This blogpost serves as a peer review for Nick Hernandez's Video Essay for Project 3.
Author: Nick Hernandez
Title & Link to Post: Are We Too Dependent on Computers?
For this peer review, I decided to make a copy-editing suggestion for Nick's Video Essay. When it comes to language, I believe that Nick made valid claims and had sufficient support, however, I did find it a little odd when it went from on-screen text to him talking, back to on-screen text. I think only one of those forms should be used, because it seemed like an abrupt entrance for him to come in and start stating his opinion on the matter. Nick had really good design elements, but one suggestion I would make is maybe cutting down the length of some of the videos. For example, I felt like there was too much footage of the military man using the laptop. The sources seemed pretty credible, and the video was very well put together, so I would say his presentation of his supporting evidence was done really well. Overall, I think Nick was successful with his Video Essay.
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Peer Review 13a
For this blogpost, I am doing a peer review of Nicholas Hoover's Quick Reference Guide for Project 3.
Author: Nicholas Hoover
Title & Link to Post: The Truth About Outsourcing
For this peer review I decided to make a re-design recommendation for Nicholas Hoover's QRG. I noticed that in his Open Post to Peer Reviewers, he noted that he should include additional white space, but I would have to say that I disagree with this idea. The white space is fairly decent, however, it is not consisted throughout the QRG. This makes for a distracting read as you make it through the guide. In addition, I feel like there is a lack of disconnect between each section for the guide; it seems like one continuous read. I believe that the addition of some color scheme, or making a theme for the QRG would also make it more inviting and interesting for the reader. The content for the project is great, there is just some refining to be done when it comes to genre conventions
Reflection on Local Revision Process
This blog serves as a reflection for the final process work and final cut for my standard college essay for Project 3.
What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
Coming into this week, I had a pretty solid draft that I had peer reviewed by two different members of English 109H. In addition, I had consulted Professor Bottai on how to better approach my revisions for the final cut of my argument, as well as a few of my peers that are not in the class. They helped me refine and fix all the small issues, that, in total, made the biggest difference in my final product.
What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.
The hardest part of my revision process was finding the right way to approach my revisions. I knew exactly what I needed to do, but I was not sure how I could make my essay less personal, without destroying the effect I had on my reader when it was personal. Eventually, I think I found a good balance between staying credible and being personal enough to where the audience could relate.
How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?
Now that this project is over, I rally have to make sure I am on top of my game for the final project. I can't afford to get distracted in my process work like I did for this project. It is going to be rough, seeing as though I have like 12 other projects to do, finals, and the timespan I have to work on it is cut in half. I also have to teach myself how to make a video essay, so that is going to be a challenge on it's own. I am pretty nervous for this final project, but as long as I stay on top of my process work, I think I will be able to pull off a pretty good final project.
How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?
I feel like my final version of my Public Argument turned out great. I believe that it shows how passionate I am about the subject, and that I have ample support for the claims that I make. This was a topic that I am really interested in and I think writing about it has motivated me to actually try and make a difference amongst greek life at the U of A.
Editorial Report 13b
This blogpost served as a second comparison for my rough cut in relation to the final cut for Project 3.
Selection from Rough Cut:
You may be wondering why these restrictions on serenades have caused such an uproar amongst many greek members, and it is because this is more than just a ban on silly performance that we perform for sororities. This ban places such a negative connotation on fraternities at the U of A, and it is coming from members of greek life itself. Instead of accusing fraternities for something that has not even been, they should be focusing on other actual problems such as substance abuse, which is a constantly occurring problem. Guys wearing skimpy clothing and dancing for the girls, while being supervised by house moms, should not be a concern. There have been no complaints thus far about serenades being a problem, and honestly they seem to bring nothing but pure joy to the sorority members at chapter. Girls are literally fangirling and cheering on the guys the entire time. These guys are enjoying their few minutes of fame at each sorority by looking like complete idiots, the last thing on their mind is the thought of promoting rape culture. If a sorority member feels uncomfortable she is more than welcome to submit a formal complaint, talk to someone about it, and the most logical of all, leave the situation. Last time I checked, there was not a choice on if you were getting raped or not, but in this case, there are many routes to take if one feels uncomfortable. There is absolutely no reason why this harmless activity should be targeted as something that promotes rape culture.
Re-edited Selection:
One might wonder why these restrictions on serenades have caused such an uproar amongst many greek members, and it is because this is more than just a ban on a silly performance that fraternities perform for sororities. This ban places such a negative connotation on fraternities at the U of A, and it is coming from members of greek life itself. Instead of accusing fraternities for something that has not even happened, they should be focusing on other actual problems such as substance abuse or other chapter violations. Guys wearing skimpy clothing and dancing for the girls, while being supervised by house moms, should not be a concern. There have been no complaints thus far about serenades being a problem, and honestly they seem to bring nothing but pure joy to the sorority members at chapter. Girls are literally fangirling and cheering on the guys the entire time. These guys are enjoying their few minutes of fame at each sorority by looking like complete idiots, the last thing on their mind is the thought of promoting rape culture. If a sorority member feels uncomfortable she is more than welcome to submit a formal complaint, talk to someone about it, and the most logical of all, leave the situation. There is absolutely no reason why this harmless activity should be targeted as something that promotes rape culture.
For this re-edited version there I tried to go for a more professional approach in how I was discussing the information. For example, I took out the use of "you" because addressing the audience seemed to informal and the reader may not be able to relate to what I am saying, so that would throw them off as they read. One crucial change I made was by taking out the second to last paragraph of the section. I felt like the initial way I worded it was too strong and did come off as offensive, but I was trying to explicitly make my point. However, after giving it some thought, I realized that it was unnecessary and would only cause more harm than benefit my paper.
Selection from Rough Cut:
You may be wondering why these restrictions on serenades have caused such an uproar amongst many greek members, and it is because this is more than just a ban on silly performance that we perform for sororities. This ban places such a negative connotation on fraternities at the U of A, and it is coming from members of greek life itself. Instead of accusing fraternities for something that has not even been, they should be focusing on other actual problems such as substance abuse, which is a constantly occurring problem. Guys wearing skimpy clothing and dancing for the girls, while being supervised by house moms, should not be a concern. There have been no complaints thus far about serenades being a problem, and honestly they seem to bring nothing but pure joy to the sorority members at chapter. Girls are literally fangirling and cheering on the guys the entire time. These guys are enjoying their few minutes of fame at each sorority by looking like complete idiots, the last thing on their mind is the thought of promoting rape culture. If a sorority member feels uncomfortable she is more than welcome to submit a formal complaint, talk to someone about it, and the most logical of all, leave the situation. Last time I checked, there was not a choice on if you were getting raped or not, but in this case, there are many routes to take if one feels uncomfortable. There is absolutely no reason why this harmless activity should be targeted as something that promotes rape culture.
