Reflection on Open Letter Draft

Nam Nguyen "GC8 WRX" January 17, 2008 via Flickr
reuse with attribution

I commented on both Hallye and Evan's drafts which are linked to here but as far as I can tell, they both resolved all of my comments so they're no longer visible.

Now I will continue my reflection on my feedback using the Student's Guide as a guideline.

Did you demonstrate an ability to think about your writing and yourself as a writer?
I think I did demonstrate this though of course based on comments, I made improvements to this.

Did you provide analysis of your experiences, writing assignments, or concepts you have learned?
I think I did do this. I did not analyse specific writing assignments however I think I covered concepts and experiences fairly well. I think specific writing assignments are not terribly illustrative in comparison to overall trends and large scale learning.

Did you provide concrete examples from your own writing?
No I didn't and I'm about to go correct that right now.

Did you explain why you made certain choices and whether those choices were effective?
I'm unsure of what this question means but I'm going to assume I didn't do it. Speed revising here I come.

Draft of Open Letter

Robert Couse-Baker "Chevelle in the Fog" November 15, 2014 via Flickr
reuse with attribution

I'm not really sure what I have to say about my draft other than be as critical as you like! I need good criticism.

Here is a link to my draft.

Reflecting More on My Writing Experiences

Dave Adams "William l'Anson - 1962 Jaguar E-Type at the 2015 Silverstone Classic (Photo 1)" July 25, 2015 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

In this blog post, I will consider my writing process in light of a number of questions provided by Professor Bottai.

1. What were the biggest challenges you faced this semester, overall?
I know this question is probably supposed to be about challenges I faced in this  course but I can't think of any particular challenge I faced. Yes, the course overall was challenging but I think I got a pretty good handle on the workload fairly quickly. My biggest challenge this semester was adapting to becoming self-reliant enough in my education that I can solve my own problems when they come up as your professors are not as immediately available to help you as teachers are in high school.

2. What did you learn this semester about your own time management, writing and editorial skills?
I think I had to overall takeaways in this regard from this semester. First off, I work very well under pressure and unless I behave unreasonably stupidly, will usually come up with the required work by the deadline. The second takeaway is that when I am writing, I will do a lot better if I simply take the time to consider the rhetorical situation of the piece that I am trying to write.

3. What do you know about the concept of 'genre'? Explain how understanding this concept is central to being a more effective writer.
A genre is the constraints of a piece of writing. Genre have conventions which help readers better understand what you are writing. As a writer, your primary goal is to communicate effectively to your readers so you have to be aware of the conventions and styles of the genre you intend to write in in order to more easily communicate with your writers.

4. What skills from this course might you use and/or develop further in the next few years of college coursework?
I don't think this course did a great deal to educate me more in the mechanics of writing. However, I think that's okay. As I see it, writing is not something you get good at by watching; you have to practice. I believe the major part of what I gained from this course was good writing practice in interesting topics that we each (hopefully!) care about.

5. What was your most effective moment from this semester in 109H? 
I think undoubtedly my most successful moment this semester in writing was writing my own public opinion piece. This is because I actually published it on a car blog and the article generated a lively discussion and a number of comments. The published piece on OppositeLock (part of Kinja) can be found here.

6. What was your least effective moment from this semester in 109H?
I think my least effective moment was writing my literary analysis. I know this is not really a satisfactory explanation of why I don't like it and I got an 88% so my score was not even that bad. Somehow I am just not satisfied with that piece of writing.

Revisiting my Writing Process

Kim Benson "Gnat 1919/25" August 2, 2014 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

I thins blog post I intend to reflect on how well I predicted my writing process as well as my time management skills at the beginning of this course.

Let's start with time management. I think college was really eye opening for me and that in a lot of ways, what I predicted at the beginning of the year was true. I have been more organized and more self-motivated than I have ever been in my life. I did not stick precisely to the schedule that I created for myself at the beginning of the year but nevertheless, I have developed a strong routine that takes care of all of my needs both academic, personal, and extracurricular very well.

My writing process, on the other hand, is very different. At the beginning of the year, I considered myself to be a heavy reviser with the desire to mix in more planning into my writing style. Essentially, I found myself to be someone who can take a load of b.s. and turn it into something presentable by revising it enough. I found very quickly this year that that is in fact not true. I don't have enough time to do that. I am much more of a sequential composer. Unless it is very explicitly required, I am fairly resistant to making a lot of drafts of my work. I think I am fairly good at writing so I simply write my initial draft more slowly and then revise it as I go.

Frankly, moving forward I see myself doing much of the same. In regard to my time management skills, I think this is a good thing. In regard to my writing process, however, I think my writing process is not necessarily bad if it works for me. To make it truly work, I should probably work to better incorporate revisions and feedback. Then I should be set.

