Roosevelt’s role in war warn-ings was developed during thequestioning of Maj. Gen

The demand came from Senatorf Homer Ferguson, Republican ofMichigan, who said it was evidentthat General MacArthur, thencommander of the Army Forcesin the Philippines, received agreat deal more information onthe threat of hostilities than didArmy and Navy commanders inHawaii

222 NOME NUGGETOLDEST NEWSPAPER IN ALASKA—MEMBER ASSOCIATED PRESS-anMMWMMM MiauaBWM m —i—■ — —————— ■————p——————————wmmmtmmv"o~L~~~X L vYl. No. 1 4~7 N O M~E~, ~A~ L~ ASK A FjUDAY, DECEMBER 7. 1 !> 4 5 PERCOPY —15cResponsi hi I i ty For, 1-Year ()hl TragedyStill Uncertain

President Roosevelt, it js reported,will conduct an investigation of t h ePearl Harbor situation. Naval forcesat Pearl Harbor w e r e undoubtedly

SecretaryKnox further expressed t h e beliefthat more than one Japanese aircraftcarrier had b e e n operating in theHawaii district; the extent of damageand the number of planes used indi-cated

When Secretary of the Navy, Frank Knox, returned to Washingtonfrom Hawaii, he revealed that the damage doneto life and proper-ty at Pearl Harbor was far beyond that which was previously an-nounced. Over two thousand officers and men had lost their liv-es; considerable damage was done to military andcivilian preperty,and several ships had been damaged. The thirty-t wo-thou-and ton Arizona, and the Oklasoma, both capital ships, were sunktogether with five other craft. The Oklahoma had beenin thespot where aircraft carriers are usually moored.

Damage to Pearl Harbor Greater than Revealed

sneak attack

The following is the text of a release by theNavy Department telling the full story of whathappened at the time of the sneak attack onPearl Harbor by Japanese planes on December 7of last year

Navy's Story of What Occurred at Pearl Harbor

This of course explains many things.It explains the long delay of the court-martial of General Short andAdmiral Kimmel.It explains why the President, through member* of Senate end House,stopped Congress from passing resolutions calling for trial'-ll explains why the President still prevents the records of theRoberts Commission and the testimony of its 127 witnesses being mad#public.It explains the Presidential order winch forbade Admiral Hoopera year ago to testify about Pearl Harbor to a committee of Cnngresa.It explains why no Information has been given out a* to the tnveatugallon by Admiral Hart, at the suggestion n» Secretary KnoxIt explains investigation number 4, now being held behind elosegdoor*White House presume suereeded In substituting aeeret hearing num«fcer 4, for a proposed resolution of Congrese falling for immediate court-martial.

The attack, which came at Pearl Harbor Dec. 7, was one which the“isolationists" could not tie onto the President.But the success of the attack can. in part, in all fairness and in suchmeasure as each citizen shall judge, be placed at the door of the Com-mander-in-Chief as commander and personally.The President, and others, in Washington, first had lulled the com-manders at Pearl Harbor into expecting only—sabotage.The President then had given them such restraining precautions andorders they did not know what they could or dare do—in measures ofprotection and defense.The Japanese, as Davis and Lindley had said, solved the problem ofhow to summon the nation against isolationism for the President atPearl Harbor.But, in trying to keep “the record clear" the President unknowinglyand unintentionally had contributed to the destruction of the Pacific bat-tle fleet, had helped to bring about Bataan and Corregidor, had lengthenedimmeasurably the Japanese war

The last full fatal week before Dec. 7. 1941, the Roberts report doesnot show a single message from Washington to Kimmel and Short atPearl Harbor.It now is known Washington had. during thus week, information ofgreatest importance, which Short and Kimmel didn^t receive until AFTERthe attack.This is the real storv of Pearl Harbor, seven warnings of danger tothe commanders there, SIX CONFUSING AND CONTRADICTORY “PRE-CAUTIONS,” which tied their hands.Word available the last fatal week—word most needed at Pearl Harbor—never was sent.

One of the last warning messages sent to Pearl Harbor was changedby the President, personally, to insert the usual precaution.The official explanation, of course, is that, if war came, the Presidentwanted the record to show he had done all he could to prevent it

Nov. 29, eight davs before Pearl Harbor, Kimmel was ordered to“TAKE NO OFFENSIVE ACTION UNTII JAPAN HAD COMMITTED THEFIRST OVERT ACT.

