I finally finished my MultiModal project! And do you know what that means? I’m done with all my CTW assignments and it’s summer!!

Source: Giphy

JK I WISH. I still have to write the companion essay for this class, and have a bunch of other assignments/tests in my other classes. BUT, that does mean that this is my final blog post, since I have hit the required 20 posts for the quarter. For this last one, I’ll reflect on my time in CTW.

As a person who doesn’t really like essays or English classes, I actually really enjoyed the class. I even got a little excited about writing some of my papers because they were about things that I cared about and was interested in (Title IX, athletics, etc.) TBT, this reminds me of Graff’s piece “Hidden Intellectualism” where he talks about using students’ non-academic passions in an academic way.

In addition to liking the class, I learned A LOT and believe that my writing significantly improved over the course of both quarters. The best part is that the stuff I learned is actually relevant!! The skills I learned can be applied to other classes/projects as well as nonacademic things.

Now that the sentimental rant is over, here is the thing you’ve actually been waiting for. So, without further ado, here is the link to my Title IX Instagram page that features my MultiModal project.

Source: Giphy

For my Cultures and Ideas class about the global culture of capitalism, our final project was to research a topic/theme that we covered in class, make a movie about it for the class, and write a companion essay about it for our teacher. Sounds familiar right?

It’s super similar to the work I did in my CTW class, but the research was not NEARLY as extensive. Thank goodness cuz

Source: Giphy

The overlap in the assignments let me apply some of the skills that I learned in CTW to my C&I. My project was focussed on the globalization of McDonald’s and specifically, its relevance in China, and whether it is an example of homogenization or hybridization of culture.

Source: Giphy

To do this, I first mapped the territory by seeing what scholars were talking about in the broader conversation about McDonald’s in China. None of them were really talking about whether it was a case of either homogeny or hybridization, so this was my gap.

Ultimately, I argued that the case is is more homogenous. To do this, I used a good ol’ fashion NAYSAYER (among other things)!  I said something along the lines of

Some scholars argue that blah, blah, blah demonstrate hybridization, and they are right. However, I would argue that because these variations are minor, the case of McDonald’s in China is more indicative of a homogenous than heterogeneous society.

It’s kinda cool when classes double dip, BUT it’s not cool when food double dips.

YES WAY! School is relevant!!! (Source: Giphy)

During my CTW class last Friday, we had a re-cap of all the things that we learned this quarter and last quarter. We came up with a pretty comprehensive list, naming things like archival research, how to use sources, finding gaps, entering the conversation, rhetorical context, etc.

The next step of this was to look at how we could apply this in our lives after we finish this class. This was really interesting for me because a lot of the time I feel that I just cram a bunch of useless information into my brain for the quarter and then lose it once I move onto the next class. This class was different and I could think of SO MANY applications of the knowledge I learned! But, the one thing that I kept thinking about was media, news and just any published information.

For example, this class taught me to be skeptical about my sources and understand who they are before I believe their “facts” to be true. A while back, we did an activity where we evaluated source validity. Ultimately, this lead us to a publication about Martin Luther King by a group called Stormfront. Most of us didn’t realize that Stormfront is actually a white supremacist group who created one of the Internet’s first major racial hate sites (Wikipedia).

Yeah…it was pretty bad…
(Source: Giphy)

Also, exploring rhetorical context and the rhetorical triangle further gave me a name for something I already practiced. For example, I knew that your message and delivery of the argument are going to differ depending on the audience; you wouldn’t say the same things to a group of college students and a group of elderly people because they value different things! This is pathos.

Similarly, I knew that all writing must have a purpose, otherwise, why do it? Some people are writing to persuade, while others inform or even entertain. I didn’t realize the importance of an author’s purpose though. For example, if someone is writing to persuade you, you should probably check their sources and their facts to see if their argument is valid.

The last assignment for my CTW class is to transform our 8-10 page research paper into some new form of media that applies to our intended audience. This can be a video, photo, podcast, anything really!

Before I started, I needed to ask myself a couple of questions.

