Loading document…
Opening in Pages for Mac...
Your browser isn’t fully supported.
For the best Pages for iCloud experience, use a supported browser.
Learn More
Cancel
Continue
Shared Notes
ENG 3080 • Professor Friend • Fall 2023
Follow along on your device:
eng3080.chrisfriend.us/notes
September 6 — Syllabus Policies
Attendance
If you miss class:
-
You are responsible for your work.
-
Check the Agenda Slides for homework assignments, etc.
-
Reach out to a colleague to ask what you missed; chat with Friend if you’re still confused.
-
Do the work that you missed.
Attending less than 80
%
of the classes will likely lead you to fail the class. If you are late to
class:
-
Don’t be disruptive.
-
Whatever you miss of the lesson you are responsible to get caught up.
-
Make sure you sign the attendance sheet.
Late Work/Revisions
Revisions have to be substantial, but no limit to amount of revisions- set up meeting w/
Professor fi rst
No limit to amount of offi ce hour visits.
Grading
Blog posts are designed to make sure you’re prepared for our next class discussion. They will
be scored as complete or incomplete; only the fi rst blog post will get feedback, designed to
make sure you’re on the right track. After the fi rst blog post, you’ll get feedback in exceptional
cases, either good or bad.
All major writing assignments (one per module) will receive a pass/fail note plus written
feedback to guide revision, but no letter/number grade will be assigned. In the fi nal weeks of
the semester, you will meet with the instructor to discuss and reach consensus on your grade.
September 13 — Terminology
Rhetoric
The way someone talks to convey information
Parts:
-
Logos: logic/reason
-
ethos: ethics & authority
-
pathos: emotion
-
kairos: timing
Making a point to convince someone of what they’re trying to say
The art of persuasion (n.b. Great book title.)
A way to present ideas that gets the most information out in the least amount of words.
(Concision) Digestible speakers in public. Speaking in a way that is appropriate for an
audience.
Can be used in a negative way: Someone’s trying to persuade you into a certain ideology or
belief, like the KKK would use rhetoric to try and get people to believe in their cause.
Groupthink helps here. People who surround you share the way you think/feel about things.
Influencing other people using a shared symbol system
Digital
A type of medium (such as writing; a place you can use to write in) you use
Using computer technology
An electronic device
Virtual platforms
Technology in general
Typing
Codes, such as number codes
Blogging
The Web
Video games
Referring to any form of technology that can access the internet
like a digital blender with a digital LED display
-
tactile on the non-digital blender
-
Something getting processed on the digital blender
A device that you input or get information from
It needs a screen and a display; numbers and letters
Digital (can be changed?) v analog (serves one purpose?) clock: They both have a “brain” that
does something or processes
Analog clock has a set “display” that doesn’t change. But the person looking at it has to
process (interpret) it.
Digital clocks do the processing for you, and you just read them.
Display: “Something that shows information”? That’s a billboard
An art display?
Typewriter: Is the paper a display? (No, that’s still analog) Separation between action and result
or intention and product
September 20 — Terminology, Revisited
Digital v Analog
Orality
➔
Literacy
➔
Electracy
Digital Literacy
Literacy = using a communication system the way society has determined it should be used.
Digital = something about reproducing stuff, maybe?
Groups of people who are good with technology? (n.b. tech ≠ digital)
Being able to give, record, communicate information with other people via images or other
symbols. Understand how to use certain formats (such as online) by understanding the agreed-
upon symbols (such as the undo arrow)
Having a good understanding the language of how things work digitally (too broad, but yes)
Something about binary code
Functional understanding (and being able to adapt to the way a digital technology is used
according to social norms) of the tools and methods used for the creation and manipulation of
digital texts
Understanding of basic tools; not necessarily mastery of them (I.e. not fluency)
Literacy = I know how to use Word, then I switch to Google Docs, and I say, “Oh, I get it.” No
need to ask others for help. Transferrable skills, like “A to jump” in video games.
Literacy = basic tasks; fluency = more advanced
Fluency = Excel; Literacy = Word?
Fluent = able to do what you want with it. (We said “able to break the rules” correctly.)
Keyboard shortcuts (such as special characters) count as “breaking rules”?