Nov. 28, nine days before Pearl Harbor, Short was cautioned againthat any protective measures he took, “MUST BE CONFINED TO THOSEESSENTIAL TO SECURITY” and HE MUST AVOID “UNNECESSARYPUBLICITY AND ALARM

Oct. 16, as Kimmel and Short were warned of danger by Washington,they were ordered to do nothing which would “CONSTITUTE PROVOCA-TION AS AGAINST JAPAN

But it is not alone the “sabotage psychology” at Pearl Harbor forwhich the President must accept his share of responsibility.

Had Hawaii “alert No. 3” been ordered, by General Short, the Japsmight never have struck, certainly the damage would have been far less

Sabotage, third in the list of attacks most expected by Knox In ,January, had become No. 1 of those expected in Washington and PearlHarbor as Dec. 7 approached

This was not in the manner that he has been commonly accused,running all the way from plotting the attack, to ordering the fleet unpro-tected to appease the Japanese—all of v.'hich are false

INCIDENT

With equal impartiality, history shall record that the President, outof his political genius, made one, perhaps two fatal errors, which mayhave brought on the Pearl Harbor disaster

Immediately after the Atlantic Conference, commercial embargoes,against oil, steel and gasoline were ordered which only could result in war.

There was no disagreement between the President and Churchillas to Japanese plans—nor that Japan must be stopped.Probably there was no disagreement that an ultimatum meant war

truth,

Why, in justice, have not these trials oeen publicly held, that thosecharged may be punished, if guilty, and, if innocent, freed?Why have not the American people been told the truth about PearlHarbor?

The Roberts report blamed General Short, commanding general ofthe Army, and Admiral Kimmel, commander-in-chief of the fleet atPearl Harbor, for the disaster

Four different “investigations” of Pearl Harbor have been con-ducted—all secret.

Certainly the victims there, those who paid the “last full measureof devotion” were not to blame for the disaster.WHO WERE TO BLAME FOR PEARL HARBOR?Surely here, if ever, there was guilt and there were guilty.Who were the guilty and why have they not been apprehendedtried, convicted and punished?

Innocent of responsibility, they died in a classic funeral pyre, builtfor them by the criminal negligence of others

TRUTH OF PEARL HARBOR

Pearl Harbor is the saddest chapter in the history of America.

Based on the literature, the hypothesis

In dairy farming, automation is being used more and more to cut costs, including laborcosts [ 1 ]. The economic realities of growing labor costs in relation to capital costs have animpact on this tendency. Dairy farmers can now manage larger herds with less labor thanksto automated technologies, suggesting that the trend of increasing herd numbers is partlydue to the adoption of automated systems [ 2 ]. Health issues (such as subclinical ketosisand subclinical acidosis) affect a large percentage of dairy cows and have a negative impacton their performance, welfare, and general health [ 3 ]. Precision dairy farming (PDF), whichinvolves the monitoring of behavioral, physiological, or production parameters to detectindividual animal disease, estrus, or comfort, is experiencing a growing trend in popular-ity [2]. The present capabilities of PDF technology encompass the ability to monitor severalaspects, such as the lying time, rumination time, walking time levels, temperature, andmilk yield [ 4]. To identify cows with health issues, sensor system data can be used, eitherindependently or in combination with proven health-monitoring methods [ 2]. However,more research is required to create standards for the detection and avoidance of illnessesusing information from an automated health monitoring system [5]. We can infer fromthe findings of our previous study that there is a strong correlation between locomotorbehavior and subclinical ketosis. Cows with subclinical ketosis (SCK) were more likely toalternate between ruminating, feeding, and drinking more frequently. There is a correlationbetween the start of SCK and lower minimum and maximal ambient temperature. Addi-tional research using a greater number of cows is required to validate these findings [ 6]. Inorder to develop criteria for treating and differentiating particular health conditi

