Dialect Notebook

·         “Both types must provide direction to the reader as to how the text should be read: what transaction is intended, what the major divisions are, what’s considered important, and what relations exist amongst the various subpoints (Bernhardt pg.36).”

·         This quote is very effective to remember and use. This is actually the process at which you choose your main points, sub points and your sub-sub points. This makes sure and ensures that you have clear and smooth transitions as well as creating relationships amongst the entire information one step at a time. I think it’s very important to do this at least in an essay in order to keep your reader on track and to allow them to thoroughly understand your topic and what you are trying to get across to them.

·         “The essay appears on the page as essentially unbroken, undifferentiated print, and effect which is heightened by printing processes which justify margins and further homogenize the texture of the page (Bernhardt pg.36).”

·         This is important to take in because I think it shows how we grow up and continually learn to write and perfect the same writing process. Also that as we go we only use this one method whether it is a speech, an essay or maybe just an event description. This article fights against and shows how this method is actually ineffective and can simply bore the reader whereas creating differentiated structure can excite the reader. Also that it can allow the reader to search and find what they are looking for or what is most important much easier than a normal format.

•“These multiple considerations of audience and purpose functionally constrain the text, influencing its shape and structure (Bernhardt pg.39).”

·         This quote is talking about the example in the paper which is a piece written about the wetlands and has many elements to its structure such as what are wetlands, why we need to save them, how we can save them and so on. Although we don’t have the example this quote is important to remember it reminds us of how we need to think about what’s the most important parts or main points to get across to the audience. Also what is the most interesting or drawing to the audience (anticipate what they will want to know). This is all important in consideration and should eventually effect how you structure your piece in order to make sure you effectively get these points and ideas across. This is important to keep in mind during your writing and structuring process because you want your information to flow and be drawing to your audience. The information you use should make the reader want to know more also that you should place the most important and interesting information in the beginning in order to bring the audience in and keep them there. It’s very important to gather the audience fast and efficiently in the beginning if you can do this you can have them for the entire paper.

·          “Figures that are more strongly defined against their field will tend to appear more important than other figures that share the same ground (Bernhardt pg.40).”

·         This quote is saying the pieces of writing that appear in a different format will be more standout and noticeable than text of typical display. This means that you should use this to your advantage and underline, bold, italicize or create spacing in order to draw attention as well as show the importance of that piece of information.

·         “A text is progressive if its structure leads the reader onwards, projects him forward from one segment of text to a succeeding one (Bernhardt pg.40)”.

·         I will always keep this quote in mind and it is very close to me because I have been taught by my teachers all the time that you need to make sure the ending of one paragraph leads the beginning of another. This in essence means that your transitions should make the reader want to keep going as well as enlighten them on what it is they will be reading and its purpose for them. You must always use this in order to have effective writing and to be able to keep your paper interesting and your audience curious.

·         “It avoids linear, progressive organization, allowing a reader to break in at any point in the text with full comprehension (Bernhardt pg.42).”

·         This is something I can agree with and think is effective but isn’t useful when writing an essay. This technique can be effective and useful in descriptive papers, papers on information or something of that nature but in an essay where your attempting to persuade the reader or show and argument on an issue I think there is no effective way to do this. The audience has to be there from start to finish in order to get your message and argument and all your points and reasons for choosing this side.

·         “Our results show that a line may be short or they may be long, a page may have neat margin or ragged margins. No matter. What is critical is whether the lines represent meaningful groups of information. It is this matching of visual design to the constraints of cognitive processing that makes for efficiency (Bernhardt pg.42).

·         This quote is simple and meaningful to me because it just re-instates that your information doesn’t need extreme detail or effective facts but instead needs to be visually attractive to the reader’s eye. Also it needs to show them where they need to really focus. Another reason is if you want your paper to be efficient then you need to make sure the parts that differ from the norm are the most important. That you need to match important information with standout text with visual keys.

