Ria's Rambles

“What do you want to do when you grow up?”

“What is your intended major?”

“Why did you choose SCU if you don’t know what you want to do?”

“Where do you see yourself in ten years?”

Every time I hear these questions, I cannot help but cringe a little.

Being undeclared is overwhelming as it is because you are trying to figure out what you are going to do, but it is even harder when you feel as though you are in a program where you do not belong. This was my issue.

When applying to SCU as a senior in high school, I had absolutely NO idea what I wanted to study.  I decided to apply to be in the College of Arts and Sciences because there is the most options of majors.  However, as I was registering for classes during orientation I started thinking to myself, what am I doing in the College of Arts and Sciences?  I always had it in the back of my head that I would be interested in possibly pursuing Marketing, but I could not just easily change to the Leavey School of Business (LSB).

After researching information on LSB, I found that the odds were not in my favor to internally transfer schools, and that I would apply Spring Quarter of my first year at SCU.  So that is exactly what I worked to do this year.  I worked as hard as I possibly could in all my classes to make sure my GPA could be the best it possibly could; however, I did not expect this to be the only thing to strive for, as I researched what to do incase I did not successfully transfer.

I did a little research and found that I had other options if I stayed in the College of A&S.  I learned that SCU has two competitive business fraternities, so I rushed one just to see what it was like.  Luckily, I ended up really enjoying it and also got the opportunity to pledge it last quarter.

In addition to that, I found I could declare as a Communication major and a Retail Studies minor, and I would get a very similar education as I would if I were a Marketing major.  This is all well and good, but from my research I found that I wanted to be in the business school even more than ever before.

Yes, I can obtain the communication skills I would need in the College of A&S, but the technical and critical thinking aspects of business can only be obtained from the LSB. As an actual  marketing major, I will obtain a solid foundation in business processes such as budgeting, generating and interpreting analytical reports, buying strategies, and industry-specific techniques, which is not only what I want to learn, but what I need to learn.

From researching this, I was able to form a very compelling argument for myself as to why I would love to be in the LSB because…

I DID IT!! I was in the library when I received the congratulatory email, and I was filled with so much shock and joy that I freaked out the person sitting across the table from me.  She gave me a weird, are you okay? look… I was very much more than okay, I was… A MAZE ING.  Might not seem like a big deal to some, but it was to me.  It was a highly selective chance for me to transfer and I feel so much better now that I at least feel passionate about what I am going to focus on at SCU.

Persuasive sources. That phrase probably seems very a little strange to a lot of students who are looking through sources because they are probably thinking, why would a source need to be persuasive? Sources are just facts right?

This is the issue Margaret Kantz addresses in the article, “Helping Student Use Textual Sources Persuasively,” as she points out the mistakes students make when conducting their own researching.  The biggest issue that Kantz discusses is that students often view history and sources just as stories or narratives, as she uses a students named Shirley as an example.  She analyzes how students like to state just “facts” in research papers, rather than arguing what the facts might be.

However, Kantz does not just focus on the negative aspects of students writing.  She also uses a student, Alice, as an example of what a student should do; and that is, argue.  Kantz really could not be more clear that she believes that students need to use sources to form his or her own argument on the subject matter by challenging others views and fighting for his or her personal views and interpretations of the topic.

I’ll just wait until I am entertained by some fights.

In relation to my research, I truly valued the advice Kantz had to offer.  When I read that most students view sources as stories and that sources are nothing more than “facts,” it really made me think about my own research habits.  I feel as though I really only utilize sources as facts. However, I do believe I also use sources to formulate my own arguments and questions towards my topic of research.

That being said, I really do believe Kantz has a good point.  I think that one of the only reasons as to why I actually build arguments based off the sources I find is because I have been taught to do so in my English classes.  So I sympathize with what she is trying to say when she says that students will just analyze and report the information they come across because they probably don’t realize that they can build a profound argument from the information.  Also, Kantz then goes on to discuss finding and realizing the gaps of communication when looking up information. Personally, I have just been exposed to this concept when researching so I am now conscious of it when looking up information, but by no means am I an expert of locating the gaps.  Moving forward with my research, I am going to keep all the reiterated and newly introduced information given by Kantz in mind while I analyze my sources to build my next argumentative paper.