This study delves into

This study investigates the impact of subclinical ketosis (SCK

Simple Summary: This study investigates the impact of subclinical ketosis (SCK) and subclinicalacidosis (SCA) on dairy cow rumination, eating, drinking and locomotion behavior. It focuses oncows in their second or subsequent lactation, producing an average of 12,000 kg/year milk in theirprevious lactation. The cows were categorized into three groups, SCK, SCA, and healthy cows, basedon the milk fat–protein ratio, blood beta-hydroxybutyrate and clinical examinations by a veterinarian.The results show significant differences between the cows affected by SCK and the healthy cows.SCK leads to a reduction in the milk yield (11.78%), rumination time (17.47%), and various eating andchewing behaviors. SCA is associated with a substantial decrease in Eating Time 2 (ET2) by 36.84%and Eating Chews 2 (EC2) by 38.10% compared to the healthy cows. These findings highlight theinfluence of SCA on feeding behaviors and chewing activity, with implications for nutrient intakeand cow health. Additionally, SCK affects locomotion parameters, leading to a 27.36% reductionin the overall activity levels, as well as reductions in the Walking Time (WT), Other Activity Time(OAT), and Activity Change (AC). Early detection and effective management of SCK are crucial formaintaining dairy cow health and productivity. In conclusion, this research underscores the needfor advanced strategies to prevent and manage subclinical metabolic disorders in the dairy industry.Effective management and early detection methods are essential to mitigate the impact of SCK andSCA on dairy cow health and benefit the dairy farming sector.Abstract: This study delves into the effects of subclinical ketosis (SCK) and subclinical acidosis(SCA) on various parameters related to dairy cow rumination, eating, drinking and locomotionbehavior. The research hypothesized that these subclinical metabolic disorders could affect behaviorssuch as rumination, feeding, and locomotion. A total of 320 dairy cows, with a focus on those intheir second or subsequent lactation, producing an average of 12,000 kg/year milk in their previouslactation, were examined. These cows were classified into three groups: those with SCK, thosewith SCA, and healthy cows. The health status of the cows was determined based on the milkfat–protein ratio, blood beta-hydroxybutyrate, and the results of clinical examinations performed bya veterinarian. The data collected during the study included parameters from the RumiWatch sensors.The results revealed significant differences between the cows affected by SCK and the healthy cows,with reductions observed in the rumination time (17.47%) and various eating and chewing behaviors.These changes indicated that SCK had a substantial impact on the cows’ behavior. In the context ofSCA, the study found significant reductions in Eating Time 2 (ET2) of 36.84% when compared to thehealthy cows. Additionally, Eating Chews 2 (EC2) exhibited a significant reduction in the SCA group,with an average of 312.06 units (±17.93), compared to the healthy group’s average of 504.20 units(±18.87). These findings emphasize that SCA influences feeding behaviors and chewing activity,which can have implications for nutrient intake and overall cow health. The study also highlightsthe considerable impact of SCK on locomotion parameters, as the cows with SCK exhibited a 27.36%reduction in the walking time levels. These cows also displayed reductions in the Walking Time (WT)

Cattle herd efficiency has been proven to be critically dependenton herd health, especially viral infections (Hashemi et al., 2022). Inthe cattle industry worldwide, particularly in Iran, Bovine alphaher-pesvirus 1 (BoHV-1) has been regarded as the

AbstractBackground: Bovine alphaherpesvirus 1 (BoHV-1) is a serious disease with severenegative economic effects on the global cattle sector, especially in Iran.Objective: This cross-sectional study was carried out to examine the seroprevalenceand associated risk factors of BoHV-1 infection with progesterone levels and embryodeath in 30-day pregnant dairy cattle at Zagros Industrial Dairy Farm in Shahrekord,Iran.Methods: Between December 2017 to February 2018, blood samples were obtainedfrom 60 dairy cow herds. To determine whether BoHV-1 was present, serum sam-ples were examined using the ELISA for serum antibodies. To find progesterone (P4)in blood, the progesterone ELISA test was used.Results: 96.7 % of sera tested positive for BoHV-1 antibodies, according to the find-ings. Additionally, 60.34 % of blood samples that tested positive had an experience ofabortion and significantly more inseminations that resulted in pregnancy, consistentwith findings from other studies conducted in Iran and other nations.Conclusions: Since this study is the first to document the risk factor for BoHV-1 infec-tion in Shahrekord, Iran, we could infer that the virus is extensively dispersed in thisarea

The hypothesis is that

. IntroductionAfter calving, the introduction of a high-grain diet can cause a maladaptive issue ofthe gastrointestinal tract in postpartum dairy cows

