Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Ben Brentin Collage
















For this post, I decided to create a collage with visual representations of my changing identity as a writer and researcher, both over time in general and specific to each project I embark on. I start off naive, then have lofty ideas of where to take it, thinking I know everything. Then, when I realize I don't know everything, I become discouraged, humbled and, finally, angry with the project. Then, through instruction or time away from the project I am uplifted and inspired with a direction for the project and some creative way to take it. I become critical of my work (and that of others when researching) and reach the en of the project, enlightened about the subject matter ans about myself and what I am capable of.

Lewis the Fox

As I sit here, staring, think what to type,
I just don’t know what to write.
Write who you are, she said, as a writer.
As if I’m I'm a super hero,
and literature is my secret identity.
I just don't know what to say,
that I haven't said a million times before.
I feel like I'm trapped in a writing box,
unable to escape, unable to be free.

But it's time I realize that's not who I am. I am not in a box. I am myself, free to be whomever I want.

I can write however I want.


I can write over here if I want.


I can write in blue
I can write a line for the clever.
I can create extra wide text.

I C
a
n
E
v
e
n
W
r
i
t
e
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
l
y


I'm not limited by what I'm assigned, but instead, what I can do with it.

 - Lewis the Fox

Saturday, May 25, 2013

DJ Hughey- Another morning...



The birds chirped and the forest animals began to rise, as the light pierced through the woods the man rose to his feet feeling the earth between his toes. The man let out a sigh as a large roar ripped through the sky, he knew what this morning would bring. Leaning his head out his window he listened once more for the roar, waiting for the sky to erupt with the beasts’ boom. In a sudden burst of noise, the roar was heard once more. To the untrained ear, this roar sounded like nothing but anger and hatred. But to the man, the roar spoke unto him its own language. He heard the lows and high in such a pitch that he knew exactly what was heading his way, a black dragon. A black dragon is no easy dragon to defeat, to defeat a black dragon one would require a blade cast from a special metal. Furthermore the blade would need to pierce the dragon’s heart perfectly in order to kill it. This would be no easy morning for the man as he reached for his armor lying on the table, no easy morning indeed.


The dragon flew about scorching the earth below with his breath. Though the dragon roared and burned everything in sight, the man put no haste in his step; he needed to make sure he was sufficiently prepared for the fight that would take place. After putting on his armor he immediately headed for the shed further outside, the shed was lined wall to wall with weapons galore. Though there many weapons to choose from, the man knew exactly what he needed to defeat the growing threat outside. Reaching in he withdrew a small black dagger under a stack of books on poisons. Though the dagger looked measly, he knew the powers and danger within. He tightened his grip around the blade, he had only used this blade before, he hoped it would still be of use to him. As he walked outside he whistled forth toward the forest, immediately a horse burst forth from a tree standing eagerly at his side.


Praying that his horse would let him stand tall he mounted the horse and rode off toward the sounds of the beast. Drawing near, armed only with his dagger he looked straight at the beast, it called and roared waiting for a worthy opponent. One that would rise to his challenge and fight to the death. The man looked only forward, his eyes began to glow as his saw the beast land in front of him; it had been waiting for him. Though he felt a small sense of fear at the beast in front of him, his heart belted out his own roar of purpose waiting for the dragon to respond. The dragon stood on his hind legs breathing fire into the sky, accepting the man’s challenge. What commenced was a battle of metal and flame as the dragon encircled the man constantly breathing waves of flames upon him. The man rode around avoiding the flames at all costs; all he could do was thank the heavens for having his horse at his side. All he had to do was wait for the dragon to land once more, and then he could seize his chance.


Once the dragon gave up on burning his opponent, he took a sharp dive jaws open wide going straight for his target. The man immediately took his own dive as he dove to the ground barely managing to roll under the sharp teeth of the dragon. Reaching forward he hooked himself on the neck of the dragon with his free hand and held on tight. The dragon immediately knew he had caught a hitchhiker as he felt a sharp pain in his neck, looking back he saw the man holding onto his dagger as it pierced his scales. Knowing he couldn’t attack from this angle he flew straight for the remnants of an old volcano. However the man was no fool, he knew the lava would have no effect on the dragon’s scales; he would only have a few seconds before he would be melted by the lava. He began to crawl farther down the dragon’s back hoping he could make it in time. As he felt the heat on his back he knew they had made it to the volcano, improvising all he could do was slash at the wing of the dragon. Skewing the dragon’s flight pattern the dragon crashed into the fiery ash near the lava. The man felt himself burning all over standing so close to the volcano’s heat, he was running out of time.


