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?
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
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so it isn't completely new, but the information seems current, and I haven't found any research that would make it seem outdated and changed.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.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)