Lauren's Final Draft of Paper 2 this is the one to peer review!
From Mizzou Wiki
Imagine that you woke up every morning at 8:30, 5 days a week, for 8 weeks to go sit in math class for college. What would you do during class? Would you write notes and listen intently to the teacher or would you browse around on the web checking your e-mails, and looking at your recently added friends page on Facebook.com for the majority of the class period? Michael Wesch from Kansas State University posted a video on YouTube.com that has roughly 2.5 million views so far. This is a very controversial video about the use of technology in the modern college classroom. Two hundred students hold up signs in a classroom that give short phrases describing what student life is like for them. Students in college today are very different than students were twenty years ago. Technology has changed so much within the world today. The largest difference between the students in the past and the students today is the amount of technological advances students today have to work with. It is almost impossible to truly imagine a life today without technology. Technology has both good effects and bad effects on student life. The advancement of technology has changed how students are able to become culturally literate and culturally competent. The results of that change are double-edged and the way students discipline themselves to use the technology they have is a way they can become more culturally literate and more culturally competent.
Wesch’s video is about modern students and how they are distracted by technology in class. In Wesch’s video there were many aspects about studentlife that were left out. Books, debt, learning, studying, walking, parking, and dorm life are all contributors to studentlife that Wesch did not mention in his video. The problem that Wesch is trying to address, in my opinion, is how technology in the classroom is being used and how it is not being used properly. If there are computers in a classroom, it is largely up to the student sitting in front of the screen how they are going to use it during class. The student could use it for further research on the topic being studied in class or they can browse the web for whatever they want. Students these days know how to multi-task and that is how students today are able to surf the web while listening to the teacher. My generation and the generations after mine have grown up learning to multitask. Everything we do is multitasking. Our brains have been trained and are capable to take in a lot of information at one time. The question is without the computer in class, would the student be able to focus better on the teacher or would the student doodle with the pen and paper they have and still be distracted? The ability to focus on the material being taught lies within the student. The computer could be used for additional web surfing to further the research from a different source for additional information about what the student is learning in class that day. It is utimately the student's decision to discipline him or herself to use the technology provided wisely.
There are elements of the video that I observe also in my classes. In Math 110, the girl sitting to the left of me every morning looks at her Facebook page for almost the whole class period. Facebook.com is an online social network developed for university students. The site has now branched off into a much larger worldwide communicating network. An issue that Wesch’s video highlights is that students bring their laptops to class and don’t work on class work. Instead of working on classwork, they browse around on the internet. When I see the girl next to me in math class looking at her Facebook page, I get distracted. When I am writing notes and she is clicking away on her mouse it makes me look over impulsively. It draws my attention away from the teacher. Even for just that brief moment I could miss something that is vital to the lesson. Cell phones are also a hindrance in class. Text messages are a fairly new obsession with students today. Before cell phones, you had to wait to see someone or talk to someone on the phone before you could tell anyone anything. Now all you have to do is write a simple message on your cell phone and it should be received within minutes to the person it was sent to. “Facebooking” during class and/or texting during class are examples of technology that are barriers to the cultural literacy and the cultural competency of the student in the classroom. They are distractions that can take away from the lesson being taught in class.
Videos, animation, network, and photos are all things you find on the internet. The internet has created a whole new way people learn and the availability of information. As long as there is an active internet connection there is endless information at your fingertips. If you are sick, you can check your symptoms on WebMD with their handy symptom checker. Twenty years ago there were just books and encyclopedias. Now we have Wikipedia! You can find anything you need to know on the internet. On the computer you can have multiple programs like iTunes, solitaire, and an internet browser open at the same time. Additionally, you can have multiple pages open on your internet browser. That is a lot going on at once! However, that is how today’s generations are growing up. Students today are accustomed to that media and they can keep up with it. With the traditional learning style, like Wesch brings up in his video, “writing on the chalkboard (what’s missing: videos, photos, animation, network) forces the teacher to move” the student may feel bored or like they aren’t following what the teacher is saying because it is too slow paced. Students today are equipped to work through doing. In the video, Wesch brings up the very good point of “how can a student learn if they are just following along. Students have to learn by doing.” So, while people can argue that technology is hurting the student’s ability to focus in class, it should also be argued that technology in the classroom can be a good thing. If class is being canceled for example, the teacher can e-mail all the students at once and address it quickly, easily and informatively. The difficulty is when students use the technology for things that won’t better their education and make them more culturally literate and culturally competent.
