Considering Types

In the following blog post I will be analyzing my potential use of the 5 basic types of public argument described in Writing Public Lives. I will be evaluating the usefulness of each type to me and which I might write in.

The first argument type which would be good for me to write in would be Causal. This type of argument, which "introduces your audience to the cause of a specific problem, would be a good choice for me because it allows me to introduce the overarching fault in funding education, then pin it on something that my audience can hold responsible. This opens to door to my audience seeing the ways in which they can spark change in the system.

The second argument type that I'm considering is the Refutation argument. This is another form of argument that points my audience toward opposing what I oppose. In the particular context of school funding, the refutation is a particularly effective argument because it shows the harmful effect of a specific thing. This allows me to point out conservative legislation as a harmful entity which puts students at a disadvantage, sometimes even in relation to race.

Position argument isn't good for my topic because it focuses on something that is good, when I want to focus on something that is flawed. Evaluative is a similar situation, which focuses on the successfulness of a particular policy. Proposal is a possibility, but would be difficult for my specific topic because it had been at such a standstill for so long.

Antoinette, "She contemplated the meaning of life"
5/2/09 via Flickr.com

REFLECTION

I read the Rhetorical Action Plan and Considering Types posts of Chelsea and found that she and I had a very similar audience and possible arguments. She and I are both writing for an audience that knows little about the topic, but is aware that it is an issue and want to know more about it. Her creative approaches to genre made me think that there is more than one way to reach my audience.

I also read Sam's Rhetorical Action Plan and Considering Types post. They were both extremely insightful and different than any other arguments I've read about. Her audience is much more technical than mine and her stance on her intended argument looked more at supporting her stance rather than looking for things to blame and opposition to criticize. It showed me that there was a lot more diverse ways to approach the construction of arguments.

My Rhetorical Action Plan

For this blog post, I will be answering the extensive list of questions provided in Writing Public Lives in order to develop a very clear rhetorical situation in which I can effectively argue my view. I will be including links to genre examples, as well as analyzing my audience thoroughly and anticipate responses

Walker, Samantha. "Screenshot from my computer" 

Audience: Who are you trying to persuade with your public argument?

          I am trying to reach out to groups of liberals who are interested about education but may not know much about it or have a strong opinion. 

• Knowledge: The liberal audience knows the general views of liberal politicians in regards to what they want in the education field. They are not well versed in the more detailed areas, such as specific legislation or specific funding situations. They have a liberal standpoint, but are not particularly opinionated about the topic. 
• Value: They value liberal ideas, such as student and teacher support, racial equality, equal opportunity, and higher funding of the more domestic areas of life. 
• Standards of Argument: High, impressive numbers and first-hand accounts tug at the heartstrings of my audience and will likely have a stronger influence because they would otherwise be overwhelmed with incomprehensible logistics and complex information. 
• Visual Elements: They would likely respond to more human visuals, such as actual schools that are suffering, protesting students and teachers. This is because it shows a human aspect of suffering that will spark a response in them. 
• Purpose: My audience is reading my argument in an attempt to gain more understanding of a topic they are curious about but have little knowledge of. They want to be given as many views on the topic as possible so that they may chose their opinion. My argument, as long as it is not biased and addresses both sides, will likely sway my audience.

Genre: What form of writing will you use?
         I will be writing in the genre of a news article.

• Function: This genre is meant to be informative and argumentative, but more relatable for audiences who are wanting to learn about something quickly and stay up to date with it. It's meant to be both a source of new knowledge, as well as offer opinions from credible sources. 
• Setting: The setting is a news site that will, in a perfect world, be on a more liberal news site that strengthens my arguments and reaches my intended audience easier. The setting for any news article is meant to be easily accessible for the audience it is written for. 
• Rhetorical Appeals: Rhetorical appeals of this genre are vast. You can apply all three to the genre, though some are more extreme or applicable to the topic, depending. Ethos is a rather applicable appeal since the readers are trusting a more human persona and must be convinced of their credibility. Pathos is useful in this genre because, again, the human-focus content. News articles are usually about how things that are happening are influencing people and that makes for a powerful impact on emotion. Logos will be used lightly because it could be overwhelming for readers who don't know much about the topic. 
• Visuals: Since this is a broad style genre, I have the possibility to use both human images, such as protests, as well as graphs, which will have more of an impact on the audience's liberal feeling. 
• Style: The style that I plan to use is semi-formal informative. That is to make it more down to earth and understandable for my readers and it allows for some variation in tone and word choice, which will generate a different argument. 

Response: 
       Positive Support

• Strengthen the opinions and confidence of liberals who already have an opinion of the matter
• More people will step forward to argue against legislation or actively call out its negative influences. 
• Gain new support for those who didn't have an opinion beforehand. 
• More people will stand by the argument because they have many people supporting them
• Provide strong support so that others may argue my standpoint.
• Again, empower people to speak up because they have confidence in the evidence I've provided. 

      Negative Rebuttals

• The evidence provided is biased due to the passion of the students.
• Conservative legislators are more aware of the implication of funding legislation than I am (I'm not credible)
• Conservatives invalidate the argument based on possible loopholes and justifications of their own legislation. 
• The opinions of liberals that differ from mine could be very negative. 

Analyzing Purpose

In the following blog post I will be providing a link to a Coggle map that plots out my intentions for purpose and what might come about from my argument.

HERE is my Coggle map.

Constant. "Map of Roman Empire" 12/28/06 via Flickr.com

Analyzing Context

In the following blog post I will be providing answers to the context-focused questions proved in Writing Public Lives in regards to the debate I will be arguing about.

1. What are the key perspectives or views of thought on my debate?
           
             Key perspectives are the views of teacher, students, parents, administrators, and political officials. These five perspectives tend to stand by one of two views on the issue of educational funding: it is either too low, or there is no need for change. These take a generally more liberal or conservative view.

