When looking at the overall effect of writing a research paper, there are several key factors that had to have gone into making eh paper. Questions such as, Why? How? For Whom? are all part of developing a well-written paper, along with one’s own opinion. How one came to write their paper all depends on the writer him or herself. When coming down to look at mine, there were several distinctions and steps that I took in order to come up with my topic and finally, in the end, my paper.
Originally when I started to think about my topic, which was already narrowed down to the subject of ‘Technology’, there were several things to think about. What was something that I wanted to explore and enter into? Was there something personal that affected me and I wanted to research on it to share with others, hoping that they can relate as well. All different types of questions came into play and it was hard for me to figure out what I wanted to do.
It came to me after reading the book Technology Matters by David E. Nye. Several chapters just sprang out at me, and got me to think that maybe he has a point here; there is something that I can see and relate to. Nye talked about being universal and different and just about how technology can either control us or we control technology. Right then and there I knew what I wanted to talk about and that was being ‘plugged in.’ Now in my paper I explained how that it is not necessarily bad or good’ that it all depends on the person who is using the technology.
Being plugged in has a variety of answers, but trying to find a true answer is difficult just because there is so much that one can be plugged into. One, however, has to be able to realize if what they are doing is good or bad for them, and also those who are surrounding them. Sometimes people get too involved with what they are doing and tend to lose focus of their main objective. Distractions are what lead us off the path and tend to get in the way, leading us to being to plugged in. A good way to look at that would be asking, “Does technology control us, or us it?” It makes sense in a good way in that if we have control and purpose we are able to be stable and balance out the personal versus the social life.
There are several things that I had noticed when researching my topic, many of them dealing with a lot of the same material, and or relating the subjects together. It seemed as if they all had just copied off of each other, but that didn’t make any sense because some of them had been written years before others were written, but in general the studies seemed to produce the same outcome or results. It just showed a trend that seemed to go in the same general direction, as technology grows so does the demand and usage of the technology. The sources that I found and used seemed to agree with that idea, but not to a full 100 percent. There is a lot that I had found, that I could see was true because I saw that it was true in people and was able to compare it to them and myself.
When I started off with the researching there were a couple things that I wanted to research, such as tv addiction, and gaming, but then as I continued to look at it I realized that it is not so much there anymore but more along the lines of computers, cell phones, and the internet. People use this more and more each day, somewhat leaving behind the tv and gaming. Well, I guess I can’t say that it has been left behind, but most of us don’t go watch the tv or play games on our game consoles till late at night, because we get home later from work and yet have things to do before we relax. This is not the same for everyone however seeing how children are either at home or in school and not having to worry about adult matters in life, well at least for now. Anyone and everyone can be apart of this matter, kids to adults, no matter who you are, there was at some point or is presently something that we are addicted to that keeps us either focused or distracted that leads to us being plugged in. Remember it is not necessarily a bad or good thing; it all depends upon the individual and how they can correlate the two, the mind and the object.
What really helped were the sources, a lot of the research that I pulled was from articles online and from newspapers. I searched through several books, but the ones that I used were basically from the texts we had to read from class. I did use another book that I found interesting and related it to the material that I was writing. I think that the books helped a lot with my thoughts and ideas/brainstorming, but the articles from online really helped bring out the ideas and helped me put it into words so that I could put my paper together. In class there were a lot of key factors that also helped me, such as the online blogging, the discussion of the texts, and other small things, such as simple questions that really had helped me get a good structure for my paper.
Originally when we had to do this paper, we, the class, all knew that our subject was going to be on technology. The one thing that I did not like and wish we would have been able to do in the beginning was pick a topic right away so that we knew what to aim for. I struggle with papers if I do not know what we are aiming for. What I mean is that I knew that technology was the subject but I didn’t know what the objective was for the paper; I didn’t know basically that we were going to have to take a certain topic and pick a subject from that topic and write on it. If I would have known in the beginning I think that I wouldn’t have struggled so much just to get a start on it. It takes me a while to gather my research and get it all together nice and tight. I felt that all of the in class research and looking at other papers and articles helped bring out the idea of finding key words and terms that help relate back to the paper’s topic. When we kept doing this I got the understanding that a good paper has the ability to let people keep in their heads that this is what the paper is about, that all of these little sentences are meant to come back and relate to the subject of the paragraph, but more importantly to the thesis statement of the paper.
After a good semester’s worth of looking at other works, reading several texts, and doing our own research it came down to creating a research paper ourselves and being able to put it together well enough so that everything seemed to have a good flow. Another thing that I used was the usage of quotes from different sources, hoping that it would relate to what I was trying to say in a certain part. Sometimes and a good majority of the time I felt that the quote could be used in several different places, but I really had to look at what I wanted to say and make sure that the quote I wanted was appropriate in the area I was writing. I also used some of my own experiences and those of others and put that into my paper. Sometimes the best way to explain things in a simpler way is to use everyday examples or examples so that those who are reading can understand what is trying to be stated at that certain part.
