Evaluation of General Sources

It took me quite some time to settle on a story. I wasn't finding too many debate topics, as so much of science manifests in the news as an announcement of a discovery with comments. But I'm a biologist with specific interest on a very controversial biological topic: evolution. In and of itself, controversy surrounds this topic and swift argument comes from theists. But it doesn't get better than Bill Nye the Science Guy debating the founder of the Creationist museum; this event took place February 4th, 2014 and no, it wasn't too good to be true. I made sure.

Lacey, Dan, "Bill Nye Versus Ken Ham Debate Painting" 2/5/2014 via Flickr. Attribution 2.0 Non-Commercial License.

This hyperlink takes you to an NPR page in which the debate video is embedded. This is likely the best source for the story.

• The URL is a .org. This domain is a reliable source for information as many are non-profit organizations and schools. NPR is also generally a credible source of news and information, and the part of the source I'm discussing at the moment is the literally the debate itself, so I don't think the URL is a problem here.
• The author would be the debators, Bill Nye and Ken Ham. Nye is a very respectable, qualified, and renowned scientist, while Ham is a devout Creationist and a founder of the Creationist museum, which probably speaks of his rep as well.
• The page was last updated on February 4th, 2014 - the same day it was originally posted, but a different time. All the links still work and nothing has really "changed" since the debate took place. Everything that was said in the debate was still said and can't really be changed.
• Ham invited Nye to the debate, so I suppose part of the purpose is just to have the debate itself. Whether for public or personal interest, I can't say. But the individual speakers each have the interest of getting their ideas out there and essentially trying to convince people to believe their sides.
• Well, it's a video, so it's kind of all graphic. But within the video, the speakers each have images and video that they refer to throughout the debate, and these add credibility to each side's argument and keeps the audience engaged.
• Well, it's the debate, so it's pretty good about showing both sides. I feel like these questions were definitely not composed with this type of source in mind.
• Throughout the debate, both reference certain outside sources on the issues - Nye's being scientific fact that can be googled, and Ham's being the Bible. No links in a video, I'm afraid. It's in the air whether the latter is reputable, but the former's sources (like hard fact and himself) are pretty reputable.

I do believe this one will be a better source for the questions posed. I wanted to know why Bill Nye would agree to debate about science, of which he's certain, and luckily I found the perfect article.

• This URL is a .com, which does tend to compromise credibility. However, because this is a CNN source, it's also a pretty reliable piece of news. It's also an opinion piece by Nye himself, so it's not like some random Joe is just writing some stuff.
• The author is definitely Bill Nye. He's an Emmy-Award winning science educator, scientist, and engineer. He's qualified.
• The only date on the page is February 4th, 2014. But as was the case above, all the links still work, and Nye certainly hasn't changed his opinion on the matter in the least. So the information is still in date.
• The purpose is for Nye to explain his reasons for accepting Ham's debate proposal. Many people were wondering, so the piece likely answers some questions. It does promote his viewpoints on science, and why he thinks the subject is so very important.
• There's a picture of the debate participants, but that's really as far as graphics go. The image's purpose was likely to get people excited for the debate before it took place.
• Nye is definitely pretty biased towards his opinion, but that's the purpose for the debate. If Nye's view is true, then virtually everyone profits from knowing the origin of life. Religious people would probably be a little sad, though.
• There are a few links. One goes to Nye's opponent, Ken Ham's reason for the debate, and one goes to a place where the debate can be viewed. The links are definitely well connected to the topic.

I'm getting the feeling that my sources aren't exactly "typical" sources, but I think they're very accurate, and will do me good in constructing my project.

Considering Genre

Deciding my genre for Project 1 was the easiest thing to decide on this whole time. I really struggled to find a story, so I figured I'd be well-off to do what I know for sure now, then work at polishing the rest later.

1.  The Quick Reference guide will be my best friend this week. I think this genre is useful for the Controversy Postmortem, because I can easily make clear what's important and organize it by idea, rather than be forced to stick to some rigid flow of ideas that would be necessary in other genres. I think it's also useful for communicating a large amount of information in a clear fashion. I don't think it works as well for projects 2 and 3, because those require so much detail and original content generation (whereas in this project, all information used for content is already out there). I'd rather be in a genre for those in which I'm able to really communicate my original work with ease.
2. The major genre conventions I plan to hone in on include breaking ideas into sections and incorporating images. As is the case with everyone, I'm so used to the basic essay in which the convention is to create transitions and allow your ideas to flow one after another. In the QRG, it seems that it's appropriate to separate ideas logically and it isn't as necessary to make them flow together. I feel like the cluster I will prepare is going to be so beneficial, as I will be able to organize my ideas and sort of adapt that organization to the QRG. Furthermore, pictures feel very welcome, and I'm anticipating enjoying that since they can be used as another vehicle with which to communicate ideas or illustrate major points.
3. I'm feeling pretty good about the project - and that's saying something, since it took me so long to decide on a story. But I feel like I understand what is expected of me, and I have a very solid vision of what needs to happen. I also feel pretty good that we have these deadlines to keep everything timely. It prevents procrastination and keeps me on track with what I should be thinking about content-wise. I'm ready to kick its butt!

