Week 15: Using the Rubric

The argument is worth making 

• The paper by discussing the changing process of education and how technology is being integrated into the curriculum.  Your thesis states, "educators should be able to embrace their role in obtaining and displaying an ownership in the literacy of digital technology", I see that you are writing toward teachers of the k-12 education. By being able to relate your thesis to k-12 educators, you've established your argument while identifying the audience.

The writer has (tried to) arrange the writing in line with purpose and audience

• Following the thesis, I noticed that you transition between your paragraphs neatly. For example, you end your 5th paragraph by saying, "Looking towards local schools in the Milwaukee area, there is an ability to see that schools have taken this community approach by implementing certain goals in an attempt to modernize their pedagogical structure", 
• you then begin the following paragraph by saying, "West Milwaukee Middle School is a modern school that allows students to use cellphones, tablets, and laptops in class as long as they are used for academic purposes". You set your transition up nicely so your k-12 teaching audience can simply follow with relevant an local examples.

The style effectively supports the purpose, argument, and reading comprehension

• I noticed that you give the majority of your paper as an onlooker on the usage of digital literacy for teachers. Not until the 7th paragraph do you draw on your own experiences with teaching. This device works well because during the first few pages of your paper, you give your audience factual evidence. Then after the facts are presented, you strengthen your argument through personal experience. Using this device allows you to establish trust with your reader, and if you gave personal experience earlier on in your paper, your audience may have not taken it seriously. 
• You also use grammar and word choice that fits your audience. The people within with the education field will understand what Pedagogical Digital Literacy is, and what your paper may be about, before they even read the entire thing.

The argument and examples work together

• You use your sources to your advantage, and own your argument. Your paper doesn't feel like a patch quilt of quotes. When a quote is used, you usually go into detail, or have a purpose for the source in order to help drive your argument. The set up for the quote, "...it is not only about what technology can do, but also, and perhaps more importantly, what technology can do for teachers"(Chen 473). This quote was nicely placed towards the end of your paper, and seems to sum up the argument that your are trying to make. 
• You follow the quote by saying, "By having a coherent relationship with our digital surroundings, teachers will have the ability to speak the technological language that many of our students already know". This sentence dose a fine job of reminding the audience why they are reading the piece, and seeing that it's the last sentence before your conclusion, nicely wraps up the ideas for the body of your paper.

All sources are cited appropriately, in MLA or APA format, in in-text and works cited references.

• They look super. Perfect MLA, if I do say so myself.
  

There is evidence of revision (which requires that the writer keep and then turn in all drafts with the final version).

• You have three separate drafts that conscience decisions and revisions were made for your essay. Your first draft begins by saying, "Students, parents, an educators, we have come to a point where the classroom that once was, is no more". Clearly, in this early stage, you were still developing your audience, and was unsure who to direct your topic towards. 
• On essay revision 2, you start to narrow down your audience by beginning with saying, "Educators, and those who plan on educating, we have come to a point where the classroom that once was, is no more". You are getting closer in defining your audience, but are still torn between two different classes of people in the education field.
• On essay revision 3, you being your essay by saying, "Adapting a functional classroom at the mercy of technological advance will most certainly be a topic of debate and controversy". This opener narrows down the topic of your paper, but feels flowery, needless to say, on your final draft, you condensed this sentence and cut out the fluff.
• On your final draft, your opening sentence is, "Adapting a functional use of digital technology within the modern classroom is a topic of debate and controversy". By starting your paper out like this, you set up your issue, and then lead into talking about your audience by saying, "a pedagogical shift is occurring within the k-12 classroom, and as educators, there should be an adaptive understanding of the evolving word that surrounds us". Within your first 2 sentence of your final draft, you have set up your issue, and established your audience.

Given the revision, the grammar and mechanics are appropriate for the audience and purpose.

• I like that your first draft wasn't that academic, then the second draft tried to be more academic. This then led to your third draft that contained flowery language, but through the peer review of your classmates, you cut it down for your final draft. All terminology and words are acceptable for the audience your are writing for. 

A criterion you can choose to use:
The writer took risks in the writing. (If you want this to be part of your own personal rubric, let me know what risk you want to take in your writing—such as trying a new style—in order that we can help you with it.)

Extra credit criterion:
The writer uses "bubbler" appropriately in the paper.

• In paragraph 7, while talking about your teacher observation, you correctly used bubbler while talking about your teaching duties. 

Week 13: My Reflection

1) So far in my reflection paper, I've used sources that I have used in the past. I'm talked about the process of change to a certain extent, but I feel that I'm still in a process of change at the same time. Writing is always a changing thing within the composing process. My opinion has certainly changed, I didn't know that there were so many key concepts involve with the composing process initially, but clearly there are. Invention, arrangement, style and delivery are all active components within the composing process. I'm hoping my paper isn't a conversion story, I'll certainly avoid this from happening.

2) What is missing from the list is possible concerns that we are still having with the composing process.

3)More that I could do is is talk about the worth of my writing so far possible, I'm also planning on talking about the other areas arrangement and style. I still have a couple of pages to go on my paper, so I can have a chance to put some of this into the works.

What can I do in a video?

I feel that I can assert a meaning on a video through an image, rather than text only. This will allow me to possibly convey meaning through less words, and more actions on screen.

Week 12: 30 seconds.

I will attempt to have an intro, like a cover letter.
Then try to establish a thesis of some sort.
So I suppose I'll possible be presenting my information in a documentary style.
I'll try to somehow relay that teachers are responsible for being technologically literate.
I really think that I'm going to sort of wing it while I make it, I tend to work best all at one time while making movies.
I have the paper, and my poster in the back of my head, so all I really need is an idea of some sort.

Week 12: Posters and Revision.

I feel that my poster may have been too simple. I could possibly put more text on each poster, just to clarify my ideas. The Sherlock Holmes poster definitely needs some revision, many people felt confused about it's message. I sort of felt this in the back of my mind before turning it in today as well. Basically, simple is good, by if it's too simple, then content can be lost. For my final poster, I plan on adding some subtext to whatever on I chose. Both could certainly use it.
------

From what I have found out, I have brought my confusion from my paper to my poster. Lucas indicated that there wasn't clarity to whether my audience was students or teachers. So I suppose, I am having the same struggle within my poster than I am with my paper.  Keeping my poster and my text on my poster directed to an audience certainly feels similar. There is a tad bit of anxiety trying to get the right words and structure so your message is fit to your audience

Week 12: Rubric and Evaluation.