2. What are the major point of contention or disagreements among these perspectives?

             As stated above, there tends to be conflict between those who view funding as too low and those who view funding as currently reasonable. The main points of conflict tend to be specific legislation such as Title 1 Portability and No Child Left Behind.

3. What are the points of agreement and common ground of these perspectives?

             Most agreements can be made that legislation needs to be rewritten. However, the effects of these changes will either reflect on the need for more funding or simple the need for clearer legislations.

4. What are the ideological differences between these perspectives?

            The ideologies of these groups can boil down to political stances, but to look into the more focused points of those ideologies; liberals value the students and teachers and fostering the healthiest possible school system, conservatives value managing a budget for the best of what they think the nation and state need. Neither of these are ill intended (for the most part).

5. What specific actions do each perspective call for from their audience?

             Liberals call parents and students to raise their voices in protest of the current state of funding. Students tend to direct administrators and state officials and challenge them to think about the betterment of the students. Conservatives call their fellow conservatives to hold their ground and argue for why the legislature they offer is truly the best change for the system.

6. What perspectives help to support my argument and why?

              Since I will arguing for the liberal standpoint, the perspectives of students provide first-hand evidence and accounts of the effects of funding in certain school systems. The perspective of liberal politicians are strong sources that I can use to provide new options of the system and change that should be done. The perspectives of parents and teachers can be used to support my argument as outside opinions.

7. What perspectives will be the greatest threat to my argument and why?

             The perspective of outspoken conservatives will be a threat due to their credibility and involvement in the legislation. The greatest threat may be, however, that of other liberals who don't actually believe in the majority opinion. Since I'm taking what I claim to be the liberal stance, a criticism from a credible liberal could weaken my argument greatly.

Stockwell, Jeremy "Context is good..." 11/4/08 via Flickr.com

Audience and Genre

In the following blog post I will be predicting the audience of my argument and where those particular audience would look regarding the subject and in what genre. I will also provide linked examples to those location and genres.

Brandon, "There is no audience" 9/7/11 via Flickr.com

Parents: parents are a likely audience to look into my topic because they are very involved in school funding debates and are looking for more concrete examples and evidence for their claims, as well as support from credible sources.

          Statistics: Washington Post, Huffington Post  

                Inequitable school funding called ‘one of the sleeper civil rights issues of our time’

               115 education groups: GOP No Child Left Behind legislation is vastly underfunded

         Public Argument: Washington Post, Huffington Post

               School Funding Inequality Makes Education 'Separate And Unequal,' Arne Duncan Says

         Why Arne Duncan is Right on Equity in School Funding

Administrators: administrators are likely going to be looking into my topic because they are the ones typically held responsible for the legislation that affects students and faculty. They are looking for explanations, evidence, and support.

         Data Reports: Institute of Education, Department of Education
     

                 State Finance Programs

                 Education Funding Per Student by State 

        Public Argument: National Education Center, Politico

                 

                  Argument for Title I Portability Carries No Weight

                 House Republicans put off No Child Left Behind vote

Reflection on Project 2

In the following blog post, I will be reflecting on my finished rhetorical analysis by answering nine questions provided by Writing Public Lives.

1. The biggest detail that I changed from one draft to the next was the inclusion and analysis of specific evidence in my essay. My first draft was completely lacking in the evidence department and, realizing it's importance, I devoted a huge amount of time into the inclusion of strong evidence and its analysis. I also looked into changing up the structure of my sentences and dried to make the composition more diverse.

2. I made my thesis a little less dense and less cookie cutter. I also restructured my introduction to relate more to my readers and grab their attention, rather than throwing dense summarizing and contest at them. I also tried to break up my example analysis into separate paragraphs because they were too dense as one.

3.  It was tricky cutting my thesis down but I realized that a dense thesis can be overwhelming and drive the reader away. It was the same idea with the body; a body that is just too dense will lose the interest of the readers. I focused greatly on the hook of an introduction because I realized the importance of getting the reader interested in the topic early, before diving into the more nitty gritty.

4. I'm not sure these changes had a huge impact on my credibility. They might make the paper seem less text-book, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing in regards to my credibility. I still wrote about the subject well, just made it more understandable.

5. These changes made me and my writing more relatable for a new student (i.e. my audience). Cutting down on overwhelming content made it so that I was more believable as someone interested in teaching students about a rhetoric.

6. As I said in my first response, I paid particular attention to restructuring my sentences in order to make them more diverse. I didn't include diverse end punctuation, but I don't think it's an impactful choice.

7. Diverse sentences will help my audience to remain interested in the content, as well as comprehend some of the key ideas better. I consistently avoided run-on sentences and that will improve reader understanding.

8. I'm familiar with a rhetorical analysis and this assignment made me completely reconsider how to write in this genre. For my previous rhetorical works, I wrote for a captive audience, so I was not interested in maintaining their attention or writing specifically for them. This assignment made me realize that you write for an audience and with their interests and goals in mind.

9. By reflecting on the specific changes I made and how I feel about the paper as a whole has helped me seen my growth as a writer and realized the importance of straying from a cookie cutter format in order to better my writing as a whole. I feel I've developed greatly after reflecting on my project because I was willing to throw out writing that, though I liked, didn't help my analysis.

Alfarroba, Antonio, "Mirror" 4/26/09 via Flickr.com

REFLECTION

After reading the reflection of Swati and Casey, I found that they had a very different approach to different areas of the reflection than I did. Casey and I have a similar revision process, but I feel that I made more drastic changes over the course of my revision process then she did, as well as focused on different aspects (she focused on intro and conclusion, while I looked more into evidence and analysis). Swati had a different mindset going into the writing process and I found myself surprised that she was still in a QRG mindset when I was already in full swing of rhetorical analysis.