However I feel that it might be easier for students to be able to know what they are being told to type in the end, just so that they are prepared and know what to look for and have the time to research. It really does help because it helps the student focus more on what is need to be written about and understood. There is the concern that people will just go ahead and write away, but it is a good thing because then people have time to learn from their mistakes and continue to improve upon what they wrote. Teachers, I think, just need to know when to start this and let the students get a head start so that the students have more time to research and write instead of giving them a certain time period, as in the day you go into a class room and the teacher says that we are going to discuss the paper, its requirements and when it is going to be due.
In the end, I felt that everything that we had done since the beginning helped me out and led me the right way into writing my research paper. It wasn’t an easy road, I can tell you that much, there is a lot that has to be done in order to reach the finale, but like in any case whether it be art, music, etc. it takes time to reach your goal and have it to a point where you are not only satisfied but beyond satisfaction and you have that feeling of accomplishment. Now it is only time that you hope that it does well and that well and that people like the work that you have done and then you know that all of that hard work had really paid off.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Conference Reflection
When starting my essay, there was a lot to think about before writing. Something that I chose to do, was first start writing about my topic with the new thoughts and ideas that I had, but eventually I decided to see what I had written and put in previous ideas that I had before when we had the other required papers to write. I went into these other papers and incorporated that writing into my essay. This I think helped me because it gave me previous information that I was able to relate with my paper. In general, just hearing from other people, and seeing other papers helped me narrow down what I needed to do.
With “face-to-face” conferences I liked the idea of having more than two people comment on my work. I felt that it wasn’t so much as people agreeing with each other, well it was, but what I mean is that online people seem to repeat what the first person said in front of them. In the conferences though, people did that, but each brought different ideas to the table, making it easier to have a broad range of options, but at the same time knowing what you should have to be able to do in order to have a much better paper in the end. Also with a group of people it is easier to get a feel of what people are trying to say to help you. Sometimes reading comments is hard because they are not as clear as you want them to be, making it difficult to cope with and use when editing or revising your paper.
One thing that I most likely took away from the group conferences are the ideas that everyone gave me. It is easy to suggest ideas, but what people told me really helped me. I know that my paper is kind of all around, but with their suggestions and their help I was able to help bring my paper back to life and kind of get a better sense of what I needed to do. I wrote down all of the ideas that others told me at the conferences and then when doing my essay over, I used what they said to help me build a stronger paper. Overall, I believe that group conferences are helpful to the extent of being able to get a better sense of what others want to see in my paper, which will help me provide a better paper in the end.
With “face-to-face” conferences I liked the idea of having more than two people comment on my work. I felt that it wasn’t so much as people agreeing with each other, well it was, but what I mean is that online people seem to repeat what the first person said in front of them. In the conferences though, people did that, but each brought different ideas to the table, making it easier to have a broad range of options, but at the same time knowing what you should have to be able to do in order to have a much better paper in the end. Also with a group of people it is easier to get a feel of what people are trying to say to help you. Sometimes reading comments is hard because they are not as clear as you want them to be, making it difficult to cope with and use when editing or revising your paper.
One thing that I most likely took away from the group conferences are the ideas that everyone gave me. It is easy to suggest ideas, but what people told me really helped me. I know that my paper is kind of all around, but with their suggestions and their help I was able to help bring my paper back to life and kind of get a better sense of what I needed to do. I wrote down all of the ideas that others told me at the conferences and then when doing my essay over, I used what they said to help me build a stronger paper. Overall, I believe that group conferences are helpful to the extent of being able to get a better sense of what others want to see in my paper, which will help me provide a better paper in the end.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Rough Draft for portfolio
Is society today plugged in? Are we any different than our parents were when they were children/teenagers growing up with the ‘new’ technology they had? These are questions that I decided to research and look for answers. Seeing how there is no definite answer, the best that can be done is to look for answers that researchers have come up with and also personal opinions that I have experienced along with others that I have noticed. This paper will focus on sources that I have had to read for this class along with the research that I found while searching for answers to this question. This involves anyone from just being born to those who are elderly; rich and poor, because we all are some how plugged into something, whether it is technological or not. It relates somehow and in some way can be compared from the technological world to the non-technological world.
