Link

Final Portfolio Problem Essay Video

This is my video that I did for the Problem Essay about Healthy Sleeping Habits.

Final Portfolio Cover Letter

Portfolio Cover Letter

WC: 665

Before I started this class I thought I was a really great writer capable of writing an entire novel on my own. My essays in high school were really well written and I always go A’s in English. I hardly ever made multiple drafts and seldom went over my work. I didn’t realize that my essays could have been much stronger just by changing some key areas such as how I validated my arguments by properly citing sources and quotes supporting my claims. I thought that all it took to be a good writer was to makes sense and have a clear source that defends your claims. Now I know that in order to properly write I need to take in so many different factors such as audience and purpose and exigence and also put particular care into how I formulate my arguments and defense them with citations and quotes.

What I learned from this class will help me in writing better essays which will make my essays much stronger and clearer. I will be better to write essays better not for just English class but all my classes that I have to write essays in. I’ll be better at articulating what I’m arguing for or writing about. Communication is key in school and in life and this class really helps you to develop that sense in writing and it translates over well into speaking which I showed in my video.

I chose the problem essay because I thought the video I made for it was very relevant and effective. I think my video is very similar to typical YouTube videos you see of people with their own problems and make videos to address them. my literacy narrative wasn’t very good so instead of rewriting it I decided to put my best foot forward and Improve on my video. I enjoyed the video because I really related to the lack of sleep. ROTC keeps me very busy and I rarely get the full amount of sleep that I need so it was a very real issue for me.

I learned that in order to succeed in writing and in other areas I have to very detail oriented to do well. I learned that My writing needs work but the more essays I write the better they get. I need to go over essays multiple times and sometimes have a friend go over it and give me their opinion. My rhetorical analysis essay is a good example of where I am now. After reading the review of my original I decided to rewrite it and adhere as closely to the prompt and revisions. The outcome is what I believe is a very solid essay representative of where I am in my writing ability.

I designed my portfolio because I thought it was as similar to my personality as possible. The color choices reflect how I am at times and the chess game stimulates thought. Also I just like playing chess and thinking games. I have never had a blog before so I’m very new to the whole blog and style thing so I made it as simple as possible.

The rhetorical analysis paper,Smart Music, and my problem essay video are good representations of how I am in life right now when it comes to writing and my own self confidence. I don’t have a problem going in front of a camera and talking about a subject. I think over the quarter my word choice in how I speak improved as well as how it did in my writing.

I hope you enjoy reading my essay and watching my video. I learned a lot over this quarter about writing and speaking and I am continuing to get better and I hope that this portfolio gives a good point of reference for where I am at in my writing. I enjoyed learning in UWP. It wasn’t easy but I learned a lot from it.

Final Portfolio Rhetorical Analysis: Smart Music

Adam Rodriguez
UWP1
Word Count: 1,146
Smart Music
A Rhetorical Analysis of Two Articles About Music Making You Smart

Music has been around since the dawn of time. Since before we could manufacture musical instruments on a mass scale humans were singing and beating rocks with sticks. Recently there have been more studies into those who play musical instruments and being smart. “Can Music Make You Smarter?” by Valerie Conners is a popular article hosted by Curiosity which is run by Discovery. In the article Conners uses two sources to answer the question of whether music does make you smarter. Her first source is an academic research study called “Associations Between Music Education, Intelligence, and Spelling Ability in Elementary School” by Hille, et al. The popular article skews the information and data found in the research study in several different ways. It makes a huge jump to assume that all who play music will get smarter. Hille, et al indicates that there is a correlation between those who play an instrument and higher IQ and test scores but it does not say that playing a musical instrument will make you smarter. The research study also only surveyed elementary school boys and did not include girls at all making the claim irrelevant to girls.

