Post 6

I felt like Grant-Davies article was very similar to the Backpack v. Briefcase article, because he also discussed who the audience is, talks about exigence, and constraints on rhetorical situations. Besides talking about the audience, exigence, and constraints, he goes on to describe discourse and how it ties in with these ways to analyze rhetorical situations, as well as how a rhetor is involved in different analyzing situations. According to Grant-Davies, discourse asks three questions, which are what is the discourse about, why is it needed, and what it is trying to accomplish. 

Discourse presents fundamental issues that evoke an emotional response from people on specific issues, values or principles. This can be tied in to constraints, because for example in this Guinness ad, not everyone can drink, whether it is because it is illegal, for a religious belief or because of personal reasons. Constrains and exigence are very similar because they are both trying to overcome specific goals, whether it is because of a belief or legal issues. He also questions what the goals are for discourse, or why it is needed. For example what is Guinness trying to achieve with their poster? To me Guinness is trying to get those who are too young to drink to get to know the product so that when they are able to begin to drink they will already have a brand name on their mind. This could be considered targeting the audience, because they want a broader audience besides the people who already are able to buy alcohol. Another audience that Guinness is trying to get to drink are those people who drink another type of alcohol. If those people see this ad and are drawn to it, they are going to be more likely to purchase the drink. Grant-Davies believes that the rhetor can be a volunteer role, as a parent, or in some other role that may be less readily defined and the rhetor can play several roles at once. The rhetor in this situation can either be someone who does or does not drink, and because of values or principles can judge it differently. 

Post 5

A type of rhetoric that I see almost on a daily basis, are advertisements for alcohol. Whether I am just watching a show on television, at a sporting event, driving on the highway or just walking around campus, everywhere I go I can see an advertisement for alcohol. I feel that the alcohol industry has a lot of potential constraints that could be analyzed that affect the capability of the advertisements to work.  

The Alcohol industry pours millions of dollars every year in to advertisements in the hopes of gaining new customers and to expand their sales to those who already buy their products. After watching some Youtube videos and from personal knowledge, the audiences that the alcohol companies are trying to target are those people who want to look cool, feel accepted, have a good time, want to look attractive, and those who already are drinking. I also think that the alcohol companies are trying to target those who do not drink, because they already know that once someone buys their product, they will most likely continue to be loyal customers. The exigence factor that affects alcohol companies and their attempts at advertising are those people who do not drink alcohol, those who cannot drink due to personal or religious beliefs, or to the people who cannot drink alcohol because their bodies cannot handle the alcohol. There is also the exigence factor that companies are trying to get those who already drink alcohol to switch to their brand, because the alcohol companies each view their products as better. I feel like the exigence factor and the constraints are somewhat similar.  For constraints I came up with that not everyone can drink, whether it is because of personal or religious beliefs, their age, or because their bodies cannot handle alcohol. I feel that these constraints are still why alcohol companies still pour millions of dollars in to their advertisements, just so they can gain a few new customers and to prove that their product is the best. 

Post 4

Porter’s article revolves around the idea that all text is intertextual, which means that the text has been used before. His example for this was Thomas Jefferson and the writing of the Declaration of Independence. He states that Jefferson had used information that was previously written by Locke in his social contract theory as well as other famous writers of that time period. Jefferson’s ability to borrow traces effectively and to find appropriate contexts for them are what Porter believes made him a good writer. Intertextual writings revolve around discourse and because of this, being a writer is just being a part of a discourse community and writing for their specific rules and regulations. He states that intertextuality supports writing across the curriculum as a mechanism for introducing students to the regulating system of discourse communities. He also believes that students need to be taught to be pre-socialized writers and wont be sufficiently immersed in their discourse community to produce a proper report, unless taught this information before they begin to write.

According to Porter, the harm in writing as an individual, as isolated, and as heroic is because if a student is not properly immersed in their discourse community, this can cause students to learn to overlook vital facts of discourse production. Porter feels that this can lead to plagiarism and not being in the confines of a discourse community. I feel like this could also lead to unrealistic expectations from teachers or professors when they are assigning projects, because I feel that there is not always a discourse community that a paper or an assignment can be placed. There are original ideas out there and that does not necessarily mean that someone has plagiarized.

