Evaluation of Rhetorical Situations

Now that Project 1 is over and done with it is time to move onto Project 2. Below I have found three examples of opinionated public speech related to the environment and have analyzed the author/audience/context for each.

1. What in the World Are They Spraying? (Full Length)

• Author/Speaker: In this hour and a half documentary, Michael J. Murphy focuses on the Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory. Murphy runs his own blog and is a heavily invested Chemtrail activist. From the information on his Facebook page, it would appear that he currently resides in Los Angeles, California. Most of his posts are related to either chemtrails or geoengineering and he appears to be fairly biased. Considering the fact that he believes in a conspiracy theory, it is hard to judge whether or not he is truly credible.

York, Chelsea. Screenshot from my computer. 9/26/2015 via Facebook.

• Audience: The primary audience seems to be those interested in potential conspiracy theories or the effects of geoengineering. Throughout the documentary the people involved continually mention things like "They're doing this to us" or "They don't care about us". The they they are referring to is the government, and the members believe that the government is lying to us. This documentary is definitely aimed more towards those with a disdain for the government and for those who believe in conspiracy theories.

• Context: The documentary was published to YouTube channel Justin Wallis on December 20, 2010. YouTube is a media outlet where anyone is free to upload just about anything they want. The video came about after some scientists noticed that chemtrails weren't fading away, even though they should have. This observation led Murphy and other individuals to believe that the government was the cause of these problems. Murphy has focused on Chemtrails for many years now, and seems well-versed in the subject.

2. Pope Francis: “Every Person Living on This Planet” Should Act on Climate

York, Chelsea. Screenshot from my computer. 9/26/15 via slate.com

• Author/Speaker: Eric Holthaus is a meteorologist who writes about weather and climate for Slate. The fact that he is a meteorologist and knows a lot about climate makes him a credible writer for topics about climate change. Most of the tweets from @EricHolthaus relate to climate issues or the environment. Holthaus currently resides in Fort Collins, Colorado and he seems to be heavily involved on current climate issues.

• Audience: Anyone who is invested in the Pope's opinions on societal issues or about the potential future of the world would be interested in this article. It seems that the article is emphasizing the importance of having a major political figure comment on what the world should do about climate change. Holthaus believes the Pope's actions were an important first step in the direction for a better future, and tries to portray that to the audience. 

• Context: This article was posted on Slate on June 18,2015. Over the past few months there has been a significant increase in the number of articles related to climate change. A lot of this has likely stemmed from the fact that Pope Francis himself mentioned it in the 180 page letter released every year. It was the first time in history that the papal letter focused on something that wasn't so religious, and it was reverberated around the globe.

3. A Cheap and Easy Plan to Stop Global Warming

York, Chelsea. Screenshot from my computer. 9/26/15 via MIT Technology Review.

• Author/Speaker: David Rotman is the editor of MIT Technology Review and spends a lot of his time thinking about what stories would be most valuable for his readers. In this current day and age, Rotman is especially interested in chemistry, economics, and materials science. He lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts, a place that publishes many scientific discoveries. 

• Audience: The primary audience would appear to be those interested in learning more about an easy way to stop global warming. The fact that the article says stop and not combat is a giveaway that it is aimed more at those who are more interested in an immediate solution. By including global warming in the title, it makes the article open anyone. Majority of the world has realized by now that global warming does exist, and they are taking an interest in methods that could stop it.

• Context: This article was posted to MIT Technology Review on February 8, 2013. Although it is a couple of years old by this point, it is still relevant. After the creation of the film, "What in the World Are They Spraying" in 2010, geoengineering methods have exploded in popularity. The article goes into significant depth about what geoengineering is, whether or not it will be helpful, and what society should do about it.

Reflection:

After reading through the blogs of Casey and Mira, I feel like we all had one example of a rhetorical situation that was lacking in interest. Reading their posts made me realize that I could've put more effort into establishing credibility of the authors. Mira's post in particular brought this to my attention. Not only did she establish credibility on what the authors did for a living, but she even looked into the beliefs and effects the authors have had in society. While I do feel like my three texts would do well in a rhetorical analysis, I now realize that there is a clear winner. One of these texts is very opinionated, very in depth, and how the author is getting their point across is clear.

Developing a Research Question

Below I have given more thought to some of the current debates and controversies in my field and have developed some potential research questions.

With significant figures like Pope Francis addressing what the future of the world holds, individuals are becoming more interested in climate change. Red flags are being raised as some believe that the government is only interested in climate change because they can make a profit off of it. 

There is also a large debate over whether or not some of the proposed methods for climate change will actually be beneficial. This is the debate that I am primarily interested in, but after the activity we did in class this past Thursday I am also kind of curious as to what the issues are behind the first debate.

Debnath, Jayanta. "~Serenity~". December 13, 2009 via flickr.
 Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Here are some potential research questions for debates on climate change:

What effects have social media had on the goal to combat climate change?

• After learning more about the effect media can have on social issues I am very interested to find out more about the statistics. Just having Pope Francis briefly mention climate change in his speech has sparked a large response on numerous media outlets. It has made me wonder what the potential effect could be of a wide scale focus on climate change in the media for a long period of time.

Where does the government play into climate change? Is it just for profit or for bettering the Earth?

• Originally I had no significant interest in the government's role. However, after seeing some of the articles my classmates found in our activity, I do wonder how involved the government is in climate change. The articles found are suggesting that they're only involved for a profit, but is that the truth?