To start off, there is Kim Vicente. Vicente wrote the piece called The Human Factor. This piece is interesting because it starts off with talking about an event that had happened in the past and had terrible consequences. The event took place at Chernobyl. The failure of a nuclear reactor had tragic consequences that resulted in the deaths of many, radiation burns and other hazardous illnesses that followed. You ask yourself though, how does this deal with being plugged in? It may not directly, but sometimes, like today we are used to machines dealing with them. We expect them to fix their own errors or have no issues at all, in other words, we expect and more on the side of want, them to be able to never fail. What I am basically trying to say is that machines and technology have come so far that we expect them to be flawless, we expect them to work, but they don’t. Ergo, we are plugged into the fact that it, the technology, will never fail, and this leads us into the idea of being blind of what happens.
However then you go into the idea of being able to fix the ‘malfunction.’ Some of us do not have any idea what to do. We buy the product thinking that it will last us the time duration, which we need. There is no need to worry about what will happen to it, we have a guarantee. This leads us into the idea of being blind; we are now plugged in. We do not look at what the problem is, instead we are so in tune and in sync with what we are doing, that everything around us, becomes a blur and what we are doing is the only main focus. There are many things that we can see this compared with such as: cell phones, TV’s, computers, internet, and just so much more. Society once thrived on people being able to work together and get things done, but now we are able to cut work forces in half. This just leads to more problems with the economy, but that is off topic, but it shows that what we do has consequences. Has society come down to simply being lazy? Yet again, a bit off topic, but it just shows that each decision society makes leads to something either positive or negative. If you break that down into the individual person, it can also be applied, we make decisions about many different things, such as when we choose to use our phones, watch tv, go on the computer or anything like that. When we choose to do that we are in an economic term making “opportunity costs.” What this means is that we are giving up something for the use or production of something else. So either way we are dedicated to something, we plug ourselves into what we want to do, whether beneficial to society or ourselves only.
Whatever we do, there is a cause and effect. Sometimes it is beyond our control, while other times we proceed without looking beyond what we already know. When inventors create projects they always, or should always be thinking of the repercussions that might be possible if it fails. Like nuclear reactors, if they fail, they cause much damage to the area. They think of the benefits and harms of the product, but it is not up to them sometimes to see where it goes. Take iPods for example: They are great for sharing music and getting information, but can make society anti-social in many ways. There is a lack of communication between people when we are "plugged-in." We are the final critics of the technology and how we use it is the review. If we use it a lot, it will get a good review, but sometimes the over use and under use of something can be good or bad. But sometimes we are so near sighted that we lose our focus and cannot seem to look beyond the actually problems that might be caused. In the end, it comes down to being our fault then, we are the reasons why communication is at a breaking point, why it fails and why the world seems to be more individual than what it was before.
Then we have David Nye and his book Technology Matters. First, before I decide to go into the piece, I felt that his title was more of a question, but put as a statement. More along the lines of…Technology Matters? The reason I feel this way is because his chapter titles are usually questions. So you would think that the book is a matter of fact and opinion. The facts coming from his use of other books to make his points, but then his opinion, which would be later, stated in his chapters. But, beyond that, there is much that can be said about Nye and his work.
With Nye, as stated before, he labels each chapter with a question. One chapter in particular that really catches my eye is Cultural Uniformity? or Diversity? What makes this chapter so interesting is the fact that with Vonnegut and Vicente each talk in some way of being uniform or diverse in life. Nye uses this to discuss the ways in which we live as individuals. He uses a quote from the book The Making of a Counter Culture by Theodore Roszak. His quote talks about how there are ‘little boxes’ each with the same family style, children, all who go to the university. It makes me think that deep down are we all trying to be the same as those around us? It may not seem like it, but I see it. If our neighbor gets a new TV, we want a new TV as well, but just not the same brand. We are trying to ‘Keep up with the Jones’. Another chapter, which can also tie in with Vonnegut and Vicente, is Sustainable Abundance, or Ecological Crisis? Vicente can be tied in with his idea of Nuclear Reactors, and even basic things such as schedules and Vonnegut with the idea of Ice-Nine.
With those authors in mind, it makes you think about today’s society and what should be doing and not be doing. Things that come to my mind are the ideas of being ‘plugged-in.’ We have so many personal items, such as cell phones, laptops, mp3 players, that we forget that we are part of society. Society cannot depend on surviving with individuality, but the cooperation of everyone. IF we are not paying attention to what is going on around us. Something extremely important might be announced but the headphones block it out, we have the opportunity to see who is calling and not answer, and we have the opportunity to do whatever we want basically from personal computers. It is a scary fact that we have those liberties. Now I am not saying to ban them all, but we, as individuals need to look beyond our own goals/benefits and ourselves and see what we can do to help each other out and benefit still at the same time. This would be a very interesting matter to look at, because we all are uniform in ways of wanting the same things, but unique in the ways in which we use them.