Re-edited Selection:
One might wonder why these restrictions on serenades have caused such an uproar amongst many greek members, and it is because this is more than just a ban on a silly performance that fraternities perform for sororities. This ban places such a negative connotation on fraternities at the U of A, and it is coming from members of greek life itself. Instead of accusing fraternities for something that has not even happened, they should be focusing on other actual problems such as substance abuse or other chapter violations. Guys wearing skimpy clothing and dancing for the girls, while being supervised by house moms, should not be a concern. There have been no complaints thus far about serenades being a problem, and honestly they seem to bring nothing but pure joy to the sorority members at chapter. Girls are literally fangirling and cheering on the guys the entire time. These guys are enjoying their few minutes of fame at each sorority by looking like complete idiots, the last thing on their mind is the thought of promoting rape culture. If a sorority member feels uncomfortable she is more than welcome to submit a formal complaint, talk to someone about it, and the most logical of all, leave the situation. There is absolutely no reason why this harmless activity should be targeted as something that promotes rape culture.
For this re-edited version there I tried to go for a more professional approach in how I was discussing the information. For example, I took out the use of "you" because addressing the audience seemed to informal and the reader may not be able to relate to what I am saying, so that would throw them off as they read. One crucial change I made was by taking out the second to last paragraph of the section. I felt like the initial way I worded it was too strong and did come off as offensive, but I was trying to explicitly make my point. However, after giving it some thought, I realized that it was unnecessary and would only cause more harm than benefit my paper.
Editorial Report 13a
This blogpost served to compare my rough cut in relation to the final cut for Project 3.
Selection from Rough Cut:
After reading the article by Buscemi, and both aforementioned Daily Wildcat Articles, I found myself initially stuck at a crossroad, but my opinion was ultimately swayed after some more research and some reflection on my very own chapter. I am part of the newest class of brothers in the fraternity Sigma Phi Epsilon, also known as SigEp. Being fairly new to the chapter, I have gotten a sense of what greek life at the UA really is, while still being aware of the “outside world,” which I believe makes me a good voice for this argument. Actually being a part of greek life has totally broken all my former thoughts on what a fraternity is and what they value. I have been able to separate the truth from the rumors, and I have to say, fraternity life is not everything that people say it is. Fraternities are known for being comprised of douchey assholes, and sororities are labeled as ditsy sluts, both targeted for “paying for your friends.” Sure, as bad as it is, some people do fit these awful labels, but that’s a very small percentage, and I firmly believe that everyone has a skewed vision on what greek life really is. The standards that each fraternity and sorority is held to is much higher than one would expect, and there are many rules and regulations that we have to follow.
Re-edited Selection:
I am part of the newest class of brothers in the fraternity Sigma Phi Epsilon, also known as SigEp. Being fairly new to the chapter, I have gotten a sense of what greek life at the UA really is, while still being aware of the “outside world,” which I believe makes me a good voice for this argument. Actually being a part of greek life has shattered all my former thoughts on what a fraternity is and what they value. Fraternities are known for being comprised of douchey assholes, and sororities are labeled as ditsy sluts, both targeted for “paying for your friends.” Sure, as bad as it is, some people do fit these awful labels, but that’s a very small percentage, and I firmly believe that everyone has a skewed vision on what greek life really is. The standards that each fraternity and sorority are held to is much higher than one would expect, and there are many rules and regulations that they have to follow.
For this re-edited version there wasn't too big of a change, I basically omitted the first sentence of the paragraph. I did this in an attempt to make my essay less personal. Even though it was a small change I believe that it made a big difference overall in how my paper turned out. I made corrections like these throughout my entire paper. I even made sure to take out the use of the word "we" and used "they" instead to make it more credible.
Selection from Rough Cut:
After reading the article by Buscemi, and both aforementioned Daily Wildcat Articles, I found myself initially stuck at a crossroad, but my opinion was ultimately swayed after some more research and some reflection on my very own chapter. I am part of the newest class of brothers in the fraternity Sigma Phi Epsilon, also known as SigEp. Being fairly new to the chapter, I have gotten a sense of what greek life at the UA really is, while still being aware of the “outside world,” which I believe makes me a good voice for this argument. Actually being a part of greek life has totally broken all my former thoughts on what a fraternity is and what they value. I have been able to separate the truth from the rumors, and I have to say, fraternity life is not everything that people say it is. Fraternities are known for being comprised of douchey assholes, and sororities are labeled as ditsy sluts, both targeted for “paying for your friends.” Sure, as bad as it is, some people do fit these awful labels, but that’s a very small percentage, and I firmly believe that everyone has a skewed vision on what greek life really is. The standards that each fraternity and sorority is held to is much higher than one would expect, and there are many rules and regulations that we have to follow.
Re-edited Selection:
I am part of the newest class of brothers in the fraternity Sigma Phi Epsilon, also known as SigEp. Being fairly new to the chapter, I have gotten a sense of what greek life at the UA really is, while still being aware of the “outside world,” which I believe makes me a good voice for this argument. Actually being a part of greek life has shattered all my former thoughts on what a fraternity is and what they value. Fraternities are known for being comprised of douchey assholes, and sororities are labeled as ditsy sluts, both targeted for “paying for your friends.” Sure, as bad as it is, some people do fit these awful labels, but that’s a very small percentage, and I firmly believe that everyone has a skewed vision on what greek life really is. The standards that each fraternity and sorority are held to is much higher than one would expect, and there are many rules and regulations that they have to follow.
For this re-edited version there wasn't too big of a change, I basically omitted the first sentence of the paragraph. I did this in an attempt to make my essay less personal. Even though it was a small change I believe that it made a big difference overall in how my paper turned out. I made corrections like these throughout my entire paper. I even made sure to take out the use of the word "we" and used "they" instead to make it more credible.
Revised Post to Peer Reviewers
The following blogpost is intended to provide my peers with a link to my final cut for Project 3, as well as discuss the strengths and weaknesses of my Standard College Essay.
The link to my Standard College Essay can be found here.
For Project 3 I wrote about a sensitive topic, rape culture, in relation to fraternity serenades and how additional restrictions on what fraternities can do will only lead to the demise of greek life at the University of Arizona. It was difficult for me to try and figure out a way to structure my paper without being offensive to my readers. I have never really written a public argument, so I tried to get my point across, but kept in mind all the possible types of audiences I may have. In the end, I believe I created a a good public argument that voiced my opinion, and in a professional way.
I think that one of my biggest strengths of my paper is making the disclaimer before I went in the public argument. When I started writing, I felt like I was walking on thin ice, but by clarifying to my readers my personal stance on the subject, I think that will make them have a more open mind as they read my essay.
One of my weaknesses is that I feel like it could have been too personal that it doesn't make me or my support seem credible. When I went through the revision process, I made sure to make it as impersonal as I could, while still expressing my ideals on the situation. I think I did a fairly good job, but there is always room for improvement.
The link to my Standard College Essay can be found here.
For Project 3 I wrote about a sensitive topic, rape culture, in relation to fraternity serenades and how additional restrictions on what fraternities can do will only lead to the demise of greek life at the University of Arizona. It was difficult for me to try and figure out a way to structure my paper without being offensive to my readers. I have never really written a public argument, so I tried to get my point across, but kept in mind all the possible types of audiences I may have. In the end, I believe I created a a good public argument that voiced my opinion, and in a professional way.