From what I've gathered so far, I feel that I'm still working towards this rubric. My argument is still being tailored towards my audience, but since I have revised my introduction, I feel that it has more weight to where I am heading. I'm hitting a wall trying to focus my attention to teachers only, so that the audience doesn't think that this is a student technological literacy paper. While I find this important, I need to make my point clearer that teachers can be behind in the tech literacy race. I'm slowly working more and more towards my style, through revision, I've already rearranged paraphraphs and phrasings so there is more word power within my paragraphs. This goes hand and hand with my examples and sources that I've been stringing in. I have been finding some wonderful sources toward my topic, and need to deep digger into the material so I can articulate my argument. I'm struggling towards finding that hidden meaning that puts all of my paper together. I most certainly need more time filling in some bulk with my essay. I still need to fit bubbler in there somewhere.

Week 12: Poster Drafts

I have on of my posters finished, and plan on finishing the other tomorrow.
For my poster, I made a yellow background, with a blue computer in the center.
The yellow background causes a huge amount of contrast with the blue computer within
the center of the screen. This then allows the computer to be the primary focus of the picture.
Then within the screen, I have it yellow, with a picture of Sherlock homes saying "It's elementary  my deer teacher". I figured that the phrase summed up what I was trying to say within the picture because:

1. The picture is made out of construction paper, and looks like elementary school arts and crafts.
2. The computer is displaying the image, so Sherlock Holmes is clearly saying that using a computer is elementary.
3. The shift from "Watson" to "Teacher" shows that the audience is being targeted.

So I started poster two, and I am trying to have a teacher chase a computer in a footrace. I'm having a little trouble in potraying this in terms of a teacher in technological literacy. It's difficult making a teacher out of construction paper. But I have to say, that I'm having a blast in making these. My color scheme is yellow, green, and blue. I tried to make it so all the colors come from the same source, therefore the picture will feel more appealing to the eye. I have the runners on the ground, so there is a depiction of gravity. And I have the computer running in first place to the right of the paper, and the teacher behind, on the left side of the paper.

Week 11: Central Idea for Poster.

*Technological literacy amongst teachers.
*Teachers should be as technologically literate as their students.
*Teachers should never stop learning.
---
Probably show a picture of a teacher confused.

Week 11: Where I'm Hurting.

From what I've understood in my writing career at college, confusion can sometimes be a good things. This is where the writer can hopefully tap into the critcal thinking process, and think about why a certain topic is difficult to write about. This is where I seem to be at, and I need to fine the thread that holds my paper together--or just start all over again. I really like where my introduction is at, but then the body just seems to fall flat on it's face. Being able to struggle shows that the process of writing is not meant to be a cakewalk, but like anything, a process where we are learning. Thing become struggles because they are new to us, thus through the struggle comes a lesson to be learned.

Week 11: Where I'm At With Writing.

I feel I need to take more time on my writing, I feel I've hit a slump on the direction of where my paper  is going. I ended up taking out a few paragraphs because they didn't align with my thesis for my audience, so through the last couple weeks, in certain areas, I've ended up with less information, but hopefully more targeted toward my audience. At this point, I'm reading through source material, and trying to find examples as to why teachers need to use certain programs to learn the importance of using technology within the classroom. These programs teach the technological literacy that is important for teachers to understand the literacies that their students may already understand.

I need to narrow my focus for my papers, it still feels much too vast. From all that I've gathered, and smaller, crafted argument can become much more powerful than and overly convoluted one. I can't seem to break past the invention stage, so therefore my revision is consuming my invention at times. I need to spend a solid 5 hours on this thing one of these days to further refine my ideas.

Week 11: What is Writing?

I would think that writing would be a developmental plan throughout the course of the semester. Sort of like how our class has been structured. The kids in my class would have the ability to develop a voice, structure and a sense of word power within the papers that they write. Writing is the ability to put words on a sheet of paper on a topic that is posed to us. Students all have an internal voice, and hopefully they can develop the ability of translating that voice to the page. Invention, arrangement  style and delivery are all important aspects of the composing process of writing, and through practice, students will be able to learn this skill. The words we use must have some rhetorical meaning and sentence structure.

Week 11: Reflective Writing About My Draft

What would you describe as your purpose in your current draft?
As of now, the purpose is to persuade teachers to find a way to accept technology into their classroom, and attain technological literacy.

For whom are you writing?
Teachers that aren't technological literate.

How have you shaped your writing to address that audience, given your purpose?
I'm giving examples of working classrooms that have technology, and also places where teachers can learn how to use technology in the classroom. I've also tried to rewrite my introduction so I could implement a little more rhetorical writing.

Describe the main points of your argument. Why are the main points arranged as they are in your current draft? Given your audience and purpose, what other arrangements might work?

As of now, this is how my working draft is arranged. 

• Teachers should become technologically literate like their students.
• Teachers should look at the models of other schools that implement technology in their classrooms.
• Teachers should seek out programs that teach technological literacy.

I could possibly start with why teachers should be technologically literate, then talk about the programs that talk about literacy programs, then lastly, talk about the school models that work.

Is your audience likely to find your sources persuasive? Why—or why not? Do you have enough sources? Are they from an appropriate time frame? Are they from sources appropriate to your argument and purpose?

I believe they will, I tried very hard to find sources that aren't before 2005. Technology from even then seems to be much more advanced, and much more integrated into the school curriculum. I could certainly use more sources toward the argument of literacy programs.

Describe the style of your writing. How is this style appropriate for your audience? How might you modify the style to be even more appropriate?

I've already modified my introduction to make it sound more academic, so eventually, once my body is more concrete, I plan on trying to rewrite some of my sentences.

What do you think your audience will walk away from your paper thinking? What might they feel when they finsih reading? What do you hope they will do?

That technology isn't scary, and actually a beneficial tool. It's like teaching people to be responsible with fire, if used properly, it can be very helpful.

What are your main choices in shaping your writing—the main strategies you have chosen—that will help readers finish reading so that they think, feel, and/or do what you just described?

I'm trying to be understanding that as we get older, the more overwhelming, but beneficial technology can be. So a sympathetic approach, with a voice will allow readers to relate.

Based on all the above, what modifications do you think you will make in order to make your writing stronger still?

Finishing my paper, then reworking my sentences to have more rhetorical power. 