Reflection on Project 3

Jeffrey Sitthi "Acura NSX" October 7, 2010 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution no-derivs

In this blog post, I will reflect on my project 3 based on the questions from page 520 of Writing for Public Lives.

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?
• I changed the goal of my argument to be more truly causal and to make my argument overall much stronger.
2. Point to global: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization?
• Initially, I ineffectively mixed several different types. I think I subconsciously thought this would work well but it didn't. By realizing this and combining it with some hard facts and figures that adjusted my previous opinions a bit, I was able to come up with a more convincing and well rounded argument. 
3. What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of Audience? A shift in purpose?
• As I already mentioned, a shift in purpose drove the majority of these changes as well as substantive changes in how I approached my argument.
4. How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?
• Overall, I think these changes have improved my credibility as an author as I was able to come up with a more nuanced and developed view and created better devices to convince my readers of my view.
5. How will these changes better address the audience or venue?
• The changes have not really effected the audience or the venue besides working to be more convincing as I already mentioned. Otherwise, these aspects are pretty much unchanged.
6. Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentence structure and style?
• I revised several sentences to flow better throughout the piece. It is hard to point to particular things in this regard as I did this in a sort of gradual incremental way by reading and re-reading the entire piece a number of times and making little changes each time.
7. How will these changes better address the audience in understanding your purpose?
• I think these changes did not so much make my purpose easier to understand but rather easier to accept and agree with.
8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?
• I did not have to reconsider any conventions but in my final draft I did add appropriate (and cited!) images as well as hyperlinks. 
9. Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?
• I think the process of reflection lets you examine what you actually did when you write something so you can identify strengths and weaknesses and hopefully build on them. 

Publishing Public Argument

Ford Europe "Le Mans Classic 2006" June 14, 2006 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

This is a link to my published public argument on Kinja.


Here is a link to my project 3 on Google Docs if that is better.

What follows is my evaluation of my project three according to the guidelines that were given.

1. Mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience currently stands on the issue (before reading/watching/hearing your argument) below:

←----------------------------------------------------|-X------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree        

                                                                                                                  disagree

2. Now mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience should be (after they've read/watched/heard your argument) below:

←------------------------X---------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree    

                                                                                                                      disagree

3. Check one (and only one) of the argument types below for your public argument:

         _______ My public argument etablishes an original pro position on an issue of debate.

         _______ My public argument establishes an original con position on an issue of debate.

         ___X___ My public argument clarifies the causes for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument prooposes a solution for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument positively evaluate a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm supporting).

         _______ My public argument openly refutes a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm refuting).

4. Briefly explain how your public argument doesn’t simply restate information from other sources, but provides original context and insight into the situation:

This is actually quite simple for me because I had a lot of prior knowledge about this topic so I had to do little research expect for looking up a couple of hard numbers as evidence and I also already had a strong opinion so I simply wrote an argument in favor of my opinion without consulting outside sources much (thereby ensuring what I write will be pretty original).

5. Identify the specific rhetorical appeals you believe you've employed in your public argument below:

Ethical or credibility-establishing appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that establish a credible point-of-view

                    __X__ Referring to credible sources (established journalism, credentialed experts, etc.)

                    __X__ Employing carefully chosen key words or phrases that demonstrate you are credible (proper terminology, strong but clear vocabulary, etc.)

                    __X__ Adopting a tone that is inviting and trustworthy rather than distancing or alienating

                    __X__ Arranging visual elements properly (not employing watermarked images, cropping images carefully, avoiding sloppy presentation)

                    _____ Establishing your own public image in an inviting way (using an appropriate images of yourself, if you appear on camera dressing in a warm or friendly or professional manner, appearing against a background that’s welcoming or credibility-establishing)

                    _____ Sharing any personal expertise you may possess about the subject (your identity as a student in your discipline affords you some authority here)

                    __X__ Openly acknowledging counterarguments and refuting them intelligently

                    __X__ Appealing openly to the values and beliefs shared by the audience (remember that the website/platform/YouTube channel your argument is designed for helps determine the kind of audience who will encounter your piece)

                    _____ Other: 

Emotional appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Telling emotionally compelling narratives drawn from history and/or the current culture

                    __X__ Employing the repetition of key words or phrases that create an appropriate emotional impact

                    __X__ Employing an appropriate level of formality for the subject matter (through appearance, formatting, style of language, etc.)

                    _____ Appropriate use of humor for subject matter, platform/website, audience

                    __X__ Use of “shocking” statistics in order to underline a specific point

                    __X__ Use of imagery to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Employing an attractive color palette that sets an appropriate emotional tone (no clashing or ‘ugly’ colors, no overuse of too many variant colors, etc.)

