Reflection On Open Letter Draft

I peer edited Breanna and Sam's open letter rough drafts. Both did a great job being specific about what they reflected on in the semester and then followed the conventions of the genre well. Below are my reflections on the peer editing I received from Charles and Tyler.

Zebest, Orin "Pen to Paper" 10/01/2007 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

1. Did you demonstrate an ability to think about your writing and yourself as a writer?

I think the third paragraph of my rough draft demonstrated my ability to critically look at my writing and my style of writing. I took a look at how my time management influences my writing style and how by correcting both concurrently I can write better and relieve stress caused by waiting to last minute to complete an assignment.

2. Did you provide analysis of your experiences, writing assignments, or concepts you have learned?

I provided analysis of writing assignments and my experiences while writing those assignments. As well, I mention the concepts I learned in paragraph 4 where I look to the future and things I am doing now to improve my writing and time management skills. Although there is no singular place in the letter that lists my experiences, writing assignments and concepts that I have learned throughout the letter you can find mentions of all three things as I reflect upon the past semester.

3. Did you provide concrete examples from your own writing (either quotes from your writing or rich descriptions of your writing process)?

I provided hyperlinks to my rough drafts from previous projects to illustrate how rushed my writing was throughout the semester. I then explained what it was like to rush through a paper and how so many opportunities for revision and analysis were lost due to the time frame I was writing in. I will, however, convey in a clearer way my writing process in the final draft as it is unclear at the present moment.

4. Did you explain why you made certain choices and whether those choices were effective?

I explained why I did certain things and why that effected me. Overall, I wrote the letter in a way that showed my time management choices were not effective but some writings strategies like creating an outline and doing preliminary research were. I were also clarify my choices and how effective they were in the final draft of my reflection.

Draft of Open Letter

Here is the link to my draft of the open letter. Please keep in mind that this is a rushed first draft and that I will be revising throughout the week. I encourage my editors to be harsh in their criticism but please explain why because that is the most helpful and will improve my writing. Thank you for taking a look!

Federal Highway Administration - MUTCD "MUTCD G20-5aP" 08/22/2012 via wikimedia.org Public Domain

Edit:

I peer reviewed on Sam and Breanna rough drafts.

Reflecting More on My Writing Experiences

I have answered some questions below regarding my time in English 109H and the struggles, growth and regression I have experienced throughout this course in my writing skills. I have grown a lot and learned how to write in different styles but I have failed in my efforts to rid myself of my procrastination habits. Find more detailed answers below.

Nllson, Susanne, "Reflection" 03/12/2014 via flickr.com Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

• What were the biggest challenges you faced this semester, overall?

The biggest challenge I faced was motivating myself to complete a little bit of my homework every night so that I didn't have the entire project due the next day when I started to do my work. Multiple times this semester I waited until Friday to even glance at the homework and begin to think about my paper before I started writing it on Saturday when it was due.

• What did you learn this semester about your own time management, writing and editorial skills?

I learned that I have no time management skills, my writing skills have improved from all the writing I have had to do and that my editorial skills are improving as I have peer reviewed my peers and my own papers. I would like my time management skills to improve and I have purchased a planner that I will use next semester to plan out all my assignments and when I am going to start and finish major assignments.

• What do you know about the concept of 'genre'? Explain how understanding this concept is central to being a more effective writer.

A genre is a style of writing that is defined by the conventions of that style of writing. Understanding what genre I am writing makes me an effective writer because it will follow the style that has been put forth by other writers so it will have a familiar feel when read. Also, it will not be illogical or jump around because it will have organization within the genre's parameters.

• What skills from this course might you use and/or develop further in the next few years of college coursework?

This course has forced me to take a look at my time management skills and made me realize that I need to develop them if I want to be successful in my remaining semesters of college. Obviously, my writing skills will be necessary in any class or professional setting I am in for the rest of my life so developing skills through this class is useful for me because I will use them.

• What was your most effective moment from this semester in 109H? 

My most effective moment from this semester in 109H was when I completed my homework for Deadline 7 ahead of the Saturday deadline. I completed all of the deadlines by Thursday that week but not only had I completed it by Thursday but I had done a few blogs each day to finish it by Thursday. This was my first success in actually complete ling homework before its due.

• What was your least effective moment from this semester in 109H? 

My least effective moment was when I started my Project 2 paper final draft on the Friday when it was due. I had a lot of homework that week and I had not set aside any time to start the revisions on my rough draft. I ended up spending all night Friday and all day Saturday rewriting my paper in order to conform to the conventions of a rhetorical analysis paper and to reflect the necessary information that rubric required my paper to have. This extreme lack of time management skills was my least effective moment from this semester.

Revisiting My Writing Process

Below I reflect on blog 1.10 and 1.12 from the first project. As apparent from my answers I have made little progress in changing my procrastination habits but I have tried this semester. Please take a look at my reflection below.