Intertextuality and Discourse Community

Intertextuality and the Discourse Community

1.       Summary:

In this article “Intertextuality and the Discourse Community” James Porter attempts to explain to the audience that there is no original writing or piece. Porter argues that in all writing we have intertexuality which is the idea that all writing has traces and ideas from other past text. Porter talks about how all text, speech and signs arrive from a single network in which we all use intertextuality. He argues that there are two types of intertextuality: iterability which is the tracing and use of references, quotations, allusions and unannounced influences like traditions and phrases. Then there is presupposition which refers to the assumptions a piece will make about its referent, reader and its context.  In the article Porter uses the Declaration of Independence and Thomas Jefferson to help explain how intertext is used in writing. Porter explains and describes Jefferson’s methods and where he got all his ideas and phrases yet his work wasn’t consider a form of plagiarism. He argues that we use these influences to write what the audience wants and expects; that the audience (readers) are actually responsible for the writers work so in essence the reader is the creator of discourse on the writer. He believes that writing doesn’t come from within but instead from a discourse community or group of readers and writer discussing and reviewing the same subjects, topics and dynamics. Porter argues that students shouldn’t have to try and create on their own because real creativity is the ability to create new meaning in the language from the use of indefinite extensions of its resources and putting it into context of the discourse community. Porter believes that real writing is an attempt to identify oneself within the constraints of some discourse community. Porter argues that all writers should attempt to find their discourse community that we should search for acceptability in our writing and validate ourselves and other writers through the critical methodology and adhering to the standards and values while still borrowing appropriate traces.

2.       Synthesis:

This reminds me of Kenneth Burke and Stuart Greene’s article where they talk about how everything will influence you and your writing. There is no way to avoid it; you are constantly being influenced by readings, clothes, TV, music and so on. This is maybe an extreme of what Porter is attempting to argue or only part of what he is speaking of but they both discuss how we need and will find ourselves searching for identity and acceptance and we can find that in a discourse community. That when we involve ourselves and our writing with people of the same subject and discourse we find that we are influenced by their work. There are always traces of other writings in the present ones because it’s these influences that make us write the way we do or approach a piece the way we do.  These articles both argue that influences from other writing is inevitable and effects what you say and write about that this is real creativity. They also both argue the concept of plagiarism and what it exactly is because people are always using other text and opinions as it is seen through traces in their own writing.

4.Question for Discussing and Journaling:

I always went about my writing in a completely different way than Porter describes his ideal version of it. Porter says that writing comes from acceptability within the reader’s community. I have always seen the evaluation of my writing as a specific format or criteria given to me by my teacher, instructor or even professor. I always thought of writing a following set guidelines and structure in order to be accepted and applicable with the other pieces written by my peers. I never thought about writing to be accepted for my values, thoughts, arguments and proper traces from past articles. This is far different from my past because teachers always have graded based on meeting criteria and how much information you use to support your claims rather than accepting it for its purpose and how it is effectively written for certain readers.

5. Questions for Discussion and Journaling:

I think Porter fits perfectly into his idea of intertextuality because all his arguments made are those from past writers as well. Porter argues about how we can always find traces of other text in new ones and that is real creativity, well Porter can be related to the ideas and concepts of many other writers such as Greene or Kantz in this book. Porter talks about how the difference is taking these text and twisting a new meaning or concept from them by using traces and forming what you want to argue yourself. Porter does just this he argues concepts already covered but implies other ideas and meanings like the concept of intertextuality and what it means. Porter  argues and creates this idea himself but branches this concept into two separate categories which explain how and why text are just central assumptions of the critics or readers in your community which he gets from multiple theorist one of which he quotes Vincent Leitch. Porter grabs many ideas about writer assumption and expectation in intertext from this man and even shows his traces with quotes but never fails to put is on meaning on this as well.  This entire article is a clear example of all Porters arguments put into one as he explains and creates his own conception of intertexuality and the discussion of discourse communities.

2.Applying and Exploring Ideas:

New Plagiarism Definition- This is the copying, using or borrowing of another’s ideas and or works within your own. The entitlement to this is if there are any found traces or relation to past text and arguments made.

When I compare the original definition and my own they seem almost entirely the same the only difference is if we use Porters ideas it is most likely impossible to write an original piece. Porter argues that we are always influenced by our audience and other works and we can find traces of it In our work so if this is plagiarism then there is really no way to write a paper. To write a paper you need to form an argument or purpose and without any knowledge or ideas on the topic you can’t create a proper piece. Plagiarism in essence is inevitable if view based on Porters conceptions because you need research and the chance to read and understand a topic before you can form your own opinion or argument on the matter.

