Believe or Doubt?

Let's try. I have done my very best work on this assignment.

I have written a few argumentative essays before, and I have a good grasp on logical structures and how to correctly validate and invalidate claims. There are a lot of things to take into account and I know I am not great with all of them. I have good verified sources and I try to quote from them whenever I'm making any sort of claim. Overall I think I did alright.

However, this isn't a normal argumentative essay. This is a rhetorical analysis, which I completely misunderstood the first few weeks of writing. Thanks to Dr. Kyburz, I have actually gone back and included some rhetorical analysis but before that my paper would've gotten a 70% at best, I'm sure! So yeah, thank God she showed me I was going about it wrong before the due date, otherwise I would be in quite a problem. However I haven't been good at incorporating opinions and mixing them with sources, ever. My brain likes to stick either on the far left with opinions or the far right with sources, there is no middle ground- which makes this paper worrying to me. Overall, I think it will be okay, but it is nowhere near as perfect as I would want it.

Everything with an "A" and a "T" are Evil. Proof? SAT, ACT, MCAT, PCAT.

Source

I'm fairly certain we've all taken either the SAT or ACT (some of us had to do both, sadly). Not only is it annoying that SAT stands for "SAT" now (it used to mean something, not anymore), but the scores are useless later in life. Don't get me wrong, they'll get you in college, but past that nobody will ever care.



 A part of the SAT and ACT that is burned into my mind was the horrid essay portions. I'm not a fast writer (atleast, not if I want it to be legible) so having to write essays on minitopics in short succession really burned me. Anyways, that's why I'm excited that this article is being circulated around the web. Lee Perelem, a writing professor at MIT, looked at a bunch of past SAT essays and found an interesting trend. The essay's content was a very small factor, the majority of high scoring essays used a lot of words, especially big and unfamiliar words. Noticing this trend he jokingly tells students to just write as many words as you can that you can vaguely relate to the subject- bonus points if you include a quote. And no, the quote doesn't have to be related.

SAT essay graders aren't paid very much, a lot are English teachers looking for some money during the summer, and are expected to sort through dozens of essays per hour. You obviously can't accurately grade for quality, content, and writing theme under these conditions. This is why it should be changed, completely overhauled.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/03/13/the-man-who-killed-sat-essay/L9v3dbPXewKq8oAvOUqONM/story.html?event=event25

Paper Update Part 2: The Squeakuel

Image Source

So I'm using a new picture because credible sources for subjective topics are very hard to come by. So I'm now using this pic, and am going to be arguing against it. I will be focusing on the psychology of how people decide what decisions are "right", arguing that slacktivism isn't done in order to make people feel good. Rather, it is done because people believe that spreading awareness is the most helpful action they can do in their current situation.

So far I have quite a few sources about how people make decisions based on their view or understanding of ethics. I'm pretty prepared for counterarguments- such as how slacktivism hurts activism, how people will trick themselves into thinking something unethical is actually ethical, and how people who engage in morally appropriate behavior will consider that they can "afford" to engage in less ethical behavior without discrediting themselves. These were the most popular and logical arguments against slacktivism I could find, atleast. I have counterarguments in mind for these, and am currently finding reputable sources to back them up!

Rhetorical Analysiseses

Source: click here if text is too small

Rhetorical analysis essays are something that I'm sure we've all done (or atleast have done something very similar) in past English classes, especially in high school. I never liked most of the essays we've been forced to do in the past (and still don't) like deciphering a poem that we didn't even choose or trying to write about how some random book about animals in a farm is actually a statement on communism and other popular government forms. Obviously, I'm being cynical with my examples- the analysis of the deeper meanings of literature is an important skill. However, that doesn't make it any more fun...

Argumentative essays, on the other hand, were always the one kind of essay that I actually enjoyed; mostly because I was able to chose my topic and which side I argue for or against (FREEDOM!!). I also like them because they give you an excuse to look up the backgrounds and merits of opposing sides in a conflict, which let you have a more complete understanding of whatever it is you're writing about.