What does the future hold for us if we implement geoengineering methods in their current states?

• From the research completed for my first project, it would appear that implementing them now could be dangerous. However, there is another issue to be addressed. If these methods aren't tested now and we wait until a global disaster happens to implement them, what would happen? Looking at it from this perspective, it would seem like it would be better to test them out before we reach dire straights.

Should scientists have the freedom to test out whatever methods they want on the environment without more research?

• This question could also encompass other areas that don't just pertain to climate change. It is pretty similar to the previous question, but there could be other methods being tested out. I would like to know more about them, if there are any, and what people think about scientists being able to experiment freely.

Reflection on Project 1

Now that my Quick Reference Guide has been published, I can reflect on the project as a whole. Below I have answered some questions pertaining to the process, including some of my successes and some of my struggles.

York, Chelsea. "Screenshot from my computer". September 25,2015.

What challenges did you face during the Quick Reference Guide project and how did you deal with them?

• When originally choosing my topic I soon realized that it was a bit too new. Since geoengineering is still being extensively researched by scientists, there is no significant presence of it in social media. After digging a lot deeper and spending a lot of time searching I was finally able to find at least a couple of examples of social media presence.

What successes did you experience on the project and how did they happen?

• The plethora of websites provided to us made it fairly easy to find credible sources. As previously stated, since geoengineering is still in its prime, it has been extensively researched by scientists. Most of the sources I found were from individuals with some sort of background in the field of science.

What kinds of arguments, rhetorical strategies, design choices and writing practices did you find the most effective for your project? Why?

• The use of headings and subheadings were especially helpful for formulating the QRG. Knowing beforehand what subtopics I wanted to address made it easier to avoid writing large walls of text. The process of peer review was also helpful because it gave me an outside perspective of what could use more work. I tend to keep my writings to myself and revise everything on my own, but I found the comments very helpful.

What kinds of arguments, rhetorical strategies, design choices and writing practices did you find were not effective for your project? Why?

• Personal arguments and personal pronouns were not effective for this project. The goal was to present information while still remaining unbiased, so the use of opinions couldn't really be implemented. Another issue I dealt with was having paragraphs that were too wordy. Learning to cut back on length while still keeping the meaning intact was a bit of a struggle. However, after reading through the clarity section and revising my sentences I found it to be doable.

How was the writing process for this project similar to other school writing experiences you’ve had in the past?

• The only other time I've really had another project similar to this was when I was doing my Senior Exit Project for high school. We were told to focus on a specific controversy based on the career we had chosen to shadow, so I had prior experience in narrowing down controversies. For this project we were also taught how to look for scholarly sources, so using sites like Academic Search Complete wasn't completely mind boggling.

How was the writing process for this project different from other school writing experiences you’ve had in the past?

• The tone of a QRG was a lot less formal than I was used to dealing with. Majority of my writing assignments in the past had to be very formal and not deviate from the third person. Another thing that was different with this particular assignment was that I had a lot of creative freedom. Even when I was able to choose my own topic I still had to follow a certain format. This project gave me the liberty to choose how I would display my subtopics, and what images I would choose to put in. 

Would any of the skills you practiced for this project be useful in your other coursework? Why or why not?

• Many of the skills practiced for this project will be useful in my other coursework. Before starting this project I never really took into account the credibility of the individual writing an article. The way I established credibility was by simply looking at the url, and if it wasn't from Wikipedia it was fairly credible. Now I know that establishing credibility of the author makes the text that much more effective. Writing the QRG and doing most of the process work through blogging taught me how to correctly cite my sources in my disciplines format. This will be very useful later on when I will have to write papers for my major.

Reflection:

Looking through Casey's blog post, I saw that we both initially struggled with understanding our topics. We both chose issues that are developing rapidly, and there was constantly new information being released. Unlike Casey, I was not as comfortable with breaking up my paragraphs, as I still have a tendency to be too wordy.

Victoria's blog post showed me that I wasn't the only one who had to rewrite their QRG. We both found it easier to write out everything we were thinking before adding any headings. Doing this project has taught me that if I find myself getting stuck I should just write everything out. It is much easier to revise something that is finished rather than sitting there and pondering on what I should do.

Publishing Project 1

Now that the end of project one is upon us, it is time to post our final products.

The final version of my QRG can be found at any of the following links. Feel free to choose whichever one you'd like.

Click me! Click me!
Click me?
CLICK ME!
Click me

Donato, Romain. "Insanity Lake".  August 1, 2010 via flickr.
Attribution Non-Commercial 2.0 Generic License

Clarity, Part 2

The Rules for Writers book has basically been my bible throughout this QRG writing. Below I have chosen four more topics from the clarity section and have explained what they taught me.

Needed Words

This section discussed adding needed words such as that, an, a, the, etc., for clarity purposes. These words are most commonly added when using compound structures or making comparisons in order to ensure that the phrases relate to one another in a way that makes sense. It taught me that it is important to check for clarity throughout sentences, and to add any necessary words in order to fix those problems.

Mixed Constructions

My curiosity about what mixed constructions led me to read this section of the book. Before reading, I thought mixed constructions were having two different subjects in the same sentence; I was close. This section discussed checking sentences to see if they make sense grammatically. Along with that, it mentioned that verbs and their modifiers should match the subject they are describing. When writing, you should be able to check for logical connections; what is the subject you are addressing? Does it make sense?

