I like how the author is using hyperlinks here but it also poses a problem. The idea that you can "influence the readers interpretation" is concerning as those who want to expel disinformation have the same means to do so. It goes to show that the "most powerful" tool that the internet has can also be a dangerous one.

I see the point the author is trying to make here. A hyperlink allows for easy connections to source to the audience and to other pieces of information. By helping the reader get direct connection to the source we get more engagement with the essay.

I find it interest that the author find a need to teach students a different method of communicating their findings through the open web. I guess it is because the open web is open to a lot more people than an essay that has a reach of about 100 people. i am curious to see how the open web effects essays.

I agree with this rhetoric. When in the process of writing you could make so many mistakes and errors just trying to hurry and get your ideas out. No one's brain completely mirrors exactly what they're thinking, or sometimes your own fingers can't keep up with your brain. Just writing this annotation I've made errors.

in the same way students try to include big, dense word salads in their essay, excessive revision do cause problems. It creates a jumbled mess no matter how perfect the writer was striving for. Effectiveness will always be better than perfection.

I find this similar to the feeling of a lot of art students. Some art students find creating a bit frustrating and even sometime challenging. The human mind is not a perfect content making machine. It takes time and energy to create something creative.

I agree with this rhetoric. People are imperfect and even the best writers go through revision periods. Revision important to writing in the same way editing is important to video software.

I agree with this rhetoric. A lot of the time, teachers interpret the writing for us and expect our interpretation to follow theirs, allowing no space for creative thinking. If we can't come to our own conclusion from reading, how can we create original ideas in our writing.

I have always hated this part of school. I never understood the reason for having teachers meet a quota for test scores. Not only does this create an environment that encourages no actual learning just memory retention but this also leads to teacher being lazy.

This viewpoint challenges the foundation of education. At the basis reading is about interpretation, just because you do not infer intensively over a piece of literature does not mean you are a poor reader.

I like the authors use of slang in this essay.

I do think that it would be interesting if more comedy writing was allowed in our writing curriculum. I think it would be more engaging for students

I like how the author of this essay makes his point by keeping the tone of playfulness to his essay. I think engages the audience more and persuades them more.

I am a bit confused with this rhetoric. Why is is important that writing be considered a family value? What value does writing add to the family.

i would have never thought something like a email or an academic essay be considered creative writing.

The author really challenged my view point of creative writing. I have always thought that creative writing had to deal with storytelling and fiction because it left people to their imagination.

I agree with this rhetoric. A lot of students these days only do he work for the grade and not for the so-called "enrichment" that the teachers want to to do it for. Combined with the fact that today's research essays are formulaic and simple, its not surprising to see that students have gotten lazy

I am having trouble understanding the authors point here. It seems as if the author is pointing out a flaw in using traditional research papers in a way that contradicts the own title of their article.

I believe these questions are important to ask. In this day and age students are expected to create original concepts in a era where virtually everything has been conceived. I am interested to see how this author would like to solve this issue.

I agree with this rhetoric. There have been plenty of times when I have done a research essay and I had to go back to the drawing board and create a new thesis because I couldn't find any sources. I feel like this issue also creates half-baked essays.

I believe that our current "research" method as it it taught in school creates close-minded people as we only seek to confirm our bias since that is what we are taught. if school were to teach the more open and true version of researching, this authors rhetoric will come to light. We can challenge out beliefs and become more well-rounded people.

I agree with this rhetoric. We like to think that the thesis-first method creates very complex and deep ideas but in reality there just a way of confirming our own bias. As previous writers have stated, research is about finding the information then creating the argument, not the other way around.

I agree with this rhetoric. Similar to when we google how to fix a problem and DIY solutions form what we find, research is meant to give us an answer not confirm our biases. It about finding the best answer, method, and reason, not confirming something that may not be right.

I agree with this statement, but thinking about how it would be applied to our current system of argument is a bit challenging. A lot of the time, schools want us to be concrete in our thinking and our arguments.

This has definitely challenged my way of thinking about research. I would associate this definition more with the scientific method rather than argumentative essays. I feel like we do not apply this method of "seeking" because it would be took complicated to our school system.

I agree with this rhetoric. Systemizing the way we write has created an environment where students just fill in the required buzz words until the reach the required word count. Any deviation from the formula is treated with a bad grade, whether or not the essay was actually good or not.

I find it interesting that the author how some defenders of the 5PE think the best way to write an essay is to organize the information. There is some truth and benefits in how organizing information may be the best way to express an idea, but there are also drawbacks.

In my opinion, the 5PE has become second nature to virtually every student (at least in America). It has always been very formulaic and simple, which is (in my opinion) why defenders want to keep it around. It removes the stress of actually having to put thought into a piece of academic work.

You would think the internet, actually encouraged literacy. We have 4-year-olds that can work the newest generation iPad and 10-year-olds who can put in card information. I just feel like if it's one thing you'll learn on the internet is to read.