The popular article by Conners makes the claim “studying music has been proven to raise verbal and non-verbal IQ scores, improve vocabulary, spelling and reasoning abilities, heighten mathematics skills, and help with language learning abilities” (Conners). The evidence in the research study indicated that “sample intelligence showed a normal distribution with a mean of 104.5 IQ” (Hille, et al). This means that boys who play instruments on average have only a 4.5 intelligence difference than the average person which is not very significant. Also “For boys who took part in a course on “First Experiences With Music” a higher non-verbal IQ was found, t(192) = 2.76, p < .01, d = 0.41. However, when families without musical instruments were excluded, this difference disappeared” (Hille, et al) this means that there was only a positive correlation for increasing IQ in families where they owned an instrument. When it came to improving vocabulary and spelling “The more intelligent the students the fewer spelling mistakes they made.” (Hille, et al). This means that it didn’t make them any better off at vocabulary and spelling than it did at raising IQ. When it came to reading there was an improvement but only for those who owned an instrument. The evidence recorded in the research study indicated that “the distribution in spelling performance showed that only students in the lowest quartile differ from the others with respect to playing an instrument.” Another flaw in the claim that playing an instrument boosts intelligence is that the study did not take into account how much a student played an instrument: “We did not specify this response: We included children who received recorder group lessons for 30 min per week at age 8 for some weeks as well as children who played instruments with up to 4 hr individual lessons weekly starting at the age of 5. Given that weak inclusion criterion our results may even underestimate the observed effect.” (Hille, et al) The cognitive gain from playing an instrument is also not as great as Conners makes it seem. The research study suggests that it might be more beneficial to speakers of languages with better “better phoneme–grapheme mapping” than English. Assuming that Conners’ target audience speaks English she is missing the audience that could benefit the most from the cognitive boost music gives. Her claim about music improving math skills is unsupported by any evidence stated in the research study.

Conners’ article is a generalization of the information from the study. Some of her claims are supported by the study but a lot of the benefits that someone can receive from playing an instrument are circumstantial. For instance there was only a measureable boost in IQ and spelling and reading for those who owned an instrument. Those who don’t own an instrument don’t receive the benefits that Conners states. Conners makes the claim that Mozart and Einstein were also musicians to bolster her argument,It seems Mozart was not only a brilliant pianist, he also had a penchant for playing billiards, and using mathematical reasoning to map out the spatial relationships among the balls on the table. Then there’s the great genius Albert Einstein, who also gained notoriety for his talent playing the violin,” (Conners) but the fact that they played musical instruments is just an anomaly like the outlying boy who scored a 146 IQ on his test. The purpose of Conners’ article is to convince people that there is a benefit for them to play a musical instrument. However in her article she doesn’t specify the benefits that one might get nor does she state that based on the way the study was conducted it may only be relevant to males all together. Conners’ makes a good argument to her audience that playing an instrument is beneficial but only if her audience doesn’t look into her sources. The research study was written to figure out specifically how playing music affected young elementary school boys. The study’s audience was sociologists and psychologists as well as educators. The research study uses much more jargon and data to back up their claims which makes it difficult for common people to read the study and understand the specifics of it. The two different purposes make it understandable why Conners would make the popular article very generalized. However, the generalization cuts out key data and specifics which discredit a lot of what Conners says.

The reason the difference between the two articles matters is because of the information the public receives. The popular article leaves out specific details about the study that are a big deal, such as not including girls into the study. Conners’ claim that playing a musical instrument makes you smarter is not entirely correct because the study only shows a correlation between higher IQ scores and various other categories but it does not say or show how playing music specifically does that to the brain. Conners was correct that there are benefits for playing a musical instrument but the data did not back up her claims correctly. There are many other studies that she could have used that would have defended her stance better and show how playing music improves brain function but this study was only designed to show a correlation of test scores not how the act of playing an instrument makes the brain work better. Audiences should be wearier of what they read and when a popular article has sources it may be a good idea to actually look at the sources and see if they actually support the author. The other article that Conners cites in her popular article is just another popular article that only has quotes and no exact location to find the evidence supporting the claims. Conners is efficient at making it appealing for readers to go out and play a musical instrument even though the evidence she uses to defend her stance does not entirely defend her position.

Smart Music

Adam Rodriguez 

UWP 1 

Word Count: 1042

Smart Music

My two articles are drastically different. The academic article explains how socioeconomics as well as gender bias affects which people play music. The popular article tells us that playing an instrument and playing music makes you smarter and raises your IQ. The popular article takes into account research done on studies done with people who play music which leaves a huge flaw in the research. This determines which types of people actually play music and have the musical aptitude to learn and get that advantage of getting smarter and raising IQ scores. The popular article is based on academic research which does not take into account the research done in or used by the research article.