cre8tivehome0, "Fist Bump Boy Fist Outside Gesture Independence" 1/25/2012 via Pixabay. Public Domain.

Reddit and What I Found There

I'm even less familiar with Reddit than I am with Twitter, and I essentially didn't get much out of my looking here. To me, it seemed like a bunch of young and uneducated individuals trying to get help or figure out science. But I believe that for many people, it could have been a good resource. I think it was definitely worth a shot!

Blue, Eva. "reddit sticker - 3" 12/22/2012 via Flickr. Attribution 2.0 Generic License.

1. As mentioned above, there isn't too much arguing going on. There are multiple high schoolers or college students who need help with understanding material, and a few people chiming in opinions with not too many comments at all. But I've seen content from a specific brain area to "is the earth round or flat" so honestly it seems that content is spread out fairly well. I'm not sure how to give a specific explanation for something so inherently broad and not so abundant (unless I'm not navigating Reddit properly. Which is very possible, but I wasn't successful earlier in the week when I tried this, either.)
2. Debates/Discussions (Due to the limited number of posts I was able to find, it was again hard to find something on debates. But I sincerely tried!)
• Here was an interesting discussion thread about a reader's opinion about B.o.B.'s comments on the earth being flat. This interests me because I had never even heard of this before. I knew there were people who have that belief, but I didn't know that such a public figure was trying to get us all to believe it, too. Like in my Twitter explorations, I found comments about Creationism and evolution, which I do take great interest in, so I was glad to see what at least one Redditor (I think I've heard that term before) had to say.
• Okay, I think I just figured out Reddit a little better, because this is much more specific and controversial. A Biology teacher in Georgia doesn't believe in evolution and doesn't believe personally that humans are animals. It seems like most people are on the side of the poster, which is that the teacher has done something terribly shameful in the scientific community. I think this is so interesting because I've never heard of something like this and I haven't already formed an opinion for that reason, so it's neat to look at something from the outside.
3. My impression of Reddit was much worse than my impression of Twitter. Reddit is so much more forum-style, so there were lots of unqualified people talking about things without sources or any evidence. This bothered me a little, and I didn't find too many interesting things here, but that's just a personal taste thing. I didn't expect to see so many posts of people just asking for help on homework and things. It definitely wasn't what I was interested in seeing.

Evaluation of News Magazine Stories

Honestly this portion of my process work was mildly infuriating. Out of the magazines in the table, I wasn't able to find any story that revolved around a controversy or argument. So I sort of took it upon myself to find a new magazine from which to pull articles. So behold, two controversy-related articles about science from The Guardian magazine.

Nobel scientist: female scientists cause men trouble in labs

GrrlScientist, "female-scientist" 3/7/2014 via Flickr. Attribution 2.0 Generic License.

1. Tim Hunt is 72-year-old proof that being successful may sometimes result in being an asshole. He made some comments about how women and men should be separated in the lab, for bad reasons like "women just make men fall in love with them" and "they cry when criticized". He made the comments in front of an audience full of female scientists and science journalists, a.k.a. the people against which he was being sexist and the people who were going to go home and write slam articles about him. The article was published in June of 2015, so the words were hastily spoken sometime around then.

2. The sympathetic character is the body of women in science who have to deal with men like this. It's not like women didn't have a hard enough time getting along in STEM careers without judgment or gender bias. The fact that they have to deal with sexist idiots like this is so infuriating to me. Women shouldn't be cast as any less able based on gender alone. As a woman, let alone a woman going into science, I can definitely envision their frustration.
3. The least sympathetic character is easily Tim Hunt because generally I don't sympathize with the person in the argument who is wrong. He has no right to be saying bad things about women. Just because he's old doesn't mean he's right or gets to say whatever he wants without consequence or backlash. And honestly, like I mentioned above, I'm a woman going into science and I don't want anything to do with someone like this.


Replication frustration: What stops experiments from being reliably replicated?


