Blog Review #2

   Blog Review #2

Emily Baker

Kelila Fitch-Cook

Jonathan Martinez

Rhonda Polak

sadpoorandhungry.blogspot.com Review

The blog is easy on the eyes with a simple visual approach that makes it easy to read. It is lacking an about page, though, which makes it difficult to discern the content and motivation behind the writing. The images at the end of each post appeared relevant and provided visual interest. The writing styles are inconsistent, but that's to be expected from three different contributors. The content is well written for the most part. The blog is so simple that there's not much left to say.

Link

English Video Project : The Use of Commas

Evaluating Online Resources Part One

Kelila Rose

ENG 121 BCC

3/6/2016

The name of the website is articles.mercola.com. The author's name, Dr. Mercola, is clearly stated in the article and there's an entire page designated to a listing of his mission and credentials. As I am studying the negative health effects of mold exposure, Dr. Mercola seems to be a reliable source as he is a DO (osteopathic physician). He lists not only his academic credentials, but history of various television and radio interviews and awards he's received in his medical field. Though the website is educational in nature, the URL does not express that.

The purpose of this site seems to be both informational and commercial. There are links to other information, as well as products for sale. The site also provides an extensive list of references, all of which are links, and mostly sourced from medical journals, such as those produced by the Mayo clinic.

The site appears to be updated regularly, as the copyright is labeled "1997-2016". And I find the depth of knowledge on the part of the author to be not only sufficient, but in alignment with my personal experience with mold exposure. When he writes "when your immune system is impaired, almost anything can happen in terms of negative health effects" (Marcola), I know this to be true, as I have lived it.

Works Cited

Marcela. Mold: The Common Toxin That Can Be Far More Damaging Than Pesticides and Heavy                       Metals. 3 Sep. 2011. Web. 6 Mar. 2016.

view link

Evaluating Online Resources Updated: Jonathan Martinez

Evaluating website:

While evaluating reporting.bizjournalism.org article on Stunt Actors Compete With CGI for jobs the first impressions that appear to the source website is that it can not be taken as a credible source. The main site does not clearly state whether this is a group that is supported by an sponsor or organization while at the same time it is this groups objective to inform the public of the lives of people trying to make it and big companies looking for the next big thing in Los Angeles. The article itself does not have works cited for the information that it provides about the people mentioned for the main sources of stunt acting. Merely providing brief descriptions of Grant Jewett, Hugh Aodh O’brien, and Bridget Riley the stunt actors without any information on where the descriptions of these people came from. Another example is the fact that this article is on top of it’s main section Making It there is no clear indication that there is any updates in the past few years, which can indicate that this organization may no longer operational.

Link

Works citied

Canalas, Alicia. “Stunt Actors Compete with CGI for Jobs.” April 29, 2013. Web. 5 March 2016

Comparing Two websites:

While looking for a second article to compare with the first on EBSCO I stumbled upon one called Endangered Stuntmen that shows professionalism to the subject between CGI and how it is dominating stuntmen. The article shows more examples and has a lot more details on how stuntmen and CGI are opposing each other in the industry of film. While it easily states where it’s source came from and other title categories that clearly states what’s in the paragraph. Although the author, Weinman, Jaime, J, would not be on a higher grade than Alicia Canales author of Stunt Actors With CGI for Jobs because they both have the same style of writing and format when it comes to creating their points on each article.

While it was hard to distinguish both articles to see which one had the possibility to being a primary and credible source. It became clear that neither had enough information on either page to be taken as either a primary or credible source.

Link

Weinman, Jaime J. "Endangered Stuntmen." Maclean's 121.18 (2008): 55-56. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5 Mar. 2016.

-Jonathan 

Comparing Two Websites

Emily Baker

Professor Zukowski

English 121

8 Mar. 2016

Link

Comparing Two Websites

Initial Thoughts:

Right off the bat, I can recognize the professionalism of the website in which the article about green sea slugs is found.  Everything on the website focuses on the articles found in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in the United States. The website takes the effort to make sure that all the information about an article is clearly stated. It gives a detailed information on the authors, when the article was published, and even when the article was edited and reviewed.  At the bottom of each article page is a list of references used. Within the article they are careful about using incite citations along with including hyperlinks to certain phrases and words.

Comparison:

There are many differences between this website, set up as a database of articles, and the website, set up in a blog format. The layout of the website is meant to attract the reader and lead it from one article to the next; whereas, the scholarly article is focused on the information and the article is really the only thing you see on the webpage.  Another major difference is the content itself. The article was much more in-depth and more detailed than the blog website. Even the abstract itself was longer than the entire blog post. Because there were multiple authors contributing to the article it is safe to assume that these authors must have strong knowledge on the subject matter. The blog post on the other hand, was written by a single author who seemed to have taken information from around the web and summarizing it.