The research article goes into very deep detail about socioeconomics and describes how different people choose to play instruments which are based off of their socioeconomic status. The article says that there is a correlation between high SES (socioeconomic status) and being more likely to play music and have a more diverse taste in genres of music. The studies show that the better off people are the higher the chance they would also play more musical instruments and have a wider variety of instruments to choose. Based on the research and thesis in the popular article this could mean that being smarter and having a higher IQ, based off of playing an instrument, is much more likely to occur in people with a higher SES. This argument could hurt the thesis of the popular article because this would mean that there is a correlation between being well off and being smarter. This makes the thesis of the popular article weaker because the access of instruments is much more readily available to those of a higher SES. This makes it possible for an argument that people with only a high level of SES really benefit from the side effects of playing instruments. 
The amount of evidence used in the research essay is much more prominent than that used in the popular article. The evidence and jargon used by the research essay make it nearly impossible for a reader to find fault or argue against the author’s point without having prior education in music and sociology. The popular article only references evidence from “experts” and the only specific evidence in the popular article is from Professor Janke of the University of Zurich. The evidence just pulls from an article that Professor Janke said or published. The fact that there is only one specific source for the popular article weakens the argument especially because of the vast amount of sources in the research article. The popular article could have had more arguments on the topic of how IQ is heightened because of music, but it only simplified an argument referenced from Professor Janke.

Even though the two articles differ greatly in their substance, their purposes are completely different and that is why the amount of evidence needed to support each claim is drastically different. For the popular essay its purpose was to communicate to the average person that by playing a musical instrument you can become more intelligent and, therefore, have an increased IQ. The only evidence that was necessary to support this claim was quoting research from a professor who said so. No one who reads the popular essay is going to question the research behind it because it isn’t a research essay. They will treat it like a popular article and take it for what it is. The evidence necessary to back up the claim isn’t necessary for the target audience. They don’t need to know that playing and performing a musical instrument requires just as much brain function as playing a fast paced sport. They don’t need to know that by playing music they are simultaneously using both sides of their brain in a way that uses a large amount of brain power that no other activity does. They just need to know that playing an instrument makes them smart and raises their IQ score. For the research article, the target audience is people who are in the music industry, if not professors of music or sociology. They need valid points and clear evidence for them to accept the points made in the article. The evidence the author uses to back up how SES affects the availability of instruments and range of exposure of a person to different genres and musical tastes is key to the thesis. Without it the latter would have no base to argue the point. For the research essay the evidence and arguments necessary are much greater because the target audience is familiar with how music works and how people think and work with music.

The style of writing between the two essays is also very apparent. The popular essay uses much more simple styles of diction. This makes the essay clear, simple, and gets straight to the main idea. The research essay uses a lot of terms such as timbre and other musical references that would require someone with musical experience to understand. The jargon makes it essential for the author of the research essay to make valid points about music. By staying simple in the popular essay, the author makes it more appealing to people because it’s easier to understand.

It is important to know why these articles are different and how they relate to one another. Music is just like any other science that requires extensive study. It’s been around as long as people have lived on this planet just like science. In order for these two essays to be effective in their purpose, the popular essay has jargon and very specific facts that come out of the research paper to make its point. It also needs to be able to have enough credit and research to withstand harsh criticism. The research essay has to have solid evidence to argue and defend itself from critics in the music and sociological fields. The popular essay needs to check facts such as how SES makes it so only those who are have a higher SES are exposed to music and are much freer to play musical instruments than those who are not.

 

My Essay Is Copyrighted, But That Can’t Stop You From Using It

 

UWP Midterm Final Draft

Adam Rodriguez

Word Count : 740

 

            How would I feel if someone took a poem that I wrote and then published it on their website without asking? I would be pretty pissed off! Intellectual property and copyright law are not just for nerds or authors who make livings off of what they write.publish whether in print or online Intellectual property and copyrights affect us all and we are all touched by the effects and limit If I were to write a poem, as described in Situation #1, and publish it online I would own that poem. That poem is mine. and Iit is my intellectual property or rather, I hope and believe that it is.

 

            The problem with someone using my poemthat arises in Situation #1 is that my poem was used without my permission by someone who could be making a profit off of my work! my intellectual property was used without my permission and published on another website. Since it is my intellectual property according to the Constitution According to the constitution, I own it.(Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8), Congress has the power to “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8) Therefore I own the exclusive Rrights to my respective writing, poem and the right to be mad that someone else is using it without my permission.