Tacke, Oliver "Kanban (individuell)" 10/01/2013 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

I recently took a look at blog 1.10 and 1.12 from the first week of the semester. Blog 1.10 is about my perceived writing strategy which at the time was a heavy reviser. However, my habits have changed over the course of the semester and I have become a procrastinator. I constantly found myself this semester writing my final draft on the Friday night or Saturday morning before my paper was due. I feel this ties in with blog 1.12 which was about finding time in my calendar to do my English homework. I set aside time during my lunch break to finish blog posts that were due that week that way my Saturdays would not be filled with English homework. However, over the course of the semester my lunch breaks have been full of eating and hanging out with friends.

Now my writing habits and time management skills have regressed. I am constantly rushing or being rushed by a due date to do not only my English homework but homework I have in other classes. What this past semester has told me is that I am going to be an extremely stressed out, college drop out with a lot of potential but lacks the motivation to work hard for a goal. So I plan in the following semesters of my college career to actively use my calendar to plan ahead the studying, homework assignments and major course projects so that I can start these assignments ahead of time. Completely assignments with my full ability will lend better grades and better work.

Reflection on Project 3

Below are the answers to questions asked on page 520 of Writing Public Lives. This is my reflection on Project 3.

deSousa, Joe, "The Thinker" 06/30/2011 via flickr.com Public Domain Dedication

• What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

I really changed my entire style from my rough draft to my final draft. I picked a different website to emulate and along with that came a different style of writing. I had to focus on speaking my mind in an implicit way in my final draft while not falling into a research paper style which is associated with the style of my rough draft. Shorter paragraphs were also a change I had to make and I did this separating my evidence from my analysis. One paragraph would focus on the evidence I gathered to back myself up and my next paragraph would focus on my analysis.

• Point to global changes how did you reconsider your thesis or organization

I focused on a problem nuclear fusion faces and then proposed a solution to it. In my rough draft, I focused on the cause of nuclear fusions struggles and how a company in the private sector is avoiding all those struggles. This led to mixing of arguments. I focused on a solution for nuclear fusion in my final draft which powered my thesis.

• What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?

A shift in purpose led to my changes. I saw my argument not fitting my style of writing and that it was becoming to convoluted to understand. I wanted to simplify so I changed what I was arguing.

• How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?

These changes affected my credibility only slightly. I am well versed in the subject due to my research but I did cite the sources I drew directly from. I find my credibility to credible although I feel I could have used more direct quotes to back my opinions up.

• How will these changes better address the audience or venue?

The final product was a more direct approach compared to the long winded version my rough draft had. This way my audience jumped right into why nuclear fusion is important, how it hasn't been funded properly and where that money should come from.

• Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentences structure and style?

I used complex sentences to convey my complex ideas and used compound sentences to link ideas together that were important. I used sentence structure to convey my ideas and to fit within the conventions of my chosen genre.

• How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

They assist the audience because they get to the information more quickly and it helps communicate the complex ideas I am conveying to them. Using compound sentences links ideas that the audience should understand in tandem or affect one another. The different sentence styles draw the audiences attention to different points which is my intention.

• Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?

I didn't have to reconsider any genres but I did have to insert titles and subtitles as well as tailor my paragraphs to fit the conventions of the website. Also, the conventions of my style didn't use a lot of pictures but graphs and large quotes so I relied on those to be the visuals of my argument.

• Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?

It helps show me that I am very flexible when it comes to writing but still end up in that rut of finding evidence and then explaining that evidence. I need to branch out and learn how tie things together from all portions of the essay to make a cohesive and intelligible piece of writing.

Publishing Public Argument

Here is a link to my final draft of my public argument. Below is some relevant information regarding my public argument, my topic and how I argued my topic.

Rawlinson, Jon "celebration of light 2007 - vancouver, canada, fireworks" 07/25/2007 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

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

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

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                          disagree

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

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

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                          disagree

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

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

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

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

___X___ My public argument proposes a solution for a problem that is being debated.

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

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

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

My topic focuses on how more funding from the United States government allocated from the defense R&D budget can allow humanity to relieve itself from its addiction to fossil fuels and provide a cleaner and more efficient energy source to draw its power from.

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

Ethical or credibility-establishing appeals

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_____ Openly acknowledging counterarguments and refuting them intelligently

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

_____ Other: 

Emotional appeals

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_____ Other: 

Logical or rational appeals

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

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

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

_____ Using expert opinions that help affirm your stance or position

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

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

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

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

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

_____ Other: 

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

1. Example 1
2. Example 2
3. Example 3

Reflections on Project 3 Draft

I reviewed Clay and Ann Emilie drafts. My draft needs quite a bit of work and some graphical design that is fitting for an Economist.com article. Below are my answers to reflection questions.

mcsporran, john "Reflections in the Mist" 04/17/2015 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

• Who reviewed your Project 3 draft?

Awaiting Feedback

• What did you think and/or feel about the feedback you received?

Awaiting Feedback

• What aspects of Project 3 need to most work going forward? How do you plan on addressing these areas? 

The work that needs to be done the most is focusing on an evaluative argument instead of leading my paper with a casual argument which is confusing and makes my article read like a research paper. Next, I need to create or research more graphs that explain the amount of money spent on nuclear fusion research to compliment my evaluative argument. Finally, some aesthetic choices that match the Economist.com website is necessary to complete my article.

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

After meeting with my instructor, I felt confident that I can complete my paper in a way that is fitting and reflects my abilities as a writer. The amount of research that I still need to complete is substantial but further analysis of my argument style and specific subject will lessen the amount of total research I need. 