1. What is my goal? To educate those most affected by Title IX about its policy, application and purpose when it comes to athletics. I hope to increase awareness so that the injustices that result from Title IX no longer go unaddressed.
2. Who needs to hear/see it for me to accomplish my goal? Anyone and everyone! But most importantly, university and college students and/or student-athletes.
3. What medium will best help me achieve my goal and reach my audience? The majority of college/university students have social media regularly. I believe that Instagram is the best way to reach my audience since it is one of the most popular platforms and incorporates both visual and textual elements. More specifically, I want to use a multi-photo Instagram post that, in a way, acts as a mini PowerPoint presentation that the viewer can easily flip through.

To make this multi-modal composition, I will use Piktochart to make multiple infographics that I can then post on Instagram.

As I sat down to write my final research argument, I knew it was going to be a struggle. The assignment is an 8-10 page paper that is the culmination of all the work we’ve been doing all quarter long.

Source: Giphy

So, to help make it a little more fun to write, I decided to incorporate something that I’ve found useful on my blog to help organize my essay. Yup, you guessed it, I broke up my paper using

Headings!

Initially this was more for my own gain, because it served as an outline to my paper and gave me an idea of where I was going when I was writing. But I decided to keep some of them so that the reader can easily navigate through my composition.

The problem that I’m currently having is that I have so many ideas in my head and I’m struggling to make them coherent on paper (is it even on paper if you are writing in a Word document??). The literature review part of the essay was easy, because I had already done the ground work with my annotated bibliography. But, the part that was difficult for me iss “filling the gap.”

I knew I wanted to apply a theory I learned in Public Health Science 1 to the broader conversation about Title IX, so that was fine. But, my problem is trying to identify the main problem with Title IX, because it is really much more complex than just one thing. The researchers in my paper suggest that it is either the policy itself or the disregard for popular opinion.

Honestly, I believe that it is simultaneously both of those things, but also neither of those things (I don’t know how this is possible). They are both key issues, but I wouldn’t say they are the main issue. But, then, is the main issue is a misunderstanding/ignorance of Title IX or is it a value change in the implementation of Title IX?

Source: Floragraphy

They are all interwoven!! The need for quantification in the policy has caused people to disregard Title IX’s true intentions for gender equality, which manifests itself as an implied value change in the policy and therefore, is misunderstood by many people.

Nope, not the Bermuda Triangle. It’s the rhetorical analysis triangle! For those of you who don’t know what this is, you can check out this link, check out the triangle below, or continue reading.

Source: Pinterest

In CTW 1, we did a rhetorical analysis of an advertisement. I thought I would revisit that concept today with an ad I saw a couple of weeks ago on the door of a bathroom stall at my school.

Source: NKenned

But, before we start, let’s talk a little more about this rhetorical triangle thing. 

Here Are Some of My Notes From Class

• Logos
  • focuses on the clarity of the argument and the logic of its reasons and support
  • appeals to reason and evidence (science)
• Ethos
  • relates to the credibility of the writer (who wrote this, why should I listen to them?)
  • demonstrated through credentials, the tone and style of the message, how the writer considers alternative views, and the writers investment in his/her claim
• Pathos
  • Focuses attention on the values and beliefs of the intended audience (sad dying dogs and cats commercial appeals to our love for animals)
  • appeals to the audience’s emotions and imaginations (excitement or fear of the unknown)
• Kairos
  • About timing, about finding the right moment and context to speak or write on a topic (joke at a funeral)
  • Holistic trait, characterizing whether the appeal is made at an opportune time and place

Now that you understand, let’s try it out on the flyer

1. Logos – The flyer uses the statistic “1 in 2 sexually active young people will get an STD by age 25” to encourage young people to get tested for STDs and increase their awareness of the commonality of STDs.
2. Ethos – The speaker here is the CDC or Center for Disease Control and Prevention, which is a federal public health agency. Sounds pretty reputable to me.
3. Pathos – This whole ad is directed at sexually active young people, so it makes sense that they advertise at a college (cough cough, college students). Their statement that “most won’t know it” plays on our fear of the unknown. It makes us wonder if we actually are the 1 out of 2 who has an STD by 25. The exclamation “Really?!! (That has to be a mistake right??!)” typifies the expected reaction from these college students and emphasizes that the stats are right and there is no mistake.
4. Kairos – I saw this advertisement on the door of a stall in the bathroom that is within our school dining hall/cafeteria. This is a perfect place for an ad like this because it reaches a lot of people since this is probably one of the most used bathrooms on campus. It is also an ideal place because it gives people a chance to actually read the ad; STDs can be an awkward subject, so by putting it in a bathroom stall where no one interrupts you or sees you looking at it, the stigma is removed.