Week 11: Shore, Dondis, Bang

All three articles brought something new to the table. Dondis has definitely the most concise explanations toward the information that is proposed. Whether it's the way we receive visual messages, "representationally, abstractly, or symbolically", this sort of frame work seems to be where Bang gets her theory from. Molly Bang shows abstract shapes, and attaches reason as to why their is an emotional weight to them. As humans, we seem to place ideas of our world into the images we see, such as gravity, symmetry, or even common phrases such as, "he's in the corner". These ideas can give certain tensions to an image no matter how abstract they may be, and the spatial element of visual communication is a key component. Shore on the other hand, tends to work with actual photographs, and talks about the four components that make a photograph: flatness, frame, time and focus. All of these dimensions show that a miniature world exists within a photo, and depending on how these elements are conveyed, will have a cause and effect on the photo.

From what I understand, with visual composition, there are different ways in conveying meaning. Photography, and visual images can go for more of the abstract, thus conveying meaning through the rhetoric of images. Tensions, emotions, gravity, framing, are all ways in which a picture can tell a story,  on the other hand, words perform rhetoric through sentences, and the act of being told something. An image however can only be shown to a viewer, but not given a script for the symbolism. Thus the two modes perform differently in their respected medium.

Knowing how to convey meaning through the use of emotion will be important. I never knew that certain shapes and spacing can cause such an internal feeling when looking at such abstract images. Dondis says, "Vision defines the act of seeing in all of it's ramifications". By attaching emotional weight through the subliminal placement of our posters, we'll hopefully be able to convey meaning of some sort.

Week 10: Delpit, Young, and Me.

Delpit
From what I gathered from the Delpt article, teaching English to non standard English speakers is both controversial  and ever changing. There seems to be no "right" way to accomplish the task, but through critically thinking about the process, there is at least thought  and empathy through the process. Language is power, and white people tend to take this power for granted. This wasn't a white hate article, but certainly a diversity understanding of culture and knowledge article.  As educators, we need to embrace the cultural differences of our students, and not exclude their individual differences, rather let them own their individuality  In the classroom, the teacher and the students need to become "experts" in the material that they approach. By this, I mean, both student and teacher need to bring something to the table in terms of the educational process. We can then teach the students the language of power, through understanding that it is the "formal language" of society. But at the same time embrace our own language codes, they make us who we are!

Young
Young is a black man that is well versed in both BEV and WEV, and has constant racial identity conflicts with himself. He is constantly questioning the system, and doesn't exactly give the "right" answer to teaching students fluent in BEV, but rather gives insight to the situation. He claims that by allowing students to Code with and have plural dialects, an identity crisis is given to students. No one in the BEV and WEV benefits from these code switching dilemma, this is because it claims that one is more right than the other. He however states that the issue is within the schools, and that there needs to be reform of some kind. This article was a little heart breaking, but at the same time empowering into the black psyche.

Me
College has definitely been an eye opening experience. There were days that I use to say "tret" instead of "treated", and other parts of dialect that seem so strange to me now. People talk like their peers and their social settings do to their environments and upbringings. When I came to the relization that "tret" wasn't a word, I was about 16 years old, and a former girlfriend asked me what it meant. I felt like my world was shaken-- tret has been a word that I used all my life, and I never second guessed it. This slang had it's teeth sunk into my past, and my parents were the source of the issue. This opened doors to me, and a greater realization that everyone speaks differently. There are times that this word comes nearly out of my mouth, and even to this day, when I'm on the verge of saying  treated, tret is not too far behind in my mind. My ability to be conscinece about the actions I make in my language could relate to Delpit's idea of "code switching". When I'm with my parents, I seem to get back into my nasty habits of improper grammar. It's difficult, because I don't want to sound like a snob when I'm around them, so I tend to conform to the code that my family speaks. Young would agree that this part of my language is a partial identity, but at the same time, I'm resentful towards it. 

Revisions

With my revision, I tried to narrow down on my audience.  I focused less on the student aspect of my piece, and more towards the teacher. This was so I can relate to teachers that are having difficulty adjusting to the digital age. I rear aged the last few paragraphs so they had  a different flow, and talked about the difficulties teachers faced first, then lastly I talk more about possible solutions to these problems within the classroom.

Beans, Buns, and Fun

Bean's Main Points
From what I gathered from the Bean article, teachers need to get their students from reading at a surface level. There are too many times when teachers are forced to somehow summarize, explain or simplify a difficult article, when in fact the student should be sharpening their critical reading lens. When teachers give this simplification, it deludes the student's chance of achieving a deep reading technique. By giving the students an understanding that some of these texts are meant to be difficult, and that it would be surprising if they would even understand 50 percent of it, we can lower their anxiety levels by helping them understand that confusion is part of the process. As teachers, we need to be empathetic, and relay that empathy towards the students so the students understand the weight of the reading is meant purposely. Ways for helping students read these text is to have the forget about highlighting, and whenever they feel the urge to highlight, have them write a quick sentence on the margin of the page. This will help the students have an easier time absorbing the information that seems convoluted.

Bun's Main Points
Bun want's people to read like a writer so people stop taking things at face value. He relates these ideas to people wanting to have directions for everything, and that there is a constant need to know how something is done. "When we read like writers we understand and participate in
the writing. We see the choices the writer has made, and we see how the writer has coped with the consequences of those choices (75). By reading like a level, we become more engaged with the words that we read, thus know that there is a specific reason why the author made the choices he/she made in conveying their message. This will allow the reader to further engage with the reading, and participate and possibly implement these techniques within their own writing. When reading like a writer, we are able to try and define the intended audience and purpose for the piece of writing, which will then give the reader a greater sense of understanding why the author made certain choices for the community they are writing for.

Bean and Bun
I enjoyed the Bean article, because I saw many things that I could relate to. I have been in these theory classes where I seemed lost, but I suppose that is sort of the point. We need to make our way through the confusion and try to come to terms with the information given. The way that Bean proposes to teach students through the teachers own personal experiences seemed like a good idea. There are too man times when I had a hard time in understanding where to underline, speed-read  of skim certain passages. Even the concept of taking notes on a dense article can feel intimidating. But knowing how your teacher goes about with these articles is very beneficial, it gives empathy towards the students, and allows them to understand that these articles are difficult. In terms of the Bun article, I found the RLW approach beneficial as well. I have learned in the past that while reading pieces, there is a selective audience that many theorist write for. So there is meant to be confusion to a certain extent, especially if you are outside of the audience. So by trying to define the audience, the reader can then understand the choices why the author wrote the way that he did.