The dragon immediately launched himself once more at his prey, jaws wide open as the fire built inside his throat, the man felt his death swiftly approaching, but in a split second he regained himself and dodged to the side barely avoiding the fiery breath. Grabbing once more in his familiar spot he latch once more onto the beast, this time on his under belly as the beast picked up once more. Before the beast a second to retaliate once more, he immediately stabbed into the beast’s stomach. Using it as a latch his crawled slowly up the dragon until he reached its chest, feeling the life of the beast inches in front of him, the man drove his small dagger as far into the beast as he could. The dragon’s eyes felt his life fade looking under to see the man withdraw his dagger, dripping in a black blood, his fate was sealed. Closing his eyes he slowly descended into the fast approaching ground. Crashing on a nearby beach the man flew off the carcass trying to stabilize his body. After he felt himself finally stop, he looked up to see the dragon’s dead body lying in the sand. It was finished.


Dragging himself back to his home, the sun graced him with its full presence. Not even mid-day and already a dragon, the man laughed to himself. Sighing he stripped his armor and tossed it once more on the table, the dagger he would have to put back later, after he cleaned it of course. Sitting back down on his bed his body gave out all its strength. Another day and he would be back out again, he could never saw no a beasts roar. It gave his heart a leap of purpose and desire to roar back, he could never turn away from a fight. But considering he had just nearly been ripped and burnt on several occasions, he lied back in bed and thought to himself “For another day perhaps…”


In case it wasn’t quite clear, this is what I feel every time I must write a paper. A sense of fear and purpose as I pick up my own small dagger and look at the beast before me, challenging me to fight back, that is my theory of writing, the purpose to answer the roar. 

Emily Krebs - final blog


Writing? Research? How's that, you say? Read along and be wowed; here's writing theory the KREBS way!


As a writer, I'm TESTY and refuse the restraints-- in topic and form. I don’t like to be confined or to stick to the norm.


Because of this, I often start out a little bit LOST. I draw things out and end up feeling rather tossed.



This usually causes some freaking-out and SECOND-GUESSING. It’s tricky and scary and often quite distressing.


But if I find something which really fuels my compassion, I HOLD ON for dear life, and work with great passion.


Digging up DIRT is my favorite profession, especially when it’s piled on a common misconception. (Hegemonic ideals, you see, are my #1 rejections!)


PERSPECTIVE is everything; I’m not afraid to get crazy. Besides, if you look at things in the common way, it’s not exciting-- simply lazy!



But before I go nuts and my brain spews oddly, I must always remember: “Stay FOCUSED”-- I tend to think rather broadly!


After all, I like my research to be STRIKING. I aim to snag my audience and leave their minds and hearts spiking.


When all that is done, I work on my style. Even I’m tired (and have been for a while!), I always make sure to go the EXTRA MILE.


So there you have it: writing and research on file. Now, once again, here's my Theory of Writing: Dr. Seuss style!

You have brains in your head; there is nothing to dread.
Write what you write and your thoughts won't be dead.
The words must be heard; do not be deterred.
This world is too comfy; it needs to be stirred.


Monday, May 20, 2013

Guidelines for Reflection over Composition in a New Genre


Please do not respond back to this post--you need to email me your reflection by our final class, which is Wednesday, May 29, 2013.

Respond to the following questions based on your project. You need to answer in complete sentences using specific language--so, don't say something like "this is the best project I have ever done because I XXX." This tells me nothing. Be specific. Each question should have two-five sentences in response. 

1. Believe this is the best project you have ever completed. Tell me why.
2. Doubt this project is any good at all. Tell me why. 
3. Predict my response to your project. 
4. Agree or disagree with your sense of my response to this project.  

And last, discuss your overall reaction to working within a group. How did your group work together? Was there an overall leader or did you work more fluidity together? This is the time to be very honest, so that I know how the group functioned together. 

