Colin

From Mizzou Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

home

Hey, I'm Colin, I'm from St. Louis but live in Columbia most of the year. I like stuff and things. They are fun. Music is good, cooking is good, friends are nice, sleeping is best, etc. Stuff

Colin's Notes Shopping list notes:

The difference between the two lists is the audience you are Shopping list:

potatoes

flour

butter

milk

gorgonzola

vegetable oil

rack of lamb

garlic

rosemary

olive oil

cumin

chickpeas

tahini

lemons

parsley

red onion

squash

zucchini

portobella

balsamic vinegar

basil


his shopping list



3idaho potatoes

bread flour

1 lb of butter

1/2 gallon of milk


gorgonzola cheese crumbles

1 gallon of vegetable oil

12 bones or 12 oz of lamb chops

2 heads of garlic

packet of rosemary

bottle of olive oil

bottle of cumin (spice)

3 cans of chickpeas

1 jar of tahini (sesame paste)

3 lemons

1 bunch of parsley

1 red onion

1 squash

1 zucchini

1 portobella mushroom

1 bottle of balsamic vinegar

1 packet of basil


Cultural literacy

Cultural literacy is cognitive recognition and acknowledgement of the history, contributions, and perspectives of cultural groups, including one's own. Also, observing different traditions, social mores, and unique characteristics of a culture, with clear eyes and no pretension. In order for an understanding of reading, writing, and other medias.


Use as a guideline for writing your paper.

Whenever you read a magazine article, newspaper editorial, or a piece of advertising and find yourself questioning the claims of the authors, you are exercising the basics of critical thinking. Instead of taking what you read at face value, you look beneath the surface of the words and think about their meaning and significance. And you ask the authors questions such as:

What did you mean by that?
Can you back up that statement?
How do you define that term?
How did you draw that conclusion?
Do all the experts agree?
Is this evidence dated?
So what?
What is your point?
Why do we need to know this?

You make statements such as:

That's not true.
You're contradicting yourself.
I see your point, but I don't agree.
That's not a good choice of words.
You're jumping to conclusions.
Good point.  I never thought of that.
That was nicely stated.
This is an extreme view.

Whether conscious or unconscious, such responses indicate that you are thinking critically about what you read. You weigh claims, ask for definitions, evaluate information, look for proof, question assumptions, and make judgments. In short, you process another person's words, not just take them in.


Ways/Steps to do this:

Keep a journal on what you read.
Annotate what you read. (take notes on the piece itself)
Outline what you read.
Summarize what you read.
Question what you read.
Analyze what you read.

[edit] Analysis?

Analysis is..

What kind of audience is the author addressing? Students, teachers, anyone
What are the author's assumptions? He assumes that you have these problems or can at least relate to them, also assumes that you spend too much time dicking around
What are the author's purposes and intentions? I think his purpose and intention is to open up the possibility of not assuming technology is the best way, but his intention could be more opinionated.
How well does the author accomplish these purposes? If that is his purpose then I think he accomplished it. But if he is trying to convince people to ignore technology and go back to the "basics" then he failed. And, of course, he ironically decided to push this idea on a website, on the internet.
How convincing is the evidence presented?  Is it sufficient and specific?  Relevant? Not very, for every sign he "posts" in the video you can probably respond, 'says who?' Where did he get his info, the internet? I found this whole video and means of distribution incredibly ironic. 
Reliable?  Not dated?  Slanted? 
How good are the sources of evidence used?  Were they based on personal experience, 
scientific data, or outside authorities?
Did the author address opposing views on the issue?
Is the author persuasive in his or her perspective?

Video Notes: Author's points - Too large of class Sitting, not doing...thinking, not practicing Expensive Lack of attention, attendance, time Technology is advancing, maybe too fast...(some have suggested technology can save us..or the only thing that can save us) Stating that it isn't that solution...What about moral standards for media, technology? Still very open and unchartered. More time spent idling or wasted than productive Thinks that technology is maybe out of control, permeating into places and aspects of life that it might not belong

Colin's First Paper

Colin's Second Paper

Colin's Third Paper