What is the primary thesis of this series? What is “remixing?” Explain how Fergueson’s concept of remixing connects to our learning about rhetoric; synthesize Fergueson’s series to any text about rhetoric from class we’ve read so far.

These videos were all about how remixing has been a part of our culture and has been used in songs, movies, and significant times in history. Remixing is when someone takes something that’s been created (physically or not) and alters it to add more to it or change it. Remixing can continue for decades or it can just be a one time thing, it all depends. Fergueson’s concept of remixing connects our learning to rhetoric because remixing alters that “something” as a means to persuade an audience to like it better. You can connect these videos as a means of persuasion to Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts”. Lamott and Fergueson both persuade that original pieces aren’t always perfect and can be altered. Lamott talks about this through writing shitty drafts and saying that a good piece of writing needs edits and Fergueson talks about how a song can be changed and altered because someone liked the song, but thought of ways to make it better and more appealing.

Blog one post discussing your ideas for Project 3. How do you think you will approach this composing project? What things about yourself or your interests would you like to highlight? How might you be able to do that effectively? Also, what software do you think you’ll use? Do you have a few you can try?

I have a general idea of what I’m going to do for this project. I’m going to take pictures from my camera roll of things I enjoy doing. I will edit these pictures by adding little images/drawing more color/filters to make them look better. I’m going to highlight the beach, hiking/nature, driving in a car, and going to the gym. Those are all things I love to do and they all make me feel a different way. I think I will use snapchat to draw, instagram story settings to get images as well as draw and then combine the four pictures to make a collage.

Blog one post discussing your reaction to Project 3. What do you think of this assignment? Secondly, what is Shipka’s idea about a composition “made whole?” What does she mean by that? How do you think this assignment draws from Shipka’s theory of rhetoric and composition?

I am really excited to start working and producing project 3. I like to express who I am through images and places. I cannot wait to start working on this project because it’s something I know I’ll really enjoy doing. I think this is my favorite project we’ve done so far. Shipka’s idea about a composition “made whole” is to have students expand on the normality of producing work. She talked about one of her students writing her essay on ballet slippers, this is what she means by composition made whole. It not only talks about ballet through the essay, but it is shown through physically seeing the essay written on ballet slippers. This takes the discipline and subject to bring everything together as a whole. You’re not just thinking of ballet you’re seeing every aspect of it so that you have the whole image of ballet itself. Shipka likes to show her work by being different and thinking outside of the box and by viewing every aspect of the subject.

Blog one post reflecting on what you learned from completing Project 2. Address the following:

• What did you learn from this assignment?
• How did you learn it?
• Why is this new knowledge significant as it contributes to your learning in (or beyond) this course?

I learned a lot about different types of writing in marketing. I’ve come to realize that marketing isn’t all about advertising. There are many types of marketing and the one I focused on discussing in my project was digital marketing. I was able to get a digital marketing internship this summer. When I went in for my interview they told me what digital marketing was all about. I was able to learn different types of writing through the description of what digital marketing is. I was able to learn about writing in marketing through this interview and by doing research online. This knowledge is significant beyond this course because I was able to learn more about marketing that I didn’t know previously and it has interested me more into pursuing a career in marketing. Before I wasn’t really sure what I wanted to do in business, but this project has helped me have a better understanding of what I want to do.

1. Who is talking/writing?
2. Who is the primary audience for this text?
3. What does the text say (or imply) “rhetoric” is? What does this text say (or imply) “genre” is?
4. What is the main argument or message of this text? 
5. What does this text say about the importance of rhetoric in the sciences?

Robert R. Johnson is professor of rhetoric, composition, and technical communication in the Humanities Department at Michigan Technological University. The primary audience for this text is the general public/anyone interested in atoms/atomic bombs. This is a mix of an audience because the reading “For the Love of Pretty Things” is for the general public because this texts explains and informs what happened with workers of a radium factory that concentrated on painting watches. For the other reading “Introduction to Romancing the Atom” is for people that are concentrating/interested in atoms and science because it goes into detail about history with atoms and Einstein. The text implies that rhetoric is the persuasion to prove real facts. They imply this by the lawyer of the radium girls having proof and evidence about the death of one of the girl workers of the factory, by using her dental records and her own dead body to prove it. Genre is medical records and research of radium harm. The main argument of this text is to prove that radium can harm people and that the start of atoms are and affect everyone and everything around us. The text says that the importance of rhetoric in the sciences is critical because in order to prove and show science through lab tests, microscopes, and diagnostics it is recorded and finalized through writing which is a big part of science in and of itself.