I think that one of my biggest strengths of my paper is making the disclaimer before I went in the public argument. When I started writing, I felt like I was walking on thin ice, but by clarifying to my readers my personal stance on the subject, I think that will make them have a more open mind as they read my essay.
One of my weaknesses is that I feel like it could have been too personal that it doesn't make me or my support seem credible. When I went through the revision process, I made sure to make it as impersonal as I could, while still expressing my ideals on the situation. I think I did a fairly good job, but there is always room for improvement.
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Peer Review 12b
For this blogpost, I talk about my peer review for David Klebosky's Podcast for Project 3.
Author: David Klebosky
Title & Link to Project: Satire is Making Way For Absurdism
For this peer review I opted to make a content suggestion for David's podcast. Podcasts can be really tricky because you want to keep the audience's attention with interesting topics, sound effects, and keeping it to the point. At the same time you want to make sure that the audience fully understands what your point is. David provided us with a link to his script and a rough cut of his podcast. He has a great voice for podcasts and I really was impressed on how simply his tone kept me engaged, I felt like he was interacting with me, it didn't seem robotic. However, I did notice that I would simply get lost at times because I felt like there was too much going on. It could have been that there was no editing and it was just a raw reading of the script so there were a lot of mistakes.
Anyways, since this is a Public Argument, I really do appreciate the jokes thrown in here and there, but at the same time I feel like that knocks down his credibility a little bit. I appreciate his attempt to engage the audience and make it seem lighthearted, it really does have an affect on keeping the listener engaged, but it can also get distracting. I would suggest just cutting out any unnecessary commentary that neither benefits nor takes away from his podcast. He is definitely on the right track, he just needs to make sure he keeps the argument concise, because right now the podcast is around 16 minutes, and personally I can't pay attention to one thing for that long.
Author: David Klebosky
Title & Link to Project: Satire is Making Way For Absurdism
For this peer review I opted to make a content suggestion for David's podcast. Podcasts can be really tricky because you want to keep the audience's attention with interesting topics, sound effects, and keeping it to the point. At the same time you want to make sure that the audience fully understands what your point is. David provided us with a link to his script and a rough cut of his podcast. He has a great voice for podcasts and I really was impressed on how simply his tone kept me engaged, I felt like he was interacting with me, it didn't seem robotic. However, I did notice that I would simply get lost at times because I felt like there was too much going on. It could have been that there was no editing and it was just a raw reading of the script so there were a lot of mistakes.
Anyways, since this is a Public Argument, I really do appreciate the jokes thrown in here and there, but at the same time I feel like that knocks down his credibility a little bit. I appreciate his attempt to engage the audience and make it seem lighthearted, it really does have an affect on keeping the listener engaged, but it can also get distracting. I would suggest just cutting out any unnecessary commentary that neither benefits nor takes away from his podcast. He is definitely on the right track, he just needs to make sure he keeps the argument concise, because right now the podcast is around 16 minutes, and personally I can't pay attention to one thing for that long.
Peer Review 12a
For this Peer Review, I reviewed Emily Bond's Quick Reference Guide Rough Cut on Childhood Obesity.
Author: Emily Bond
Title & Link to Project: The Kids Aren't Alright
For this peer review activity, I decided to make a suggestion on the form of her Quick Reference Guide. I noticed that she could make a subtle change that would make such a big difference on the entire project, one that I had to make when I created my QRG. I suggest that Emily creates a little more whitespace in her QRG. Having the sections stacked right after each other makes for a cluttered look. Her QRG looks great and professional already, but spacing the different sections out would make the QRG appear less wordy and be easier on the eye. Having a lot to read could deter her target audience. Emily does a great job of incorporating relevant images and placing them with an in-text wrap to break up the different sections of text. Her rough cut is in solid shape, just a little tweaking here and there and she will have a great project.
Author: Emily Bond
Title & Link to Project: The Kids Aren't Alright
For this peer review activity, I decided to make a suggestion on the form of her Quick Reference Guide. I noticed that she could make a subtle change that would make such a big difference on the entire project, one that I had to make when I created my QRG. I suggest that Emily creates a little more whitespace in her QRG. Having the sections stacked right after each other makes for a cluttered look. Her QRG looks great and professional already, but spacing the different sections out would make the QRG appear less wordy and be easier on the eye. Having a lot to read could deter her target audience. Emily does a great job of incorporating relevant images and placing them with an in-text wrap to break up the different sections of text. Her rough cut is in solid shape, just a little tweaking here and there and she will have a great project.
Reflection on Global Revision Process
This blog serves as a reflection on the third week of process work for Project 3. With one week left, this blogpost shows where I am standing.
I am definitely ready for this week and to receive feedback on my rough draft. At first I felt a little disconnected with my project, but once I actually started to do my rough draft I felt like I had so much to say and I hope my passion for this subject can be seen throughout my essay. This week I am going to do my best to get as much commentary as possible on my draft, that way I can make the final the best that it can be. I personally feel really confident about my draft, but I really want to hear what other people have to say about it. I want to make sure my audience stays as engaged as I am about this topic and to prove that it is so much more than just a ban on a harmless activity. One of my weaknesses may be that I didn't have feedback during the pre-production week because I fell behind a little, but I think I made up for that by spending a long time on my rough draft.I have high hopes for this week.
Open Post to Peer Reviewers
This post is designed to share my Rough draft with my peers both in my section and other sections of English 109H.
The link to my rough draft for my Standard College Essay can be found here.
The link to my rough draft for my Standard College Essay can be found here.
- Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know.
This Rough Draft is my first actual piece of work right out of my outline, so please don't hesitate to tear it apart and suggest changes, ideas, even voice your opinion about the topic itself! I know it is a sensitive topic, so any suggestions on how to approach it better will help with my final draft.
- Major issues or weaknesses in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses).
I guess my major issues would be dealing with technical errors such as properly doing the in-text citations. I feel like I might have also steered away from my topic a little bit, but at the same time, I feel like all that information is necessary to prove my point. In order to show that the serenades were harmless, I needed to show that Fraternity guys are not all just driven by sexual behavior and have no clue how to handle themselves as respectful gentlemen.
- Major virtues or strengths in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths).
I think a major strength of my rough draft is that I spent a really long time on it, so I feel like it is in good shape to be fairly close to my final draft. I feel as thought I was able to get my point across with ample support, but I know there is always room for improvement.
Editorial Report 12b
This blog serves as an update from the Rough Cut stage to a revised version of the Rough Cut.
Since I fell behind in my pre-production phase, I went straight from an outline, to a detailed rough draft. Due to this, I don't have anything to compare my rough draft to, but I will give an update on my progress thus far. The following section of my essay is where I discuss who proposed the ban, the arguments in support of the ban, and other information on rape culture. For this section, I feel like when I revise it I should make sure that I am accurately representing their side, while making sure not to promote their side of the argument along the way. I need to make sure it stays unbiased, but at the same time accurate.
