I'm going to use ethos, pathos, and logos in my slideshow in a few ways. For ethos, I'm going to cite my sources verbally during the slideshow to show my credibility. Also, I'm going to speak in a serious tone to show my credibility as well. I will speak clear and professionally as well as be grammatically correct. For pathos, my pictures will get an emotional reaction from my audience. Because my topic is the history of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, a sad emotion makes sense for my slideshow. For logos, I will make sure that my slideshow is chronological order and make sense to my audience. Also, I will use statistics.
I think I will rely on ethos most, because my slideshow is about the history of the war. I will have to prove that I'm credible so that my audience will believe that all my information is correct. My slideshow is informational, so my audience needs to know that all my sources and information are credible, up to date, and correct. Being clear and professional will help prove my credibility which is very important considering my topic and audience. That's why I think I will rely on ethos most.
I'm not quite sure what slideshow prompt I'm supposed to look at for rhetorical devices. I don't really know what that part of the blog question is talking about. I know that visual rhetoric will be really important in the slideshow. I'll have to make sure my pictures fit well with what I'm talking about as well as making sure the pictures flow well. The way the pictures are arranged with what I'm saying will definitely be important to my topic and main points.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Week 10 Blog
For my slideshow, I have decided to use the history of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq as my topic. I'm going to inform my audience of the history of how it started and everything that's happened since it started.
My main point sentence is: The war in Afghanistan and Iraq has had a very extensive and interesting history, and I would like to inform you about it.
This is a good topic for an audio/visual slideshow, because using pictures will better help me explain the history of the war. This will illustrate what I will be talking about and help me inform my audience through photos and graphs. This will compliment my MOR, because it will completely explain the history of the war, and my webtext was about whether or not to continue the war. So, it will fit in very well.
My main point sentence is: The war in Afghanistan and Iraq has had a very extensive and interesting history, and I would like to inform you about it.
This is a good topic for an audio/visual slideshow, because using pictures will better help me explain the history of the war. This will illustrate what I will be talking about and help me inform my audience through photos and graphs. This will compliment my MOR, because it will completely explain the history of the war, and my webtext was about whether or not to continue the war. So, it will fit in very well.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Week 8 Blog Post
Questions and concerns about the podcast:
My first question I would like to ask is about my audience. Is it okay to flat out say who I'm directing this podcast to in the introduction? I'm not quite sure how to go about addressing my audience.
My next concern is whether or not you think I've gone over the issue completely. You said for this podcast we only needed two sources, and I've used three already, but I still feel like I don't know if I've gone over the issue adequately. I know I need to add more information in my conclusion to better explain why my solution will work, but I just don't know if you think the main issue is covered enough.
With my solution, I wasn't quite sure what it could be, so I was wondering if you think the basic solution good enough.
I also have absolutely no idea how to site my sources at the end after I'm done talking. How am I supposed to do that? The same with the body, if I rephrase something an author wrote and cite them after the sentence, how do I say that aloud?
My first question I would like to ask is about my audience. Is it okay to flat out say who I'm directing this podcast to in the introduction? I'm not quite sure how to go about addressing my audience.
My next concern is whether or not you think I've gone over the issue completely. You said for this podcast we only needed two sources, and I've used three already, but I still feel like I don't know if I've gone over the issue adequately. I know I need to add more information in my conclusion to better explain why my solution will work, but I just don't know if you think the main issue is covered enough.
With my solution, I wasn't quite sure what it could be, so I was wondering if you think the basic solution good enough.
I also have absolutely no idea how to site my sources at the end after I'm done talking. How am I supposed to do that? The same with the body, if I rephrase something an author wrote and cite them after the sentence, how do I say that aloud?
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Week 7 Blog Post
Podcast Sources:
Disentangling Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Stress Reactions:
This article is mostly about mild traumatic brain injury and how it can have effects that are much like post-traumatic stress disorder. They also mention that when being evaluated in a clinic, people have been mistaked for having neurological problems instead of psychological problems. The writer mentions that there really isn't clear enough definitions and outlines to mild traumatic brain injury which also causes many mix-ups when it comes to diagnosis. I really like this article, and I think it will help me establish my issue, which isn't post-traumatic stress disorder, but many people being incorrectly diagnosed and not being given the correct information and testing.
Analysis:
This article was definitely written with authority. The writer is very short and blunt with his information and ideas. He explains his reasoning and research and sticks to his opinions. The article seems accurate. He explains a lot of different research that made him get his conclusions and also talks about other research as well. The information seems right compared to other articles I've read. This was written in 2008, so it isn't completely new, but the information seems current, and I haven't found any research that would make it seem outdated and changed. His objective seems to be to inform people about the issue of mixing up different diseases and the reasons behind that.