                    _____ Use of music to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Use of sound effects to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    __X__ Employing an engaging and appropriate tone of voice for the debate

                    _____ Other: 

Logical or rational appeals

                    _____ Using historical records from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    __X__ Using statistics from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    _____ Using interviews from stakeholders that help affirm your stance or position

                    __X__ Using expert opinions that help affirm your stance or position

                    __X__ Effective organization of elements, images, text, etc.

                    __X__ Clear transitions between different sections of the argument (by using title cards, interstitial music, voiceover, etc.)

                    __X__ Crafted sequencing of images/text/content in order to make linear arguments

                    __X__ Intentional emphasis on specific images/text/content in order to strengthen argument

                    _____ Careful design of size/color relationships between objects to effectively direct the viewer’s attention/gaze (for visual arguments)

                    _____ Other: 

6. Below, provide us with working hyperlinks to THREE good examples of the genre you've chosen to write in. These examples can come from Blog Post 11.3 or they can be new examples. But they should all come from the same specific website/platformand should demonstrate the conventions for your piece:

Example 1
Example 2
Example 3

Reflection on Project 3 Draft

Dave Adams "Johannes Van Nierop & Frank Wrathall - 1989 Audi 80 Quattro at the 2015 Silverstone Classic" July 25, 2015 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution

In this blog post I will answer the provided questions about my Project 3 draft.

To begin with, I reviewed Evan and Hallye's drafts.
Now on to the questions about my draft:

1. Who reviewed your Project 3 rough draft?

As of now (Saturday night), no one has reviewed my draft. I will do my best to remember to check again on Sunday as the deadline was extended.

2. What did you think and/or feel about the feedback you received? Be explicit and clear. Tell me what helped or what confused you about the feedback you got.

See above. I hope to be able to get some good editing help and hopefully come to Professor Bottai's office hours.

3. What aspects of Project 3 need to most work going forward [Audience, Purpose, Argumentation, or Genre]? How do you plan on addressing these areas? 

I think I just need to polish up my project overall and publish it as best I can (perhaps on Kinja!).

4. How are you feeling overall about the direction of your project after peer review and/or instructor conferences this week?

Don't have any peer review as of now but I hope to be able to still have a brief discussion about my article with Professor Bottai.

Draft of Public Argument

brent flanders "the Legacy in the blizzard" December 24, 2009 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution no-derivs

Here is a link to my Project 3 draft.

Feel free to tear it apart. I have no reservations. The one thing I would be aware of is that there may be some more technical terms but that my intended audience (car enthusiasts) will probably have a decent idea what they are and what they mean.

Thanks!

Considering Visual Elements

Ken Haworth Photography "MK1 Escort Mexico" September 6, 2014 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution

In this blog post, I will be examining a number of questions from Writing for Public Lives about visual elements. The car above is a Ford Escort Mexico. TL;DR it's gorgeous.

What color choice best fits the rhetorical tone?
A simple black and white color scheme would be most appropriate for this project considering my genre. White text on a background image can be very cool but it is more difficult to create and not necessarily be necessary for my genre.

If your project contains large block of text, could they be broken up more effectively using test boxes, lines, headings, or images?
In writing, it is always beneficial to break-up long block of text with something more interesting. With that in mind, I will attempt to include pull quotes, perhaps lines, and appropriate images.

Do too many visual images make your text busy or disorganized?
Too many images would be inappropriate for my genre. I have a text based argument that I want to communicate so too many pictures would be distracting and unnecessary.

Does the image inform or emphasize my argument?
Images should be directly be connected to my argument or the issue at hand. Something that would be appropriate might be a diagram of selective catalytic reduction would be appropriate.

Scan your argument or outline. Do your eyes move easily from section to section in the order that you intended?
My outline is a bit of a mess right now but my final product should be pretty straightforward in this regard. If I can break-up the text block effectively, the argument will move in a sequential manner from top to bottom so it shouldn't be bad.

Do the visual and textual elements come together persuasively as a whole, or are there elements that seem disconnected or out of place?
My visual elements should come together fairly persuasively and cohesively as I do not intend to use something that does not work well to start out with.

Project 3 Outline

JML78 "Porsche Racing" May 31, 2014 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution

In this blog post, I will develop my outline for Project 3.

Introducing Your Public Argument
Think about your situation
This type of introduction lets me draw on current events to try to get my audience thinking about my ideas in regard to the Volkswagen emissions scandal.