Variety

One of the most important things to do when writing is to provide variety. This can be accomplished by finding a balance between the different sentence structures and inverting sentences occasionally. By differing the sentence structures, one can avoid sounding monotonous and keep the text flowing smoothly. In the case of inverting sentences, it should only be used if the meaning behind the sentence won't be lost and is good for providing emphasis.

Wordy Sentences

The reason why I chose this section is because I know that I'm guilty of having wordy sentences. After reading, I have discovered some ways to help cut back on my word count. There are many different methods, including limiting the number of clauses used, narrowing the clauses down to phrases or single words, and eliminating redundancies and unnecessary repetitions. While they may seem to provide emphasis, they actually do the opposite, so it is important to be aware while writing.

Bellucci, Marco. "Question mark". August 4, 2005 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

After revising my paper and focusing solely on these four topics, I noticed that a lot of my sentences were either too wordy or had mixed constructions.

For example in this sentence: "To combat this dilemma, reddit user m0llusk, with no previous background on the subject, suggested reengineering the oceans . . .", there are too many topics being addressed at once. It would be much more effective if I restructured the sentence into smaller clauses so it wouldn't be such a run-on.

I also found while revising that I completely forgot to add a verb to one of my sentences.
"Another newer and riskier method proposed by 1995 Nobel Prize winner and atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen."
In my first couple of scans I didn't pick up on this error, probably because my brain knew what I was trying to say and added it for me. Since the verb was nonexistent, the meaning was unclear, causing it to be a mixed construction. This sentence was also originally one long run-on, but I found that there were two separate ideas in it and broke them up that way.

Identifying Basic Grammar Patterns

In this blog post I have provided a link that will take you to my longest paragraph from my QRG. In this paragraph I have identified many different grammatical elements as referenced throughout the Rules for Writers section on "Grammar Basics".

studio tdes. "'Woman Gets Out Of Parking Ticket Because Of Missing Comma". July 7, 2015 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

My longest paragraph can be found here.

After completing this activity I noticed that I have a tendency to write very long sentences. Majority of the longer sentences were the combinations of numerous subordinate clauses. I would like to focus more on creating shorter sentences, and varying the purposes and patterns of my sentences. As it stands, they are all fairly predictable and could use some major reinventing.

Copy for Paragraph Analysis

In this blog post I have provided a link to my QRG draft with all of the comments removed. I have replaced them with an analysis of all of my paragraphs.

After going through and performing a paragraph analysis of my QRG, I noticed that I have very weak developments. I am able to provide examples to the main point to help with organization, but they just seem to appear, with no strong development present. One of the things that I did well was connecting ideas to one another through signal words or phrases, which helped with the overall flow of the document. There was also something that didn't even occur to me as I originally wrote the document: I provided subheadings for the problems associated with each method, but none for the benefits. The benefits were just lumped together in my explanation of what each method was.

My paragraph analysis can be found here.

Liza. "Puzzle Pieces". October 14, 2008 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Reflection on Project 1 Draft

In this blog post I will be answering the questions about "Audience" and "Context" on page 66 of the Student's Guide book.

For this first draft of Project 1 I reviewed Swati's QRG and Elliot's QRG. Swati's document focused on the controversy surrounding genetically modified embryos, and whether or not it was ethical. Elliot's QRG covered the usefulness of the scientific method.

Audience

Who. specifically, is going to be reading the document? Who am I trying to reach with my argument?

• This quick reference guide is being written specifically for my English class. While any outsider has the potential to come across my blog and find my QRG, my primary audience is my fellow classmates and teacher. By writing this document, I am aiming to present them the information from both sides of the argument in an unbiased way as to not influence their opinions on the subject.

What are their values and expectations? Am I adequately meeting those expectations?

• Considering most of us have chosen topics that are relatively obscure to the masses, I would suspect that my classmates expect me to have researched adequately. It is my goal to present them with the general background information and enough knowledge to give them a deeper understanding of my topic. I feel like I have presented enough information to understand the topic, but I feel that I might be slacking on the opposing sides.

How much information do I need to give my audience? How much background information or context should I provide for them without insulting their expertise?

• Since geoengineering is still a new phenomena, there was a lot of information that needed to be presented. There are many different approaches to consider, and each approach has its own pros and cons. I feel like I adequately provided my classmates with enough background information without insulting their expertise.

What kind of language is suitable for this audience?

• While I am writing a document for a college class, I can be a bit more lax on my language choices. QRGs are meant to be a bit more informal, and don't require a rigorous vocabulary in order to be understood. The purpose is to present a lot of information quickly, without being too wordy or confusing. I think I've done a decent job at not being too confusing, but I find myself wondering if some of my paragraphs are too wordy and could be rearranged.

What tone should I use with my audience? Do I use this tone consistently throughout my draft?

• Wanting to avoid any bias, I am aiming to write in a neutral tone. I am trying to present both sides of the debate equally to avoid skewing opinions. I believe I've done a good job at remaining neutral throughout, but I never really identified the opposing side. Their presence is there, but they don't have any form of being their own group.

, 

TEDxSF. "audience participates in  Dr. Ali Binazir's talk - IMG_0076-sc © Adrianne Koteen". November 18,2009 via flickr.
Attribution NonCommercial 2.0 Generic License

Context

What are the formatting requirements of the assignment? Do I meet them?

• As we've discussed in class and through some of our blog posts, there are many different elements of a QRG that should be addressed. There should be an informative title and headings or subheadings throughout the document. Visuals that relate to the topic and aide readers, along with hyperlinking and white space are also important aspects to consider. While all of these are present in my QRG, I think that I could have more visuals and better titled subheadings. At this moment in time I have only found a couple of images that I feel work well with my topic, but I am looking to change that.

