What comments have I received that emphasize the strengths in my essay? How can I maintain this type of writing in the future?

One of my strengths in my essay was my title, since the very first comment to my paper remarked, “Great title!”  I rarely create bad titles, so I would say as long as I keep thinking of catchy things to write I can maintain good titles!  According to the second comment to my paper, I did a great job of catching the reader’s attention in my introduction paragraph and making them aware of my topic.  Another strength in my essay was that I wrote an “Excellent analysis of
Anderson’s logos,” as the fifth comment to my essay says.  

What did I consider the strongest part of my essay? Do the comments reflect this belief? If so, how? If not, what can I do in a revision to make this my strongest point?

My introduction was the strongest part of my essay.  It states exactly what my paper is going to discuss.  The comment made to my paper about my introduction said that I did a grabbed my audiences attention and I did a good job of introducing the topic to the reader. 

What comments have I received that point out weaknesses in my essay? What do I need to do to begin improving on these essays?

In the second comment that you made to my paper, you also wrote that I failed to “conclude your introduction with a specific thesis statement.”  I thought I did conclude my introduction with a specific thesis statement when I wrote, “Unfortunately, an argument was not presented in
Anderson’s article credibly.”  Why did you not consider my statement to be a “specific thesis statement?”  Although I did do a good job at citing my sources, I did overlook one quote that I used that I needed to make a citation for.  This shows a slight weakness in that I need to look a lot closer when checking that ALL citations have been made accordingly.  I could probably fix this problem by printing out a rough draft and highlighting all sentence with quotation marks in them and making sure that I have provided a citation for all quotes.   One weakness that was pointed out in the fifth comment to my paper was that I need to remember not to use quotations in the last sentence of a paragraph but rather use the last sentence of a paragraph to restate main point and transitioning into the next paragraph.  This problem could be easily fixed by adding a few more sentences to the end of the paragraph in which I review the main point of that paragraph.Based on the sixth comment to my paper, one thing I definitely could use practice on is pointing out awkward-sounding sentences and finding a way to reword them.  When I wrote, “It is this that makes the reader question what type of person, or people in general, are trying to convince them why the government should legalize marijuana – a businessman? A person with a degree in law? or a pot smoker who just wants to smoke his marijuana in peace without being imprisoned?”  I tried to demonstrate how Anderson’s use of unprofessional language, which diminishes the credibility of his article, makes the reader wonder who exactly is trying to convince them that it would be a great idea to legalize marijuana.  By questioning whether it was, “a businessman? A person with a degree in law? or a pot smoker who just wants to smoke his marijuana in peace without being imprisoned?” I was simply showing how the reader, in the beginning of Anderson’s essay, would think that a professional person was trying to convince them that legalizing marijuana would be beneficial, but by the end of his essay, the reader can no longer tell who their convincer is because he does not seem very professional anymore, but rather a pot smoker trying to get marijuana legalized so he can smoke in peace.   While at the Write Site, my helper and I tried to figure out the best way to word this sentence but found ourselves clueless.  Therefore, I did it the best way I could come up with at that moment.  (Sorry for such a long explanation.)      Comment 7 helped me to see something that I should have gone further in explanation with.  In my fifth paragraph, I stated that, “Monroe Anderson was not able to use pathos to aid in the persuasion of his audience.  However, if
Anderson would have presented the other side to his argument, he might have had a better opportunity to use pathos to capture his audience’s appeal.”  Here, I was demonstrating how it was obvious that
Anderson was not very successful in arguing his side of the issue and perhaps, if he had chosen to argue why marijuana should stay illegal, he may have been able to suck the audience in by using pathos to capture their attention.  By arguing why marijuana should stay illegal, through pathos, he could have shown how so many have been killed in car accidents because one of the drivers was under the influence of marijuana, or even more touching, how innocent children joyfully playing in the street have been brutally run over by drivers who were smoking pot and were just too careless to think of stopping.  With the use of pathos, he could have his audience gasping in shock and tears if he had argued the opposite side of the issue because the emotional truth would have them convinced.     One last weakness found in my paper showed how I failed to write a “formal conclusion that is not part of you actual essay.”  I did not even notice this when I rewrote my paper, but now I can make sure it does not happen in my next paper.       

