WP3 PB1

Keeping the Peace is a piece on the flaws of the college dormitory system that is used to pair up students. Rosemary Counter uses a very academic piece of writing, and does not utilize humor. It first starts off with an example of a roommate pairing gone wrong. The roommates that are paired together have the same things written down on their questionnaires, but when they meet each other, they are complete opposites. One roommate was incredibly shy, and would tag along with the other roommate to whatever they went to. Counter then explains what the problem with the roommate dormitory system is, along with ideas of why these problems occur. Mainly because of dishonesty on the questionnaire, and parents also had a big deal to do with it. Counter then further goes on and gives a couple ways that other universities had adopted in order to make the roommate pairing process more effective.

            To make “Keeping the Peace” a more children suitable book, I would make it a picture book. It could have a mother teaching her children about rooming or something. The word choices in it would be much easier, it would also come with a

WP2 PB2

Kyle D. Stedman has a specific move set in his article, “Annoying Ways People Uses Sources”. He enjoys using parallelism to get his multiple points across, for example his numbering of explanations when he compares

“1. They don’t know that the generally accepted practice of high-way driving in the US is to move to the right if an upcoming car wants to pass. Or,

2. They know the guidelines but don’t care” (Stedman 242)

and also when he goes over The Annoyances. Stedman always starts off with his made up title of the annoyance, and then gives a little example of what that literary annoyance is like in real life. After effectively giving his audience something that they can imagine or relate to, Stedman then introduces a passage that features that annoyance, and clearly examines why the passage features the given annoyance. After presenting these facts, Stedman always uses “The Fix:” to teach his audience how to turn the annoyance into a work of art. Stedman uses a lot of parallelism and for every single one of his annoyances, he follows the same order, 1. Name of annoyance, 2. Relatable experience or an image, 3. An example in writing of the annoyance, and 4. How to fix the annoyance. Stedman also uses a lot of bolded words and italics in his writing in order to keep the attention of his audience, which works quite well. His italics highlight the key points of the annoyance and his bolded words show what he has changed in his fix of the bad passage. These italics and bolded sentences express themselves more firmly onto the reader, which allows them to better understand the changes that Stedman is trying to teach. Stedman also writes as if he’s write next to you and talking to you, much like a teacher talks to a classroom, which is also extremely effective. The way he writes allows the reader to get a great grasp of the knowledge and stay entertained through the whole thing. With a combination of jokes, corniness, and knowledge, Stedman effectively gets through to the reader and enlightens them on how to use sources more completely. He also uses colloquial language to help enthrall the reader, allowing better absorption of his text.

While Stedman is fun to read throughout the whole reading, Rosenberg starts off beautifully in the beginning, but her writing starts deteriorating after the section, If At First You Fall Asleep. Rosenberg starts off as if she’s writing a story, illustrating the first years of her college life, she writes through personal experience, and relates to the reader through her similes, metaphors, and personification. She expresses her love for reading and many hours reading in the “overstuffed red chair in the library that enveloped [her] like the lap of a department store Santa” (Rosenberg 210). But once she reached the English texts, she “curled up, opened a book on the Chinese Revolution, started reading, and fell asleep” (210). She then shows her lack of concentration on the reading by depicting herself holding on for a couple paragraphs, and then day dream. With her similes, metaphors, personification, and especially her vivid details, she relates to the audience, describing the dread of reading academic texts and then appearing as a savior by offering tips on how to make the reading of academic texts more enjoyable.

                Everything falls apart after that section, once she starts the next section, the reading is near unbearable, she rambles on about how reading a scholarly work is a conversation, and multiple examples on how it becomes a conversation. The next section is where it actually becomes helpful, Rosenberg also uses bolds in her writing, and she bolds everything that the reader should look at or think through. After bolding the word that Rosenberg wants her audience to focus on, she then goes on to show why that works. She gives little tips and tricks that she learned after her seven years of college.

                Rosenberg and Stedman both wrote terrific pieces, but Stedman’s piece was by far the best. His understanding of the current student is great, and he’s very good at keeping his audience’s attention with his colloquial language, parallelism, short entertaining stories that relate to the reader, and corniness. His piece of work was much more entertaining than Rosenberg’s was, which had a lot to do with the spacing. Each annoyance of his was short and to the point, telling you a story, then a passage of it being wrong, and finally how to fix the problem. His brilliance in keeping his audience fascinated was through the simplicity of his text and his straight to the point writing style. Rosenberg would have been a much more entertaining read if she had used more dashes, and more spaces in her text. If she had had more paragraphs and borrowed some of the ideas that Stedman used, her piece would have been Justas interesting as Stedman’s.

Find a scholarly academic publication, then compare/contrast its rhetorical features and conventions with those present in the “SCIgen” genre generator program.  (Note: this is a revisitation of PB1B.)

Optimizing Firm Performance Alignment of Operational Success Drivers on the Basis of Empirical Data is much different than the SCIgen generated articles. First off, it is completely real, and it’s also not very fun to play around with. The SCIgen website also generates articles about computer science, and Optimizing Firm Performance Alignment of Operational Success Drivers on the Basis of Empirical Data is about economics, and the way and reasoning behind the way a firm works . They’re also totally different because the SCIgen articles are complete bullshit, while Optimizing Firm Performance Alignment of Operational Success Drivers on the Basis of Empirical Data is written based on information gathered about the how firms work and what works and what doesn’t work in a firm. SCIgen’s articles are about a fake topic that is randomly generated, even though it can seem to make sense, because the wording is so complex. SCIgen generates research papers about computer science. They have the title at the top, followed with the author’s name right under it. The first section is the abstract, which gives an idea of what the author is going to be writing about. It is then followed by a bolded Table of Contents with the first in the table of contents to be 1 Introduction, in the introduction, a general idea of his argument or point is trying to be given and the abstract is expanded upon. The introduction ends with a thesis and is followed by 2 Methodology. In the methodology section the way and theory of how the topic works is shown, with graphs and diagrams showing how it worked. 3 Implementation is about how everything else works and how the topic functions in real life. The 4^th section is about results and analysis with some information about how to put together the experiment and then results of how it worked out. The paper ends with related work with other people who have made advancements in the topic and a conclusion, along with references as a works cited page.

                Like the SCIgen essays, Optimizing Firm Performance also has 6 sections in its table of contents. Optimizing Firm Performance also starts with an introduction and the purpose behind the paper. They also have a thesis, and the paper focuses on why and how the author came to write the paper and a brief look into what he will delve into. It then has a Working Capital Management sections with information about working capital and why along with what it’s like working capital over long periods of time. The main part of the paper is covered in the third and fourth sections of the book. The author goes over how driving firm performances based on an integrated operations approach consisting of manufacturing, supply chain management, working capital management and supply chain risk steering. Optimizing Firm Performance also contains methodology of how its techniques and stuff works. After explaining the theory in chapter 3, the author goes on to show how to boost the productivity of firms. The reader is supposed to identify the drivers and motivations in the firm, and then use that to fuel its workers. The fourth chapter also covers  supply chain risk steering, and how to use it in the firm. The book also ends with a conclusion and also a bibliography.