What are the content requirements for the assignment? Do I meet them?

• Based on the grading rubric for Project 1, this document should present both sides of an issue and all the required background information without getting too in-depth. There should be many links within the document to add to credibility, relevant images, and it should address why people should care about the issue. My QRG does present both the positives and negatives of geoengineering, although one side of the debate hasn't been effectively established. I could definitely use more images and address more in-depth why people should care about this issue. I kind of glance over it when I talk about the effect it could have on the global food supply, but that's about it.

Does my draft reflect knowledge or skills gained in class in addition to my own ideas and voice?

• Before taking this class, I had no clue about the usage of hyperlinking or accurately citing images. Throughout my draft I provide many external links for the audience, and I have cited the images I used. I still need to format them correctly in Google Docs, something I have yet to figure out. By remaining as unbiased as possible, I feel like I'm lacking in my own voice, but I try to emphasize the negatives more than the positives.

Have I addressed any grammatical issues that my teacher highlighted in class or in my previously-graded assignments?

• Since this is our first assignment for this class, no grammatical issues have been pointed out. Although everyone has a tendency to make grammatical errors here and there, and these will hopefully be pointed out as my peers review my document. I fixed any obvious errors that I noticed, like matching verb tenses with one another, but I may have missed some things.

Clarity, Part 1

The Rules for Writers book provides many excellent tips on how to write a successful paper. Below I have chosen four topics out of the clarity section of the book and have discussed what they taught me.

Parallel ideas

One of the reasons why I chose to study this topic was because it seemed to be a relatively new concept to me. After reading through the chapter I realized most of it was common sense, making sure verbs were kept in the same tense or adjectives matched, but still provided me with a lot of information. When writing, I have a tendency to switch around tenses or forms which can cause confusion to the reader. By using parallels effectively (i.e. to be tossed and to be caught) establishes emphasis, and can be useful when trying to portray certain actions or emotions.

Misplaced and/or dangling modifiers

This section of the book taught me what modifiers were and the proper way to use them. A common mistake when using limiting modifiers such as only or almost is to put them in the wrong spot, distorting clarity. I know that I am guilty of occasionally screwing up the placement of modifiers, and now that I understand more about how they function hopefully this will be avoidable.

Emphasis

Before reading this topic, I was not aware of subordinate and coordinate phrases. I now know that if two ideas are of equal or near equal importance they are considered coordinate and should be joined using a semi-colon. Subordinate phrases join one important idea with one less important idea, the more important one going first. Although this technique is helpful, it must be used cautiously, as overuse of either will draw away from the purpose of the text.

Exact words

The biggest lesson behind this topic was to become best friends with a dictionary and a thesaurus. Having access to a larger vocabulary can add vivacity to your text and avoid making it a snooze-fest. It is also important to use standard idioms to ensure that the meaning isn't lost in translation and to avoid relying heavily on cliches. Being consciously aware of the images being invoked by figures of speech used will help establish clarity- if the image invoked isn't what you are trying to portray, then consider changing the figure of speech.

fauxto-digit. "Bob and Weave". October 4, 2008 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Reflection:

While reading through Swati's and Elliot's QRG drafts, I noticed that one of the biggest issues was the use of parallelism. In some of the sentences, the parallels were fine, but in others verb tenses were being switched around, or missing the modifiers that would match them. I noticed that all four of the topics I studied were used at least once throughout both of their drafts.

This sentence, from Swati's QRG, shows a common mistake made when trying to use exact words:

"In order to spread awareness about the bioethical issues involved in this type of genetic experimentation, bioethics.com (2015), an organization established to raise consciousness about bioethics, used their Twitter account . . ."

While the word consciousness does have the connotation of awareness of one's surroundings, in this particular instance it sticks out as not belonging. Simply using awareness instead of consciousness would make the sentence more effective.

This sentence, from Elliot's QRG, shows the proper use of parallelism:

"The answer to this question is a yes and a no."

A section of the Rules for Writers book focuses solely on the use of parallelism. By matching tenses and forms with one another, the overall meaning is emphasized more and makes it more effective.

Thoughts on Drafting

Throughout the development of this QRG, we have used the Student's Guide book extensively. In this blog post I will be analyzing how useful the book's advice on composing a paper were.

• What parts of the book’s advice on the above bulleted topics are helpful for writing in this genre?

I found most of the book's advice on how to write a paper very helpful, especially its recommendations on creating effective thesis statements. For me, what stuck out the most when it came to writing a thesis was asking yourself a question that was worth being answered. If you aren't able to think of an interesting question and develop a meaningful answer yourself, is there truly a point in writing it? Although not all QRGs utilize a thesis statement, keeping these ideas in mind when writing will help to direct your paper. Another piece of advice that I found useful was utilizing signal words to connect topics to each other. By continually connecting ideas to one another, you are staying in tune with your paper and are avoiding going off on tangents. This is especially effective when trying to display large amounts of information to an audience.
What parts of the book’s advice on these topics might not be so helpful, considering the genre you’re writing in?

• What parts of the book’s advice on these topics might not be so helpful, considering the genre you’re writing in? 

The book had great advice on effective ways to write a standard essay, however, some of these methods are not practical when writing a QRG. I personally found the book's advice on writing paragraphs in the form of PIEIEIE to be unhelpful. Using this format often creates long, in-depth paragraphs, and in a QRG we want to avoid having walls of text everywhere. However, utilizing the simple form of Point-Illustrate-Explain is a great way to ensure that you are staying on track in your paragraphs and that they are sensible.