This just brings it down to the idea of being less secure. In one of my previous works I mentioned the idea of privacy. How do you feel about the issue? Do you feel that you still have the same privacy as you did 10 years ago? Take for example going online, people seem to know what you want. I go online and there are ads that are promoting things, such as shoes, phones, and other accessories that I am interested in. When you search for things, the people at ad companies see this and know how to target you and make you want to buy their products. Where is the privacy in that? We have government officials who listen in on conversations of people because of threats against the United States, but there is no privacy there at all.
In my own opinion, well to narrow it down, there has never been full and complete privacy. Thing leak out from people, documents get into the wrong hands. In regular day activities people always ask what you have been up to, and when we say we don’t want to talk about it, they start to speculate about what might be going on. Why can’t people just stick to what the have and not worry about others? It is who we are, it is what we do, and privacy doesn’t seem to be in out English language.
To start off, there is Kim Vicente. Vicente wrote the piece called The Human Factor. This piece is interesting because it starts off with talking about an event that had happened in the past and had terrible consequences. The event took place at Chernobyl. The failure of a nuclear reactor had tragic consequences that resulted in the deaths of many, radiation burns and other hazardous illnesses that followed. You ask yourself though, how does this deal with being plugged in? It may not directly, but sometimes, like today we are used to machines dealing with them. We expect them to fix their own errors or have no issues at all, in other words, we expect and more on the side of want, them to be able to never fail. What I am basically trying to say is that machines and technology have come so far that we expect them to be flawless, we expect them to work, but they don’t. Ergo, we are plugged into the fact that it, the technology, will never fail, and this leads us into the idea of being blind of what happens.
However then you go into the idea of being able to fix the ‘malfunction.’ Some of us do not have any idea what to do. We buy the product thinking that it will last us the time duration, which we need. There is no need to worry about what will happen to it, we have a guarantee. This leads us into the idea of being blind; we are now plugged in. We do not look at what the problem is, instead we are so in tune and in sync with what we are doing, that everything around us, becomes a blur and what we are doing is the only main focus. There are many things that we can see this compared with such as: cell phones, TV’s, computers, internet, and just so much more. Society once thrived on people being able to work together and get things done, but now we are able to cut work forces in half. This just leads to more problems with the economy, but that is off topic, but it shows that what we do has consequences. Has society come down to simply being lazy? Yet again, a bit off topic, but it just shows that each decision society makes leads to something either positive or negative. If you break that down into the individual person, it can also be applied, we make decisions about many different things, such as when we choose to use our phones, watch tv, go on the computer or anything like that. When we choose to do that we are in an economic term making “opportunity costs.” What this means is that we are giving up something for the use or production of something else. So either way we are dedicated to something, we plug ourselves into what we want to do, whether beneficial to society or ourselves only.
Whatever we do, there is a cause and effect. Sometimes it is beyond our control, while other times we proceed without looking beyond what we already know. When inventors create projects they always, or should always be thinking of the repercussions that might be possible if it fails. Like nuclear reactors, if they fail, they cause much damage to the area. They think of the benefits and harms of the product, but it is not up to them sometimes to see where it goes. Take iPods for example: They are great for sharing music and getting information, but can make society anti-social in many ways. There is a lack of communication between people when we are "plugged-in." We are the final critics of the technology and how we use it is the review. If we use it a lot, it will get a good review, but sometimes the over use and under use of something can be good or bad. But sometimes we are so near sighted that we lose our focus and cannot seem to look beyond the actually problems that might be caused. In the end, it comes down to being our fault then, we are the reasons why communication is at a breaking point, why it fails and why the world seems to be more individual than what it was before.
Then we have David Nye and his book Technology Matters. First, before I decide to go into the piece, I felt that his title was more of a question, but put as a statement. More along the lines of…Technology Matters? The reason I feel this way is because his chapter titles are usually questions. So you would think that the book is a matter of fact and opinion. The facts coming from his use of other books to make his points, but then his opinion, which would be later, stated in his chapters. But, beyond that, there is much that can be said about Nye and his work.
With Nye, as stated before, he labels each chapter with a question. One chapter in particular that really catches my eye is Cultural Uniformity? or Diversity? What makes this chapter so interesting is the fact that with Vonnegut and Vicente each talk in some way of being uniform or diverse in life. Nye uses this to discuss the ways in which we live as individuals. He uses a quote from the book The Making of a Counter Culture by Theodore Roszak. His quote talks about how there are ‘little boxes’ each with the same family style, children, all who go to the university. It makes me think that deep down are we all trying to be the same as those around us? It may not seem like it, but I see it. If our neighbor gets a new TV, we want a new TV as well, but just not the same brand. We are trying to ‘Keep up with the Jones’. Another chapter, which can also tie in with Vonnegut and Vicente, is Sustainable Abundance, or Ecological Crisis? Vicente can be tied in with his idea of Nuclear Reactors, and even basic things such as schedules and Vonnegut with the idea of Ice-Nine.