Adapting to phone updates. Understanding of the basics, not limited to the specifi c way one
version did things.
VPN = fluency because it’s a hack that gets to the goal but not using the “proper” approach
Incognito mode in Chrome—hacking the way webpages work
Kids fi nd a way to get to YouTube even if the school blocks it (The students have more digital
literacy than the tech guy)
Digital Rhetoric
Friend’s off-top-of-head defi nition: `Using digital tools and practices to influence people
through shared symbol systems.
September 27—Digital Rhetoric & Digital
Literacy
What’s the coolest aspect of digital texts?
Quick tricks to getting what you need faster (like ^-F, hyperlinks). Multiple (unlimited?) options
to get what you need. It has to do with effi ciency and individual accessibility (but roadblocks
exist). Options of how to get the same information.
What’s the most influential (i.e. rhetorically effective) aspect
of digital texts?
Echo chamber / bubble
Nefarious content creators shape/mold the information that’s out there and give it to people
who don’t recognize the fi ltering, shaping, manipulation, etc.
Easier to access different information—we only know things have happened because we saw it
online. Good and bad: Anything is available (wild west sort of thing).
The use of the data that we generate as we go about our lives
What’s the biggest challenge of developing digital literacy?
Age? (Y’all
so
old.)
When you’re exposed to something (a new environment) as a kid, that becomes what you
know. Age is important because you’re like a sponge as a kid.
Something about transferability — “I have a Mac, but I don’t know how to use all the tricks.”
Kids circumventing blocks (or Praxis proctors turning things off) show ______?
Adaptability and change—things move all the time.
How to use devices changes all the time from model to model.
Heard v traced v tracked
Understanding how your data will be used. (Can Photoshop/Adobe use your art to train their AI
systems? Can Google use your Gmail messages to train their AI language model? How can
you protect your intellectual property? Is it possible to use tools without contributing your
labor/products to the company who made the tool?)
“Adhesion contracts” = the TOS/EULA you agree to when signing up for a service
October 11 — Criteria of Textuality
Group 1: [Miracle, Darion, Keslande, Nathaly]
Text Selection
Communicative event being analyzed
( Written Notes being passed) Example note says
"Let's ditch gym class next period." and is passed to a classmate.
Reason your group chose this event to analyze:
( We chose it because it worked). The goal and the intention was achieved.
Criteria for successful texts (Titscher et al., 2000, pp. 22–23,
paraphrased on Eyman, p. 21):
Cohesion:
No grammatical rules or dependencies because it was communication on a
piece of paper between two people. Using notes in class was the only form of
communication to be used as verbal and texting via phone.
Coherence:
The knowledge of the world is a school setting
The knowledge is between
two friends in class that have similar schedules, and specifi cally the class we were in at
that moment.
Intentionality:
Transmit a message amongst the students in the class-the question of
not going to class between person A passing a note to person B. Overall the intention
was to ditch class. Another intention was to be able to talk to a friend even though we
weren't allowed to talk in class.
Acceptability:
The fi rst note is read and then second message is made as a response.
In the end, everyone agreed to comply with the original message.
Informativity:
The new information is the response from one friend to the next. More
responses continue to follow.
Situationality:
It shows real life scenarios where people use physical paper to transmit
a message rather than use technology because they may not be digitally literate and
choose the paper/writing route. Many people till this day choose paper over technology
even though technology surrounds us.
Intertextuality:
Knowing what was to come in gym class in terms of the games/
activities such as running, and flag football, we never wanted to participate.
Conclusion
Distinguish between “text as a representation of discourse” and “text-
as-designed
discourse” (Eyman, 2015, p. 22, emphasis in original).
How might we understand your
selected communicative event as an example of the latter?
Our selected communicative would be design discourse because the purpose of the
discourse is to influence someone. The design of the notes comes from not wanting to
get caught. The words were written small so no one could peek over shoulder and read
it. Whereas the paper was small ripped pieces to make it less noticeable when we
passed it or while reading. Even the way it was passed from person to person was in the
design. The notes were dropped on the floor and slid across the floor using feet to pass
and discreetly pick up.
Group 2:
[
Emily. C, Amanda R., Furui C., Juliana H.