 

            Now the problem becomes what should I do because they used my poem with out my consent. Well in this case it is a poem and it doesn’t seem like it’s a big deal for my poem to be used. But if I were a writer or if I were to become a well-known and respected writer then the worth of my writing is much more valuable to me than if I am not well known. With writers and any one who creates art and claims it as intellectual property, we are only granted their lifetime and 70 years after for them and my their heirs to capitalize on their works before their copyrights expire and their work becomes fair gameI am not a poet and I don’t make money off writing so it’s not as big a deal. If my poem was that good and could make money then I would have an issue. As said in, In “Who Will Own Your Next Idea?” (Mann) his friend runs into the same issue where some magazine took his article and spun his words around and published it in their magazine. For me I would be somewhat excited that someone thought my poem was worth publishing. I would just ask that my name be added so I could receive credit for writing it.“A Great Idea Lives Forever. Shouldn’t Its Copyright?” (Helprin) artists and writers can only capitalize on their respected works for 70 years after the death of the author while other companies and inventors who have established patents on their intellectual properties are protected indefinitely and their earnings exceed well into future generations. Helprin points out that even though writings and art aren’t material goods that can be patented they are still valuable to society in the same way that goods that are protected by patents are. The inventors of the goods protected by patents can receive benefits for however long their invention stays relevant or until it becomes obsolete but for writers and artists, they lose out on all their prospective profits after 70 years! How can that be if some writings that live on forever have the power to influence history but the owner is only allowed to benefit from it for a certain amount of time! Furthermore, they may also lose even more profit if people begin to use the Fair Use Doctr

            Anyone can reproduce a copyrighted work fairly for purposes “such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.” (17 U.S.C. 107)

 ThisSo this means that if my poem is so valuable to anyone who wants to use it, they can be reproduced it as long as it adheres falls under the parameters as stated by to the Fair Use Doctrine. This leaves a ton of gray area where one could argue that their use of my work or anyone else’s can be used and reproduced and still not infringe on my right of ownership. Just like in, “Who Will Own Your Next Good Idea?” (Mann) intellectual property is not entirely protected. The rights to his writings and my poem but because of Fair Use (17 U.S.C. 107) the French magazine was were  aallowed to reproduced and used his writing in their article and the website because they were commenting onadding to it. The magazine company is making a profit by selling and distributing the magazine and even though they are making a profit, Charles’ friend doesn’t receive a dime because his copyright does not protect against the company’s use of it because the Fair Use Doctrine and I don’t receive any payment from the ad space the website sells.  (17 U.S.C. 107).

 

            In class, my group read the article, “Where Do All Those BuzzFeed Cute Animal Pictures Come From.” (Madrigal) We learned that although they do not own the rights to photos they publish online, they are allowed to use them and post them because they are not able to locate the original poster. Also since they are a company who is for-profit they are obligated to acquire rights for the photos they post however if they put in the effort to try and locate the owner of the photo or copyright and are unable they are able to post it. This means that if they can’t find who the original poster of the poem is then they can post it and use it. So it becomes my job to ensure that I have it posted with my name so I can secure credit for it.In class we also learned that unlike BuzzFeed which has to follow copyright law, w We as individuals can post and repost and use images, articles, and videos, etc. without having to worry about copyright law. We aren’t big websites who are making money off of ad space small fish in the infinite pond called the internet. We are individuals who are using the internet to publish our feelings and interact with friends or family or colleagues or professors. We aren’t making profit and we fall under that gray area of Fair Use. So even though I wrote my poem and it is my property, anyone can pull it from my blog and post it and share it and quote it to their heart’s content and I can’t stop them. I can only hope to get credit for my poem by having my name attached to it.  stop them if they tried to publish it in a way that they were to make profit off of it in some form or other but that would also require a lot of work and not being well off or a published writer I would have limited resources to fight for my intellectual property.

 

            So my solution to this problem would simply be to ask the website to kindly attribute the poem to me as I am the original poster and it is my own work. I would not ask for compensation for allowing them to post it because I am not well-known or a professional writer. And since I am not a professional writer, or rather not yet a professional writer, they are doing me a service of distributing my work and helping boost my popularity as a poet by allowing others to see my work. My solution uses my right for the right to my poem as protected by copyright law to claim it as my own but also allows the company to publish my work through the use of the Fair Use Doctrine to mutually benefit both me and the website. This allows artistic progression to flourish because I am not limiting who can see my writing while also claiming it as my own.

