Reflection on Project 3

Project three is over, and at this point I am quite tired of reading about my controversy...

Gwynydd, Michael "3 for me" 01/14/2007 via Flickr CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

I generally tried to make each section of my argument more thorough. I also tried to incorporate more evidence from credible sources, although most of the evidence I found was in relation to the F-35's failures rather than the causes. To account for this, I provided analysis of the causes through the context of the failures. I identified the two main causes that I wanted to discuss in my argument and stayed focused on those. I also added a bit of an emotional appeal by incorporating the safety of American soldiers.

2. How did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

My focus on concurrency and commonalities necessitated some reorganization. I tried to minimize reorganization by writing more transitions.

3. What lead to those changes? Different audience? Shift in purpose?

I needed to make it more clear that I am making a causal argument.

4. How did these changes affect your credibility as an author?

I believe my credibility benefited from the changes, mostly due to the increase in credible sources and evidence.

5. How will these changes better address the audience?

I now have more basis for my argument. My interpretations are good, but without support they may seem too biased.

6. How did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

My structure and style remained mostly the same, but I attempted to make questionable technical terms more understandable. I also provided more context.

7. How did these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

Some of the comments I got from my peer reviewers indicated that the technical language made the argument less relatable for them. I believe that this issue was largely caused by a lack of background knowledge on the subject. Providing more context should make the argument more understandable for general readers.

8. Did you have to reconsider the particular genre in which you are writing in?

No.

9. How does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?

I am honestly surprised by how much I added and changed in my revisions. With many assignments, I usually forego the revision process aside from scanning for grammatical errors. This reflection made me realize that taking a second look at my writing helps me identify content gaps.

Publishing Public Argument

Here is the link to my final version of project three.

Gibbison, Teresa "Wharfedale Printing Press" 03/12/2011 via Flickr CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

I am making a causal argument, so I expect my audience to already have a negative viewpoint on the F-35. My goal is essentially to clarify the causes of its failure to discourage the funding of similar programs in the future. For one and two below, I would identify the issue as the following:
Concurrency and commonalities are effective strategies for engineering design in the defense industry.

In the science and technology community, opinion on the issue varies depending on each reader's experience with the design strategies being analyzed.

1. Mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience currently stands on the issue (before reading/watching/hearing your argument) below:

←----------------------------------------------------x--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                            disagree

2. Now mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience should be (after they've read/watched/heard your argument) below:

←----------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------x----------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                            disagree

3. Check one (and only one) of the argument types below for your public argument:

         _______ My public argument establishes an original pro position on an issue of debate.

         _______ My public argument establishes an original con position on an issue of debate.

               x       My public argument clarifies the causes for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument proposes a solution for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument positively evaluate a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm supporting).

         _______ My public argument openly refutes a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm refuting).

4. Briefly explain how your public argument doesn’t simply restate information from other sources, but provides original context and insight into the situation:

My emphasis on the strategies used in the program, rather than the capabilities and politics of the program provides a new perspective on the program as a whole. The identification of causes offers an explanation behind the failures, which most authors simply rant about. It also offers a look at the future of defense design and examines the lessons that can be learned from past failures.

5. Identify the specific rhetorical appeals you believe you've employed in your public argument below:

Ethical or credibility-establishing appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that establish a credible point-of-view

                  x_____ Referring to credible sources (established journalism, credentialed experts, etc.)

                  x_____ Employing carefully chosen key words or phrases that demonstrate you are credible (proper terminology, strong but clear vocabulary, etc.)

                    _____ Adopting a tone that is inviting and trustworthy rather than distancing or alienating

                  x_____ Arranging visual elements properly (not employing watermarked images, cropping images carefully, avoiding sloppy presentation)

                    _____ Establishing your own public image in an inviting way (using an appropriate images of yourself, if you appear on camera dressing in a warm or friendly or professional manner, appearing against a background that’s welcoming or credibility-establishing)

                    _____ Sharing any personal expertise you may possess about the subject (your identity as a student in your discipline affords you some authority here)

                    _____ Openly acknowledging counterarguments and refuting them intelligently

                  x_____ Appealing openly to the values and beliefs shared by the audience (remember that the website/platform/YouTube channel your argument is designed for helps determine the kind of audience who will encounter your piece)

                    _____ Other: 

Emotional appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Telling emotionally compelling narratives drawn from history and/or the current culture

                    _____ Employing the repetition of key words or phrases that create an appropriate emotional impact

                  x_____ Employing an appropriate level of formality for the subject matter (through appearance, formatting, style of language, etc.)