Post 3

The type of research method that Greene describes in his article is inquiry. Greene believes that writing is a form of inquiry, and that inquiry, research, and arguments are all related. Inquiring is not just a way to ask questions for your own benefit, but also to understand other people’s points of view. Greene also believes that research can be related to arguments. As human beings we have arguments all of the time, and to Greene, one can see research as a way to make a conversation more in-depth and can make the research process seem more real. Arguing can be seen as a form of research, because one needs to support their claims with information they have found, in order to get others to agree with you. By describing research in these two states, the reader gets a feeling that Greene leans more towards wanting the reader to discover information, instead of being taught how to find it. When Kleine describes the two types of research, he describes it as strategic and heuristic. He then further distinguishing them as the hunter and gatherer type. In the hunter type, or findings, he states that “a hunter finds what he’s looking for, and a gatherer discovers what might be of use” (25). After reading both articles, I believe that both authors preferred the reader to discover their research and to ask questions, instead of trying to force yourself to find information.

While reading the articles, it was hard for me to distinguish who the authors were trying to address. In Greene’s article it seemed like he was trying to capture the attention of just the reader, mainly someone who is interested in learning to become a better researcher. Then in Kleine’s article, I felt as though he was writing to a large audience and not directly to the reader. Because the two authors are writing to different audiences, Greene’s article is more informative on the subject of researching, while Kleine’s story was just that, a story. I felt that it did not convey any important information and it was rather difficult for me to finish the article and understand what he was trying to say. 

Post 2

I have always believed that Wikipedia is a very useful source. While there are mistakes and some false information on Wikipedia, it has always been my go to site to find all sorts of information. Since I use Wikipedia so much, I could never quite understand why professors and teachers would not allow us as students to use Wikipedia in research papers, projects, and other various activities that needed outside sources. After reading this article I have a better understanding as to why teachers are so weary to allow us students to use Wikipedia. I still believe that Wikipedia can be a useful tool for finding information, but because Wikipedia has open participation and can be easily changed, I now feel that it is not necessarily the best place to find information.

After reading Purdy’s article, I believe that there is a lot to learn from the academic research process that happens on Wikipedia. Authors on Wikipedia must review what other people have written on their topic so that they do not write information that is not related to the topic or put information on the page that is already there. Purdy states that to avoid repetition, one must do a literature review, which “entails summarizing main points from your sources, identifying their insights and/or limitations, and situating these texts in relation to one another and your writing” (214). Conducting a literature review is helpful when beginning the process of writing or editing a Wikipedia page, because if there are repetitions the work that is done will most likely be deleted from the page. It is also necessary not to copy from sources or take credit from others’ information, because that will make the writer seem unqualified. Also, while revising the paper or article, one should revise frequently and should receive feedback from peers, teachers, family, and friends. Receiving feedback should also happen before finalizing the paper so that the article is clear and has no repetition. I believe that all of these steps are relevant and can be extremely helpful for writing both a successful research paper, and writing our own Wikipedia pages. 

Post 1

Hi, my name is Annie Connors and I am from Medina, Ohio. I am a junior at Ohio University, and I am studying  Health Services Administration. I have an older brother, who also attends Ohio University, and a younger sister who has Down Syndrome. Once I graduate from college, I would like to be able to volunteer more time with the Special Olympics, because I have seen first hand how the Special Olympics has changed the lives of individuals with special needs. I am a member of Tau Beta Sigma, which is a music service sorority and a former member of the Ohio University Marching 110. I enjoy running, music, Irish dancing, volunteering, spending time with my family, and hanging out with my friends.

In ENG 151, I enjoyed that the professor would have a daily video that would pertain to that days discussion. The least rewarding aspect of ENG 151, was that it wasn't anything more than a high school english class. We did not get an opportunity to write about topics that we felt were interesting and instead wrote about topics that the professor thought was interesting. I think that the class would have been more interesting if the professor would have let us pick our own topics for our papers instead of learning about something that a majority of the class did not want to learn about.

For 308J Composting in the Digital Age, I feel that the layout is very straight forward and wont drift too much from the planned class context. This class differs from my previous classes, because I have never been able to blog, write wikipedia pages, or do other things related to new media.

By the end of winter quarter, I hope to gain the knowledge to successfully create, edit, and write a Wikipedia page and become a better researcher and writer. I am worried that I wont find a topic where I can find enough information for my projects and I am also worried that the projects will be too hard to handle with my course load this quarter.