Developing a Research Question

A Brainstorm on Research Questions for Computer Science

In this post, I will think of a few research questions for computer science that may lead me to ongoing debates that have a significant depth, and relevancy, to today so that I might later analyze them in detail and assess what people are saying on those topics.

Wikimedia Research Team, "Wikimedia-Research" 26 May 2005 via wikimedia.org.
Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) License.

Below are my tentative research questions for topics I'm interested in within the field of computer science:

What are people saying today about computer science in education and general curricula?

I think that this would be an excellent research topic because I know from experience that general schooling systems, like school districts and high schools, are struggling to take a definite stance on teaching computer science and to what degree computers should be present in schooling. I think this would also be an interesting topic because I have personal interest in it not only due to my interest in computer science but also because I am personally involved to an extent, as I've gone through high school and been in some computer science-related courses. I also imagine that it would be interesting to see how schooling systems justify their stances on teaching computer science considering that it is a growing field in our society.

What role does technology play in global politics, considering such aspects of national interests such as cyber-security and commerce?

 I believe that this topic would be interesting for multiple reasons. Firstly, this question is concerned about a large, macro scale in the form of world politics, so it may be interesting to see what important figures and nations are saying on the topic. Additionally, my QRG project was somewhat related to this topic and I found China's shift from reliance on western operating systems and online services interesting given the context of national censorship in its mainland and replacement of these banned items. Lastly, I imagine that this topic is very up-to-date because there are many, many foreign policy and global affairs magazines and articles to be found online that I think would extensively cover this issue.

What are the rights surrounding encrypted data, and are governments treating encryption specially?

 I am certain that I would be intrigued by this topic if I researched it. Recently, I heard about a talk show interviewing Edward Snowden on a variety of topics that included his views on encryption and encrypted data, and what he had to say was subject to my fascination. Snowden spoke about how governments are treating encrypted data in special ways that do not reflect their similarities to mail and other forms of information that are already regulated by law in our society. I think that I would be able to find large amounts of material on this topic because it's related to law, computer science, privacy, and our society's massive use of technology and the internet.

What are the ongoing debates surrounding robotics and advancements in artificial intelligence?

 I think that this topic would be interesting because it's concerned with our changing world in the context of constant advancements in robotics and software that are now reaching into the roots of our society. I would imagine that many people are speaking on this issue since software and robotics, and even developments in artificial intelligence, are threatening jobs and promoting productivity in our industries today, which is affecting many people and businesses worldwide. I would find this topic to be intriguing because I imagine I would find a large diversity in opinions on the matter.

Reflection on Project 1

My Reflections on the Quick Reference Guide

In this post, I will consider and reflect on my work that went into creating my Project #1 Quick Reference Guide, now that I've completed it. In the process, I may learn something new about my writing from the experience I've had over the past month.

Deboni, José Eduardo, "Some Considerations" 20 August 2008 via flickr.com.
Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC-BY 2.0) License.

What challenges did you face during the Quick Reference Guide project and how did you deal with them?

My main challenges were the compiling and formatting of images, and dedicated revision. I found it difficult to find images that were relevant to my topic and fit in well with my QRG, which I attribute to my topic being somewhat esoteric and about China, which isn't really in the western sphere of technology and internet. I overcame this by just searching smartly and trying multiple approaches to formatting and keeping an open mind. I also had trouble carrying out dedicated revisions, as I have only once or twice before revised one piece of writing so many times, but I think that I learned how valuable it can be to perform four or five revisions, which is what I did to deal with my challenge in revising - I just sat down, and make sure I did it. And I think I'm better for it now.

What successes did you experience on the project and how did they happen?

I think I saw many successes in the project in planning my writing. I not only think I was successful in the actual writing of my QRG with the sections, which allowed me to organize my writing and explanations, but I was also successful in understanding what my QRG would be like when I created the Clustermap for the earlier assignments. I thought that the coggle.com clustermap was incredibly cool and useful, and I saw great successes with it. I plan to use it in other works from now on!

What kinds of arguments, rhetorical strategies, design choices and writing practices did you find the most effective for your project? Why?

I found a neutral stance to be the most helpful when it came to creating an argument for my QRG, as I was able to focus on providing information and explanations while writing with it, which in my opinion is the most important aspect of the QRG genre. Additionally, I found contrast and parallelism to be among the most useful rhetorical strategies and writing choices as I created my QRG because I was able to display differing evidence clearly and write my points in between or following the parallel, contrasting sentences or paragraphs. 

What kinds of arguments, rhetorical strategies, design choices and writing practices did you find were not effective for your project? Why?

For my writing, I found much of the reading's advice on theses not of use to me, as they detailed how to make arguments, but the QRG genre needs to have some level of distance from the topic and avoid total bias. While some elements of the theses could be helpful, such as lessons on how to construct them, I didn't find thesis-based construction to be helpful in my writing. I also didn't find images on to be very helpful for me in writing the QRG, as I felt that it was more of a chore to add them to my piece and they didn't help me in organizing my writing very much. However, as a convention of the QRG genre, I still had them in my piece.

How was the writing process for this project similar to other school writing experiences you’ve had in the past?

I think that the explanatory nature of the QRG made it similar in writing process to literary analyses, at least in my mind. My reasoning behind this is that in literary analyses, one is to construct an examination on a topic in a writing and ground the writing in evidence from the text, just as a QRG writer must examine a controversy and root the QRG in evidence and sources related to the topic. I think that the two are also similar in that they integrate quotes into the writings. I suppose the primary differences between the two are that QRGs are usually written without the reader having knowledge on the topic whereas the readers know the text referred to in literary analyses.

How was the writing process for this project different from other school writing experiences you’ve had in the past?

I found the QRG's writing process to be extremely different from that of historical essays that I've written in the past. I say this because in historical essays, the writer's primary focus and central component in the writing is their thesis, and they cite evidence from history to construct an argument that supports their thesis. This is different from the QRG because in QRGs the emphasis is on informing, not extracting an argument from the information, and QRGs are typically on recent controversies or events, unlike the history essays I've written in the past which had topics on thousands-year-old civilizations or on 19th century America, for instance.