Rough Draft: Pro-Ban Section
" On March 22, 2016 the University of Arizona Panhellenic Council passed a resolution that dictates that fraternity serenades must return to a more traditional approach in comparison to their current form. (Merrall) UA Panhellenic President Allie Patberg pitched this resolution after recently engaging in the “I Will” campaign. The “I Will End Rape Culture” campaign is a student-driven campaign that intends to “raise awareness about sexual assault and promote consent.” (Laskey) The campaign started a little over two months ago, when the “I Will Week” took place from February 1-5 that included various events throughout the week to inform students about sexual violence, harassment, consent, and many other forms of sexual assault. According to the campaign, rape culture is “a term used to describe the normalization of sexual violences in society, such as victim blaming and slut shaming.” (Laskey) The campaign received a lot of attention, and for the most part, turned out to be a successful movement across campus. Many students got involved and were willing to learn more about what rape culture is and how they can do their part to help put an end to it. Some, even many, would say this movement was inspiring, like Pattberg herself, “I decided that it would be best if I took that knowledge and information and tried to create a positive change within our individual greek community.” (Merrall) Staying true to her decision, Pattberg was able to place her ideals into a proposed resolution regarding fraternity serenades, which was eventually passed. Pattberg mentions that there were some concerns regarding serenades, however, she did not provide any examples of these concerns or what about the serenades sparked this concern. The article also states “Patberg assured that although there currently haven't been any direct instances of Title IX violations regarding sorority members in relation to serenades, she does not want to take any risks.” (Merall) Still no hard on evidence Pattberg’s side, more so, taking precautions to prevent something from happening. The article goes on to say how it is more of the culture of these serenades that could trigger traumatic memories of sorority girls during chapter. In essence, it was concluded that “the council and its advisors collectively decided that the serenades were not reflective of greek life’s value.” (Merrall) In an attempt not to steer from the truth, I suggest giving this Daily Wildcat article a read, rather than just getting extracted quotes, but the ones provided give a good sense of what was going on and why this resolution was made."
Editorial Report 12a
This blog serves as an update from the Rough Cut stage to a revised version of the Rough Cut.
Since I fell behind in my pre-production phase, I went straight from an outline, to a detailed rough draft. Due to this, I don't have anything to compare my rough draft to, but I will give an update on my progress thus far. The following section of my essay is a disclaimer I made before I went into the public argument. I think I covered everything properly, but I do think it is a little lengthy. I also hope it doesn't take away from my argument. Over the next week I will be refining this part of my essay.
Rough Draft: Disclaimer Section
"Before I start this discussion I would like to take a moment to make a couple statements about my views on this situation. First off, I cannot speak on behalf of my chapter and/or the rest of Greek life across the University of Arizona, rather, I am acting as a voice for those against placing regulations on fraternities serenading sororities. I am aware that the topic of sexual assault and/or rape culture can be a sensitive, and I will do my best not to offend anyone while expressing my side of the argument. I, in no way, am in support of “rape culture,” but I firmly believe that some acts should not be deemed as such when they truly are harmless and meant for the entertainment of all participants of greek life. Lastly, my intentions are not to disrespect anyone or their beliefs, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, so keep an open mind while reading through this essay."
Peer Review 11b
This blogpost is for the peer review of Alexander McCarthy's Content Outline for his QRG about the F-35 fighter plane.
Author: Alexander McCarthy
Link to Project: Content Outline
For this peer review, I decided to provide Alexander with an outlining suggestion for his content outline. He seems to have a solid idea of what he wants for his body sections, they are very well planned out. However, his opening section seems to be the part that is slacking. I noticed that I was not really able to tell what the public argument was for this project. After reading everything, I got a better sense, but from the start it should let the audience know what you are advocating for. Once this has been done, then the whole description of the body sections and closing makes better sense. Other than that, it looks like he's on the right track.
Author: Alexander McCarthy
Link to Project: Content Outline
For this peer review, I decided to provide Alexander with an outlining suggestion for his content outline. He seems to have a solid idea of what he wants for his body sections, they are very well planned out. However, his opening section seems to be the part that is slacking. I noticed that I was not really able to tell what the public argument was for this project. After reading everything, I got a better sense, but from the start it should let the audience know what you are advocating for. Once this has been done, then the whole description of the body sections and closing makes better sense. Other than that, it looks like he's on the right track.
Peer Review 11a
For this blogpost I am peer reviewing Alec Eulano's opening section for his Quick Reference Guide.
Author: Alec Eulano
Title & Link to Project: Unknown
For Alec's production report he provided us with his original content outline and then the rough cut version of what he wanted to say in his opening section. For this peer review I am going to make a form suggestion for his QRG. I'm aware that it is still in the works and he has not yet created his actual QRG, but already I think I can help steer him in the right direction for creating a better QRG. Like he said in his post, the QRG should be written in short paragraphs that are concise and to the point, however, I feel like he has split up his intro into too many parts. Already it is 4 different sections and I think maybe he could make it two. If it is too short, it makes the QRG sound choppy and there is no flow to the reading. It can also be very distracting and difficult to follow once he actually start getting into the meat of his project. So I would suggest keeping the writing conventions in mind, however, don't take it too literally.
Reflection on Production
This blog serves as a reflection on the Production process for Project 3.
As I have stated in the previous blogs, due to some personal issues I sort of fell back on blogposts/pre-production work. However, I am not behind in the project process, for my Rough Cut I produced as complete rough draft, citations included. Now I am spending my time catching up on my blogposts, but I think that I am on a good track and will be caught up by the end of the day. I am really looking forward to getting my draft peer reviewed so I know if I am headed in the right direction.
As I have stated in the previous blogs, due to some personal issues I sort of fell back on blogposts/pre-production work. However, I am not behind in the project process, for my Rough Cut I produced as complete rough draft, citations included. Now I am spending my time catching up on my blogposts, but I think that I am on a good track and will be caught up by the end of the day. I am really looking forward to getting my draft peer reviewed so I know if I am headed in the right direction.
Production Report 11b
This blogpost serves as an update on how I moved from my Content Outline into a Rough Cut of a certain section of my outline.
- How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?
The form of my content in the raw material was pretty simple, just standard paragraphs as part of standard college essay. Quotes were used to properly insert pieces of evidence inside my essay.
For the closing section I will recap on the argument being made, as well as make suggestions on how to alleviate the situation to benefit my side of the argument. I can include a hypothetical solution with some support to further strengthen my argument at the end. By this point in my paper is is crucial to have my audience swayed towards my opinion.
Members are already being tied back by so many rules, that even more restrictions on how men can dance at serenades is just one step closer to members flaking out on greek life as a whole. That raises the question as to “what’s next?” seeing as though everything nowadays every little thing seems to be out of line for fraternities and sororities. There is already such a negative view against greek life, members should not have to deal with excess and irrelevant accusations. Instead of inflicting self-harm to the greek community, we should all be trying to actively break the stereotypes against fraternities and sororities. If more restrictions keep getting placed for no solid reason, greek life will start to diminish on its own. Yes, it is good to stay cautious and prevent bad things from happening, if change is needed it should be done. However, for something like the serenades which has been a tradition for many years without any issues, change should not be made. This situation is so much bigger than just a ban on serenades, it affects the future of greek life at the University of Arizona.