Draft of Public Argument

Here is the link to my rough draft of my public argument. Please remember this is a rough draft and not representative of its final form. For a few days it will remain in outline form to help me organize my ideas. However, I would greatly appreciate it if you could look for any grammar mistakes or could point to sentence that either repeat themselves or make no sense. Thank you for taking a look at my draft.

Gallagher, Joe "borat-thumbs-up" 05/20/2013 via flickr.com Attribution-NonCommericial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic

Considering Visual Elements

My genre uses limited amount of images usually one at the beginning and some graphs or charts used throughout the article to give context or explain various numbers referenced in the article. The questions below helped me consider adding these visual elements into my project.

Lowe, Glyn, "Northern Lights- designer Jesper Kongshaug" 02/21/2013 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

Creating Visual Coherence-

• What color choices?
• My article will be written on white paper with black text. The only other color will be in the visual images which will have appropriately colored graphs and be aesthetically pleasing to the eye.
• What font choices?
• I will use times new roman and use a larger text size for the title. The main body of the article will use 12 point font so that it is easily readable.

Creating Visual Salience-

• Image Selection?
• The images I choose for my article will relate to the subject of nuclear fusion. More specifically I will use a picture of Tri Alpha Energy as the leading image and graphs of data I wish to show throughout the paper where it makes the most sense to paste them. This will validate my logos style argument and bring my audience into complete understand of my topic. The opening image is used to say a thousand words because giving a visual of the main example of my subject is most important.

Creating Visual Organization-

• Text?
• My paragraphs will be medium length with complex sentences because I want the audience to gain as much information as possible in a limited amount of space. However, I will double space my text because it makes the text easier to read. There will however be limited space in between paragraphs to conform to the conventions of the genre.
• Images?
• I plan on have 3 or 4 graphs explaining various numerical points and one opening image that really encapsulates the main example my subject will be based on. I am using this limited amount of images to conform to the conventions of a short length to my paper that both articles in the economist and editorials in the New York Times typically conform too.

Creating Visual Impact-

• Placing an image at the topic engages the reader right away and if the image is striking enough will draw them to read the article. Also, it gives a visual reference to the people and the company my subject will be exemplifying. The graphs are there to show visually and numerically points that need to be emphasized such as how much money is being spent on nuclear fusion project, how much total these nuclear fusion project cost and so on. Furthermore, the use of graphs adds credibility if properly cited.

Project 3 Outline

Below is my Project 3 outline. The outline below may not resemble my final paper but I am using it as a launching pad for my project 3 paper.

Seattle Municipal Archives, "Engineering drafting room, 1962" 09/18/1962 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

Introduction- Frame the Consequences

• Grabber
• Nuclear fusion has the potential to provide unlimited amounts of clean carbon dioxide free energy for generations but due to a lack of global long term vision its reserach has been severely underfunded.
• Thesis
• For the past 60 years, nuclear fusion research has been significantly underfunded due to political policy and a lack of long term vision. Due to this lack of funds, nuclear fusion research has been set back decades but new small startups are gaining ground on the lost research due to relatively small amount of capitol needed to create nuclear fusion now. One of these startups is Tri Alpha Energy and they are going to bring nuclear fusion to fruition.

Body Paragraph-

• Topic Sentence
• The United States Government's budget over the past 50 to 70 years has had decreasing amounts of funds set aside for nuclear fusion research.
• Evidence
• Need to insert a graph here regarding the downward trend of government spending on nuclear fusion. Also, need to insert quotes from one of my sources regarding how much money needs to be spent each year for nuclear fusion to become possible.
• Analysis
• Analyze the evidence above.

Body Paragraph-

• Topic Sentence
• The ITER global nuclear fusion project has been riddled with money concerns and a lack of funding since its conception in the late 90's but this has been a common occurrence for all large scale nuclear fusion projects.
• Evidence
• Speak about ITER's financial concerns in the mid 2000's and provide some evidence about abandoned nuclear fusion projects in the 70's specifically in the United States.
• Analysis
• Analyze the point that large scale projects have failed and have not yielded the data needed to make nuclear fusion a sustained energy source.

Body Paragraph-

• Topic Sentence
• Tri Alpha Energy and another half a dozen nuclear fusion energy startups have sprung up in the past decade with the intention of using enhanced computer technology to refine abandoned ideas about how to create a sustained nuclear fusion reactions.
• Evidence
• Speak about what Tri Alpha Energy and other startups are doing differently than other global government funded experiments. Also mention who is funding these startups such a the founder of Paypal and Microsoft.
• Analysis
• Analyze the difference between the large government expierments and what these nuclear fusion startups are doing.

Conclusion

• Concluding Strategy
• My concluding strategy is to speak about the positive consequence of funding nuclear fusion and that a way to fund nuclear fusion more effectively is to give money to these startups because they can work specifically on these various styles of nuclear fusion reactors.

Analyzing My Genre

I took a look at two similar genres as possiblities of the style my public argument would be written in. I think I will write a mixture of the super formal, in depth, factually written that the articles in the Economist resemble and the slightly less formal, more personable writing of the New York Times editorial section. These two genres are fitting for my style of writing and I want to emulate two genres that have produced a lot of good writing and important subjects.