 Example References the article used:

Rumpho ME, Summer EJ, Manhart JR (2000) Solar-powered sea slugs. Mollusc/algal chloroplast symbiosis. Plant Physiol 123:29–38.

Rumpho ME, Dastoor FP, Manhart JR, Lee J (2006) in Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration—The Structure and Function of Plastids, eds Wise RR, Hoober JK (Springer, Berlin), pp 451–473.

Works Cited

Rumpho, Mary, et al. “Horizontal Gene Transfer of the Algal Nuclear Gene psbO to the Photosynthetic Sea Slug Elysia Chlorotica.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in the United States. 105. 46 (2008): 17867-17871. Web. 3 Mar. 2016

Evaluating and Reviewing a Website

Emily Baker

Professor Zukowski

English 121

8 Mar. 2016

Link

Evaluating and Reviewing a Website

Initial Thoughts:

The website, IFL Science appears to be a factual science website that is set up like a blog. Different author contribute by providing a wide variety of posts about science related information.  Articles range anywhere from biology and chemistry all the way to technology and space. Because it is set up like a blog, there are various ads, including ads that direct you off the website and onto other blog type websites. However, the information on this particular website appears to be very credible. In each post there are various links within the text directing the reader to the original source of information. Each article is very factual based and unbiased. The goal of the website seems to want to provide readers a quick way to gain new science knowledge without having to go read an entire scholarly article.

Excerpt from an article:

            The green sea slug is unique in its biological structure because although defined as an animal it possesses the ability to photosynthesize. According to an article on Science, “The sea slugs embed the chloroplasts into their own digestive cells, where the organelles continue to photosynthesize for up to nine months—that’s even longer than they would perform in algae. The sea slugs stay nourished thanks to the carbohydrates and lipids produced with photosynthesis (Fang).” This form of digestion is considered to be a unique from of gene transfer that still seems to puzzle biologists. By carefully studying the green sea slug’s uptake of the photosynthesizing DNA, scientists can understand the molecular evolution of multi-cellular organisms.                 

Works Cited

Fang, Janet. “Sea Slug Steals Photosynthesis Gene from Algae” IFL Science. IFL Science, 4 Feb. 2015. Web. 3 Mar. 2016

Research: More Than Detective Work

Kelila Rose

ENG 121 BCC

3/2/2016

I appreciated the content of the text, though I found the formatting to be a bit visually disorienting. I do like some comic strips/graphic novels, but the flow of this one had me misplaced at times. It is, though, a creative and fun way to represent a topic that might otherwise incite a yawn from its audience.

The information is useful and I will be using it as a reference in the future. The difference between primary and secondary sources and the bias that can exist in both is something that I will now more readily scrutinize. This piece also emphasized the importance of utilizing sources for a specific purpose. For example, while an online source that may be biased and promoting of self-interests may not be appropriate for a research paper, it may be appropriate for an opinion piece. Overall, I found this article to be encouraging in these days prior to our looming research papers.

view link here

Research: More Than Detective Work blog: Jonathan Martinez

Eng. 121

3/2/16

There is more to research than meets the eye

While reading through a comic strip Research: More Than Detective Work it seems at first glance a work of a modern day mystery case, only to have the detective already have an answer for the murderer in what seemed to be a quick, lucky, and educated guess. In truth however the process of that guess was the work of a more sophisticated but old form. Organizational techniques that worked to help out with the capture of the criminal and the comic strip in turn, throughout the strip, implores the reader to understand that having organization techniques when doing research papers is beneficial because even though it sounds tedious the payout works in the favor of the writer.

With everything now being eletronic from writing messages to looking for a good place to eat it makes sense that doing research papers should be pretty easy to do, especially with all the information at the tips of the writer, but there is more to research than looking. First and foremost as the comic strip says it is good to have keywords, good labels, or tags to simply have a good way to find the points in the research paper faster. In turn it was interesting to hear that when looking for sources there are two main points to look at primary, and secondary sources. Primary sources are characterized as anything from experimental results, to field research, and even first hand witness reports if the witness was involved or a spectator. While secondary sources go to descriptions, analyzations, and interpretations of primary sources. Another point that was interesting was that it was good to look for quality and quantity of sources, have them wide from interviews, to books, historical accounts, and debatable materials to have a better grasp of what the writer is trying to prove.   

When trying to write a research paper it is important to identify what is a primary and secondary source so that no confusion arises from having the two sources expand, or form with each other from the point of the primary source. While having files, and clear labels to go back on for easy to reach sources, and accounts with any sub categories to help connect the paper together in a concise format.

Overall the time consuming effects of a research paper pay off to the writer in the long run as they will be able to understand where there paper will go, have good sources t back up any claims and the organizational skills to effectively create a clear well thought out and flowing paper.