- How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?
Outline Item: Closing Section
Adaptation of Outline Item: Closing Section
Production Report 11a
This blogpost serves as an update on how I moved from my Content Outline into a Rough Cut of a certain section of my outline.
- How did you decide to use form to present your content in the raw material you’ve shared here? How did the conventions of your chosen genre influence your choices?
The form of my content in the raw material was pretty simple, just standard paragraphs as part of standard college essay. Quotes were used to properly insert pieces of evidence inside my essay.
For the opening section of my Public Argument, I plan on addressing the situation at hand, along with some background information to give the reader an idea of where the situation started from. I should also include how I personally came across the issue. After some context for the essay has been established I will express my argument that the essay will be based on.
It was a typical Sunday night, I was sitting in my living room with my sisters doing some homework and all of a sudden my phone starts to blow up. The source of all the notifications was coming from my fraternities GroupMe where one of the members shared a link to an article from the website many college students follow, Total Frat Move. The link was to an article about fraternity’s serenades written by TFM member, Alex Buscemi, titled U of Arizona Fraternities Banned From Dancing For Sororities Because It “Promotes Rape Culture”. For those of you who do not know what it means by serenading in Greek Life, serenading is when the newest pledge class of a fraternity goes to a sorority's chapter and presents a performance that is usually a musical act with dancing involved. It is very clear from the article that Buscemi was livid about this accusation that serenading sororities promotes rape culture and my fellow brothers also had some strong feelings in support of Buscemi. I was inspired by how they all came together to have an actual conversation about this situation, looking at it from all perspectives. I personally am writing this article in support of Buscemi, and all other Greek members at the University of Arizona who are against putting additional restrictions on serenades.
- How did the production of this raw material go? What kinds of any hiccups, challenges, successes, creative epiphanies, etc. occurred during the process?
Outline Item: Opening Section
Adaptation of Outline Item: Opening Section
Peer Review 10b
This blogpost is intended to be a peer review for Joshua Smith's Research Report.
Author: Joshua Smith
Link to Research Report: Research Report
Joshua did a great job of finding a diverse list of sources for his Project 3 Research Report. They all seem to come from credible sources such as BBC, CNN, Nat. Geo, etc...but some other sources I am not really sure if they are credible sources. To evaluate this better, Joshua should do some research on not only the websites, but the authors that wrote each article. He should get some background information to ensure that his sources are credible. In addition, Joshua did not explain how these sources will be used inside of his argument, he provides the gist of the sources, but not how they will be incorporated in his project.
Author: Joshua Smith
Link to Research Report: Research Report
Joshua did a great job of finding a diverse list of sources for his Project 3 Research Report. They all seem to come from credible sources such as BBC, CNN, Nat. Geo, etc...but some other sources I am not really sure if they are credible sources. To evaluate this better, Joshua should do some research on not only the websites, but the authors that wrote each article. He should get some background information to ensure that his sources are credible. In addition, Joshua did not explain how these sources will be used inside of his argument, he provides the gist of the sources, but not how they will be incorporated in his project.
Peer Review 10a
In this blogpost I discuss my peer review of Alex Vergara's Rhetorical Analysis for Project 3.
Author: Alex Vergara
Link to Project: Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3
For this blogpost I decided to make a brainstorming suggestion for Alex Vergara on her Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3. From her rhetorical analysis I believe she is writing about the unequal pay for women in jobs throughout the country. It wasn't specified what the public argument was, but I'm sure it is women deserve equal pay as men. She did a pretty good job of creating her rhetorical analysis, however, I think she missed out on a key audience target. Although she wants to write to inform women, I think she writes more about the men's role in the unequal pay with women. I'm pretty sure women are fairly aware, but since this does not affect men, she should try and appeal to their senses in order to make it their problem in a sense. She should want them to read it and inspire them to want a change. If she does not appeal to them, I feel like her argument will be ineffective. I know she addressed that she does not know how to be able to connect with men on this topic just yet, so I think that should be her main concern as she works through this project.
Author: Alex Vergara
Link to Project: Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3
For this blogpost I decided to make a brainstorming suggestion for Alex Vergara on her Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3. From her rhetorical analysis I believe she is writing about the unequal pay for women in jobs throughout the country. It wasn't specified what the public argument was, but I'm sure it is women deserve equal pay as men. She did a pretty good job of creating her rhetorical analysis, however, I think she missed out on a key audience target. Although she wants to write to inform women, I think she writes more about the men's role in the unequal pay with women. I'm pretty sure women are fairly aware, but since this does not affect men, she should try and appeal to their senses in order to make it their problem in a sense. She should want them to read it and inspire them to want a change. If she does not appeal to them, I feel like her argument will be ineffective. I know she addressed that she does not know how to be able to connect with men on this topic just yet, so I think that should be her main concern as she works through this project.
Research Report
This blog serves as a report on the different sources I used as evidence for my public argument. All of my evidence is from web-based articles.
Source: Total Fraternity Move
Author, and Host: Alex Buscemi writing for Total Fraternity Move
Source's Authors: Writer/Content Manager for @GRANDEXinc and @totalfratmove. Recent graduate of USC ('15). Member of Total Frat Move since 8/21/14.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is all his followers on Total Frat Move, to inform them of the resolution that was passed, as well as, voice his own opinion on the situation. His tone gets a little aggressive at the end, and he does not attend the U of A, so he could not have too many of his facts correct.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform all of his followers of this new resolution passed by the U of A Panhellenic Council and to inform the readers about what he thinks about the entire situation.
Contextual Details: Although very informal (which is expected), his passion for this argument really spiked my interest in this subject. His article was the first that I heard about this resolution being passed.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is all his followers on Total Frat Move, to inform them of the resolution that was passed, as well as, voice his own opinion on the situation. His tone gets a little aggressive at the end, and he does not attend the U of A, so he could not have too many of his facts correct.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform all of his followers of this new resolution passed by the U of A Panhellenic Council and to inform the readers about what he thinks about the entire situation.
Contextual Details: Although very informal (which is expected), his passion for this argument really spiked my interest in this subject. His article was the first that I heard about this resolution being passed.
Source: Total Sorority Move
Author, and Host: Veronica Ruckh, writing for Total Sorority Move
Source's Authors: Director of Total Sorority Move for @GRANDEXinc. Member since 3/3/11
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is all her followers on Total Sorority Move, specifically sorority and fraternity members. For analyzing a case study, she keeps it really casual which can be a turn off to those that want to take it seriously.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform all of her followers of a case study held by two researchers that show that non-greek members are more hyper-masculine than men in fraternities, and that fraternity men are only appear to be filled with hypermasculinity.
Contextual Details: I used this article as a source because it analyzes the case study and outlines the key findings of the article, all while tapping into the emotions of your average college kid. This article supports my claim that fraternity men aren't what people make them out to be.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is all her followers on Total Sorority Move, specifically sorority and fraternity members. For analyzing a case study, she keeps it really casual which can be a turn off to those that want to take it seriously.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform all of her followers of a case study held by two researchers that show that non-greek members are more hyper-masculine than men in fraternities, and that fraternity men are only appear to be filled with hypermasculinity.
