Assignment Three
Posted by 
Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on 
Writing and Rhetoric
TR 2:00-3:15pm | jessericeevans@gmail.com | https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82719242667?pwd=aGlZQzR0a2p4VWhnNEM5RzZMU3ZGQT09
Ashraf Alam
Peer Review: Third Assignment (Digital Recipient #13)
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on Research Draft: Assignment Three
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on Assignment #2: Rhetorical Analysis (Digital Receipt #9)
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on One rhetorical situation that I found interesting was the infamous MLK speech at the Lincoln memorial; thus chose to talk about it. The speech, lasting just short of seven minutes, was delivered by Martin Luther King. Jr, 1963, was credited as one of the main foundations for the civil rights moment as it bought attention and change following the speech and his unfortunate demise. His pothos is his expression of how people of color were treated and chined down by society, his ethos of being known for peaceful protests, the infamous bus boycotts, and his logos where he expresses his ideas about equality for all playing a role in his speech. In terms of appealing to people, he wanted the world to hear it; more especially he wanted government officials and local people to hear the speech. Since government officials have the power to change (those that are in Congress) and local people are the subject group he wanted to bring this change. MLK was very fixed in his ways of nonviolence, hence why I think this was one of the ways he expressed himself: through his voice as an American.
Out of all the points he made during his speech and the topics he skipped through, I found his approach and point of view as a speaker interesting: his opinions on what he had to say. I noticed where he had chosen to give the speech: under the Lincoln memorial. Aside from the obvious symbolism, he stood next to not only people of color but people of no color. It drove home the point he was trying to make to the world. Following that, I noticed he used a lot of American legislative quotes, talking about how he wanted everyone to be born equal in this nation and the emancipation proclamation. He brought up the notion of the emancipation proclamation and what power it held back then, but such powers were not working: people of color were still not equal.
He uses his own emotions: his dreams, where he wishes to see people of every color and race playing together in the park, or how he wishes to see his children be judged by the context of their character, not race or skin color. It adds personality and personalization to his context and what he is preaching. It sets a common goal that makes him more acceptable to the local and common people.
Finally, he talks about the issues faced during those oppressive times, where people of color were treated harshly. He describes how they are left alone on an island, saying they are separated from society and still under acts of discrimination.
WLLN Final
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on Ashraf Alam
Prof. Rice-Evans
8/18/22
Freshmen Eng. Comp.
WLLN: First Draft
A recent troubling moment that I had: was when having to write a scientific paper for both AP Capstone and AP Research. Having written loads of scientific papers before that point (credit to my science research class), however, these two papers were different in the sense that the language used and the way we had to format the paper was something I had never seen or done. Also, we were the pioneering class to take this course; there was no reference to go off of, and the papers themselves counted for about 60% of our final grade (the other 30% being the presentation). The hardest thing I can remember was the formatting: we needed to write the paper in a way such that our reference articles (which had to be all scientific papers/articles/journals) “needed to talk to each other”; the style was something I had never seen or written, and to say I had trouble was an understatement.
The AP capstone paper, in particular, was troubling due to the use of different lenses and the incorporation of stakeholders we needed to write about for each referenced article we used. There were eight lenses, but we had to use three. In the beginning, finding reference articles was not complex; having a science research background helped a lot, but the formatting and writing were other issues: I could not “solve” so easily. It took over four-six versions of the paper (all proofread by my instructor and peers) for me to get something decent. The first struggle came when detailing the findings; I was incorrectly listing the work under the wrong lenses/trying to make the articles fit into a lens that did not. Trying to connect lenses when they did not fit was not fun. Considering my paper, how the socioeconomic status of adults and its effects on their levels of happiness in rural China: were viewed from the social, economic, and political lenses was not an easy task. What was harder was the last paragraph: we had to interconnect all three lenses to make them “talk to each other” (this also acted as our closing statement).
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fQRE_gfv1gQET6IsGrYvIJ-W0jtVn5tXlnenu912x_s/edit?usp=sharing
(Paper for IWA (AP Capstone))
https://drive.google.com/drive/u/3/folders/1SgQPBSzeJI8xdZR7rfSuRIizjgaW0y1k
(Presentation used for AP Research)
Continuing to the next year (AP research), we had another paper, but it was our study. We had to conduct either a human subject study or an experimental study, collect, analyze, and interpret data; this was what we were doing in our science research class, but this paper was more scrutinized and harshly graded. The AP research paper followed the same format as any basic science paper: the abstract, introduction, methods, results, data analysis, and conclusion. The only troubling part was that the reference articles (background research) had to build off each other. If the idea did not follow a logical direction, it was marked wrong, and we would not get those points. One article introduced an idea, the following article built on that idea, and so forth until we came to our study and how it was relevant to modern society or our bigger “question”/”topic” that we answered. I had some experience at this point: granted my experience from writing the AP Capstone paper.
The difference between my start to finish and where I currently am today is the difference in my abilities from back then to now. I am more competent in literacy and better know how the English language flows. Without AP capstone and AP research being two of the harshest English classes I have taken, I would not in the same shoes are I am in today. It has also given me general experiences in understanding the author’s points of view, biases, and perspectives of sources within the paper. I am nowhere near perfect or probably will ever be; however, this experience has shaped me and has brought me closer to better writing and reading of the conventional English language.
Reflection #1, Digital Receipt #7
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on 1) My audience was my classmates and my Professor. I wanted to use formal language for obvious reasons: it was an assignment; however, I wanted to target people who have also struggled with higher-level English courses (AP) to resonate with them more. People who have taken AP Literature or AP language: my Professor, classmates, and anyone reading this piece of work.