Hannelore Kinney

I thought being able to identify what sentences were best written,  and had the most meaning was a good exercise in being able to critically read your own paper. This was effective so hopefully I can implore these skills at other points of my paper. This technique was used by many people we read about in our theory articles, so there is no doubt that there is a benefit here.  However, I felt confused what he general outcome of the assignment was suppose to be. For using this assignment in the future, there should be further guidelines in the goals that states the purpose of why we should be able to make these identifications.

Angela Mosby Assigment

I enjoyed Angela's assignemt because it had me examine my writing in a vulnerable way. By having the sentences seperated and having them much more visually stand out, I was able to identify a few patterns in the way I write. This was effective due to the isolation of each sentence, which gave me individual time with each seperate part within a specific paragrahph. By using this technique in the future, I can hopefully have peers extract meaning, content, and indivual sentence patterns within paragraphs.

The assignment didn't have stated goals for what was expected as an outcome at the end of the assignment. This was the only major thing the assignment lacked. So if used in the future, goal would definitely be beneficial.

ASSIGNMENT

Audience and Argument
From what I've gathered from our peers, and even myself, there can be a difficulty having a cohesive argument that identifies with your audience throughout your paper. There may be times you veer off topic, rant, or even start taking your argument to whole new place completely.  By the end of this assignment, I hope a connection can be made between your audience and argument. We  should all be making an argument that makes sense for the group we are writing for, and strengthen the weak points of our argument whenever possible.

Step 1
Sharon Crowley's essay on invention says, "I use the term argument to refer to any rhetorical situation in which people disagree with one another, although ' argument' can also refer to the proofs developed by a specific rhetoric for use in a given situation"(32). Within your own paper, I want you to find areas in which someone may disagree with your argument. Then ask yourself, what is there to disagree with? Write a response on the areas of disagreement, and then afterwards, try and think of ways to reach disagreement your audience may have with your audience.

Step 2
Find areas where your argument speaks the best to your audience, then write about why this is.
Ask yourself the following while finding these areas:

• What am trying to tell my audience?
• Why should my audience agree with me?
• Are there any potential setbacks by making this argument to my audience?

Once these are established, I want to then try and find the weakest areas of your argument and answer the previous three questions again. This time around, by viewing these setback, you can then try to find and address the misunderstanding a person in your audience may have. This will allow you to expand your thought process in your writing, and understand any questions your audience may have while reading your piece.

Step 3

Now that you have pinpointed your weakest areas, have you realized that some of what you wrote doesn't apply to your audience at all? If this is the case, scrap the area (but save it just in case!) and try to write a new paragraph that helps target your audience. Then afterwards, ask yourself why this new paragraph fits your audience and arguemnt more so then it did before. 

week 8: Revision plan!

So, I've come to realize that I still have a way to go on my paper. I spent too much time trying to find my argument and audience, while ignoring style almost altogether. I finding the proper style is most certainly at the top of my list of things to do. Next, I also need to focus my argument more on my audience. This is proving to be difficult, but I'm still not done with the paper yet either. I have the words down on the page, but I still need to find the write link in my thesis that puts it all together. When I have this understood, I can then get my transitions down, I might save this towards the end of my paper. I tend to move paragraphs around after writing a paper to see if things fit better in a different order.

Week 8: Revision!

So, what I've come to gather from most of my peer feedback--I need to establish my argument. I think that my audience has finally been found, but I need to somehow engage my arguement with my audience to a greater extent. I originally wanted to write about the use of digital media technologies and how it effects the k-12 classroom. Then I realized that this is too vague, and I needed to tighten up the audience. So instead of making a k-12, parent, teacher, student audience, I focused on mainly teachers and students. This still proved to be difficult  and found that just aiming for the prospective of teachers and digital media technology was the best route. My issue then is having all of this left over information from my previous paper, and trying to zone it in on the teacher perspective. Therefore, I need to find the proper source to thread it all together.

1)Not quite yet, I have established my audience, but need to relate the arguemnt with my audience to a greater extent. Regardless, I believe that I still have a strong thesis.

2)So far yes, however, I'm still talking about how digital media effects students, when it should be more about teachers. I need to somehow make this a contrast in how teachers can learn from the technical abilites students have over teachers.

3) I would say so, I'm trying to write this paper as someone that isn't that tech savy, so it allows the reader to sympathize and understand that many are going through the same process.

4)Not quite yet, I need a few more paragraphs and something to connect my ideas together.

5)Not quite yet, I need some work in this area.

6) I would hope so, I'm trying to write clear an concise.

7)I engage my audience, and try to relate my arguement to my audience. Unfortunately, I still need to fit these two together.

8)Not quite yet.

9)I think they do.

10) I don't have one yet.

Week 8: Bartholomae

Bartholomae claims that in order to get our students writing, teachers shouldn't be giving  instructions to writing as a subject, he calls this the "Big Bang Theory". To teach an entire semester on writing, and have no writing in the process because the students are "poor writers" doesn't help anyone in the process. This would be like giving students a math lecture with no homework--there would be no time to absorb the lesson. Instead, Barthalomae gives examples of how writing can be incorporated in the classroom so it can be dissected, and be seen as a learning process. Through revision, and repetition on past writings, students can look at old writings with a new "richness", allowing them to look at old work through a new light, and learn from others within the composing process.
------------
Writing should be taught through the composing process
--------

I find when Bartholomae talks about the negative aspects of learning about writing, while not incorporating the terms into your own writing important. I myself, need to try and incorporate more of these devices into my writing. I found it suprising how past writings, such as journals, can be used and made into a new assignment. By having the students write about write about what they learned through reading their journal, rather than write about what they learned while writing the journal, forced the students to look at past writing through a new lens. I wouldn't mind using this technique in my own classroom eventually. This is a non judgmental form of writing practice that allows the student "to write about journal writing without writing about the writing in the journal"(37). This would be good for students that speak in languages that are not the Standard White English  It will allow them to write in their native thoughts, and then through the composing process, look back on what they wrote.

Week 8: Reflective Writing.