Developing Strong Supporting Paragraphs

1. List Down Major Supporting Arguments
• Emissions standards will accurately reflect how cars actually perform.
• Proper emissions controlled diesel engines are still the best answer for efficient vehicles
2. List Down Major Criticisms
• Doesn't sound good to lower emissions standards on cars
• We should put everything toward electric cars
• Diesel is the devil
• Fine VW the maximum
3. Select Your Key Support and Rebuttal Points
• Support
• Urea injection makes diesel exhaust clean
• Batteries are extremely energy intensive and environmentally destructive to make
• With lower standards but real world mileage and emissions tests, we will have accurate estimates for how cars actually perform. 
• Rebuttal
• Fine VW the maximum
• The scandal didn't lead to any deaths
• Diesel is the devil
• Urea injection makes diesel exhaust clean
• We should put everything toward electric cars
• Batteries are extremely energy intensive and environmentally destructive to make
4. Write out a Tentative Topic Sentence for Each Support and Rebuttal Point
• While Volkswagen's institutional cheating has encouraged an alarmist and reactionary stance in much of the media, diesel engines that use Selective Catalytic Reduction (urea injection) have remarkably low emissions while maintaining favorable power and fuel consumption.
• As Sergio Marchionne can famously be quoted, producing high density batteries is extremely energy intensive to the point that a gas powered Fiat 500 could go 10,000 miles with the energy it takes to make the battery for the electric Fiat 500.
• While it may sound insane, we should actually the lower emissions and mileage targets  that automakers currently have to shoot for. Why? Because all of these targets are based on inaccurate lab tests. If we lower the targets but set them at an achievable but ambitious level and mandate road testing for mileage and emissions, everyone will benefit. Automakers will be subject to more realistic regulations and customers will have a realistic idea of how their cars will perform in the real world.
5. Gather Evidence - I will cite other sources and find specific data as necessary but I have very in-depth knowledge about the VW scandal myself so it should not be too difficult to write this from my own knowledge.
• http://jalopnik.com/?trending_test_d&utm_expid=66866090-62.H_y_0o51QhmMY_tue7bevQ.4
• http://www.caranddriver.com/
• http://www.roadandtrack.com/
• personal knowledge
6. Develop a Map of Your Argument

Concluding Strategies

Negative/Positive Consequences

As I am writing about the issues that we currently address, I think I will most likely conclude by pointing out the problems with the current system and what we would gain by changing current emissions regulations to be more accurate.

-----

I read Chloe's Project 3 Outline and her Considering Visual Elements posts. Chloe and I agree on a lot of facets of about visual elements. It was reassuring to read something from someone who essentially agreed with all of my opinions. All in all, what I learned was that while the outlining work was a good start, there is still as lot of work that needs to go into this project to make it good.

Analyzing my Genre

Anik Shrestha "Volvo P1800" September 11, 2011 via Flickr
reuse with attribution

In this blog post, I'm providing answers to the bulleted questions found on page 342 of Writing for Public Lives. I've also included 5 examples of the genre:

Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Example 4
Example 5

Social Context

• An opinion column is generally found in a magazine or in it's online form.
• Depending on the subject of the magazine, the subject of a column found in it would vary.
• Generally magazine editors will write opinion columns as as space to express their own opinions and biases.
• The genre is a space where people who are generally professional journalists who are not usually supposed to express bias can show their personal opinions and biases.

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre

• Content is text-based with limited images sometimes included.
• I would think the appeals skew toward ethos as the piece is about personal opinions however depending on what the particular article is about, any and all rhetorical strategies can be used.
• The texts don't all include a specific organization but they are all generally an argument about something that has to do with cars. How that argument is structured and how it proceeds etc. depends on the author.
• Sentences in this genre do no have an overarching pattern.
• As a magazine article, the word choice tends to be formal with informal words only used as necessary. However, the tone is generally conversational and easy to read.

Analyse What those Patterns Reveal about Social Context of the Genre

• The genre itself does not intrinsically include or exclude anyone; magazines are generally written very accessibly.
• I don't see any particular role as being encouraged for the writer and readers. Obviously the readers are reading the writer's opinion about a subject.
• There are also no values intrinsically associated with this genre. With the audience of a car magazine: yes. But not in particular with readers of an editorial column.
• The genre generally treats the writer's opinion as the most important content as that is what it is centered on.

------

I commented on Hallye and Swati's Genre blog posts. Hallye chose to write more of a magazine article which I think will work really well for her topic (something art history related). Her analysis for this blog post was excellent in particular regarding what audience she would be reaching. Swati on the other hand chose more of a general interest science topic which she also analyzed very well. In both situations, however, I would be slightly concerned how they would get across their own opinions. I specifically chose my genre because I knew it would be very easy to make an argument because objectivity is not expected in an editorial column.

Considering Types

Land Rover Our Planet "Land Rover in action in the Altai Mountains" June 10, 2011 via Flickr
reuse with attribution, no-derivs

In this blog post, I am evaluating different types of arguments for possible use in my paper.

Position
I think a position argument seems on the surface to suite my paper very well. This argument type would allow me to defend my ideas based on their merits as well as explain why the current system has problems.

Causal
More interesting, I think, would be a causal argument. This type of argument argues for why a certain thing caused something else. I think it could be compelling to try to combine this sort of argument with a position argument to explain how unrealistic and arbitrary legislation caused VW to illegally cheat on it's emissions tests.