Wightman, Chris. "all's well that inks well". April 11, 2008 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Reflection:

Reading through Chloe's blog post, I found there was a heavy emphasis on how important it is to have a strong thesis statement. We both agreed that the book was helpful with the advice of asking yourself if your thesis is interesting and if it answers an important question as you formulate it. Although Casey and I disagreed on the usefulness of PIE in a QRG, we both found that most of the book's advice was very helpful when pertaining to writing our own QRGs. Looking through my own QRG, I found there were three things that could use some work:

1) Giving my introduction a better sense of direction
2) Better presentations of the two sides involved in my debate
3) A conclusion that closes off the QRG

Draft of Quick Reference Guide

In this blog post I will be explaining some of the key facts of my controversy to help aid understanding. A link to my Quick Reference Draft can be found at the bottom of this post.

Before taking a look at my quick reference guide it is important to understand the reasoning behind geoengineering. Geoengineering is a developing method that involves altering the environment in order to combat anthropogenic climate change. At this moment in time there are three popular methods being proposed; injecting chemicals into the atmosphere, gathering carbon dioxide and storing it, and relying on reafforestation. Each of the proposed methods have their pros and cons. When looking through my QRG, I would greatly appreciate feedback on whether or not clarity is needed on the types of methods proposed, along with whether the overall understanding is clear. Any other general feedback will also be accepted with open arms.

Penn, Joanna. "Editing for the 2nd edition of How To Love Your Job or Find A New One". April 12, 2012 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

My Quick Reference Guide can be found here. Thanks!

Practicing Quoting

This blog post is about how to properly cite quotes in my discipline's citation style. Below is a paragraph including quotes from the opposing sides, color-coded to easily identify the four different citation elements.

York, Chelsea. A screenshot from my computer. Taken September 12, 2015.

Key:

Purple= Signal phrase

Green= Establishing authority

Blue= Ellipsis and brackets for clarity

Orange= Context

QRGs: the Genre

A Quick Reference Guide is a useful tool for those interested in finding out information quickly. Below I have analyzed the different elements of five QRGs, and how, if used correctly, very useful they can be.

1.What do the conventions seem to be?

Throughout all of the different QRGs we looked at in class, there seemed to be five elements they all had in common:

• Informative titles and subheadings to aid the reader's search for certain content.
• An introductory paragraph that gives an overview of topic to be expanded upon.
• Images- including graphical statistics- to help humanize different parties involved and provide information without the need of in-depth explanations.
• Internal linking to provide more insight if wanted by the reader, and to add credibility to the QRG.
• High-level use of white space to make the QRG easily skimmable. 

2. How are these conventions defined by the author's formatting and design choices?

It is easy to identify effective QRGs by their usage of white space and headings. Headings and subheadings are informative enough to provide the audience with a clear view of what will be discussed, but also avoids confusing them by giving too much information. By keeping the text nicely spaced out, it invites the audience in to continue reading. Emotional images also help to draw in the audience, and those images that are more fact based are easy to understand and are explained briefly. If more information wants to be acquired, the many hyperlinks within redirect the audience to the desired place.

Altmann, Gerd. "Info, Information, Tips, Icon, Support, Announcement". 9 months ago via pixabay.Public Domain License

3. What is the purpose of these QRGs?

The purpose of QRGs is to provide an audience insight and perspective into certain issues without having to research on their own. The QRG puts the issue at hand into context by providing a basic background, identifying key figures involved, and explaining why and how it is relevant to our daily lives.

4. Who are the intended audiences? Are they similar or different? How and why?

The intended audiences for QRGs are typically the general public. The types of QRGs read will depend on what the specific reader is interested in. For example, those interested in the developing controversy of the growing presence of women in mainstream media may choose to look at the QRG for GamerGate.

On the other hand, those wishing to know more about the health effects of E-cigarettes may choose to take a look at Vox's E-cigarettes and health analysis. An individuals interests will determine whether or not they will be drawn to certain QRGs, but anyone in the general public can obtain more knowledge with the simple click of a mouse.

5. How do the QRGs use imagery? Why do they do this?

The QRGs use imagery in a plethora of ways. For those topics with a lot of important groups or individuals to remember, the use of images helps to easily identify said people. If the author is aiming to portray an emotion, they may use an image that sparks feelings from within. The QRG on Greece's growing debt shows an image of a young child looking afraid, attaching on to the reader's emotional instinct to want to protect them.

Imagery is also useful for providing the audience with a lot of data in an easy-to-read-format, rather than overloading them with numbers and information. Not only does it make it easier to understand data, but it also prevents the information from being a wall of text. Images provide color and break up different sections, making the text easier to read.


Reflection:

After reading through the blogs of Mira, Alex, and Samantha, I found that we were all in a general agreement over the conventions of a QRG. Alex's comment on there being a smaller target audience within a QRG reminded me that I shouldn't get too broad when writing my own QRG. Mira mentioned that keeping all of the important information for the end is a good idea, because people tend to skim through the bulk of the text anyways, and Samantha emphasized the distinction between graphics and images. All of these posts have given me more things to consider as I edit my own QRG.

Cluster of My Controversy

Below is a zoomed-out screenshot and a link to my coggle on the dilemmas associated with geoengineering.