]
Text Selection
Communicative event being analyzed:
Ch. 11 of
The Future is Disabled
Reason your group chose this event to analyze:
We are all familiar with this book.
Criteria for successful texts (Titscher et al., 2000, pp. 22–23,
paraphrased on Eyman, p. 21):
Cohesion:
Piepzna-Samarasinha purposely negates the use of grammar to
demonstrate writing from an autistic standpoint. They also intentionally avoided editing
their thoughts to align more with Standard Academic English, in order to present
themself accurately.
Coherence:
Piepzna-Samarasinha
writes this chapter to convey how their autistic
thought process affects their writing, and conveys these differences from a neurotypical
thought/writing process. By virtue of how the text is written, as well as Leah's provided
defi nitions, this information is conveyed.
Intentionality:
The intent behind this chapter is to educate the audience on the autistic
thinking and writing process. For example, Piepzna-Samarasinha introduces a few
terms, such as autistic long form, and clearly explains them.
Acceptability:
Piepzna-Samarasinha wrote this chapter to explain their "unorthodox"
writing style. While reading
The Future is Disabled,
it is nearly impossible to ignore
Piepzna-Samarasinha's writing style. This chapter educates the audience on autistic
long form and echotextia. This forces the audience to accept the fact that the author
does not adhere to the rules of Standard Academic English, as well as explain why they
don't.
Informativity:
Piepzna-Samarasinha presents new and relevant information to her
audience about the writing habits of disabled and neurodivergent people. This is
through her explanation A
utistic Long Form Writing, or Echotextia
. They demonstrate
how it defi es standard academic English and should be accepted as its own unique
form of literature.
Situationality:
The entirety of
The Future is Disabled
is written in the voice of someone
who is neurodivergent and disabled, and consistently makes references to these lived
experiences. Piepzna-Samarasinha's explanation of their writing process is in line with
the rest of their lived experiences as presented in other chapters of the book. This book
was written as a response to how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the disabled/
immunocompromised community, as well as being a tribute to Piepzna-Samarasinha's
friends (who were major Disability Justice activists) who were lost during the pandemic.
As the social climate grows more aware of and accepting of different life experiences
(the experiences and struggles of marginalized groups), there is more of a place at the
table for these differing narratives to be recorded and shared.
Intertextuality:
Piepzna-Samarasinha references and draws inspiration from other
works or authors such as Stacey Park Milbern and the Disability Justice community as
a whole to
enrich the reader's understanding and provide context for the themes
explored in the
chapter.
Conclusion
Distinguish between “text as a representation of discourse” and “text-
as-designed
discourse” (Eyman, 2015, p. 22, emphasis in original).
How might we understand your
selected communicative event as an example of the latter?
The purpose behind this particular chapter was to explain to the audience why Piepzna-
Samarasinha's writing style is different from what is perceived as "standard". This chapter is
placed two-thirds of the way through the book, which was an intentional choice made by
Piepzna-Samarasinha. By placing this chapter towards the end, when the reader has already
consumed most of the text without explanation of its format, Piepzna-Samarasinha forces the
reader to sit with that question, so that when it is fi nally answered, it recontextualizes their
previous reading. This incentivizes the reader to go back and reread the book with this new
understanding, this new lens. This decision is smart seeing as an additional reading of the
content may cause her words to stick with the reader, and they are able to better digest these
new concepts.
Group 3:
[
Alissa Damiano, Camille Oates
]
Text Selection
Communicative event being analyzed:
[
https://writingspaces.org/past-volumes/
understanding-and-maintaining-your-privacy-when-writing-with-digital-technologies/
]
Reason your group chose this event to analyze:
We chose this article because this body of
work provides arguments and persuasions on how and why users should keep themselves safe
within digital technologies.
Criteria for successful texts (Titscher et al., 2000, pp. 22–23,
paraphrased on Eyman, p. 21):
Cohesion:
the text demonstrates cohesion in the way it is structured and the fact the it
follows specifi c grammar rules. For example, the breakdown within the text is easy for
readers to follow and the subheadings are clearly stated for audiences to understand
what the section will give information about.
Coherence:
Each section of the text directly relates to privacy. It starts off introducing
the topic then, transition into discussing data, which touches on different aspect.
