Response #2

Sean Demme

5.29.12

Eng 1510

QDJ

#1. Kleine talks about research, and how it is done in many different ways, and is not a “concrete” process. I am really bad at research and to hear that most people have trouble with it and forming the way they do their research is relief to me. It does sound like he is describing the way I do my research, I have never done a paper the same way, I am always trying something new and it seems I always find a way to fudge it all up.

#3. Kleine uses well educated people to take his data from. This is good because I, as an inexperienced writer, can see that even at a higher level, you can still have a problem with how you collect and use your data. In past, my sources have always been off of the internet, the way that Kleine uses real people to show his evidence gives me a sense of reality. In the past I’ve never really had the chance to have such relevant information to me. The difference between Kleine’s sources and my own is the way that he is researching something he is interested in and has the time to collect good, quality sources. Whereas when I do a research paper, my sources are Wikipedia and Google sources because I am not so passionate about the topic.

#4. What would I change? I am not quite sure 100% what I’d change but I do know what I would change WHAT I am researching about. I feel that when you have something you’re passionate about, like Kleine did, I would want to search for better sources, like professionals in the field, and see what they have to say. Kleine’s article was helpful in that sense - that I need to be more passionate about my research, not just for the teachers’ briefcase, but for my own advancement.

Response #1

Sean Demme

5.29.12

Eng 1510

QDJ

#2. Greene uses this metaphor in order to explain how argument can go a bunch of different ways but cannot really be resolved. One side of the argument can go one way, to be countered in another direction. In the end, they are basically going nowhere because both parties has different views. Greene uses this because he wants to show the way that argument has to be shown from each side, you have to address your counter argument. It presents writing in almost a bad way, at a glance, even though it isn’t intended to be that way. The intent is to show that argument, if let go, can just turn into a game of tug-o-war. It also challenges the idea of context, this is true because if you take an argument out of context, like the way the men do in the saloon, you can end up losing your original argument.

#3. Framing is basically outlining what small part of a big whole that the author is trying to convey. The metaphor more commonly used is like a picture -  and the way a photographer can focus and shine lights on different parts of a picture, the part that he/she wants you to see. Framing can allow a writer show you that he/she know what they are talking about and also put more focus onto this subject.

API

#2. Greene’s passage is presented as a conversation. He is telling the reader the tools that authors use in order to get the right points across. He frames his argument with passages from other authors to show that he A. has done research, and B. can show actual examples of these writing tools at work. I didn’t know at the time, but at the end you realize that Greene is actually arguing in conversation.