Geoengineering has two main groups, those for it and against it, and in this coggle I broke down the key arguments for each side. There are many individuals and methods being proposed, and it was important to analyze the validity of each.

York, Chelsea. A screenshot from my computer. Taken September 11, 2015.

The entire, non-zoomed out view, can be found here.

Reflection:

It was interesting to see how many of my peers chose Coggle as their platform. After looking through the seven suggested platforms and trying a couple of them out, Coggle was the most effective one. A closer look at my classmates blogs showed me that I could've been a bit more elaborate with some of my branches, but I am still satisfied with how mine turned out. The cluster map was useful for organizing my thoughts into a somewhat legible format, and will make it easier to identify key figures when writing it.

Isaak's cluster was structured similar to my own. Although our branches have different headings, we both identified important points and elaborated on them. His topic has been explored more than my own, so it was likely easier for him to find media outlets and speakers. Since my controversy is still developing, it was hard to identify many media outlets or speakers. His format was easy to understand, and if I wanted to know a specific person it would be easy to locate.

Elliot's cluster was also created in Coggle. There were fewer branches on his cluster, but he also provided more in-depth summaries of his different points. It's not as appealing to the eye, but it gets the job done.

Annotated Bibliography in APA Style

Throughout the last few blog posts, I have compiled a list of potential sources for my Quick Reference Guide. My annotated bibliography can be found at this link because there were too many formatting errors when trying to format it in Blogger.

Bildhauer, Niklas. "File:FileStack.jpg". January 11, 2008 via wikimedia

A sample annotated bibliography can be found in the APA 6th edition guide.

Reflection:

After looking through many of my classmates annotated bibliographies, I realized that I was not the only one who struggled to correctly format it on Blogger. A closer look into the formatting provided me with a quick and simple solution. Using a different writing platform, such as Microsoft Word, should address the issues I had.

Victoria's annotated bib was in the same format that I used, and I noticed that the hardest part for both of us was figuring out how to create hanging indentations. After spending quite a bit of time studying the APA style in order to create my annotated bib, I found it very easy to identify where her sources came from, when they were published, and where they were published.

Alex's post allowed me to see the uniqueness of the AMA format. Rather than having citations listed alphabetically, it is preferred for you to list your sources in the order that they appeared in the paper. It also showed me that I need to work on shortening my summaries. Compared to some of my classmates, my summaries are practically essays within themselves and require a lot of reading.

The different citation styles help to identify what field the paper belongs too. Looking through many other blogs, I've found that a lot of the science related controversies use the APA format. Some of the other styles (i.e. IEEE or AMA) I had never seen before, and are likely career field specific.

Ideology in My Controversy

Below I will be answering questions about my understanding and take on the debate at hand in the past few posts.

Who is involved in the debate?

As with any debate, there are those that support the topic in question and those that are against it. In the debate I've chosen, the two groups are those that support geoengineering as a tool for mitigating climate change, and those that believe geoengineering will be more detrimental to the environment.

Who are some of the major speakers/writers within these groups?

Paul Crutzen is one of the leading speakers in regards to learning more about what geoengineering entails. Crutzen was one of the first scientists to tear open at the concept of releasing aerosols into the air to counteract climate change. Since geoengineering is still relatively new, there aren't many leading speakers or writers at this time.

What kind of power does each group hold?

Each group holds about the same level of power, with both sides being comprised of many well versed scientists. The true power comes from how the different groups relay their information to the public, and whether or not it is easily understood.

What resources are available to different positions?

Both sides have the same availability of resources, and can alter their facts to skew the views of those around them. Since the topic chosen is a science debate, large amounts of data are collected by both sides and are compiled to create a compelling argument.

What does each group value?

Those that are opposed to using geoengineering value preservation of funds and current weather conditions. They believe that the use of chemicals to reflect sunlight back into space in order to cool the earth will likely damage current weather patterns and have no large scale effect on cooling the globe.

On the other side, many scientists feel that geoengineering is an important first step to solving the human caused climate change. They believe that the combination of chemicals will have a large scale effect on cooling the globe. Their plan isn't to just toss a bunch of chemicals into the air and hope for the best, but to regulate the chemicals released while also implementing greener technologies.

PublicDomainPictures. "Man Coat People Laboratory Lab Glass Liquid Blue" One year ago via pixabay.

Public Domain License

What counts as evidence for the different positions?

Research conducted by the different groups serves as their evidence. As studies are published, depending on the content within, certain groups are able to gain the upper hand. The usage of data in arguments helps to solidify and validate the point of view being presented. For those that oppose geoengineering, data related to the harm of releasing aerosols into the atmosphere would aide them. Those that support geoengineering could use data revealing the cost effectiveness versus the potential gain of using such methods in the field.

Being scientists, there is always a debate over who holds the power over certain issues. As new research is published, opinions are shifted, and friendships are severed. However, there is a general respect amongst peers in the science field, and while they may not always agree on the methods for solving a problem, both sides agree that climate change is a huge problem for the globe. It is a matter of finding a feasible first step to combat climate change, and will likely take many more years of research.

Evaluation of Social Media Sources

The website Storify is a great tool for finding social media sources related to specific topics. In this post I will be closely analyzing a couple of the authors of articles that can be found in my own story.

Although the primary purpose of using Storify was to find social media posts on sites like Twitter and Facebook, it was not feasible to find any. Geoengineering is still fresh out of the bag, being heavily evaluated by many scientists, and as such, most social media displays topical articles.

