think what I will do to make sure I am staying on track is stop after ever difference I list and make sure I know how I did or will explain the reasons for that difference. I think I'm going to have to check myself every so often during the writing process. I do not have an outline planned out yet, but have started looking at the differences between the articles.

Discussion Forum Post

I think that the discussion forum was helpful in cetain ways. I think that reading other people's comments was helpful and gave me a different perspective. I did not participate as much as I wanted. I had a lot of work that day during the forum so all I managed to get done was my posts. I did not comment on others' posts, but did go back and read their comments. Other people in the class had some great things to say or add onto one another's post which created a great discussion.
I think a forum discussion would be good to have in the future, but perhaps have them on a more contreversial or popular topic. I found it hard to talk about those articles in depth. If the class had a more "exciting" topic to discuss, I think everyone would participate and enjoy the forums a little more. I like the opportunity to discuss things in a cyber-setting with the class, I just think a different topic would impove the quality and participation of the forum. Overall, the discussion forum was an interesting and unique idea and I would not mind having one in the future, especially with the improvements I already mentioned.

Entering the Conversation Post

I loved this article by Liberman. The number one thing I think you can learn from his blog is the fact that no one should take science based writing for fact without putting a little bit of research into it. Obviously, Liberman proved that this particular writer for a well-known science magazine was completely twisting results from an experiment just to make a popular story. Instead of the public simply taking his word for fact, it is important to research the results he talks about in the article for yourself.
Liberman is able to prove this article wrong by real, reported data from the exact experiment the writer refers to. The results are even cited as to where they came from for anyone to look at. Clearly the results are the complete opposite of what the writer leads people to believe. Also, Liberman adds that the man that he got the data from is now cited as a source on the science magazines article. Further proving that whoever reads the science magazines article should and now can look at the true results of the experiment. Unlike the science magazines columnist, Liberman makes good use of citations and legitimate sources. The sources I think are very helpful to the reader and reassure him/her that what they are reading is true and proven.
The best and most effective way I think there would be to remedy the problem of false information in the media or resources seen by the public is for the editing that goes on within the sources to be concise and strict. Obviously, the writer for the science magazine had to submit his work to a supervisor for editing before the printing and publishing process. This supervisor did not do his/her job by checking the sources used by the writer or whether or not the information that will be presented to their readers is correct. The best way to prevent false information from being sold to the public is stricter processes of editing within the magazine, newspaper, ext companies before going to print. I believe it is their responsibility to ensure the material in their media is correct, and part of the blame for this misleading article should be on the writer's supervisor. Cracking down on this editing process and having certain standards of citation and proof available in an article would help the problem we see in this particular science article.

Open Writing Post

The consequences of writing openly on the internet are often talked about. Many times we hear "don't put things on facebook, myspace, or twitter that would be inappropriate or give someone too much information about you." There are certain dangers to putting too much information on the internet or expressing opinions about a certain topic that might upset someone out in the cyber world. I do think that a lot of people take advantage of the internet by putting information up on facebook such as addresses, phone numbers, email and so on. Many people who can see this information might take advantage of it and contact you or try to use your information inappropriately. Also, there have been several instances where someone blogs or writes about their opinion that they feel strongly about. This can sometimes severely upset and offend someone else and extreme measures have been taken physically against such bloggers. Basically, I think that you need to be considerate of others when posting online, and also conscious of how much information you reveal to others.
The benefits to writing openly online include reaching a very large amount of people instantly and all at once, as well as making a difference in what people think or know. It is awesome that so much information from so many different points of view are available in one place, the internet. It is undoubtedly one of the best and most valuable sources of information that exists. I think what attracts so many bloggers online is the fact that they can openly express their feelings and thoughts to others, which they might not be able to do in their everyday life. They can also receive instant feedback and connect to others from all over the world. There is just such a diverse and large community online, that it is hard to resist for a lot of writers to take advantage of.
I think that in class we do utilize the freedom to speak online to a good degree. We do talk about our opinions and feelings on certain topics to the public. Most of the time I forget that other people besides the class can see what I write! I just think about other classmates reading my posts. But it is interesting and new for me to write online to such a degree.
I think the biggest challenge faced when writing online, is being careful how you word your opinions, especially on touchy topics. Just like I said before, you don't to offend people to the point where they no longer want to read what you write. The best way to overcome this is by just wording things in a so called "politically correct" way. Just consider other people's points of view on topics. Not to limit what your ideas are, but to say them in an appropriate way.

Feedback and Critique Post

When it comes to offering criticism of other people's work, I think I can offer it in a decent way. I'm not the best at it because I do not want to say anything that will hurt someone's feelings or offend them. I can very easily point out grammar and spelling errors and other practical things like that, but commenting on the body of the paper is hard for me. I am always fearful of saying too much, or being too harsh and judgmental. I have gotten over that more than I used to be because in high school, my English teachers made us all peer review each others’ papers. I have been doing it for awhile, so I think it will continue to get easier and easier with time.


My idea of good constructive criticism comes from my previous English teachers' comments when they critiqued my papers. They always offered really good advice, but in a nice way. All the advice was simply given to make my papers better, not because of their personal opinions. I try to give advice like that whenever I critique another person's paper.

The most useful criticism I think someone can give me is if I sound confusing at some point in my paper. If one of my points doesn't make sense to the reader or is not clear, I want to know about it. It is better for me to know that ahead of time, instead of when I turn it in for grading. I appreciate when someone kindly but honestly points out places where my writing is not clear. That above everything else, is the most helpful.

Based on what others have told me about criticism, I think I can offer valuable critiques. I try to find things in every paper to praise as well as correct. The papers I read in my peer editing group did not have that much that I would correct. I thought that each person presented something unique and different. Besides small, things I did not have too much to say about each person’s paper. Overall though, I try my best to give valuable advice to each writer.

What is it? Blog Post

Based on what we have discussed in class and on our own, I think a rhetorical analysis is mainly a break-down of the text, (whatever that may be,) with a detailed look at each aspect. Whether that be the motives behind the text, the circumstances that might have affected the text, the audience, or the constraints placed on the text. Instead of just simply looking at the text as a whole, a rhetorical analysis focuses on the underlying issues that inspired the text. Why did the author argue a certain point, and who is it trying to persuade? What is the main rhetorical appeal used? How might the appeal draw people in? These are all main questions that I think a rhetorical analysis should answer. As for organizing a rhetorical analysis, I think they are most effective when putting the information into sections. For example, look at each aspect of the text individually and discuss each aspect one at a time. If you start to group details together, valuable information can be lost or become confusing. Also when considering the audience, exigence, and constraints; it is still important to discuss each one at a time, elaborating thoroughly on each subject.

When I write my own rhetorical analysis, I plan on organizing the information similarly to what I described above. So far, I plan on analyzing a BP commercial, so the first things I will discuss are the audience, exigence, and constraints possibly targeted in the propaganda. I will elaborate on each and try to explain my reasoning behind each of my beliefs. Next, I would talk about the rhetorical appeals used in the commercial (pathos, ethos, logos), still keeping the information in an orderly and concise manner. After this, my final piece would be my argument, or the positive and negative things I see in the commercial. As I write, I will probably come up with new points or ways to organize my arguments, so it is kind of hard to say right now exactly how it will be. But I will definitely try to keep the paper flowing smoothly and presenting my information in a clear effective way.