Extended Annotated Bibliography

In the following blog post I will provide a link to my newly extended annotated bibliography. This extension includes 4-6 new sources regarding my focus questions of my previous post and an annotation for each on how they will be used in my argument.

HERE is my extended bibliography

Ward, Chris "070510" 7/5/10 via Flickr.com

Narrowing My Focus

In the following blog post I will be choosing 2 or 3 of my favorite controversy questions from the previous post and explaining why I've chosen those questions as more interesting or important to answer before crafting my argument.

Wijnants, Roel, "Red Hallway" 11/25/14 via Flickr.com

1. How has school funding changed over the last decade? Has there been no change?
             
          This is a very important aspect of the subject to understand. If there hasn't been a change, that stagnation could prompt to demand change. If there has been a negative change, then that would, again, demand an argument for change. It's a broad question that allows for context, as well as an initial spark of a conflict or call to action. It's a gateway question, as well as a necessary source for detail.

2. What are the feelings specifically of students and teachers in regards to current school funding?

          This question allows for specific references and the possibility to appeal to my audience by playing on their emotions with the emotions and feelings of other people. It also humanizes the topic and allows people the voice very specific situations which provide insight and the insight to pursue other information.

3. How are either political party arguing for their standpoints? What appeals do they have?

           This question provides me with the opportunity to look into more factual, dry content that is important in presenting the issue and how those "in charge" are addressing it. It provides me with the chance to give the audience a villain to target their anger at or a group to find support in. It's also important for me to remember the opposition of my argument, and this question reminds me of that.

Questions About Controversy

In the following blog post I will be developing twenty five questions regarding the controversy of educational funding in preparation of writing my own public speech about the controversy. These questions will address what I still need to know about the controversy.

King, Dave, "Question Mark" 1/5/13 via Flickr.com

WHO
1. Who are the top government officials involved with education legislature?

2. Are there any people worth noting who are not politicians that are involved with school funding?

3. Is there any one individual who holds a notably higher amount of legislative power over school funding?

4. Have there been any students or faculty to speak against the current state of funding?

5. Who speaks for higher funding and who speaks for no need for change/lower funding?

WHAT
1. What are some of the current laws affecting school funding?

2. What are the feelings specifically of students and teachers in regards to current school funding?

3. What are the stances of liberal vs. conservatives regarding school funding?

4. What has been the most influential education funding legislation passed and what have been its effects?

5. What are some of the ways school systems are addressing the current funding situation?

WHEN
1. When was the most recent change to school funding legislature?

2. Have there been any specific triggers for changes in legislature and when?

3. Are there any notable up and coming changes that schools should be aware of?

4. When was the most notable education funding legislation passed?

5. Have there been recent political conflicts regarding education funding?

WHERE
1. Where are some of the worst funded districts/best funded districts?

2. Are there any particular areas that are protesting/fighting current school funding issues?

3. In which districts do students and faculty have a strong say in education legislature?

4. Where are the most students negatively effected by recent changes to education funding?

5. Where in the government are people debating this? House? Senate? White House?

HOW
1. How has school funding changed over the last decade?

2. By what means do students and faculty have the opportunity to influence school funding and legislature?

3. How are either political party arguing for their standpoints? What appeals do they have?

4. How are parents in particular responding to the current state of funding in the nation?

5. How does the government/schools see the state of funding changing in the future?

Published Rhetorical Analysis

In the following blog post I will provide a link to my completed rhetorical analysis

HERE is my rhetorical analysis.

Kumar, Sinu, "Fireworks" 4/16/14 via Flickr.com

Punctuation, Part 2

In the following blog post, I will be examining three more punctuation topics found in Rules for Writers and examine my own draft to better my understanding of the punctuation topics and reflect on what I learned from my draft.

~Blu~,"What", 1/2/12 via Flickr.com

The Comma:

I thought that I was familiar with the use of the comma, but to know the technical terms and situations that it applies in are incredibly useful to spotting where they apply in my writing. This section surprised my in the sheer number of different situations a comma should be present in, but most of them I was already practicing, though not particularly aware.

After reading through my draft for comma's specifically, I found that they had the tendency to lead to run on sentences that were too complex for their own good. I removed some of my commas because they allowed for a change in sentence structure and broke up some very dense areas of text.


The Apostrophe:

I have had a poor understanding of apostrophe and possession for the longest time. After reading this section, I have a much better understanding of what situations there is possession that indicates an apostrophe. The advice of when to avoid using an apostrophe was also very useful, such as plural numbers and years.

Based on my new understanding of possession, I was able to make a lot more grammatical changes for the sake of possession and pluralization. I feel into the habit of reversing the two and adding apostrophes for plurals and not possession.


End Punctuation:

This section was not particularly insightful. Most people are familiar with the three end punctuation. The specific feelings that each can evoke was a useful portion in trying to find a situation in which they can be used.

After going through my essay, there weren't many circumstances where I could use any other punctuation but the period. I could have used a question mark for a rhetorical question posed to my audience, but most times I tried, it seemed forced and unnatural.

Paragraph Analysis 2

In the following blog post, I will be including a link to a copy of my draft which I have analyzed for paragraph coherency. I will also include a reflection on what the exercise enlightened me of in regards to my drafts formatting strengths and weaknesses.

Here is a link to my COPY

Main Point:

My paragraphs did well to present a main idea in all of them, with the exception of the conclusion, which has multiple smaller ideas scattered throughout it. The main points help to dictate each of the paragraphs as well as tie the entire paper together.

Development of Main Point:

My development of these points fell pretty short because of my failure to produce any direct evidence. The paragraphs have a tendency to go from main point directly to conclusions about it (such as effectiveness and relation to audience), which doesn't make much sense without evidence to develop the main point and it's conclusions.

Internal Organization:

The essay has a very clear, repeated structure that makes it easy to understand, but it does not have a particular mode of organization as described in Rules for Writers. The closest is that it may resemble in some way cause and effect due to the conclusive nature of the paragraphs endings.