I've been thinking more about the process of writing than ever before. Even outside of this class, I've been trying to incorporate Invention, Arrangement, Style and Delivery into many of my other English papers. In order to describe these main processes to someone that has never encountered these four devices, I'd have a person describe their own writing to me. This can build them from the ground up, and allow me to incorporate these methods into what they already know and expand upon that knowledge.

From our past reading, I have realized that writing is a cultural identity  If you judge the writing, you are almost judging the person and their ideological beliefs. Knowing this allows me to be a tad more self aware, and understand that the way I write comes from the background of where I came from. By knowing this, I'd like to try new things in my writing and try to take new steps in understanding the composing process.

Week Seven: Response to Feedback....

I felt the feedback was very beneficial, I'm still having difficulty pinpointing my argument  but at the same time the topic is there. So I need to have the two meet, and make my argumentative voice stronger in my paper.

Week 7: Where my Writing is at this Stage....

I suppose my writing at this stage would be around the Drafting stage. I'm still making my thesis concrete, and was glad that I got feedback on how to do it. I was focusing on the use of digital media technology with students and teachers, but with the help of feedback, I narrowed it down to teachers. After I receive my peer-reviewed draft, I think I'll be able to get further into my draft. I'm about a few weeks away from revising.

Week 7: Responding to others' writing

While responding, I tried to find areas of the person's argument that I really enjoyed. I though Harris idea of focusing in on the areas that are good, and why they are good would be benifical for my peer to understand from an audience's perspective. I also use the criteria that the writer asked me to use, therefore offering feedback in areas that they were curious about.

Week Seven: Blog 2

I feel that I should respond to my peers writing in a way that constructivley questions and critques their writing. By telling them about parts of their paper that I like, and why I like it, will help them try and emulate this style throughout their paper. I want to use Richard Larson's 4 step criteria


1. Does the writer perform felicitously the act he promised?
2. Are the conclusions, the judgments, consistent with and supported by
the data and arguments that precede them?
3. Is it possible for the reader to see, from beginning to end, in what
direction the piece is moving, what steps are taken to reach the writer's
goal, and why?
4. Who is talking to us? Are we in the presence of a faceless speaker or a
distinctive identity? Is that identity consistent within the paper, and is it
suitable to the writer's goal in coming before us? 6

This is to help test the effectiveness of a students piece of writing as a whole "Larson". I should also make my evaluation aimed towards the reader so the student can "practice and refine their critical skills"

Week 7: Faigley and Harris

Faigley has an old school way of thinking in terms of responding to people's writings. He talks of the 1931 Commission of English and their report, Examining the Examination of English. This nine member board talked about what makes a well written English entrance exam.
They passed a certain student because "...pupils should have the opportunity to 'execise and reveal their powers"(401). And according to the Commision, this can be done through metaphor. Along with this, Faigley quotes Roger Garrison by saying that, "Good writing is inevitably honest writing. Every writer, beginner or not, needs what Hemingway called a built-in crap detector'. All of us, like it or not, are daily immersed in tides of phony, posturing, pretentious, tired, imprecise, slovenly language which both suffocate and corrupt the mind"(223). There seems to be some insight here, but a little hypercritical as well. In order to try knew things, people probably have to write in different styles to find their own honest style. By trying to sound academic, I suppose it comes across as phony, but to achieve this, people need to at least emulate what their surroundings.

Harris claims that in order to get students to write well, is to get them off the idea that teachers should judge a final product. Rather teachers should "...turn the student loose to become self-regulating editor who can effectively spot the need to reorganize, revise and correct"(83). He also claims that peer evaluation is important within the prewriting stage to help find the writers stance on their issue. Through various stages of the writing process, there should be a discussion and anaylsis of what works in a pupils paper, why it works, and what could be changed.

Week 6: Mastudu's Process Movement

As far as I can see, it seems that the Process movement isn't exactly the right answer towards writing, Mastudu even thinks so, but it's a step in the proper direction. Allowing to teach so  that "writing constitutes a process of some sort and that this process is generalizable, at least to the extent that we know when to intervene in someone’s writing process or to the extent that we know the process that experienced or ‘expert’ writers employ as they write" tells me that the students should be allowed to write, but the teachers should only intervene when needed.

As far as history goes, I didn't realize that the Process movement wasn't the first movement to reform composition instruction. According to the article, composition instruction has received much reform over the past 100 years, and "and many of the tenets of process pedagogy
existed long before the rise of the process movement in the latter half of the
20th century"(69). This tells me that even now, the pedagogy for composition instruction will probably change in the next 100 years.

Week 5: Good Feedback.

Some of the best feedback that I've received  is from some of my former English teachers. When teachers have asked me to look closer at quotes, and close read them, I found it beneficial. This is because, I was then able to digest the sentence and look at it from a new light.

This is how I learned how to critically close read.

Other times, when teachers have told me to talk more about my quotes. 

On a side note, I made a really good sandwich the other day. 

What Resonates...

After reading both articles, I feel that I have a rounded understanding of the two authors ideas.
I'm guilty of only seeing if my papers are grammatically correct after I have written the entire thing. Micciche claims that this categorizes what is write and wrong, and can leave your paper flat. This idea is new to me, and makes sense. During the writing process, I'm going to need to put more thought and emphasis and the rhetorical grammar I use, so in the end, I have more of a voice. By using grammar during the composing process, I can explore possibilities, and give thought to every sentence and paragraph I construct.

I need to start examining things the articles I read for sentence structure in terms of rhetorical grammar. Once I caught onto this, I tried to pay close attention to how the two authors wrote. Automatic mastery of this is impossible, but through practice, it should help.

Micciche's Rhetorical Grammar

Micciche is calling for students to begin using grammar before the revision stage. I myself have this problem, so this article spoke to me. Rather than making it a "grammatically correct" paper, we should make it so it's "rhetorically grammatically correct". This makes it so thoughts and ideas flow, and the audience can easily hear the tone of the piece. In order to get a sense of this rhetorical grammar, Micciche suggests that students write in a "commonplace" journal.
Micciche states goals for the common place are,

• first, to emphasize the always en- tangled relationship between what and how we say something; 
• second, to designate a place where students document and comment on their evolving relationship to writing and gram- matical concepts. Both goals circulate around the idea that learning how to recognize and reflect on language as made and made to work on people’s lives is central to being able to use language strategically. (Micciche 9)

With this journal, students can deconstruct what makes a good passage good, and get behind the rhetorical essence of its grammar.
Grammar is a varying cultural practice, and by understanding this, we can further understand what makes language great.

