Monthly Archives: February 2015

Article Summary #8- Rachael

February 19, 2015Articlesarticle summary, Group one, Rachaelrgong25

Rachael Eddinger

Group One

February 18,2015

Article Source Information

Title: “Kelsey Myers on Diane Suess’ ‘Turd'”

Author: Kelsay Myers

Website: In Present Tense:Assay’s Blog

Date Written: January 26, 2015

Date Accessed: February 18, 2015

Article Summary

In this part of this blog’s “My Favorite Essay to Teach” series, this author really nails it. Aside from being an writer, she is also an artist. In this article she boasts about her “..writing mentor,Diane Seuss,” and her essay “Turd.” Naturally upon seeing the title of the essay I was interested. It’s hard to imagine an essay with that title being anything short of hilarious. However, this author makes it a point to mention just how wrong that assumption is. She tells her readers to “make no mistake..it is a serious piece of writing.” She proceeds to talk about the essay’s popularity amongst her students. Apparently it is very easy to relate to. This causes her students to become fascinated with not only the essay, but also the discussion that comes soon after. This author concludes her article by discussing why she likes to use this essay in her classroom. In her words, “I want to shock my students. I want to unbalance them and expand their ideas of what’s possible in writing and in literature. I want to show them how to be just as fearless in what they choose to write about and in how they go about doing it.”

My Opinion

I think this article is absolutely brilliant. The author is obviously a great writer and teacher. I love that she uses essays such as “Turd” to shock her students. Not many teachers have this sort of passion for their work; I have met a few who do, however it is much too rare. I think students need teachers who, like this author, challenge them to go beyond their comfort zone. It not only helps them to ” expand their ideas,” but it also makes it easier for them to truly enjoy the class. For example, I am a big fan of the song analysis that we do in class. By turning something we like, i.e. music, into something we can learn from, we are able to enjoy our course more. Although I am well aware of the fact that college is meant to be difficult, I believe this form of teaching would make more people want to continue their education after high school. Learning doesn’t have to be boring. With that being said, why do so many teachers stick to boring coursework? Having a classroom full of students who are bored to tears can’t be good for a teacher’s self-confidence. This article, and this class, have opened my eyes to some of the possibilities for spicing up otherwise boring material. When it comes to teaching, captivation is key. This author has gained one more captivated reader. “Turd” has definitely gained a place on my To-Read List. Hopefully, I won’t be the only person in this class to check it out!

Rhetorical Style

I would say the rhetorical style being used in this article is narration. The author is simply telling a story. She wrote about an essay that has impacted her life and her students lives. There is no concrete point. It is merely a narrative about an essay that her mentor had written.

Emily Blaine Article #8

February 15, 2015Articlesarticle summariesrgong25

Emily Blaine
2/14/15
Article Summary #8

We Didn’t Know

Source:

Kelly, Diane. “What We Didn’t Know about Penis Anatomy.” Ted.com. Ted.com, Apr. 2012. Web. 15 Feb. 2015.

Article Summary:

Kelly is talking about how she wanted to research the skeletons and how the penis works. She noted that when the penis is not in use, it is flexible and easy to bend. When it is time to be used for reproduction, it becomes ridged and hard to bend. When she started her research she was very interested in mammalian penis. So she started way back with the skeletons. But she isn’t talking about bones, she is talking about an earthworm, because, functionally, a skeleton is any system that supports tissue and transmits forces. And she already knew that animals like this earthworm, indeed most animals, don’t support their tissues by draping them over bones. Instead they’re more like reinforced water balloons. They use a skeleton that we call a hydrostatic skeleton. And a hydrostatic skeleton uses two elements. The skeletal support comes from an interaction between a pressurized fluid and a surrounding wall of tissue that’s held in tension and reinforced with fibrous proteins. And the interaction is crucial. Without both elements you have no support. If you have fluid with no wall to surround it and keep pressure up, you have a puddle. And if you have just the wall with no fluid inside of it to put the wall in tension, you’ve got a little wet rag.

So Kelly went ahead, collected wall tissue, prepared it so it was erect, sectioned it, put it on slides and then stuck it under the microscope to have a look. There’s an outer layer and an inner layer. Kelly found out that there was another way of arranging fibers in a hydrostatic skeleton, and that was with fibers at zero degrees and 90 degrees to the long axis of the structure. The thing is, no one had ever seen it before in nature. Kelly went around and was showing everyone, no one had ever seen anything like it. The fact that she was serious about the penis theory even scared her professor.

Critical Thinking:

When I clicked on this video I was honestly scared, I mean who doesn’t know about penis anatomy. But when I got into the video and listened to what Kelly was saying, it made so much sense for someone to research it. I mean no one ever thinks twice about a penis, most people know what they are used for. If it is not urinating or reproducing , it’s just hanging there. Honestly the way that this just popped in her head, blows me away. In the end it is good research and Kelly did a great job. I hope more men watch this, so they know these things about their penises.

