
JVL
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
trying on a metaphor
hello vonnie

roma★

izzy's playlists!
cherry valley forever
sheepfilms
Monterey Bay Aquarium

Janaina Medeiros
will byers stan first human second
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

ellievsbear
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
KIROKAZE
AnasAbdin

blake kathryn
Claire Keane
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

seen from Singapore

seen from Canada

seen from Germany

seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Canada

seen from United States

seen from Brazil

seen from Japan
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Singapore

seen from China
seen from United States
@stuffandthings1020-blog
Chances are good that if you went to college in the United States after, say, 1975, your campus featured at least one imposing, bunker-like concrete building in the architectural style known as Brutalism. Colorfully translated from Le Corbusier’s purely descriptive term béton brut (or raw concrete), Brutalist architecture—as it was...
The Panopticon is a type of institutional building designed by the English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century. The concept of the design is to allow a single watchman to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) inmates of an institution without them being able to tell whether they are being watched or not. Although it is physically impossible for the single watchman to observe all cells at once, the fact that the inmates cannot know when they are being watched means that all inmates must act as though they are watched at all times, effectively controlling their own behaviour constantly. The name is also a reference to Panoptes from Greek mythology; he was a giant with a hundred eyes and thus was known to be a very effective watchman.
To send with paper on Mon/Tues
Copy and paste the following text into your email when you submit your final project.
I have done everything I can to meet the following goals:
1. To understand writing as a conversation, not an individual, isolated process.
2. To understand the systems in place to honor authorship and creativity.
3. To identify ways things and places make arguments in our world.
4. To create an argument about a place or thing and incorporate other voices into the conversation.
My header/pg #/format reflects MLA style as seen in models we discussed in class. YES NO
My documentation of sources is clear and includes in-text citations as well as inclusion in the works cited. YES NO
I own or have/rent a copy of the Bedford textbook so that I was able to check the MLA chapter for accuracy. YES NO
I read this paper out loud and had a friend look at it before submitting the final copy. I know frequent mistakes hurt my ethos. YES NO
Above are some phrases that may help you “join the conversation” with your sources. Some students really love these and find them useful.
Blog 15
Read the online essay by Jennifer Thimell. After you’ve read, answer these questions:
How long is the introduction? How many paragraphs?
What is the thesis?
Are there background or definitional paragraphs before the argument truly begins? If so, what do they do or say?
How does the writer organize the body of her paper?
How effective or ineffective is the conclusion?
How many sources are in the works cited? Out of these , how many are peer reviewed?
Does the author address opposing views?
In the biography at the bottom, what does the author say she wishes to study in graduate school?
How do you submit work of your own to this journal? (hint: check left side menu)
z�1 K�5
back to 3.2 Looking for Love With All the Wrong Rhetoric by Jennifer Joy Thimell Imagine this scenario: A young man walks into a popular singles bar. He places himself strategically in the center o…
noun | \ˈhī-(ə-)ˌrär-kē also ˈhi(-ə)r-ˌär-\ | See the full definition…
Visit your favorite social network feed (Facebook, Twitter, etc). Is there a hierarchy to the information there?
Your outline should show a clear hierarchy of ideas and a PURPOSE to your arrangement. Most information in our world today does not do this.
This handout describes and provides examples of parallel structure (similar patterns of words).
We’ll practice parallel structure today with this neat little spiraling tool. There are some things MWord cannot do in formatting. This is one of them.
We’ll also discuss MLA format and practice setting up documents correctly in that style.
Think you don’t have homework for English 1020? You do. These are just some of the tasks you should be completing before every class. Don’t fall behind on this project!
Good example of journey from topic to thesis
Topic: Four Way Stop at AUM Drive and Senator Drive
Issue: This four way stop slows traffic
Question: Should the four way stop at the intersection of AUM Drive and Senator Drive be changed to a traffic circle like the others on campus?
Position: A traffic circle at AUM Drive and Senator Drive would be better suited than the four way stop currently present.
Final Thesis: The Auburn University Board of Trustees should consider transforming the four way stop at the intersection of AUM Drive and Senator Drive into a traffic circle. The traffic circle will perhaps enhance the flow of traffic, decrease the amount of traffic violations, and possibly decrease traffic accidents.
(Three things to do to make thesis specific:
1. Read traffic reports
2. Interview AUM Police
3. Watch documentary on traffic violations
Create OUTLINE!!!!!)
LIES, DAMNED LIES, AND STATISTICS: CREDIBLE ARGUMENTS AND YOUR COMPOSITION PAPER
BY CATHERINE PRENDERGAST