Evaluative
As part of an explanation of how the current emissions testing system fails, I could also easily include evaluative aspects in my argument. This would most likely come about by looking at current policies which would be causal and then constructing an evaluative argument about how they are failures.

Proposal
Regardless of what I do with the rest of my argument, there will certainly be proposal characteristics to it. A large part of my paper will revolve around what the current problem is and how we can fix it.

Refutation
I don't think a large part of my argument will be a refutation as there are not really directly clashing viewpoints about the VW scandal.

------

I commented on Swati's Rhetorical Action Plan as well as her Considering Types post. I also commented on Evan's Rhetorical Action Plan and his Considering Types post. I think this was a very valuable exercise over all. It was very interesting to see what types of argument my classmates deemed best in a variety of situation and it was somewhat relieving that I happened to agree with all of them.

My Rhetorical Action Plan

photosbyflick "Peace, Love, and a Yellow VW" September 30, 2011 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution

In this blog post, I will create my rhetorical action plan based on the provided questions.

1. Audience: Who are you going to try to persuade with your public argument? Arguably, I'm not trying to convince anyone. My argument is more of a reasoned rant about some of the ridiculousnesses currently governing automotive emissions laws in light of the recent VW diesel cheating scandal. My argument is, however, particularly aimed at car enthusiasts who probably agree with me.
• Knowledge: What does the audience know about the topic, test, or idea? How do they know the topic (where do they get their knowledge from)? Do they have certain predispositions or opinions about the topic that you will need to address? 
  The Volkswagen has been publicized in the general media a lot. Considering that I am mainly writing essentially an opinion piece addressed at car enthusiasts, such an audience would probably get most of their information from publications such as Car and River and websites such as Jalopnik. Obviously, what VW did was wrong and everyone has that predisposition. As far as anything else goes, they probably haven't developed particularly firm positions.
• Values: What do you know about how the value, ideals, principles, or norms (standards of conduct) that members of the audience might hold? 
  Car enthusiasts don't necessarily subscribe to a very specific set of values. 
• Standards of Argument: What type of research or evidence do you think will be persuasive for your audience? How might you have to translate this research for them? 
  I think in regard to this particular issue, logical discussion and hard facts would be the best approach as the simple fact is that VW vehicles vastly exceeded the allowable NOx emissions under current American emissions law. From that, a discussion about the emissions laws and their problems could follow.
• Visual Elements: What visual images or elements might your audience respond to? Why? 
  A good graph might be appropriate for this article as well as some appropriate pictures though I am not sure how appropriate visuals will be depending on the genre I choose to write in.
• Purpose: Why is your audience reading or listening to your argument? Are you trying to expand their understanding of an idea, encourage them to take action on an issue, challenge a long-held tradition or viewpoint, etc.? How likely is your argument to motivate your audience? The audience is likely to listen to my argument because they have similar interests (they care about cars). I am trying to expose a perhaps unique opinion about the issues that the VW cheating scandal raises. Hopefully, my argument is good enough to make my audience consider the validity of my opinion and argument.
2. Genre: What form of writing will you use? I could use either a blog post or an opinion piece/column to support my viewpoint. Here is an example of a column/news article and here is another example of an opinion piece. Examples of a blog post about the VW scandal are included here and here.
• What is the function of the genre? What is it designed to do for your readers? Or, why did you choose it? The genre give you guidelines for how to approach the topic based on the conventions of the genre. I will most likely write my public rhetoric as an opinion column as it allows me great latitude to pursue and explanation of my own personal opinions.
• What is the setting of your genre? Where could you see it being used? The setting for something written in this genre would most likely be a car magazine or a car blog either online or in print.
• How might you use the rhetorical appeals we have studied -- ethos(character), pathos (values/emotion), and logos (logical argumentation) in this genre? 
  Logical appeals would probably work best in this genre. I can think of little use of other appeals as it is not really an emotional topic.
• What type of visual elements, if any, will you use in this genre?
  A good graph might be appropriate for this article as well as some appropriate pictures though I am not sure how appropriate visuals will be depending on the genre I choose to write in.
• What type of style (formal, informal, conversational, academic, etc.) will you use in this genre?
  I think an informal style would be most appropriate for this sort of writing. I am not writing an all out news article and therefore don't need a strictly formal writing style however an opinion column is also not that far removed from news to be truly informal or conversational.
3. Responses/Actions: Explain the possible actions you would like your audience to take after they read or view your argument.
• Positive reactions
• They might agree that diesel is still a good solution for high efficiency cars.
• They might agree that mileage and emissions tests conducted in labs are unrealistic.
• Because of the unrealistic nature of the current mileage and emissions tests, they might agree that we should make those tests more realistic and lower the required standards on automakers to make them realistic.
• Negative rebuttals
• Electric cars are the answer.
• Subject automakers to stricter real world emissions tests.
• Hit VW with even more fines.