Post-traumatic Stress Disorder:
This article is about everything to do with post-traumatic stress disorder. It discusses different ways to manage the disease. It also lists different symptoms and how many a person has to have to be considered to have PTSD. It mentions risk factors for PTSD as well. Lastly, it talks about how treatments aren't perfect and that more treatment ways should be developed and researched. I really liked this article as well, because it gives a lot of basic information on PTSD and would help me explain a lot of useful information to my audience. It will help establish the reasoning and importance of my topic.
Analysis:
This article was written with authority as well. The author provides a lot of information and writes with authority in ideas and opinions. This article seems very accurate. It was written in 2007, but the information is still current compared to my previous knowledge and other things I've read. It may not include every treatment that may exist today, but other than that, it's very current. The objective is to inform the readers of PTSD and many different symptoms and treatments. It also discusses opinions on treatments and other things as well.
Bryant, R. A. (2008). Disentangling Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Stress Reactions. Sydney: The New England Journal of Medicine.
Disentangling Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Stress Reactions:
This article is mostly about mild traumatic brain injury and how it can have effects that are much like post-traumatic stress disorder. They also mention that when being evaluated in a clinic, people have been mistaked for having neurological problems instead of psychological problems. The writer mentions that there really isn't clear enough definitions and outlines to mild traumatic brain injury which also causes many mix-ups when it comes to diagnosis. I really like this article, and I think it will help me establish my issue, which isn't post-traumatic stress disorder, but many people being incorrectly diagnosed and not being given the correct information and testing.
Analysis:
This article was definitely written with authority. The writer is very short and blunt with his information and ideas. He explains his reasoning and research and sticks to his opinions. The article seems accurate. He explains a lot of different research that made him get his conclusions and also talks about other research as well. The information seems right compared to other articles I've read. This was written in 2008, so it isn't completely new, but the information seems current, and I haven't found any research that would make it seem outdated and changed. His objective seems to be to inform people about the issue of mixing up different diseases and the reasons behind that.
Post-traumatic Stress Disorder:
This article is about everything to do with post-traumatic stress disorder. It discusses different ways to manage the disease. It also lists different symptoms and how many a person has to have to be considered to have PTSD. It mentions risk factors for PTSD as well. Lastly, it talks about how treatments aren't perfect and that more treatment ways should be developed and researched. I really liked this article as well, because it gives a lot of basic information on PTSD and would help me explain a lot of useful information to my audience. It will help establish the reasoning and importance of my topic.
Analysis:
This article was written with authority as well. The author provides a lot of information and writes with authority in ideas and opinions. This article seems very accurate. It was written in 2007, but the information is still current compared to my previous knowledge and other things I've read. It may not include every treatment that may exist today, but other than that, it's very current. The objective is to inform the readers of PTSD and many different symptoms and treatments. It also discusses opinions on treatments and other things as well.
Bryant, R. A. (2008). Disentangling Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Stress Reactions. Sydney: The New England Journal of Medicine.
Bisson, J. I. (2007). Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. The United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Week 6 Blog Post
The problem I am going to talk about in my podcast is the problem of the high amount of people with post-traumatic stress disorder. The people who care about this are those people with post-traumatic stress disorder and the US government. The effects of this problem are the lack of the ability to correctly handle stress, anxiety, depression, and repeated upsetting memories of the event. These effect the audience, because the audience are those people with post-traumatic stress disorder, and the government should be concerned about the high amounts of people with post-traumatic stress disorder. The cause of this problem is going through a traumatic event such as assault, war, and any other big bad experiences. There aren't any technical solutions to post-traumatic stress disorder, but there are better ways to handle it. With men coming back from war, I believe they should have the opportunity given to them from the government to see a counselor as much as needed. Also, those who go through these types of events should be given financial help from the government to go to a therapist.
My main point would be that there are many people with post-traumatic stress disorder, and this issue needs to be worked on.
My main point would be that there are many people with post-traumatic stress disorder, and this issue needs to be worked on.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Week 5 Blog Post
Revision plan:
I think that for each segment, I could use more statistics and facts. I think I also need to make sure I have clearer topic sentences. I still need to add captions to my pictures and explain their relevence. I do need to change my introduction to focus more on the argument instead of the background to the war. I think all my anchor texts are good except for one which I think isn't very informational and important. I'm also going to work on my conclusion and make it more meaningful.
I also need to add secondary sources. I'm also going to work on my organization on ideas, the font and color choices, and explaining my quotes better before writing them. I need to give more examples who is saying and believing these ideas, not just throwing them out there.