When looking at my peer blogs, there was a particular blogger that stood out to me — Leslie. Being so unique and interesting, her blog’s title, College & Caviar, instantly caught my attention. What does this mean? Or what does Leslie mean by this? I sure didn’t know so I decided I had to keep reading.

Leslie’s blog posts might be long, but I defiantly did not get bored when reading her posts. She goes deep into her analysis on all the articles we have read in class and gives a truthful, honest reflection on them.  Most importantly (or what I find most important), she is able to display her voice and humor in her blog SO well…like if I had to rank all the blogs in my class, Leslie would hands down be #1 to me because she is a blogging goddess.

In addition to her blog posts, I really enjoyed the tab she includes, Blogs I Enjoy, and You Should Too!  Naturally, I clicked on the tab, just like I hope you just clicked on the hyperlink to the tab. Because if you did you will see she included two blogs: BarefootBlonde by Amber Fillerup Clark and GaryVaynerchuk by Gary Vaynerchuk.

These blogs might be very different, but I can totally see why Leslie enjoys them both.  The first blog, BarefootBlonde, is much more fun and cute; while the blog, GaryVaynerchuk, is more business-y, as he blogs about business in social media.

BarefootBlonde.

GaryVaynerchuk

The first blog caught my attention because of how fun it is and I enjoyed browsing and skimming it.  Even though the second blog is a tad more serious/educational, I feel as though I found more interest in it.  I am currently a student in the College of Arts and Sciences; however, I recently applied to transfer in to the Leavey School of Business. As an aspiring business student with very high hopes of getting accepted, I am hoping that to one day be a marketing major. In addition to that, I recently just heard back from a marketing firm in Phoenix, RIESTER, that I will be interning there this summer, yay! Anyways… Gary Vaynerchuk’s blog was intriguing to me because he focusing on his ability to create such a successful business from social media marketing, and also his recent post, The Ultimate Advice for Every 20 Year Old, was a great read too.  His posts inspired me, just as I can assume they inspired Leslie. I plan on continuing to follow his posts as they are pretty beneficial to my life thus far! But for now, I am tired, sick, and ready for bed so…

peace.

Hunter vs. Gatherer

When I first hear this I would assume someone is talking about a time long, long ago when men were described as hunters because they went into the world with a strong sense of purpose and direction, and form deliberate strategies and technologies to kill his targets…

And when women were described as gatherers because they looked  about widely making sense and use of the food he or she discovers by chance.

However, in an article I have recently read, “What is it we do when we write articles like this?” by Michael Klein, I was shown a next prospective of a hunter and gatherer. The article expressed that I could be a hunter and/or gather while I am conducting my own research.

Because a hunter finds what they are looking for and gatherers discovers something that may or may not be useful, I understand why researchers can be categorized as hunters and gatherers, especially with regards to my archival research.  In my own research, I would be considered a hunter when I searched for keywords, topic-based tables, opinions, questions, trends, and drafted a paper.  On the other hand, when I tried to find background sources, just read random articles, looked at big conversation ideas, and outlined my writing process, I would be considered a gatherer.

I think Klein’s ideas truly align with every researchers process, including my own. I would not say I am solely a hunter or solely a gatherer, but rather that I sometimes represent the role of a hunter and other times I embody the role of a gatherer. And personally, I think it is better that I can illustrate both qualities rather than just one of them.

You get the both of both worlds!

On January 12, 1777, the glorious Mission Santa Clara Asis was founded.  I am sure you might be thinking something like…

Oh yeah, that makes sense! I know where the Mission Church is on campus.