With those authors in mind, it makes you think about today’s society and what should be doing and not be doing. Things that come to my mind are the ideas of being ‘plugged-in.’ We have so many personal items, such as cell phones, laptops, mp3 players, that we forget that we are part of society. Society cannot depend on surviving with individuality, but the cooperation of everyone. IF we are not paying attention to what is going on around us. Something extremely important might be announced but the headphones block it out, we have the opportunity to see who is calling and not answer, and we have the opportunity to do whatever we want basically from personal computers. It is a scary fact that we have those liberties. Now I am not saying to ban them all, but we, as individuals need to look beyond our own goals/benefits and ourselves and see what we can do to help each other out and benefit still at the same time. This would be a very interesting matter to look at, because we all are uniform in ways of wanting the same things, but unique in the ways in which we use them.
This just brings it down to the idea of being less secure. In one of my previous works I mentioned the idea of privacy. How do you feel about the issue? Do you feel that you still have the same privacy as you did 10 years ago? Take for example going online, people seem to know what you want. I go online and there are ads that are promoting things, such as shoes, phones, and other accessories that I am interested in. When you search for things, the people at ad companies see this and know how to target you and make you want to buy their products. Where is the privacy in that? We have government officials who listen in on conversations of people because of threats against the United States, but there is no privacy there at all.
In my own opinion, well to narrow it down, there has never been full and complete privacy. Thing leak out from people, documents get into the wrong hands. In regular day activities people always ask what you have been up to, and when we say we don’t want to talk about it, they start to speculate about what might be going on. Why can’t people just stick to what the have and not worry about others? It is who we are, it is what we do, and privacy doesn’t seem to be in out English language.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Picking My Research Topic
When I was thinking about the topic for my research paper, there was one thing that kept on really getting to me, and that was the idea of being “plugged-in.” Of course, not in a literal sense, but the mere fact that in someway, shape, or form, all of us have an addiction to something, whether technological or not. It is when we are in that mode that we cannot seem to be broken from concentration unless we are surprised or caught off guard by something; we are then broken from the ‘spell’ or the trance state, which were just in.
I find this to be very interesting, because I can apply it to others that are around me, and myself as well. I see the things that I get ‘caught’ up in and therefore ‘plug’ myself into. I myself am a stakeholder in this issue, because I know of several things that I really get into, such as Facebook. When I open up my internet the page it opens up to right away is Facebook. I am already signed in. However, this doesn’t mean that I am always on the site, sometimes I just have my page open but I am not on it. But I would say that a good majority of the time I am on it. So there in just one thing I am plugged in. I am not ‘addicted’ to my computer, I can manage without it, but if I do not have something to do, I am generally on it, sometimes with a purpose and other times without a purpose, just for messing around.
Moving outside of myself though, there is so many other things that people are addicted/plugged into. Such things as cell phones, computers, TV, online gaming, messaging, and even such simple things, as texting on a phone are things people get plugged into. I know a large amount of people who have cell phones, but they are spending more time texting than they are actually on a phone. It’s like why don’t you get unlimited texting, with maybe a couple hundred minutes of talking. But then again, that all depends on the person, such as a college student, compared to a businessman or salesman who is always on the road for their job.
In general what I want to find out is how plugged people are into objects that are stationary, such as television versus the portable, such as PSPs, cell phones, and IPods. What makes each different and compatible at the same time? Why is it that one might have more influence over people than another? The two objects that I want to compare are two basic but heavily used in today’s society, and that is TV and cell phones. Now I could do it on a large scale, but not all countries are the same, such as 1st world nations to 3rd world nations. So to narrow it down, I am going to do it on society in modern day United States. That will hopefully give me a good glimpse of how society is functioning with technology and if we are truly ‘plugged’ in as I and maybe others might think.
I find this to be very interesting, because I can apply it to others that are around me, and myself as well. I see the things that I get ‘caught’ up in and therefore ‘plug’ myself into. I myself am a stakeholder in this issue, because I know of several things that I really get into, such as Facebook. When I open up my internet the page it opens up to right away is Facebook. I am already signed in. However, this doesn’t mean that I am always on the site, sometimes I just have my page open but I am not on it. But I would say that a good majority of the time I am on it. So there in just one thing I am plugged in. I am not ‘addicted’ to my computer, I can manage without it, but if I do not have something to do, I am generally on it, sometimes with a purpose and other times without a purpose, just for messing around.
