Keeping that "Wow my peers are really good at constructing intriguing arguments and projects" train going, I reviewed David Klebosky's project titled "Satire is Making Way for Absurdism". The project lives here in audio form and here in raw script text form.
I left him a long-winded comment about his sources and the nee to include some of a different type that is currently lacking in his draft. I suppose it's kind of a hybrid research recommendation and content suggestion, as the inclusion of new research would change the content, which is essentially what I was advocating for.
I think my comment helps because he doesn't introduce his topic as something that other people are interested in or talking about. He never brings up a source in which people are talking about the issue, whether agreeing or disagreeing, and it makes the audience wonder if the topic is even relevant in the least. I wanted to call this to his attention and challenge him to include some source (if there's something out there) about what other people are saying.
Apparently I struggle to tie in Student's Guide. Maybe I just can't put my genius into a category. Hahaha completely kidding. But I am able to tie in the Project 3 Assignment Sheet, which states that we need to contribute to an ongoing controversy. David didn't paint his argument in this way and I wouldn't want his argument to be weaker or lose points by not giving mind to this idea.
I really liked David's use of genre conventions and his overall comfort on the mic. He was really good at communicating conversationally, and it was definitely a pleasant project to experience. He was really intriguing and funny, and this does a lot to hold a listener's attention. I hope I'm able to employ a similar interest factor in my own project, despite that my genre is text-based.
No comments:
Post a Comment