Coherent Ideas:

My ideas are generally coherent but because of my lack of evidence, it's hard to find a logical progression from a main idea to a conclusion about it. I failed to see that as I was writing because I knew so well what I was writing about. I will have to elaborate on how ideas relate to one another with more evidence so my reader may follow my conclusions.

Smooth Transitions:

This particular subject of focused helped me realize that my transition were lacking in fluidity. My ideas were so structured and linear that they did not transition into one another very well. It ended up being choppy and ridged when read, making it an unpleasant paper. I do need to add some descriptors and transitions just for the sake of transition fluidity.

Javier, "Scaffolding" 1/18/15 via Flickr.com

Revised Conclusion

In the blog post below I will be completely reconstructing the conclusion of my rhetorical analysis draft and chose one of four approaches provided in A Student's Guide. I will also evaluate how the changes I made helped to create a stronger conclusion for my paper.

My second conclusion is much more gripping and does much less summarizing of the entire analysis. I took the "Look Forward" approach, much like the author of my article, and predicted the changes needed to make the argument come into fruition. However, I did include a restated thesis and maintained the themes of my analysis, so that there was not a completely new argument introduced to the reader for mo reason.

Original Conclusion

Brown articulates a desire for political parties to focus all efforts on to doing what ’is right by students and schools by presenting references from both political perspectives and deconstructing them both. She enforces an urgency for the need for change by presenting statistics that convey the detriments of legislation. Both of these approaches are combined with condescending, frustrated word choice that relates the feelings of the author and her readers. The essay does well to prompt the reader to want change in the current situation. It stimulates a frustration based on frightening and compelling statistics, as well as the feeling of support from a credible author who the audience is siding with. Brown runs into the issue of prompting a response in her audience but failing to provide them with any direction. The audience now has feeling of frustration toward the education stalemate, but is given no guidance in how this needs to change. The best we are given is a desire to take the power which government has over schools altogether and give it to the states; so that they might do the right by their schools.

New Conclusion

The racially heated political environment of today demands action be taken soon in regards to education. However, many education-focused liberals feel that the changes that are to be made must be done with the best interest of the students and school systems in mind, rather than economic and political gain. In her article, author Emma Brown refers to credible sources, powerful statistics, and uses condescending word choice to enlighten her readers of what she argues are the faults of both political parties: both fail to consider both the fundament and racial need for equal opportunity of success in schools everywhere. From Brown's well argued standpoint, changes in legislation must be made that do not leave minority districts economically devastated, nor leave all the power in the hands of the government; rather the power should be given to the students. Brown effectively grasps her audiences attention, even though there are criticisms of their liberal party. In order for the change necessary to better the education system to be made, both parties must relinquish the power over the system and reach a compromise which prioritizes all students and their success.

Ryan, "Finish Line", 4/24/10 via Flickr.com

Revised Introduction

In the following blog post I will be completely reconstructing the introduction of my rhetorical analysis by following the tips provided by the A Student's Guide reading. I will also evaluate the changes that I've made and how they make my introduction stronger.

My new introduction has a much stronger hook and is substantially less dry than my first draft. It is more fluid in providing context without throwing in unnecessary details that I will later include in my essay. I also revised the thesis to make it slightly more fluid and inclusive of the rhetorical situation.

Original Introduction

In the teetering political environment of today, liberals and conservatives are frequently at each other's throats regarding any legislation suggested by either side. The matter is no different when it comes to the education system and its laws.  In an essay published in The Washington Post, entitled “Arne Duncan blasts House effort to revise No Child Left Behind”, in response to the education stalemate between Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and House Republicans, the readers get a glimpse at the different political opinions surrounding education reform efforts. The author of the essay, Emma Brown, devotes most of her time to either describing impressive and frightening financial statistics surrounding underprivileged and minority-heavy school districts or analyzing the opinions of different politicians regarding the impact of suggested legislation such as Title 1 Probability.
In her analysis of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's responses to Republican education efforts and a press statement from Duncan regarding school funding inequality, Emma Brown refers to credible sources to enhance her own credibility and compelling statistics to dramatize the potential detriments of Republican legislation, tying it all together with passionate and critical word choice of the entire situation. With the combination of these strategies, Brown argues that the situation is at an impractical standstill, with both sides falling short of doing right by students and schools.

Revised Introduction

Political parties hardly ever fail to find an area of inequality to debate about in todays society. With the renewal of No Child Left Behind, it is education that is now in the political inequality spotlight. Numerous reform attempts have been made by both parties to reform the flawed school system, but these attempts have only opened the flood gates to harsh criticisms of funding and racial inequality among school districts. In an article published on The Washington Post entitled "Arne Duncan Blasts House Efforts to Revise No Child Left Behind", the typically liberal audience gets a glimpse at the faults of both parties. The author, Emma Brown, spares no one in her criticism of preposed conservative legislation, which will undoubtably harm minority-heavy districts as well as democrat Arne Duncan's stagnant behavior in his position of power. Both criticisms are made in the name of students and teachers, who Brown believes should be the primary concern in education reform. In her analysis of Republican education funding reform efforts and Democratic Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's response to these efforts, Brown refers to credible sources to enhance her own credibility and compelling statistics to dramatize the potential detriments of Republican legislation, tying it all together with passionate and critical word choice of the entire situation to fuel the passion of her audience. With the combination of these strategies, Brown argues that the situation is at an impractical standstill, with both sides falling short of doing right by students and schools, which should be the true forces of reform efforts. 

Moran, Nick, "Early Bird", 3/8/08 via Flickr.com

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

In the blog post below I will be reflecting on what I learned about the drafting process by peer editing the drafts of my classmates. I will be focusing specifically on questions asked in A Student's Guide in order to evaluate my understanding of my draft. 