Yes, you are right the Mission Church on the present day Santa Clara University campus is a key representation of what used to be Mission Santa Clara de Asis; however, there is so much more to it than just that.  Even though I typically tend to be very indecisive and hesitant, this is the main reason why I decided to focused my research question around the historical aspect of SCU.

Because I had never entered an archive before, I was a bit nervous to what I would encounter when I was supposed to enter Santa Clara University’s archive with my class.  Fortunately when we went this past Thursday during class, it was very satisfied with the abundance of information I stumbled upon.  The main archival artifact I found to focus on is an informational “Welcome” pamphlet for a historical tour of the school.  Who would’ve known SCU even offers such a thing…

LOL NOT ME.

Anyways… this archival artifact was published fifteen years ago in 2002.  So after our class time in SCU’s archives, I was inclined to do a little more research of my own to find some additional information on Mission Santa Clara that speaks to my topic.  Although I originally thought I was in search of something more along the lines of an article, I ended up finding a painting of Mission Santa Clara.  Here is an image of the painting I found:

This particular digital image of a painting of Mission Santa Clara is courtesy of the Santa Barbra Mission Archive–Library.  The painting allows me to get a sense of a visual representation of what the original Mission Santa Clara appeared as before it was vital for it to be rebuilt and remodeled, due to the fact it suffered from its fair share of flooding, earthquakes, and fires over time.

Honestly I find it pretty embarrassing that many students here (myself included) don’t really know the true historical importance our university hold.  This is the main reason why I choose this topic, so that I may argue the importance of knowing the history of the place one lives and goes to school.  History might not be that crucial to some, and I can attest that being that I have never been fond for any history classes, which says a lot because I am focusing my research on my school’s history.

I’d like to give a HUGE shoutout to my homie g, Faithy-Poo!

Last quarter I took a class, Ethics in Society, to fulfill my ethics core credit.  I was not thrilled to take this class for two reasons:

1. It was a MWF 8:00AM class.
2. It was a MWF 8:00AM ethics class.

I am not gonna lie though…it was rough for me to make it to all those class, and I am not upset that it is over.  However, it was to my surprise that I actually ended up really enjoying the class.  My sweet, old professor with his Boston accent, William Parent, somehow always got me interested in the conversation topics.  I personally thought he truly did his best to respect, yet challenge everyone’s views in the class.  Because I grew to so particularly found of him and his class, I suggested to both my suite-mates to take his class, and they are!

One of my suite-mate’s, Faith (aka Faithy-Poo), is also in my CTW with me.  As previously stated that I have formally taken the ethics class she refers to in her blog post, Morals: Ethics, I found her post to be very #relatable.  She discusses that she is a bit apprehensive about having to present to her class on the topic of abortion, and I don’t really blame her for it.  My presentation topic was about if homosexuality is moral or immoral… so you can imagine the uneasiness I also had because of the political environment I am surrounded by here at SCU.  Despite my worries, my partner and I ended up doing very well to respectably facilitate a class discussion, and also to be extremely courteous of all the opinions of our peers.

However, I was very jealous of Faith as she explained that she is able to utilize the research skills we have learned in our CTW class when she does her research for her ethics project.  I especially appreciated when she pointed out and linked the two classes together when she observed that “…in having to show both sides of the argument, I am reminded of this class and the use of the naysayer from fall quarter,”  and also when she meantions, “I am reminded of a blurb I read in Lynèe Lewis Gaillet’s article, Archival Survival: Navigating Historical Research  in which she claims, ‘the relationship between the researcher and subject is often problematic and needs to be addressed. The researcher’s interests, prejudices, selection of subject matter, research questions, and biases inform and guide the research, and the researcher should inform readers of these factors up front’” (36).

I can’t help but agree with her that it is extremely important to inform one’s audience as to where she stands to give her audience credibility and not to confuse them.  With that being said, I truly resonate with Faith about worrying about the class, but also am happy that she is becoming more confident with this class, just as I did.