Aaron says: this is the right idea for bringing up the framework, but you're not "comparing", you might say something like "how the video (argument) fits into Toulmin's..." or "by looking at the video through T's rhetorical framework..." Also, "this" needs a referent--what are you referring to? I can tell that this is hard to write though--read it aloud, and see if you like the way it actually sounds. All the content is fine, though.
One way of looking at this is by comparing the video and these argumentative ideas to Toulmin's Rhetorical Model. Steven Toulmin became famous for his moral reasoning and his rhetorical analysis. Steven Toulmin made a diagram that consisted of six components of argumentation that are all interrelated. The diagram is used to support and analyze an argument. Toulmin's argumentative model focuses on the logistics of the argument and not just the argument as a theory. Toulmin's model of argumentation differs from a theoretical argument because Toulmin first finds the claim of the argument and supports the claim. A theoretical argument finds support and then finds the claim. Toulmin's model supports an argument very well because you have a solid claim and solid support. Toulmin's six components of argument are first the claim, grounds or data, warrant, backing, qualifier, and finally the rebuttal. All of these are interrelated to support an argument.
Aaron says: I have to agree with Katie's comment below. Content is fine, but it seems like you're trying too hard, or aren't comfy with the terms yet. pathos/ethos/logos should be talked about as "appeals"..as in, appealing to one's emotion, or to their logic, or to their sense of character. You can't call them rhetorical stances, because that's a different sort of term.
In Michael Wesch's video he uses certain rhetorical techniques to persuade his audience of some of the ideas he wishes to be seen. He uses the students to hold up signs to tell about their studentlife. This is rhetorical because it relates to students who watch the video. If a student watching the video is also in a class where their neighbor pays for the class but never comes they can relate to that so that student might feel more inclined to feel stronger about the video. The student might also see more through Wesch's eyes because they feel they relate to the video. This goes hand in hand with the rhetorical stance of ethos. There are three in this category. There is ethos, pathos, and logos. Wesch shows all three of these. Pathos deals with the emotional stance of persuasion. In the video this is seen through a very light hue**(what?)** but it is there. Wesch is definately provoking an emotional tie to how students are in college today. When I watch this video I cannot help but to feel that students are not acting the way they should in college**(try and think of a way you can rephrase this)**. Not all students are browsing around on the internet all through class but it seems like even the students who are not don't take college as seriously as they should. This is how Wesch shows pathos. The music in the film if it were mood invoking then it would support the pathos argument but it is pretty unemotional so we will not add that to the pathos category. Lastly, logos*(doesnt sound good)**. Wesch shows logos in his video by showing the statistics of the students. Different students hold up signs that give different data about what their college life is like. They calculated that with everything they do in a day their day would need to be 26.5 hours long. Wesch does many things in his video to try to persuade the person watching his video to think more deeply about the education system and about how students are acting in college.**( i like all your key points here, although the paragraph doesn't flow, its almost awkward to read.)**
Aaron says: Why do we skip away and then back to Toulmin? I know you mentioned this earlier, but it's not making sense to me now as I read it. I have no idea what "humm" means in this context, but you do provide the content here. Take your time. Don't worry about word count, and WRITE. If you need to break up paragraphs around his model, do so.
Now, let us get back to Toulmin's model. Toulmin's model can be applied to the video and to the argument I am making in this paper**( humm?)**. The claim is that technology in the college classroom is both good and bad and how it is the student's responsibility to use the technology wisely. The data or grounds that support this claim would be double-edged. Evidence from the video that supports how technology is bad is where a girl holds up her sign that says, "I bring my laptop to class but don't work on class stuff." Evidence from the movie that supports how technology is good is at the end of the video where Wesch writes on the chalkboard and he is saying that "writing on the chalkboard encourages the teacher to move" but it also has a box saying, "what's missing: animation, network, photos, videos". All of these things come from technology and also help expand your mind. The warrant would be how technology is useful in class but it must be used properly. The backing would be additional support after the warrant by saying that if the technology in class is used properly students can do much more research about the topics being taught in class to become more culturally literate and more culturally competent. The qualifier is how most people will become more culturally literate and culturally competent if they use technology wisely to expand their minds. And lastly the rebuttal is that technology in the classroom is a good thing unless it is used poorly. Toulmin's model, as you can see, really helps to show the support in the argument. People are more likely to believe an argument if it has strong support.**(again, try to rephrase your points. sounds almost like your listing your points)**
Toulmin's model helps to support how technology is both good and bad in the classroom. The model helps you to see that if the student is using the technology wisely then the student has more power to become more culturally literate and more culturally competent. Technology has brought a whole new meaning to cultural literacy and cultural competency. To me those terms mean for example, that you are able to go to California when you don’t reside there and you can hold a conversation with someone you don’t know. You can talk with them and they can respond. You could talk about things you know about in your culture because you both know about your culture. You are literate and you are competent in your culture. The internet has changed these terms. You can talk with someone not only about routine things but you can talk about the latest thing you read on the internet for example. The internet allows you to become more culturally literate and culturally competent. If you and the person you met in California were having a debate about something you could resolve the debate with factual information by searching on the internet to find an answer relating to what you are debating about. The internet is everywhere and it allows you to have information at your fingertips. If the teacher in class was just writing up on the chalkboard and the student was just following along, information is limited. With technology and the availability of information it allows the student to have more information readily available to them.