Analyzing Purpose

Jacob Holmen "Descent" December 20, 2011 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

This is the link to my Coggle for Analyzing Purpose.

Analyzing Context

Robert Couse-Baker "yellow miata in left turn lane" January 21, 2015 via Flickr
reuse with attribution

In this blog post, I will answer the questions about context posed on page 340 of Writing for Public Lives. Here goes:

1. There are not really fundamentally different schools of thought about my topic. It is very obvious that Volkswagen cheated their diesel emissions tests and lied to millions of customers However, what I will delve into is my opinion on some of the reactions to this scandal as well as some of the reasons it happened. Another interesting view on the cause of the debacle is included here as well.
2. Some of the things I want to point out include the fact that the hyper-strict NOx emissions standards that VW ran afoul of are optional on diesel trucks. This is very suspect as most diesel passenger cars are imports while most diesel trucks are domestically manufactured. Also contentious is who is at fault as well as detractors who have taken this scandal as a reason to abandon diesel as a viable fuel.
3. Everyone does agree that what VW did was wrong and needs to be fixed however. A good example can be found here.
4. I wouldn't say there are clear cut ideological differences in regard to the VW scandal but two different groups involved are relatively un-knowledgeable people in the general public as opposed to car enthusiast and auto industry insiders who have a much better idea of what is actually going on. Generally, the less someone knows about something like this, the more reactionary they tend to be. This is an example of a more reactionary approach.
5. No audience is necessarily asked to take a specific action.
6. I think my chosen perspective which is critical of the illegal actions that VW took but generally in favor of responsibly using diesel cars will serve me very well in making my argument.
7. I don't think I have much to worry about from more reactionary perspectives as my views are quite reasonable and measured.

-----

I read Mira and Swati's blog posts for the Read/Reply/Reflect assignment for this blog post. Both were very well constructed and thoroughly investigated. Reading their blog posts, I realized that it was a little bit hard for me to do this assignment as there are not as clear cut sides in my controversy as there are in Mira's and Swati's. This made some of the analysis for this particular assignment harder as everyone can pretty much agree that cheating your emissions tests on a massive scale is pretty bad. The argument for me, on the other had, is more about what the implications of the VW scandal are and how it should be handled.

Audience and Genre

Best of Rally Live "2012 WRC Rallye Monte-Carlo - Day 2" January 18, 2012 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution, no-derivs

In this post, I will identify several possible audiences and then corresponding places where I could publish my article for each audience group.

Car Enthusiasts
Car Magazines

• http://www.roadandtrack.com/
• http://www.caranddriver.com/

Enthusiast Forums

• http://www.vwvortex.com/
• http://www.thesamba.com/vw/

General Audience
Newspapers

• http://www.nytimes.com/
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/

General-interest magazines

• http://www.newyorker.com/
• http://www.nytimes.com/section/magazine

Regulators and/or Engineers
Trade Journals/Newsletters

• https://www.asme.org/about-asme/news-media/newsletters
• https://www.asme.org/about-asme/get-involved/advocacy-government-relations/policy-publications/capitol-update

Automotive Industry Magazines

• http://www.autonews.com/
• http://www.autoindustryinsider.com/

Extended Annotated Bibliography

Alexis Martin "DTM 92 en circuito bacheado ..." February 27, 2011 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

This is a link to my Extended Annotated Bibliography.

Narrowing my Focus

Paul D'Ambra "Formula 1" July 27, 2013 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution no-derivs

In this blog post, I will choose several (2-3) questions from the ones I developed in the previous post, to focus on more specifically.

Where is this an issue? Is it only in the United States with our hyper-strict NOx emissions standards?I think this question is particularly important because it allows me to expand on why this happened in particular as well as the fact that when the diesels are on the more polluting cycle, they are in fact much more powerful and much more efficient. This also allows me to talk about how these same hyper-strict regulations the EPA enacts on diesel cars are optional on diesel trucks. This is a classical example of regulatory capture and trade protectionism that I really want to paint as unreasonable and unfair.

How did the defeat device work?This is very interesting to more technically minded people because, though Volkswagen resorted to cheating instead of facing a difficult technical problem, the cheating was still very sophisticated and this lends itself also very well to a discussion about why it was so difficult for the EPA and CARB (California Air Resources Board) to discover what was going on in the first place. From that, I can segue into how all cars in fact pollute much more on the road than they do in labs and how testing procedure can and should be adjusted to reflect that. From here, I can even move on to estimated gas mileage and how that is tested for in a similar ineffective manner.

Who is at fault?An answer to this question is always very interesting to readers. People have an intrinsic desire to be able to blame someone for a problem. However, as I greatly admire many of the engineers who suffered for this scandal, this section also allows me a platform to pontificate about how those engineers were treated unjustly and most likely had no part in the scandal.