Contextual Details: I used this article as a source because it analyzes the case study and outlines the key findings of the article, all while tapping into the emotions of your average college kid. This article supports my claim that fraternity men aren't what people make them out to be.
Source: Daily Wildcat
Author, and Host: Leah Merrall, writing for the Daily Wildcat
Source's Authors: Writer for Daily Wildcat since February 2016.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to discuss the resolution that was passed by the Panhellenic Council and to explain the reasoning behind it by quoting Allie Pattberg.
Contextual Details: I used this article as a source because it provides information for those who are pro-ban. I used this source to explain pattberg's side in my essay, and it also helps with my counterargument.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to discuss the resolution that was passed by the Panhellenic Council and to explain the reasoning behind it by quoting Allie Pattberg.
Contextual Details: I used this article as a source because it provides information for those who are pro-ban. I used this source to explain pattberg's side in my essay, and it also helps with my counterargument.
Source: Daily Wildcat
Author, and Host: Chastity Laskey, writing for the Daily Wildcat
Source's Authors: News Report for Daily Wildcat, Executive News Editor @bottle_magazine, Journalism and Communications student.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers about the start of the "I Will" campaign and the week of activities that are planned. It discusses the campaign, what it stands for, and what it plans to accomplish
Contextual Details: I used this article as a source because it provides information for those who are pro-ban, to help me form my counterargument so that there are no holes in my argument.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers about the start of the "I Will" campaign and the week of activities that are planned. It discusses the campaign, what it stands for, and what it plans to accomplish
Contextual Details: I used this article as a source because it provides information for those who are pro-ban, to help me form my counterargument so that there are no holes in my argument.
Source: Daily Wildcat
Author, and Host: Elise McClain, writing for the Daily Wildcat
Source's Authors: N/A
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers about a piece of investigative journalism regarding sexual abuse called "The Hunting Ground" and how it relates to the University of Arizona campus.
Contextual Details: I will use this article to show my audience that greek life at the UA campus is already looked down upon. UA's Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) was said to have a reputation of having the name "Sexual Assault Expected." I will try and refute the accusations made here.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers about a piece of investigative journalism regarding sexual abuse called "The Hunting Ground" and how it relates to the University of Arizona campus.
Contextual Details: I will use this article to show my audience that greek life at the UA campus is already looked down upon. UA's Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) was said to have a reputation of having the name "Sexual Assault Expected." I will try and refute the accusations made here.
Source: Daily Wildcat
Author, and Host: Brandi Walker and Christianna Silva and Meghan Fernandez, writing for the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Authors: Brandi Walker- KOLD News 13/Fox 11 Intern & Photographer at The Daily Wildcat.
Christianna Silva- El Independiente, Arizona Daily Star,Bottle Magazine, The University of Arizona, Arizona Daily Wildcat, MergerWatch
Meghan Fernandez- N/A
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers about an investigation on a report of sexual assault that happened near a fraternity house.
Contextual Details: I will use this article to show my audience that fraternities automatically are targeted for situations of sexual assault, simply because they are so easy to blame. This article was perfect, because, initially, the writers were accusing the fraternity house of being part of the investigation. It turns out that the fraternity was not involved at all, and were not be accused of anything.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers about an investigation on a report of sexual assault that happened near a fraternity house.
Contextual Details: I will use this article to show my audience that fraternities automatically are targeted for situations of sexual assault, simply because they are so easy to blame. This article was perfect, because, initially, the writers were accusing the fraternity house of being part of the investigation. It turns out that the fraternity was not involved at all, and were not be accused of anything.
Source: Daily Wildcat
Author, and Host: Devon Walo, writing for the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Authors: Devon Walo, Marketing Associate at Daily Wildcat, Vice President of Communications for Sigma Kappa Sorority.
Target Audience for Source: The target audience for this source is readers of the Daily Wildcat.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers that greek life is constantly looking for ways to combat assault and alcohol abuse, and to show that greek life isn't the problem, rather the solution.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to inform readers that greek life is constantly looking for ways to combat assault and alcohol abuse, and to show that greek life isn't the problem, rather the solution.
Contextual Details: I will use this article in support of my argument by quoting Jamie Utt of WRC Men's Programming to help show that it isn't the fraternity men who are the problem and are uneducated, rather, they are the ones that set the example for non-greek members.
Source: 2013-2014 Judicial Report
Author, and Host: Fraternity and Sorority Programs
Source's Authors: Greek Life at the University of Arizona
Target Audience for Source: All fraternities, sororities, national headquarters for each chapter, IFC Council and Panhellenic Council.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to show all reports of cited violations by any greek organization on the University of Arizona for the 2013-2014 school year.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to show all reports of cited violations by any greek organization on the University of Arizona for the 2013-2014 school year.
Contextual Details: I will use this data source in support of my argument to show that sexual assault in fraternities has not been an issue over the years.
Source: 2014-2015 Judicial Report
Author, and Host: Fraternity and Sorority Programs
Source's Authors: Greek Life at the University of Arizona
Target Audience for Source: All fraternities, sororities, national headquarters for each chapter, IFC Council and Panhellenic Council.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to show all reports of cited violations by any greek organization on the University of Arizona for the 2014-2015 school year.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to show all reports of cited violations by any greek organization on the University of Arizona for the 2014-2015 school year.
Contextual Details: I will use this data source in support of my argument to show that sexual assault in fraternities has not been an issue over the years.
Author, and Host: Fraternity and Sorority Programs
Source's Authors: Greek Life at the University of Arizona
Target Audience for Source: All fraternities, sororities, national headquarters for each chapter, IFC Council and Panhellenic Council.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to describe what the Greek Standard's Board is at the University of Arizona, their constitution, how to file a complaint, and how to become a member of the board.
Source's Main Purpose: The main purpose of this source is to describe what the Greek Standard's Board is at the University of Arizona, their constitution, how to file a complaint, and how to become a member of the board.
Contextual Details: I will use this data source in support of my argument to show that fraternity men and sorority women hold each other accountable for ALL of their actions and that their is actually a board in each chapter where members will be sent if a complaint is filed against them.
Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3
The following blogpost serves as a Rhetorical Analysis for Project 3- A Public Argument.
1. How will you draw on any or some of the following for Project 3? Be specific about how your plans for Project 3 connect to some previous, current or burgeoning interest of your own, such as...
I recently joined a fraternity this past semester and it is always been something that I enjoyed talking about ever since I joined. I was really intrigued by how much my views actually changed about what a fraternity is and what the people are like. When I saw how outraged my fellow brothers were about this ban on serenades it really showed me how everyone comes together to fight a fight together. It also gives me the opportunity to knock down outsider's views of what a fraternity is and show them that it is not what they think it is (for the most part).
2. What are the preconceptions, previously held opinions and/or potential areas for bias that you should be aware of for Project 3? What about any of the following?
