An Exploration of Ongoing Public Speech Acts in Computer Science
In this post, I will analyze three different examples of authors and speakers discussing current events and matters of debate in the field of computer science. My analyses will cover each example' author or speaker, its intended audience, and its context.
 |
| Tengrrl "Digital Rhetoric" June 20, 2012 via flickr.com. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) License. |
First, I read an article about the development of artificial intelligence and how it should be handled.
The author of the article, Cecilia Tilli, wrote the article on slate.com, where her biography states that she holds a Ph.D. in both philosophy and neuroscience from Princeton University. Additionally, according to the website, she currently works at the Future of Humanity Institute and Oxford Martin School (University), which confirms her statement made in her article that she has experience leading discussions on and working with "AI safety research." Also, Tilli revealed in her article that she sent out an open letter urging care with AI research to leaders in the field, which supports the fact that Tilli is actively involved in such research and in developing safety measures as developments progress.
I believe that this article's audience is anyone who is worried about or interested in the development of artificial intelligence. I choose this broad audience because in the article, Tilli discusses how the media portray AI safety guidelines or cautions as fears and terrors, which affect the surface-level opinions of many people who may not know much on this issue but are concerned in some way. I would say that this audience is anyone who is not only concerned about AI development, but interested in its potential effects on our society and how it stands today, as Tilli explicitly tackles the issue of current AI development in her article, in addition to issue of preparedness for when artificial "general" intelligence becomes a reality.
While the article itself lacks a date, it discusses a meeting the author Cecilia Tilli had in January, presumably this year. Tilia speaks through her article on slate.com, and does so in an editorial style that fosters her sharing her opinion to a large extent, while still pulling evidence from other sources or common knowledge. The event that this article was written in response to was a meeting about AI development safety in January, and the media's portrayal of an open letter that urged caution in AI research as being more drastic than it really was. This topic mostly relates to anti-technology push-back movements in our society today, but otherwise is fairly independent in its topic. This article also heavily referred to other articles on the January meeting and following open letter that displayed the event as a confirmation of extreme fears over artificial intelligence when in reality it was just a reiteration of the necessity for caution in such research.
Second, I examined a reading from npr.org that was a blogpost on computer science education at lower education levels such as kindergarten.
The author of the article was Anya Kamenetz, who is the lead education blogger and reporter for NPR, and is also the author of several books about education in America. Additionally, she lives in New York City, where she also writes for other publications such as Fast Company Magazine. While Kamenetz does not reference herself in her blogpost, it's clear that she has large prior knowledge in the field of education as she uses education-related terms fairly frequently and often without much explanation.
The intended audience of this blogpost is likely individuals who have some basic level of knowledge regarding education and curriculum, as evidenced by the author's use of education-related terms and focus on what education academics are saying about current issues, rather than an explanation of the issues themselves. Additionally, I think the audience for this blogpost is assumed to have some preconceived opinions on computer science education, because the author speaks about what arguments are being voiced for and against it. Ultimately I believe the message of the article is mostly that the ongoing debate over early computer science education is continuing but is making progress towards providing more opportunities in programming for young children.
This blogpost was published on September 18th, 2015 and largely responded to new events in education such as New York's mayor saying that computer science was a new educational goal for all grades of schooling or the recent development of software that teaches young children basic coding. The blogpost had the conventions of traditional blog entries, where there was use of images in addition to more concise and spread-out paragraphs, in addition to sections that divided the post up into main ideas. The article seemed to mostly address current social movements that are resisting heightened levels of technology in education, or the converse, which would be social movements that are urging the integration of technology into education so that children can become more acclimated to current technology. Interestingly, I think a linguistic background that is referred to heavily in the post was coding, which the article claimed is the new literacy of the 21st century. While this article doesn't respond to a specific text, it largely speaks to what current educators or commercial education products are saying or offering to America's education of computer science.
Third, I read an opinion piece on the Huffington Post about women's participation in the field of computer science.
The author of the post, named Kira Makagon, is a UC Berkeley graduate with a degree in computer science, who has been extremely successful in her entrepreneurial endeavors by founding startup technology companies and turning them around for massive profits. She also is regarded as a role model for women in science fields, especially in computer science, which reinforces her authority in writing this specific article on women participation in the field of computer science.
I think that the intended audience of this article is anyone concerned with equal opportunity in education for all genders, specifically those interested in ensuring women are receiving quality educations and opportunities. While the post was mostly just an opinion piece, Makagon did focus on urging that women be encouraged to participate in science fields and be instructed in real world dealings in business and science. While the post may be focused on a female audience, it certainly does not exclude male readers as the article does not restrict its message to women by directly addressing them, but rather displaying an opinion on the issue today.