Could the Write Site help me with these improvements? Why or why not?

I did use the Write Site to help me with my paper.  The lady who worked with me did a great job of helping me cite quotations, using paraphrases, lengthening my paper by coming up with another topic to write a paragraph over, and ways to cut out repetitive material.   One of the comments you made to my paper slightly disturbed m.  It disturbed me because the assistant at the Write Site who helped me edit and revise my paper gave me advice on a thesis statement that would fit with the paper I wrote.  While I was there, I came up with the ending sentence to my introduction paragraph, “Unfortunately, an argument was not presented in
Anderson’s article credibly.”  We agreed that this was a thesis statement since it did state exactly what I was going to write my paper about:  Proving that
Anderson did not effectively present a credible argument.  **The only reason the last sentence in my introduction sentence may be worded funny is because I had to reorder the sentence to show an example of passive voice from my grammar assignment.      

Do you feel that you could adequately revise this essay and receive a better grade now that you are able to see where the weaknesses in your essay?

Now that I do see the weak points of my essay, I can revise my paper to receive a better grade. 

I narrowed my choice of topics down to the spanking of children.  This is my most-liked topic of the ones I have considered.  I do not really have “proof” of any facts or statements I have made, I simply made a outline for myself to work with…but I will research all the information below and cite any information that I will be using in my paper.    

SPANKING CHILDREN

As hard as it may emotionally be for me to write about the issues of spanking children, for personal reasons, I think it would be worth fighting my pasts to write a paper over this topic.  This is a definite two-sided topic and it should not be hard to find a good amount of information on the subject of spanking children.

In Proverbs 13:24, the Bible states, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him bedtimes.”  This verse is interpreted in many ways by different versions of the Bible in which corporal punishment is either supported or not.  The New International Translation of this verse does not seem to highly support corporal punishment because it states that, “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.”  However, the New Living Translation states that, “If you refuse to discipline your children, it proves you don’t love them; if you love your children, you will be prompt to discipline them.”  The NLT does seem to support corporal punishment.  I presume this is what makes the spanking of children controversial because it questions “how much is too much?” 

One view is that spanking is a good way to discipline children in their early years and use the verse from Proverbs 13:24 of the Bible to show that corporal punishment is a method for parents to control their children.  Although, some may use this as an excuse for the practice of purposefully inflicting pain on children by saying that the Bible teaches that corporal punishment is okay.  So, does that make it right if a man beating a child with a 2×4 piece of wood or kicking them into a wall is okay because, through his interpretation of the Bible, the Bible says it is okay? 

Another view is that spanking promotes violence and aggressive behavior which the child will imitate.  Spanking can lead to a child to become depressed or have a low-self esteem. Some think that spanking is like child abuse.

So, the sides I will be presenting are whether spanking is an okay way to punish a child or if it is spanking is a form of abuse on children. 

I found this story to be quite touching.  I felt bad for Ashley and the parents, but then I realized how supporting they were to Ashley.  The decisions that the parents had made regarding her health all seemed beneficial to Ashley.  The parents decided to give Ashley “high-dose estrogen therapy” which would make her smaller in size, a “hysterectomy to eliminate the menstrual cycle and associated discomfort to Ashley, and breast bud removal to avoid the development of large breasts and the associated discomfort to Ashley.”  These decisions would all be beneficial to Ashley now as well as later in her life.  I think it is such a great thing that they are showing so much love and care for Ashley and I appreciate that.

Three topics that strike particular interest to me are.  

**spanking of children – How much is too much?! – I really like this one, and I am concidering this to be one of my topics. 

**outlawing anorexic models – I am concidering this one too.  There should be a limit on how skinny models are allowed to be.  Many females look up to these “rail-thin” models and think, “If only I could look as perfect and skinny as them.”  From the commercials on t.v. to the magazines on the rack at the grocery stores, media plays a major influence on the way we live our lives.  Seeing only anorexic-looking models on the run-way or in fashion magazines, or the super skinny maniquines in Victoria’s Secret and other clothing stores makes females, as well as males, wonder if that is how they are supposed to look and whether they have to be skinny in order for the clothes to look best.   

**pressure to be thin

I got this list from class, but I have a pretty good idea in mind for a topic that I want to write my controversial paper on.  I figured i’d go ahead and write down this list to have topics on hand in case my topic is not controversial enough.