So about the only thing that matters in this post: the picture. I was thinking of writing my rhetorical analysis on different schools of thought relating to these pictures. I chose this pic because I thought that a lot of these gave bad advice or contradicted one another. Let me clarify- I'm certain that the creator of this pic had good intentions and only wanted to help people, but that doesn't mean it can't be scrutinized.

For example, the second picture- "don't compare yourself to others because you are not them". Taken at face value, obviously you aren't someone else. That doesn't mean you shouldn't compare yourself to others, though. Comparing yourself to others is a great way of setting goals and aspirations for yourself, whether its "I want to be as fit as him, so I'm going to start going to the gym" or "I don't want to be selfish like that slob, so I'm going to start thinking a little more about how I use my time and interact with others." By refusing to compare yourself with others you are ignoring obvious personal flaws and instead take the easy way out. Instead of being the "best version of yourself" you should push yourself to reach beyond your imagined boundaries. It's not a good thing to think "I'm fine just the way I am" "I'm not anything special, just like these other folks" or "I'm just going to let life happen to me."

Cell Phones aren't Actually Evil

Source

Seems like every new technology brings with it the angst of the older generations claiming that it will devalue human interaction. While this claim isn't unfounded, its not as true as most seem to claim it is- atleast it isn't in my personal experience. I've been to 3 schools before I came to Lewis, so I have a wide array of people for my little "sample group" for this argument. The earliest I can remember cellphones actually becoming a "thing" was during middle school (6th-8th grade). During this time the article pretty much hit the nail on the head as most students were using their phones to distract themselves during class. Middle school classes are boring and its hard to really care about grades at that point, atleast that was the consensus for my school.

     But beyond class, the main form of talking was... well... talking. Lunch time was always a loud time where every table was trying to out-volume the neighboring table's conversations. This is even more apparent during the bus rides and passing periods, everyone was talking with each other. You were "that kid" if you were just alone on your phone.

     Then came highschool, where things changed. I went to a private highschool so it was pretty small compared to most others (my graduating class had 57 people), so public highschool students may have behaved differently. Regardless, at my school cellphone use became very specialized. When people were around, nearly everybody was talking. There was quite a few times I remember a person in the group focusing on their phone, but it wasn't a multi-task as the post describes. These people looked at their phones for a short time (texting or something) then focus back on the conversation. The students at my highschool used their phones the most when we were alone during free period. The biggest impact that phones had at my highschool was actually due to music; people would sit in groups all listening to their own music and studying or reading, ignoring each other.

     However, wanting a focused environment for studying is hardly blame-worthy. This is not to say that phones have no effect on conversations, I have a few friends who glance at their phones atleast once a minute. One friend in particular will text while she's hanging out with me, and that annoys me to no end. The way I see it, if you're taking the time to go and meet up with someone- they should have priority with your attention. If you don't want to be with someone then why make the effort of hanging with them? A simple "Im busy, txt ya later" will be enough for normal people to understand "ohh, s/he is busy".

     A huge problem that cellphones have caused is concert and performance quality. Every concert you go to there will be a bunch of people trying to get a photo or video of the event in a dark area with scattered, intermident, and bright light sources. Unless you have an actual camera, you're not going to get a great quality photo or video. I understand wanting to remember a great concert or performance, I myself take some pictures every time I go to a concert, but when you're spending the majority of your time with your cellphone in the air- I think some line has been crossed. Not only is it distracting for the people behind you, but quite a few bands have openly said they hate having phones being shoved in their face during performances. A picture of the band at their merch booth will always be a better quality picture, plus most band members are nice enough to take pictures with you!

     Overall, I think the article over-dramatizes the effect of cellphones on people. Its hard to talk face-to-face when you live 40 or so minutes away from someone or if they're in another state. Texting on the go makes a boring walk with strangers more comforting because you feel like you're there with a friend. From what I've seen, talking will always trump texting.

How to Summarize the Summary with a Short Summarization

Original Source

Now that we have turned our summaries in, all we can do is wait for the dreaded grade *cue dramatic music* when Dr. Kyburz hands it back to us. Rooting out all the analytical fluff and past/future tense descriptions was a very big chore to me. What was your biggest difficulty in creating your final draft?