Summarizing Ehrenworth and Vinton

Within the Ehrenworth and Vinton article, I found that they really wanted the writer to develop a voice. By doing this, they can incorporate grammar mechanics, and this can only be done through practice. They are afraid that the current way that grammar is taught only offers resentment towards students, thus inhibiting their inner voice. Students tend to write in a language that is similar to their peer groups, so by tapping into personal experience, they offer empathy towards their audience. This makes for an identifiable reading for the audience.  Also, by properly using punctuation  and knowing when to end a sentence, you are able to put power into your words.
By not waiting for the revision process, writers are able to think about their sentence during the free writing process. This will give the writer practice and understanding toward the process.

Week 5: Grammar and Mechanics

While writing papers for class, I tend to use grammar that will help the reader understand my message. I suppose this is why grammar and mechanics are under "delivery". In order to properly deliver your ideas to your audience, you need to construct your thoughts so they are a cohesive unit. I'm not entirely sure what "mechanics" are, but it probably has something to do with grammar as well. Maybe it's sentence structure, or stylistic ways to develop sentences. I'm sure I'll find out with the two readings I'm about to do.

When I write for other people, I tend to ignore my grammar. Only when the proofreading process begins, do I actually spend time with grammar. I'm not sure why this is, but possibly it's because it's easier to get your thoughts down, and then polish them up later. Then you can play with the way you phrase certain things so it becomes a much more enjoyable experience while reading.

What will happen in my paper.... And Why it Should Matter to Audience

So far, I feel that my argument is coming into shape. By finding sources, I've found many positive things about using technology in the classroom. Is there a benefit to using digital media in the classroom? Of course there is, but how will I be able to make an argument that makes the audience care? I plan on highlighting the benefits and drawbacks to the experience. For example, some schools are allowed to use cellphones in class-this seems negative..................

----------------------
My audience should understand, because I'm sure that many people over 20 without kids don't have a clue how much technology is being used in the k12 school system. I graduated about 6 years ago, and things are certainly different now, than then. I remember getting detentions for having a cellphone in school when pulled out at the wrong times, now in certain schools, this isn't the case. The audience needs to understand that technology isn't going away, but is become more woven into our society that it will continue to be utilize and grow.

Everyone in this classroom is using a computer, we had a class on d2l last week, this is all something that we can talk about and learn from. How will be embrace digital media in the coming years, and how will our children come to terms with it?

2/14 Class Response 1

Starting with invention, and moving to arrangement and style has made me question my original thoughts on invention. Through the coming weeks I've started thinking more positively towards digital media than I  have originally intended, but makes me question where I'll go next. Between Invention and Arrangement, I seem to keep going back and fort between the two, which may be the point. This is still the prewriting, and brainstorming process, so I feel some confusion is accurate because it's helping me think closely on what I'm actually going to write about. In terms of style, I feel that I need to get closer to Invention and Arrangement before I can zone in on what I will do.

How Johnson Defines Style Part 2..

So when I read the Johnson article, I was in the middle of a bunch of homework. So I reread it with fresh eyes, and had an easier time coming to terms with his ideas.

Johnson looks at style as an ongoing process of discovery with his students. He wants his students to not look at writing as a chore, but as playing. By playing, he doesn't mean  playing a video game  but playing an instrument, athletic sport, or anything where the person is engaged, he want's his students to channel this source of inspiration. I don't think Johnson tries to exactly define style, but offers alternatives on different styles to use in writing.  He feels a writer needs a certain "magic" while writing there piece. If the magic isn't there, it's aware that the writer isn't completely sure on their topic, and understand it fully....

Speaking of magic, I'm writing with haste because I have to go to our class right now. Off I go...

Continuing My Research.

I've found good sources to contiune my search on using digital media within the classroom.
The UWM library online cateloug is a great tool, and thats how I found the majority of my sources.
One of my sources talks about how the using the internet can help using direct or differentiated styles of teaching while in the classroom. They are trying to decide if by using this technology the teachers should adapt their teaching styles to their students differences.

To Differentiate Or Not To Differentiate?:Using Internet-Based Technology in the Classroom

• b:y Aries Cobb

 My next source talks about linking literacy to technology in the K-8 classrooms. By using technology, it's possible to help at risk students and have poor reading habits.
Here, I'm able to find some solid positive examples of how technology can work in the classroom.

Using Technology in the Classroom To Foster Student Learning

My last new source talks about how using print never goes out of style. This focuses not really on the negatives of technology, but more on the positives of the old standard.

For Many Students, Print is Still King

• By: Jennifer Howard

Own Your Style

I need to pay attention to my sentence structure, and make sure that they flow and are coherent. Another thing I need to consider is integrating my vocalized voice into my work, this will help things sound less awkward when written out. This will allow me to vary my sentence and paragraph lengths, and give a helpful flow to my paper. I need to speak with words that are natural in my vocabulary, otherwise they will come out oddly and sound phony. There is much more to consider, and will develop with the coming weeks.

Johnson.

This was article was clearly theory, and I hope I at least gained something from it, so here we go.

I believe that Johnson doesn't want writers to not just write in their own voice, but to try and own it. By writing in a way that's similar to the way they talk, it allows the reader to comprehend the authors message. He wants the students to use prose, and own it at the same time. I like his idea of using stylistic devices, and trying to use time within your paper. By speeding things up, or slowing things down, this can determine pace and can make things dramatic.

Honestly, I believe that I'll have to hear people talk about this article in class to fully grasp it. I'm going to try and finish this question after class on Thursday, because many of his ideas are still unclear to me.

Styles in Handbook

DKHB Style

I found this to be one of the more benefiting sources, it wasn't as old school and seemed to get to the point. By addressing your audience through either Academic, Workplace, or Popular writing, I found that this helps the writer get points across. You must find a tone in your writing and write for the audience that will read your words. Somewhere in the reading it said something along the lines of, "You need to ask how your choices will help your readers understand your purpose", this quote was a good point. How will I make the correct choices in helping my reader understand my argument?

Hill and Brooks

I enjoyed the Hill reading more than Brooks', but thought they both had something informative to offer. Hill did a good job of offering terms and styles, and then defining them. By using the different styles he offers--Dry,Plain,Elegant, Florid, and Bombastic-- we'll have an ability to see different ways to communicate our purpose to our writers. Hill claims that style is the way in which thought is expressed, and I happen to agree with him. 