Evolution – With whom/what did creation begin with. 

healthcare

rights of sex offenders

gay and lesbian rights – Why not let gay/lesbians marry; should we not all be allowed to live the happy life we choose for ourselves?  Religion or law…what would make gay/lesbians issues right or wrong?

assisted suicide

obesity in America

abortion

global warming

HPV 

china population control

1. What (specifically) is a culture? Put this in your own words. I want to see how well you can define culture on your own.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, culture is the behaviors and beliefs characteristic of a particular social, ethnic, or age group or rather the totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.  As I see it, culture is a set of traditions, behaviors, beliefs, and customs, shared within an ethnic group and carried on into next generations.   

1. What cultures do you belong to? What specifically makes you a part of this culture?

In terms of culture, I would have to say that my family and I belong to a pretty much Americanized culture.  Although I am of an Irish and German heritage, I was not exposed to many Irish or German cultures, behaviors, or beliefs because my family was born and raised in
America.  The only exposures I have had to my culture are a few traditional Irish recipes that have been passed down on my mom’s side of the family.  Omitting the fact that I do not have red hair and lack an Irish accent (obviously the result of being born in the United States to parents who also do not have an accent), Irish definitely does run in my family, my last name will tell you that.    

1. What cultures (list 5) would you like to know more about? (Note: these cannot be cultures that you classify yourself among. I want you to explore cultures outside your own.)

Actually, since I do not know much about my own culture, I think this would be a great opportunity to explore and learn about what it is that makes my family and I who we are.  But, I suppose that is not an option.  Five cultures I would like to know more about are:

Japanese, French, Scottish, Chinese, Italian

1. Now that you have chosen your cultures, rank them by preference (i.e. your top choice should be #1 and the one you wish to consider a last choice should be #5)

1. Japanese

2. French

3. Scottish

4. Chinese

5. Italian

1. Finally, for each of the cultures you have listed, make a quick list of what you already know about that culture. 

1. Japanese – Have street style that is dramatically different that of the
U.S. (Harajuku); the use chopsticks at every meal. 

2. French – The birthplace of the art movement known as Cubism; famous for art.

3. Scottish – Celtic mythology (Loch Ness); bagpipes are played here.    

4. Chinese – Their New Year’s is celebrated in January or February; the use symbols/animals to represent many things (everything is symbolic); the use of chopsticks at every meal; worshipping of Buddha.    

5. Italian – Close friends and family kiss each other on each cheek.

1.  What credibility did you give to the article after a first reading? Did you feel that the author adequately persuaded you to see their side of the issue? How subtle was this persuasion?  After first reading Monroe Anderson’s article, but before truly analyzing it in detail, I felt slightly convinced to see his side of the issue.  Although I originally did not approve of the legalization of marijuana because I thought it was a flat out stupid idea, for a moment after reading the article I actually considered how legalizing marijuana might not be a bad idea.  The two statements
Anderson made that made me see his side was when he said, “we’re spending $1 billion a year to put them there and another $8 billion a year to keep them there” and “we could regulate, license and tax marijuana.  Instead we blow billions on busting and jailing peaceful citizens from whom we could collect millions in tax revenue.”         2.  How have your feelings changed now that you are more aware of the author’s ethos? Do you feel that knowing the credibility of the author changes the way in which you view the argument presented? What have you learned about the author’s education, peripheral writings, and career that altered your view of the article you are studying?   My feelings quickly changed as soon as I began to analyze
Monroe’s article in depth.  Realizing his unprofessional use of language; he constantly used slang terms that did not seem educational to me.  Also, I found that
Anderson failed to cite his references and statistics which, in my opinion, made his article less credible.    3.  If you were writing an argumentative essay on the article’s topic, would you consider using the article as a credible source in your essay? Why or why not?   I definitely would not have to think twice about this question.  I do not think that this would be a credible source to use if I were writing an article on this topic.  I would only use sources in which had citations to refer to.  I mean, although this article might have been written for today’s generation, it should still sound somewhat profession…maybe that’s just me. 

What is the argument the author makes in the essay? 

Monroe Anderson is trying to argue why marijuana should be legalized in
Illinois.

