Being There

This paper was written very well. I feel it gave good arguments for both sides, showing equal weight in important points. Yes, most people would probably like to be there when their relative is potentially dying. But no, I agree with the doctors in that most people are probably not ready to see the procedures that go on to try and recessitate their loved ones. There are always going to be people who think the doctors didn't do all in their power to bring them back and possibly sue for malpractice. I can fully see how this could put pressure on the doctors when performing because they have to look at someone, going through the full emotional spectrum of losing someone they love. This, in comparsion to, just working and going by the numbers (pulse, blood pressure, vitals etc.) would be an added stress. Now to vouch for the people who want to be there, myself included. A lot of us that are reading this are probably fully prepared to witness the whole procedure of recessitation because we are educated in the aspect of science and medicine (some of us). So taking the gruesome aspect out, I would want to be there if I knew my loved one could see me, so he/she knows that they're not alone. And to be able to say the last words to them, I feel would be a great sense of closure. So I can see how this is a very sensitive and controversial topic. I guess the best solution would be on that was stated in the writing. Allow the relative(s) to be there according to the discretion of the doctors performing the recessitation.

How to write a Review Paper...

Again from the Colorado State site, I thought that this layout was actually very well organized. A page that appealed to me was the "What is a Review Paper?" page because it displayed five different angles to which one could write a review paper. This could provide as a good option for groups to write with different aspects of their topic, and each has their own description so he or she can stay focused on their angle they're taking.
The next section about key considerations when writing a review paper I thought would make a good checklist when one is outlining, making a draft of, or even reviewing their paper. It's like its the essentials to make a good paper. Just turn each section into a question. Is the focus narrow? Is the title informative? How did the paper consider the audience?
Then the last section actually breaks down what each sections of your paper should have in them. Very well laid out. I could see myself using this as a checkoff when my paper is done and every point should be covered to make a good review paper. Some may find it kind of elementary right now, but I still find that, when writing, even the smallest things can be left easily forgotten. It doesn't hurt to have a well structured formate to frame your writing on.

Liar Liar

First off I thought how ironic this read was to me because, while I was at the gym, the movie Liar Liar with Jim Carrey was on, and to finish the night, my girlfriend and I got on a discussion about deceiving (not a great conversation by the way). It was interesting to read this article because it touched on so many topics, some recent, some personal. Bringing up the whole issue of lie detection is something I feel the media doesn't take as seriously as it is. For me, and maybe a lot of people, lie detectors are famous due to daytime talk shows involving "who my baby dad is". Though I know it is used for more serious things, I don't really hear much of them, and how much potential for inaccuracy there is. It was shocking to see the mention of 9/11 and anti-terrorism and lie detection. In another section it talked about functional MRI and ERP along with stroop testing. This brought up personal memories since I had once participated in a study for UC Davis in which I did some stroop testing in a functional MRI and also another time hooked up to the ERP. In the end of the study, being a control subject and fairly educated, I was allowed to view some of the images from the MRI and some of the data collected from the EEG.

It was amazing to see some of the things these machines can do. MRI was able to show which areas of the brain were being used due to blood flow, while the ERP was so sensitive that they knew when I was starting to get sleepy from alpha wave patterns. Technology is exciting, yet the author is correct. We still don't know what it means. All this data we can now collect, but does it mean we know how to tell if someone is lying? No. And I don't think we ever fully will. People are all human, but still differ so much in physiology. I don't think one test will be able to be used on everyone. Another thought I had was that in the article it mentioned that something like 5% of people are really good at telling facial lies, but it can be taught to some degree. This made me wonder about poker players and professionals. Is that the reason why we see the same faces at final tables? Have they mastered the ability to sense one's facial expressions to give them an edge on the cards? Very interesting and intriguing thoughts. I have much more to say but my time is up...