The Making of a Researcher


Throughout the past quarter, you have been discussing the process of writing and researching. For this last blog post, I want you to discuss who you believe you are as a writer and researcher: in other words, what's your writerly identity? What's your identity as a researcher? How do these identities connect together? 

To do this I want you to have a little fun, so I'm not looking for you to do a traditional 300-500 word response. What I want is you to think about how you could represent the characteristics that define you as a writer/researcher that you have developed and honed this quarter (and those that you came in with). 

Some suggestions for ways to create this:
*A job wanted ad or a personal
*A  poem
*Through a series of images
*an obit
*a short short (short fiction piece)
*a song

The possibilities with responding are very open. You can respond back to this post OR you can create a new post. 

This should be as long as it needs to be to get your point across. I should see elements of you----so I should be able to get a sense of who wrote what without even looking at the author's name.

Due by class time on Wednesday, May 29, 2013. 

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Composition in a New Genre: Plan of Attack


For this blog post, you and your group are going to brainstorm for your project. Think about what type of genre switch you want to make; what type of audience you want to direct your project towards; what will be each group members role within the project; and what will you bring to work on in class on Monday. In other words, you want to decide on your plan of attack for organizing and completing this project. You need to provide an overview of project expectations (as established by the group), project specifics (genre, audience, rhetorical situation), and calendar of events (how/when the work will occur).

Outline of Due Dates: 

Monday, May 20th: In-Class Work Day

Wednesday, May 22nd: Draft Due to Workshop

Monday, May 27th: Memorial Day

Wednesday, May 29th: (last day of class!) Project Due with 3-5 min presentation




Monday, May 13, 2013

Reflection

After reading Belanoff's piece on reflection, please respond to the following questions: 

(1) What is Belanoff's theory of reflection? How does this theory connect to writing and learning? 
(2) How can you apply Belanoff's theory to your writing practices? 
(3) More generally, where does reflection/reflective practice fall within your own writing process(es)?
(4) Why might reflection be an important part of writing practices and writing process(es)? 

Use Belanoff to ground your thinking pulling out specific quotes and details from her text. 

Respond to your peers. 300 words or so.

Due: Monday, May 20, 2013. 

Monday, May 6, 2013

Simply Meet the Press


In the "Beltway Blog", there is an interesting dialogue about "old media" and "new media." Using Jenkins, Johnson, and any other readings you feel helps you relate to this, I want you to "meet the press" and create a case for old media, new media, or both. Your response should take whatever form you feel allows you to step up and meet the press. It should NOT simply be a response--you can take a side to speak from (the press or the public) and create a voice based on that side. In other words, this shouldn't read like a normal blog response. It should have a clear, distinct voice, and it should sound like you are, in fact, "meeting the press."

What I'm looking for is for you to create an INFORMED case speaking from the voice of either the press or the public. This means evidence, evidence, evidence, and I want you using the readings from class. Per normal you should be responding to your peers as well.

**If you don't know what "meet the press" means...you didn't critically read the Beltway blog. =)

250-400 words. 

Due: Monday, May 13 , 2013 by class time. 

From the Lit Review to the Essay


The move from your lit review to your first draft may seem challenging because there is not much cross-over between the two, and you want to make sure you aren't merely lifting chunks of your lit review into your draft. 

I want you to begin to explore the differences using your own research as guidance. What are some central claims you believe you will make in your essay (in other words, what do you believe you'll be adding to the existing conversation)? How do these claims differ from your lit review? What are things you need to anticipate for your audience? What are things you'll need to include so that it's obvious who your intended audience will be? Last, what are some things you, as the researcher and the writer, need to keep in mind as you begin to start drafting your essay? 

Shoot for 150-250 words. 
 

Monday, April 29, 2013

Beginning to Draft the Essay


For this blog post you are doing an SRR: summary, respond, reflect. First quickly summarize what happened in Ballenger's #4. Next respond to it, in other words, what did you learn; what applies to your own research; what was your reaction to learning these things. And last, you are going to reflect on the chapter. What connections can you make between other readings, class discussions, and drafting of your own essay? 

***He discusses two ways to respond to inquiry-based research. Remember for your essay, you are NOT creating an argument. 

Shoot for 250-350 words and engage with your peers. 

Due: Monday, May 6, 2013 by class time. 