I reviewed the essay draft of Mira and Alex for my peer review.

1. After reading through these drafts and looking back at my own, I realized the importance of having a clear thesis and how it influences the readers understanding of the paper's purpose. I feel that I had a very clear thesis which drove the majority of my analysis. It uses specific rhetorical strategies and links them together. However, this linking in the thesis could cause some confusion and I may want to keep the ideas separated until the conclusion.

2. I intended to focus on one particular strategy in my thesis in one paragraph each with the evidence being examined in that paragraph. However, I fell incredibly short on my evidence analysis and only did minor allusions and summarizing of the actual points of evidence from my article, so this are in particular requires some SERIOUS work. My analysis isn't terrible, but it is unclear without the particular evidence.

3. The 5 elements of a rhetorical situation are: text, author, audience, context, purpose. I primarily focused on audience and context. I fell a little short in the other three areas, not realizing how important it is to focus on all five equally in order for the reader to get a complete grasp on the article and my own analysis. I want to go more into the details of the article and the authors claims and purpose.

4. I feel that I executed the analysis of rhetorical strategies and their effects on the audience better that most of my other elements in my analysis. However, it is possible that they are rather convoluted and dense. I might try to thin them out to make room for more evidence and examination of the text itself, while maintaining the integrity of my rhetorical analysis.

5. Once again, I failed miserably in the area of evidence. I completely neglected this element of the analysis, even though I have evidence already picked out for each analysis in my outline of this analysis. I desperately need to implement my evidence in order to actually make a compelling argument and analysis.

6. My conclusion is a little dry, but it does end up answering the question "so what" in regards to the article and its effects on its audience. However, I don't think it leaves the reader very interested or wanting more. It's too dry and I need to spice it up substantially.

Bilton, Matt "mirror" 3/11/12 via Flickr.com

Punctuation, Part 1

In the following blog post I will be analyzing three punctuation topics found in Rules for Writers that I felt unfamiliar with.

The Green Album, "Punctuation",
 2/16/08 via Flickr.com

I reviewed the essay draft of Mira and Alex for my peer review.

The Semicolon:

I've always known semicolon's as a means of diversifying your sentence structures and connecting sentence elements. The possible applications of semicolons, however, are much larger than I ever thought. If a sentence uses a comma, it's important to reflect on whether you can place a semicolon in it's place. I found the use of the semicolon in lists with internal punctuation interesting, as well as the warning of using a semicolon in place of a colon.

The Colon:

I knew the typical use of a colon for a list and vaguely knew of the use of it with a quotation. I was, however, unfamiliar with its use for a summary or appositive. The summary use I found to be particularly useful. It gives the writer the chance to thin down on words as well as introduce a new sentence structure to keep the text interesting.

An example found in Alex's draft uses a colon in the case of an appositive:

"There is another argument for this policy based on fairness: provided that a drug is safe, it is unfair to the honest athletes that they have to miss out on an advantage that the cheaters enjoy."

Other Punctuation:

The use of other punctuation I found very interesting in particular because of their diverse usage. The use of a dash for emphasis seems like a fun and interesting structure. I feel that both parenthesis and brackets can be a little messy, but convenient when you know how to execute them. An ellipsis is convenient and saves space while cutting out unnecessary content. The slash is a clarifier.

Here is an example of the use of a dash in the place of a comma from Mira's draft:

"Much to the dismay of conservatives and climate change deniers alike, the Pope has pleaded with the world in his encyclical “Laudato Si’” - the original document sent by the current Pope to all of the Catholic bishops calling for recognition of the environment -  to realize the human effect on the planet and make a concerted effort to protect it."

Draft of Rhetorical Analysis

In the following blog post I will include a link to my draft of my rhetorical analysis and inform my peers of some of the areas in the document where I have concerns and wish to be addressed in a peer review.

For this analysis, I'm concerned that my ideas are all over the place and my use of evidence is not as strong as it should be. I'm also uncertain as to whether I discuss the debate itself enough, or focus too heavily on the rhetorical analysis.

HERE is a link to my document.

Ciccolella, Mary "Drafting Table" 1/19/13 via Flickr.com

Practicing Summary & Paraphrase

In the following blog post, I will be analyzing and paraphrasing a strong quote from my text which demonstrates the author's argument or standpoint and using some tips from A Students Guide to better understand paraphrasing.

Quote from Original Source

"No Child Left Behind expired in 2007 and Congress has been unable to reach a deal to revise it, even though the law is widely considered to be broken and unworkable. The law’s failure has helped make Duncan an unusually powerful education secretary: With the promise of waivers from the most onerous provisions of No Child Left Behind, he has been able to push states to make rapid and sweeping changes to their academic standards, teacher evaluations and other key policies."

Paraphrase of Original Source:

Since its expiration in 2007, Congress has been unable to salvage the incredibly flawed No Child Left Behind Act. Though efforts have been made from both parties, neither can come to an agreement on how the bill should be addressed. By offering schools an out from some of the excessively demanding requirements of the broken law, Education Secretary Arne Duncan has become incredibly influential in school systems nation wide. Duncan has had a hand in dramatic change of school policies, standards, and staff evaluations.

Summary:

By taking advantage of the outdate No Child Left Behind Act, Arne Duncan has gained the authority to make sweeping changes to U.S. school systems by alleviating some of the more outrageous demands of the law.

Law, Kevin "Long Hot Summer" 7/29/08
via Wikimedia Commons Creative Commons Attribution

It's a pun again

Project 2 Outline

In the following blog post, I will be constructing an outline of my essay by following "The Sections of the Paper" reading in Writing Public Lives. 