This study aimed

Bovines, like other animals, present individual differences in behavior when exposed to chal-lenging situations, and these behavioral differences are often described as temperament [1].Temperament is expressed through a set of behavioral and physiological responses as a strategyto adapt to stressful situations in the environment [2]. However, most studies recognize thatthe characterization of temperament is complex since it can consider various traits, such ascoping style, emotionality, and sociability [1, 3

We hypothesized

In a previous study we showed that repeated lowdoses of GnRH analogue buserelin (0.4 μg i.m.) oncea day for 5 consecutive days stimulated the develop-ment of ovarian follicles in anovulatory dairy cows withfollicle growth to emergence (Barański et al. 2022).The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectof this treatment regime on fertility performance in dairycows with anovulation type I

In a previous study we showed that repeated lowdoses of GnRH analogue buserelin (0.4 μg i.m.) oncea day for 5 consecutive days stimulated the develop-ment of ovarian follicles in anovulatory dairy cows withfollicle growth to emergence (Barański et al. 2022).The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectof this treatment regime on fertility performance in dairycows with anovulation type I

The aim of this study was to evaluate the fertility response of dairy cows with anovulationtype I on repeated low doses of GnRH agonist buserelin.

Heat stress is caused in dairy cows due to an imbal-ance between heat accumulation and heat dissipationin a hot environment (Bagath et al. 2019). The milkyield and dry matter intake (DMI) of dairy cows sub-jected to heat stress decreases significantly. In add-ition, heat s

Therefore, the objective of this study was toevaluate the effects of BE supplementation on thehaematological profiles, mineral metabolism, and hor-mone levels of early-lactation dairy cows during thesummer months

Our hypothesis was that this would show a decreasing ability of the olderanimals to cope with the postpartum changes in metabolism and immunity, thus acting asan important determinant of their lifespan

1. Introduction

In this study, we aimed to investigate the metabolic changes in the serum and milk ofHolstein cows during different parities using metabolomics and a conventional nutritionalapproach. Specifically, we aimed to identify the key metabolites involved in the metabolicchanges occurring during different parities and to gain insights into the adaptations ofthe lactation metabolic status over time. By understanding the metabolic changes occur-ring during different parities, we hope to provide valuable information for optimizingmanagement practices and improving milk production and cow health

Stall design plays a major role in the prevalence of many skin and muscular-skeletallesions in dairy cows [ 1 –3 ] and this impact may be more severe if lying down is not easy, asit happens with lame animals. These lesions have been described in various parts of thelimbs (e.g., carpus, hock, and neck) but very rarely have ribs been included.The bovine thoracic cavity is protected by 13 ribs on each side [4 ]. Some areas of thesebones are easily exposed to trauma, which can be self-inflicted, caused by other animals

1. Introduction

This paper aims to investigate the prevalence of this type of rib lesions in Portuguesedairy farms and to identify farm and animal risk factors. To our knowledge, this is the firstscientific study on the prevalence of rib lesions in different housing systems to be published.

Simple Summary: Some dairy cows show uni or bilateral hard protuberances over certain ribs.Although not painful, these injuries may have welfare and economic implications. The cause forthese lesions is not completely clear. We examined all 1319 lactating cows from 22 dairy farms inPortugal. In each farm, housing and animal potential risk factors were recorded. Additionally, clinicalexamination, including lameness scoring, was performed on all cows showing rib lesions. The globalrib lesions’ prevalence per farm was 2.3%, ranging from 0% (n = 12 farms) to 6.1% (n = 1 farm).The main farm risk factors found were narrow stalls; insufficient feeding places and cubicles; andthe presence of an exposed curb at the back of the stalls. Lesions were mainly found in older cows(average of 3.7 lactations). Rib lesions were also associated with a clinical history of lameness but notwith ongoing lameness. Because rib lesions seem to be associated with chronic lameness and badlydesigned stalls, they could be used as an indicator in on-farm welfare assessment

