Friday, July 25, 2008
Journal #7
Well the end is finally here. I would have to say that I think i'm in an okay spot right now. I am moving down to purdue on the 9th so I do not work anymore after today so i will have plenty of time to work on my papers. I thought i was done with my annotated bibliography but i heard Jenn say in class to Brittney that an A-type annotated bibliography was around 22 sources. and i definatly only have about 12. however, after i put in my interviews and charts for my paper, i think i should be okay. Another thing i know i have to get done is revising my Rhetorical Analysis. As for my research paper, my draft is due tuesday for the workshop so i think i will be okay. I hoping for really good feedback from my classmates. I hope to get the most help with my citations. I do not know if i cite everything right in MLA. I guess what is left is to get everything together for my portfolio. I really hope to get a good grade in this class. I have tried hard to make my drafts great so my polished material will be A-quality. Today i plan on making my introduction and first section perfect for peer review. For tommorrow, i plan on making my conclusion perfect. Then on monday i will do a final read and fix any last minute problems. I'm really excited for people to read this paper because alot of people don't know what exactly is going on with yellowstone's volcano. I think it will really shock them! Plus i need some major help with citation. I have read some pretty good drafts in class, especally the alzteimers' ones, and i hope i can get awesome feedback because i have been giving some really good feedback for the others.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Journal #6
I feel that i am right where i need to be right now. My draft of my research paper is coming along. slowly but surely :) but it's coming. I am having trouble with my conclusion but i'm sure i can get some good feedback from my classmates to help me out. I am a little skeptical about my introduction. Christine and Brittney said it was good but i am not completely satisfied with it just yet.
As for my annotated bibliography i feel pretty good about it. I am done researching and i sumitted my annotated bib through email and expect a good response (hopefully). And my Rhetorical Analysis still needs to be revised and sumitted into Jenn. However, the first draft was pretty good. I just need to explain some points more clearly and add some comments here and there.
I am really happy about how the work shops we are doing the next couple of weeks. I think it is cool that i can get feedback from every single person in the class. I am also curious to see what everyone has to say about their topic. And also i would like to see how people react to my topic and my research paper.
So, after all that said, i think i'm in a pretty good spot right now. I just need to revise, revise, revise. As for the portfolio due in less than a month, i'm not too shocked. I think i have it under control
As for my annotated bibliography i feel pretty good about it. I am done researching and i sumitted my annotated bib through email and expect a good response (hopefully). And my Rhetorical Analysis still needs to be revised and sumitted into Jenn. However, the first draft was pretty good. I just need to explain some points more clearly and add some comments here and there.
I am really happy about how the work shops we are doing the next couple of weeks. I think it is cool that i can get feedback from every single person in the class. I am also curious to see what everyone has to say about their topic. And also i would like to see how people react to my topic and my research paper.
So, after all that said, i think i'm in a pretty good spot right now. I just need to revise, revise, revise. As for the portfolio due in less than a month, i'm not too shocked. I think i have it under control
Friday, July 11, 2008
Journal #5
The narrowed purpose of my research paper is to inform Americans living in the western United States about the Yellowstone supervolcano. Of course my audience is then Americans living in the western United States. I believe that this is the best audience for my topic because many people living in the western part of the United States don't know about the dangers of Yellowstone. Instead, they focus mostly on major earthquakes caused by the San Andreas Fault.
After reading the major research i have done for this paper, I think i have enough information to back up the topics i would like to disscuss in my paper. I also don't think i will have problems with length either. I have a pretty good idea of what i want to talk about considering my audience.
I would like to disscuss:
1)What a supervolcano is and it's elements
2)The history of Yellowstone's past eruptions
3)The warning signs of a future eruption and amount of damage possible
4)Is America prepared and what Americans should do before, during, and after a volcanic eruption.
A possible thesis statement would be: Many Americans living in the western part of the United States are not informed about the Yellowstone supervolcano. What these Americans should know is what a supervolcano is, the history of Yellowstone's past eruptions, warning signs to look out for, and steps to prepare and survive a major eruption.
After reading the major research i have done for this paper, I think i have enough information to back up the topics i would like to disscuss in my paper. I also don't think i will have problems with length either. I have a pretty good idea of what i want to talk about considering my audience.
I would like to disscuss:
1)What a supervolcano is and it's elements
2)The history of Yellowstone's past eruptions
3)The warning signs of a future eruption and amount of damage possible
4)Is America prepared and what Americans should do before, during, and after a volcanic eruption.