Rhetorical Style:

Kelly used a lot of illustration, she showed pictures and diagrams of what she was explaining and what was going on in the pictures. But most of all she was informative. She told us about things we didn’t know, she brought knowledge to us in a video. And the fact that she researched the topic on her own, so she has firsthand experience. So as you could guess, she also used narration. Kelly talked about how she found out, and how she shared it with everyone around her. She, herself informed the people around her. The rhetorical styles in this presentation are as followed: illustration, informative, and narration. She did a kick ass job and I am glad she found out the anatomy so maybe men will realize that their penis is not a toy!

Emily Blaine Article #7

February 15, 2015Articlesarticle summaryrgong25

Emily Blaine
2/14/15
Article Summary #7

The Mathematics of Love

Source:
Fry, Hannah. “”The Mathematics of Love”” Ted.com. Ted.com, Apr. 2014. Web. 15 Feb. 2015.

Article Summary:

Fry is explaining in this article that it is pretty easy to find a significant other, and she explains it but using dating networks. She throws out OkCupid, and she say that it is better to show off your flaws, and the fact that you put so much information online that you’re imagine should not matter. When you are online you should just be yourself, and Fry states that the less attractive you are the more messages you get. It was pretty interesting, there is a method that if you reject the first 37 percent, and select the next one that comes along it is supposed to be your perfect match. They didn’t say it was 100 percent effective, but it is a method. So the two facts that Fry has listed was, the less attractive the more attention and to reject the first 37 percent of people that try to get to know you. Now the third tip is how to avoid divorce, the best couples are the most successful couples. They have a really low negativity threshold, which is best to avoid divorce.

The whole reason she made this presentation was to bring light on to the fact that the people who start up dating websites, are mathematicians. And Fry wanted to bring light to this so people know that, the people behind everything are really smart. I can see why she brought it to everyone’s attention, people don’t realize, anyone that is behind great technology. Fry gave people great tips for online dating but what about physically? She didn’t mention anything.

Critical thinking:
Personally, I like this presentation. I think that Fry did an amazing job talking about the tips for online dating. But honestly the one and only tip a person needs is: Be yourself. That is how you will find the perfect person, and the person that you want to spend the rest of your life with. It is so hard pretending, and then you have to put on this “front” every time you are with that person. It is exhausting, don’t sugar coat things if you think they will fall in love with you, because when they find out the truth, they are going to be pissed and hurt. Why do people desperately try to find their other half? I mean just relax and if it is meant to be then it’s a done deal. But other than that don’t force anything, that is a way to an unsuccessful and dishonest relationship. From my experience, anything that is rushed or moving too fast, it never has a good outcome. Fry was talking about how successful couples have a lesser chance of being divorced and I cannot really agree, most successful relationship, their partner is having an affair. In my mind that is what I think, I am not saying it is true. But going through my mind that is how I see things.

Rhetorical Style:

Fry used Compare and Contrast as her rhetorical style. The reason I say this is because she pointed out differences with the attractive and less attractive guy. And how relationships are more successful if the couples are. I mean she wouldn’t know this unless she compared and contrasted them. I mean the fact that she studied this so well is really amazing but, who has all that time. It is possible that she cited someone else’s research, but even then, they are comparing couples. When they compare the couples, they also compare other couples in order to see the similaries and the differences. That is why I choose Compare and Contrast as the rhetorical style.

Ben Main Article 4

February 11, 2015Uncategorizedgroup3xx

”Report urges new name, better diagnosis for chronic fatigue”
Associated Press

The article describes the struggles of how people who have chronic fatigue are upset by it not being taken more seriously in the professional world of medicine. They say that the name needed to be changed to Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease, or SEID, to reflect that symptoms worsen after exertion. A few medical personnel stood up and said that these patients were right and a new set of tools should be provided to help physicians diagnose this ailing disease. The recommendations mark “a critical step toward assisting medical providers in making a diagnosis for those with this serious and debilitating illness,” said Dr. Nancy C. Lee of the HHS Office on Women’s Health. She said the government would review the recommendations.
As Americans we have lost our fucking minds if we are actually listening to this and taking it with any merit. First off, chronic fatigue, meaning literally constantly tired, is the biggest joke of a medical term I have ever heard. In what way can that ever be measured? Can you count blood cells, take samples, run brain scans or even treat it? The answer is no, which then dictates that this is a poor life choice, not a damn medical condition. I am not saying that people don’t get chronically tired. I work 60 hours a week, go to school full-time and have a great relationship with my fiancé. I am always tired, but that is how I have chosen to live my life. This is just another example of how ignorant people can get with medical advancements and the faux importance of their implications.
The author seems to be on my side. The attitude is very saucy and flippant. He uses sarcasm and over exaggerative words to drive his point home. The quotes that he uses are from well-respected professionals, obviously, but they have no real cavalry to their statements. The author doesn’t pose any real hope for the cause either which makes it seem as if he really thinks this cause should just disappear anyways.

Associated Press. “Report Urges New Name, Better Diagnosis for Chronic Fatigue.” Fox News. FOX News Network, 10 Feb. 2015. Web. 10 Feb. 2015.