Purwanto, Yan Arief. "Journalist on duty" 09/19/2007 via flickr.com Attribution-Alike 2.0 Generic

Example 1.

Example 2.

Example 3.

Example 4.

Example 5.

Social Context:

• The genre is typically set in a news driven and fact based world. The editorial portions of the New York Times is written to provide opinions from respected individuals about divisive topics. While the Economists writes analytical articles about important political and economic leaders, events that have an impact on on the economy and any future events that may impact economic security.
• The subject of the New York Times can be anything but is typically regulated to US news, World news, Political news, Economic news and topics concerning science. While the Economist speaks about all the subjects above it puts an economic analytical spin on their articles.
• This genre is used by journalists to get their work out to the masses. The readers are informed, educated, educated individuals interested in the news and the economy.
• This genre is used on a monthly to daily basis to convey the news to its readers. The people who reader the New York Times and the Economist are using to be more informed and in some cases make investment decisions based off of a subject they read about in the two mediums.

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre

• The content included is a mixture of facts from both sides of the argument, quotes from leaders of the different factions involved in the argument and analysis of the situation through the viewpoint of the author or authors. What is typically excluded is uninformed opinions about the topic for example there is little mention of social media posts from insignificant people about a certain subject.
• The most prevalent rhetorical appeal in the Economist is logos. The articles are shaped around providing factual evidence to convince the reader of a certain analysis of a situation. Little emotional appeal is used probably due to the English writing style. The New York Times editorials, however, the style and rhetorical appeals that are used in the writing really depends on the writer and their is a lot of variation between editorials.
• In both genres the text open up in a similar way. They present the subject and delve into the meat of the subject and their opinion or analysis of the subject. The conclusion in the New York Times articles is a little more pronounced and long winded for the most part while the Economist has simple, concise conclusions to the articles.
• The sentences obviously vary throughout all the examples. Simple, complex and complex compound sentences are used by the authors of both genres to convey their point. So not a lot of difference in style between the two. The New York Times editorials is for the most part active in telling the reader their opinion; while, the analysis of the Economist uses is subdued and implicit. There is a lack of exclamation points and rhetorical questions in both genres do to the professional tone both institutions demand from their writing.
• The word choice is professional but easy to understand. There is definitely a lack of ten dollar words which makes it easy for a casual reader to understand even though the sentence structure can be complex. The word choice is formal but not academic in the Economist and in the New York Times the editorials can be humorous at times but formal as well. 

Analyze What those Patterns Reveal about the Social Context of the Genre

• Both genres include world news events in the political, economic and scientific realms of life but for the most exclude popular culture analysis or opinions and only on rare occasions do an article on a pop star.
• The writers encourage analysis, understanding and want their readers to engage in the text especially in the editorials for the New York Times.
• There is a knowledge of economic understanding assumed when reading the Economist and the New York Times editorials can assume the reader agrees with their political views depending on the writer those views can be different but it is mostly a liberal lean.
• The most valuable content for the Economist is economic policy and political policy changing to affect the economy. The least valuable is pop culture happenings such Ariana Grande dumps her boyfriend, etc. The most valuable content for the New York Times is any political, economic, social or any other type of problem that is important and an individual needs to write an opinion piece about. Again, unimportant pop culture happenings are rarely written about as they are not important.

Considering Types

I read briefly about five different types of arguments. They are position, causal, evaluative, proposal, and refutation. All of them have their strengths and weaknesses but one can be chosen to be the basis of my argument in Project 3!

ClkerFreeVectorImages, "Co-Workers Argument Argue Worker People Yelling" 2014 via pixabay.com CC0 Public Domain Dedication

Reading over a brief description of the five different types of arguments, two particular arguments stood out as a good fit for my project were an evaluative arguments and a position argument. Both argument types draw on established ideas, social constructs or tangible objects to prove their purpose to their audience. A position argument in my subject, nuclear fusion, would defend the position people are taking about the high cost of nuclear fusion and how it might not be worth all that money. While an evaluative argument, might evaluate why a small startup company like Tri Alpha Energy is getting so much monetary support and success in regards to their advancement of their nuclear fusion reactor. 

I thought one of these arguments was not a good fit for my subject and this argument was a causal argument. My main reason for disliking this type of argument was that many of the articles I read about nuclear fusion had this style all ready and I thought that I could differentiate my project's view from their's by first changing how I argue my view in project 3. 

My Rhetorical Action Plan

I have created a rhetorical action plan to put on paper what the rhetorical situation of my project 3 will be. First, I discuss who the audience is because my project will have to address them implicitly or explicitly in a way that connects with them. Second, deciding on which genre I want to emulate in project 3 is important so I will draw inspiration from the sources I have already researched. Lastly, I brainstorm about what reactions, positive or negative, my audeince will have to my rendition of project 3. I explain all of this in detail below.