However, they all relate to maintaining privacy on the web.
Intentionality:
The author's purpose of the text is to inform readers on the different
ways to keep your information and work safe within digital spaces. The text itself
discusses the ideas of digital privacy by conveying it through literature and expanding
on it in ways that connect with their audiences.
Acceptability:
Since this text gives real life examples of how to keep your information
safe digitally, this information can be applicable in our own lives by learning through the
experiences talked about within the text. Also, using the suggestions made within the
text on how to keep ourselves safe on the internet can be applied into our everyday
uses of technology as well.
Informativity:
The text does a good job creating new information that keeps up with the
progression of digital spaces in order to keep their users safe from harmful users. It
keeps up with the times and progression of how digital spaces continue to become
more complex and advanced with receiving our personal information beyond our
understandings.
Situationality:
it gives real world examples and it strongly connects to our daily
activities within using digital technologies in both safe and unsafe ways. These real life
examples allow us to reflect on our personal experiences so that we can understand
whether or not we have incorporated digital privacy into our own uses of technology.
Intertextuality:
The author links their article to other texts from scholars discussing
similar topics to support their point. For example, the article's author quotes another
scholar's viewpoint on maintaining privacy in digital spaces in accordance with their
own views.
Conclusion
Distinguish between “text as a representation of discourse” and “text-
as-designed
discourse” (Eyman, 2015, p. 22, emphasis in original).
How might we understand your
selected communicative event as an example of the latter?
Our text represents "text-as-designed discourse" as it pushes the readers to give a
level of trust to the author through their and explanations and the art of persuasion of how to
maintain their privacy on the web. the article encourages us to integrate what we've learned
about methods of digital privacy into our own uses of technology. It also gives us the
opportunity to take a step further to think critically about the way we approach maintaining our
privacy on the web. The text put forth helps us to expand our digital literacies and the amount
of trust we give.
October 18 — The Late Age of Print
Speed undermines formality
Depends on context. Relaxed person, formality isn’t normalized. “Prim and proper” stuff isn’t
personal style. Speaking to someone “not on your level” calls for more formalized language.
This difference isn’t a huge issue.
We’ve been taught how to talk and type things for a long time. We’ve learned to use MLA
format, to write emails a certain way, to introduce ourselves a certain way, to differentiate email
and text. Speed defi nitely undermines formality—though maybe not inherently. You
can
write
an email the same way you write a letter, including formatting (greeting, salutation, etc).
Depends on context/audience. Emails to friends are casual; formal exchange calls for more
time.
No matter what medium you’re using, there’s still a greeting involved. Speed might limit
formality, but it doesn’t undermine it. Level of formality is determined more by the audience
than by the medium.
Hand-written letter reveals penmanship. E-vites are quicker and cheaper than physical invites;
most friends preferred a physical letter (20-to-3 ratio). Invitation through mail is more personal.
Physical invitation serves as a memento, like a Christmas card.
Friend’s birthday cards: Rhetorically unsustainable.
Thank-you cards are a rhetorical choice and reflect the signifi cance of whatever is being
thanked.
Is email better than a letter? Texts better than calls?
Texts v calls: Urgent messages should be conveyed through a call. Tone of voice only comes
through with sound. Sarcasm is tough to send via text. Written messages lead to unintended
misunderstandings.
“Important information should never ever be sent via text. Things get lost in translation.” If
something needs to be worked out, a conversation with sound works best. Calls force the
other person to react to what you’re saying; keeps them honest because they react in the
moment.
Texting can be a good way to resolve anger because it offers distance to diffuse frustrations.
Texts allow a detached approach to the discussion, pacing the discussion, and reducing the
stress.
Getting the time to type things out allows someone to be more articulate, adding clarity to the
discussion. Edit prior to send, etc. If something is confrontational/heated, text can allow things
to cool a bit and people can say what they mean.
In-person conversations can be quicker, including to resolve unintentional tensions. Depends
on the material being discussed.
Time spent = more meaningful?
Transparent technologies
Content v medium on the Web
Social media remediated as TV news
McLuhan & Martian dirt
Computers replace all other media
Ephemerality: orality & computers
Autosave and value
Self-expression in social media