Nevertheless, we must press on! Onward to something called a Microtheme. This semester I'm learning so many new words (mainly from organic chemistry), and spell correct says they're all wrong. I'm beginning to think its a conspiracy- all these higher-level classes, they get together at the start of each semester and make up words just to confuse students! This week's conspiracy, Microthemes, is a short and concise summary of an issue or debate with a major focus on your personal reason for being involved with it. Atleast from what I can tell, its a hybrid of an opinionated essay and a summary analysis of a social issue or debate.

I don't fully understand what a Microtheme is about or how it will be graded, so I thought this blog could serve as a little brainstorming/informing area where we help each other understand what a Microtheme is. I am, however, assuming that I'm not the only one who doesn't know what a Microtheme is- hopefully I'm not alone in this boat! Anyways, it seems like this will focus on our ability to: present different sides of a topic without bias, explain the importance of the topic, and logically defend the topic though inquiry rather than fact-citing. What about the rest of you? Please feel free to correct me anywhere I'm wrong in my assumptions of what a Microtheme is!

What I Learned About Boating School is...

Image Source

I, being the genius (~sarcasm~) that I am, volunteered to show my horribly incomplete summary draft in class so you all got to see the incoherent rambles that my brain can conjure! However, always look for a silver lining- I learned a lot of things that I need to fix for my next draft. So yay, free group review for me!

My first problem to fix: knowing when to shut up. Every English/composition class I've taken so far the teacher has heavily pressured me to analyze better, to go deeper, to see something from many points of views. Pros of this conditioning- I can be super annoying in arguments and write a 4 page paper about something that should only take half a page. Cons- I can't write a summary to save my life. Seriously, cutting all the analytical stuff from my draft reduced my 3 page paper to about 4 lines (including title).

Next problem is formatting. A simple fix for most, however I don't have a working laptop and I have to use google docs most of the time with my roommate's laptop. Though I guess I should count my blessings and be happy my roommate lets me borrow it in the first place!

My final huge problem is tone of writing. I switch between first person, third person, past, present, and future tense many times. I don't know why, but it's just a little weird to think of writing this in present tense. I watched the movie, so my brain defaults to "then they did a thing" instead of "the film shows..." and that was difficult to fix.

How did all of your revisions go? I hope my blunder of a draft helped some of you make a better paper!

Why I Haven't Seen Many Documentary Films

Original Picture

I have a very small history with documentary films, so perhaps I haven't seen enough to form a proper opinion about this yet. I've seen two George Washington, an Augustus Caesar, and a Thomas Edison documentary. Both Washington documentary films I was forced to watch in elementary and high school. These documentary films were, by all accounts, boring- because of how censored they were in order to adhere to the school's curriculum. There was nothing mentioning the harsh guerrilla tactics George Washington employed, but boy did the film hammer home the fact that he is the "father of our country" because some war stuff happened and we won in the end. Both school documentaries brush off the war as something that was easily won, when in fact Washington's leadership, brilliant as it may have been, barely tipped the scales in America's favor- it was an extremely hard fought and close victory. Washington himself said that we (the revolutionary colonists) were "trembling for the fate of America, which nothing but the infatuation of the enemy could have saved; we should not have remained all the succeeding winter at their mercy" when he was forced to retreat over the Delaware (shsu). So these boring and misleading school documentaries left a sour taste in my mouth whenever I thought about watching one in my free time.

 While you can say this was just something the directors had to do to stay within the bounds of school education, every documentary I've seen so far has had obvious bias. After thinking about it a little, it isn't very surprising that documentaries are biased- they are supposed to show the person or group in the best light possible. So documentary "bias" (if you can call it that) isn't inherently a bad thing. I remember being awed at a History Channel documentary I watched of Augustus Caesar. However, after doing a little independent research I saw that a lot of the things he is accredited for happened because of someone else. The most prominent example I can think of that most people will know is one of Augustus' famous quotes "I found Rome a city of bricks and left it a city of marble" where he quite clearly is taking credit for Rome's bolstered economy (TQP). While its true that Rome certainly got richer while he was in power, this was mainly due to Julius Caesar's previous successful conquests in Gaul. Not to say Augustus wasn't important, but the documentary was obviously missing a few facts. Same thing with Thomas Edison, the film showed him as a brilliant businessman and thinker who brought wide-spread electricity to the modern world. However, his title of "Father of Electricity" is a stolen one. He subverted and used Nikola Tesla's ideas and innovations while simultaneously smearing his name. The reason why we can have those small and efficient power lines all around America is because of Tesla, yet he is given the boot in favor of Edison.

