The wiki website has really helped with all the writing in this class. It is very helpful in trying to critique someones pepers and getting feedback on them too.With this feedback we can improve our writing so much and become very good writers. I think all schools should use this method of critiqueeing other peoples work. If I had the luxury of doing this in high school my writing would have been alot better already. I would have been writing better papers and would be able to better critique someone elses paper. All in all this class was very helpful with my writing I think we did very well with collaborative writing, and everyone benefited from this class in some way
3 Of Hearts-I think that this one is illustrating the love in all aspects of life, Prehistoric, humans, and plants.
Phtosynthesis-I thikn this one means that eventually we (humans) will eventuallydie off as did the dinosaurs and plants will rule
Second Chance- We will die off and dinosaurs will come back to life and have a "second chance"at life
Untitled- It seems as if the dinosaur and the human are going trick or treating. maybe this means that humans and prehistoric creatures will eventually learn to live together.
Taking- Humans will die off and become a source of nutrients for the animals we use to kill off for food.
Sowing-A seed creates life for a plant so a human creates life for another human
Memories-After human has died off human and dinosaur will reminice about times past and realize they have many things in common
http://http://www.mercycorps.org/countries/sudan/1253
Mercy Corps is a group of people that are helping mothers and children that are going through difficult times in Darfur's Displacement camps. More than 180,000 people have died because of hunger, violence, and disease since the rebels took arms in Darfur against the government. Mercy Corps is improving sanitation by providing clean water, distributing relief items and building schools and safe areas for children to play.
It took me a while to find a topic to write about for this project. There is alot of injustice in the world, but none that I know enough about to write a paper on. I like talking about very controversial topics so I picked gay marraige. I have always supported gay marraige. I believe you have the right to do whatever you want. There is nothing wrong with gay marraige, its just love, a diferent kind of love yes, but love nontheless. So I have decided to write my third paper on gay marraige.
Public Crises give way to the most persuasive arguments that dictate the direction of local, national, and international policies in all civilians. It is important to analyze the situation in your crisis by asking yourself important questions like how did the situation evolve into a crisis and what can be done to resolve this crisis. You must have a strong thesis, while imagining your anti-thesis, and creating a synthesis. You can use allusions, analogies, authorities, testimony, and appeals to logic and value. You should know where to distinguish between the crisis and the solution. You must also use techniques such as woner, imformality, formality, and accusation to get the audience invloved.
Arguments could be about anything, such as policy, behavior, event, text, act, and many other things. They argue that something is wrong, bad, good, positive, negative, valueble, flawed, and what not. Each and every argument is focused on the social worth of the topic. A good argument flows and connects each of its topics.
There Is a variaty of advertising strategies that can be used to attract customers. For example there is advertising that appeals to kids with catchy slogans and alliteration. There is also the Ad Hominem approach, which attacks someones character, and the dialogismus strategy which uses a one person conversation. There is still an abundance of strategies used that I have not mentioned. All these strategies can be seen on T.V., in newspaers, and on large billboards.
To begin my first paper here in Comp 2 I have already founf an artcle in the Invernting Arguements book about standardized testing. Now I have to find another article about these types of tests. I would like to find one that is for this type of test seeing as my other one is against it. Once I have found a suitable article I am going to read them both and create a rhetorical analysis. I am biased so I am going to have to force myself to open up to the opinions of the article that is for the standardized tests. Once I have succesfully been able to get over my dislike of standardized tests I will be able to make an efeective rhatorical analysis of the two articles.
When you read an arguement you are usually persuaded to take a side. You either agree or disagree. But when it comes to arguements there is not a side to be taken. You are to create your own side, you make your own ideas about the subject and look up facts and make sure it is all very organized. You also have to keep an open mind about other peoples opinion and listen to details. Follow all these guidelines and you will have an effective arguement.
I came across an article on page one hundred and thirty one. The article is called Standardized Testing vs. Education by Justin James. James argues tat stndardized testing is curropting our youth, That these tests are giving students a false definition of education. I acutally agree with Justin James. With all the pressure being put on students to learn the material for the test, its no wonder all students think about these days is making a grade, when really, as James said, learning should be about discovery, and curiosity.
I found this new article about standardized testing in the Lexis Nexis database. I merely serach for an article containing something on standardized testing. I found an article against standardized testing by Don Mayhew The Fresno Bee. He is strongly against standardized testing claiming that it is demoralizing and destructive. He says it takes time away from being curious and discovering. Which is what learning should be about. He says that this can be changed. "Standardized tests are not like the weather. They're political decisions that can be questioned and ultimately challenged" (Don Mayhew).
This essay is about two authors who use the some type of strategy to prove two different points to the same audience. They both use Rhetoric to prove their points. For example, John Derbyshire is trying to prove that Yates is guilty of mudering her five children by drowning them. He argues against the objection that Yates might have been acing on the "intolerable frustrations of child raising" (Eggers) (Ramage, Bean and Johnson 711). Charles Krauthammer on the other hand is arguing that Yates was not mentally stable when the murder took place. He uses an example of a man who cut off someones head because he thought it was a pumpkin. He wants the audience to see that the cases are similar and as, obviously, the man who hallucinated the pumpkin head should be sent to get help, so should Yates, instead of being sent to jail. (Egger)