The University of Queensland, "Pitch drop experiment with John Mainstone" 5/25/2007 via Wikipedia. "GDFL, requires acknowledgement of the University of Queensland"

1. The issue in this article is about being able to successfully re-do an experiment and get the same result. It's important to do this to make sure the initial result was accurate, but it seems that often reproduction of experiments does not lead to the same result. The article mainly focused on grad student Samuel Mehr attending Harvard University. He and his team of psychologists tried to reproduce an experiment published by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) and ran into various roadblocks and difficulties. It becomes a debate because PNAS's policy conflicts with copyright policy, and it's almost impossible to settle on a compromise.
2. The most sympathetic character is probably Mehr because he did all kinds of things to make the reproduction work and it just wouldn't. Replicating the experiment using different videos than were used in the original didn't work, and trying to obtain the original videos resulted in copyright issues. There's no reasonable way around it, and this is unfortunate for scientists like Mehr who just want to reproduce the experiment for themselves.
3. Honestly, I'm not able to pick a least sympathetic character. No one in this case is really the bad guy; copyright rules exist for reasons, and same for the journal's policy, and nothing could really be done to help that. All parties tried to find a compromise or solution, and it just didn't seem possible, though everyone was trying. So sorry, but this question isn't really applicable.

Twitter and What I Found There

Oh, Twitter. How I struggled to figure out how you work. But this exercise placed me outside of my comfort zone and allowed me to dive a little further into the 21st century. As a biology major with a specific interest in evolution, I discovered Twitter was home to many conversations about these topics.

Wilson, Elaine R. "siallia currocoides - Mountain Bluebird, Cabin Lake Viewing Blinds, Deschutes National Forest, Near Fort Rock, Oregon" 5/31/2006 via Wikipedia. Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic License.

1. 1. Many posts that come up when searching "Biology" are stories about new discoveries and studies - there isn't too much debate or conversation besides "Whoa, that's cool!" But adding a term like "evolution" to the search brings in much more discussion. There are a good number of tweets that begin with an idea, like strong evidence for evolution or a person's strong faith in a creator. The replies accumulate below, often resulting in an argument about who's view is correct. Evolution and Creationism have always been two contrasting ideas, and lots of that debate takes pace on Twitter.
2. Two conversations:
• Here is the most interesting conversation I found. In the beginning, one woman misunderstood the post and started arguing, when in reality both parties supported evolution all along. After that thread, a few people chimed in about how they disagreed, but didn't stay for too long to argue. I was intrigued because it showed how so many people really are actively engaged in this debate, and that so many people are willing to throw their beliefs out there - knowing full well that someone will likely be there to argue back.
• And here is an example where other issues tie into the conversation. The original tweet was about a database of qualified women who speak on biology and evolution. It isn't something I would've originally expected to come up, but it is relevant! We could always use more women in science. I just wasn't anticipating that issue to come up when searching about evolution. No one was arguing or saying women don't belong here, which is definitely very encouraging. The issue pertains to all scientific disciplines, and I was happy to see it come up.
3. I suppose the above example is a good illustration of how things came up that surprised me. Overall, I got a very good impression from people talking on Twitter about evolution and biology. People generally have sources and evidence for their claims (even Creationists are consistent about citing the Bible, which is better than nothing for sure). Evolution is a "big picture" idea, so that likely explains why many separate issues in science come up in the conversation. The large amount of debate between Evolutionists and Creationists was definitely expected, and I love following the debate and seeing what specific things people have to say.

Evaluation of New York Times Stories

The New York Times is an excellent resource for staying in touch with the current happenings of the world. It seems like it's a pretty good place to start when broadly researching current events. These news articles can be viewed as "stories", with characters and plot events


Beatrix Potter Manuscript About a Cat With a Double Life is Found

Hartvig, Niels. "You even scare me, Psycho!" 30 Aprl 2011 via Wikimedia Commons (originally posted on Flickr). Attribution-Share Alike License

1. The main character/protagonist is Jo Hanks. She is the woman who found a hint about this unpublished story from the late children's literature author, Beatrix Potter. Ms. Hanks was then able to track down the manuscript and get the gears in motion for the story to be illustrated and published.
2. The general setting of the story is Britain. The specific event where Ms. Hanks found the manuscript took place at the Victorian and Albert museum in London. This is a very reasonable setting - if the manuscript had been found underneath a placemat at a run-down Chinese restaurant, that would have struck the audience as unusual. The museum setting also gives importance to the late Beatrix Potter - even if the reader had never heard of her, the reader now knows that she must be important if her work is immortalized in a museum.
3. There's no real debate going on here. It's just a pretty happy story.