Questions about Controversy

Audi USA "Audi R18 Le Mans Prototype" November 3, 2010 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

I have chosen to participate in the public debate about the Volkswagen diesel emissions cheating scandal for this project. Though I did not choose this for a previous project, I would have chosen it for Project 2 if I could have found a good enough public speech act to analyse. Additionally, it is extremely relevant currently as it is very much a current controversy and I am also quite knowledgeable about it. Therefore, I think I will be able to write about it very well and would like to use it.

WHO?
Who discovered the scandal?
Who is at fault?
Who has been affected?

WHAT?
What happened exactly?
What/why did this happen?
What models are affected?

WHEN?
When did this start?
When was it discovered?
Who should have checked this out better?

WHERE?
Where/which/what countries are affected?
Where was it discovered?
Where is this an issue? Is it only in the United States with our hyper-strict NOx emissions standards?

HOW?
How did Volkswagen get away with this?
How did the defeat device work?
How are they going to fix all those cars?

Reflection on Project 2

Jimmy "porsche racing, Biere Switzerland" June 12, 2005 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution, no-derivs

In this blog post, I will reflect on my revision process in Project 2.

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?
• I had a sort of incremental approach to this essay (and really all essays). My first revision was aimed at removing general errors. Then I moved on to addressing all of the comments on my essay from peer review. Then I once again checked for small errors such as grammar, word choice, and spelling. Then I had my father who is a lawyer and an English major revise the essay for major issues which I fixed after which he did a final check for more minor issues once again.
2. Point to global changes: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization?
• I restructured my thesis after initially having a too general thesis toward having one that clearly elucidated what I was going to say in the essay. I also worked in more analysis to make the essay stronger overall.
3. What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?
• Those changes stemmed from shortcomings in the original draft.
4. How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?
• These changes did not really have an impact on my credibility as an author as what I am ultimately writing with a rhetorical analysis piece is an opinion. I am writing what I think the piece is trying to convey and how.
5. How will these changes better address the audience or venue?
• The global changes I made made my essay better reflect the requirements of the assignment.
6. Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentence structure and style?
• My local changes were minimal. They were simply aimed at making the essay easier to read and easy to understand. My goal here was incremental improvements with the goal of making the essay flow.
7. How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?
• These changes made my essay (in my opinion), easier to read by making it flow better and reducing awkward moments which hopefully makes the information in the essay easier to absorb.
8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?
• I guess so. I just had to make sure I wrote a good essay that provided in-depth analysis.
9. Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?
• I think the process of reflection makes you think about what you actually did and why you did those things. That brings you to a place where you can then reflect on and consider if your choices were actually effective.

-----

Reflection

I replied to this self-same post on Victoria's blog and on Chelsea's blog. I think Victoria and I had some very similar experiences with the revision process. We both worked very hard to make good these based around solid factual evidence from the pieces we were analyzing. We also gained a lot from talking to Professor Bottai about our essays.

Chelsea and I had a rather more different experience, I think. She worked a lot more on having an engaging introduction and conclusion that would be easy for readers to absorb. Her thesis also started out pretty strong. my experience was essentially reversed. Though my essay was okay, I had to adapt my thesis to be more effective considering the entire essay. My writing, on the other had, tends to be pretty engaging and easy to read.

Project 2

tecnica "2015 Singapore Airlines Singapore Gran Prix" September 19, 2015 via Flickr
un-restricted reuse

This is my published Project 2. Enjoy!

Punctuation. Part 2

Best of Rally Live "2011 WRC Rally de Espana - Day Two" October 22, 2011 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse no-derivs

In this post, I will continue to reflect on the punctuation from Rules for Writers.

Quotation Marks
Quotation marks are used almost exclusively when quoting other people's words. They can also be used as a semi-ironic use of a word or as scare quotes.

Ex.
John called him "the biggest idiot I ever met."

End Punctuation
End punctuation determines how you place punctuation at the end of certain structure. An example of this is not including extra punctuation when you have an e.g. or putting the punctuation inside the quotation marks if a quote ends the sentence.

Ex.
John called him "the biggest idiot I ever met."

The Colon
Colons are usually used to offset something from the rest of the sentence. This is often an appositive or something of the sort. The easiest way to show this is to give an example so I shall.

Ex. That test was written by Scattante himself: the devil.

Paragraph Analysis 2

In this blog post, I will discuss what I learned from my paragraph analysis of my draft of my rhetorical analysis essay.

Eddy Clio "MCLAREN F1 GTR LONGTAIL" October 5, 2013
attribution no-derivs

The biggest weakness I learned about my rhetorical analysis is a need for more in-depth analysis. I need to dig deeper instead of simply scratching the surface of rhetorical analysis. I think that overall my analysis was fairly interesting an easy to read as I tend to be good at that as I have a conversational "easy" style in my writing. I think the most important thing for me is to get some really good editing probably from my father and really sit down and dig deep and force myself to spend a lot of time doing some proper analysis of the article. Overall I think I have a good draft but I always lack analytical strength.