ClkerFreeVectorImages, "Engineer Architect Person Plans Man Blueprints" 2014 via pixabay.com CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication

Audience

• My audience will have a general knowledge of nuclear fusion and the struggles it has encountered over its long history. I can safely assume that the audience will know about the vast potential nuclear fusion has and the difficulties nuclear fusion scientist and engineers have faced in creating a sustained nuclear fusion reaction. My audience will also hold the belief that nuclear fusion is not a waste of time or money but just a difficult problem that needs to be solved.
• My audience holds the ideal that protecting the energy future of the world is an important matter and that doing so through sustainable energy sources is the best way forward. Their values are to cultivate a future for their children and their children's children that is secure. Finally, my audience likes to stay informed regarding scientific advancements and where to wisely invest their money for the greatest return.
• Numbers will persuade my audience as well as quotes from important people that they look up to or base their investments off of. By taking the large amounts of money being spent on nuclear fusion startups and large internationally funded experiment and weighing it with the benefits of a nuclear fusion reactor expressed numerically in many journals and website articles I can accurately portray my point to my audience clearly.
• Pictures and design diagrams of various nuclear fusion reactor would be interesting to the reader because it would describe the difference between different types of nuclear fusion reactors. Also, graphs of costs and energy outputs of different types of fusion reactors would help the audience engage positively with the text.
• The purpose of the argument is challenge the belief that nuclear fusion is a waste of time and money. I want to engage my readers in a thought provoking way so that they might take an interest in nuclear fusion like past generations did. By providing my readers with engaging material and explaining a successful future for nuclear fusion my audience will leave with a new opinion about nuclear fusion.

Genre

• Example 1 (Opinion Piece)
• The function of this genre is to establish an opinion about a subject, explain it and then convince its readers why it is true. This style is designed to express the author's opinion as well as back it up with evidence to explain why this opinion in the author's mind is the correct one.
• This is used in blog posts as well as an editorial write-up about a specific subject that the edition is revolving around. 
• I would use my opinion to appeal to the emotions of my audience to convince them that my opinion is correct. Also, using logos when writing for my audience will allow me to use the facts available to convince my readers of my opinion.
• This genre doesn't use a lot of graphs but pictures are used sometimes to add context to my opinion.
• An opinion piece has an informal style to it but keeps the writing formal. It really depends on the website the opinion piece is published on. For instance, a piece published on a blog is more informal than an opinion piece published for the New York Times.
• Example 2 (Report Journalism)
• The function of this genre is inform its readers about a subject giving facts from all sides of the subject. Inherently, this type of writing has no explicit mentions of an opinion from the author but some articles do have a slight lean in their writing or style of presenting the material.
• This style is used at all major new organizations to create articles that inform and interest their readers.
• Using logos to connect with audience is the way because this highly formal style of writing needs a logical approach to connect with its audience.
• Using graphs to display the data is the best way to visually represent my subject. Also, specific relevant pictures is a good way to display the subject in an appealing way.
• The style of Report Journalism is formal because it is written for an audience expecting to hear the facts and very little opinion based writing. The facts are to be written in an expeditious manner that accurately retells the subject so the reader can gain the maximum understanding.

Positive Reactions

• Increased exuberance in nuclear fusion and use links provided in text to fund nuclear fusion projects.
• Interest in nuclear fusion grows and other webpages like the ones linked in the text and others get more views as my audience wants to learn more and more.
• My audience sees the need for more money to be diverted to nuclear fusion and petitions representatives to do so.

Negative Reactions

• The startups in the text are based off of failed experiments done by other scientists decades before with a lot more money backing them up. What do these scientists hope to do but pocket the venture capitol when the reactor fails to work.
• These startups are taking a focused approach to each style of reactor they specailize in. Using that data from earlier failures is actually a positive because the engineers can work on fixing the flaws in the design to get closer to the goal of creating a working nuclear fusion reactor. Each of these companies are being supported by heavyweights of buisness like the founder of Paypal, Yahoo and Microsoft so the founders of these companies have their reputations to lose if they steal these venture capitol dollars.
• Billions and billions of dollars are being spent on nuclear fusion experiments when that money could be used to subsidize solar panels construction and tax incentives for Americans to put solar panels on their roofs.
• Billions of dollars have been spent of solar panel subsidizes but a lot subsidy money did go to putting solar panels on the roofs of the American middle class but to startups who miss managed the money and ended up losing a majority of it in the hopes of creating solar farms. An example of this mismanagement of tax payer dollars is here.
• Nuclear fusion is a time drain and money drain it has never worked and these new experiments will not work either.
• Nuclear fusion has not been properly funded for the past 30 years and perhaps longer as stated in numerous articles therefore and progress that has not been made yet could of been made if the foresight was there from the beginning. Nuclear fusion is an extremely complicated problem but the fact that such power lies within humanity's grasp is to big a reward to simply give up when the monetary and timely cost is high. It is worth the energy, time and monetary support because nuclear fusion can solve humanity's rising energy needs.

Analyzing Purpose

Below is a Coggle I created to help me brainstorm what I could add to the public debate regarding nuclear fusion. After reading various articles from many different websites with varying subjects and genres, I have expanded my knowledge enough to begin to think about insight I could provide to this debate. My Coggle is the first step into shaping what that insight will look like.

(Coggle)

Analyzing Context

Analyzing the context surrounding nuclear fusion will form my argument for project 3. Understanding the various opinions, ideas and controversies surrounding nuclear fusion as well as knowing who are the major players in the nuclear fusion debate culminates in a better understand of the context surrounding the debate about how economical is nuclear fusion.