Brooks gives us scenarios and techniques to learn through trial and error. I didn't have a chance to practice any of these, but appreciated the summary of his thoughts at the end of his reading. Brooks want the writer to own their sentences, and he gives us many different way of doing this. While reading through his peace, it felt a little daunting, but this is more of a textbook example. 

My Definition of Style

As far as my writing style goes, I think I'm more of a thought process writer.  Through all the papers that I've had to write in college, many of them were reflections on different theoretical academic sources. I had to then make a connection between them, and show the critical thinking process through my writing. This is the first that I've asked myself about a style in my writing, so other than that, I'm really drawing a blank. But I try to find sources to support certain claims I make, and this helps show my position in a paper. 

When I think "Style", I think a way to get points across. How is your message going to be relayed to you readers? This is done through style. 

Week 4: Using My Research Question for Invention.

Question
Does digital media benefit the function of k-12 classrooms?

This question is open ended, which seems good. It doesn't  really offer a direct "Yes or No"response,
so this will allow me to form an argument, and hopefully persuade my audience toward my findings. I plan on researching while writing and try to come to a conclusion towards the end of my paper.

By doing this, it allows the reader to go through the journey of discovering an answer to my question. I'm hoping this is the write way to do this, as long as I'm trying to support my argument throughout the process, I should be alright.

I would hope this would encourage a person to look at the positives and negatives of using technology in the classroom.  Who would the question then be the most beneficial for? It could be directed towards either teachers or students. Students of course would love being able to use all of this great technology in the classroom--I know I would if I were still in k12. But it's the teachers that would have to look at this more closely and see if this model will match a working pedagogy in a classroom.

Different Forms

Comparison and Contrast:

• In a changing world, what are the possible outcomes of the evolving technology being used in the k-12 school system?
• This will allowing me to look at both sides of the issue and help me draw a conclusion as to where this argument lyes. 

General to Specific:

• How does the use of digital media effect the teaching in a k12 classroom?
• This sounds like it could be a cause and effect question, but this will allow me to take a general question, and then focus on how it works in certain classrooms and situations. What works for one classroom, may not for another. 

Reflection

I found the first exercise to be extremely helpful. I've realized it's a bit harder to pick a great question than we originally thought. These key questions made me wonder if my own argumentative questions deserved a closer look. I need to make it so it's not an easy "yes" or "no" style question, and gives me some length to talk about. It also can't be summed up in a few paragraphs, and has to allow me to develop a certain form.

Why'd You Have to Go and Make Things So Complicated?

Question 1
Why do some people think video games are harmful?

Or.....

Are video games as harmful as they really seem?

Question 2
 Is the death penalty effective and moral?

or...

What defines the morality of effectively dealing with murderers?
 

A Complex and Not so Complex Response.

More Complicated
How does teen parenthood affect the future lives of young women and men?

This question feels complicated, people with or without children can already put themselves in this situation. Of course, this isn't a "yes or no" question, but could probably be talked about in many pages. It's along the lines of ethos, due to there being an ethical attachment to this question. So a writer will be able to identify and attach to a side to the issue.

 By stating that there is an affect on teens due to teen parenthood, you already have a vision in your mind of possible negative connotations. Granted, this question doesn't say anything negative about teen parenthood, but it suggests that there is still an affect from it.
What causes these teens to go through such an early parenthood? Whether it's consensual, forced, or just plain stupidity, there is always a reason for why these children are having children.

Hopefully, the student will explore possible positive affects from the teen pregnancy issue. No one is the same, and for the sake of not being bias, I feel the paper would benefit from both point of views. 

This question also will be answered differently between adults and teenagers. Most teens have no idea how this could affect another teen's future life, so will probably approach this as a research question. An adult will come at this question in a parental, and "experienced" way, and will probably answer much differently than a younger student would.

Less Complicated
Is it right for scientists to create new life forms?

Right off the bat, people can answer this in a yes or no fashion. This questions raises some ideological morals, and would cause the student to argue their own world views rather than facts. Of course, this may not be true with every student. But it's general enough for the students to easily answer the question. Hopefully, the student would take the time to define what constitutes a life form, and when or if there is a time when creating a life form is just. At that rate, hopefully the student is able to see that saying something is "right" is on a personal level, for there are many truths, not just one. This is an opinion question, and the student will have to understand this and try to bridge the gap between the two sides of the argument.

Lindemann and Podis: Finding Form.

Both Lindemann and Podis have opinions on how a student should arrange a paper. I found useful ideas from both authors, but I found the Lindemann article a tadd bit more cohesive than the Podis article. This may be because she writes very conversationally, but the Podis article seems like much more scholarly. I know I wasn’t supposed to write on the way they wrote, but I had to get it off my chest. 

Moving on, I still found beneficial information from the Podis article. Podis approached this with a much more of a “There’s no right or wrong way to organizing an essay”, but then goes on to explaining helpful strategies at trying to achieve the “right way” of organizing a paper.  Leondard Podis himself says, “My suggestion in this essay…is that as teachers of arrangement we must directly explore for our students the relationship between essay organization and logic rather than working on the teaching of basic logic per se”(Podis 201). Thus, Podis wants to spark critical thinking in the student in terms of making a cohesive and strategized paper. Using progression, “…is to lend a sense of controlled, orderly motion to an essay”(200). By using this logical rationale, the writer is able to think out a strategic way of putting their thoughts on paper so they’re sequentially plotted out. This approach is different than the Lindemann way of going at essay development.

Lindemann wants the students to discover the form of their paper through writing, and this is possible threw prewriting.  She claims that “writers discover form at every stage of composing”(Lindemann 132), this is very true. She wants us to get rid of the 5 paragraph model, because there are times when this just doesn’t suit the situation, and 5 can simply not be enough. Lindemann tells the writer to use form so the reader can follow along. Erika also suggests that students read other argumentative essays in preparation for their own paper. This allows the student to be influenced and understand the way their paper should be approached in terms of creating a proper form. 

Like Lindemann suggests, we are supposed to get inspired from other people ideas and thoughts. This is happening for me already, and I plan on using things such as promise sentences,  blocking, progression,  and “consciously crafted scheme of arrangement”(Podis 197). By constantly revisiting my stasis for my paper, I’m already trying to craft an arrangement in my head of how this will all fit together. I finally understand the function of these blogs; they’re a form a prewriting.  And I believe that’s the point of much of this—to get us think about our papers. A lot of prewriting can happen in your head, not on paper. So with a mixture of both, I’ll be better off within the coming weeks.