In the end, I think that's why I don't like documentaries- they don't tell the full story. I like to hear both sides of a story, and to hear about both the good and bad aspects of a famous person. I believe that learning about what struggles overcame a person and how they bounced back from them to end up on top again shows the person in a much brighter light than only learning about their achievements. Washington won an impossibly outnumbered revolution, Augustus isn't the sole reason Rome was able to expand her borders again, and Edison stole alternating current from Tesla. Every great person has faults, but it is a part of who they were and how they came to be the person that is so famous now that we have documentary films about them! We shouldn't hide these important facts just because they aren't as pretty as some others. To sum everything up, the reason I haven't seen many documentary films is because every one that I've seen has blatantly ignored important facts about the person the film was about; I don't like being told strictly one side of a story, I want to know the full and exhaustive story.

Works Cited:

• Washington, George. "George Washington on the Problems of the Militia." George Washington on the Problems of the Militia. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2015. <http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Militia1.html>.
• Caesar, Augutus. "The Quotations Page: Quote from Caesar Augustus." The Quotations Page. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2015. <http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/24364.html>. 

Curious Video

Well, what is not to love? Ever since I saw this a few years ago its been one of my favorites! I personally love the captions that the maker put in the video for the dogs "arguing" because it just adds to how adorable the dogs are. This video brings a new meaning to the word argument, one dog just wants to play outside and the other just wants to enjoy her bone she's munching on (in reality, they both probably want the bone). The video probably should've been edited to be a little shorter, as headphone users will definitely see how annoying high-pitched barking can be after only two minutes.

Regardless, I think this video is cute because I love animals so much. But it's also funny because of how they're acting and the humorous subtitled put in for them. I can't imagine anybody not smiling at least once watching this- this has to be the perfect remedy for anybody having a bad day.


Works Cited:
Gardea. "2 TALKING DOGS ARGUE." YouTube. YouTube, 23 July 2011. Web. 09 Sept. 2015.

Questions, Questions, Questions.

Picture source

Not sure how many others are in the same boat as me, but the first day of class sure threw every expectation of mine out the window. I thought this was simply going to be another English class where we read novels and short stories by famous authors, sprinkled with a few famous poems, and maybe one or two of the instructor's personal favorites. 


From what I can see, this class is going to be all about modern age stuff. I'm excited about taking a different style of writing class, but also slightly worried. Quite a lot of the subjects and situations that are happening with slacktivism and online protests are very subjective and opinionated topics. With normal writing courses you can fall back on the fact that (most of the time) the author of the novel you're writing a report on had a defined point or goal, so there wasn't much bias you could throw in that report of yours. This, however, isn't like that. I'm curious and worried about how our assignments will be graded. I have full confidence in Dr. Kyburz as a professor, but asking anybody to grade while having no influence from any bias is an almost insurmountable task. This is even harder when you have the stress of grading multiple classes. In short- everyone has biases and they can affect a grade, I'm not saying they "will" I'm saying they can.


The other concern I have is how these blogs should be written and organized. How much leeway do I have with the picture and title before they're considered irrelevant or off-topic? Should they use casual language and have a simplistic idea of "flow" or rather should this blog be treated as a method of posting college-level micro-essays with full attention to structure, word choice, and progression? Should it only be written in a first-person perspective or third-person perspective? Am I thinking too hard about this? Am I allowed to include questions? This post itself may be marked down for attempting to juggle two points that are related to the topic instead of focusing and expanding on one. Or it could be marked down for referring to myself (the author) with a personal pronoun. This paragraph itself could bring down the post's grade for simply discussing the grade! That last part would be some phenomenal irony. While this was brought up in class, the discussion didn't go very in-depth.


Other than those points, I think that I'm pretty excited to start a different style of writing class. Hopefully I will be able to understand and adapt to it!