Would any of the skills you practiced for this project be useful in your other coursework? Why or why not?

I actually think I learned a couple skills from writing my QRG that will prove useful in the future. Chief among those skills is organization of writing, which I learned and practiced extensively in writing the QRG thanks to the clutermap exercise and sections of the piece itself. I learned the value of having a well-planned work, and I aim to carry that lesson onto future works because I don't think having a plan for writing could ever be bad. I also learned how to research and integrate research into my writing much better from this project since that was such a large component in the process of writing the QRG, and I think that skill will obviously help me in the future whenever I write a work that requires research and sources.

Reflection

I read the Project #1 Reflections of Carter and Kelly, and found both similar and differing opinions on what the important lessons to be taken from the QRG are.

I found that I largely agreed with Carter's responses because he highly valued the section-based format of the QRG for the structure it brought his writing. I had the same thoughts in my responses, and thought the QRG had a great organizational quality that it lent to the writing process.

I had more varied opinions on Kelly's responses, but thought that they were very thought-provoking. Namely, I completely agreed with Kelly's approach to the writing process of the QRG through a neutral stance to present information and explanations, and with her decision to make her QRG's conclusion present the ideas she had that were not presented earlier in the piece. However, I also disagreed with Kelly on the grounds of images being an effective organizational tool and social media sources not being useful, as I actually disliked having to include images in my work yet I found an immensely useful social media post that gave my QRG direction.

I suppose that what I can take away from reading others' reflections is that organizing one's writing is very important when writing an extended piece, but that every writer finds uses in different elements in their own ways. I think that, in the future, I will try to approach every large writing assignment with a mind on how I will best organize my thoughts into writing for the work.

Final Draft of Project #1: The Quick Reference Guide

Final Draft for My QRG

In this post, I simply am going to include the link to my final draft for the Project #1: Quick Reference Guide. 

Additionally, I will include a quick note for the grading instructor (please read, Sean!)*.

Mika Lorenzen "Screenshot of QRG" 26 September 2015 via google docs.
Self-created content.

Here is the link to my final draft of my QRG!

*Hey Sean!

So, I tried my best with the formatting of images, but in order to wrap images with text but also have them captioned, I was forced to use text boxes. The only downside to this approach was that text in text boxes are not "clickable," so the links in the captions can not be accessed.

To ensure that I have proper citations complete with links, below I provided the same citations, but you can interact with the texts so you can test the links!

Thanks!

Cherryx, “2011 Protests Against Internet Censorship in Turkey” 15 May 2011 via wikimedia.org.

CC BY 2.0 License.

An example in Turkey of protest against internet censorship, like that which is present in China.

An online comment made by user John Robertson on Quora.com

Screenshot taken by Mika Lorenzen 6 September 2015.

GitHub, Inc. “Logo of GitHub” 27 March 2010 via wikimedia.org.

Public Domain.

Bigmorr, “Republic of China Ministry of Education Seal” 22 September 2012 via wikimedia.org.

Public Domain.

Clarity, Part 2

A Return Visit to the Clarity Section

In this post, I provide my reactions and lessons from reading through my Quick Reference Guide draft following my readings of the Clarity section from Rules For Writers. I decided to read the chapters on Active verbs, Shifts, Emphasis, and Wordy Sentences. From there, I revisited my QRG draft and applied the readings to my writing.

BenAveling "Turtle Returning To Sea" 28 May 2007 via wikimedia.
CC BY-SA 3.0 License.

I feel that this time around in performing the Clarity exercise, I chose topics which much more adequately speak to me as a writer in need of improvement. While I don't think that I needed much advice from the reading in crafting well-emphasized sentences or in ensuring proper shifts in my writing, I believe that I really benefited from the reading's chapters on active verbs and on wordy sentences.

Yaoxue called his project a work in “transparent computing,” one of two that he has been developing in his time since he left the education ministry in China in 2011, and it was selected to win one of China’s most prestigious science awards in natural science.

The above sentence was extracted from my Quick Reference Guide, and I chose it to illustrate how I needed help with active verbs in my writing. In this sentence, I used "it was selected to win" in the place of the project doing the winning, making it the subject of the verb rather than the object which received the selection to win the award. Even in describing it, this sentence becomes awkward and lacks flow, so in my revision of the sentence I simply reworded the latter half of it so that the MetaOS project won China's most prestigious science award in natural science, which is more direct and effective writing.

Some individuals do not think that the project is any more than an elaboration on cloud software and remote-desktop systems, which has cultured skeptical opinions on the merits of the project which won the distinguished award.

Lastly, this sentence demonstrates evidence that I definitely have some wordy sentences in my writing. In my academic career, I've always struggled with wordy sentences, so I actively try to avoid them. Yet in writing a massive body like a QRG, I suppose I was bound to have a few. In this sentence, I included a redundant phrase at the end, which is not only redundant in that I mentioned the project earlier in the sentence, but in context I also stated that the project won the award. I simply removed the last phrase to help the sentence stay manageable and not awkward.

I honestly believe that I have improved my QRG in revising it for active verbs and wordy sentences!

Identifying Basic Grammar Patterns

A Paragraph That Has Gone On For Far Too Long

In this post, I reflect upon my writing patterns through examining the grammar I use in an excerpt paragraph taken from my Quick Reference Guide Draft. The paragraph, which was my longest paragraph, can be found here in Google Docs, wherein I made comments that showed where certain grammatical elements were present across the various sentences included.

Pacres, Jeffrey James, "Writing" 9 February 2009 via flickr.com.
CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 License.

In completing this exercise, I rediscovered just how wordy and lengthy my sentences can be. While I don't always think this is a negative quality of my writing, it is definitely something I need to be aware of whenever I'm writing. I encountered this thought during this exercise as I realized that I had to pick apart my long sentences for independent and subordinate clauses, which sometimes got very complicated. Given this, I have already set about revising that paragraph in my draft.

Additionally, I think I would like to explore variety of placement of certain sentence elements, as I think that varying where certain components of your sentences are can be refreshing for readers and prevent information and messages in your writing from being missed.