Is this argument clear? Does it make the point?

It is quite obvious that
Anderson wants marijuana to be legalized.  I think he makes a good effort to make his point. 

Which side of the issue does the author take? Does he enforce his opinion?After reading Anderson’s article and after much debate in class, I found that
Anderson made it unclear what side he is on.  He presents reasons for why marijuana should be legalized then turns around and contradicts his own statements.  For example,
Anderson notes, “we could regulate, license, and tax marijuana. Instead we blow billions on busting and jailing peaceful citizens from whom we could collect millions in tax revenues.”  He then counteracts this statement by saying, “…an entire industry from bureaucrats to law enforcement agencies to penal systems that are making money by keeping marijuana illegal.  He leaves the reader wondering, “so, is it a good or bad thing if we legalize marijuana?” and “Was this guy smoking pot when he wrote this essay?”    

What facts does the author use to support the argument? What references does the author use to support their argument? How does this factor into the author’s ethos? Do these facts support the author’s logos? How? If not, what should be done to aid in supporting the author’s logos and, therefore, improving his own ethos? 

The reader can not help but wonder if the facts presented are actually proven fact because
Anderson does not cite his sources.  Also, although he gives some statistics, we are given no information as to where these statistics can be found.  For all the reader may know, Anderson could have just had these numbers pop in his head while “blowin’ some weed.” 

Anderson’s use of unprofessional language also makes the reader question who the author of this essay is, what type of person/people are trying to convince the reader why the government should legalize marijuana—a business man, a man with a degree in law, or a pot smoker who just wants to smoke his marijuana in peace?  I can see how
Anderson could have used phrases like “blowin’ some weed”, “Roaring ‘20s”, and the reference to marijuana as “pot” to “relate” to his audience; however he published this article as well as many others in the political columns of Chicago Sun-Times.  This means the reader assumes that Anderson’s audience would be businessmen, although, with the slang language he uses and his lack of citations we can not help but wonder how educated businessmen would find this article the least bit scholarly material.     

How does the author use pathos to aid in his persuasion? If the author has not used pathos, what could be done to improve upon this appeal? 

Anderson did not use much pathos to persuade his audience, but if he would have presented the other side to his argument he could have used pathos to make it convincing. 

Anderson’s argument did not strike me emotionally.  To make his argument more convincing, Anderson should have used professional-level language rather than slang terms.  Also, Anderson definitely should revise his paper and add statistics and quotations that he can provide citations for and actually cite those sources for his reader.    Did you have an opinion on the topic before reading this article? Has that opinion been changed or reinforced through reading the article? If you were ambivalent to the topic before, how has this changed? If your opinion has not changed, what could the author have done to change your mind? 

Before reading Anderson’s paper, I did not feel that it would be beneficial to legalize marijuana.  Although, in the process of reading his paper, I might have started to shift my opinion of legalizing marijuana, by the time I had thoroughly analyzed his paper, I could not see myself voting for marijuana to be made legal. 

If you were writing this article, what would you have done differently in order to persuade the audience? 

If I were writing this article, would have absolutely no undocumented sources.  Every quote, number, statistic, or example would be cited so that the reader would know that I researched my topic.  I would have used professional language, no slang, because this type of article might be read by the scholarly and I would not want to lose their interest. 

The topic of homosexuality and homosexual marriages is very controversial. I feel that it is a collision of religion and law that causes the sparks over such a controversy. You’ve got your extreme religion followers who mold their life after the Bible; the same bible that states marriage is supposed to be a special bond between a male and female and nowhere does it say that this bond can be altered. Then, you’ve got your not-so-followers-of-the-Book that simply don’t agree with homosexuality and same sex marriages just because it is against the law. And they do not plan to become alittle more open-minded about changing the law so that homosexual couples can live a normal happy life and be accepted in society. I find myself floating somewhere in between. I do not have a problem with homosexuals and same sex marriages, I have had many bi/gay friends and to me, they are just like the rest of the people in this world. I am not a hard-core Christian and I am very open-minded. If we change the law to allow same sex marriages, that would be great…the only problem I would have with that is the fact that I would hope the government can find a way to define a line of extremes; after allowing same sex marriage would the government draw the line there? I question this because what about those rare people who have sexual obsessions with animals? How would they react after we allow same sex marriages?

