- Jan 2022
-
hybridpedagogy.org hybridpedagogy.org
-
While both of these articles present facts, there are clear biases presented as well. Fox’s article attempts to discredit McCabe, where the presence of a link to FiveThirtyEight can betray, or invoke, pro-Clinton and anti-Trump-administration emotions. By linking to either, I can trigger memories and emotions that exert some influence over the reader’s interpretation of what follows in the memo.
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.
-
The hyperlink still remains one of the most powerful elements of the web. In fact, I’d argue that the hyperlink is our most potent weapon in the fight against disinformation.
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 was there specifically to help them as they work through how to communicate their findings to a public, non-academic audience on the open web.
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.
-
-
textbooks.lib.wvu.edu textbooks.lib.wvu.edu
-
The more writers push through chaos to get to the good stuff, the more they revise.
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.
-
- Oct 2021
-
textbooks.lib.wvu.edu textbooks.lib.wvu.edu
-
However, talking about revision in terms of numbers of drafts implies that all writing, all writers, and all revision work one way: hit your target draft number, like your daily Fitbit goals, and you magi-cally get good writing. But more revision isn’t necessarily better. Effective revising isn’t making changes for the sake of change, but instead making smarter changes.
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.
-
My writing students are usually relieved to hear that published authors often find writing just as fraught as they do. Like first-year college students, people paid to write—the journalists and the novelists and the technical writers—more often than not despair at the difference between what’s in their heads and hearts and what
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.
-
The fantasy that good writers summon forth beautiful, lean, yet intricate sentences onto a page without sweating is an unhealthy fiction, and it is wrong.
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.
-
Worse yet, instructors may even supply the meaning for students, many of whom expect their instructors to do just that
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.
-
As teachers understandably grew fearful about losing their jobs because of low test scores, they devoted class time to preparing students for the tests rather than developing prac-tices that would have helped students improve as readers and writ-ers.
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.
-
leading them to believe they are poor readers rather than people who have not been taught to read deeply, thus potentially limiting their abilities
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.
-
So just who are these gradgrinds, these crabtrees, these kill-joys, these robocops with big sticks up their bums? Alas, unless you’ve taught or supported the teaching of writing using comedy, the kicker is: very likely they is you. And it’s a shame: there’s much to recommend the endorsement and teaching of humorous academic writing, the conveyance of the big schtick
I like the authors use of slang in this essay.
-
And should they happen to acknowledge the existence of some-thing like comedy in good writing, they often allow it for momen-tary purposes
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
-
Too soon?
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.
-
It is also associated not with workplace forms, but with poetry and fiction. A question that comes to mind is that if families do not see themselves as skilled writers (because the designation of writer is reserved only for poetry and fiction), then how can they encourage writing in all of its forms as a family value
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.
-
People who write everything except poetry and fiction—that is, people who contribute the vast majority of writing to the world in the form of lists, essays, emails, blog posts, texts, instruction manu-als, and so on—see their work as less creative and less important
i would have never thought something like a email or an academic essay be considered creative writing.
-
The problem is that one image of writing dominates the popu-lar imagination and is weighted with value more heavily than all others: creative writing, which is treated as if it’s interchangeable with fiction and poetry.
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.
-
Students may believe that if they include a certain number of sources of a particular kind, and use the instructor’s preferred documentation style, that their research paper will be successful. Too often this simplistic approach is mistaken for lazi-ness.
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
-
Although traditional research papers undoubtedly address the problem of how to evaluate and integrate sources, a contemporary first-year college writing student will probably be sensitive to her limitations as a single writer.
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.
-
What incen-tive does any researcher have to make new ideas in the data deluge? When almost anything that can be conceived is searchable via the Internet, what is the researcher really responsible for? Verifying data? Deliberating about its significance? Informing their social media networks?
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.
-
When we enter the research process with a narrow and rigid focus on our thesis, we can become discouraged and inclined to abandon our ideas when the research process does not unfold neatly
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.
-
. When we are open to selecting and engaging with these multiple published perspec-tives in our research, we’re also forced to consider how they extend or challenge our beliefs and ideas about a topic.
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.
-
Specifically, it leads to a thesis-first research model in which research is only used to verify our existing ideas or theses.
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.
-
Researching isn’t meant to be a narrow task of looking up information, but of creating and discovering new information in response to prob-lems.
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.
-
Classical argument, in its basic principles, was meant to be a continual process rather than strictly a completed product.
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.
-
Seeking is not limited to locating what exists, but also extends to creating new data or information in service of answering a question or solving a problem.
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.
-
Teaching the 5PE is like turning students into Charlie Chaplin’s character from Modern Times, stuck in the gears of writing. The 5PE allegedly dehumanizes people.
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.
-
Like many proponents of the 5PE, he assumes that the main impediment to expressing an idea is knowing how to organize it
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.
-
If all that sounds familiar, then it might be because you were taught the 5PE.
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.
-
- Aug 2021
-
textbooks.lib.wvu.edu textbooks.lib.wvu.edu
-
Most recently, technology has been named one of the culprits.
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.
-