Final Reflection

Abstract language and composition are what separate humans from the other 2 billion species that have lived on earth. Language works through rhetoric meaning that all language is about persuasion. It is through rhetoric that people are allowed to be different. My favorite definition of rhetoric was provided by John Locke. He said, “Rhetoric, that powerful instrument of error and deceit.” Andrew King and Jim Kuypers give a definition that ties rhetoric and persuasion together. They said, “The strategic use of communication, oral or written, to achieve specifiable goals.” Since composition is what divides us from animals, it is therefore the most important subject humans learn.
In order to understand the art of persuasion Aristotle introduced three concepts: logos, pathos and ethos. Logos appeals to an individual’s logic, pathos appeals to an individual’s emotion, and ethos appeals to an individual’s character. Encountering these three elements happens every day, and as I learned through my rhetorical analysis, they often persuade you to buy certain products. Concentrate on a car website for example; the reasonable price and generous cash back incentive applies to your logic. Ethos is present because the website proves that their brand is well known and trusted. Exaggerated photographs that show endless possibilities are the most obvious pathos.
I have a new respect for composition because I understand that it is about so much more than I imagined. In Kelly Slacks oral presentation, the article she studied said that composition classes need to play a role in “diversifying education and building positive and understanding character in their students.” The article, by Danielle Mitchell, concentrated on homosexuality and composition, but what I really took away from it was the fact that teachers need to teach critical analysis of the ideas being studied.
Although I am not going to be a teacher in school, I think you constantly have the opportunity to share your knowledge with people. You can teach your co-workers, your children, or your friends. The three approaches to learning are subjective, objective and rhetorical. I think that the best education consists of a combination of the three. Teachers could start with the objective approach and present the facts, through lecture. Then they could move into the subjective approach to let the students break down the information in their own heads. Finally, the rhetorical learning process allows the students to interact with one another. With the advancement of web 2.0 into the classrooms interaction is becoming more and more common. Web 2.0 gives the students a form and allows them to fill in the content.
Grasping the concept that all language is persuasion was very difficult for me. The Toulmin argument helped break it down in simpler terms. With the Toulmin argument you have a claim, data and a warrant. The claim starts the argument, the data supports that argument and then there is the warrant. The warrant is the assumption being made, and most people consider this the hardest element to understand.
Audra Osborne’s oral presentation introduced an idea that, surprisingly, I had never thought about. If teachers created assignments that focused on the students’ interests then maybe they would find it less tedious. Also, focusing on the individual’s ideas and allowing room for mistakes would get secondary students more interested in the subject and less afraid of error.
Overall, this class opened my eye to a completely new view of composition. Before this semester I thought composition was the formula we used to convey our written ideas. Now, I know that composition encompasses so many things. There is not one way to teach composition, and I think it is obvious that NOONE should use the 5-paragraph essay. Clearly there is great value in teaching composition because it is the primary component that separates humans from every other living thing. Also, if language is directly related to persuasion then it is a skill you use in every aspect of your life, making it necessary to understand. Take Joseph for example; the boy had no realm of the past or future. He lived in a very small present and had no idea the difference between love and hate. Joseph had never encountered language or composition.

Blog Post #10

This class has probably meant something completely different to me than most of the other students in the class- primarily because I am not an English major and have very little knowledge on the subject. Even though I am not going into teaching as a career, I have great respect for good teachers and I can relate to them because everyone has had their share of good and bad teachers. I hope my ideas contributed as an outsider’s point of view. The first day of class is the most memorable lecture from the semester. I had never thought of, much less discussed whether or not humans were cannibals. I was interested and had an open mind from the beginning, mainly because early on the class definitely went against what I thought it would be. I really enjoyed how Dr. Garrison put a lot of emphasis on getting your ideas out there, even if he didn’t always agree. Having open discussions in class and doing blog postings gave everyone the opportunity to express what they were thinking. Another one of the strongest languages was the first one where Dr. Garrison started to push on the point that all language is persuasive. It showed me that if you introduce an interesting, NEW topic to students it is nearly impossible that they won’t be interested. Some of his ideas had me saying “huh???” but I still thought about it, which I presume is the overall goal. I have found throughout college that I trust a professors lecture and knowledge based on his or her credentials; however, it is a real turn off when they list every award they have ever gotten or every impressive thing on their resume. Dr. Garrison was able to show his intelligence through his lectures and discussions without having to brag or boast. For me, this class gave me a completely new way to think about English. I no longer think of it as writing a paper or reading Shakespeare, but it is a whole new language and way of thinking. For everyone that is teaching English I think it would be really helpful to surprise your students on the first day, just as Dr. Garrison did, and give them a new way to think of the subject.