Paragraph Analysis

A Detailed Analysis of The Nine Sections of My QRG Draft

In this post, I include a link to an analysis on the effectiveness of my Quick Reference Guide's paragraphs. I decided to analyze the nine sections of my QRG, including the introduction, and the paragraphs that comprise them. However, I focused on the sections as wholes rather than focusing intensely on each individual paragraph due to the short nature of paragraphs in QRG and the amount of such concise paragraphs. Additionally, in this post I reflect on what I learned about my writing style and structure from conducting this analysis. 

geralt, "Problem Analysis Mark Marker Hand Solution" March 2015 via pixabay.com.
CC0 Public Domain License.

The link to my analysis of the sections of my Quick Reference can be found here.

What I learned from this exercise in analyzing my own work was that my main strength is the logical flow of my paragraphs and sections, while my weakness in my writing may be that my paragraphs within the various sections of my QRG weren't split where they needed to be. In examining every paragraph, I found that each sentence logically flowed into the next in a way that lent itself to the explanatory nature of the QRG. I hope to keep that quality of my writing intact as I revise and add to my piece, as I think it is my greatest asset in the organization of my QRG. However, I now plan to revise where my paragraphs are divided, as I spotted multiple instances in my QRG where two separate ideas were not properly separated across two paragraphs, or at least not in the most effective way. I hope to remedy this issue so that my sectioning of my paragraphs and QRG makes perfect sense, which will make it easier to read in addition to making it easier to scan.

Reflection of Project 1 Draft

An Honest Reflection on My Quick Reference Guide Draft

In this post, I examine what I learned about my draft through the peer editing process. So far, I have examined other drafts by Brandon, who wrote about genome sequencing and the ethical debate surrounding the issue, and by Dylan, whose QRG was about the Oscars and the racist controversy over its nominations given that the critically-acclaimed movie Selma was not represented well at the Oscars. I learned more about important aspects of the QRG genre in peer editing their works, and now I will reflect upon my own draft, which has been peer edited as well.

flyupmike "Glass Water Sky Live Reflection" October 2014 via pixabay.com.
CC0 Public Domain License.

Below are my responses to the sections on a draft's "Audience" and "Context" from the Student's Guide to First Year Writing.

Audience

• My instructor, who will be grading my Quick Reference Guide, and my classmates, who have been peer editing it in its drafting stages, will be reading my Quick Reference Guide. However, as the conventions of the QRG genre hold, I have written my QRG in an informative style that is targeted at people who are looking to know more about the controversy over Chinese National Science Awards, but may have absolutely no knowledge on the topic.

• The expectations of an uninformed reader looking for information on this controversy are that my QRG should provide all the necessary information they need in order to understand the origins of the controversy in China, how the controversy developed, who the groups involved are, and how the controversy fits into a larger, more meaningful picture of China's actions in the world today. I think I am addressing these needs well, as I ensured I paid special attention to describing and informing the reader on how the controversy grew, and what implications it has for more global issues and trends worldwide.

• Given the fact that my controversy is fairly esoteric to American readers, as its about a national science award in China, I assume that readers of my QRG will have no prior knowledge on the subject. With this in mind, I realized that I needed to completely portray my topic in an informative way that establishes the foundations of the controversy, namely the MetaOS project created by Zhang Yaoxue and his team, and then builds from there to discuss the Chinese Government and its worldwide policy.

• I believe that formal, academic language is suitable for the audience who my QRG is designed for. However, as the QRG genre allows, I think that I do have some room to work with, meaning that I could sacrifice some formality in my writing for a more clear illustration of my subject if that is what I deem necessary. Despite this capability, though, I think I will try to use as much formal academic writing as I can without too much heightened vocabulary, as I find that is the writing style that will allow me to do the best job I can in informing the reader.

• As mentioned above, I think it will be best if I assume an academic, measured tone in my writing. As my controversy topic is based in another country, I don't want to risk sounding biased based on my own nationality and opinions on the world, so I think that a strictly academic tone will be my best choice in remaining fair to the topic and those groups involved in the controversy. From what my peer editors wrote in response to my draft, I think I successfully sustained this academic tone throughout my writing of my QRG - however, the main focus I must see to in revision is making sure that my QRG remains interesting and easy to read.

Context

• The formatting requirements of the Quick Reference Guide genre are a blend of essay and blog post format. QRG is defined largely by its subheadings, short and concise paragraphs, and use of white space to encourage easy reading and even scanning of the work. I honestly believe that I used sectioning effectively in my draft, but I still think that I need to work on making my paragraphs concise and short so as to make the reading easier to digest. Additionally, I should consider the use of more visuals in my QRG as visuals may ease the stress of reading for my readers, as I have a significant amount of writing for my QRG.

• The content requirement for the QRG genre is, almost singularly, to have a composed body of writing that has the sole purpose of informing the reader. I think I actually have done well in this aspect of my draft, as I emphasized the need to provide my readers with all possible, basic knowledge on the topic while I was writing it. Though again, I do think that I could include more visual aids in my QRG to add variety to it.

• I think that my draft reflects careful analysis of the QRG genre that we have performed in class, as it operates within the conventions of the genre and imitates the style I assessed from five different examples viewed in class. I do firmly believe that I introduced some of my own ideas into my draft in establishing a larger picture for my controversy, as I drew connections in the latter half of my QRG that were related to the controversy but placed it on a larger, world scale. However, I intentionally tried not to include my own voice in my writing because I did not want to risk sounding biased, especially since my controversy takes place in another country.

• Yes, I am currently in the process of clearing up grammatical issues in my QRG draft that were pointed out by my peer editors. In addition, I plan to make my own pass on the draft after addressing my peer editors' comments for the purpose of catching any remaining errors of that nature.

Clarity, Part 1

A Look Into Learning - Improving My Writing

In this blog post, I described what I learned in reading Rules for Writers in sections that I thought I could improve my writing in. Below, are the four topics I sought to learn more about and what information I gleaned from the sections.

geralt, "Home Distance Learning Courses" 2014 via pixabay.com.
CC0 Public Domain License.