bstract: Unilateral or bilateral hard bony enlargement is sometimes palpated over dairy cows’ ribs.Although usually not painful, these injuries may have welfare and economic implications and canbe used as indicators of poor husbandry conditions. The objective of this study was to determinethe prevalence of rib lesions in dairy cows kept in intensive systems and to identify the risk factorseither associated with the housing or with the animal’s clinical history. We examined the ribs of all1319 lactating cows from 22 Portuguese dairy farms. In each farm, housing and animal potential riskfactors were recorded. Additionally, clinical examination, including lameness scoring, was performedon all cows showing rib lesions. The global rib lesions’ prevalence per farm was 2.3%, ranging from0% (n = 12 farms) to 6.1% (n = 1 farm). Lesions were found in cows with an average of 3.7 lactations.The main farm risk factors were narrow stalls; insufficient feeding places; insufficient cubicles; andthe presence of an exposed curb at the back end of the stalls. Rib lesions were associated with a historyof lameness but not with lame cows at the moment of examination or a history of being a downer cow.In conclusion, rib lesions’ prevalence can be high in some farms, being significantly associated withcubicle design and lameness. By being associated with chronic lameness and inadequate housing, riblesions should be included in dairy cows’ welfare assessment protocols

Simple Summary: Some dairy cows show uni or bilateral hard protuberances over certain ribs.Although not painful, these injuries may have welfare and economic implications. The cause forthese lesions is not completely clear. We examined all 1319 lactating cows from 22 dairy farms inPortugal. In each farm, housing and animal potential risk factors were recorded. Additionally, clinicalexamination, including lameness scoring, was performed on all cows showing rib lesions. The globalrib lesions’ prevalence per farm was 2.3%, ranging from 0% (n = 12 farms) to 6.1% (n = 1 farm).The main farm risk factors found were narrow stalls; insufficient feeding places and cubicles; andthe presence of an exposed curb at the back of the stalls. Lesions were mainly found in older cows(average of 3.7 lactations). Rib lesions were also associated with a clinical history of lameness but notwith ongoing lameness. Because rib lesions seem to be associated with chronic lameness and badlydesigned stalls, they could be used as an indicator in on-farm welfare assessmen

The smaller effect on daily milk yield between 2 and 3 milking per day compared with 1 and2 milking per day, in combination with a negative correlation between peak milk yield and milkyield persistency (Chen et al., 2016) could make up for a reduced daily milk production in earlylactation on total lactation yield. The question driving this experiment was, therefore, if reducingmilking frequency from 3 to 2 times per day in early lactation in high yielding dairy herds couldreduce the risk of disease related to early lactation due to the unbalance between energy intakeand milk yield, without a negative effect on milk production through the total lactation.Hence, the objective of this experiment was to investigate the effect of reduced early lacta-tion milking frequency on milk yield and persistency through lactation and early lactation fatmobilization, indicated by BCS and BHB in milk.

Previous research has shown that milking cows once per day for the first 3–6 weeks post-partum followed by milking twice per day for the remaining lactation improved metabolic sta-tus and reduced bodyweight loss in early lactation (Remond et al., 1999; McNamara et al.,2008; Phyn et al., 2014) and helped to maintain a functioning immune system and thusimproved cow welfare (O’Driscoll et al., 2012). However, reducing early lactation milking fre-quency to once daily milking also reduced milk production throughout the whole lactation.The effect of increased milking frequency through the whole lactation was larger from 1 to2 milking per day compared with from 2 to 3 milking per day (Erdman and Varner, 1995;Stockdale, 2006), and even up to 4 times per day increased daily milk production fromdairy cows (Erdman and Varner, 1995; Stockdale, 2006)

In many high yielding dairy herds it is today common practice to milk cows more than 2 timesper day throughout the lactation, either by use of automatic milking systems (AMS) or 3 timesmilking in traditional systems (Lehmann et al., 2018). However, increasing the milking fre-quency in early lactation might worsen energy status with a greater body fat mobilizationwhereas decreasing milking frequency has been shown to improve energy status (Phynet al., 2014). Increased fat mobilization with a greater loss of body condition score (BCS) isa risk factor for reproductive problems and health issues in early lactation (Barletta et al.,2017; Bedere et al., 2018), which already is a general high-risk period (Erb et al., 1984;Ingvartsen et al., 2003)