A possible thesis statement would be: Many Americans living in the western part of the United States are not informed about the Yellowstone supervolcano. What these Americans should know is what a supervolcano is, the history of Yellowstone's past eruptions, warning signs to look out for, and steps to prepare and survive a major eruption.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Journal #4
Well I did get most of the things accomplished that I had listed on my previous blog. I have the two articles picked out that I would like to use for my rhetorical analysis. These articles are different from the original two I had picked out last week.
After discussing the rhetorical analysis drafts in class, I now have a much better understanding of exactly what I need to do. I was a little lost because I have never written a rhetorical analysis before but Mrs. Stewart said my outline was good and I was ready to write. So, I guess I am. I feel more prepared since I have already lead a group discussion which was basically an oral rhetorical analysis.
I polished my annotated bibliography and I only have twelve sources. I don’t know if that is enough or if that is what is expected. I only put the sources I get the most use out of in my annotated bibliography so I think it is pretty solid.
As of now, I am ready to write my rhetorical analysis. I have a great plan to guide me through my draft.
I. Introduction
A. Audience of paper: W131 students
B. Explain what a rhetorical analysis is and why it is useful
C. Introduce the author of each piece and tell where each of the articles appeared originally
1. Are the original sources credible?
2. Give the purpose of each piece in a short one-sentence summary
D. Give thesis
II. Body
A. Audience
1. Give the audience of each source
2. Explain how I know the audience with examples
3. Compare/contrast the similarities/differences between the authors
B. Credibility
1. Are the authors credible? – If so explain why. If not, also explain why.
C. Compare and contrast organization
1. Did the authors keep focused?—if not, briefly quote a section not on topic
2. Subtitles of chapters—give examples if evident
3. Describe any pictures and explain why they are useful
D. Describe each author’s paragraph development
1. Too long? Too short?
2. Give examples of any strange transitions
3. Which author has better paragraph development and why
4. PIE
E. Tone
1. What is the tone for each article?
2. Is the tone appropriate for the intended audience? Give examples of words/phrases/sentences to back up decision
F. Research Methods
1. List any research methods the authors used – are these sources credible?Explain.
2. Mostly primary or secondary research?
3. Explain which article was researched better—Does this make the author and source more credible?
III. Conclusion
A. Explain why the authors’ writing does/does not mirror each others
B. Restate thesis
1. Give specific details to explain claim
C. Again tell readers (w131 students) why it is important and useful to write and read rhetorical analysis papers
I think if I follow this outline I should be able to write a pretty good draft and have no problem meeting page length requirements.
After discussing the rhetorical analysis drafts in class, I now have a much better understanding of exactly what I need to do. I was a little lost because I have never written a rhetorical analysis before but Mrs. Stewart said my outline was good and I was ready to write. So, I guess I am. I feel more prepared since I have already lead a group discussion which was basically an oral rhetorical analysis.
I polished my annotated bibliography and I only have twelve sources. I don’t know if that is enough or if that is what is expected. I only put the sources I get the most use out of in my annotated bibliography so I think it is pretty solid.
As of now, I am ready to write my rhetorical analysis. I have a great plan to guide me through my draft.
I. Introduction
A. Audience of paper: W131 students
B. Explain what a rhetorical analysis is and why it is useful
C. Introduce the author of each piece and tell where each of the articles appeared originally
1. Are the original sources credible?
2. Give the purpose of each piece in a short one-sentence summary
D. Give thesis
II. Body
A. Audience
1. Give the audience of each source
2. Explain how I know the audience with examples
3. Compare/contrast the similarities/differences between the authors
B. Credibility
1. Are the authors credible? – If so explain why. If not, also explain why.
C. Compare and contrast organization
1. Did the authors keep focused?—if not, briefly quote a section not on topic
2. Subtitles of chapters—give examples if evident
3. Describe any pictures and explain why they are useful
D. Describe each author’s paragraph development
1. Too long? Too short?
2. Give examples of any strange transitions
3. Which author has better paragraph development and why
4. PIE
E. Tone
1. What is the tone for each article?
2. Is the tone appropriate for the intended audience? Give examples of words/phrases/sentences to back up decision
F. Research Methods
1. List any research methods the authors used – are these sources credible?Explain.
2. Mostly primary or secondary research?
3. Explain which article was researched better—Does this make the author and source more credible?
III. Conclusion
A. Explain why the authors’ writing does/does not mirror each others
B. Restate thesis
1. Give specific details to explain claim
C. Again tell readers (w131 students) why it is important and useful to write and read rhetorical analysis papers
I think if I follow this outline I should be able to write a pretty good draft and have no problem meeting page length requirements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