Conference Day Blog

As part of your conference day, you need to complete this blog by 10:00 pm or you will be considered absent. 

Essentially, you have thought about your theory of writing at least once in the blog post "investigating key terms." Other blogs have hinted at your theory without being so direct. You are going to continue your thinking, musing, and defining of your theory of writing for this post. This is meant to be reflective in nature, so it's good to revisit some of your old blogs and see what you said.

Questions to springboard your thinking: 

(1) Key Terms for Writing
What are your key terms for writing? How does it expand your writing practices to understand these key terms? How do these key terms connect to your research? Why is it important that you write in different genres of writing (so far, you've experienced the following genres: blog, proposal, report, lit review, outline/brainstorming, reflection)? 

(2) Writerly Identity
Who are you as a writer? A researcher? How does considering key terms contribute to the development of your writerly identity? How do you think research, especially inquiry-based research that you're doing right now, contributes to your writerly identity?

(3) Prior Knowledge and Experiences
How is writing this quarter similar or different to what you've done in the past? What are you learning that you might carry forward to future assignments, in this class or in others? Will understanding the key terms help you in future?

(4) Theory of Writing
Dr. Seuss known for his witty and oddly inspiring quotes sets the tone for your conclusion of this post. In one-two sentences, write your theory of writing in Dr. Seuss style. 

350-500 words. Engage with others (there's at least one or two of you not doing this--you can't receive a check plus without engaging with others...). 

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

What is a Lit Review?!?

After reading through the 2 sample lit reviews and essays, please take a look at these 2 websites again: 

(1) http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/literature-reviews/
(2) http://www.duluth.umn.edu/~hrallis/guides/researching/litreview.html

Taken together--the sample lit reviews, the sample essays, and the two websites, please respond to the following questions pulling on at least one of the samples to evidence what you are saying: 

What is the purpose of a lit review? (be specific!)
What is the purpose of an inquiry-based research essay? 
How do the two differ? 
Why might it be *extremely important to do a lit review before writing your essay? 
Why do we learn how to write a lit review? 

Next move to your research, and respond to the following questions:

What is the purpose of your lit review?
What is the purpose of your inquiry-based essay? 
How will you make the two differ? 

Be as specific and detailed as possible. Remember to engage with one another. 

**You will NOT be able to respond to this blog without having read through the examples and the two websites. And this is NOT the time to *breeze your way through the blog hoping to get some amount of credit. 

Due: Monday, April 29, 2013 by class time. 

Lit Review: In-Class Work Day

In about 200-300 words, explain your visual representation: what's your purpose of your lit review? What are some of your themes? What sources will you use within each theme? Finally, then discuss what's next: where do you need to do to start drafting your lit review.

Monday, April 22, 2013

Why Write and Why Research?

Auster answers his question "why write" through different experiences. For this blog post, you need to respond to this question on two levels: (1) why write in relationship to yourself (use examples from your own life as Auster did) and (2) why research, in other words, why do you need to know how to research? Pull on your own experiences again. 

As you respond to these two questions, you also need to draw on past readings and use key words to begin to make connections between readings and key words and to your own writing identity. 

250-400 words. Respond to one another. 

Due: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 by class time. 

Emily & Dre


Our key terms revolved mainly around rhetorical situation and its role within activity theory-- basically how our rhetor, Chuck Norris, is “learning through doing” (giving) his speech (Russell & Yanez).

The rhetorical situation is spurred on by an exigence, as seen in the explosion bubble near Chuck’s head. Chuck then makes choices as to how he well present his response to this exigence since, after all, “No situation can have a nature independent of the perception of its interpreter or independent of the rhetoric with which he chooses to characterize it.” -Vatz (p. 154).

Next, we placed our audience in the path of the “salience” rays being emitted by Chuck. After this the waves are interpreted, which is a key step in any rhetorical situation. Finally, “logos,” “pathos,” and “ethos” are on top of the audience because they modes through which Chuck’s argument is conveyed upon his crowd.

Our visualization is strong because it is simple AND comprehensive. It’s also highly imagistic, so it’s easier to understand and commit to memory. Plus, it’s Chuck Norris. He’ll kick your ass if you don’t.