In many high yielding dairy herds it is today common practice to milk cows more than 2 timesper day throughout the lactation, either by use of automatic milking systems (AMS) or 3 timesmilking in traditional systems (Lehmann et al., 2018). However, increasing the milking fre-quency in early lactation might worsen energy status with a greater body fat mobilizationwhereas decreasing milking frequency has been shown to improve energy status (Phynet al., 2014). Increased fat mobilization with a greater loss of body condition score (BCS) isa risk factor for reproductive problems and health issues in early lactation (Barletta et al.,2017; Bedere et al., 2018), which already is a general high-risk period (Erb et al., 1984;Ingvartsen et al., 2003).Previous research has shown that milking cows once per day for the first 3–6 weeks post-partum followed by milking twice per day for the remaining lactation improved metabolic sta-tus and reduced bodyweight loss in early lactation (Remond et al., 1999; McNamara et al.,2008; Phyn et al., 2014) and helped to maintain a functioning immune system and thusimproved cow welfare (O’Driscoll et al., 2012). However, reducing early lactation milking fre-quency to once daily milking also reduced milk production throughout the whole lactation.The effect of increased milking frequency through the whole lactation was larger from 1 to2 milking per day compared with from 2 to 3 milking per day (Erdman and Varner, 1995;Stockdale, 2006), and even up to 4 times per day increased daily milk production fromdairy cows (Erdman and Varner, 1995; Stockdale, 2006).The smaller effect on daily milk yield between 2 and 3 milking per day compared with 1 and2 milking per day, in combination with a negative correlation between peak milk yield and milkyield persistency (Chen et al., 2016) could make up for a reduced daily milk production in earlylactation on total lactation yield. The question driving this experiment was, therefore, if reducingmilking frequency from 3 to 2 times per day in early lactation in high yielding dairy herds couldreduce the risk of disease related to early lactation due to the unbalance between energy intakeand milk yield, without a negative effect on milk production through the total lactation.Hence, the objective of this experiment was to investigate the effect of reduced early lacta-tion milking frequency on milk yield and persistency through lactation and early lactation fatmobilization, indicated by BCS and BHB in milk.

Abstract

Because of the fast growth of technology, classes can now use different types of media to delivereducational services and content to students in different locations, to meet the educational requirementsof larger or more geographically diffuse student populations. Interactive video, print materials, satellitetelecommunication, broadcast television, electronic mail, multimedia computer technology, broadcastradio, and computer conferencing have all been used to help teacher-student interactions, albeit mainlyin the narrow context of providing feedback to distant learners. Although the methods by which distancelearning is applied vary among countries and particular context, distance education programs in generaldepend on technologies that are currently available, or are considering investment in such technologies,because of their increasing cost-effectiveness

M-learning is a modern learning model formed by employing technological mobile mechanisms andwireless technology to assist in collaborative and approachable education at all stages, from primary topostgraduate education, which will be the next generation in distance learning and e-learning approaches,since it revolutionizes the capabilities of ubiquitous learning (anytime, anywhere)

Liz sounds a lot like Elbowindeed when she says, “I can take my thoughts and go from there into the essay instead of having somany different things in your head at once and you have them, the majority of them down on paper soyou can kind of see it in front of you instead of it all being in your head.” It really is no surprise thatLiz sees freewriting as a valuable form of prewriting.

On the whole, observing Liz freewriting, examining her freewriting, and talking with her about it wasin many ways disappointing to my original suppositions about the capacity of freewriting as athinking practice. Liz wasn’t automatically using this writing space to interrogate or grapple; shedidn’t automatically come to view freewriting as a means to critically think about a topic as Isupposed she would

I asked her to write a few sentences of reflection in which Iasked her to consider how her thinking changed. Liz’s first comments would suggest that she didexperience and see a movement in her thinking as she says, “In the beginning, when I read throughthe first time this passage, I thought that the author believed in this five paragraph essay method andused it religiously. But as new points came up, I began to change my mind.” What Liz’s reflectionfails to reveal, however, is what these “new points” were. She doesn’t elaborate on what causes her toshift her thinking. Significantly, though, during our interview time, when I asked Liz if she felt likethe process on the text helped her learn something or discover she didn’t feel like she initially knew,she said, “my opinion I guess changed about the text because once I read it through I thought onething and then once we started talking about it and I started seeing those certain things, I kind ofbasically just changed my mind” (emphasis mine). Tellingly, it seems that Liz found movement in herthinking in our conversation, rather than through her freewriting.