I think that being a part of a fraternity obviously gives me some personal bias towards one side of the argument. However, this is not really a fight between outsiders of greek life and greek members, rather a fight between greek members and their higher power. Obviously, for this subject, I don't have a bias to promote rape culture, but I do believe that fraternities and sororities already have so many restrictions, that adding more will just lead to the demise of greek life at the U of A.
1. How are you thinking about your audience for this project? Who are you going to make this for? Describe them.
The primary audience for my project would be all members of Greek life at the University of Arizona. This includes sorority members, fraternity members, as well as the Interfraternity & Panhellenic Council. In my essay I also go in to talk about dismissing peoples preconceived ideas about what a fraternity is, so this could affect greek members nationwide. The tone of my essay is casual, but it truly shows how I feel.
2. What beliefs and assumptions might this audience already hold? What position are they likely to take on this issue? How will you respond to that position?
There are a few different types of audience members, but I think there are 3 types of positions that they can take on this argument. The first type of audience member is in support of the argument that there should not be a ban on how serenades currently are. This is most likely a majority of fraternity members as well as a good amount of sorority members. The other type of audience member is in support of Pattberg's resolution to ban serenades and/or make them more traditional. This audience is most likely to say that even though there have not been any issues with yet, they want to prevent anything from happening. They could say that people are too nervous to say something, to which I refute that there are many different ways to form a complaint or talk to someone. In no way are they forced to participate in these activities. I will also bring in the case study about how fraternity men are less hyper-masculine, as well as the judicial reports outlining how no sexual assault has been reported for any fraternity over the past few years. The third audience member is probably ambivalent towards the issue, and these would be key target audience so I could try and prove to them my side of the argument with all the evidence I have gathered.
3. How might they react to your argument?
The topic I am covering can be very sensitive and for this reason, I placed in a disclaimer about my beliefs and that I am in no way trying to offend anyone. I am aware that it is kind of like walking on egg shells, but I hope to prove to both the readers against my argument and those who are on the fence about it, that serenades, in no way, promote rape culture.
4. How are you going to relate to or connect with your audience? Are there any specific words, ideas or ways of arguing that will help you relate to them in this way?
One of the main ways I am going to appeal to my audience is by trying to keep the essay semi-casual in the tone it is written in. I want my readers to understand that I am just your average college student trying to fight for what I believe in. I think this will tap into the emotions of college students campus-wide because everyone has their own battles they are fighting, and mine currently, is trying to correct people ideals on what a fraternity is. I should not have to justify why our harmless activities have been deemed as "promoting rape culture," and it looks even worse that is came from someone inside of greek life. In order to appeal to the senses of board members of the council, I will provide ample support for my argument to try and prove to them that even their ideas about fraternity men are flawed.
5. Think of one specific person or a set of people you know personally or professionally who fall within the definition of ‘target audience’ you’re using for Project 3. What could you tell them or say to them in order to convince them of your perspective? What would need to happen for them to agree with you?
My target audience out of this whole argument would be the board members of the council who passed this resolution. I would first start by showing them that I understand their argument and that they have valid points, but I would come back with they have no valid data in support or their argument. I would then go in to provide examples of why their ideas are flawed, the effect the resolution could have, and show that they are making greek life look worse to outsiders on top of the negative outlook people have on us already. I would tie it all back by showing them that I respect what they are trying to achieve here, but this resolution is unnecessary, has a negative effect, and there are bigger problems to fight with. I believe that showing them that not only serenades are a harmless activity, but the men performing them are also harmless will make them realize that they are getting ahead of themselves.
1. What do you want to accomplish with Project 3? What affect do you want it to have on your intended audience? For instance:
With Project 3, I hope to not only get my target audience to reevaluate their decision on the ban that was made on serenades, but I also hope to reach the minds of many students college-wide to show them that fraternity men are not as douchey and rapey as many make us out to be. The guys may act like assholes on the surface, but that's because they are trying to live up to this standard that they think college men are, but on the inside fraternity men are well-educated, respectful men (well a good sum of them).
2. Once you’ve done all your research and figured out what you think about the controversy you’ve chosen, what still needs to be accomplished?
I think I need to make sure that I try and make this argument specific to the serenades at the same time, and try not to make it an argument as to why fraternity men are not assholes. However, big part of explaining my argument, is showing how well educated these men are on substance abuse, sexual assault, etc. I need to make sure my audience understands that the intention of serenades is supposed to be in good fun for both parties, where the guys make fools of themselves for the enjoyment of the women in sororities.
1. What course genre will you be writing in for Project 3?
For project 3 I am doing the Standard College Essay.
2. What kinds of audience expectations come along with this genre, generally?
For this writing genre, audience expect a well written, and thoroughly-supported essay that is decent in length. It has to keep the reader engaged and not be too short but also not too long, just enough to get the point across with sufficient data and excess information should be excluded.
3. What is your history working in the genre you have selected for Project 3?
I have been writing essays for years, it is the most common writing genre for English courses, so I am pretty familiar with this genre.
4. Describe your comfort level and general feelings about the genre. How will they affect your work on Project 3?
I feel pretty confident with this genre, seeing as though essays are not out of the ordinary for me. I just have to make sure my conventions are correct for this specific project. I have written 20+ page research papers in high school, so this should not be a hard task especially because it is a subject I am interested in.
5. What are the two most effective conventions in this genre, in your opinion? Why? Be specific.
I think the two most important conventions of this genre are formatting and evidence. Formatting is so crucial, because if you have different fonts, altered spacing, and it just does not look professional, your reader will be distracted and not take your essay seriously. Evidence is also very important, because one can make claims all they want, but if there is no concrete evidence, then the whole essay will be deemed ineffective.
1. Are there any historical events that might impact how your audience perceives your argument or the kind of background information or evidence you need to include? For instance, does media reporting on any of the following involve your issue/subject for Project 3?
There are not really any major historical events that affects how my audience perceives my argument, it is more-so, word of mouth that creates these preconceived ideas. The recent I Will campaign also heavily impacts my argument. This is, after all, where it all started, but because of that recently taking on campus, it may be harder for me to voice my opinion.
2. Who else is talking about this topic? Provide us with working hyperlinks to coverage of the controversy on FOUR different media outlets.
Total Fraternity Move
Daily Wildcat- Say Goodby to Serenades as You Know Them
Daily Wildcat- 'I Will' Campaign Kicks off This Week to End Rape Culture
Daily Wildcat- Greek Programs Try to Combat Assault and Alcohol Abuse
3. What are the three or four major counter-arguments you’ll have to respond to, based upon what people are saying in the press/media? Be specific and cite your sources using working hyperlinks.
Author
I recently joined a fraternity this past semester and it is always been something that I enjoyed talking about ever since I joined. I was really intrigued by how much my views actually changed about what a fraternity is and what the people are like. When I saw how outraged my fellow brothers were about this ban on serenades it really showed me how everyone comes together to fight a fight together. It also gives me the opportunity to knock down outsider's views of what a fraternity is and show them that it is not what they think it is (for the most part).
2. What are the preconceptions, previously held opinions and/or potential areas for bias that you should be aware of for Project 3? What about any of the following?
