Untitled

In papers and essays in other classes I can use the revision techniques that I have learned in this class in order to revise my other works and ultimately make them better. I have already had the opportunity to do this in my UNI class, we just submitted our final research papers and I used the “chunking” technique when revising it. I learned how to revise in “chunks” in this class and I feel like it is the best way for me to revise because I can focus in on smaller parts instead of looking at papers as whole. 

The infographic has been the most challenging for me because of how little space we had to share all the ideas we needed to. I can tend to be a wordy person and I like to explain all of my reasonings and ideas in depth and I felt constrained with the infographic because the whole point is to have less words and more pictures and graphs. It wasn’t what I was used to so I felt very challenged because I was worried my ideas weren’t going to be clear and I wouldn’t have enough room to fully explain myself. My writing has improved a lot because this is the first writing intensive class I have taken so it gave me the opportunity to focus in on improving my skills. My revision skills of my work and peer editing skills have improved the most.

I chose to expand on my articles original argument, I researched other articles about a similar topic and used some ideas that were presented in those to make my original authors primary claim stronger.

It is important to evaluate sources because it establishes the credibility of what you are reading. When you are applying what have read to something else such as a paper or a project it is important that what you are using is credible in order to make the project or paper credible. I have learned that it is almost impossible to find something that has no bias at all. When reading an article I will wonder what kind of biases it includes because I am in the environment group I assume most of what I will read will be pro-science. You have to take everything you read on the web with a grain of salt because it is almost certain whoever wrote it has some sort of opinion and bias when they wrote it. 

Potential Counterarguments: That in some places like the desert, they might not be close to any body of water so would it take longer for them to have access to these resources and is that fair to them just because of where they live. 

This image of a hurricane shows a vast difference of what we think of when we think about an ocean breeze and palm trees. In the picture we see high winds and water way too high and close to that structure for comfort. This picture has an intended audience of the people who may be interested in the circumstances of a hurricane if they have never experienced it first hand. The image uses pathos as rhetorical appeal. Our natural instincts see this picture and automatically think “danger”, the picture uses this to appeal to the human heart and makes us think “oh wow, someone has had to go through this dangerous situation. what can we do as humans to help those people?” This picture demonstrates a way to use alignment by showing all the trees being blown in the same way at the same angle, which we know is not how trees normally look. It also shows how close in proximity the water is to the structure to show how much a hurricane can push the limits of normal. This image reflects on how almost anything can be analyzed rhetorically, and that even pictures can appeals to how a human feels naturally and what emotions can be drawn up by a simple image. 

In my article the author did not use a traditional quote of someone else's words but she does put quotations around several things such as “blue carbon.” She does this because she has hyperlinked to a new resource in order to give the audience the ability to go and find more information on what she has put in quotations. Instead of having to analyze and go into further detail about what she is quoting she uses the hyperlink to explain more if the reader wants to click that link and learn more. I don’t feel like this is effective because hardly no one is actually going to click on the link and read a whole other article to understand one little statement in the article they are already reading. 

When I have received peer reviews the most helpful tips are usually the most brutally honest ones. They can hurt your ego a little bit especially when you are feeling very confident about what you have written, but for me I would prefer to get all the advice I can because I like to do the best I can. When someone reviews what I’ve written and doesn't have anything to say, good or bad, it makes it hard to figure out your next step of where you want to take your writing. I like the peer review process but I don’t particularly enjoy when someone tells you need to fix something but doesn't tell you why or guide you to some way to fix those issues.