Reasoning of Outline

The reading gave me a clear structure that I wanted to follow in my essay. I tried to specifically hit every idea in my outline so I had a clear idea of the things that I wanted to address in my draft. The analysis and evaluation section of an argument I found particularly helpful because it showed that the two are closely related and evaluation relies heavily on analysis, but reiterated the point that both need to be differentiated so that they may be effectively addressed. The introduction section reinforced some key ideas for me like the inclusion of context and deciding how much of it to include based on your audience and the complexity of your argument. The claims section was also important because it made me want to have a clear claim in every paragraph I included. The body paragraph section created a detailed outline which I followed in my outline, including a conclusion section of each claim, which is something I occasionally overlook.

Casutt, Patrick "Silhouette" 9/22/15 via Flickr.com

OUTLINE


Introduction

General Premise: In the teetering political environment of today, liberals and conservatives are frequently at each others throats regarding any legislation suggested by either side. The matter is no different when it comes to the education system and its laws.

Rhetorical Situation: In an essay written in February as a response to the education stalemate between Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and House Republicans, the readers get a glimpse at the different political opinions surrounding education reform efforts. The essay devotes most of its time either to impressive and frightening financial statistics surrounding underprivileged and minority-heavy school districts or the opinions of different politicians regarding the impact of suggested legislation such as Title 1 Probability.

Thesis: In her analysis of Secretary of Educations Arne Duncan's responses to Republican education efforts and a press statement from Duncan regarding school funding inequality, Emma Brown refers to credible sources to enhance her own credibility and compelling statistics to dramatize the potential detriments of Republican legislation, tying it all together with passionate and critical word choice of the entire situation. With the combination of these strategies, Brown argues that the situation is at an impractical standstill, with both sides falling short of doing right by students and schools.


Body Paragraphs

Paragraph #1 (will be broken up into more paragraphs):

           Rhetorical Strategy: Reference to credible sources

           Claim: Brown frequently includes quotes and references to educationally involved politicians in an effort to both gain different perspectives on the matter and point out the weaknesses in both of those perspectives for her own argument, all while improving her own credibility.

           Examples (perhaps make these each a focus of a paragraph):
             
                     1.  "The White House is using scare tactics and budget gimmicks to kill K-12 education reform, because they know a new law will lead to less control in the hands of Washington bureaucrats and more control in the hands of parents and education leaders." Quote from John Kline, head of the House education committee." 

                     2. "That was never the goal,” Duncan said Monday. “The goal was to fix the law for kids in 50 states and have clarity. We stepped into a leadership void, we stepped into dysfunction, because kids and teachers were being hurt. And we’ve done the best job we can. I’m sure we’ve done it imperfectly. I actually think we’ve done a pretty darn good job with it.” Quote from Arne Duncan after the statement "Wouldn't the secretary like to stay in the driver seat?

           Effectiveness: The strategy is very effective in making Brown even more credible and making her audience trust her opinion on the matter of education funding. She is very particular about including both perspectives, which demonstrates a lack of bias.

          Conclusion Relating to Audience and Purpose: With the use of these credible sources, she hopes to a effective pokes holes in both arguments. She presents perspectives from both political parties, making her


Paragraph #2 (will be broken up into more paragraphs):

           Rhetorical Strategy: Compelling/shocking Statistics

           Claim: If there is a reference to a source, Brown is quick to lead away for the opinionated nature of these references with impressive and frightening statistics that are meant to catch the reader off guard with their size and enlighten them to the potential dangers of the situation.

           Examples (perhaps make these each a focus of a paragraph):

                     1. "For example, Detroit — where more than half of students are poor and more than 80 percent are black — would lose $265 million during the next six years, according to the Education Department’s analysis. Los Angeles, which is 31 percent poor and 74 percent Hispanic, stands to lose $782 million."

                          2. "Based on our analysis of FY14 data and what would have happened if those dollars were allocated under the Republican’s Title I portability proposal, the highest-poverty districts across the nation would have lost an estimated total of about $700 million in the first year of implementation,” department officials said in a statement. “Two thirds of that money would have been redirected to the lowest-poverty districts (0 to 15 percent poverty) and the remaining third would have gone to districts with 15-25 percent poverty.” 

PARAPHRASE/Summarize!

           Effectiveness: The numbers that she directly includes are effective in making the reader concerned for how the situation and side with her in regards to the need for change. The strategy is very effective is prompting frustration in the audience.

          Conclusion Relating to Audience and Purpose: Brown specifically uses impressive statistics to overwhelm the reader with sheer numbers. She doesn't intend for her audience to read every statistic she provides, but aims to generate shock and frustration at all the options politicians are looking at for education legislature.

Paragraph #3 (will be broken up into more paragraphs):

           Rhetorical Strategy: Critical and passionate word choice that remains analytical

           Claim: Brown consistently alternates between an informal and formal word choice throughout the essay in an effort to make the reader feel more connected to the content of the text and feel compelled to look harder into the details she is presenting, all while retaining the respect of her readers by respecting her own data and references with formal language.

           Examples (perhaps make these each a focus of a paragraph):

                       1. The word "wonky" found in paragraph five compared with the more article word choice of the following paragraph makes the reader question the content more specifically.

                       2. "There are plenty of other stinking points" again conveys a level of informality and frustration at the situation.

           Effectiveness: This strategy is one of the weaker ones, because it demonstrates a level of informality that can translate into disinterest from the author. However, the reader is able to look past that due to the frustration in the word choice and the passion that it prompts in them.

          Conclusion Relating to Audience and Purpose: The audience is empowered by the relatable word choice and feel that the opinion of politicians are invalidate with these harsh and invalidating phrases. The word choice, however, may occasionally fail to achieve it's intended purpose and lead the reader to think that the author is too informal.

Conclusion:

           Restated Thesis: Brown articulates a desire for political parties to focus all efforts onto doing whats right by students and schools by presenting references from both political perspectives and deconstructing them both. She enforces an urgency for the need for change by presenting statistics that convey the detriments of legislation. Both of these approaches are combined with condescending, frustrated word choice that relates the the feelings of the author and her readers. 

