Similarly, in “In Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively,” Margaret Kantz frames the reading by sharing her input on what facts, opinions, and arguments actually are. First, Kantz states that, "'research' does not mean compiling facts and transmitting them to a teacher, but instead it is using a variety of conflicting sources to make an original argument on the subject that one is researching." In other words, when writing a research paper, it is important to enter into the conversation and share how the information that you found while researching effects your personal view on the subject. Furthermore, it is important to note that all the information that you find on the internet is not necessarily facts. Kantz defines facts as,
…show more content…
First, he defines a discourse community as “groups that have goals or purposes, and use communication to achieve these goals.” He then goes on to say that all discourse communities include the six characteristics of a broadly agreed upon set of common public goals, mechanisms of intercommunication between members, participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback, utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres for the furtherance of its aims, has a specific lexis, and has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discourse expertise. In my own personal experience, I have come to believe that Swales six characteristics do in fact define a discourse community and I saw that when I researched the sneakerhead community which fit all six requirements. To illustrate this, in the paper itself, I went through all six characterics and wrote how the sneaker community fit these requirements which is a process that Swales would both encourage and praise. Additionally, I feel Swales might have critiqued my work for not going in depth enough or defining all the terms I used …show more content…
Then he goes on to make a more ambitious claim: writer-based prose is sometimes better than reader-based prose. Elbow also goes on to explain how audiences can be inviting or very enabling and inhibiting. This has proven to be true in my own experiences with writing. Specifically, in high school, my English teacher was very strict with grammar and always marked up our papers with her red pen and did not include positive feedback on our papers. With a red sea of corrections, I felt uninspired and like my quality of my writing did not really matter unless the grammar was perfect, which inhibited my writing. After learning about how beneficial ignoring audience can be, I have strived with my papers in college to write for myself and freely incorporate all my ideas without having the restricting voices of various audiences playing in my mind. Continually, I think that Elbow would critique my writing in high school for conforming to what my audiences wanted me to write instead of ignoring the audience altogether and directing my words only to myself or to no one in particular. On the flip side, I have
First, he defines a discourse community as “groups that have goals or purposes, and use communication to achieve these goals.” He then goes on to say that all discourse communities include the six characteristics of a broadly agreed upon set of common public goals, mechanisms of intercommunication between members, participatory mechanisms primarily to provide information and feedback, utilizes and hence possesses one or more genres for the furtherance of its aims, has a specific lexis, and has a threshold level of members with a suitable degree of relevant content and discourse expertise. In my own personal experience, I have come to believe that Swales six characteristics do in fact define a discourse community and I saw that when I researched the sneakerhead community which fit all six requirements. To illustrate this, in the paper itself, I went through all six characterics and wrote how the sneaker community fit these requirements which is a process that Swales would both encourage and praise. Additionally, I feel Swales might have critiqued my work for not going in depth enough or defining all the terms I used …show more content…
Then he goes on to make a more ambitious claim: writer-based prose is sometimes better than reader-based prose. Elbow also goes on to explain how audiences can be inviting or very enabling and inhibiting. This has proven to be true in my own experiences with writing. Specifically, in high school, my English teacher was very strict with grammar and always marked up our papers with her red pen and did not include positive feedback on our papers. With a red sea of corrections, I felt uninspired and like my quality of my writing did not really matter unless the grammar was perfect, which inhibited my writing. After learning about how beneficial ignoring audience can be, I have strived with my papers in college to write for myself and freely incorporate all my ideas without having the restricting voices of various audiences playing in my mind. Continually, I think that Elbow would critique my writing in high school for conforming to what my audiences wanted me to write instead of ignoring the audience altogether and directing my words only to myself or to no one in particular. On the flip side, I have