Dealing with contradiction or competing lines of thought played out significantly in the inventionfreewriting sessions as well. In this focused freewriting process, I began by asking Liz “ where [shewas]” in terms of composing her Rhetorical Analysis essay for my course. Liz revealed that shehadn’t really started work on the essay, but had the text in mind that she wanted to work with (AnneLamott’s “Shitty First Drafts”) and had read it several times

directed freewriting promise movement and change, development and discovery

involve an effort to loosen the habits and assumptions about academic writing that our students havebeen enculturated to believe

freewriting in the college writing classroom isn’t then easy or automatic

freewriting was the precise opposite of doing writing in school.

practices in which freewritesare taken through a process of generating, reading, reflecting, and refining)

Facilitators of freewriting, then, canbenefit from assuming the difficulties of thinking through freewriting.

This record of our interaction demonstrates the dialogue required to get the student writer touse freewriting to think outloud, change her mind, and encounter contradiction, a kind of involvementfrom the facilitator previously unaddressed in scholarship on freewriting

freewriting wasonce considered problematic or vexed,

Directed freewriting acknowledges the structured ways collegestudent writers may need to be introduced, trained, or untrained to use writing for thinking inpotentially radically new ways

Directed freewriting is a series of prompted freewritingsessions, bridged by review and analysis of what has been written, and designed to stimulate analysis,discovery, and development.

Writing is a way to end up thinking something you couldn’t have started out thinking

Elbow re-asserts that freewriting is a “fast easy way toget a first draft”

easy, valued fundamentally for “how iteffortlessly captures onto the page some

Means Comparison for Final Paper Ratings between BP and Control Groupswith Significant Differences (*

Students were then asked to find six citations andparaphrases from their own research and to create a “quotation sandwich”by introducing the quote, writing the quote, and then explaining the quote’srelevance in a final sentence.

students’ annotated bibliographies

Several students reported drastic shifts in opinion after evaluating the veracityof claims and uncovering the political and personal agendas of debaters.

Module 1: ListeningBy framing initial, exploratory research efforts as “eavesdropping” on a con-versation rather than amassing citations, this module encouraged studentsto view research as a process that builds knowledge through dialogue.

Our collaborative team was excited by the potential of the Oregon Statemodels. When looking at the models, fyw personnel were most concerned withthe coherent assembly and effective framing of source material to support apersuasive rhetorical purpose. Meanwhile, librarians were looking for evidencethat students knew how to use library resources, that they had thoroughlycanvassed and organized the available source material, and that they were ac-curately documenting it

Instead of seeking discrete answers to complex problems, experts un-derstand that a given issue may be characterized by several compet-ing perspectives as part of an ongoing conversation in which infor-mation users and creators come together and negotiate meaning.

identified documentation and use of re-search sources as areas needing improvemen

The Burkean Parlor provides a handy scriptfor teaching the research process to our students,

the concept of writing rhetorically may be new to students when they enter college

view of writing may be challenged to rethink thisunderstanding in college.

high school level. In these kinds of writingsituations, it does not matter how students arrived at their final written product, whereas theWPA Outcomes Statement suggests that by the end of college composition, students shoulddevelop not only an ability to produce effective writing, but also learn to adopt particular writingpractices and attitudes.

Standards vs. outcomes To achieve learning outcomes rather than standards,students may be expected to develop particularattitudes and practices.Writing vs. composing Students may be asked to see writing as part of abroader process (composing) that includes visualelements.Students vs. writers Students may be challenged to re-position themselvesas writers and members of a disciplinary community.Product vs. process Students may be challenged to see writing as acomplex, nonlinear process, rather than as a set ofsteps leading to a product.Rhetoric, conventions, and fields Students may be unfamiliar with the idea of writingrhetorically, and they may associate the term“conventions” primarily with grammar

However,rhetoric is not mentioned at all in the writing standards

The term rhetoric does appear in the 11th-12th grade Common Core

“Rhetoricalknowledge is the ability to analyze contexts and audiences and then to act on that analysis incomprehending and creating texts. Rhetorical knowledge is the basis of composing” (p. 1,emphasis in original).

he students in Wells’s (2011a) study saw their college professors as being less clearabout what they wanted students to do for each writing assignment, while the students inHarklau’s (2001) study believed that their college professors were more explicit aboutcommunicating expectations than their high school teachers. A key difference between thesetwo studies, however, is that the students in Wells’s (2011a) study went to a college preparatoryhigh school while the students in Harklau’s (2001) study were primarily placed in low track highschool classes due to their language minority status. These conflicting findings suggest thatstudents’ experiences in college may vary widely depending on their high school instruction, thetype of postsecondary institution they attend, and their individual characteristics.