This article was published on October 14th, 2014 and follows a format that I would describe as an opinion piece. For the entire post, Makagon really only discussed her opinions on the current state of the computer science field in regards to its participation by women. Makagon did not cite any other events, aside from some light statistics about gender breakdown in computer science programs, and she used an informal "I" throughout the writing, which gave the post an opinion-based structure. The post was primarily replying to recent declines in women participation in the computer science field and education systems, which speaks to the current social movement to ensure women are receiving fair and useful education. The post did not reference any other writings or events, and thus was not based on much else aside from statistics and Makagon's opinions.
Reflection
After completing my rhetorical analyses, I examined those of Alyssa and Nick. Overall, I was impressed with how they were able to find sources that touched on important, controversial topics that also had interesting authors with opinions that were good for analyzing rhetorically. I thought Nick also did an especially good job analyzing background information on the authors and contexts of the articles he analyzed.
I think I did a fairly thorough analysis in my three blogposts and articles, overall. I think I had good detail and covered sufficient information in each field but perhaps should be sure to explain the consequences of certain qualities of the rhetorical situations in future analyses.
Second, I examined a reading from npr.org that was a blogpost on computer science education at lower education levels such as kindergarten.
The author of the article was Anya Kamenetz, who is the lead education blogger and reporter for NPR, and is also the author of several books about education in America. Additionally, she lives in New York City, where she also writes for other publications such as Fast Company Magazine. While Kamenetz does not reference herself in her blogpost, it's clear that she has large prior knowledge in the field of education as she uses education-related terms fairly frequently and often without much explanation.
The intended audience of this blogpost is likely individuals who have some basic level of knowledge regarding education and curriculum, as evidenced by the author's use of education-related terms and focus on what education academics are saying about current issues, rather than an explanation of the issues themselves. Additionally, I think the audience for this blogpost is assumed to have some preconceived opinions on computer science education, because the author speaks about what arguments are being voiced for and against it. Ultimately I believe the message of the article is mostly that the ongoing debate over early computer science education is continuing but is making progress towards providing more opportunities in programming for young children.
This blogpost was published on September 18th, 2015 and largely responded to new events in education such as New York's mayor saying that computer science was a new educational goal for all grades of schooling or the recent development of software that teaches young children basic coding. The blogpost had the conventions of traditional blog entries, where there was use of images in addition to more concise and spread-out paragraphs, in addition to sections that divided the post up into main ideas. The article seemed to mostly address current social movements that are resisting heightened levels of technology in education, or the converse, which would be social movements that are urging the integration of technology into education so that children can become more acclimated to current technology. Interestingly, I think a linguistic background that is referred to heavily in the post was coding, which the article claimed is the new literacy of the 21st century. While this article doesn't respond to a specific text, it largely speaks to what current educators or commercial education products are saying or offering to America's education of computer science.
Third, I read an opinion piece on the Huffington Post about women's participation in the field of computer science.
The author of the post, named Kira Makagon, is a UC Berkeley graduate with a degree in computer science, who has been extremely successful in her entrepreneurial endeavors by founding startup technology companies and turning them around for massive profits. She also is regarded as a role model for women in science fields, especially in computer science, which reinforces her authority in writing this specific article on women participation in the field of computer science.
I think that the intended audience of this article is anyone concerned with equal opportunity in education for all genders, specifically those interested in ensuring women are receiving quality educations and opportunities. While the post was mostly just an opinion piece, Makagon did focus on urging that women be encouraged to participate in science fields and be instructed in real world dealings in business and science. While the post may be focused on a female audience, it certainly does not exclude male readers as the article does not restrict its message to women by directly addressing them, but rather displaying an opinion on the issue today.
This article was published on October 14th, 2014 and follows a format that I would describe as an opinion piece. For the entire post, Makagon really only discussed her opinions on the current state of the computer science field in regards to its participation by women. Makagon did not cite any other events, aside from some light statistics about gender breakdown in computer science programs, and she used an informal "I" throughout the writing, which gave the post an opinion-based structure. The post was primarily replying to recent declines in women participation in the computer science field and education systems, which speaks to the current social movement to ensure women are receiving fair and useful education. The post did not reference any other writings or events, and thus was not based on much else aside from statistics and Makagon's opinions.
Reflection
After completing my rhetorical analyses, I examined those of Alyssa and Nick. Overall, I was impressed with how they were able to find sources that touched on important, controversial topics that also had interesting authors with opinions that were good for analyzing rhetorically. I thought Nick also did an especially good job analyzing background information on the authors and contexts of the articles he analyzed.
I think I did a fairly thorough analysis in my three blogposts and articles, overall. I think I had good detail and covered sufficient information in each field but perhaps should be sure to explain the consequences of certain qualities of the rhetorical situations in future analyses.
No comments:
Post a Comment