ClkerFreeVectorImages, "Context Question Direction Meaning Arrow Circle" 2012 via pixabay.com CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication

1. Their are a couple key perspectives surrounding the debate about whether or not nuclear fusion is economically viable. They both are centered around the lack of progress made in the field of nuclear fusion. On one side, scientists argue that not enough money has been set aside for nuclear fusion research which is why nuclear fusion has been in the experimenting stages for so long. On the other side, critics of expenditures on large nuclear fusion projects say that enough money has been spent on nuclear fusion and little progress has been made. They believe that money could be put to better use improving proven clean energy sources like wind, solar, geothermal and hydroelectric.
2. The major points of contention are the massive amounts of money being dumped into nuclear fusion project like the one currently being built in France which is projected to be finished in 2020 and could cost over 20 billion dollars to complete. As mentioned in this TIME's magazine article, the ITER nuclear fusion project is simply an expensive science project that will never produce anything for society once its use is outlived as a testing ground for nuclear fusion. This is a major point of contention for skeptics of nuclear fusion.
3. While nuclear fusion does cost extreme amounts of money to simply create the apparatuses that house a nuclear fusion reaction, it is widely accepted that nuclear fusion does have the potential to create large amounts of power at cheap and renewable cost. It is easy to see this agreement in the following two articles: the first article is from the Institution of Engineering and Technology website writes about the gold mine a working nuclear fusion reactor would be because of its widely accessible fuel (seawater) and the amount of power released when the reaction occurs, and this second article is from the New York Times website which explores new start-ups and how these same nuclear fusion ideas are cyclical and have no chance of working explains that nuclear fusion does have the potential to create large amounts of power for cheap.
4. The people who wish to spend money on proven methods are more conservative in their approach to their expenditure of money and this group are the individuals against the large expenditure of money on nuclear fusion experiments. Their conservative way of spending money influences them to go with an option that has a larger guarantee of success but smaller reward than an option that has a larger reward but smaller guarantee of success. This is the main ideological difference between the two groups on either side of the nuclear fusion debate.
5. Specifically, in this article from euroscientist.com is suggesting to its audience to take a good look at nuclear fusion and all of the fake promises surrounding it. It is a scathing review of nuclear fusion and slight progress it has made over the past decades of research and experimenting. Next, this article from TIME magazine is suggesting to its audience to give nuclear fusion another chance because these small groups of engineers are working in specific avenues to make nuclear fusion a reality. Two different articles coming from two different viewpoints about the argument of nuclear fusion's relevance.
6. The best perspective is that nuclear fusion has the greatest potential in regards to creating the most clean and renewable energy. Nuclear energy may be the only way to save Earth from global warming and carbon emissions that are destroying our atmosphere. Nuclear energy is the most viable option to create a world that runs on clean energy. 
7. The cost of nuclear fusion is the greatest perspective that has a negative effect on my argument. The cost of nuclear fusion has always been a high price but as experiments reach the billions without any progress regarding the actual implementation of nuclear fusion into the energy grid, this prospective gains strength each day scientists do not come through with a breakthrough in nuclear fusion technology.

Audience and Genre

The first audience I think is interested in public debates a nuclear fusion's viability as a major source of clean energy is alternative energy scientists. Their world revolves around creating devices to capture energy from new untapped energy sources. The second audience is economists dealing in energy futures. These people project how new technology is going to affect the market. By keeping up to date on these technologies, economists can determine whether or not providing venture capital funds to small startup companies is worth the investment. My results are found below.

Slmones, Pedro Rlbelro "Reading the weekly newspaper" 01/25/2015 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

1. Alternative Energy Scientists

• phys.org
• http://phys.org/news/2015-06-sandia-machine-funding-aimed-fusion.html
• http://phys.org/news/2015-10-fusion-reactors-economically-viable-experts.html
• Scientific Journalism
• http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/technology/start-ups-take-on-challenge-of-nuclear-fusion.html?_r=0
• http://www.gizmag.com/nuclear-fusion-power-2020-crowdfunding/32058/

2. Energy Market Economists

• Emerging Technology Markets
• http://fortune.com/2015/09/28/jeff-bezos-peter-thiel-fusion/
• http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21676752-research-fusion-has-gone-down-blind-alley-means-escape-may-now-be
• forbes.com
• http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2014/10/20/the-iter-nuclear-fusion-experiment-who-is-providing-the-funding-infographic/
• http://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferhicks/2015/07/22/boeing-files-patent-for-self-sustaining-laser-powered-nuclear-fusion-jet-engine/

Project 2 Final Draft Rhetorical Analysis

Here is the link to my final draft of Project 2 Rhetorical Analysis.

Blaha, Karen "Fireworks 1" 09/02/2007 via flickr.com Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

Narrowing My Focus

The two questions below are my favorites from my earlier post titled "Questions About Controversy". These questions will help form my own view on the controversy of nuclear fusion's potential to be an economically equivalent source of energy to fossil fuels.

Grossalber, Markus "sewing needle with thread" 03/09/2013 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

Is nuclear fusion a safe way to produce power?