1.       Meta Moment:

I see Porters argument and to me it is valid I would agree that writing is more of a group effort than that of your own. The people might not physically be with you but you are using their text, ideas and arguments to form and validate your own. This would change how I normally think about writing because I’ve always been raised to think of it as a step by step process you work on and complete on your own. Writing to me has always been about creating and making your own argument and conception but you really can’t do that without the help of other and their arguments in your discourse community. I don’t think this would change the way I write it’s just a matter of understanding and thinking about writing in a different way. This might lead me to further my reading and research on something now because this allows me to see and understand what’s acceptable in certain communities as well as make sure my work is valid and original. Also when I say original I mean has traces of other text and arguments but is an overall formation of my own thinking and objective.

1.       Article Evaluation:

I think that this article was interesting to read because it put ideas and concepts from other authors into one single one about intertextuality and discourse communities. What made it interesting is the fact that you could understand and see traces of other works in Porters as he talked about the idea of borrowing ideas from others and what exactly is plagiarism then. It was a different perspective and way of looking at information collection and how you should think about it and do it. Also it argued about ideas and influences always come from another source just like past articles we read which allowed me to be more into the writing and get a better understanding. This compares to my own experiences because I always struggle with dealing with structured outlines or having to match a certain criteria instead of writing to be approved by your community or audience. I don’t know if this will help at all because it is just a different way to look at writing and how we all do it. This is just another opinion on getting research and how to go about making your paper but overall I think I agree with Porter that writing is a group project and or collaboration of different text to form a new argument and new piece.

Elbow response

Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries

1.       Summary:

In the article “Voice in Writing Again: Embrace Contraries” by Peter Elbow the focus is talking about voice. Peter Elbow opens up talking about the Greek’s, philosophers and famous authors and their opinions on voice. Peter argues that voice is hard to keep from writing that intuitively and unconsciously we apply voice to our writing when we feel a relation or passion towards it. He talks about how many try to use the either/or method when discussing voice, that they accept one theory and discredit the other. Peter argues to instead make a compromise and have a both/and theory in which we must look at a piece of writing through one lens and then through another. Also that we must look at it through text which means to highlight the visual and spatial features of print. Along with that we should look through the lens of voice which highlights the language uses and how words differ based on who says them and how. He argues voice can help with effective writing in carrying meaning and purpose and that it can also help students become better writers and make better revision by hearing voice and using it in words. He then discusses how only looking at text usually makes the writing better because when students learn to read without voice they have to fully understand words and phrases. Also that it can teach students to separate language and voice and see effective writing and techniques beside pervasion.

2.       Synthesis:

This article relates a lot to Berger in the ideas and attempts to get students to better understand and use certain techniques when going about their work. These pieces are talking about two completely different things, Peters is about writing and reading and Berger is about photographs but they both focus on how you look at these pieces and the process at which to do it. Peter and Berger talk about how you need to look for the identity in the piece, why the author made this and what they are trying to say. Also they both talk about how small key features tell more than most of the entire piece like when Peter talks about how you can see where the author put their voice in a paper by comparing sections and how they are written. Then Berger argues about the ways at which women are posed or what the setting in the background looks like. IN these two article both authors talk about in their own way looking at different works through a lens and identifying the key features or things that speak from it.

1.       Before You Read:

When I am creating a profile for Facebook I tend to keep it as close to whom I truly am as possible. I am a very honest person so I try to describe myself to the fullest with my qualities, the things I enjoy, my hobbies, things I’m involved in and just overall background. I am almost smart about putting information about myself out so I choose to be smart and limit the things I say. I also leave out revealing information like my address or phone number. I think it’s important to be true to you but it’s also very important to be smart and safe.

2.       Before You Read:

I think that having the chance and ability to use I in a paper is a very good opportunity. This allows you to put feeling, emphases and personality into the paper. Also this can allow for more in depth thought in the paper because you don’t have watch how you describe things or place your information in the paper. Another thing is it allows you to put creative thought in your piece and not have to worry about placing bias and also you don’t really having any limitations or restrictions on what you can say.