2) The first and foremost would be my writing skill and style, writing scientific papers for my high school career. It was challenging at first to develop another style and form that was not always in the active voice/pronouns like I or us in the paper. It was a learning curve for me. I developed analyzing skills, formatting skills, how to make my paper flow, and how to smoothly transition into ideas without slashing paragraphs. My grammar also developed; although I was somewhat proficient and confident in my grammar before, after the course, I understand the formalities of grammar and have a deeper understanding of literary composition.
3) Certain authors and their points of view stood out to me since that was the biggest learning curve, understanding to make their point of view “talk” while trying to prove your point of view/lens impacted my writing and understanding of the article or piece of writing. The context of the articles also mattered since an author may say something that supports your claim, but the statement itself wasn’t about your claim; it only unintentionally supports it. Some may then argue that the piece of evidence does not support your claim: I am assuming that they support my claim without any actual proof.
Digital Receipt #6
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on There are many arguments about technology negatively or positively affecting young’s English and grammar; however, I feel like English or any form of communication can and has changed. Why should technology be credited for changing our language? There are no arguments that it has not, but to say it is bad or good is a little contradictory, no? English has evolved from us using basic sounds like “Ah” to archaic English with “thy, thee, and thine, and thou” to modern English; why should technology be held accountable for causing change when all English has done is change from generation to generation? Why couldn’t it change now?
Digital Receipt #5 (WLLN Peer Review)
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on WLLN: Draft 1
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on Ashraf Alam
Prof. Rice-Evans
8/18/22
Freshmen Eng. Comp.
WLLN: First Draft
A recent troubling moment that I had: was when having to write a scientific paper for both AP Capstone and AP Research. Having written loads of scientific papers before that point (credit to my science research class), however, these two papers were different in the sense that the language used and the way we had to format the paper was something I had never seen or done. Also, we were the pioneering class to take this course; there was no reference to go off of, and the papers themselves counted for about 60% of our final grade (the other 30% being the presentation). The hardest thing I can remember was the formatting: we needed to write the paper in a way such that our reference articles (which had to be all scientific papers/articles/journals) “needed to talk to each other”; the style was something I had never seen or written, and to say I had trouble was an understatement.
The AP capstone paper, in particular, was troubling due to the use of different lenses and the incorporation of stakeholders we needed to write about for each referenced article we used. There were eight lenses, but we had to use three. In the beginning, finding reference articles was not complex; having a science research background helped a lot, but the formatting and writing were other issues: I could not “solve” so easily. It took over four-six versions of the paper (all proofread by my instructor and peers) for me to get something decent. The first struggle came when detailing the findings; I was incorrectly listing the work under the wrong lenses/trying to make the articles fit into lense that did not. Trying to connect lenses when they did not fit was not fun. Considering my paper, how the socioeconomic status of adults and its effects on their levels of happiness in rural China: viewed from the social, economic, and political lenses was not an easy task. What was harder was the last paragraph: we had to interconnect all three lenses to make them “talk to each other” (this also acted as our closing statement).
Continuing to the next year (AP research), we had another paper, but it was our study. We had to conduct either a human subject study or an experimental study, collect, analyze, and interpret data; this was what we were doing in our science research class, but this paper was more scrutinized and harshly graded. The AP research paper followed the same format as any basic science paper: the abstract, introduction, methods, results, data analysis, and conclusion. The only troubling part was that the reference articles (background research) had to build off each other. If the idea did not follow a logical direction, it was marked wrong, and we would not get those points. One article introduced an idea, the following article built on that idea, and so forth until we came to our study and how it was relevant to modern society or our bigger “question”/”topic” that we answered. I had some experience at this point: granted my experience from writing the AP Capstone paper.
Digital Receipt #2: Backpacks vs. Briefcase Response
Posted by Ashraf Alam on
Ashraf Alam on Summary of Reading
The article describes what everyone does every day: analyzing a situation or entity based on perspectives, actions, what they see visually, and what they hear; the concept itself—rhetoric analysis— is the idea of understanding/interpreting a given argument with the notion of identifying the purpose, targeted audience, and the main reason behind making the argument in the first place. There are three main parts to understanding rhetorical moments/events: exigence, audience, and constraints. Exigence is the reason why the person (who created the argument) made it this way. The audience is the target group for that said argument. Constraints are the limits of exigence; this can be any form of limitation: forcing the exigence to be that way. The ethos, pathos, and logos of an argument also help shape the structure and strength of an argument and can change the way people perceive that said argument. When looking at a statement or argument, it is best to identify these things: which will make you understand the rhetorical analysis better.
My personal experience
Aside from the mobile ads and online sponsorships that make you want to buy a product or item of clothing, the best example in which I analyzed a situation or person (that I can think of) was when I was paired up with a research partner in my junior year of high school. The person whom I had the option of working with had a negative/not-so-popular reputation among our class. Most of the people that knew him personally said that he could be hot-headed at times and that it was not fun to work with him; he always wanted to do things his way. The ethos of such arguments made by such individuals was not of a question as they knew him better than me, some even working with him in prior years. The exigence of these arguments might have been based on the negative experiences they may have had with him, but the constraints with that exigence would be that they had not worked with him for a while, meaning he could have changed his habits. He also could have had personal issues that they were unaware he was attending to result in such work behaviors. Despite all the warnings, I still choose to partner up with him. I found out that he was hot-headed, but not due to his lack of decency, but rather his obsession with being perfect. He set an almost impossible standard for our work, one in which everything needed to hundred percent correct at all times: being with grammar, data, statistics, formatting, and more. Using opinions that I heard from close people to judge him based on his work and how he manages to work with others, I made the wrong decision of disregarding him as a tyrant: when he was not.