I hope you enjoyed my rhetorical analysis of an advertisement! Until next time.

Today, my Critical Thinking and Writing class was in the library with the lovely librarian Gail. She had a lot to teach us about investigating, evaluating and introducing sources. Now thinking back on it, the process you undergo when finding/using a source is similar to finding a boyfriend/girlfriend, or really any friend!

I know it’s cheesy but…

Let me show you what I mean:

1. Investigating – Before you agree to date a person or be their friend, you want to know who they are. You wouldn’t want to be hanging out with a fugitive and not know it!! It’s similar to finding a source: before you commit to one, you kinda have to play detective and look below the surface. This includes looking up the author(s) to see what they studied, what they do for a living, where they are from, etc. This also includes looking up the journal or whatever the container (as MLA likes to call it) to see what type of publication it is.
2. Evaluating – This is where you decide if you decide if the relationship is really going to go anywhere; you have to figure out if you can trust the person or not. For sources, you have to assess the author’s ethos and whether they are qualified to talk about the given topic. You have to decide if the journal/container in which the source comes from is well-regarded, biased, peer-reviewed, etc. If not, then ditch the source and move on to the next.
3. Introducing – If a boyfriend/girlfriend makes it home to meet the parents, you have to be confident in your choice. The pressure isn’t just on the boyfriend/girlfriend though, you have to introduce them to your parents in the right way. This is the same with sources; if a source makes it into your paper, it better be a good one. But, you have to introduce them correctly, highlighting all the key information. For example, if you include a source in a paper about depression, you should probably bring up the fact that the author is a clinical psychologist and the article was published in one of the American Psychology Association’s journals.

Thanks for reading!

What Does the Title Mean?

It comes from John Swales’ CARS (method source!!).

These CARS?? Source: Pexels

No, not those CARS; it’s an acronym for “Create a Research Space” which basically provides a framework for composing a research argument.

1. “Mapping the territory” is just another phrase for entering the broader conversation, seeing what “they say,” finding background sources or doing a literature review. It essentially means establishing the context for your research argument.
2. “Minding the gap” refers to finding the holes or spaces that need to be filled in the existing research. When you find the gap, you occupy it with your own research and perspectives and voilá, there’s your argument.

My Territory 

To map my territory, I have been reading anything and everything that has to do with Title IX and it’s application to collegiate athletics, leading me to lots of useful (and some not so useful) sources. This has helped me better understand what people are saying in the broader conversation about Title IX in college sports. The main topics that are coming up are

1. Pros/Cons – Now, more women are participating in collegiate athletics than ever before, and they have far greater opportunities than they did 40 years ago. BUT, in order to comply with the proportionality requirement (one of the three tests for compliance), many institutions have cut men’s programs. In short, women gain opportunity while men lose opportunity.
2. Factors that influence support – Various studies have been done to determine if factors like sex, age, race, education levels, income levels and political party impact one’s support for Title IX. Multiple sources indicate that women typically support Title IX more than men, but sources are contradictory about the other factors.
3. Evaluating Compliance – There is a three-pronged test to evaluate educational institutions’ compliance with Title IX, but most rely on the aforementioned proportionality requirement. Many of the sources believe that these requirements are problematic because 2 of them are hard to measure, and the proportionality requirement leads to discrimination against men.

My Gap

Before I began researching, I was intending to use my Santa Clara survey as a case study, but I know realize that my survey information doesn’t fit with the broader conversation. Now that I can’t do that, I’m struggling to find a gap that I can fill.