I think that for each segment, I could use more statistics and facts. I think I also need to make sure I have clearer topic sentences. I still need to add captions to my pictures and explain their relevence. I do need to change my introduction to focus more on the argument instead of the background to the war. I think all my anchor texts are good except for one which I think isn't very informational and important. I'm also going to work on my conclusion and make it more meaningful.
I also need to add secondary sources. I'm also going to work on my organization on ideas, the font and color choices, and explaining my quotes better before writing them. I need to give more examples who is saying and believing these ideas, not just throwing them out there.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Week 4 Blog Post
Part A:
This article talks about reasons why the US has troops stationed in Afghanistan. It mentions what the most important reasons are for being at war and why they are so important. It also discusses President Obama's key points he wants to address in sending troops to Afghanistan. I think that this article will help me a lot with my webtext, because the author explains the reasons why the war should continue.
The author has much authority in this article, because he is straight up with his ideas and thoughts. He explains everything very well involving reasons why the war is going on and what the benefits are. It seems very accurate, because the facts match up with other things I have read. The article was written in 2009, so it is pretty current, but not completely current. The article is not very objective, because the author mostly discusses the reasons why we are at war and doesn't discuss benefits of ending the war.
The next article I found is titled Correlates of Anger and Hostility in Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans.
This article discusses different negative outcomes of being a soldier in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. It talks about different mental health problems that come from going to fight in these wars. It discusses how these soldiers are more likely to have post-traumatic stress disorder, head injuries, and alcohol abuse. It discusses mostly the health related outcomes of going to fight in these wars. I think this article will help me a lot with my webtext, because it will help me discuss the opinions of those who think that we should take our troops out of the Afghanistan war.
The authors have a lot of authority in this article, because they are also very straight up with their ideas and beliefs. The article seems to be accurate, because a lot of the information in the article I have heard about before. I'm sure if I searched other articles, they would probably discuss the same issues. This article was written in 2010, so it is very accurate. The article is not objective with the ideas discussed, because they do not discuss any positive effects of going to fight in these wars. It just discusses negative health-related issues that come from fighting in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
Part B:
The only concern I have at the moment is that I'm not sure if I'm doing the APA style correctly. I didn't take English 104, because I have the English credit from a high school AP course and exam, so I never learned how to do entries in APA. I tried looking it up online, and it was a little confusing to me. So far, my research is going well and I have found many sources to use. I haven't started composing the webtext yet, I've just been gathering information and jotting things down, but I'm sure when I start composing, I will have more questions.
The first article I found is titled Afghanistan and Pakistan: Reorienting Military and State Security Strategies to Regional Human Security
APA format:
Janzecovak, John. (2009). Journal of Human Security. Australia: RMIT Publishing.
This article talks about reasons why the US has troops stationed in Afghanistan. It mentions what the most important reasons are for being at war and why they are so important. It also discusses President Obama's key points he wants to address in sending troops to Afghanistan. I think that this article will help me a lot with my webtext, because the author explains the reasons why the war should continue.
The author has much authority in this article, because he is straight up with his ideas and thoughts. He explains everything very well involving reasons why the war is going on and what the benefits are. It seems very accurate, because the facts match up with other things I have read. The article was written in 2009, so it is pretty current, but not completely current. The article is not very objective, because the author mostly discusses the reasons why we are at war and doesn't discuss benefits of ending the war.
The next article I found is titled Correlates of Anger and Hostility in Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans.
APA format:
The American Journal of Psychiatry. (2010). Correlates of Anger and Hostility in Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans. Retreived from http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/index.dtl
This article discusses different negative outcomes of being a soldier in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. It talks about different mental health problems that come from going to fight in these wars. It discusses how these soldiers are more likely to have post-traumatic stress disorder, head injuries, and alcohol abuse. It discusses mostly the health related outcomes of going to fight in these wars. I think this article will help me a lot with my webtext, because it will help me discuss the opinions of those who think that we should take our troops out of the Afghanistan war.
The authors have a lot of authority in this article, because they are also very straight up with their ideas and beliefs. The article seems to be accurate, because a lot of the information in the article I have heard about before. I'm sure if I searched other articles, they would probably discuss the same issues. This article was written in 2010, so it is very accurate. The article is not objective with the ideas discussed, because they do not discuss any positive effects of going to fight in these wars. It just discusses negative health-related issues that come from fighting in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
Part B:
The only concern I have at the moment is that I'm not sure if I'm doing the APA style correctly. I didn't take English 104, because I have the English credit from a high school AP course and exam, so I never learned how to do entries in APA. I tried looking it up online, and it was a little confusing to me. So far, my research is going well and I have found many sources to use. I haven't started composing the webtext yet, I've just been gathering information and jotting things down, but I'm sure when I start composing, I will have more questions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)