Henry Fountain
In the New York Times article written by Henry Fountain, he relays what a panel of individuals thinks about using geoengineering as a tool against climate change. The article explains the different approaches being considered for climate change, and what the risks might be.

In order to analyze the validity of the post, some research was made on Henry Fountain. He is a science writer for the New York Times and is currently residing in New York, where much of the discussion on geoengineering is occurring. His twitter account, @henryfountain, has been active since December of 2008 and majority of his tweets are hyperlinks to news articles he feels is important.

Henry Fountain holds a significant amount of credibility, with his primary focus being on engineering, but he also quite frequently dabbles in the sciences. Most of his followings on social site Twitter are individuals who are either journalists or inspired scientists-to-be. Since Henry Fountain appears to be a fairly credible man, his article about geoengineering has also been deemed credible.

Altmann, Gerd. "Hook, Check Mark, Check Off, Confirm, Confirmation" Two months ago via pixabay.

Public Domain License

Brian Kahn
The second article, found on Mashable, gives a foundation for the dos and don'ts of geoengineering. Much like the scholarly articles found, it analyzes the costs and risks of implementing geoengineering. Author Brian Kahn relays valuable information in order inform the masses of what climate engineering entails.

Screenshot from "Mashable". September 5,2015 via Mashable

A closer look into Kahn's background, it was found that he is a senior science writer for Climate Central. Along with being a senior writer there, he has collaborated with the Wallstreet Journal, Yale forums, and has had many relations with website climate.gov.

His twitter handle, @blkahn, was created back in January of 2010 and shows that he is also currently residing in New York. Upon closer inspection, majority of Kahn's tweets have something to do with the changing climate and weather conditions, and can be validated through the hyperlinks he provides with his tweets. He is associated with his place of work, Climate Central, on twitter, along with Climate and Society, and the Society of Environmental Journalists, indicating that he is well versed in events related to climate change.

Evaluation of Scholarly Sources

In this blog post I will be analyzing two of the scholarly sources I have chosen for my controversial issue. The content within the two journal publications are closely related to geoengineering, and have been dissected in the post below.

The first scholarly journal publication "An economic evaluation of solar radiation management" is as self-explanatory as it gets. The primary purpose of the article is to evaluate whether or not creating technology to reflect the sun back into space will be cost effective for the impact it will have. This specific article was published through academic journal Science of the Total Environment and was revised and edited multiple times before being made public.

Geoengineering contains a lot of data relating to temperatures in the air, ground and soil, as well as the percentages of different amounts of chemicals in the atmosphere. Throughout the article, there are many in-text citations that will lead to more information on the research conducted, and at the end of the article is a long reference sheet.

Anyone who is interested in learning more about geoengineering, climate economics or climate modeling can read this article published by the following authors: Asbjorn Aaheim, Bard Romstad, Tamyuan Wei, Jon Egill Kristjansson, Helene Muri, Ulrike Neimeier, and Hawke Schmidt. A quick search on Academic Search Complete with the terms geoengineering, atmospheric and change allowed me to find this article.

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. "National Climate Assessment Released" May 16, 2014 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

The second scholarly source chosen was written in order to analyze potential risks and benefits of applying geoengineering to climate change. The article "Review of geoengineering approaches to mitigating climate change" was also found within Academic Search Complete with the same search terms.

Jurgen. "Smoke, Smoking, Chimney, Fireplace" 11/13/2012 via pixabay.

Public Domain License

Authors Zhihua Zhang, John C. Moore, Donald Hulsingh, and Yongxin Zhao wrote the article with the intention that readers would like to better understand the economical and environmental impacts of geoengineering. Much like the previous article, many researches have been conducted in regards to cost effectiveness and overall environmental impact of geoengineering. Published through the Journal of Cleaner Production after much peer review, the article includes many in-text citations as well and provides an extensive list of references near the end.

Evaluation of General Sources

In this blog post I will be evaluating two sources I found from a general Google search. I will be analyzing their general purpose, along with whether or not it seems credible.

The controversy of climate change has been an ongoing battle for many years. Geoengineering is a new concept aimed at counteracting the effects of human caused greenhouse gases. Both of the articles analyzed below focus on different aspects of climate engineering. One provides general information on what climate engineering is and its potential. While the other argues against the use of climate engineering and explains why it isn't feasible.

Why Climate Engineering Won't Work

This article comes from The Huffington Post with a URL ending with ".com", which automatically makes it less reliable than other URLs ending in .edu  or .org. In general, URLs that end with a .com could be edited by anyone. After gathering some background information on The Huffington Post itself, this source is potentially filled with bias. The online news source is known for being a liberal-oriented business, implying that many of their viewpoints will be skewed.

Screenshot from "The Huffington Post". September 5,2015 via The Huffington Post

However, the author of the article can convince an individual that the article is indeed credible. Author Anders Levermann is a climate change scientist and physics professor. He was the lead author in the most recent UN climate change report and has some level of authorization over climate change discussions. The article was last updated on May 10, 2015 and provides no internal links. Geoengineering is still a relatively new concept, so the article does not seem to be too out of date.

Levermann's purpose in writing this article is to put the process of geoengineering in layman's terms, and to then explain why it isn't a feasible solution. As a climate change scientist, he explains why simply reflecting sunlight won't work and presents another possible solution. The only graphical image included in the article was of a chemical plant emitting harmful gases. He provides no citations at the end of his article, but has many links to other popular topics related to climate.