                    _____ Appropriate use of humor for subject matter, platform/website, audience

                  x_____ Use of “shocking” statistics in order to underline a specific point

                    _____ Use of imagery to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Employing an attractive color palette that sets an appropriate emotional tone (no clashing or ‘ugly’ colors, no overuse of too many variant colors, etc.)

                    _____ Use of music to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Use of sound effects to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    x____ Employing an engaging and appropriate tone of voice for the debate

                    _____ Other: 

Logical or rational appeals

                    _____ Using historical records from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                  x_____ Using statistics from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    _____ Using interviews from stakeholders that help affirm your stance or position

                    _____ Using expert opinions that help affirm your stance or position

                  x_____ Effective organization of elements, images, text, etc.

                    _____ Clear transitions between different sections of the argument (by using title cards, interstitial music, voiceover, etc.)

                  x_____ Crafted sequencing of images/text/content in order to make linear arguments

                    _____ Intentional emphasis on specific images/text/content in order to strengthen argument

                    _____ Careful design of size/color relationships between objects to effectively direct the viewer’s attention/gaze (for visual arguments)

                    _____ Other: 

6. Below, provide us with working hyperlinks to THREE good examples of the genre you've chosen to write in. These examples can come from Blog Post 11.3 or they can be new examples. But they should all come from the same specific website/platform and should demonstrate the conventions for your piece:

America Doesn't Do Enough To Protect Its Innovative Designs 

What We Can Learn From the Epic Failure of Google Flu Trends 

We Should Have Seen This Refugee Crisis Coming

Reflection on Project 3 Draft

I peer reviewed Brandon and Mehruba's drafts.

Badzo, Bill "Mirror and Relectioned Infinitely 2004 ~ Milwaukee Art Museum ~ Milwaukee Wisconsin" 09/12/2009 via Flickr CC By-NC-SA 2.0

1. Morgan and Mehruba peer reviewed my draft.

2. Overall the feedback was helpful. I was aware of many of the issues that Morgan and Mehruba discussed. Their suggestions gave me a better idea of how to fix the issues.

3. I need to work more on both purpose and argumentation. Although my peer reviewers both gave me high scores for purpose, one of them read my draft as a position argument. I will have to make it more clear that I am making a causal argument. I have some good points in my argumentation, but to support my logos, I have to add statistics and references to credible sources.

4. At this point, I know what I need to do to improve my project before final submission. The conference last week and the peer reviews were very helpful. I know that I need to make my writing style less technical to make it more accessible, while incorporating more facts to support my argument. I may also need to place less emphasis on criticisms of the F-35 itself to make it clear that I am making a causal argument.

Updated 11/16/2015

Draft of Public Argument

The draft of my public argument is an opinion column intended for use in Wired magazine.

urbanworkbench "Writing with Ink" 04/18/2012 via Flickr CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

I am primarily concerned with identifying which sections of my argument seem self explanatory, and which sections need more background and evidence. Some sections of my argument are very general and expand the principles that I acknowledge in my analysis of the F-35. The main body is specific to the F-35, so I want to make sure that my transitions between the two discussions are effective. Here is the draft of my public argument.

Considering Visual Elements

In an opinion column, visual elements are generally not a key contribution to the column's purpose.

Forsvarsdepartementet

"Første norske F-35 på produksjonslinja" 04/14/2015 via Flickr CC BY-ND 2.0

1. Is the theme or association that the image produces relevant to the theme of my argument?

The manufacturing process shown in the opening image connects to the engineering and manufacturing discussion in the text. The gap for the engine of the aircraft can also be seen in the image.

2. Do your eyes move easily from section to section in the order that you intended?

Yes. The short paragraphs make the column more readable, and the content flows in a standard top to bottom format.

3. Do the different visual and textual elements come together persuasively as a whole, or are there elements that seem disconnected or out of place?

The use of a single relevant picture at the beginning of the column connects the text to something tangible and is in accordance with the conventions of the genre.

4. Is the visual-rhetorical tone of your project consistent?

The tone is consistently formal throughout, and the image contributes to it. The statements of fact are intermingled with opinionated interpretations of them.

5. Is the call to action specifically developed?

I ended the draft with a very general call to action. The reference to the democratic process is broad enough to accommodate any future issues which are systematically similar to the F-35. The F-35 is essentially too big to fail at this point, so a call to action in regards to the F-35 is not particularly useful.