Link

-Jonathan

Reading Response - Research: More than Detective Work

Emily Baker

Professor Zukowski

English 121

3 Feb. 2016

Link

Reading Response: Research: More than Detective Work

            I thought the layout of this packet was really cute. It was every entertaining for me because I am a very visual learner. It is a nice change of pace from our text book. I also really enjoyed the fact that it wasn’t just listing the information out, but rather incorporated into a story. One of the most helpful things from this packet for me personally was the explanation about primary and secondary sources. Last semester in history, my professor required us to use primary sources when writing our paper. I kind of had an understanding of what it meant but still ended up having to ask him if a source was primary or not. This packet did a good job at clarifying the differences between the two.

            This packet is a good source to give writers a boost to help them start out writing a research paper; however, I think for it to be truly beneficial the writer would need to have some prior knowledge about writing research papers. I thought that much of the packet assumed that the writer has already written a paper before and is just reminding and reinforcing the key concepts to writing a solid paper.  With a combination of the information from this packet and from the textbook a writer will be well prepared for writing their next research paper.

Argumentation

Reading  Response Argumentation

   02/28/16

“ The process of reasoning that asserts the soundness of debatable position, belief, or conclusion. Taking a stand supported by evidence and urges people to share the writer’s perspective and insights.”  Defines Argumentation close to what a persuasion paper’s idea is, but the subtle differences between the two, come from Argumentations stronger stand points for logical papers that are created from the great use of logos.    

As the differences between the two become clear through reading Patterns For College Writing by Kirszner and by the realization that, although both types of papers contain appeals it is logos, the appeal to logic and reason. Using a credible source(s) to create proof that the writer is trying to make a stand with. When appealing to logos in the book it was evident to balance emotions and logic to allow the stance of the writer to become clearer. While trying to not take emotions too far ahead of logic, or else the paper will become a persuasion form. Which begs the question of where does the emotion end and logic begin to create an Arguementation paper? The best way to understand this from the book, are on pages 525-526, in which the goal is to first understand what the opposition of the writer’s initial logic is based on. Creating an anti-thesis while finding credible facts, and expert opinions will help to sure up any queries that the opposition can ask.

For future assignments It would be best to understand that to create an Argumentation paper the balance between creating a logic and emotional based stance. Having an open mind will grant a much better paper in which the ability to understand not only the stance that the writer is trying to say but also be ready to understand the opposition's point of view and ready to adapt. In which the writer has to be ready to modify the paper due to lack of evidence or change the stance to the opposition's view due to better evidence.

While the differences of a persuasion and argumentation paper depend on how strong the use of logos can be the defining factor that breaks the confusion of the two papers. 

       Link

-Jonathan

Chapter 14: Argumentation- Reading Response

Emily Baker

Professor Zukowski

English 121

March 1, 2016

Chapter 14: Argumentation

          

            To start off, the fact that an argumentation and a persuasion have two different meanings really surprised me. I definitely was on the boat that would use the two words interchangeably. However, I still am a bit confused on the difference between the two. The author states, “To persuade an audience, a writer relies on various kinds of appeals… Argumentation is the appeals to reason.” Yet in the very next paragraph it says, “… however, most effective arguments combine two or more appeals (524).” This sounds more like a persuasion according to the definition given earlier above.  

            

           The rest of the chapter was a lot to digest. There was a lot of information presented in only a few pages. The chapter was still clear and well presented in such a way that was understandable. Another interesting point that caught my attention, was the idea of choosing an argumentative topic that appealed to an audience that would disagree with your stance. I especially liked the example the book gave about the tuition and higher pay for teachers. Although technically it could be argued, it has no appeal because it would already be telling the reader what he or she already knows.

           

Link

 The most interesting section to me was the fallacy section. It really gave me insight on different ways an idea can seem true but in fact, the evidence that supports it is faulty. I’m starting to recognize how much the media can twist our perception on what is true through its logical fallacies. Especially during election time, it seems like the only thing that comes out of the media’s mouth is fallacies. One I often see is the ad hominem, especially during the debates. Yes, the candidates may not have a whole plan laid out for solving some of America’s greatest problems, but it seems like if they cannot provide a solid answer the revert to attacking the other candidates character.

         
         Overall this chapter provides some very helpful and key points to help writers create a argumentative essay that has enough support to back up their thoughts. Although, it offered many ways in which one can present their supporting idea, some of the examples were not very clear. For example, the section about inductive reasoning seemed to only provide situations where the inductive reasoning was incorrect or not valid enough. There was nothing about the correct way to include inductive reasoning into a paper. Other than that, this chapter was well structured for preparing students when writing a strong argumentative essay.