I could analyze the differing results regarding factors that influence support, however, I suspect that it’s simply due to differing samples that are not representative of the entire population. So, kind of a

Source: Flickr

I am most interested in analyzing the injustices that have recently occurred as a result of Title IX, such as men’s sports teams being cut to meet the proportionality requirement. I believe that this is due to improper enforcement of Title IX that no longer aligns with its original values of eradicating discrimination. But, I fear that this may be too similar to the argument made by Ambrosius in her article “Title IX: Creating Unequal Through Application of the Proportionality Standard in Collegiate Athletics.”

Basically, I’m struggling to add something new to the conversation.

Librarians Are Helpful

Today, we had a change of scenery for my CTW class. Instead of our normal classroom, we met in the library and continued identifying sources for our research paper. Do you know what this means? MORE BOOLEAN SEARCHING!!

Source: Giphy

This time, I used composed a more advanced Boolean search: I truncated words with asterisks*, used “quotes” to search for phrases, and used OR to include other ways of saying the same thing. Here is the first search I did in the OmniFile database.

Source: N Kennedy

When I did this search, I only got 7 hits and none of them were really compelling or presented information that I wanted to talk about.  So, I consulted the librarian and told her what I was interested in: the differing perceptions of gender equality in athletics and academics. She helped me formulate this new and improved Boolean search.

Source: N Kennedy

This brought up a loads and loads of sources, and after sifting through all the hits, I saved 14 to read for later. To describe this process, I will borrow a phrase coined by Linda Flower (aka, use her as a method source): “construct a purpose” (Kantz 80). Instead of going in with a predetermined purpose for my research, I let the data guide me.  I constructed a purpose by adjusting my content goals and writing plans “as [my] understanding of the topic develop[ed]” (80).

But What Do I Do with All These Sources?

My goal is to synthesize these sources to generate a road map of the broader conversation about my topic. This will give me a bird’s eye view of the territory and allow me to see where/how I can integrate my own argument and analysis.

My argument in the broader conversation – Source: N Kennedy

How do I do this? Well, I can certainly tell you how NOT to do this. For this, I will now borrow from Margaret Krantz’s “Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively.”

I will NOT:

1. Read these sources as narrative stories, focussing on plot and characters (Krantz 72-73)
2. “Expect my sources to tell the truth” and accept all their ideas as valid (72)
3. Assume that the “facts” presented in the sources are only there for accuracy and comprehensiveness (72)

I WILL:

1.  Read sources rhetorically and consider the speaker (Encoder), the audience (Decoder) and the topic (Reality) of each article (74)
2. Analyze each source’s argument and consider other interpretations of the authors’ ideas (77)
3. Recognize that facts and opinions are essentially claims that authors use to persuade their audience (76)

Basically, I will keep my overall goal for gathering (@Michael Kleine) these sources in mind and read them with this lens. Hopefully, I find some interesting stuff!

Give me just a second and I will explain!

For my CTW2 class, we had to find an article that engages our research topic by bringing it out into the broader conversation. In order to find an article, I conducted an advanced search on a research database called OneSearch through my school’s library website. This advanced search involved boolean searching, which is a fancy search method that allows you to input various key words or phrases to refine your search results and ensure that you find what you are looking for. Here’s mine

Source: Natalie Kennedy

The second hit that popped up seemed like a perfect match, as it was entitled “Gender Equality in Private Collegiate Athletics: Is Title IX Having an Impact?” It seemed like decent source since it provided data from comparable schools: private, no football, in the NCAA.It was too good to be true! The only mismatch was that these were Division II schools, not Division I.

After watching the tutorial, I went back and retried my search to see if I specified it a little more, the same article would still come up. The videos stressed the importance of obtaining sources from peer reviewed, academic journals, so I restricted my results to only include articles of this type. Because I am interested in discussing the contemporary implications of gender equality, I restricted the publication date to 2012-2017. Here are some of the adjustments shown on the boolean advanced search.

Source: Natalie Kennedy

After doing all this, I am pleased to report that my selected article still appeared on the results, meaning it met all the criteria! YIPPE!

The article helped me to answer my questions about the current state of equality with regards to financial aspects. For example, it presented data on scholarships, expenditures, and basketball funding to evaluate equality among the sexes. However, it did not address the other dimensions of equality that I was hoping to explore: the social and cultural. I will continue my research in the hopes of finding information about these aspects.