1.       Journaling and Discussing:

I think that voice is a way in which to put yourself or your own identity into writing. This is to say that you describe and place your own side, meaning and feeling on the topic or issue being discussed or written about.  There are many other definitions that you can see about voice whether it is your literal voice or discussing or saying an opinion out loud. This is all well in comparison to what Elbow says because he talks about how voice is what the text says or how it talks to you.

1.       Applying and Exploring:

Sincerity- this is truthful writing or writing that is honest and believable by the audience or reader.

Resonance- this is writing that is added to the regular format in order to add excitement or power.

1.       Connecting the Reading:

I think that this connects the matter that your voice will inherently come out in the paper whether you realize it or not. The way you write a paper and the information you use is just a factor of your voice and how you choose to use it within the lines. They both speak on how it is rhetorical and is a quality of your writing; that it will appear visually and especially vocally.

3.       Article Evaluation:

I think that this article was a little on the dry side and at times was hard to understand because of the different vocabulary. The article was also complicated because of the analogies used and I think it was poorly developed for reader understanding. Although I think all of this Peter made strong arguments about writing and reading and how you should go about it. I think that his way of reading through the two different lens (texts, voice) is very logical and an extremely effective way of reading and understanding a piece and the author who wrote it. Also how he attempts to compromise analysis and going about writing with or without voice as both/and process instead of accepting and booting another. Overall I think the piece was ok but the message was strong and is very useful especially sense I am writing my construct on voice or identity in an academic paper.

Allen repsonse

The Inspired Writer vs. The Real Writer and Text/Constructs: How do readers read and writers write?

1.       Summary:

This article is by Sarah Allen and she attempts to argue that nobody is a perfect writer. She talks on how everybody has to struggle with writing and what to talk about or how to explain something. That even her, a writing teacher gets a writer block or often finds herself not wanting to write a paper or report. Sarah feels that everyone struggles with writing an everyone can be pained by it as well but that’s not what matters. The concept is that you have to keep going and searching for ways to develop and improve your piece. That nobody is gifted at writing a paper real quick and mastering it all in one draft. That you have to take time develop a structure and that you have to keep communicating. That’s the goal that’s the idea, you must keep practicing and using writing or communication in whatever you do to develop and to grow. She talks and argues how everyone is scared of their piece or that it will fail but you have to know and understand everyone is like that and that’s why you must work at it constantly. Then the second article is more of an opening description of what is to be done and covered in the next chapter. This covers projected things to happen as well as it covers the concept of construct. It explains and gives examples of what these are and which ones will be brought up later in the chapter.  

“Decisions and Revisions” and “Response of a laboratory Rat-or, Being Protocoled”

2.       Summary:

In this first article by Carol Berkenkotter we find the author talking about an experiment that she and Mr. Murray decided to perform under naturalist terms. This experiment is being used to conduct and observe how a writer such as Mr.Murray goes about writing and performing certain writing task. The article argues that he has a distinct process he uses in order to get papers done but also depending on what he is writing about or for he will change his area of focus. She also sees and discovers that Mr.Murray at points uses a process called reconceiving where he uses other author’s opinions and ideas on his own material in order to improve it and eliminate all error. Another is how he talks about writers and when they use internal revision which is doing so by self and when external revision occurs because of and for the audience. Then she precedes to mention planning and incubation and how they are important a work together revising a paper. First in planning what needs changed for fixed to format with the others then using incubation to come to and revise astoundingly there writing piece. Then she argues how Murray used introspective revision to fix and revise his piece and title. That this is the process of using breaks in order to think deep and get a chance to escape form compressing your piece. The piece also spoke on or went in depth of the process of his revision at all levels from planning to drafting. In Mr. Murray’s response he talks about all the things that this research project has shown him about himself and about writers. He argues writing is a intellectual process and that it is not separate from thinking just because you don’t sit there and do it out loud. He and the researcher agree that introspective research was great for allowing new ideas to generate as well as how import and affective conditions can be on research. He also argues for is fear that writers us other writers or common processes to much and often fall into a rhythm and lose the ability to branch off and explore further in research and rhetorical heuristic writing.