6. Are the consequences of not taking action and the benefits of taking action clearly expressed?

A significant portion of the project is devoted to assessing the consequences and causes of the F-35 program's failures. The consequences of not taking action are the same as the consequences of the failure of a large Department of Defense project. The benefits are expressed as government and defense industry efficiency.

I read Dylan and Jayni's posts about visual elements. My considerations of visual elements were much more simplified than theirs were because one of the conventions of my genre is the use of a single prominent image. Reading their posts made me realize that creative and appropriate use of visual elements in some genres is more valuable than textual elements.

Project 3 Outline

My outline takes a broad approach to the assignment, so I may need to further narrow down the points that I want to use when I create project 3.

Samoff, Tim "My Fall Photo" 11/03/2005 via Flickr CC By-ND 2.0

Introduction:
Framing the consequences

Framing the consequences of the issue in my introduction will allow me to prove the magnitude of the controversy to my audience. It will also provide a good lens for analysis in the body paragraphs.

Body:

Supporting Arguments:

• Limiting factor of design consolidation 
• Lack of competition
• Political red tape

Rebuttals:

• Use of commonalities to consolidate the design reduces cost
• Multi-company and multinational cooperation spurs growth.

Topic Sentences:

The dependency on structural design commonalities among the three F-35 variants has limited specialization.

The initial selection of major contractors has prevented constructive competition in the program.

The political nature of the program has inhibited its design progress, while also safeguarding its existence.

The focus on using the commonalities of the aerial goals three separate military entities has restricted the capabilities of the final products, and ultimately cost the Department of Defense more money than it has saved.

Conclusion:
Future of the debate

Discussing the future of the debate will allow me to focus on the root causes of the debate rather than the debate itself. This will result in an expanded application of the principles learned from the failure of the F-35.

Analyzing My Genre

I am writing an opinion column for a scientific and technology magazine or section of a newspaper.

See-ming Lee "'Have and opinion. Elaborate' /SML.20130408.PHIL" 04/08/2013 via Flickr CC BY 2.0

Examples:
What We Can Learn From the Epic Failure of Google Flu Trends 

We Should Have Seen This Refugee Crisis Coming

Cancer Screening Can Do More Harm Than Good

Crowdfunding is Good for Science. Selling Space is Not.
  
With G.M.O. Policies, Europe Turns Against Science




Social Context:

Where is the genre typically set?

The genre is found on the websites of magazine publications and newspapers, usually under a directory marked "opinion."

What is the subject of the genre?

The subjects discussed within the genre are widely varied. I am limiting my examples, and genre settings to opinion columns with scientific topics.

Who uses the genre?

People who read the publication are the most likely to read or write the opinion columns found online. People will not read the column unless they have an interest in its topic.

When and why is the genre used?

The genre gives people outside of the realm of reporters and journalists a chance to voice their opinions in a medium that has a large audience.

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre:

What type of content is usually included and excluded?

The majority of an opinion column consists of presentation and analysis of supporting evidence. The evidence is used to support the author's overall opinion of the topic.

What rhetorical appeals are used most often?

Logos is the primary rhetorical appeal used in opinion columns especially for columns with scientific topics and publications.

How are the texts organized?

All of the examples have titles and single pictures at the start of the column. The paragraph structure is similar to that of a blog post, but the paragraphs are generally longer than the paragraphs in a blog post.

Do sentences in the genre share a certain style?

Sentence structure is varied with a fairly formal or academic style.

What type of word choice is used?

Technical terms are used with the assumption that the reader is fairly familiar with the topic. Words with positive or negative connotations are used to develop the author's opinion on the topic.

What Patterns Reveal About Social Context of the Genre:

Who does the genre include and who does the genre exclude?

The genre includes the scientific community, and casual scientific magazine readers. People with less than a college education are less likely to read the publications.

What roles for writers and readers does the genre encourage?

The genre encourages readers to connect and sympathize with the author, because the author is typically a reader just like them, or a writer taking a personal stance.

What values and beliefs are assumed about or encouraged from the users of the genre?

It is assumed that readers are invested in general scientific topics. Readers are encouraged to develop their own educated opinions.

What content does the genre treat as most valuable? Least valuable?

The most valuable content is supporting evidence that justifies the author's opinion. The least valuable content is speculation, or discussion outside the scope of the topic.

I commented on Ayra and Jayni's genre analyses. Jayni's genre is a blog post, which has similar genre conventions and employs similar rhetorical strategies as an opinion column. Ayra's genre is a video, specifically for activism. Her genre requires heavy use of pathos. The broad spectrum of genres for project three demonstrates the versatility of rhetoric. I feel fairly confident about my ability to work in the genre I have selected.