A second video produced by Michael Wesch is called "Information R/Evolution". This is another thought provoking video. When I watched this video for the first time I was awestruck. This video contains so much information about how the internet is changing society as individuals and society as a whole. The title of the video is explaining the revolution of technology and the evolution of technology. This video differs from Wesch's first video because it focuses solely on the internet. Wesch's first video focused on technology in the classroom. If we are talking about cultural literacy and cultural competency, by watching the second video it is clear that the internet is making society much stronger in both areas. "Information R/Evolution" talks about how the internet is full of categories. There is no bookshelf on the internet. In the past there were bookshelves and it took experts to find things on shelves and in a filing system. Now, with the internet, we are the experts. The internet makes you think in a whole new way. When you search online for something you have to know what you are wanting to search for and you have to know how to search for it. The internet has links. If you click on a page, that page can lead you to another page. The information doesn't end. You can always keep clicking on links. Every new page that you click on will expand your mind in some way. You will read a new headline, or see a new picture of something that stuns you. The internet is ever changing. In a college classroom, if there is technology available there is endless information available and if it is used properly it could benefit you greatly.**( good flow, lots of information)** I agree, well done
My experience is unique. Summer enrollment is different than a full load of classes that start in the fall, especially if they are your first college courses ever. My college experience so far has been different than the college life I see in the video for the most part. A girl in the video holds up a sign that says her average class size is 115. I haven’t been exposed to a class size of over 25 yet. Another major difference is that the program I am enrolled in is an 8-week program. The pace is much faster and I am required to stay on top of my class work and homework or I will get too far behind in just a matter of days. The video describes the typical student who has been enrolled in a full load of college courses and the student who sits in a regular lecture class. The biggest part of the video that does not relate to me is how the technology that I am allowed to use in class does not affect my ability to focus in class. I discipline myself to stay focused in class. In both of my courses this summer the classrooms are fully loaded with computers at each seat. This does not hurt me. I do not sit in class and look at a Facebook page.
Seeing both of Michael Wesch's videos opened my eyes to both the uses and abuses of the technology provided in class. If I needed or wanted to I would use the computer to search the internet for more information about the material the teacher is teaching me. College is very important to me and I am not going to jeopardize that by looking at things on the internet that I can look at when I get out of class. I will use the technology in class to become more culturally literate and more culturally competent so I can become a better student.
Again, I agree, this comes up a little soft, after you've covered so much ground before it.
PEER REVIEW: I really enjoyed reading your paper, it started off really strong and stayed on topic though out the paper. I think you have a lot of strong points. The only thing that i can suggest is to work on the flow of each paragraph. In the first two paragraphs of the second draft, it sounded like a list. Try to use better wording and detail to addresses the points. Although i think you picked good spots to tie your new paragraphs in with your first paper. Over all i think you hit everything that was asked for and really put good effort into it. Your thesis was a little unclear to me in the beginning but you made points to back it up later in the paper when you talked about your own experiences. I wasn't really sure where you were going about the pathos? Try to make that more clear. I thought you did a good job in explaining Toulmins style of rhetorical method. Again i would just try to have a better flow with all the points. The conclusion was a little soft. Try to add more and spice it up because it is the end of your paper! Try adding some points from your thesis to make sure your audience knows exactly what you want them to learn. I think you have a lot of good points just try to clear up the delivery. **