Problem Video UWP

Healthy sleeping habits

Problem Essay Rough Draft

A major problem for college students that we all probably suffer from would be unhealthy sleeping habits. Sleep is a key part to a healthy life. Healthy lives have a lot to do with diet and exercise but also healthy sleeping habits. Your body needs time to recover and build on itself. Your mind needs time to shut down and relax and not be stressed. College students don’t normally follow the typical 8 hour sleeping period that we should get. I know I am definitely not getting enough sleep especially because of how my schedule is but I know a majority of my friends also do not sleep as much as they should. Unhealthy sleeping habits can lead to poor health, more stress, and overall an unhappy life.

The Scam Of Publishers

The relationship between academics and those looking to learn have been greatly affected by business. Not too long ago there used to be a prevalence of non-profit publishers that would publish texts for academics and students alike. But then they realized they could be making money off people so they turned to selling their writings at inflated rates to compete in the open market of quality of writing and value in order to make money off the consumer’s dime.

Me on Communicating

School taught me how to write and communicate through words in essays and various forms of writing. From school I developed a sense of my own style of writing and learned how to write in a way that allows me to keep a tone that would resemble the way I would normally speak to another person. From my interactions with people and teachers and friends and so forth I learned how to communicate differently depending on the situation. I think stylistically that change of speaking translates to writing in a subtle change in style much like how one would change the way they speak from communicating to friends or family to communicating with a professor or superior. In school there are even subtle differences in how you talk to specific people.

I think when talking to certain people you develop a bond and relationship between the two of you in which you learn about them and subconsciously know how they feel about certain things. Because of that bond you begin to have inside knowledge into their lives and personalities and that’s how you get “inside jokes” with various people. For me, because of technology I act differently when talking to guys or girls especially depending on the circumstances. For example if I were to try and flirt with a girl via social media, I would be much less fearless in what I say because I am hiding behind a computer screen and so what I would say would differ greatly that what I would actually say in real life and it would also be received differently as well. If I were to talk to a guy who I’m friends with or live with I obviously wouldn’t talk or act in the same way because when I talk to guys online it Is much more concise and simple without all the flair of flirtation.

For me speaking and communicating has changed a lot this past summer because I had my first job in sales. Working sales is an interesting way to learn to communicate and it’s kind of a double-edged sword. On one hand you want to do your best to communicate and best serve the customer using whatever means at your disposal and on the other hand you also want to land a sale so you can make a living. I repeatedly had to make phone calls or respond to emails and try to solve the customer’s problems as best as possible so that they would trust me and be more willing to fork over money and buy what I’m selling. Sales really taught me how to talk to people and serve them while also serving myself. I learned that communication is really a give and take model and you can really manipulate what you give and what you take by being good at “playing the game”.

When I communicate through the computer it is also a lot different than how I would communicate verbally or in person. When I am communicating via email with professors or with peers my style of writing is much more professional. When I was working in sales all my emails were very professional and friendly and I got accustomed to writing and dealing with people in that way. To me communicating through computers can be very dry and lacking that bond that you get by having face to face real interactions with people.

When you cut out body language you lose the humanity of communication. Even when I communicate through social media (ex. Facebook, Instagram) I feel like it is lacking a real human touch. I personally think when people communicate through social media like Facebook, Twitter etc. they are really just communicating in a way that is a lot like propaganda. What they post and what they say online is propaganda to try and shift your views of what you think of them. Social media is like a never ending socio-political campaign full of what you want people to think of you and how you want them to react to what you say and what they can see of you. When I use social media I like to work it like it is a socio-political campaign, especially now a days where you don’t know who will see what you post such as bosses, professors, friends, family, and people who you’ve never met. Inevitably people will judge you based on what you have online and what they can see of you from the internet so personally I try to be as much as myself as possible online and limit who I interact with online to be people that I can see face to face or verbally communicate with.

In conclusion, I miss the humanness of “old school” means of communication but I also understand how important it is for us to adapt and develop new means of communicating. Technology and social media are just tools we use now and they have become everyday parts of our lives whether we like it or not. I will continue to try and be as human as I can be through non-verbal and non-face-to-face contact. I continue to think that who people are on social media is a mechanism the have developed to be what they want everyone else to think they are.