Moving outside of myself though, there is so many other things that people are addicted/plugged into. Such things as cell phones, computers, TV, online gaming, messaging, and even such simple things, as texting on a phone are things people get plugged into. I know a large amount of people who have cell phones, but they are spending more time texting than they are actually on a phone. It’s like why don’t you get unlimited texting, with maybe a couple hundred minutes of talking. But then again, that all depends on the person, such as a college student, compared to a businessman or salesman who is always on the road for their job.
In general what I want to find out is how plugged people are into objects that are stationary, such as television versus the portable, such as PSPs, cell phones, and IPods. What makes each different and compatible at the same time? Why is it that one might have more influence over people than another? The two objects that I want to compare are two basic but heavily used in today’s society, and that is TV and cell phones. Now I could do it on a large scale, but not all countries are the same, such as 1st world nations to 3rd world nations. So to narrow it down, I am going to do it on society in modern day United States. That will hopefully give me a good glimpse of how society is functioning with technology and if we are truly ‘plugged’ in as I and maybe others might think.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Thoughts on Essay
In order to fulfill the objective for completing the essay on the sources that Nye used, there were several things that one had to do in order to achieve it. Well, when I say use different things, I mean each individual since we all have different ways of completing tasks. When I had to do this, what I did was read the sources, which I decided to use. One of them was a short packet of papers, while the other was quite the opposite, being a book. But for the book, I decided to read a chapter that dealt closely with the topic in which I wanted to write about. So after reading that chapter and the article I drew up some notes and main ideas that they both brought out and then tried to tie them in with what I wanted to use with Nye. Also, the chapters that I wanted to use in Nye’s book, Technology Matters, I wanted to be able to relate the article and chapter with them. So I had to be careful on what I wanted to talk about, and choose the chapter(s) carefully so that I knew that I would not be using sources and materials that did not necessarily go together.
I found that the peer editing this time seemed to be a lot more broad, but yet helpful. When the peers who edited my paper commented, they also gave questions, which they should have done. The questions though seemed to be more of opinion. What I mean is that they gave me a question, but it wasn’t were I was supposed to add more information, but of my own opinion. They wanted to know what I felt about the topic that I was talking about. I feel that outside of having the actual facts and quotes that your own opinion is crucial to add because it helps support your argument, that is, if you are trying to make one. Sometimes the best papers are not the ones filled with facts, but those, which have both, fact and opinion.
I feel that Nye along with other writers use their research to make their statements much stronger and easier to back up with. It is easier to break down someone’s argument when they have no back up information, than it is to break someone who has information that can back up what they are trying to say. I feel that Nye used his sources fair and well to make us understand. I think that researchers have a difficult time putting research into their own work because you have to make sure that it goes along well with what you are trying to say. You do not want to have research that makes your essay, book, article sway all over the place. If that happens it makes it hard to the reader to understand and comprehend what you are trying to say. When I add my research, I think comparing it to Nye; I want to add my own opinion. I feel that Nye doesn’t do this; he just gives it how it is. Then he will simply add examples. He is good with what he does, but sometimes the opinion helps out a lot more than some might think.
I found that the peer editing this time seemed to be a lot more broad, but yet helpful. When the peers who edited my paper commented, they also gave questions, which they should have done. The questions though seemed to be more of opinion. What I mean is that they gave me a question, but it wasn’t were I was supposed to add more information, but of my own opinion. They wanted to know what I felt about the topic that I was talking about. I feel that outside of having the actual facts and quotes that your own opinion is crucial to add because it helps support your argument, that is, if you are trying to make one. Sometimes the best papers are not the ones filled with facts, but those, which have both, fact and opinion.
I feel that Nye along with other writers use their research to make their statements much stronger and easier to back up with. It is easier to break down someone’s argument when they have no back up information, than it is to break someone who has information that can back up what they are trying to say. I feel that Nye used his sources fair and well to make us understand. I think that researchers have a difficult time putting research into their own work because you have to make sure that it goes along well with what you are trying to say. You do not want to have research that makes your essay, book, article sway all over the place. If that happens it makes it hard to the reader to understand and comprehend what you are trying to say. When I add my research, I think comparing it to Nye; I want to add my own opinion. I feel that Nye doesn’t do this; he just gives it how it is. Then he will simply add examples. He is good with what he does, but sometimes the opinion helps out a lot more than some might think.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Draft
David Nye uses many sources in his book Technology Matters. He uses them as a way to help the reader understand what point is trying to be made and clarified by him. Nye uses not just one source, but also many. With each example he uses something different. He makes it more detailed and simple by given a variety of examples. He just doesn’t dwell on one certain area to make his point. What I mean is that, he refers to different generations and centuries. We go from modern science to basic things such as tools and roads. It is how he is able to explain his thoughts and words. I will be using two sources that Nye also used in his book to explain what his views are and those that are being shared and left out.