Yeah yeah yeah – I’m on a mission

Yeah yeah yeah – If you’re with me raise your hands

Yeah yeah yeah – Got no inhibitions

It’s our decision, we’re gonna have a good time

Yeah yeah yeah – Got a new religion

Yeah yeah yeah – Gotta take me as I am

Yeah yeah yeah – I’ve got expectations

With gradification, we’re gonna have a good time

Not only is this such a catchy song, but you will see later that it is pretty punny too.

(…well not quite yet)

Being that I will be spending time in Santa Clara University’s archive, choosing a topic pertaining to SCU is my obvious guideline.  Even though it may seem like an obvious guideline, pin pointing a specific topic question was some what tough for me.  But not to worry I had somewhat of an epiphany as I was sitting in SCU’s Mission Church this past Sunday on Easter.  As I was day dreaming during the homily (hate to admit it, but it’s true…), I was thinking about how the very church I was sitting in has evolved so much over time and how it has effected the SCU community.  And this is when I realized my research question pretty much slapped my in the face.

(figuratively, not literally lol)

I decided I wanted my research question to be something along the lines of…

How has The Mission church changed and effected the SCU community over time?

From asking this question, I am on a mission to find out as much as possible about The Mission. I hope to find out all aspect of the history of the church then in comparison to now, such as…

1. Architectural
2. Spiritual Life on campus
3. Mission
4. Vision
5. Values
6. Events
7. Services

Most importantly, I really just want to find out all the factors that contributed to the Mission becoming a University.

After many class discussions and reading various articles on archival research, I feel as though I am much more educated and have got a new religion on how to go about my own archival research. The archive has gotta take me as I am as I attempt to test out my new researching plan.  From Tirabassi’s article, I have learned that even though I’ve got expectations, I have to mindful that not all of the information will be available. Also, it is really good that I’ve got no inhibitions because it allows me to be like Nancy Drew, being that I will look for as much research as possible because I know I will never find research in one spot.  Also from Gaillet’s article, I learned more about ways to tackle the legal and moral complexities often associated with investigating valid, credible manuscript collections.

So if you’re with me raise your hands if you think we’re gonna have good time while working on this archival research project!

You are probably thinking to yourself, where exactly are we journeying to?  And the answer is… into the archives.  Why? Simply because every archival research encounter influences one’s research process, just as Katherine Tirabassi claims in “Journeying into the Archives.”

Like many other people, before spending tike in an archive, Tirabassi viewed an archive as its obvious function: as a storage facility preserving historical materials that might otherwise be lost in closets, attics, barns, and local landfills.  However, from her first archival encounter, she was directly able to see how artifacts could be reimagined with a fresh perspective by a researcher asking a different set of questions than those implied by the archive’s established categories.  As she saw the archives through a new perspective, she outlines some practical approaches and challenges of archival research.

The four key principles that motivate her work in the archives are as follows:

1. Principle of Selectivity
2. Principle of Cross-Referencing
3. Principle of Categorization
4. Principle of Closure

The Principle of Selectivity is understanding how the archivists select and omit artifacts for a given collection.

The Principle of Cross-Referencing is the practice of searching across documents for contextual traces that clarify  an archival document’s rhetorical situation or that confirm, clarify, or contradict a fact or point cited in a given document.

The Principle of Categorization is the development of keywords and findings aids that help researchers access information in the archive.

The Principle of Closure is understanding that there are inherent gaps in the archival records and that while the archive is complex and rich, it cannot be searched exhaustively. Finding the ending point or knowing when to make an exit is an essential part of archival research.

In addition to that, Tirabassi claims that when we choose to conduct archival research, it is because we have a passion for the work and the questions that are pushing us to find answers.  Personally, I do not necessarily agree with this statement. I might not actually have a passion for an archival research project, but it might be assigned to me.  This can be related to a topic I touched on in my most previous blog post, “Is It Really a Disaster Though?”  With that being said, I would question Tirabassi by asking, what if we do not have passion for it?