You may have heard that you need to “back up” your argument with outside sources—quotes from academic experts, maybe a statistic or a bar graph. Certainly an academic paper must cite outside sources in order to be credible. You gain your reader’s trust by showing that you have done the work of locating and citing existing scholarship on the subject of your research. But none of what you’re going to find is going to “back up” your argument. Here’s why.
“I need back-up” is what cops say on cop shows when they feel outgunned and want another body to double their show of force “through the door.” You, too, may feel outgunned as you launch into your paper’s argument. You face the daunting task of speaking “up” to an instructor who has more degrees than you do, as well as the institutional authority to decide whether or not your argument is convincing. It seems logical that a quote from an academically validated expert supporting your position would multiply its force.
Before amassing your small army of like-minded backers, however, consider this: If you use a quote from an expert to “back up” what you’re saying, you are essentially saying the same thing twice. Readers prefer not to read the same material more than once. Readers prefer not to read the same material more than once.
In academic writing, only novel contributions to the knowledge pool are valued. Your quote from an expert reveals that someone has already asked, and answered, the same question as you. What, the reader then wonders, is to be your contribution?
The second reason not to use quotes from an expert simply to “back up” your argument is that doing so will slowly corrode your own faith in what you have to say. You will start to think that without that expert there to ventriloquize your argument, it’s not worthy of attention. You give the impression to others, and more significantly to yourself, that your own words are of lesser importance. In short, the more you go for “back up,” the more you shrink.
Believe it or not, the expert who counts most in all your papers is you. You are the author, therefore the authority. Time to start thinking of those published experts not as supports on which you can lean, but as authors whom you can engage on a level playing field. How do you engage with them? Tell your reader how what you are saying is different from (though related to) what the published expert said. Then tell the reader why that difference makes a difference.
How about “backing up” your argument with a statistic or similar numerical factoid instead of a quote from an expert? Conventional wisdom would dictate that you need facts to support your argument, and numbers make the best kind of facts because no one can argue with a number. Recall, however, the words of Mark Twain (or whoever Mark Twain stole these words from), “There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Numbers plopped in the middle of your paper do not make your argument more convincing. Those numbers would not have impressed Mark Twain, and they’re not going to impress your instructor, either. Academic readers, generally a skeptical bunch, get even more skeptical when faced with a statistic. They want to know: Who created that statistic? Where was it published? Who paid for the research that resulted in that statistic? What was the motivation for the research? And, most importantly, does the statistic have any relevance to the subject of the paper? If you collected the statistic yourself, your readers will have questions about your methods as well. Your paper needs to anticipate and answer such questions. What makes you credible is not the statistic, but what you have to say about the statistic—your weighing of its worth.
Remain the expert in your paper. It’s easy to let your research take over and to let yourself fall into the role of ventriloquist’s dummy, particularly if you’ve been told that you can’t use “I” in academic writing (you can), or if you think you have nothing new or interesting to say (you do), or if you think composition instructors don’t care about what their students have to say (they do). One tip for staying out of the dummy role is to start every paragraph with your voice; begin not with a fact, not with a quote, but with your point, your take, your words. The first sentence of every paragraph is precious real estate. Consider it the beachfront property of your paper. Your readers will look there for your voice to guide them through the thicket of facts and expert opinions you have assembled. No one, and nothing, can take your place. There is no “back up.” There is only you, your reader, and the world of damned lies you walk through together.
�� H�
This State of the Union address will address the union about the state of the economy, foreign policy, and the general state of this country.
BLOG 7: Intros, Conclusions
Fast food burger vs. fancy burger (research ppr)
Essays before now: bread, meat, bread
Intro, body, conclusion
Essays now: research docs tend to have more than one intro and sometimes more than one concl. paragraph.
INTRO:
1. Overall view of the world itself and an issue in it
2. Your take on the issue—add your thesis here
3. Define key terms
(give background) / expectations paragraph—telling the reader what to expect and what NOT to expect
CONCLU:
Admit the other side has a few good points (acknowledge the opposition)
Restate what you’ve argued to stress that you don’t agree
More research still needs to be done, and you can refer them to other books or sources that give a fuller picture of the site
Gesture toward the future—might it be safer in 10 years?
Qualify yourself—this MAY happen, I believe it’s possible
Ao���h
Outline for A block class (Mon/Wed)
Remember, you need BOTH context (intro material/conversational moves) AND citations at end when sharing someone else’s ideas!