One of the sources that I chose to use was a piece written by Sherry Turkle who is a professor of social studies of science and technology at MIT. The title of the article she had written is called How Computers Change the Way We Think. And in no debate this is a true statement. With the recent development of computers there is so much we have been able to do which would not have been able to do before or would have took much longer to accomplish. But with this development there has been a lot of debate on what has provided us with, the good and the bad. Turkle tells us that it has made us more efficient in the idea of getting things done faster and more smoothly. This however does not still prevent errors from happening.
She talks of the bad with her first encounter with ‘computers’. When calculators were first a thing for students to have and use many lost the ability to do calculations that were simple in the back of their heads. Those who had used them made many more errors than those who still did the work the long way. A simple idea that even technology can screw up even if we put in the correct data. She moves on to the idea of privacy. My generation has never experienced the true idea of privacy. Like Turkle says, “Middle-school and high-school students tend to be willing to provide personal information online with no safeguards, and college students seem uninterested in violations of privacy and in increased governmental and commercial surveillance.”
Turkle brings up the idea of chat-rooms and online gaming. Is it portraying us as whom we really are or as some person we want to be. In conclusion we, the people, do both. We act as ourselves but at the same time we act as people we aren’t, making ourselves look better. She then moves on to the idea of PowerPoint. This program is of great use and can do a lot for people. However it truly shows the person for who they are. The misuse of the program can only be blamed on the person running it. However we get a sense of that person on how they gathered their information and how well they put it together.
In general you can see that Turkle sums up the idea that technology changes us for better or worse. But she does not tell us what is the outcome; we have to see for ourselves. It all depends on how we use it. With that we are able to see how we react with the technology to see if we are in control or it controls us.
The next source that I used from Nye was by Theodore Roszak. His book is called The Making of a Counter Culture. The first chapter he has talked about the idea of Children of Technocracy. What he means is that we, or even any generation, are the children of technocracy. Meaning that even if it is not as complex as today’s time, at some point there was a technological advance that was the big thing of the time. We are run by it all no matter what. How we use it depends on the need and if it is really vital to you. This can be related to any generation like I said because technology comes out at anytime. (need more from this source)
I think that Nye has the general population involved in these sources, because it deals with everyone. No one is left out because this involves everyone and everyday lives. I feel that I will use this because one of my questions that I want to answer is how technology controls us. Is it us that controls us or not really? Such things as iPods, computers, and cell phones. It deals with all people in the world.
One of the sources that I chose to use was a piece written by Sherry Turkle who is a professor of social studies of science and technology at MIT. The title of the article she had written is called How Computers Change the Way We Think. And in no debate this is a true statement. With the recent development of computers there is so much we have been able to do which would not have been able to do before or would have took much longer to accomplish. But with this development there has been a lot of debate on what has provided us with, the good and the bad. Turkle tells us that it has made us more efficient in the idea of getting things done faster and more smoothly. This however does not still prevent errors from happening.
She talks of the bad with her first encounter with ‘computers’. When calculators were first a thing for students to have and use many lost the ability to do calculations that were simple in the back of their heads. Those who had used them made many more errors than those who still did the work the long way. A simple idea that even technology can screw up even if we put in the correct data. She moves on to the idea of privacy. My generation has never experienced the true idea of privacy. Like Turkle says, “Middle-school and high-school students tend to be willing to provide personal information online with no safeguards, and college students seem uninterested in violations of privacy and in increased governmental and commercial surveillance.”
Turkle brings up the idea of chat-rooms and online gaming. Is it portraying us as whom we really are or as some person we want to be. In conclusion we, the people, do both. We act as ourselves but at the same time we act as people we aren’t, making ourselves look better. She then moves on to the idea of PowerPoint. This program is of great use and can do a lot for people. However it truly shows the person for who they are. The misuse of the program can only be blamed on the person running it. However we get a sense of that person on how they gathered their information and how well they put it together.
In general you can see that Turkle sums up the idea that technology changes us for better or worse. But she does not tell us what is the outcome; we have to see for ourselves. It all depends on how we use it. With that we are able to see how we react with the technology to see if we are in control or it controls us.