Advent of Geoengineering

The information provided in this article comes from a scholarly journal at Yale University and has a URL ending in ".edu". When compared to other URLs, such as ones ending with a .com, this website is more reputable. Scholarly websites are well-known for citing where the information gathered was obtained from, and many of these articles are not published until sufficient research has been completed.

Screenshot form "YaleNews". September 5,2015 via Yale News

The specific journal published has five authors; Dan Kahan, Hank Jenkins-Smith, Tor Tarantola, Carol Silva, and Donald Braman. All five authors reside at universities and study different types of sciences - ranging from neurosciences to political sciences. The article was last updated February 10, 2015 and has a couple of internal links, one being to the journal itself and the other to another subset of the Yale website.

Within the article, one will find the results from a study conducted on a group of people. The five authors wanted to see how an individuals opinion changed depending on how informed they were on the topic (studying the facts themselves or receiving majority of their knowledge from politics). Through the study conducted, it was found that geoengineering has the potential to counteract both the political hold over climate change and the human effects of climate change. Although no images can be found in the article, it provides an accurate citation and hyperlinks you to the full journal publishing.

My Discipline

For this post I will be explaining the aspirations of engineering students and current spectacles related to the field. Engineering is one of the most common fields college students pursue, although there are still many questions generated. Below I will answer five general questions to get a better understanding of the field.

What do students in your program learn how to do?

Students in the field of engineering are taught how to develop solutions to technical problems through rigorous studies involving mathematics and science. The first couple of years primarily focus on getting students accustomed to using computer programs in order to produce and analyze designs and then using those designs to simulate and test machines. An engineer's goal is to create products that are more efficient. That means not only creating products that will run more efficiently, but will also allow consumers to preserve their funds.

For those who don't wish to create products, they can focus on maintenance projects. Analyzing problems within factories and determining the time and cost required to fix the problem is another common area of interest for developing engineers. Through their acquired knowledge of science and mathematics, they are able to quickly identify issues and allow the flow of production to continue. Engineering has paved the path for where we stand today, with most things automated and running efficiently.

What do people who get degrees in this field usually go on to do for work?

The field of engineering has about 17 specialties that have been recognized by the Federal government. Majority of the primary fields of engineering have subsets of engineering within them. For example, someone who chose to specialize in the field of Civil Engineering would also deal with structural and transportation engineering.

As discussed in the question above, a large portion of engineers go on to create products that are cost efficient and increase production value. The degrees that focus heavily on bettering the quality of life through technology include, but are not limited to; Electrical and Chemical engineering, Mechanical engineering, Biosystems engineering, and Biomedical engineering. Those who want to focus on analyzing problems and developing plans often go into Engineering management, although most engineers are taught to deal with the problems within their own specialties.

What drew you to this field?

Throughout most of my high school experience I knew that there were two things I was interested in; computers and the earth. Preserving the earth and trying to maintain the scarce resources we have available to us has always been a fascination of mine. I wanted to be able to pursue a field of study that would allow me to create models of equipment that could help to better sustain the environment.

Moritzer, Wolfgang. "Download" via Unsplash.
Creative Commons Zero License

Originally, I assumed that what I was looking for could be found within one of the science degrees offered here at the University of Arizona. However, upon further investigation, the degree that suited me the most was within the field of engineering. By majoring in Biosystems Engineering, I will be able to develop technology to gain a deeper understanding of agriculture and biology. This encompasses creating sustainable soil and water resources, developing biological and biomedical products, and potentially designing life support systems for other planets.

Who are the leaders/most exciting people in your field right now? Why?

One of the most primitive leaders in the field of engineering is a man by the name of Bernard Gordon. Founder of the Analog Corporation, Gordon is well-known for creating one of the first fetal heart monitor back in the 50's, as well as inventing the first CAT-scan machine.

Well into 80's, Bernard Gordon is still a predominant figure in the field of engineering. Many people look to Gordon for advice, and he spends much of his time visiting schools to give speeches. His continual presence in the field of engineering has inspired many individuals. Gordon wants to promote the importance of engineering education, and aides schools through funding them. His advancements of analog-to-digital conversions are found in a plethora of machines today, and he serves as the model engineer.

What are the leading academic/scholarly journals in your field? Where are they published?

The field of Environmental engineering has three leading scholarly journals.

The most popular of the three is the Environmental Science and Technology journal, under chief editor David L. Sedlak. The journal headquarters lie in the University of California in Berkeley, and has had thousands of articles published within the past year.

Another high-ranked journal is the Journal of Power Sources under Editor-in-Chief Stefano Passerini. The journal is published by company Elsevier and has roughly 250,000 articles released each year.

The journal of Water Science and Technology resides with editor Professor Wolfgang Rauch and is published by IWA publishing.

EDIT

Before browsing through some of my classmates disciplines, I had no idea how many people were pursuing similar fields to mine. While I never knew the specific field I intended to pursue, I had the general concept of what I wished to do, and that was to work with nature. It was comforting to see that some of my classmates had the same aspirations as me, and that we could be the ones to create a drastic change in the field.

Samantha's post revealed to me that I wasn't the only high school student that actually enjoyed being able to analyze literature. Although I could never see myself teaching students, it's nice to know that someone will open the doors of literature to growing students.

It was Mira's post that left me with a large sense of euphoria. My passions are very similar. We both intend to focus on sustaining and preserving the environment while continuing to play music. Much like Mira, I found myself torn in the decision of music or science, but since music has a very low pay rate I also went down the path of likelier success. It will be interesting to see if our paths cross down the road as I create technology that can potentially be used in the field of environmental science.