Ben Main Article 3

February 11, 2015Uncategorizedgroup3xx

“White House unveils new medical research initiative”
Alexandra Jaffe

President Barack Obama on Friday announced the details of his “Precision Medicine Initiative,” a proposal aimed at pushing the U.S. to the forefront of cutting edge medical treatments. The article states the plans he has in terms of how to spend the allocated money in regards to medical advancement. He says that out of the $215 million a little less than half of that is going to creating a database for all doctors to use. Privacy will be maintained and security will be in full force as the Obama Administration hopes.
This means that we are giving $130 million of a budget to make an IT database. Are doctors going to create this program and database? They may assist minimally but the bulk of the work will go to the IT guys. Doctors won’t get any extra pay for this. And the rest of the money is going to “bring us closer to curing diseases like cancer and diabetes — and to give all of us access to the personalized information we need to keep ourselves and our families healthier”. I believe we could be doing so much more with our money! Make a budget for a separate department to create this database. Leave the doctors to what they are doing. Make it a free enterprise even, see who can come up with the best system. And with the medical technology we already have we don’t need anything more. People who have cancer and diabetes and even incurable viruses like HIV are at the point where they can manage and fight their battles. What happens when twenty years from now we realize that cancer is not curable? Can we even grasp that or do we have too much of a God complex? Money could be spent in much better places.
The author is more descriptive and persuasive in her rhetorical style. She is for the movement and uses human emotion to make you sway towards having this bill be enacted. She uses words like “announced” and “proclaimed” when she refers to Obama speaking which puts him on an already elevated pedestal.

CNN. “White House Unveils New Medical Research Initiative – CNN.com.” CNN. Cable News Network, 30 Jan. 2015. Web. 10 Feb. 2015.

Ben Main Article 2

February 11, 2015Uncategorizedgroup3xx

Wired/Permalink
“Sony Got Hacked Hard: What We Know and Don’t Know So Far”
Author: Kim Zetter
The article summarizes the attack on Sony and other cyber attacks on companies around the world. Sony was reported to have blamed North Korea at first. This was due to theie controversial movie The Interview that involved the assassination of the N. Korean leader. This was proved to have no legitimacy. The hackers stole personal data from the company that included social security numbers and salaries from many of its employees. Some speculate that this was an inside job. Most other claims from different companies around the world start off being viewed as an attack from another nation, but are always refuted into being a hacker or cybercriminal.

Ben Main Article 1

February 11, 2015Uncategorizedgroup3xx

Washington Times
“Obama Amnesty to Qualify 2 Million illegal Immigrants for the Tax Break, Benefits”
Author: Stephen Dinan
In the article Stephen Dinan says that Obama and his Administration are allowing illegal immigrants, 2 million effective immediately, will qualify for social security and healthcare benefits. Along with these citizen based programs he will allow them to claim special tax breaks for low income families. The Obama Administration says that up to 5 million immigrants will qualify but only 2.25 million will have signed up by 2017. Texas, along with a few other states, is suing Obama by claiming that this act is unconstitutional and they never had a vote or say in the matter. They also say that Obama has to rewrite the laws in order for this to happen and that is a job for congress.
So here is where my natural logic takes me on this subject. The title of the article has the phrase “Illegal Immigrant”. Based on the first word in this phrase, people who are categorized in this group did something illegal to obtain said status. So in what judicial system do people get to say they deserve the benefits that they have clearly and admittedly been convicted of gaining illegally? How do people get rewarded for breaking American law? Why would the leader of our country enact a law that said you will gain favor and amnesty for blatantly breaking the laws set down by the United States of America?
First off, you can’t be rewarded for breaking the law. If a person steals $500 from another person, that person who stole is tried, convicted and made to pay to for their crime. If they no longer have the money they pay it back. In the Obama Administration logic that man should be rewarded with an additional $500 and given special privileges that he would not have qualified for before the crime. Imagine the anarchy that would ensue such leadership and laws!
Now to say that Obama is trying to create panic in the streets would be a far stretch that clearly does not match his educated mind. He, as a rational human being, would realize there is no gain for such a venture. And people who say he is trying to plunge America into the Dark Age are not following sound logic. The answer lies with what one side of any bi-partisan system desires most of all; power.
There are an estimated 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants in America. Some of these have some semblance of a legal patron in the States who has the full rights and privileges of any American citizen. They would support a maneuver that allowed them to get more help from the government to feed their illegal family members. The laws are clearly giving a max number of 5 million social security numbers to these illegals. We are a democratic nation and being as such we vote on laws and elect officials because we believe that every citizen has a voice that should be heard. Obama and his administration are gaining political power by enticing illegal immigrants and those who support them with handouts paid for by the American people. Out of the current 12 million illegal immigrants here not one would go against Obama. They would be irrational and illogical if they did! Obama is extremely intelligent to use such a strategy because even after his term, he is retaining a vast amount of power for the Democratic Party. There is no one move over any specific group of people that would yield this result. It goes back to the age-old saying; when something seems wrong follow the power, it will always point to the wrongdoing.
The author’s rhetorical style being used seems to be purely informative. It doesn’t appear that any agenda is trying to be pursued. He gives pros and cons from both sides of the argument. In a subtle way you can hear that the author is more in favor of the act based on his live quotes from activists for the move. Still, he seems to put forth unbiased material.