This question is important to answer because this is one of the main sticking points of some people's apprehension about the potential use of nuclear fusion as a source of power. Nuclear fission power plants can have meltdowns as seen in the Fukushima power plant meltdown in Japan and wide spread nuclear fallout from disasters like Chernobyl in Ukraine. These disasters have caused a stigma around the word nuclear. By answering the question about whether or not nuclear fusion have major safety concerns will validate any fears about nuclear fusion plants.

What organizations (or other groups) are providing money for nuclear fusion experiments?

Finding an answer to this question would help me discover who the supporters of nuclear fusion are. If certain energy companies are investing millions or billions of dollars into nuclear fusion project knowing who they are would be an interesting topic to write about. Also, taking a look into who is supporting nuclear fusion will also allow me to make a guess to which companies are making a move to gain a foothold in the next generation of energy production.

Punctuation, Part 2

The comma, the colon and end punctuation are the three topics I chose to explore under the Punctuation section of Rules for Writers. Each of these topics have given me grammatical hell throughout my writing career which is apparent in the examples I show below from my analysis paper.

Wentzel, Larry "Punctuation Dinosaur" 07/23/2010 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

The Comma (292)

Obviously a comma is used to separate clauses where it could be potentially confusing for the reader. This is most necessary with the need for a comma after an introductory clause. What was new, was the need for a comma after every item in a series including before the conjunction for the last item in the series. Finally, the use of commas to denote who is the direct object or direct address of a sentence was a new use of commas that I only sort of understood before.

Example 1.

Example 2.

The Colon (319)

A colon is mostly used to show the beginning of a list after explanation of what the list is or is about in an independent clause preceding it. There are a lot of common misuses of the colon such as using a colon between a preposition or verb and its object. Finally, using a colon in between an idiom (for example, etc.) and its object is a misuse of a colon.

Example 1. 

Example 2.

End Punctuation (333)

Reading through this section I came across interesting points about how to accurately use exclamation points and question marks at the end of sentences. For instance, a question mark must be used when an actual question is asked not when one is writing about a question and an exclamation point should be used when there is actual exclamation not when simply writing about a momentous moment. Finally, a big question of mine was answered in this section. When a sentence ends in an abbreviation one should not end a second period after but that period will serve dual purposes in that sentence.

Example 1.

Example 2.

Reflection on Project 2

My Project 2 paper came together at the last minute as I finally understood the meaning of the project and how to effectively explain to my readers how to analyze a piece of writing. Overall this paper was a success but I am still struggling to my best work on the paper because I don't feel like I fully understand what is expected as college writer.

Heidrich, Nadine, "Reflection - Day 96/365" 02/01/2014 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic 

1. My first draft really focused on the article and it was completely about the article's rhetorical situation. I didn't mention anything about my audience or write in a way that would accommodate my writing. I was unaware of my own rhetorical situation which is what significantly changed from draft one to the final draft. 
2. My thesis in the first draft was focused on what the article was talking. When I revamped my thesis I spoke about what rhetorical strategies the author used to get across what the article was talking about. This fundamental shift got me on track for what this paper was suppose to be about.
3. What led me to this shift in my thesis, is that I wasn't on track for what the paper needed to be about. Also, my audience was completely wrong. I was writing for a teacher who understood the material instead of a group of students who need to know how to rhetorically analyze piece of literature. 
4. This change, I don't think affected my credibility as an author. Instead it made me more credible because the paper was on topic and was better written because of that. Without an on topic paper my readers would have suffered from bad examples in regards to rhetorical strategies and a focus that dealt with only the text instead of the whole rhetorical situation the article was written in. 
5. The changes addressed the audience more directly and writing in the final draft more geared towards their level of understanding. In the end, the final draft addressed the audience with explicit implicit sentences that clearly analyze why rhetorical strategies of the article were effective or not effective and how that sway the audience one way or the other regarding the purpose of the article.
6. My first draft was very repetitive. I would analyze a piece a quote for example and then write a one sentence analysis. Then, I attempted to expand upon that first piece of analysis but that second sentence had the exact same meaning as the first bit. In the final draft, I decided to vary up my sentence structure. I analyzed the text with a simple sentence that had no conjunctions. Then I followed the simple sentence with an in depth analysis that was a complex and addressed many ideas.
7. This change in sentence structure and organization made it clear to the audience right away why they read a sample from the text because they knew what rhetorical strategy it exemplified and whether or not it was effective. Then I dropped that sample into the realm of the article's rhetorical situation to help my audience understand why the rhetorical strategy was effective with the author's targeted audience.
8. Since this paper was an analysis paper at its heart I really just focused on my paper conforming to the conventions of the essay by providing ample amounts of examples and analysis of these examples. I differentiated from past analysis papers that I have written by using a lot more paraphrasing when trying to grasp the entire paper's organization into a paragraph and still provide analysis. This was my major struggle when trying to conform to the conventions of an analysis paper. 
9. This process of reflections helps me to identify my identity as a writer because it lets my reflect on what I did in my paper that looking back on it might of been unclear. My identity as a writer I assume is one that needs to be extremely clear with his audience but in doing so is so overly clear that it gets repetitive and therefore confusing. I need to shape my writing in a different way so that I can eliminate my repetitiveness and stick to be super clear.