Ninth Planet May Exist Beyond Pluto, Scientists Report

NASA, "Alone in Space - Astronomers Find New Kind of Planet" 18 May 2011 via Wikimedia Commons.
 Public Domain/"NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted."

1. The main characters/protagonists in this one are Michael E. Brown and Konstantin Batygin, the scientists who are working on finding evidence for this planet. So far the two have found compelling evidence for the existence of such a planet, making them vital to the story.
2. The scientists' work takes place at California Institute of Technology. This gives the characters credibility in their assertions and makes their work seem much more relevant than if it wasn't taking place at a well-renowned university. Because their institution likely has the most up-to-date technology, such a setting enables the scientists to produce quality work.
3. There isn't exactly a major debate in this story. Most people tend to take a scientist's word for it, especially when there is a substantial amount of evidence. However, their work is not 100% truth at this point, so it's possible that there are people who disagree (for whatever reason a person could have for arguing against solid scientific evidence - I'm sure these reasons must vary). The credibility of the scientists is what is at stake here, along with the fact that they surely don't want all of their time and effort to have been a waste if they turned out to be wrong.

Course Projects

Ahhh, the course projects. The time-consuming aspects of English 109H. The bulk of our course grade. No sweat.

[No author or date posted] "White laptop, female hand, note, pen, phone, desk" via Pexels. Creative Commons Zero License.

• I'm most nervous about the rhetorical investigation. It's worth a quarter of the grade and based on content that just genuinely makes me anxious. I'm all for Googling away in the comfort of my little dorm room, but I'm a very awkward person sometimes. I don't savor meeting strangers, and conducting interviews give me a fuzzy (but not warm) feeling. But it's healthy to be placed outside of your comfort zone every once in a while, and learning things for myself through conversation will be a positive experience in the long run.
• I'm so excited about the different genres we get to use! After writing 28,394 essays and doing essentially nothing creative in high school, I'm looking forward to the change of pace. I've always enjoyed listening to podcasts and watching videos on YouTube about topics I'm studying, so I think I will like constructing one of these myself. I also prefer picking my own topics over being forced to study something in which I take no interest. All the way around, even if they take a lot of work, they won't be a complete drag, and I'm grateful for that.
• Planning ahead: Life-saving strategy or bane of my existence? I believe that the planning and acquisition of material that goes into each project may be the biggest challenge. Each step has to happen in a timely fashion: whether it's conducting an interview, picking a topic I enjoy, or even doing all assignments to the best of my ability, these things are required for successful projects. I may not enjoy it, and I may have to make adjustments based on my ability to successfully manage time (which historically hasn't been so incredible). But again, it will be worth it in the long run, both for the good grade and for the practice with scheduling and timing.
•  High school helped teach what was expected of me above all else. Though there wasn't so much option for creativity or expression in my high school English classes, I know I still gained skills that will benefit me in this class. The high standard to which my past teachers held me seems equivalent to the standard that Sean expects from us now, so I'm grateful for having taken tougher classes back then. I also know that I am strong in English. I'm good at grammar and writing, so I don't think I will experience too much trouble in those respects.
• No questions, just ready to get started. The assignment sheets were very detailed and the examples provided helped illustrate the genres, so I have a fairly solid understanding of what to do. I'm just glad we get to begin soon!

Reflections:
Erica Mohr brought up her concern for the use of technology that I neglected to mention in my post Now that someone mentioned it, I realize I'm a little worried about it, too. I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one. We'll probably cope just fine, though.
Ryan Hittleman mentioned that the focus of his past classes was on writing essays. My experience was the same - that I s what I meant about the lack of focus on creativity in high school. His post made me second guess whether I'm prepared as much as I think I am. It doesn't hurt to rethink, but I do think I'm still pretty ready and that I have some skills going for me. I hope Ryan will be able to look at the situation in a more positive light as well.

Investigating Genres

One of the best parts of receiving a higher education in the 21st century is having access to so much technology and media that I can use to aid my studies. Now for the first time in my college experience, I get to produce a good amount of work using that same tech I so love to use in studying. I think these "new media" genres will be exciting and effective ways of producing projects. For example, let's look a little more closely at the podcast, shall we?

Breitenbach, Patrick. "My Podcast Set I" 8/8/2008 via Flickr. Attribution 2.0 Generic License. 