3.       Synthesis:

I think this article and Sarah Allen’s article are very similar they both argue for the concept that writers make mistakes and need help. Also that they can’t always do it by themselves or perfect on the first time they argue for revision and for the help and opinions of others whom they respect and trust. Another idea they both speak on is ho no author is perfect that everyone has to revise and edit that you can’t ever discover or use a perfect formula to write. Writing is a form of communication and is ever changing Sarah Allen would argue as in this piece they talk about how Mr. Murray found himself stuck and in trouble using the same process over time and caught up with him in one of his writing assignments to complete. They both mention how space away and to think can often help bring up and discover someone’s best work, but overall they both argue for the continuous revision and in depth methods of so in order to get better and create a better paper.

1.       Questions and Analyzing:

I think the way Murray went about his revisions and writing in general was very effective and professional compared to mine. Murray spent a lot of time brainstorming and review recently written work. Also he was always using his peers to branch off new ideas and concepts or to fix errors or faults in his writings. I often only found myself review the whole draft once and allowing a single peer review before I would turn my work in. I do many things differently to such that I don’t use breaks in or to develop new and better ideas or I don’t tend to think to myself or out loud to work up an idea.

2.       Berkenkotter used this research and discovered that there is no single method of revision and planning. Berkenkotter argues that you can never narrow it down or categorize it to a single system and so forth. The author argues that planning and revising is a long process of creating and eliminating new ideas and concepts as well as the constant editing of sentences and structure. That in using different methods and different peers you can learn to write in many different methods and create a more diverse and original piece instead of repeating your past methods.

1.       Applying and Exploring:

I think that when I write I spend almost all my time on brainstorming an idea and concept I think will work best for my piece. I then go about writing and making my paper and after I continue to revise the things I’m saying and how I choose to say them. I have never been beginning on editing my work for simple structure and grammatical mistakes but I have never been good at grammar or noticing it either way. This has definitely been a big flaw of mine and I think it effects how much time I spend on certain parts of the paper all the time. I always find myself revising sentences to sound a specific way or fixing them to make a powerful statement or quote. I look to revision and brainstorming to do all my best work because I lack the effort and ability to edit and rewrite my work. I think that we subconsciously go about our writing like this because we find areas where we do our best or where we are most comfortable and we stick to them. Writers tend to follow their best ways but eventually get stuck there or use other writers to advance their paper instead of brainstorming and working new ideas and processes yourself.

1.       Meta Moment:

I think that after this reading I will go about my writing differently and I will try and use introspection in order to branch off my work and make better papers or concepts overall for my paper. The use of this and peer revision I think will really help me in writing a better paper because I always rely on myself and my original idea instead of challenging for more or something new and different.

1.       Article Evaluation:

I think that all of these article can be of use because of all the information and enlightenment provided on revisitng and revising your papers. All these articles really harp on using your writing ability to generate and create ideas, concepts or just overall papers from new and different methods. That also you shouldn’t limit yourself to a single process or step by step method for competition that changing it up often leads to new and original work that diversifies the world of writing. Also the articles have motivated me and helped me understand that I am not alone in struggling with writing a paper and then after doing so struggling to edit and revise it to a completed form. This is because of my lack of attention to all important areas of the process and the fact that over time I began to rely to much on the things that I could do best. I now will use my peers to edit my work further grammatically and structurally as well as the further my concepts and develop different opinions on the work and how it is presented. I don’t think any of these articles were interesting to read or super enlightening but I got a lot of information and tips I think will help improve and develop my writing into much more effective work. These articles were dry and lacked fun and drawing examples like those of some of our past reading assignments but these were just as relevant and important in the process.

McCloud response

McCloud Reading Assignment

1.       Before you read:

    My favorite cartoon when I was younger was Ed, Edd and Eddy. I really enjoyed this show because it was about these three best friends who did everything together and where always brainstorming ideas on how to make money or get back at other neighborhood kids. The show was really funny because they all had their own flaws like Ed was tall, goofy, and stupid and always did the dumbest things. Then there was Eddy who was always about making money and was extremely greedy and this greed always seemed to get them in loads of trouble. I think I connect to these characters and the show because me and my neighborhood friends were always running around in the summer making lemonade stands and selling toys, pretty much did whatever we could to make some money and buy candy or the next best action figure. Also we were always being risky little kids and getting in trouble with our parents or with the older kids for messing around with them. I think I really connected to this even though we were completely different or the things they did were extremes it all just reminded me of my life and my friends and all the crazy stuff we did and went through together.