I think that being a part of a fraternity obviously gives me some personal bias towards one side of the argument. However, this is not really a fight between outsiders of greek life and greek members, rather a fight between greek members and their higher power. Obviously, for this subject, I don't have a bias to promote rape culture, but I do believe that fraternities and sororities already have so many restrictions, that adding more will just lead to the demise of greek life at the U of A.
Audience
1. How are you thinking about your audience for this project? Who are you going to make this for? Describe them.
The primary audience for my project would be all members of Greek life at the University of Arizona. This includes sorority members, fraternity members, as well as the Interfraternity & Panhellenic Council. In my essay I also go in to talk about dismissing peoples preconceived ideas about what a fraternity is, so this could affect greek members nationwide. The tone of my essay is casual, but it truly shows how I feel.
2. What beliefs and assumptions might this audience already hold? What position are they likely to take on this issue? How will you respond to that position?
There are a few different types of audience members, but I think there are 3 types of positions that they can take on this argument. The first type of audience member is in support of the argument that there should not be a ban on how serenades currently are. This is most likely a majority of fraternity members as well as a good amount of sorority members. The other type of audience member is in support of Pattberg's resolution to ban serenades and/or make them more traditional. This audience is most likely to say that even though there have not been any issues with yet, they want to prevent anything from happening. They could say that people are too nervous to say something, to which I refute that there are many different ways to form a complaint or talk to someone. In no way are they forced to participate in these activities. I will also bring in the case study about how fraternity men are less hyper-masculine, as well as the judicial reports outlining how no sexual assault has been reported for any fraternity over the past few years. The third audience member is probably ambivalent towards the issue, and these would be key target audience so I could try and prove to them my side of the argument with all the evidence I have gathered.
3. How might they react to your argument?
The topic I am covering can be very sensitive and for this reason, I placed in a disclaimer about my beliefs and that I am in no way trying to offend anyone. I am aware that it is kind of like walking on egg shells, but I hope to prove to both the readers against my argument and those who are on the fence about it, that serenades, in no way, promote rape culture.
4. How are you going to relate to or connect with your audience? Are there any specific words, ideas or ways of arguing that will help you relate to them in this way?
One of the main ways I am going to appeal to my audience is by trying to keep the essay semi-casual in the tone it is written in. I want my readers to understand that I am just your average college student trying to fight for what I believe in. I think this will tap into the emotions of college students campus-wide because everyone has their own battles they are fighting, and mine currently, is trying to correct people ideals on what a fraternity is. I should not have to justify why our harmless activities have been deemed as "promoting rape culture," and it looks even worse that is came from someone inside of greek life. In order to appeal to the senses of board members of the council, I will provide ample support for my argument to try and prove to them that even their ideas about fraternity men are flawed.
5. Think of one specific person or a set of people you know personally or professionally who fall within the definition of ‘target audience’ you’re using for Project 3. What could you tell them or say to them in order to convince them of your perspective? What would need to happen for them to agree with you?
My target audience out of this whole argument would be the board members of the council who passed this resolution. I would first start by showing them that I understand their argument and that they have valid points, but I would come back with they have no valid data in support or their argument. I would then go in to provide examples of why their ideas are flawed, the effect the resolution could have, and show that they are making greek life look worse to outsiders on top of the negative outlook people have on us already. I would tie it all back by showing them that I respect what they are trying to achieve here, but this resolution is unnecessary, has a negative effect, and there are bigger problems to fight with. I believe that showing them that not only serenades are a harmless activity, but the men performing them are also harmless will make them realize that they are getting ahead of themselves.
Purpose/Message
With Project 3, I hope to not only get my target audience to reevaluate their decision on the ban that was made on serenades, but I also hope to reach the minds of many students college-wide to show them that fraternity men are not as douchey and rapey as many make us out to be. The guys may act like assholes on the surface, but that's because they are trying to live up to this standard that they think college men are, but on the inside fraternity men are well-educated, respectful men (well a good sum of them).
2. Once you’ve done all your research and figured out what you think about the controversy you’ve chosen, what still needs to be accomplished?
I think I need to make sure that I try and make this argument specific to the serenades at the same time, and try not to make it an argument as to why fraternity men are not assholes. However, big part of explaining my argument, is showing how well educated these men are on substance abuse, sexual assault, etc. I need to make sure my audience understands that the intention of serenades is supposed to be in good fun for both parties, where the guys make fools of themselves for the enjoyment of the women in sororities.
What Genre?
1. What course genre will you be writing in for Project 3?
For project 3 I am doing the Standard College Essay.
2. What kinds of audience expectations come along with this genre, generally?
For this writing genre, audience expect a well written, and thoroughly-supported essay that is decent in length. It has to keep the reader engaged and not be too short but also not too long, just enough to get the point across with sufficient data and excess information should be excluded.
3. What is your history working in the genre you have selected for Project 3?
I have been writing essays for years, it is the most common writing genre for English courses, so I am pretty familiar with this genre.
4. Describe your comfort level and general feelings about the genre. How will they affect your work on Project 3?
I feel pretty confident with this genre, seeing as though essays are not out of the ordinary for me. I just have to make sure my conventions are correct for this specific project. I have written 20+ page research papers in high school, so this should not be a hard task especially because it is a subject I am interested in.
5. What are the two most effective conventions in this genre, in your opinion? Why? Be specific.
I think the two most important conventions of this genre are formatting and evidence. Formatting is so crucial, because if you have different fonts, altered spacing, and it just does not look professional, your reader will be distracted and not take your essay seriously. Evidence is also very important, because one can make claims all they want, but if there is no concrete evidence, then the whole essay will be deemed ineffective.
When?
There are not really any major historical events that affects how my audience perceives my argument, it is more-so, word of mouth that creates these preconceived ideas. The recent I Will campaign also heavily impacts my argument. This is, after all, where it all started, but because of that recently taking on campus, it may be harder for me to voice my opinion.
2. Who else is talking about this topic? Provide us with working hyperlinks to coverage of the controversy on FOUR different media outlets.
Total Fraternity Move
Daily Wildcat- Say Goodby to Serenades as You Know Them
Daily Wildcat- 'I Will' Campaign Kicks off This Week to End Rape Culture
Daily Wildcat- Greek Programs Try to Combat Assault and Alcohol Abuse
3. What are the three or four major counter-arguments you’ll have to respond to, based upon what people are saying in the press/media? Be specific and cite your sources using working hyperlinks.
- "Serenades have been a really fun part of my experience in a sorority,” she said. “Despite the fact that I feel the dancing and sexual tone of this activity is harmless at the UA, it isn't at all universities, and I believe it is the responsibility of the UA Panhellenic council and the Interfraternity Council to continue the campus, country and world-wide fight against rape culture by giving serenades a more appropriate and respectful vibe."- Link Found Here
- “We obviously don’t know what our members have been through, and we don’t want to create any triggering situations for anyone,” Patberg said. “Our ultimate goal is to protect the well-being of our members.”- Link Found Here
- “We hope to have events after this week, in the spring and the fall, to hold people accountable and give them the resources to become more informed,” Hammond said. “We’re hoping that students continue to educate themselves and the people around them and their community.”- Link Found Here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)