1. Podcasts serve to communicate information in a way similar to a news program or even a public presentation, but using only audio.  This genre seems to be a much less formal way of communication - the speaker can speak as if they are having a normal conversation with a live person, and the audience only has to listen intstead of devoting all of their attention to reading or studying the material.


2. Podcasts are easily found on the Internet or through recommendation from friends. While podcasts aren't typically advertised all over the place, they exist in plenty on sites like iTunes, SoundCloud, YouTube, and others. The context for finding a podcast could be anything from a Google search on a topic of interest to stumbling upon it accidentally, but it would usually require use of the Internet.

3. Speaking of the Internet, this is where you'd find a podcast's typical audience member. But because topics could vary so drastically, so could the audiences. You likely wouldn't find many teenage girls listening to a podcast about theoretical physics, but they may be listening to one about celebrity gossip. As long as a person has a good Internet connection and some working headphones, he/she could probably find a podcast of interest and become part of the genre's audience.


4. Major conventions of this genre are conversational speech and voice. Many podcasts (especially those not being turned in for an English grade) employ colloquial terms and do not speak in a completely formal manner since the author is speaking out loud. In addition, rhetorical techniques like irony and sarcasm are much clearer since the speaker’s tone is audible.


5. Essentially, the podcast is a genre in which speakers have freedom to speak naturally and discuss a lot of information in a short amount of time – ideal for an audience who likes to learn from spoken word.


Reflection:
Rigo Avila's post about QRGs: After reading this post, I feel a bit better about the Quick Reference Guide genre. This was the most unfamiliar to me - I've encountered podcasts and video essays before, but a QRG sounded a little scary. I've realized, thanks to Rigo's post, that maybe I actually have encountered a QRG and I just didn't know it. Since the main takeaway is that it's just a large amount of information in a condensed format, it seems a bit more manageable and less like a monstrous feat to overcome in the class. The examples he listed will be of use when I have to sit down and make one myself.
Zane Preudhomme's post about podcasts: It's always good to compare what someone else said about the same topic, which is what led me to comment on Zane's blog. He mentioned an important point I neglected: Podcasts often have multiple speakers. This allows room for multiple opinions, and for listeners to hear what the conversation is really like. It's also interesting just to see what his research led him to understand about the genre that differed from my understanding. I think that's a really neat thing about the public writing aspect of this course. Through each other we can all gain a better understanding of what is expected of us, and how to succeed in this course. Cheers to the blog!

My Writing Process

I've never been one to categorize myself. Never ever. I tend to think every trait can be placed on a spectrum and we all have some of everything in us. But when it comes to my writing style and process, I admit that one type fits me much better than the others.


1. I'm definitely a heavy planner. As I write, I often pause to plan the next few sentences and make sure my ideas are flowing in the right direction. I usually type a draft, make some small adjustments, and turn it in. When an assignment is coming up, I find myself brainstorming ideas while performing tasks that don't require much brainpower - walking, eating, falling asleep. These tendencies place me in the position where I can generally write without the need to revise.


2. But even major planning can't make my writing foolproof. Sometimes I change my mind on what I mean to say. Sometimes I can't quite express my ideas properly. In these situations, I'm forced to return and revise - sometimes adding or deleting in mass quantity. And when I find myself struggling with an assignment for any reason, I become a minor procrastinator, waiting a little too long to start. This seems like evidence that I am a composition of many elements; even if one trait usually overpowers the others, it doesn't mean the others can't stand out in the right situation.


3. Lots of planning works for me. I'm pretty confident about my writing. I don't want to sound proud, but I think my method works. Planning allows me to ensure I don't misspeak, and I'm able to catch many errors before they make it into my paper. But weaknesses do exist to balance those strengths. For example, I become fairly attached to my first draft in many cases. I try to convince myself that I don't need to edit, I procrastinate the revision, and I just feel annoyed the entire time I revise.


4. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. While it would benefit me to work on my revision skills, I don't see the sense in changing my approach. I don't even want to think about procrastinating - I probably wouldn't finish by the deadline because I'd spend most of my limited time planning. On heavy revision, I feel that forcing myself to go against the grain would result in a lower-quality final product. I think the ideal improvement situation would be not trying a new approach, but working on incorporating a bit more revision when it's needed. I'll always prefer to plan, but getting closer to a balance would be a useful and achievable goal.


As a heavy planer, I have to brainstorm. But you can't have a rainbow without the rain, right?

Mangold, Andy. "Brainstorm" 3/23/2010 via Flickr. Attribution License.

shokunin. "Illustration of a rainbow" via Free Stock Photos.biz. Public Domain Dedication License.