2.       Summary:

In Scott McClouds article “Vocabulary of Comic” Scott speaks a lot on the idea of icons and representation. Scott is trying to convey to his audience which is students and professors both the concept of icons and how they play a big role in our brain. We all process icons and their meanings subconsciously and never truly think about their effect or role they play. He talks about the different types of icons like symbols which represent ideas, beliefs and different concepts. Also there is icons that represent the language of science and communication these are practical or real icons such as letters, words, numbers and so on. Lastly there is the icons that are known as pictures and images which show and represent their specific subject. He argues that we have all these icons but we often separate or linger from the real realm and go towards more simplistic images because it allows us to relate or see ourselves. Scott is saying that we are a selfish breed us humans, which we choose to see ourselves in all icons or to create and find a self-image. He talks about how everything we create or watch we somehow find a way to see ourselves in it. That the more we go towards simplicity and away from realistic representation the more we use this to see ourselves and relate to the image or icon. He believes that as children watching cartoons and using drawings are not just observing they are becoming; as children we use these things for self-identification and awareness and it carries on with us as we grow.

3.       Synthesis:

In this comic or short article McCloud talks about the use of comics and cartoons for children to self-identify. That when we are young we see these simple “icons” and use them to see and find ourselves which in turn takes effect in our lives as we progressively grow older. This relates to Kantz in a very weird way I think that both authors are very open-minded and seem to believe in the effect of things around us whether it’s TV or a magazine. The authors talk about two completely different subjects but the same idea for instance Kantz argues that we are often influenced by what we read and what the book or article tells us. She says that students always read this and take it for what it is instead of questioning or examining the claims of fact and fiction. McCloud is similar to this concept because he argues that we are influenced by these cartoons when were young that these icons have an effect on what we feel or believe. He talks about how we relate to these simple forms such as cartoons because it allows us to have identification and relation to the character which affects our concepts and beliefs as we grow.

1.      Discussion and Journaling:

I think that adults still like the concept of simple cartoons because it’s exactly like what we watched when we were younger. People grow older but these little things or icons that allowed us to relate and identify as a kid subconsciously helped and affected our lives so when we watch cartoons now we subconsciously search for that same chance and feeling of identification. I don’t think there ever is an age at which it’s inappropriate to watch or read comics. There is nothing wrong with them it’s just another form of art and entertainment adults often stop watching it claiming it is for children but there are many adult comic books and adult cartoons such as Family Guy, Furturama, South Park and the list goes on. These cartoons are created for adults to relate to and it’s often a simple and effective way to entertain people while still seeking a purpose whether it is just laughter or political views. I think that McCloud would be very upset with the idea of being too old to watch cartoons or read comics because he himself knows and argues for the idea that they are something we use to fill in the gap. They are there for us to discover or relate to who we are and what we choose to identify with or as.

2.      Discussion and Journaling:

The idea to use a comic book style to argue his point was very clever and effective. I think it really helped drive his point across because as you read on you thought exactly what he said next and it was almost as though he was reading your mind. Also that when he showed examples he would tell you how you saw it or what they meant to you and he was right, it’s pretty wild how he was able to relate to my thoughts and concepts as I read. Also this was very useful because it was a very good article written but also visually. The visuals and just the overall comic book theme drove his points across and allowed the audience to see and understand what he was saying much better. If Scott choose to write it just like an average article I think it would lose all of its effectiveness because many of his examples were visual such as simplify a character to a smiley face. If he just wrote it out there would be no way for the audience to see what he was saying and arguing.

1.      Applying and Exploring:

I think that visual imagery is a very effective way of teaching. This allows students to get more involved and help develop and see the idea or concept discussed a lot better. Teaching with visuals can be a great strategy for many classes and lessons. The use of visuals would be great for explaining and helping students perform math problems. Math students often suffer relating or getting the concept of a word problem when it is just written out but when given a visual example the students have something to relate and identify with so they no longer struggle to think of the concept.