Revised Conclusion

In this post I will briefly reflect on my revised conclusion.

Chris Ibbotson "IMG_3645" May 26, 2007 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

Here is my old conclusion.

Here is my revised conclusion.

I used the circle back method to try to create a conclusion. My old conclusion was certainly a summary of my claims. I am not sure I like the new one better, however. It doesn't feel like it has a proper place in the rhetorical analysis.

Revised Introduction

Otis Blank "Corkscrew" August 16, 2014 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution

Here is my original draft.

Here is my draft with a new introduction.

My new introduction is a lot better thought out. The thesis is a lot better and I think the hook is a lot better as well. I made sure this time that the thesis covered the pertinent topics necessary for rhetorical analysis as well.

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

In this post, I will overview the feedback I gave on two of my classmate's Project 2 Drafts.

Maurizio Montanaro "Renault Alpine" June 11, 2011 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution, no derivs

For peer editing, I commented on Michael and Swati's drafts.
For the rest of my post, I will reflect on my draft considering the questions on page 197 of the Student's Guide.

• I do have an identifiable thesis. I think it reads very well but it falls short in illuminating the most important rhetorical strategies the original article uses. I do not simply fall back on logos, ethos, and pathos; rhetorical strategies are just not part of the thesis at this point.
• I decided to organize my essay in a multi-faceted manner. My paragraphs reflect rhetorical changes that occur sequentially throughout the original article. I think this is a fundamentally strong idea but I need to be more concrete in my analysis.
• I do identify the rhetorical elements that are of consequence to my article. as always, the analysis could use work.
• I do discuss the rhetorical strategies that were used and how they were implemented and how they impact the very specific audience of my piece. I think this is one of the strongest parts of my essay.
• I am using specific examples from the original text. I'm not sure if I could call my uses particularly thoughtful but I am certainly implementing them.
• I think my conclusion provides a solid summary of how the original text fulfills its rhetorical purpose however I think my more in depth analysis is probably wanting.

Punctuation, Part 1

Antoinine Valentini "Ferrari Kiss" June 22, 2013 via Flickr
reuse with attribution

In this section, I will address three topics under punctuation from Rules for Writers in light of my own writing.

The Comma
I don't think I ever explicitly realized that commas exist to help readers but that is an excellent definition. The purpose of a comma is to organize writing with pauses so you read it in the same way that you would say it. I think that overall I have a fairly good command of how to use commas in writing. I think this is because I try to use it in the most sparing way possible by mentally reading over what I am writing and inserting commas only where I naturally pause. Also important is creating a series with commas.

The Semi-Colon
Semi-colons are used to connect clauses that are not also connected by a coordinating conjunction. Their other use is between independent clauses linked with translational expressions. I think semi-colons are very underutilized punctuations and they can really add a lot to writing when used correctly. I have recently worked to improve my use of them but I definitely still under use them. This is because I am pretty scared of using them incorrectly so unless I'm fairly sure I have a valid place to use a semi-colon. I'll usually leave it out.

The Apostrophe
The apostrophe is only used for tow things: indicating a quote within a quote and for possessives. Pluralizations do not use apostrophes. To create a possessive, you add an apostrophe s ('s) unless the word already ends in an s or s-like sound in which case you only add an apostrophe.

-------

Reflection:
I commented on both Swati's and Michael's drafts.

I discovered that no one uses semi-colons. Period Paragraph. Michael used none and the only ones in Swati's draft were in quotes such as the following one:

“'But growing usable tissue in the lab is notoriously difficult; the advent of 3-D printers that can print ink made of cells has offered a ray of hope'”

Just for fun, the following is a place in Swati's draft where a semi-colon could have been used. "additionally" could have been removed and replaced with a semi-colon effectively:

"Acknowledgement of other opinions, and then an argument against these opinions, may have been an effective tactic to use that would have increased the logic of Groopman’s argument. Additionally, there were no statistics or other supporting facts that contributed to the logic of the argument."

 Neither draft contained a quote within a quote either so there were only apostrophes for pluralization of which I did not find any incorrect pluralization.

There were correct and incorrect comma uses (comma splices etc) in both drafts. Here is an example from Michael's draft of commas being used to separate items in a series:

"Nonetheless, Partovi still uses conventions such as appealing to his own credibility, presentation of compelling statistics, and a myriad of other tactics to make his argument as agreeable as possible."

Draft of Rhetorical Analysis

Jim Culp "Wim van der Poel - Bryan Lord" June 22, 2013 via Flickr
non-commerical reuse with attribution

Here is my draft for Project 2.

Here is the article I wrote about.

I think the biggest thing I think peer editors should know is that this is very much a work in progress and strong revisions are most likely necessary. I tend to be a heavy reviser as I truly believe if you buff anything enough, you can come up with something good. So be vicious!