DJ, Keegan, Jack

Wordle: Key Terms
















We set up the representation based on a hierarchy within the connections of the key terms. Going off of Vatz’s definition, the rhetor creates the rhetorical situation and thus it is the largest word in our collage. The reason that Vatz has the rhetor in such high regard is because he gets to choose the salience and reinterpret the situation. The second largest word is rhetorical situation because it encompasses some of the other connections like audience, purpose, and salience. Bitzer is the reason we have rhetorical situation as a large word because he includes the whole process, he has the exigence and the audience (the cause and the responder). It shows that we need to be responsive to all parts within the context in order to have the most successful persuasion and so it represents that part of our research, writing, and thinking. It connects to the course because we have discussed these terms in depth more than a few times and it shows how we think the terms have been presented in importance.

Hannah and Will (Vote for us)


Will and Hannah

We chose to create a flowchart to show the connections between several key concepts. We started with rhetorical situation, collectively defined as the cretion of reality. This creation of reality can be thought of using either the definition given by Bitzer or the defintion given by Vatz. Bitzer claims the sitution affects the rhetoric, and therefore Bitzer’s key terms relating to rhetorical situation include exigence, audience, and contraints. Exigence refers to the problem that the rhetor solves through his or her discourse. Audience refers to the people receiving the message. Contraints are the factors that shape the response to the rhetorical situation. Vatz claims that the rhetoric controls the situations, and his definition of rhetorical situation includes the terms salience, choice, interpretation, and rhetor. The rhetor is vital to Vatz’s definition the rhetor chooses, based on what they feel is important (or salient) what they convey. The rhetor is responsible for how the audience interprets the situation that they present. Regardless of whose defintion is used to explain rhetorical situation, the creation of reality synthesises together to provide the final product, which is discourse. 

This flowchart makes sense because different interpretations of the same concept lead to the finished product, discourse, through unique processes. The flowchart also represents both of us as writers because one of us agrees with Bitzer’s view of rhetorical situation while the other agrees with Vatz’s definition. In this course, as with in other courses, we can connect this image to our researching, writing, and thinking skills. For example, our perception of the discourse we produce can be viewed throught the lense of this flowchart.


Ben and Jackie

Here is the link to our online crossword puzzle. After you're on the link, scroll to the bottom and press "solve online" the answer key AKA our key terms are also available at the bottom of the page. Click on "Answer key HTML"
http://www.armoredpenguin.com/crossword/Data/2013.04/2213/22134207.684.html  


For our representation of the key terms of rhetoric we decided to create a crossword puzzle. A crossword puzzle formats the answers in a way that connects letters from one word to another. Therefore, the crossword is an accurate representation of rhetoric. The puzzle illustrates the interconnectedness of the words. Without a rhetorical situation, salience, choice, ethos, pathos, logos etc. would not exist. Although Vatz and Bitzer’s key terms differ immensely, both styles are important when considering the key terms of rhetoric cumulatively. In Vatz’s article, he proposes that, ‘“The very choice of what facts or events are relevant is a matter of pure arbitration. Once the choice is communicated, the event is imbued with salience, or what Chaim Perelman calls ‘presence,’’’(Vatz 157). Therefore, our decision to include salience, choice, and rhetor in our key terms is logical. This statement also reveals how the words are related. The situation would not be interpreted if not for the rhetor. Without the rhetor, a choice would not have been made. In turn, there would be no salience in the situation because the choice of what to make salient would not exist. In an article based on Artistotle’s perception of rhetoric he also references the rhetorical appeals that Bitzer explains. The article states, “According to Aristotle, the available means of persuasion are based on three kinds of proof: logical (logos), ethical (ethos), and emotional (pathos)” (Artistotle 280).
This format represent us as writers because as each word in the puzzle relies on another word to be complete, we rely on all of these aspects of writing in completing a given piece of writing. The crossword relates to the course because we do not only study one aspect of rhetoric. We need to understand all of the different terms in order to build an argument. Just as you use the other answers in a puzzle to determine another solution, we rely on our knowledge of certain terms to guide us in our interpretation of the others. In an article based on Artistotle’s perception of rhetoric he also references the rhetorical appeals that Bitzer explains. The article states, “According to Aristotle, the available means of persuasion are based on three kinds of proof: logical (logos), ethical (ethos), and emotional (pathos)” (Artistotle 280).