2.      Applying and Exploring:

McCloud argues this because the more real or vivid an image becomes the more we see it for what it is. The difference is when you start to simplify and idea, image or icon you start to relate and see yourself as the character compared to when you see a real image you tend to just see the character for what they are and you just understand. McCloud believes that when the icon becomes simpler you not only understand but you relate and identify. I have related to many real images but it’s only through relation I never feel a connection or self-identification with the image. I have seen many cartoons and have related myself to characters or episodes but when the cartoon becomes simpler I am able to see myself as that person.

4.       Thoughts on the reading:

I thought this was a very fun and interesting article to read. This was a lot more drawing and interesting to me because it had many visuals and allowed me to really see and fully understand his argument and the concepts he was talking about. Also it was a lot shorter and directly to the point compared to the past articles which seemed very long and drawn out. This article is helpful because it allowed me to realize the effectives of comics and cartoons. This article showed me how icons affect us or appear to us subconsciously without even knowing its happening. I was glad we read this I learned a lot and it was actually just a fun article in the way it was presented and the subject he choose to argue about.

Kantz response

Writing About Writing: Kantz

In the article “Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively” Margaret Kantz attempts to speak out to other teachers and professors about helping there students.  Kantz says that when writing a paper on a subject or a topic that requires research students often just comply with requirements and just write a paper for the grade or with a simple summary. Kantz argues that professors need to teach students how to write with “analytic and rhetorical proficiency”(Kantz,81). This meaning that students need to stop looking at writing papers as summarizing or answering one single question but instead look for gaps in there sources or try to contrive an argument about one of your sources or the topic your writing on. Also that students need to learn to look at pieces as rhetorical readings or a Reality that is being sent or brought up by a encoder and being delivered to a decoder. Kantz wants students to not focus on summarizing but instead analyzing; to look at the pieces and ask question or try to derive the whys, how’s and so what’s? She argues that the best writing is creative writing and that if students just knew how to look at sources differently than just reading what’s being stated they could have infinite possibilities.  Students could create and discover problems or questions with sources or what they are saying and they could give solutions and reasoning to these problems or questions.  In this article Kantz states “A fact is a claim the audience will accept as being true without requiring proof, although they may ask for an explanation. An opinion is a claim that an audience will not accept as true without proof, and which, after the proof is given, the audience may well decide has only a limited truth”(Kantz,76). She is saying that there isn’t ever really facts or opinions there is only claims some of which can be agreed on by everyone therefore making them true. Also with writing a paper Kantz believes that students are thrown into a fire because teachers will just give them the assignment and let them go instead of giving them step by step process to prevent them from being overwhelmed. She wants students to be able to write in a process and multiple drafts in order to help them improve their writing and become proficiently better at rhetorically heuristic reading, analyzing and writing. This article is very similar to Micheal Kleine’s article they both have common elements they believe to create the best pieces. In both articles they talk about how to go about your research how you can both gather and hunt for information and that through doing this you are influenced by the ideas around you. Kantz wants students to look at research with an open mind or an attitude of questioning everything you read or how it reads in a way. In both articles they want students to be more creative in what they choose to write about instead of just simply typing up a summary and expressing whether you agree with information or not. Also they both talk about the failure of professors to help or guide there students in the right direction of rhetorical research. Also in Kantz article she chooses to really express her feelings on facts and opinions. Most people look at the words and say facts are truths and opinions are not necessarily true but what someone feels or values. Kantz expresses that both are actually just claims made by people and the only difference between the two is that facts are claims that can be agreed on by everyone whereas opinions can be situational truths. When I say situational truths I mean that they are true in some situations but not in all. Kantz also talks about arguments are always conducted of the two and it’s actually just a matter of acceptance. Kantz says that students don’t understand how to write in a original way that students often just write in a first point next point pattern. Also she argues that students look at facts and believe them as truths and they never question how the source might be bias or that the fact is manipulated in a certain way to change the way it sounds or is expressed. Another argument she makes is that students choose to look at the paper as a whole instead of going a step by step process and going from there.  Lastly she says that students need to learn to take the research as an opportunity to find a problem and present a solution. I think she is correct with almost all of these statements because speaking from experience I have never really thought about looking at information or facts as claims instead of truths also I have never thought about developing a solution to some problem I would discover from a source.  I think this article with great to read because it really did enlighten me on all these aspects and Kantz explained them all very well. I think my idea of creativity was completely different from Kantz until I read this article in my thought process I always considered creativity in writing a research paper to be just finding a different way of presenting information but through reading this article I now understand you can actually completely change your argument on a research paper by just simply looking for gaps in the writing. I think her understanding is very influential to mine because I have a good ability at writing papers but I often struggle to find what to write about or how to get the paper started. I think in some terms it might not work because she talks about finding gaps in research but you can’t always find gaps there is sometimes papers that are truly factual. Kantz is trying to analyze how students go about their papers and how they do research. She feels that students lack the ability or intuition sometimes to discover or realize that facts and opinions are both claims that are just made by people and some happen to be agreed upon while others can only be truthful in certain times otherwise just how someone feels on a subject or issue. I think this article is very useful because it opens up so much more paths to take on a paper or even just a single source. Overall I think this was a very interesting article in the way it was presented and also what it talked about. The article was helpful and more interesting than the past ones I feel because she used examples and set up various situations helping to make the understanding a lot easier in my opinion. Also I have never looked at sources the way she described students should I was always that Shirley she talks about in the story. I agree with her claims and I think they will be very helpful in my future when I see and experience research papers.