Last week, the article, “The Great Research Disaster,” was discussed in my CTW class.  The author presents a student, Liw, that who has written to requirement.  When I read this, I thought…

Who doesn’t write their school assignments to fulfill requirements? Who doesn’t do what they have to do to get an A?

No one.

The author says the problem isn’t that Liw is lazy, but that no one has led him into the adventure of research, which is a task that takes time and certain amount of motivation.  Their mission is to make students like Liw and me information-literate; however, they say one cannot accomplish this until he or she realizes research is fun.

The author says that research is about discovery and problem-solving, not merely about meeting obligations; and also that students projects are their own, not presents to their professors. Grappling deeply with issues and open questions instead of fudging a professor’s assignment is indeed fun.

This is where I have a problem.  This article is just the authors opinion on research projects.  For example, I know if I was assigned a research project with a topic that I have zero interest in, I would definitely not find it to be fun.  How could that be fun for me?  So, when the author describes Liw’s research as a disaster,  I can’t help but think he is being a complete drama queen.  Especially because in the article the author is basically lining up a different type of “requirement” or “guideline” that a student will just aim to meet and call it a day, which I could then call his method a disaster.

Despite my issue with the article, I really appreciated that the author does not say that it is Liw’s fault that he just meets his teachers requirement and calls it a day, but instead Liw has not been guided to understand the adventure of research to help him “get it.”  However, the intention and meaning behind the author saying Liw has not been led to comprehend the adventure of research to help him “get it” could be take the wrong way by a reader.  Like is the author being passive aggressive and saying…

… but is it really though?

Personally, I do not think that was the authors intention when he said Liw doesn’t “get it” yet.  But if that were the case, I definitely would have an issue with it because the adventure of research is not something you should just automatically know (aka common knowledge)… And that is the entire reason as for why I am currently learning about the adventures of research in my English class.  Even though I have done research projects prior in high school, I am not by any means a research wizard, but my research is also not a disaster.

I like researching,

Yes I do!

I like researching,

How ’bout you?!

I find it very strange that many people don’t really like to research.  Like who doesn’t like gaining knowledge new topics, ideas, people, etc.

Just kidding, I don’t think these people are necessarily stupid people, but simply that they are lazier and more impatient.  I actually think that intelligent people might not like research because they think they already know everything.

Anyways, my research process has immensely developed over my learning experience.  If you asked me many years ago, I would have just said Google.

But now as I have matured, my research is something like this:

1. Choose a topic I am passionate or inclined to learn about
2. Google to read basic gist of topic information
3. Use library search engines for reliable sources
4. Survey people or ask people in my life their opinions and journal my findings (reflect)
5. Physically going to the library to get physical books

Recently, I have stumbled upon Joseph Bizup’s system that I can’t wait to try out with my next research project.  The way of researching is called BEAM.

No, not like a laser beam. The BEAM I am referring to is an acronym: backgrounds, exhibits, arguments, and methods.

Backgrounds or background sources are materials whose claims a writer accepts as facts. The author then uses these found fast as “common knowledge,” which can later be used in arguments.

Exhibits or exhibit sources are materials a writer offers for explications, analysis, or interpretation.  Therefore, exhibits are commonly referred as one’s “evidence” or “examples,” which add to a writers conversation.

Arguments or argument sources are materials whose claims a writer affirms, disputes, refines, or extends in some way.  One would naturally say that arguments are just “conversations,” and can even just be commonly held views.

Methods or method sources are materials from which a writer derives a governing concept or manner of working. In other words, methods are simply just influential concepts that may enter into the general language of disciplines or professions, which allows them to lose their ties to specific sources.

BEAM is the framework for readings, being that strong writing depends on strong critical reading skills.  Consequently, BEAM acts as a framework for writing.  The framework for critical reading also make useful as a framework for writing.  The best academic papers are normally those that analyze specific exhibits in order to further conversations embodied in specific constellations of argument sources.  In my opinion, I think BEAM will allow me to successfully accomplish a strong academic paper.