Extended Annotated Bibliography

Here is the link to my annotated bibliography. I have been researching who the big supporters of nuclear fusion experiments are and how dangerous nuclear fusion can be. These two topics will heavily influence what I argue about in project three.

Roenlgk, Caleb "Writing? Yeah." 03/20/2012 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

Questions About Controversy

The controversy I chose is whether or not nuclear fusion is a viable economic option for the replacement of fossil fuels as a primary energy source.

OpenClipartVectors "Protest Demonstration Communism Fight Fists Girls" 10/24/2013 via pixabay.com CC0 Public Domain

Who?

1. What organizations are providing money for experiments into nuclear fusion?
2. Who are the major scientists in nuclear fusion community?
3. What members of the community are against nuclear fusion technology?
4. Who are leaders of organizations such as UK Atomic Energy Authority?
5. Who is Steven Cowley and what is his role in the nuclear fusion debate?

What?

1. How much power does a theoretical nuclear fusion power plant produce?
2. How much money does a nuclear fusion power plant cost?
3. How much time would it take to implement nuclear fusion power plants?
4. Is nuclear fusion a safe way to produce power?
5. 
   

When?

1. What is driving the large amount of capital behind experiments with nuclear fusion?
2. When did nuclear fusion first become theoretically possible?
3. When did people begin to object to the use of nuclear fusion?
4. When did lawmakers and others begin to object to large expenditure of money on nuclear fusion experiments?
5. What are some major advancements within nuclear fusion technology?

Where?

1. Where is nuclear fusion being tested?
2. What realms of society (government, social or academic) object the most to nuclear fusion?
3. Where are some of the privately funded nuclear fusion projects being tested?
4. Where are some of the publicly funded nuclear fusion project being tested?
5. Where or which type of media or which websites, news outlets or journals has nuclear fusion been the most debated about from a social and scientific point of view? 

How?

1. How does Facebook feel about nuclear fusion?
2. Opinions about nuclear fusion on Twitter?
3. Professional opinions about nuclear fusion on social media?
4. Are there any accounts devoted to nuclear fusion on social media?
5. Is there in-depth analysis of nuclear fusion and its impact on YouTube or other similar sites?

Paragraph Analysis 2

While I was reading through the body paragraphs of my essay I started to notice a similar trend. I have a formulaic way of writing.  I tend to write a topic sentence, provide a piece of evidence and then write some analysis. While this is neither a weakness or strength it is predictable and I want to revise to change that up a bit somehow. The strengths across my paragraphs were my paragraph length and providing a clear main point. My paragraphs have excellent length and I don't feel I have more to add. Also, my main point is always clear and stated boldly at the beginning of the paragraph. My weaknesses are my lack of clarity in my analysis and my lack of key words and transitional paragraph phrases to tie my points together. I need to weave more of my examples together across multiple paragraphs. I intend to spend time doing that while revising.

CollegeDegrees360. "Schoolgirl with books on her head" 07/12/2012 via flickr.com Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

Here is the link to my Paragraph Analysis.

Revised Conclusion

I employed two different strategies when writing my conclusion for this essay. In my original conclusion I answered the question "So what?" with a rhetorical question. This was effective in my mind but confusing as well and I didn't think it got to the point of the essay. My improved conclusion used the strategy circling back. I circled back to the quote I used in my introduction to analyze it as a way to show the skill my audience had learned and why rhetorical analysis is so important when reading academic writing.

Heath, Struart. "Stop" 10/25/2008 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

Original Conclusion
Cowley's use of contextual examples and organized writing were his most effective rhetorical strategies . Why does his analysis of an obscure opinionated piece of scientific journalism matter? This analysis has explained how to take a deeper look at how an author articulates himself to his audience. The use of rhetorical strategies for instance, that were once a subterfuge, now have been brought to light.  It is easier to understand how this author convinces his readers that his point of view is correct. Throughout your academic career, reading academic literature will always be a way to gain knowledge. However, understanding the rhetorical strategies used by authors and the rhetorical situations that the author was writing in will help you understand the authors motivation and why he chose these strategies to sway his audience. Being able to look past the manipulations that writers use to convince their readers allows a better understanding of the material and lets you come to your own conclusion about the points the author is making. This places you as almost a third party, a reader who sees both sides.

Improved Conclusion
We have just analyzed a piece of scientific journalism written by Steven Cowley.   Now I want to revisit the statistic that introduced this essay.  It mentions that a nuclear fusion power plant could theoretically run on just 112 gallons of fuel.  It then compared that to the amount of gallons purchased by the average American driver in one year, which is 429 gallons. While taking a better look at this statistic, we can assume that a nuclear fusion power plant is not using the same fuel that the average American consumes. It is imperative that this is pointed out because if 112 gallons of unleaded gasoline could power a nuclear fusion power plant we would have heard of this sooner. Looking at this statistic, within its rhetorical situation, we can assume that Cowley is using this statistic to play on the logical of his audience who have been influenced by the context that this was published in. The simple use of rhetorical analysis will expand our understanding of the academic writing we will encounter in our scholarly careers.