Greene repsonse

Writing about Writing: Informal Writing

Getting ready to read:

1.       The word argument is brought up and often relevant in almost every conversation you have day by day. This word is used in everyday life as a form of conversation or interaction between two or more peoples. This all meaning that it is a method of backing up what you say or think, whether that’s through evidence or verbal and non-verbal communication. I think in the academic setting the word argument is narrowed down even further. It has one meaning and that is supporting evidence. Today in the academic society we often us arguments to support a claim or idea; it is the evidence or data that we use and collect to back up our statements. I think the difference between the two is that in the academic society we use it strictly to support a claim or idea where as in the outside world it can be as simple an aggressive conversation or a form of defending yourself or an idea without having any facts.

Discussion and Journaling:

2.       Greene quoted this information again because it reinforced his opinion on arguments and how there isn’t really a begin source to an argument it’s an ongoing conversation on paper. This extended metaphor means that there never is a beginning argument you can go back to. The process continues of people researching and developing from past information and then throwing in their argument thus creating another source. I would say it puts a valid point on writing, it shows how it has flaws in its “rule book” if you will. This shows how writing is an open world of arguments and conversations in a continuous cycle of millions of subjects. This could also challenge the ideas on plagiarism because it shows that you can’t trace any facts or information to any true source. So, doesn’t that mean its plagiarism? This shows how it’s hard to choose one side because you never truly know which one is right or more valid.

3.       The concept of framing is trying to organize and setup a boundary or system in which you research and decide your argument. This idea is a form in which you choose to place your argument on a certain side or perspective. I believe the first metaphor best underlies the idea or concept of framing. The metaphor is trying to get across the idea of looking at a big idea or argument and narrowing down to the most important message you can find and creating your argument around it.  This concept is important to Greene because he is trying to convey and give multiple examples as to how writers generate their arguments. Also it helps to explain how writers think in the manner of being one sided and only narrowing and focus on one part instead of being open-minded. Framing allows you to pick a side on a certain subject for your argument as well as create a specific meaning or purpose of the argument and what you want to say.

Applying and Exploring Ideas

                2. Greene’s article does represent a conversation; it represents a conversation or argument presented to others and myself reading the book. Greene frames his argument to express that there was and always will be a difference between research argument and an everyday argument. He explains how writers use different methods for their arguments such as framing their work or how writers use research and information to change or create their own argument. Greene practices what he preaches throughout the entire article explaining how other authors feel or think about writers and their methods in which to express and argument. Also at the same time he expresses his own version or twist to the idea. Greene only focuses on his own argument and opinion over the subject of arguments instead of branching to counterarguments. Greene relishes in his own argument and it’s apparent throughout the article whether it is through another writer’s work or his side notes reinstating what the author is conveying, Greene keeps to his word and frames the idea of an argument to center directly on his image and perspective.