Prosopagnosia

I can't even begin to imagine a world without being able to identify faces. To think that 2% of the US, roughly 16 million people, have this condition is so sad. Considering that this particular paper was written in the 90's, where he states that we can't just plug electrodes in the brain and see what's going on, it made me think how far technology has gone since then. On Discovery channel, an episode on the physiology of vision, a woman lost her eyes in a car accident when she was 9 years old. Having lived almost 40 years without seeing she underwent experimental surgery where 200 electrodes, implanted in her visual cortex, were wired to a small camera. This camera would send information which would stimulate these electrodes and she would see spots of light in her visual field. This was only with 10 electrodes activated. Scientists hope to activate more in the future and predict she should be able to see outlines of things, enough to depict what they are. All with NO EYES. Back on to face blindness, I feel for these people, though I have no way to know what it feels like. But, I do see hope for them. As with the blind woman, technology is advancing so rapidly that treatment or even a cure may be in the works. Emphasizing in NPB, I know how indepth the brain can get, yet what appeals me is how much we still don't know. Some say that we only use 12.5% of our brain (might be an old fact now). Even if we used 75% of our brain, that still leaves 25% for what? Maybe for cures to our own problems. The untapped potential of the human brain is infinite...

QPS by OWL

This read was short, maybe too short. I'm not afraid to admit that I am still not clear about paraphrasing or summarizing. I understand when to quote and how to use it. Where I get confused is when an idea becomes my own or was it influenced by what I was read. I mean honeslty, most things we think about in our writing has been influenced or thought up by someone else way before we did. Do I source them and credit them even though I thought of it all on my own (I think?). That's where I think this resource could go more in depth with. Examples of paraphrasing and summarizing would be helpful, and maybe tips on when you should use quoting versus paraphrasing versus summarizing. This read we pretty much already what I knew about each of them, but I still find myself confused on when it is right to paraphrase or summarize. My peers will see that I will most likely stay as far away from them as I can as I typically use quotes to support my ideas. I guess if I wanted to know what the definition of a quotation, paraphrase, and summary is, this resouce would have it...

All Abouts and Peers Help...

The readings in the Rhetorical Analysis and Peer Review and Revision modules I found were very good resources to fall back on when the time is needed. The Rhetorical Analysis How to module I think will be the most beneficial to me when I start my analysis. It's basically an ouline of what's needed for the paper, but already outlined for me in questions. All I have to do is fill in the blank. Simplicity is convenient. The guidelines for peer review and editing were also great because it helps provide instructions on how to provide a helpful peer-review that is beneficial to the writer. I would definitly like anyone who reviews my work to follow such guidelines. They would definitly help improve my writing. The peer review and writing workshops and revision resources were almost rediculously abundant with information. Usually I feel like "less is more", but this case more was fully appreciated. All the links provided great means of explanation if any point were unclear. The only thing is that I wished it would be a little easier to navigate. With links all over the place, I easily lost my place and almost felt like I was going too far off topic from what I was trying to learn about. Either way, the site provides a great source of information for any type of peer reviewing or editing questions and/or procedures.

The Project Worksheet for Efficient Writing Management

Wow, this article is not like the others. I don't know about the rest of my fellow friendly classmates in UWP104E, but I lost interest in this read really quickly. Not only did I not really relate to it or find a situation where I may fit into it, but the tone was boring and confusing. I can tell that it is essentially stating what the other 3 articles have mentioned, but more formally. If needed I will add more to this post about this article, but other than that good night!

The Direct Writing Process for Getting Words on Paper by Elbow

So Peter Elbow has this "Direct Writing Process". Basically it's just,

Let's-get-this-thing-over-with!

It's intended for the kind of writing that doesn't have much to say about the topic and/or you just don't know much about it. You divide your time into fast writing, where you just write without worrying about organization, language, correctness, blah blah... basically what I'm currently doing. The second half of the time is spent on revising.

During the first half, I should consider my audience and purpose, but if I can't its ok. What is important is to write down everything I know or can think of that relates to my writing task and write FAST, wasting no time in organizing, spelling, etc. Elbow calls this "helter-skelter writing". This process says I should leave my errors, crossed out, so that I would have a complete draft in the end. Then revise.