I found that when I researched information on writing standards and marketing on the library website it was very difficult and challenging to do. I wasn’t able to find any information on those two topics combined and I even tried changing up my wording on the search bar. I was actually able to find a lot of information for the internet, which was much less stressful. What I was able to find was that marketers need strong writing skills because it makes them better at communicating and getting their point/idea across, and to further go into a specific field, digital marketing is heavily relied on content itself. By becoming a stronger writer, it strengthens a marketers performance drastically. It allows them to get their point across a lot easier, critically think more, and present their work in a more efficient manner.

1. Who is talking/writing?
2. Who is the primary audience for this text?
3. What does the text say (or imply) “rhetoric” is? What does this text say (or imply) “genre” is?
4. What is the main argument or message of this text? 
5. What does this text say about the importance of rhetoric in other fields like law and medicine?

The writer of this piece of writing is Jason Palmeri. He is an Associate Professor of English at Miami University. I think the primary audience for this text is the public that are interested in research/the study of English because throughout this text it goes into question to process when doing research and how to correctly write when researching. The text implies that rhetoric is, “the ability to produce “rich” narratives that moved back and forth between medical and legal discourses.” The text says that the genre is reports, medical records, and statements because nurse consultants and lawyers read and compose these forms of writing. The main message of this text is what type of discipline they do and what forms are writing compose of their discipline. This texts says that the importance of rhetoric it has in this specific field is key because without it, there isn’t evidence, proof, and any sort of guide to move forward with injury reports and law suits. Writing is a very big part of these fields and it will never go away in existence, whether it moves to technology or stays on physical paper.

Blog one post outlining your thoughts about research (aka “inquiry” or “information literacy”). What is research for? Why do people do it? Why do researchers use different methods? What research methods have you used? What about research is confusing for you? 

In my opinion research is when you are trying to find or solve a problem by finding information about it from different type of sources, ex. books, essays, previous research, articles, newspapers, etc. People conduct research because they’re looking for answers and information about a given situation. Research is for any person (students, scientists, teachers, professors, doctors, analysts, etc.) that is looking to solve a problem related to a topic they choose or are given. People do research for many different reasons. Depending on who you are and what your specific job is, you’re conducting different types of research for you field of study. Most people do research to gather information that will help that come to a conclusion about something. Researchers can use primary or secondary research. Primary research is, “Research collected directly by the researcher using tools he or she has designed to find the information needed to answer a particular question.” Secondary research is, “The locating of previously published materials.” Primary research provides students to work with others, critically think, and to learn how to organize and interpret data. Secondary research is a key part of this process because it proceeds any and all of the primary research. The research method I’ve used was to search online for all of my information. I’ve been able to find many different sources of literacy documents ranging from books to historical documents. By looking something up quickly online there are many different websites that have tons of information about whatever topic you’re trying to research and most of the times, data is given. There isn’t anything in particular that confuses me about research.

I learned a lot from this project. First off, I learned how to create a mind map and a memo. I’ve never made either of these before and I actually loved doing it. I like how this project wasn’t like usual class projects and that I was able to expand and do what I wanted to do with it. I also learned how to create my own rhetorical ecology structure with subcategories. I learned all of these things by trial and error. I was able to gain more knowledge based off of viewing classmates mind maps and memos. Also, Professor Wilgar’s advice when we had workshop helped me a lot because I realized I put way too much information and should’ve just done bullets of words instead of paragraphs with many sentences. I felt that viewing other people’s work helped me edit and critique my own project. This new knowledge is significant because I’m able to take all of the skills that I’ve learned from making this project further into this course for future assignments/projects and I can also use it in the future. I need to make sure that I know what a white paper is so that I don’t just write an essay about my discipline in Project 2. I also need to gather my thoughts about what discipline I want to talk about because I’m not drawn to one specific major/minor. Whether it’s a marketing or finance major, both, a minor in one of them, or a minor in economics and/or business analytics, I’ll have to decide which one works best with my life at the moment and the one that I can talk most about/am the most passionate about.

The writer of this text is Elizabeth Wardle. She is a professor and Center Director for Writing Excellence at the University of Miami. The primary audience for this text is mainly geared towards students because she is telling you to sit down and write as to if you had no prior knowledge of how to write. This text is nonfiction because what she is saying is true. The main argument of this text is that it is impossible to start writing without having prior knowledge on how to write. She also argued that no matter how much experience or knowledge you have of writing there’s always room of error and more space to learn about writing. Her main argument is different than the other writers because they are more structured with their views on writing. The texts primary rhetorical purpose is trying to persuade and inform to the audience that having a background knowledge on writing helps you write and the more experience you have with it the better you may be.

The writer of this text is Carolyn Miller. She is a rhetoric professor at North Carolina State University. The primary audience for this text is her peers and fellow rhetoricians. The genre is nonfictional. She is talking and arguing about how rhetoricians need to focus more on rhetorical situations and less materialistic-ness. The main argument differs from the other writers because she’s talking about rhetorical situations whereas another writer talks about rhetorical ecologies. The texts primary purpose is to persuade and inform other rhetoricians.