I decided to read the chapters in Rules for Writers on Parallel Ideas, Needed Words, Variety, and Exact Words.

1. Parallel Ideas - In reading this section, I learned about how to construct parallel sentences more effectively, which I think is important because I use parallelism often to convey relationships or like natures in informing readers on a topic. The main item that I learned from this section is that in order to create a successful sentence that uses parallelism, one must be sure to concise in their language so as not to obfuscate the parallelism, but also not omit too much from their sentence as that may compromise its structure and lose the intended effect of the parallelism. For instance, verbs in parallel structure should match tenses and connect strongly, and in a like fashion, to the subject of the sentence.

2. Needed Words - While I don't believe I learned much new information from this section, as I try hard to make clear sentences with needed words, I did learn the important message that clarity should always supersede flow in sentences where the two are conflicted. By this statement I mean that, if a sentence would have better flow with omitting words or phrases that would potentially compromise the meaning of the sentence, one should not omit those items as doing so would create a potential for misreading which should be avoided at all costs, especially in an explanatory genre such as QRG. 

3. Variety - I think that this section offered very useful, general advice for writing sentences in the context of a larger body. While I was aware of the ways in which you can vary sentence structure, I think that I learned from this chapter that it is dangerous to only use one or two types of sentences in your whole piece as that alone can lose the reader. This chapter offered advice to, as the writer, actively consider variation to carry the reader through your reading. While this may be difficult or not entirely apply to the QRG genre, which may have more simple sentences for informative purposes, I still think it will be important to have variety in my QRG to prevent it from being too difficult to focus on and read.

4. Exact Words - The main lessons I learned from reading this chapter were to be aware of connotation, and to use specific, concrete nouns whenever possible. As the book emphasized, a writer should always strive to use concrete nouns that are not abstractions so that the reader can immediately gain an idea of what is being discussed. Additionally, this idea is often easily altered by the connotations of the words the writer chooses to use, so the writer must be sure to be aware of such connotative influence in their works to ensure the right idea is being conveyed to the reader. In writing my QRG, I think I need to be aware of noun confusion and connotation as those two can betray the meaning I intend to have in my writing, especially with connotation as improper word choice my imply I as the writer hold a certain belief when I do not.

Reflection

In reading my classmates' drafts of their Quick Reference Guides, I learned that the one of the most problematic element of the writing process is word choice and placement. In reading the drafts of others I noticed that wording demands a large amount of attention and consideration from the writer, especially needed wording, which was one of the sections I focused on most in my reading.

Below is an example sentence from Brandon's QRG on genome sequencing and ethical debates over the matter.

"The source, Prenatal Whole Genome Sequencing: Just Because We Can, Should We?, itself focuses more on the issue of whether to inform the parents of unborn children of possible "undesired" qualities of the child."

The above sentence exhibits an instance in which needed wording was a conflict. As I read the sentence, I stumbled following the "whether" component; I tried to look for a "or not" to complete the sentence's format, but there was none. Typically, the word "whether" is accompanied by a necessary "or not" to indicate a decision or two different approaches to the subject, and this sentence lacked that secondary component and thus became confusing.


Additionally, below is a sentence extracted from Dylan's QRG on racial debates over the Oscars and the Academy's nominations of primarily white individuals despite spectacular and critically-acclaimed performances and directing from the movie Selma.

"This is obviously not as severe as any of those incidents however most view this as yet another instance of racial repression in the United States. "

In this sentence, I mostly found issue with the overuse of the pronoun "this," in the place of a specific, concrete noun. This example speaks to the need for exact wording, as out of context, the subject of this sentence is not discernible and thus it can be unclear, even in context.

I am proud to say that since, Dylan has made the edit of adding "Oscar controversy" following the second "this," which completely clarifies the subject of the sentence and allows it to function fully.


In summary, I learned from others' drafts that special attention needs to be paid to wording, especially in the QRG genre in which the writer is almost an expert on the topic describing it to those who are not, which may lead to omission of necessary words in sentences that will confuse the reader rather than inform them.

Thoughts on Drafting

How I Think the "Student's Guide" Reading on Drafting Affected My Drafting Process

In this post, I reflect on the reading from the "Student's Guide to First Year Writing" on the topic of drafting and organizing one's piece, as I now have the experience of writing my own Quick Reference Guide and thus am prepared to analyze what advice I used, or didn't use, in my writing process.

Unknown, "Man Sitting At Drafting Board" circa 1936 via commons.wikimedia.org.
Public Domain.

I think that, looking back after writing my own Quick Reference Guide, the "Student's Guide's" information and recommendations on writing introductions and conclusions is important. My main reason for saying this is that, regardless of what type of writing you're working with, I believe you cannot have an effective work that does not have some identifiable introduction and conclusion. No piece of writing can simply omit a beginning and an end and be intact. I felt this importance as I was writing my QRG; I arguably struggled the most at the beginning and end of the guide because I felt like that was where I had to establish, and re-establish, what my guide was about in a way that wasn't strictly informative, and rather was a blend between informational and just plain intriguing. This quality of introductions and conclusions - the appealing concision accompanied by meaningful construction - made these parts difficult because I had to approach them differently from the body of my guide which only required me to maintain an account of the controversy and its happenings, groups involved, and sources reporting on the matter. The "Student's Guide" had advice that I used for both the introduction and conclusion of my piece. For my introduction, I focused primarily on what the reading said about direction; I ensured that my introduction gave my reader a sense of direction before the body of the text began, and I think this functioned well in my piece. And as for my conclusion, I think the reading had an abundance of excellent advice for crafting a smooth finish to one's piece. In the reading, it was highly recommended that you, as the writer, answer the ever-persistent "so what?" question, which can be done through a painting a picture. I did exactly that, as I had my final paragraphs dedicated to providing a sense of a grander picture that the controversy rested at the center of, which I believe assigned a great amount of meaning to my topic and my guide about it.