n their study of teachers’ writing feedback within the ePortfolio Project, a programwhich enabled high school students to receive feedback from both their high school Englishteacher and college professors, Acker and Halasek (2008) found that there were significantdifferences in the kinds of comments high school and college teachers wrote on students’ papers.High school teachers tended to focus more on local concerns (such as conventions and wordchoice), whereas college teachers focused more on global concerns (such as the development ofideas). These differences in the kinds of feedback prioritized may reflect similar differences inthe underlying values of high school and college teachers in regards to what they see as “good”writing.

However, some scholars have questioned whethercourses that allow students to earn college credit in high school, such as AP Literature, are in factequivalent to similar classes that are offered at the postsecondary level (Hansen et al., 2006)

development is notonly a matter of skills; rather, it is also influenced by social interactions, classroom instruction,an individual’s identity, and many other factors (Schultz & Fecho, 2000).

tudents may be able to demonstrate proficiency on astandardized assessment or on a performance task within a given class, but that does not meanthey will be able to transfer what they’ve learned to new situations.

Though there is a dearth of research on young adult writing development, various studies suggestthat writing for new purposes and audiences (as when students transition from high school tocollege) is so challenging that even experienced adult “expert” writers may find themselvesstruggling when faced with an unfamiliar writing task (Anson, 2016; Sommers, 2008)

Even with the most rigorous preparation, is itpossible for students to be “ready” for every writing situation they could encounter in college?

almost half of their students are not adequately prepared to meet the demands of college-levelwriting

She wondered if she would be able to meet herprofessors’ expectations and whether she would need to change her current practices in order to“fit what they want.”

For Adam, college represented freedom and a welcome changefrom the “set schedules” of K-12 education

All your life you grew up just having these set schedules and periods at snack andlunch. At college...it gets free. Teachers don't tell you what to do. They lecture you and okay,you know. And everything is you.

writing has often been associated with the results of acquisition,rather than a tool that assists acquisition process. To put it differently, learners are assumed todevelop their writing at the last stage.

Teachers and learners should find a balance between learning to write and writing tolearn. English major students sometimes have difficulty in choosing to invest their efforteither on content or language

he emphasis on “freedom” or lack of freedom is implied by another respondent who pointedto the strict rules:

The challenges of writingSelf-doubt Proper construction of ideasInsecurity Own voice is exposingIntimidating to start (frightening) Fear of critiqueGetting ideas Judging/comparison in relation to other writersAre the ideas worth talking about? Judging against other peopleDoubt about relevance of ideas Marking and approvalStruggle to accumulate material Pressure of other people’s expectationsCourage to ditch material Own judgment callLack of skills Lack of confidenc

This pursuit of academic excellence in a new territory isusually value-laden, that is a particular set of values are assumed. Thus, not surprisingly,learners’ L1 or L2 output, as Rinnert and Kobayashi (2009) argued are somehow shaped bythe social context they live in and their perceptions, preferences, values and languageproficiency, which are affected by their L1 and L2 instruction as well as disciplinaryknowledge. Students’ writing in L2 is usually affected by their rhetorical and cultural writingpatterns in their native language (Kaplan, 1987, 1988). Connor (2008) argued that rhetoricalpatterns are unique to each language and culture and the differences in these rhetoricalpatterns might make it more challenging for the learners to identify themselves in the newwriting convention

They only have others’ finished work tocompare theirs with; generally they do not see the messy drafts of their peers andsupervisors. And their own critical voice tends to be far stronger than their creativevoice (p. 272)

Moreover, when writing in foreign and second language contexts are also compared,learners in the former setting usually demonstrate a lower level of proficiency and less fullydeveloped competencies (Ortega, 2009

Before 1960s, when the Audiolingualism was in its heyday, emphasisusually fell on spoken language. Moreover, with the escalating number of students enrollingin American universities, a growing interest in writing was conceivably situated. However,the growing interest in second language writing was not much influential in the social aspectsof writing and it is not surprising to see that the social nature of the writing wasunderrepresented (Can & Walker, 2014).

They only have others’ finished work to compare theirs with; generally they do not see the messy drafts of their peers and supervisors. And their own critical voice tends to be far stronger than their creative voice (p. 272).