Finding Sources

How it Went
I tried to find sources that asked if using Digital Media in the Classroom was beneficial.
I found many sources, which is comforting, so I know I'll find much to talk about. There are articles talking about the use of smartboards, cellphones and other digital means within the classrooms and possible challenges involved with the process.  I typed my question of invention into Google, and got a ton of hits, so it definitely helped out.

My Four Sources

The Challenge of Digital Media in the Classroom:

• Popular Source: http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/09/the-challenge-of-digital-media-in-the-classroom265.html

Learing, Teaching, and Scholarship in a Digital Age:

• Popular Source: http://edr.sagepub.com/content/38/4/246.full.pdf+html

Blogs in Language Learning: Maximizing Students’ Collaborative Writing:

• Have the pdf downloaded--Scholarly Source. 

Learning with Laptops: Implementation and Outcomes in an Urban, Under-Privileged School:

• Have the PDF downloaded-Scholarly Source.

What I Decided On.

Digital Media
Even though it still feels painful to make a final decision, I must. I feel that I should go the Digital Media route. Technology is evolving everyday, and the more it grows, the more it will be integrated into the school system.

I have a friend that is a teacher in the West Allis school district, and their students are allowed to use laptops, smartphones, and tablets throughout the class day. When I has in high school, this was never possible, but hat was almost 7 years ago. In order to be a good teacher, I need to adapt to the ever changing world, and by writing my argumentative paper about this topic, it will hopefully help me wrap my head around it. I am nowhere near anti-technology, I'm just use to using a paper, pencil and a book. I just had to drop a math class because they wanted us doing math on a computer four days a week. I think I must be getting old.

Why does Rhetoric Inluence Others?

Deciding to go the Thesis and Theoretical Route.
For My other question, "Why Does Rhetoric Influence Others?", I feel that I must approach my question as a "Thesis". This is because the question isn't as specific as a hypothesis, and this will allow me to use many examples of great speakers that used the art of speech to influence people. This would then be more of a "Theoretical" question, rather than a "Practical". Theoretical questions are questions of knowledge, rather than a question of action. Being able to question the actions and reasoning behind rhetoric is much more Theoretical than a practical approach.

Possible Stasis Approach
If I use this question, I believe a suiting stasis would be the "Quality" route . This will allow me to as questions like:

• Is Rhetoric good or bad?
• By asking this, I'm able to question the pros and cons, and then come to a consensuses by the end of my paper. 

• Is Rhetoric add up with Fact?

• There are times when we see speakers dodge questions, and try to be flowery with their words. But does it come out to be a positive thing, or negative?

Was this Useful?
Now that I've done some thought on my two topics, I feel even more torn between them.
I wasn't too hot on this topic from the start, but now that I've had some time to think about it, it's definitely grown on me. I suppose I'm still confused if either of these topics are even worthy of a 5-7 page paper, so I should probably make a decision somewhat soon. 

Using digital media in the Classroom.

I believe one of my argumentative questions, "Are there Benefits to Using Digital Media in the Classroom", would be viewed as a "Thesis". This is because this question has a much broader approach, and will allow me to then take examples of where this would possible work and not work.

Step 1
Using the Thesis method, I could use the following questions:

1. Does digital media benefit the function of a K-12 Classroom? (Conjecture)
2. What is Digital Media in relation to a classroom? (Definition)
3. Why would Digital Media be considered a bad thing within a classroom? (Quality)
4. If Digital Media is used in the Classroom, should it then be regulated? (Procedure)

Step 2

For the Next Step, I would approach my question Generally, and stated Practically:

• What Happens when K-12 students use Digital Media in the Classroom?

Step 3

Now reaching step three, I feel that using a combination of  the first three stasis'--conjecture, definition, and quality--would be beneficial. I'm curious if this will be possible, I'm still trying to make my final idea concrete. 

What I learned about my issue and about invention tonight?

So, I think I'm leaning more towards the composing process through digital media.
I think this topic is much broader, so I'll be able the question in a "Thesis" form.
THis is because the topic is less definite, and allows me some room to move around with it.
I'll possible be able to zero in on it within the coming weeks and decide if the topic needs either
a "theoretical" or "practical" approach.  As of now, I'm leaning more towards the theoretical approach.
This is because the question feels more like a question of knowledge, rather than a question of action....
Time to stop writing.

Lindemann and Crowley: Rhetorical Writing

Between the Lindemanm and Crowley articles, I’ve found a vast assortment of ideas toward the topic of rhetoric and writing. Both presented great ideas, and I’m sure to use them in my future argumentative paper. Much of this feels knew to me, but some feels familiar at the same time. I see some reoccurring themes between this class, and communications 103. I’m eager to have the ability to rhetorically persuade in my writing, rather than through my speech. Moving forward, I’ll first talk about Lindemann’s article and how she approached her topics.

 I noticed that Lindemann talked about:  prewriting techniques, brainstorming, free writing, journals, heuristics (Who? What? When? Where? How?), and models.  The author finds importance in brainstorming, whether it may be in the act of freewriting, asking questions, or imitating “noteworthy essays, aphorism, fables, speeches, and excerpts from works by great writers”(Lindemann 126).  Through freewriting, Lindemann wants the student to put the thought process on a sheet of paper in a nonjudgmental way. This will allow a student to practice writing and articulate thoughts that might be swimming around their brain. Clearly, Lindemann wants the student to fire up their brain before stating the final product.  Crowley comes at this with a different approach.

Sharon Crowley looks toward the past for writing in the future. She write that invention is, “…the division of rhetoric that investigates the possible means by which proofs can be discovered: it supplies speakers and writers with sets of instructions that help them find and compose proofs appropriate for any rhetorical situation”(Crowley 30). By this, Crowley wants the writer to think of ways to reach the audience, and much of this is done through asking the audience the right questions; also known as the “Stasis Theory”. With this theory Crowley tells us that it is crucial to implement a point of stasis in any rhetorical argument. By taking a stand, it allows the audience’s disagreements be known and hopefully rhetorically changed throughout the process. 

As far as similarities go, I see that the heuristic approach and the stasis theory both want the writer to ask questions during the composing process.  I’ve used the heuristic approach before, but never knew the terminology. Regardless, I plan on using both approaches for our upcoming paper.