Down to the Main Steps in the Direct Writing Process

• Divide time in half: Writing and Revising
• Think about audience and purpose if you want, but just write!
• Write anything, everything, quickly about the topic.
• Don't get caught in repetition or getting lost, and at the same time don't worry about the organization of the writing.
• When half the time is up, switch to revising, even if writing isn't done.
• This process is only good if you don't have a problem coming up with material or if you're on a time deadline.

VERY entertaining read. I don't know if I agree with this type of writing and it's ability to produce adequate work, but I'm sure I've used something like it in the past without even thinking...

The Writing Process by Michael Adelstein

Adelstein believes that writing is a process. To accomplish this process well, I, the writer should complete five stages and with the workload divided amongst them.

1. Worrying - 15%- In other word thinking about what you are going to write.
2. Planning- 10%- Organizing and outlining for the task.
3. Writing- 25%- With the ouline planning out what you want to say, write it.
4. Revising- 45%- Multiple times with different perspectives.
5. Proofreading- 5%- Quick check of the appearance of the paper.

Only 25% of the time is spent on writing while the other 75% is spent on preparing and perfecting the task.

I found this article to be very beneficial. It was written in a style in which it made me understand what is essential for a complete work, and at the same time not make me feel TOO stupid. It all makes sense. I wonder why I haven't done it this way all my life...?

Using PAFEO Planning by John Keenan

Using PAFEO Planning

In this article, the writer John Keenan states that the major weakness in writing is clarity; when is it time to give detail and build up a thought, or just plain out state it?

I find myself always asking this question whenever I'm revising my writing.

Unclear writing comes from unclear thinking (makes sense...). Keenan believes that the work done in the prewriting process and in the revising process is what makes the difference between clear writing and confusing writing.

Here's the general overview of the process Keenan believes a writer should take to ensure clear writing.

Think PAFEO

P-urpose- "why am I writing this?" Writing must aim to accomplish something:

• Seek a particular response from the reader.
• Make it as precise as possible (to ensure clarity)
• For longer letters/reports, this is the THESIS, the central idea.
• Make it a complete sentence to set up the direction of the report. (ex. Disappointing sales make be attributed to insufficient advertising, poor selection of merchandise, and inadequate staffing during peak shopping hours). -Subject= Dissappointing sales.

A-udience- Communicate with the reader. Who is my audience?

• Consider how much background position, attitude toward subject, and experience with subject.
• Think about out what the reader needs to know, and how to deliver.
• Consider my credibility with the reader. Will he/she accept my judgements straight up?
• Will the reader agree or disagree with my position? Think of what TONE would fit best. Make the effort to look at the subject the way the reader may look at it.

Better writing depends on better reading.

F-ormat -How will the paper be displayed?

• Use external signals: headings, underlining, numerals, WHITE SPACE, to draw attention to important ideas.
• Format for quick identification of main points. This will keep things clear for the reader.

E-vidence- How will I back up my claims?

• Collect evidence before writing will make writing easier.
• Evidence= facts and information obtained by: observation, fieldwork, and research.

Use the evidence to form a probable conclusion.

Rules of Evidence:

1. Look at the evidence and follow it. Don't bais your search for evidence to fit your design.
2. Look for the simplest explaination that accounts for all the evidence.
3. Look at all likely alternatives.
4. Beware of absolute statements. Avoid using: all, never, or always.

Use deductive reasoning. Keep ideas true and logical.

O-rganization- How will I lay things out so it flows?

• Use note cards with a fact (opinion, observation...) on each and arrange them in piles which evidence supports one idea.
• Move the piles around in a sequence: Chronological, Spatial, Logical, Classification and Division according to idea, Cause and Effect, Problem-Analysis-Solution, Order of Importance.
• Go through each pile and arrange facts in a clear sequence. Which fact should go first to paint a clear picture?