Blog Posting #9

My final essay is in the very early forms of development but I want to share with everyone what I have so far in hopes to get some suggestions. I have chosen to concentrate on the effects that web 2.0 is having on English grammar and language; and I personally think that it is negatively effecting our grammar. The most important thing I will establish from the beginning of the essay is what I mean by grammar and what I mean by Web 2.0. Originally when I thought of grammar I thought of sentence structure, capitalization, misspelling of words, etc. But through research I discovered people have many different ideas of what grammar is. What are the top three things you associate with grammar? Also, when I use the term Web 2.0 I am referring to Facebook, MySpace, blogging, instant messaging and the ability to leave comments and reviews for products and/or news articles. My basic outline would be the following. Present my thesis, define grammar and its importance, define web 2.0, use an article that discusses the each of these individually, use an article that combines the two elements, and then find examples of people using grammar poorly throughout web 2.0. The last part will obviously be the easiest! The reason I chose this topic is because these discussions are what I found most interesting in our class. I know and recognize the good aspects of web 2.0 like giving shy students a way to express themselves and giving more people a voice but I think the “harmful” aspects of web 2.0 were overlooked. At some point, even if these students have good ideas and a solid voice, they are going to have to fill out at online application, or send an e-mail to someone who cares about more than their “voice” and if they don’t have the proper grammar skills to project their ideas it will not matter what they are saying. A lot of students express that English is boring because they have to sit through countless hours of grammar, spelling and punctuation but there is much importance in acquiring a good understanding of these basic concepts. I am having trouble finding research and articles that combine the two elements: how web 2.0 effects grammar, so if you find any please feel free to e-mail me. I would really appreciate it. Lindsey.priess@ttu.edu

Post #8

After hearing everyone talk about Topic so negatively I am very very very thankful that I didnt ever take freshman composition at Tech. I think it is absurd from what everyone in class was saying, to not know or ever encounter who grades your paper. Half of understanding and benefiting from a grade is seeing and discussing the comments made by the teacher. Our discussion in class today was really interesting. I don't agree that web 2.0 is taking away credit from talented people... In fact I think it is doing the opposite. People who "make it big" now are even more admired because they are competing with so many more individuals. There is a fine line between the reader and writer on web 2.0 but that is not news to anyone! Everyone knows that when you read the review for a product, if its really good and shows no flaws, it was possibly written by the creator. It goes back to what we have been saying all semester-- what you see on the internet has to be taken with a grain of salt. I also think the loudest people don't always succeed. Alot of times when peopel are too in your face about an issue or too loud people block them out and don't listen to their argument. It's the people who are more shy that are listened to when they speak. If someone who is normally quiet speaks up, then it causes others stop and listen. I don't want to repeat what I said in my last blog but I was not a fan of the MOO. I thought it was too chaotic and a waste of time. I know alot of people were just having fun, so I guess in order to really judge that method of education we would have to do it several times.

Blog Post #7

I think that the internet can be used as an effective means for communication, but things like Facebook, Myspace and Wikipedia should not be used for composition… only communication. Like we experienced in class today, online classes would be very sporadic and off topic 99% of the time. I’m sure everyone had fun today using the MOO but how much educational value was there to it all. In order for a student to get anything out of chatrooms used for education they need to be taught from an early age the purpose of these teaching methods. There would have to be very strict teaching guidelines to monitor, not only the quantity of participation from each student, but the quality as well. The video we watched in class today on youtube was very interesting to me. It raises a concern for people who are planning to become a teacher. If education is going to continue to advance technologically it seems near impossible for teachers to catch up. I think generation gaps are natural, ya know as things advance it makes since that the older crowd would be slower to catch on. I do know a lot of parents who text message and have Facebook accounts, so it is possible to stay current. All of the technological advances do kind of scare me, but I think about what people predicted about the millennium and it has been fine so far. When the changes come gradually everything seems a lot more manageable. A question that I would like to have answered is what will happen to our grammar and our students’ language if everything begins being taught online? Just think how different text message lingo is from how you would write an English paper.

Blog Posting # 6

I think the discussion today about the differences between print and web was really interesting; especially when we broke the web into two different categories, 1.0 and 2.0. I think print and philosophers go hand in hand. People are a lot more reluctant to publish something in a book, and it’s a lot harder to find someone to publish your work, if you are writing about non sense. With the internet and rhetoric era people are just trying to persuade one another that they have knowledge they might or in most cases might not have. I made the argument in class that sites such as Wikipedia are probably pretty safe because people wouldn’t waste their time writing about something unless they were passionate and knowledgeable on the subject. However, as the day went on and I continued to think about that, I take my statement back. I think there are enough bored, ignorant people out there that would just put information on open forum sites because they have the power too. They are trying to convince themselves as much as they are trying to convince others that they know what they are talking about. I have come to find that people argue, just to argue, regardless of if there is a point… It is examples like these that make the internet less credible and dangerous for children. I am glad we have started switching to the 2.0 version of the web because I think it gives a lot of intelligent people a way to speak out and share their intelligence. Sites such as wikipedia can be a good reference point as long as people remember to use a filter when reading the information. The responsibility of patrolling kids on the internet is in the hands of parents AND teachers. If a child is chatting online or looking at their myspace I think that is more geared toward the parents’ responsibility. But as far as teaching students how to find credible research sites, that is something teachers should show them.