In addition, I think the reading made good points about organizing information and creating structured paragraphs. In all, I think having a mind on my guide's organization was essential to my writing process, as I actually began my QRG with the formatting and organization of subheadings to plan out how my guide would read, from which point I then just set about filling in the blanks. And when it came to constructing paragraphs, I think the Point-Information-Explanation archetype did a fair, but not great job, in most cases encountered in my guide. While I think in some instances it was best to link ideas through information to then portray a point, I do think that explanation is key in any paragraph, as it is extremely relevant to the QRG's purpose of informing and explaining a topic in depth.

I did not think that the reading's various points about thesis statements proved useful in my drafting process. While this may not have been the case for others who wrote QRGs, for me the QRG was about telling a story in a way that emphasized logic, information, and fair analysis, and I did not think that a thesis statement fit well with that objective. In my experience with thesis statements, theses are arguments to be made in your writing that you declare like an abstract in a science paper, and I found myself, as I wrote my QRG, actively avoiding trying to craft a specific argument, as I think that would obstruct the purpose of displaying all the sides of the controversy that my QRG was about. In other words, I do not think it is the writer's place in the QRG genre to make a thesis statement, or argument, as it betrays the point of the QRG. The writer's duty in this genre is to present the facts and inform, a purpose which I believe can be made clear in an introduction. I suppose the only element of the reading's advice that I think applies would be to have a clear sense of direction be established early in your piece, which is an element that was also included in the reading's recommendations for the composition of an effective introduction.

Reflection

I found numerous differences in my thoughts on the reading on drafting from those of Savannah and Isabel. Primarily, I found that my classmates valued using theses in QRGs, at least to some extent. In my response I thought that an argument, or thesis, had no place in QRG, but my classmates seemed to suggest that in some way the thesis can still be applied in order to give the writing an explicit direction. Additionally, my classmates held similar views to me in that they believed introductions and conclusions were very important in the genre to begin and end the piece effectively.

I think that the three areas I need to focus on in my QRG are:

1. An introduction that is succinct, but also conveys enough information on my controversy to attract the reader.

2. In some sense, a thesis in that introduction that provides a clear sense of direction to the piece so that the reader will know how I will construct the organization of my QRG, to ensure that the way I inform on the controversy is logical and understandable.

3. A conclusion that ends the QRG efficiently but also successfully alludes to a larger picture in a way that does not lose the reader, as I think it's vital I do so because my controversy alone may seem esoteric and need to fit into a larger, more meaningful picture for the reader.

Draft of Quick Reference Guide

A Guide to China's Controversy Over Computers, Scientific Prestige, and Technological Worldview

In this post, I will provide a link to my draft of my Quick Reference Guide, and give directions as to what types of feedback I would like to have from my peer editors (thank you in advance).

renji7, "Crumpled Paper" 16 November 2008 via deviantart.com.
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
In every writing process there is some scrapping, slate wiping, and starting over. 

My Quick Reference Guide is ready for peer edits! Before you read, you should know that my controversy is about Computer Science in China, which I assume the reader has no base knowledge on. As such, I tried to be as informative as possible in every area I suspected a reader might need it, so please let me know if you understood what I wrote. I want the QRG to be accessible.

Additionally, I would really, really appreciate it if in your peer review you looked specifically at my balance of information/evidence, how I introduce sources, and the structure of the QRG.

But most of all, I would be extremely thankful for feedback on if I represented/analyzed the sides/speakers of my controversy well, and for suggestions on what I can do visually with this.

My draft of my Quick Reference Guide can be found here.

Thank you so much!

Practicing Quoting

Quotations Over Plagiarism Allegations of Code in Yaoxue's OS

In this post, I practice quoting sources by selecting large bodies from the articles I used, and creating a paragraph that introduces the each of the quotes and provides room for them to be integrated into sentence thought. Using this structure, I will display how the quotes speak to each other through the issue to demonstrate each source's view on the controversy on plagiarism in China's National Natural Science Award.

Ibrahim ebi, "Quotation Mark" 18 October 2012 via commons.wikimedia.org
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Below are three pictures of the Google Document in which I applied these practices of quotation:

QRGs: The Genre

A Look Into the Genre of Quick Reference Guides

In this blog post, I consider what it means to write in the genre of Quick Reference Guides by examining elements of the genre's conventions, in addition to the purpose of their writing. Through these analyses, I will learn how the author effectively shapes their Quick Reference Guide using various writing methods and tools to tailor the piece to their audience.

DeTurck, Matthew "Quick Reference Guide" 3 October 2009 via flickr.com.
CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 License.

1. What do the conventions of this genre - the Quick Reference Guide - seem to be?

    The Quick Reference Guide seems to follow several major conventions. The first that I noticed in

    examining the examples provided was the wide usage of subheadings. In all of the examples,

    subheadings are present every few paragraphs, save the E-cigarettes example which has longer

    sections, and are usually posed as questions, such as in "The Only Guide to Gamergate You Will

    Ever Need to Read," which has subheadings like "What is Gamergate?", "Why Should I Care

    About This?", and "What Can Be Done to Resolve It?". 

    Additionally, all the example seemed to have short, direct paragraphs written in an explanatory

    style that is informative and clear. For example, the Sochi Olympics Quick Reference Guide

    assumed the reader knew enough about the event to recognize parts of the opening ceremony in

    order to respond with each of its subheadings, but in every subsection the piece clearly explained

    the topic in easy to read and forward language that answered the question of the subheading.

    The writing styles of the Quick Reference Guides also were closely linked with the use of

    hyperlinks in sentence and the use of diagrams or photos, or even sidebars as seen in the E-

    Cigarette example which provided an informative timeline on the left side of the page. The use of

    hyperlinks allows the writers to continue with a thought in a sentence but quickly provide direction

    for the reader to other sources on the issue or topic currently being discussed. The use of graphics,

    however, allows for the writing to stop for a moment and give the readers a break to examine them,

    or eases the writing's burden of information slightly with the use of effective graphics. 

    Alternatively, graphics can be used to obtain an emotional reaction from the reader that the 

    informative writing may not have.