Okay, now that i’ve expressed my opinion, I can discuss the four videos we watched.

In video one, “Homophobia & Homosexual Discrimination Must Stop,” the director, Omgwtfitsfaith, uses pathos to attract the appeal of the audience. Although it is crystal clear the director feels angry that homosexuality is not accepted, the director uses harsh profanity in bold and rather large font to express his anger. In doing this, the director loses some of the appeal from the audience. The audience is not as persuaded as much as they may have been in the beginning because the director’s use of profanity makes him/her seem unscholarly and childish. One who has experience in the field of writing argumentative papers knows that it is unnecessary to use profanity to get his/her point or opinion across to the audience. Also, the director tries to connect the ridicules of handicapped people with those of gay people. A disability is not the same as a sexual orientation. The director states that we wouldn’t make fun of a handicap or even our president if he were “handicap” so, what should make the gays any different? Well, this statement makes absolutely no sense. You can not possibly tell me that people do not ridicule handicapped people…everyday we see people saying the crudest things to people with disabilties. I also find it hard to believe that America would not take the disability of a soon-to-be-president into consideration before voting him into office. Does prejudice still not exist in America today? In order to make this video more appealing to the audience, the director first of all, needs to cut out all profane language; this would make it less apparent that an teenager might have written it. The director should also take out the part where he discusses the handicapped, or at least he could revise it in some way to make it tie to gay people better. I did not feel very persuaded by this video.

The second video, “Homophobia is Gay” definitely convinced me. Although I already did not have a problem with gays, the director, FrerardLives, made some very good statements that made the video touch the audience’s heart. The director uses all three points of Aristotles Rhetorical Triangle to get his message across the audience. He makes the audience feel emotional by using the stories of gay people who’s lives have been torn apart by the criticisms of unaccepting and unopen-minded people that surrounded them. “I am the boy who never finished high school, because I got called a fag everyday”, “I am the girl who got kicked out of her home because I confided in my mother that I am lesbian”, ” I am the sister who holds her gay brother tight through the painful, tear-filled nights”, “I am the man who stopped attending church, not because I don’t believe, but because they closed their doors to my kind”, “I am the person who has to hide what this world needs most, love.” These words were touching and the audience sympathizes with them. There were also pictures included in this video along with a song that was fitting. The pictures were sad, like the picture of a boy who had hung himself, however, we really do not know if the reason he hung himself was because he was gay and made fun of, it is just a touching picture because some teenagers might actually hang themselves or commit suicide in some other way because they just can not deal with the pain anymore. I do not think I would change anything about this video because it was the most capturing to me of the four videos.

The third video, “Liberty Sunday – Anti-Gay Rally in Boston,” directed by Atoleos, did not appeal to me. This video was a news broadcasting that tried to use ethos to appeal to its audience. The only thing is, no side was taken or put to discussion. The director simply showed people stating different views. There was no point to it because the audience was not left feeling as though they were for or against homosexuality and homosexual marriages. The director could have showed one side or the other or the ridicules made about gays. That might have made this video have a point.

I honestly do not remember what the fourth video, “C-38 Part 18…Responses to Same Sex Marriages,” by c38 themovie, was about. I guess it just was not as appealing as I found the second video to be.

Overall, I still think our society should be a bit more open-minded about homosexuals and homosexual marriages.

Tim Wu’s, “Does You Tube Really Have Legal Problems?” and Monroe Anderson’s, “It’s Time to Legalize Marijuana in Illinois!” 

How do the authors address their specific issue?Wu compares You Tube with Napster.  He uses no personal opinion but rather states the facts.
Anderson uses many outside information which he ties into the topic of legalizing drugs and also makes it clear what his position on the topic is.  Do you see any way that the authors try to persuade the audience to take their side?Wu is most persuasive in the paragraph in which he approaches the reader by asking, “Why isn’t You Tube in trouble in the same way Napster and Grokster were?”  This is the paragraph in which Wu identifies the differences between You Tube and Napster.  He informs the reader that You Tube, unlike Napster, “provides space for people to do things, legal or not.”  However, Napster wasn’t providing a space for people to do things but rather actually providing a means for users to “find and download predominantly infringing content.”  That is what makes the legal/illegal difference.  I became aware of the fact that You Tube actually has the ability to take down material that is infringing at anytime.  Although I find nothing harmful with You Tube because, technically, they are not performing any illegal activities, that does not have to mean You Tube is 100% A-OKAY.  Everyone has their own interpretations.

