Untitled

This year I really liked focusing on one major topic as a group. For instance I was able to do research in the environmental science topic, and then talk to people in my group about their topics. I do believe that the peer review requirements were unclear. I wish we would have went a little more in depth on that topic so I could understand it better.

I beleive that when I apply for a job and give my resume it will be a lot similar to that of the writing process. I feel that I will still need to plan out what I am going to write, get a peer to look over it, and revise my previous thoughts. After all this is done I believe that my resume will be finished, and I believe that this writing process will help me submit a solid job application. I understand that this formula can be used for other styles of work; however, I am excited to use this on a resume.

The most challenging assignment this semester was the revision on our chosen article. I had a lot of trouble on the revision because I had trouble on finding what to change. However, I know that my article had flaws I just couldn't see them myself. I need to do a better job of getting other peoples opinions, so I can make better revisions than I did on this assignment. I did not do as well as I had hoped to do, but I know understand that it is best to have multiple people look at your papers therefor you can get the most possible feedback.

my argument is different from my original article because the first article gave reasons why fracking is beneficial, and I only give reasons why it is bad. My argument gives more facts and statistics than the first article.

It is important to evaluate sources because getting information from an inaccurate source can lead to a faulty argument. The most important thing I leanerd from the reading was to evaluate the publisher. Most books which are best suited for writing papers are books that are published by colleges. This knowledge will make me take into close account what I am reading and how I am interpreting it. In the future I will always make sure that I am using appropriate sources with my work.

The thesis or main argument from my article in project 2 was that fossil fuels like nitrogen gas from fracking need to stop being used. The author uses logos as her evidence. A lot of facts about the problems of using fossil fuels are given throughout the passage. The evidence listed was informative; however, I wish she made meaningful connections to society throughout the paper to make the reader want to get involved. I believe that giving a specific example of how fracking impacted a family or business in a negative way would make the paper a lot better.

I found a picture of a polar bear on a tiny block of melting ice. This picture was to raise awareness for climate change. The picture pertains to people who are unaware of how serious climate change is. The photographer uses pathos by capturing a sad helpless polar bear. The white polar bear stands out because of the dark ocean background, so the focus is solely on the polar bear and the ice. Also the polar bear is front and center of the photo which makes the animal impossible to miss. Also the polar bear takes up the whole image. Its not far away to the point where the audience can't tell what animal it is. This image reflects my understanding of our topic because I love animals and I love our planet and this image combines both and is able to show a series problem. The picture caught my attention so I'm sure it will catch others.

In my article a quote was not included. I believe a quote was not included because the author was using information that she already knew. She was not basing her facts off of anyone but herself. To be fair she is a reliable source because she has a PhD and two masters degrees. Therefor a quote is not entirely necessary to have throughout this informative paper.

The most helpful type of feedback is when I have wordy sentences and my peer reviewer can break it down to something more simple. This helps me because I know the sentence is wordy but I sometimes become blocked and cannot think of another way to word it. The worst feedback is when someone tries to change the entire idea of my essay just because they do not agree with it. This is awful because essays are meant to bring up discussion and just because it does not agree with your point of view does not mean it is a bad essay. Also if one is to make changes they should always be confident in the changes they are making.

My article uses ethos pathos and logos throughout the passage. They use logos by giving a lot of facts about how fracking is dangerous but can also be useful if done correctly. They then use pathos by saying how fracking can contaminate a water supply and effect thousands at a time. Finally they use ethos by saying if we know fracking is bad and can be dangerous why are we still doing it. They then go on to say that we need to find a safer form of energy. I do believe they emphasized logos because they gave a lot of facts on fracking which informs the reader.