    Lastly, while this varied from example to example, I believe Quick Reference Guides can be

    written with more freedom of voice than traditional genres, as it is explanatory and direct. Namely,

    the Gamergate example was written with a blunt voice that was obviously biased, but was

    reasonably so given the topic, thus it was not inappropriate.

2. How are those conventions defined by the author’s formatting and design choices?

    As I stated earlier, I think the conscious decision by all the writers to structure their pieces by use 

    of subheadings was an important formatting choice that emphasizes the need for informative

    writing in Quick Reference Guides. Most of the subheadings posed questions that were then

    answered in the paragraphs following them, which gave more purpose and direction to the text that

    followed each subheading. Additionally, the avid use of hyperlinks lends itself to the structure and

    format of the Quick Reference Guide as the writer can include extra information in their writing 

    without compromising the flow of their paragraphs as they continue to directly answer the question

    posed in that section of the work.

3. What does the purpose of these QRGs seem to be?

    I believe these Quick Reference Guides' main purpose are to inform. They all are seeking to

    explain something to a less informed audience, whether that difference between the writer and 

    reader is small or large in knowledge on the issue, whether the issue be about an upcoming

    Democratic presidential candidate or a recap of Sochi's opening ceremony for the Winter

    Olympics. Each and every one of the examples informed the reader about the subject with facts

    and research. However, I think writings in this genre also have the purpose of convincing the

    audience to care about the issue they are discussing, as all the examples were explaining how the

    various sides of the controversies reached their positions or shed insight into the reasoning behind 

    an event, as was the case with the Sochi Olympics example. 

4. Who is the intended audience for these different QRGs? Are they all intended for similar audiences? Or different? How & why?

    I believe that the QRG on Bernie Sanders was intended for an audience of people who are

    interested in the upcoming political events in the next year, as Bernie Sanders is a Democratic

    presidential nominee who is rising in popularity rapidly, and is now challenging Hillary Clinton for

    the party's nomination for the 2016 election.

    I think the Sochi Olympics QRG was written for an audience who had already viewed the opening

    ceremony and was looking for more information on it and possibly insights into why it was made

    into what it was. I say this because the article assumed the reader already was aware of "the ballet"

    or a certain three horse symbol that aired in the opening ceremony.

  

    The Greece Debt Crisis QRG seemed to be for a wider audience, as it broke down the crisis in

    detail and explained the events as they developed while providing appropriate contextual

    background information as it addresses various elements of the issue.

    The QRG on Gamergate was written for an audience that was not expected to have heard of

    "Gamergate" before, as the article literally posed the question: "What is Gamergate?". With that

    assumption, the writer simply approached the explanation of the issue with a complete summary

    of the events and consequences as the scandal played out, so as to allow to the reader to obtain the

    full story.

    I think the E-Cigarette QRG was also written for an audience that didn't have much knowledge on

    the topic, E-Cigarettes, aside from what they are. This was evidenced by the fact that in the first

    couple paragraphs of the article, the writer presented less commonly known information that 

    brings the portrayal of E-Cigs into question. In this respect, this QRG was intended for a similar

    audience to the Gamergate QRG, with both assuming their audiences were far from experts on the

    issue. The Greece Debt QRG also shared this quality but was more focused on global current

    events than explaining a lesser-known issue. 

    I think the Sochi and Bernie Sanders QRGs were different in their approach to their audiences as

    the Bernie Sanders QRG assumed the reader had interest in political current events, and the Sochi

    Olympics QRG assumed the reader had watched the opening ceremony before.

5. How do the QRGs use imagery or visuals? Why do you think they use them in this way?

    The informative style of writing is largely influenced by the writer's design choices as graphics

    can be used to reinforce the information written, provide new information not mentioned in the 

    writing, or even to appeal to a reader's emotion in a way that text cannot do. In the example on

    Greece's Debt Crisis, there was both a graph of "Greece's G.D.P. and Unemployment Rates in 

    Europe" and also a picture of a concerned little girl on a man's shoulders (which occupied the 

    space next to the headline). These choices of graphics illustrate how a writer could use a chart in

    the Quick Reference Guide to provide data, or use a picture of people that we can relate to as 

    readers and thus allow the writer to elicit an emotional response from us. In either situation, the 

    informative writing style adapts to balance the amount of information being given and the

    explaining of why the audience should care about the issue being addressed.

Reflection

I read the QRG genre analyses of Savannah, Isabel, and Kyle. Across the three, I think the most commonly emphasized aspect of the QRG genre was its purpose to inform, which translated to each of the different writers whose responses I read in different ways. Savannah noted that, as the QRG is meant to inform, the diction of the writing must be accessible for someone who does not have a base knowledge on the topic of the Guide. Additionally, Isabel noticed that every example QRG utilized direct, clear subheadings that allowed readers to orient themselves within the writing and have a means to easily scan the piece effectively. And lastly, I think Kyle made an important observation in stating that the formatting of QRGs is primarily to provide a means to inform the reader, which I felt was illustrated best in the E-cigarette example that we all reviewed.

In knowing that these conventions of the genre are what seem to be the most highly valued, I think that I can confidently review my own QRG to see how it meets the expectations for these conventions, as I think it's important that it achieves the purposes of those conventions without a hint of a doubt.

Cluster of My Controversy

A Cluster Map of The Chinese Science Award Controversy

Below is an image of a cluster map I created to chart the various sides of the controversy over China's National Natural Science Award. This controversy has been the subject of plagiarism accusations, warnings to the Chinese government, confessions of evaluation process corruption, and more. In this cluster map, these arguments are displayed with their major speakers in various forms of media.

mikalorenzen, "Cluster Map of My Controversy" 14 September 2015 via coggle.com
Self-use.

In my cluster map, I tried to chart out the main avenues of the controversy, namely the project itself and plagiarism accusations its receiving, worries over the award's history and China's standing in world science academia, discontent over the award's selection system that is influenced by the government, and the Chinese government's agenda in the realm of computer science.

In these various aspects of argument surrounding the controversy, I identified key speakers or players in the issue, such as the China Computer Federation, the Chinese government, Zhang Yaoxue, and even anonymous individuals at universities who wished to avoid being named since they were speaking out against the government's role in the selection process.