Anderson presented very good issues that made the topic of legalizing marijuana in
Illinois quite debatable.  After reading Anderson’s argument I found the issue of
America wasting billions of dollars jailing peaceful pot-smokers when we could actually be taxing these people for this stuff to be extremely convincing,

Do the authors know what they are talking about?I felt that Wu knew exactly what he was talking about and he made some interesting points.
Anderson definitely knows the background information on the topic of which he is arguing.  He uses statistical data, and even ties the issue of how Harry J. Anslinger’s jealousy lead him to start a campaign on cannabis by giving weed a bad rep. and the “War on Iraq” to the issues of legalizing marijuana.  What points do the authors make about their issues?The main point Wu makes is that, “You can act out in cyberspace. Just don’t be a copyright pimp.”  It is just that simply stated.  

Anderson brings up a very good point about how we could tax marijuana if we made it legal but “instead we blow billions on busting and jailing peaceful citizens from whom we could collect millions in tax revenue.”Do you see one of the essays as more argumentative than the other? Why? What features do you see in the essay that differ from the other essay?Although Tim Wu’s essay, “Does You Tube Really Have Legal Problems”, states some good points, he doesn’t quite reach the level of a true argumentative paper as Monroe Anderson does in his argument over legalizing marijuana in Illinois.  The reason I find
Monroe’s essay to be more argumentative is that I am actually having a hard time deciding which side of his argument I would stand on.  I mean it is one thing to just say, “Well, I’m neutral about the subject,” but I actually want to take a side.  I have never been one to agree with the usage of drugs, except maybe for medical use and that is the only exception.  However,
Anderson opened my mind to when he presented his point of view on the matter: the taxation of marijuana, how the use of marijuana has gone up 2,000 percent since Anslinger banned pot in 1937.  After analyzing the positive sides of legalizing marijuana I actually choose
Anderson’s side of the argument.      Finally, and this should be the lengthiest part of your blog, do you agree with the authors? Did this essay change your mind about the issue? If so, what specific facts presented in the argument changed your opinion? If not, is there any way in which the author could have changed your opinion? Why or why not?

I must admit, I was completely unaware this argument over legality issues with You Tube even existed.  However, by the end of Wu’s argument I did find myself to be in agreement that You Tube was not as illegal as Napster and other similar companies.  Although many good, convincing points were presented, no personal opinion was offered.  I believe that personal opinion may have helped boost the arguments appeal since it is an argumentative paper but since he only gave facts, I had to base my decision on statements. 

Anderson, on the other hand presented a much more debatable topic.  The topic of legalizing a drug is a controversial subject that produces sparks between many people, and therefore when this subject is argued, the outcome should be many different points of view and personal opinions.  I definitely got that from
Anderson’s argument.  And because he did use some excellent background information and I could feel what he side was so it helped me pick sides-which was not the same as my original side.

Diagnostic Exam Part II

A Writing Assignment that I Found to be Quite Difficult

The most difficult writing assignment that I had recieved in my educational career would have to be from the English class I took my first semester of college.  The type of writing assignment that I had particular trouble with was an exploratory essay.  My topic focused on prevention strategies for childhood obesity.  The reason I found this assignment difficult was because I was baseing my essay on facts from scholarly journals, but those scholarly journals used other people’s facts which meant I had to do inside research on those statistics and prove them true.  This made citing my resources particularly tough.  I was baffled by all the confusing resources and I was scared that I would be accused of plagerism or false citations if I did not cite my resources correctly or mistakingly chose not to cite reference to a fact I used.  To help with all the confusion our teacher held an MLA workshop in which we learned and became familiar with citing references correctly.  Although I found this assignment to be quite complex, I did improve some of my writing skills, such as using correct MLA format and creating an MLA works cited page.  I also gained a better understanding of ding indepth research that would help me in my future career as a dietitian.  As a dietitian I will most likely have to write scholarly journals myself, so this writing assignment gave me some insite on how to differentiate regular journals/magazines and scholarly journals.