           Effectiveness of the Essay overall: The essay does well to prompt the reader to want change to the current situation. It stimulate a frustration based in frightening and compelling statistics, as well as the feeling of support from a credible author who the audience is siding with. 

           Does it achieve its goal?: Brown runs into the issue of prompting a response in her audience but failing to provide them with any direction. The audience now has feeling of frustration toward the education stalemate, but is given no guidance in how this needs to change. The best we are given is a desire to take the power government has over schools altogether and give it to states so that they might do right by their schools.  

REFLECTION

After reading through the outlines of Hallye and Sam's, I found that I took a very different approach to the construction of my outline than my peers. Both Hallye and Sam constructed a brief outline of the general ideas of their essays, while I went very in depth of every idea I wanted to address and the evidence I wanted to use. This difference isn't bad, per say, it just means that I wanted to go into the draft with a little more construction than they did. Sam took a particularly interesting approach to the body outline including a specific claim that the body as a whole would address, rather than multiple claims that different parts of the body would tackle. Hallye had a slightly denser intro and thesis section that resembled mine slightly, but she had a more list-like body construction. Both did not include specific evidence from the article.

Analyzing My Audience

In the following blog post, I will be analyzing my particular audience for my paper. I will be doing this by answer the questions regarding my audience is A Student's Guid and referring to the project rubric.

Sebastian, "Audience?" 12/9/12 via flickr.com

1. Who am I writing for? What are their beliefs and assumptions?

               I'm writing a rhetorical analysis of an argument made in the English discipline as an example for other incoming students in the field. The students are coming into the program with a general understanding of an argument, but are having difficulty constructing one. They value clarity, articulation, and understanding. I have been asked to do this by a professor in my discipline, making her a secondary audience. She expects a well-constructed analysis of an argument made publicly in the field.

2. What position might they take on the issue? How will I need to respond to this position?

               Since the argument of the essay I'm analyzing is rather complex, my readers could likely go either way in how I interpret the argument of the author. The students will be passionate about education, seeing that they're students, and will have their own pre-existing values and political stances which may influence how they interpret the authors argument. I will have to focus less on the politics of the essay and more on how the opinions in the essay are used objectively.

3. What will they want to know?

               Both audiences want to know the specific construction of an argument in the field of English through the rhetorical analysis of and argument made publicly in the field. They'll be reading an argument specifically about education so they'll want to know how people construct arguments while remaining objective. They want to know the importance of author, audience, context, purpose/message, and rhetorical strategies.

4. How might they react to my argument?

                My readers might have a differing opinion on the argument made by the author based on their own political opinions and might fine mine to be a misinterpretation. Hopefully, since my argument painted the author in a more neutral light, both sides will not have many political qualms with it. Since I'm writing about rhetoric in a field that highly values rhetoric, I will have to be cautious to not get swept up in the debate itself.

5. How am I trying to relate to or connect with my audience?

                Since I am writing specifically for other students in my field, I have the immediate connection with them and their pursuits as a student. I have a connection with the professor asking for the argument, again since we are in the same field.

6. Are there specific words, ideas, or modes of presentation that will help me relate to them in this way?

                By reiterating the subject of my argument and the fact that it comes from an argument made in the field, I hope to connect with them in regards to our shared field. Also, since the argument I am examining is in regards to education and funding, I establish another common area of education between me and my audience.

REFLECTION

After reading through the posts of Casey and Swati, I gained a lot of insight regarding how to think about my audience. Casey brought a lot to the table in how well she understood her audience and what they wanted. She went beyond just the prompt of "write an  analysis" and applied what the students were learning from us to real life. She was also very realistic about how her essay will be valued by other students, while still remaining very dedicated to the proper execution of the analysis. Swati's post was very insightful since it was from a totally different field than my own. She also made a point to mention the important of focusing on the author's rhetoric, rather than the validity of their argument, which particularly stuck out to me due to the heated nature of my topic.

Draft Thesis Statements

In the following blog post I will be constructing several thesis statements by following the listed instructions found in A Students Guide. 

Thesis #1

In her analysis of Secretary of Educations Arne Duncan's responses to Republican education efforts and a press statement from Duncan regarding school funding inequality, Emma Brown refers to credible sources to enhance her own credibility and compelling statistics to dramatize the potential detriments of Republican legislation, tying it all together with passionate and critical word choice of the entire situation. With the combination of these strategies, Brown argues that situation is at an impractical standstill, with both sides falling short of doing right by students and schools.

                      This thesis focuses more on the construction of Brown's argument, which helps to outline my analysis. It does fall short in contextualizing the article itself in depth, which could be an issue, but it's pretty easy to add that context in the introduction before the thesis is introduced.

Thesis #2

Emma Brown, author of the Washington Post article "Arne Duncan Blasts House Effort to Revise No Child Left Behind", appeals to her younger, politically diverse audience by connecting to their values through credible sources from both perspectives and challenging the intent of both political parties with dismissive and condescending tone, all in an effort to prompt some form of change that will give educational authority to states and school districts, rather than the government.

                      This thesis looks more into the content of the essay and the political focus, which gives me a lot to run with in terms of arguments. However, it has less of a focus on the rhetoric as my previous thesis, which could cause some confusion in the construction of my own analysis.

Balayogi, Srividya "Writing" 7/11/13 via Flickr.com

REFLECTION

After reading through the posts of Chloe and Michael's, I found that the two were very different from one another and both offered insight. Chloe had two brief, direct arguments which had differing opinions. It made me wonder what the article actually argued, which was an important attention grabber for the reader. However, neither included much context of the actual essay and that made me realize just how important that is in constructing a thesis. Michael's statements were constructed very similarly to mine. He brought to my attention the importance of pointing out where the author may fall short in remaining objective in their argument and how much it influence the effectiveness of the article. Both were very beneficial for me realizing that which makes a thesis very strong.