The next source that I used from Nye was by Theodore Roszak. His book is called The Making of a Counter Culture. The first chapter he has talked about the idea of Children of Technocracy. What he means is that we, or even any generation, are the children of technocracy. Meaning that even if it is not as complex as today’s time, at some point there was a technological advance that was the big thing of the time. We are run by it all no matter what. How we use it depends on the need and if it is really vital to you. This can be related to any generation like I said because technology comes out at anytime. (need more from this source)
I think that Nye has the general population involved in these sources, because it deals with everyone. No one is left out because this involves everyone and everyday lives. I feel that I will use this because one of my questions that I want to answer is how technology controls us. Is it us that controls us or not really? Such things as iPods, computers, and cell phones. It deals with all people in the world.
Monday, March 9, 2009
2 Sources
When reading the two sources obtained from Nye's Technology Matters, it seems that he was able to use them in proper context. I feel that Nye properly used the text in a way that he is able to explain his examples from another perspective. He uses the idea of cultural uniformity and diversity with a passage from Theodore Roszak's The Making of a Counter Culture. But before we go into Nye and the sources, I will talk about the sources and how they make their arguments.
The first source that Nye used and I decided to look up and research was a journal article called How Computers Change the Way We Think. Written by Sherry Turkle, it basically brings up the fact that as technology gets more complex we aren't willing to pay attention how to fix things. She points out the fact that as personal computers came into play, people in the beginning were willing to figure out the problem, but as the complexity grew the less and less people wanted to know how to fix them. They became to complex to understand, so in reality, who would want to fix them all by ones self? This is a great example, and I believe that it definitely relates to society and how it works. We buy all of these gadgets and want them to work, but when they break down on us, we usually don’t bother to fix them ourselves. Instead we send them away to the ‘technicians.’ And instead of saving money by learning to fix it ourselves we spend the money to get it fixed or even more to replace it. Programs are made complex, but at the center they are very easy to use. Children at the Elementary level start to use Word processor and Microsoft Excel. This just shows the facts that we are not challenged as much to think about how to organize and put words together. With the technology we have in programs, most of the time it will show us the correct way to figure everything out.
The other source that I used was The Making of a Counter Culture by Theodore Roszak. In this piece I read about the ‘Technocracy of our Children.’ In this part Roszak explains that we are part of society ran by ‘experts.’ We saw this in Kim Vicente’s The Human Factor. Experts are meant to manage and maintain society to keep it running at its best. This is the reason for having professionals do their job. We do not have simple folks who have no idea about surgery take over a surgeon’s job. Instead they have to go to school to understand the concepts on how to perform a surgery and know what they have to do in order to have a successful surgery. This is what technocracy seems to be. The ideals that certain people are meant for certain jobs. Without this the ‘technological world’ cannot be advanced without people understanding their jobs and what their contribution to the world is.
I believe that Nye uses these two contexts well. He is able to explain what he feels, but also gives facts by using the other sources to make sure his point is heard. With not only these two but many others, his ability to make his book well written gives him the opportunity to make us think not only what he believe but also for ourselves.
The first source that Nye used and I decided to look up and research was a journal article called How Computers Change the Way We Think. Written by Sherry Turkle, it basically brings up the fact that as technology gets more complex we aren't willing to pay attention how to fix things. She points out the fact that as personal computers came into play, people in the beginning were willing to figure out the problem, but as the complexity grew the less and less people wanted to know how to fix them. They became to complex to understand, so in reality, who would want to fix them all by ones self? This is a great example, and I believe that it definitely relates to society and how it works. We buy all of these gadgets and want them to work, but when they break down on us, we usually don’t bother to fix them ourselves. Instead we send them away to the ‘technicians.’ And instead of saving money by learning to fix it ourselves we spend the money to get it fixed or even more to replace it. Programs are made complex, but at the center they are very easy to use. Children at the Elementary level start to use Word processor and Microsoft Excel. This just shows the facts that we are not challenged as much to think about how to organize and put words together. With the technology we have in programs, most of the time it will show us the correct way to figure everything out.
The other source that I used was The Making of a Counter Culture by Theodore Roszak. In this piece I read about the ‘Technocracy of our Children.’ In this part Roszak explains that we are part of society ran by ‘experts.’ We saw this in Kim Vicente’s The Human Factor. Experts are meant to manage and maintain society to keep it running at its best. This is the reason for having professionals do their job. We do not have simple folks who have no idea about surgery take over a surgeon’s job. Instead they have to go to school to understand the concepts on how to perform a surgery and know what they have to do in order to have a successful surgery. This is what technocracy seems to be. The ideals that certain people are meant for certain jobs. Without this the ‘technological world’ cannot be advanced without people understanding their jobs and what their contribution to the world is.
I believe that Nye uses these two contexts well. He is able to explain what he feels, but also gives facts by using the other sources to make sure his point is heard. With not only these two but many others, his ability to make his book well written gives him the opportunity to make us think not only what he believe but also for ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