Lastly, I tried to display where the controversy becomes clearer above and below the initial box, as in each area two different aspects of argument converge, ultimately creating a more complete picture that sheds insight on the issue.

Reflection

In reading Brandon's and Dylan's posts and viewing each of their cluster maps, I learned the most about the tools for cluster mapping. As evidenced in Dylan's map, which he made on Google Docs, using that tool allows you to insert images into your map, which makes it visually pleasing, but perhaps at the cost of the easy-to-use branching of coggle. And in inspecting Brandon's map, which I was really impressed with, I learned that coggle can actually be used to create an incredibly structured layout, which I admired in contrast with my own map which was less organized but followed and united arguments on my topic. Honestly, I feel that I could perhaps reorganize my map to look more structured after seeing Brandon's map, but I did learn that your map can be organized based on different criteria. All in all, I think that coggle and cluster mapping are both extremely useful for pre-writing. I mean it when I say that I will use it in the future.

Annotated Bibliography in IEEE Style

The IEEE Style

Additional example for online source citation here.

In this post, I compile a References list in the style of IEEE citation, used for Computer Science, and provide annotations for each source. All of the following sources are related to the current controversy in China over the awarding of the National Natural Science Award to computer scientist Zhang Yaoxue.

Me6620, "The Alternative Ethernet-Style Cabling Used by 1394c" 23 May 2007 via wikipedia.com.
CC BY-SA 3.0 License.

References

[1]   L. Zheng, R. Huang, G.-J. Hwang, K. Yang "Measuring Knowledge Elaboration Based On A

       Computer-Assisted Knowledge Map Analytical Approach to Collaborative Learning" Journal of

       Educational Technology & Society vol. 18, No. 1, January 2015, pp. 321-336. [Online] 

       Available: 

       http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/stable/pdf/jeductechsoci.18.1.321.pdf?

       acceptTC=true. [Accessed September 5th, 2015].

       This article was written to inform those interested in educational science studies involving

       technology about recent studies in the field. The purpose of this entry in the Journal of 

       Educational Technology & Society was to reveal findings in recent studies that previous 

       knowledge on research topics as well as strong team research performance both are positively 

       correlated with knowledge gain on research objectives. This study was conducted with 185

       undergraduate students randomly assigned to either a research objective of learning curriculum

       or economics, where they were split into groups of three or four members that used computer-

       assisted knowledge maps to achieve their objective. In this study, a positive correlation was 

       found in both team performance and each student's individual knowledge on their topic before

       the exercise and knowledge gain. In the future, I will use this study to illustrate current uses of 

       computer science in studies in China.

        

[2]   T. H. C. Chiang, S. J. H. Yang, G.-J. Hwang "An Augmented Reality-Based Mobile Learning

        System to Approve Students' Learning Achievements and Motivations in Natural Science

        Inquiry Activites" Journal of Educational Technology & Society vol. 17, No. 4, Review Articles

        in Educational Technology, October 2014, pp. 352-365. [Online] Available:

        http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/stable/pdf/jeductechsoci.17.4.352.pdf.

        [Accessed September 5th, 2015].

       This article on young children's learning was written to inform those interested in educational 

       uses of technology about recent findings and developments on the matter. The purpose of this

       writing in the Journal of Educational Technology & Society was to inform others about studies

       that prove that integrating computers in learning methods in younger educational levels can 

       produce more confidant and motivated students. This study was conducted by giving some fourth

       graders lessons with a new, augmented reality-based system for learning, while other fourth 

       graders were given lessons through traditional methods, after which both groups were assessed 

       for knowledge gained and confidence in further learning. The findings of this study was that the

       computer-assisted learning system resulted in more confidant students that learned more from 

       their lessons. In the future, I will use this specific study to demonstrate how computer science is 

       providing new opportunities in the educational field in China.

[3]   H. Xin. (2015 February 2). Critics Pounce on China's Top Science Prize [Online]. Available:

        http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2015/02/critics-pounce-china-s-top-science-prize

        This article, written while the controversy over the National Natural Science Award was given 

        to Zhang Yaoxue, was written to inform a wide range of readers about how the controversy 

        began, the project that won the award, and the history behind the award. The purpose of 

        presenting this information was to highlight the prestigious history of the award, and thus

        display how critics believe the 2014 selection was undeserving of the award. The main point of 

        this article was that, while Yaoxue's operating system project was scientifically significant, it 

        doesn't reside on the same level of prestige of other projects that have won the award in the past.

        I plan to use this article in the future to give details on how the controversy around the winning 

        project began, and how that project measures in the history of the award.       

[4]   D. Cyranowski. (2015 February 12). Questions Emerge Over Top Chinese Science Prize

        [Online]. Available: http://www.nature.com/news/questions-emerge-over-top-chinese-science-

        prize-1.16902

        This article was written to inform readers interested in science news about how plagiarism
        allegations are emerging over the winning project for the Chinese National Natural Science
        Award. In addition, this article seemed to promote more transparent evaluation process in the
        award's selection and more careful examination of projects to uncover potentially plagiarized
        components. The primary message that this article seems to be sending is that the selection
        process for the award needs to be more transparent so as to negate criticisms of the award being
        given to undeserving projects that may have plagiarized. I plan to use this article in the future to
        describe another point of view on the controversy that focuses on the selection process and the
        winning project's credibility.

[5]   A. Li. (2015 January 25). Stop Meddling In Science Awards, Chinese Computer Federation

        Tells Government [Online]. 

        Available: http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1690609/chinese-scientists-slam-

        government-meddling-after-unoriginal-research?page=all

        This article in the South China Morning Post, a news source in China, describes a current battle
        in the controversy over the National Natural Science Award being awarded to Zhang Yaoxue's
        operating system project for readers concerned with China's scientific merits being displayed
        poorly. This article seeks to inform how computer scientists in China are reacting to the award.
        The main focuses of this article were Chinese Computer Federation's post detailing their
        discontent with the selection for the award and how other computer scientists related to
        academic institutions in China confess that the selection process for the award is influenced by
        the Chinese government and may not be fair. I will use this article in the future to display how
        sides over the controversy have developed, and how the selection process as influenced by the
        Chinese government may be fair.