Cluster of "Arne Duncan blasts House effort to revise No Child Left Behind"

In the blog post below, I have included a link to a cluster of my article "Arne Duncan blasts House effort to revise No Child Left Behind".

In the cluster, I have restated and condensed three separate aspects of my own analysis: the cultural context of the essay, the rhetorical context of the essay, and the rhetoric used to construct an argument. Each portion includes either examples from the text or summaries of the ideas in the area (or both).

HERE is a link to my cluster.

Analyzing Rhetorical Strategies in "Arne Duncan blasts House effort to revise No Child Left Behind"

In the blog post below, I will be looking specifically into how my article uses an appeal to several different rhetorical areas to influence its audience, as well as analyze how those appeals reflect on the author and their purpose. This will be done by referencing A Students Guide and going further how the information applies to the article.

Appeals to Character and Credibility

Which items on the bulleted list of "Appeals to Credibility and Character (Ethos)" on page 182 can you recognize in your text?

•   Reference to Credible Sources

•   Tone

•   Word Choice

•   Author Reputation

How and why would the author(s) use these strategies?

         Reference to Credible Sources: The author is addressing a topic that requires specific insight in order for the readers believe the information. While the author does not go into extreme detail in regards to a large portion of this information, it provides the reader with numerous hyperlinks to many credible sources, which provide more specifics.

       

       Tone: The author uses a rather harsh tone to convey her frustration regarding the state in which the education system is in. The tone frequently switches between critical and condescending to analytical. These shift convey a feeling of passion, as well as credibility in regards to the subject. 

       Word Choice: Similar to tone, the word choice wanes between critical and analytical to generate an urgent feeling of frustration from the reader. The word choice does have a tendency to slip into informality, but that only servers to enhance the authors passion regarding the subject. 

       Author Reputation: The author does not allude to their own credibility much, but they do provide the reader with a description of their subject of writing and Emma Brown frequently writes about student and teacher rights, the state of the education system, and politics surrounding education, making her a very credible source.   

How do these strategies affect the audience’s perception of the author's/authors' credibility and character?

The strategies are very convincing of the author’s credibility. They demonstrate a level of confidence and composure that make the readers comfortable with trusting the information they are presenting and the claims they are making.

How does the use of these strategies impact the effectiveness of the text’s overall message?

These strategies are very effective in validating its argument. The author uses the strategies above to present themselves as someone the reader can trust to provide with credible, valid information. The message of the text regarding the presence and importance of the inequality in education becomes much more convincing based on how credible and reliable the author presents herself.

Does/do the author(s) seem to have any biases or assumptions that might impact their credibility?

The largest biased that is apparent in the article is that the author is evidentially liberal, based on their response to Duncan and their agreement to his argument. However, this does not impact their credibility very much since it does not inhibit their ability to make valid arguments or disregard the opposition.

Appeals to Emotion

Which items on the bulleted list of "Appeals to Emotion (Pathos)" on pages 182-3 can you recognize in your text?

• Repetition of Key Words 

What emotional responses is the author attempting to create?

                 Repetition of Key Words: The phrase inequality and privilege is repeated in an effort to create a response of frustration to the situation from the reader. The word loss is also heavily focused on to emphasize the severity of the negative effects of the current legislation. 

What is the actual result?

                 Repetition of Key Words: This strategy does well to accurately do what it set out to do and gets the reader thinking about the unfairness and irrational of the situation, creating frustration and desire for change. 

Are these emotions effective or ineffective for this particular audience and rhetorical situation?

The article is not heavily reliant on pathos due to the nature of the topic. Political discussions try to avoid relying on emotion to stimulate their readers because it seems invalid. The few instances the author uses pathos, they do so in a very composed, thoughtful manner that makes it seem like they are not driven by emotion, which is what makes it successful in this situation. Duncan's address itself does play more toward emotion, but that is expected from a quoting source. 

How do these emotional appeals affect the credibility of the author(s) or the logic of the text?

As I mentioned above, the author avoided pathos. This ensures that their credibility is not heavily questioned based on relying too much on emotion.  

Appeal to Logic

Which items on the bulleted list of "Appeals to Logic or Rational Decision Making (Logos)" on page 183 can you recognize in your text?

• Statistics
• Interviews
• Arrangement of Images for Emphasis

What response is the author attempting to create by employing these strategies?

Statistics: Statistics are used as a means of bringing to light several extremely pressing issues with modern legislation and to fill the reader with frustration and concern regarding the loss that will be suffered by underprivileged school systems based on where the system is heading. 

Interviews: The Arne Duncan speech used by the author throughout the article is meant to be both an argument in it of itself, as well as a point of argument for the author. There are also several additional interviews provided that allow the reader to see a more analytical take on the issue, which makes the arguments of the author all the more convincing. 

Arrangement of Images for Emphasis: There are several images used throughout the article which contain statistics and these are placed in the center of the document very blatantly to emphasize the issue of funding inequality in a very in-your-face way and what the school systems stand to lose. 

What is the actual result?

Statistics: The statistics are presented well and convincingly, but the author occasionally relies too much on those provided by Duncan in is speech, rather than producing their own.  

Interviews: The author does well to include Duncan's speech and their own opinion in the text,

however, they occasionally fall back on the speech and fail to elaborate on its details. 

Screenshot "Article Graph" 10/13/15 via Washington Post

Arrangement of Images for Emphasis: The image is very striking in regards to its presence in the article. However, it does lose some of its impact based on the fact that it is somewhat unclear to read. 

Are these strategies effective or ineffective for this particular audience and rhetorical situation?

These strategies are very effective for this audience because it is important for political debates to reply primarily on logic to convince the readers of the audience. The audience is looking for clarity and fact in order to form a conclusion for themselves or even begin to think about believing the authors claims. This author does a great job of relying on logic to convince their points.