Blog Posting #5

Honestly, I think Humanism is the most difficult concept we have discussed this far in this class. Especially when you try to determine whether or not humanism should be recognized as a religion. Humanism doesn’t seem all that different to me that the way a lot of people practice religion. If humanism ultimately means seeking out personal happiness and happiness for others, I think that is the way a lot of people view religion on the surface. I understand that the bible sometimes asks you to overcome difficulties and to take the “hard” path in order to avoid sin and this will not always make you happy but I see a lot of similarities, too. If you describe humanism simply it doesn’t seem that abstract—I mean isn’t everyone trying to obtain happiness and most people enjoy making others happy too. The part that confused me is I think this is more a way of life than a religion. But then it makes me question, isn’t religion a way of life? Composition allows humanists to get their ideas out into society and to further their thoughts. Without composition people could still verbalize their ideas, however as we have already learned nothing reaches as many people or survives history like written work. As far as choosing an artifact for our rhetorical analysis… I haven’t decided on one yet. I was hoping to read everyone’s’ blogs to get some ideas. There are a lot of things that I think are persuasive but I’m struggling to find one that interests me. I think this assignment could be a lot of fun if you choose an artifact you actually care about. I welcome any suggestions you aren’t using!

Blog Posting #4

I think understanding rhetoric affects every part of a persons life. It not only helps you understand yourself and why you do and say certain things, but it also helps you better decipher what others are trying to communicate to you. Before I was familiar with rhetoric communication, both emotionally and logically, was very one dimensional. I didn’t think much about the meaning behind what I say or more importantly what others were saying to me. I think rhetoric is more accepted within “formal” relationships, for example between you and a co-worker, or a boss, or a professor. You understand that going to work and school means people are using their language to teach and persuade you of something. What it has really changed for me is the communication between people I feel very comfortable with, like friends, family and/or a spouse. Its with these people that I thought I said what I really meant to say without any type of persuasion involved. It has really made me question what I am trying to get from certain relationships by the way I use language. Its important to understand rhetoric in order to successfully communicate with anyone, regardless of the relationship or situation.

Blog Posting #3

I do think this class has raised a lot of questions in my head regarding language, but more specifically, rhetoric. I’m not an English major so until now I was completely unaware of what rhetoric was. I am not totally convinced that all language is meant to be persuasive but I am at least pondering the idea which is a lot more than I can say for before this course started. I like how we have open discussions and it seems like everyone feels comfortable enough to contribute. I also like the freedom we have to write whatever we are thinking about on our blogs. It helps everyone to get to know each other better than we could just meeting a couple times a week. The articles we read the first couple classes were really interesting and fun to talk about—maybe we could read more of those. I know it’s important to understand all of the theories too, but the other articles were more entertaining. I think it is helpful that you lead the discussions/lectures with a thesis to guide us; without the thesis I bet we could go off on a bunch of random tangents. Anyways I think this class is great and completely not what I expected.

Blog Posting #2

I am having a harder time finding my stand point on this issue because I think that SOME language is purely done for persuasion, but not all. I know a lot of people have ulterior motives when they talk with friends, but sometimes I think people do things without the mindset to persuade others. I think the reason I am not comfortable with saying that all language is rhetoric, meaning it’s persuasive, is because it makes all of our language seem “evil.” If we only say nice things to each other in order to persuade our peers it takes away the happiness and joy. Or if we only help the needy in order to persuade them, it takes away the selflessness. This goes back to our first class lecture about humans being innately selfish and evil… I’m beginning to see a trend here! Now I’m switching to the power that language has over humans and society. Without language we would have nothing. I definitely have a new respect for language… it’s not that I didn’t appreciate language before but I had never studied the effects as in depth as we are in this class. I don’t think this stuff is mindless at all… if humans know and understand anything I think it should be what sets ourselves apart from all other species on the planet.

Blog Posting #1

Today in class I really thought about how powerful written language really is. It was interesting to think that written literature can be an accurate part of history and reach 6 1/2 billion people. Moving on to the issue of cannibalism... I do not think humans are born with the gene to be cannibals. I think in extreme and desperate situations SOME humans will rely on cannibalism to survive. I'm not sure whether I think we are simply not born with the gene or whether we all have the gene to be cannibals but society suppresses this in each of us. Without language there would be no good or evil. It is because of language and society that humans have placed certain thoughts, actions and ideas into either the good or evil category. These topics can be so extensive because there are many tiers of severity within "good" and "evil." For example, telling a lie is evil but most would agree that it is not as bad as eating another human. I would describe myself as an optimist, but in a different way than a lot of people. I think that everyone desires to be "good" and your life is a constant battle to push away evil thoughts and actions-- but then it makes me wonder are people born good or evil. Some would say we are born evil since we are constantly battling the negative... others would say that we are good since we desire to push away the evil.