[6]   J. Robertson. (2015 January 12). Computer Architecture: How Do You Evaluate Yaoxue Zhang's

       Team and Their Work, MetaOS, Which Was Awarded the First Prize of the National Natural 

       Science Foundation in China Recently? [Online]. Available: https://www.quora.com/Computer-

       Architecture/How-do-you-evaluate-Yaoxue-Zhangs-team-and-their-work-Meta-OS-which-was-

       awarded-the-first-prize-of-National-Natural-Science-Foundation-in-China-recently

       Robertson's comment was written in response to a question posed on Quora.com, and thus his
       response was primarily given to provide an answer to the individual who posed the question, but
       still provides a unique perspective to those interested in the controversy over China's National
       Natural Award. Robertson, in his comment, sought to provide insight into why China's selection
       board chose Yaoxue's as he said that the Chinese government has been seeking a new operating
       system for their computers that is created in China, as opposed to in the West. Robertson
       defended the selection of Yaoxue's project, and explained his opinion in the context of China's
       national goals in computer networking. I will be using Robertson's comment in the future due to
       its unique perspective and because it provided an outlook that actually defends the selection for
       the award.

[7]  Unknown Author at Springer.com. (2015 April 23). China Computer Federation and Springer to 
       Publish New Journal Data Science and Engineering [Online]. Available:
       http://www.springer.com/gp/about-springer/media/press-releases/corporate/china-computer-
       federation-and-springer-to-publish-new-journal-data-science-and-engineering/246316

       This article, written earlier this year, announced that the China Computer Federation (CCF) and
       Springer, a global publishing company, were officially collaborating to create and publish the
       new journal Data Science and Engineering. This article was written to anyone interested in
       science journals or developments in the Chinese sphere of scientific influence. The primary
       message behind this announcement was that the CCF is making a bold, first move in the
       realm of international science because this journal is the first global computer science journal
       created and ran by a Chinese-affiliated research group, which thus makes this journal's beginning
       an important moment in the history of international science. The President of the CCF, Weimin
       Zheng, was cited in this article stating that the CCF is excited to be raising China's academic
       influence to the international level through a journal created in China itself. I plan to use this
       source to provide more background for the CCF, which is central to my controversy topic, by
       citing evidence that the CCF is truly concerned with China's global standing in the scientific
       community.

[8]  China Daily USA. (2015 February 5). Top Scientist Defends Criticism of Award [Online].
       Available: http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2015-02/05/content_19498838.htm

       This article, which appeared in the Chinese-news website usa.chinadaily.com.cn, was written to
       an audience concerned with the controversy of China's Natural Science award to inform them
       about the award winner's, Zhang Yaoxue, response to the criticism over his winning of the award
       and to plagiarism allegations. This article cited Yaoxue's statements that his award-winning
       transparent computing software borrowed no code from other computer scientists, while a
       separate project did, but did so legally with license. I aim to use this source to cite statements
       from Zhang Yaoxue in context of being accused of not deserving the award and for copying
       code, which will provide more balance to the representation of the sides involved in my
       controversy.


[9]  J. Stone. (2014 August 25). China Developing National Operating System to Compete With
      Microsoft, Google Amid US Tension [Online]. Available: http://www.ibtimes.com/china-
      developing-national-operating-system-compete-microsoft-google-amid-us-tension-1668796

       This online article was written in the International Business Times primarily for audiences
       interested in business and the stock market on current international trends with companies that
       may have their profit largely affected by foreign affairs, such as Chinese bans on services and
       products from the West. The article stated that China over the past decade has gradually been
       banning more and more western products and services, such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter,
       and created substitutes that are Chinese and are censored by the government. As a result, those
       western websites have experienced drastic declines in usage in China, and China has been able
       to put more worries over cyber-security to rest with less reliance on western services. Lastly,
       the article stated that the most important development on this issue is that China has released a
       new COS, or China Operating System, for computers and mobile devices following their bans on
       Windows products, with hopes of further establishing an independent online computer
       environment that is more capable of competing with the West. I will use this source to illustrate
       China's persistent goal of becoming less reliant on western technologies and services, a vital
       point in one explanation for Yaoxue's winning of the National Natural Science Award for
       purposes of government usage and implementation.

[10] Y. Yi. (2015 January 9). Top Science Prize Honors Transparent Computing [Online]. Available:
       http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2015-01/09/c_133908345.htm

       This short, explanatory article on the Xinhua news website's English extension, was written for
       anybody interested in academic awards around in China, as the article was very direct and brief
       its summary of China's National Natural Science Award and the winning project. The article
       directly stated that Zhang Yaoxue and his team, who won the award, developed a transparent
       computing system. Explained in common terms in the article, this transparent computing allows
       various operating platforms, such as computers or mobile devices, to access information
       and task-programs remotely with the team's new Meta OS project. I plan to use this short article
       to assist me in giving a brief, yet understandable, summary of the project that won the award, as
       the article did not indicate any stance in the controversy around the project, as it preceded the
       criticisms of the award process and thus reported only on the project itself, which gives a
       valuable background to the controversy.

Example of IEEE Reference List here.

Reflection

After reading Jayni's and Kyle's  annotated bibliographies, which were both in ACS style as I did not find other IEEE styles in others' works, I noticed that ACS isn't dissimilar from the IEEE format I used myself. Aside from bracketing numbers and a few minor shifts in the order for citation, they read alike to me. I'm not very surprised that I didn't encounter another IEEE styled bibliography mostly because it's incredibly specific to the computer science field, and also because I myself am not even decided on that major so I can't blame others for not being the same way I suppose!

In both my own IEEE format and in ACS, I think that the citation of sources clearly condenses necessary information about a source which makes it easy to spot in the list and allows the summary following the source to provide key reference points for the writer to use as they write with the sources, which really makes the annotated bibliography useful (I know I used mine extensively while compiling my QRG).