Energy And Place
During this project, we were tasked with describing our environmental ethic and our sense of place. Basically, we took our connection to a specific place and connected this with an environmental perspective. Personally, I chose a less concrete place. For my project, I chose to discuss my connection with the internet and online community, as I don't feel a particularly strong connection with any specific place.
Overall, I don't feel there was a very large amount of writing growth that occurred during this project. This is mainly due to two reasons. First, my original draft was only two paragraphs long, when I decided to scrap it and start over as it felt inauthentic. Also, my second draft felt almost equally inauthentic. I don't know that there's a reasonable way to express what I was attempting to say without using cliches or assuming prior understanding most audiences won't have. My first draft can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W2OZRlPOjZMfEOtpc_-qBvz8jjnravqKArzrwSTBr60/edit
and the second draft is here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ylg7Ruag4DDIN2hzAee5VR8Hbeq1XXpqYg7icWrG_g4/
In terms of personal growth, I feel that there was an important realization I had. I realized that I don't really feel rooted in the real world. I'm not sure if this is a good or a bad thing, but I think it may be the cause of a lot of my problems. I often have a very difficult time relating to other people and places, and this may very well be why. This is difficult for me to say definitively, but perhaps finding somewhere I feel at home would be worthwhile.
Overall, I don't feel there was a very large amount of writing growth that occurred during this project. This is mainly due to two reasons. First, my original draft was only two paragraphs long, when I decided to scrap it and start over as it felt inauthentic. Also, my second draft felt almost equally inauthentic. I don't know that there's a reasonable way to express what I was attempting to say without using cliches or assuming prior understanding most audiences won't have. My first draft can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W2OZRlPOjZMfEOtpc_-qBvz8jjnravqKArzrwSTBr60/edit
and the second draft is here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ylg7Ruag4DDIN2hzAee5VR8Hbeq1XXpqYg7icWrG_g4/
In terms of personal growth, I feel that there was an important realization I had. I realized that I don't really feel rooted in the real world. I'm not sure if this is a good or a bad thing, but I think it may be the cause of a lot of my problems. I often have a very difficult time relating to other people and places, and this may very well be why. This is difficult for me to say definitively, but perhaps finding somewhere I feel at home would be worthwhile.
The Morality And Politics of Justice
Cyber vigilantism should be allowed as long as it leads to the arrest of another, and doesn't harm the innocent.
For this project, we began with learning about justice from the perspectives of different philosophers. We began with Henry David Thoreau, and then progressed onto the works of other philosophers such as John Rawls or Immanuel Kant. We looked at various moral dilemmas through the lenses of various philosophies. After this, we began researching a topic. For instance, my topic was internet vigilantism. We were then tasked with writing an op-ed taking a stance on this issue, and designing an art piece to represent our perspective.
Before revision, my op-ed was lacking in several places. Specifically, I used a massive amount of passive or nonspecific language, My hook was also weak, and in the end I rewrote a large amount of my op-ed. My hook and thesis are now far stronger, and I improved passive/nonspecific language usage.
My poster utilizes several important pieces of symbolism. The shadow hands represent evil, reaching for the innocent. Protecting the child, a symbol of innocence, stands a lone hero, who represents vigilantes. However, Uncle Sam, representing the US government, is pointing an accusing finger at our hero, perhaps in an attempt to poke him out of the way, allowing evil to reach the innocent child. This poster utilizes pathos and logos primarily, but also touches on ethos. The pathos is the image of a child in danger. Logically speaking, it makes no sense to remove the hero protecting the child. Though it's somewhat minor, I think the bash terminal in the background adds credibility to the poster. Anyone with knowledge of the programming world is likely to recognize the syntax used in the background, and perhaps it's validity will add to the impact of the poster. I chose to arrange the poster as such to create a creepy atmosphere. The vignette around the edge of the poster creates the illusion that darkness is closing in, while also highlighting the main characters in this piece. Overall, I was fairly content with this poster, but I was very disappointed with how Uncle Sam's hand turned out. It looked somewhat tacky and thrown together to me.
I thought it was interesting working through this project, but what I felt really taught me more was looking at other people's projects. There's students that took stances I would never have expected on their issue. This has really opened my mind to the possibility that others don't think the way that I think they do. I don't generally consider that, but now that it has been introduced to me, I feel more open to the concept and more accepting of my classmates.
Before revision, my op-ed was lacking in several places. Specifically, I used a massive amount of passive or nonspecific language, My hook was also weak, and in the end I rewrote a large amount of my op-ed. My hook and thesis are now far stronger, and I improved passive/nonspecific language usage.
My poster utilizes several important pieces of symbolism. The shadow hands represent evil, reaching for the innocent. Protecting the child, a symbol of innocence, stands a lone hero, who represents vigilantes. However, Uncle Sam, representing the US government, is pointing an accusing finger at our hero, perhaps in an attempt to poke him out of the way, allowing evil to reach the innocent child. This poster utilizes pathos and logos primarily, but also touches on ethos. The pathos is the image of a child in danger. Logically speaking, it makes no sense to remove the hero protecting the child. Though it's somewhat minor, I think the bash terminal in the background adds credibility to the poster. Anyone with knowledge of the programming world is likely to recognize the syntax used in the background, and perhaps it's validity will add to the impact of the poster. I chose to arrange the poster as such to create a creepy atmosphere. The vignette around the edge of the poster creates the illusion that darkness is closing in, while also highlighting the main characters in this piece. Overall, I was fairly content with this poster, but I was very disappointed with how Uncle Sam's hand turned out. It looked somewhat tacky and thrown together to me.
I thought it was interesting working through this project, but what I felt really taught me more was looking at other people's projects. There's students that took stances I would never have expected on their issue. This has really opened my mind to the possibility that others don't think the way that I think they do. I don't generally consider that, but now that it has been introduced to me, I feel more open to the concept and more accepting of my classmates.
Final Draft
Voices from the Animas
Storycorps Interview
Seminar pre-write:
Seminar Self-Assessment:
For the perspective category, I feel like I met all of the requirements, and offered interesting perspectives to the conversation. It is because of these reasons that I’m going to give myself a 3/4 for that category. However, I had a lot less evidence than I could have had. I only cited one piece of evidence during the seminar, but I did cite it multiple times for various scenarios and used hypothetical situations. An excellent example of this was when I mentioned that frogs could be a good indicator that the water was poisoned. Because of this, I feel I deserve a 2.5/4 for the evidence category. I also feel that I exhibited strong communication skills, invited others into the conversation, and attempted to return to the original question several times. I believe I deserve a 4/4 for the communication portion of the rubric. I also made several fairly abstract connections during the seminar. Due to this, I give myself a 4/4 in the connections category. Finally, I posed several original questions to the group, pulled others into the conversation, and attempted to help others understand points made by various students. It is because of this that I’m giving myself a 4/4 in the leadership category.
Overall scores:
I feel like I did a good job of stepping down for today’s seminar. That’s something I usually have a lot of difficulty dealing with. As someone with extremely strong opinions, it’s often very difficult to let others speak. I find myself talking at people, not with people. This is a skill I hope to continue improving in the coming months.
Project Reflection:
The interview was by far the easiest part of this project. However, it was also the most enjoyable part. I really feel like I got a lot of insight from my interview, and it was a great way to wrap up the project. I actually wasn’t aware that there were alternative programs to superfund until my interview. I think that overall, this process has really helped my listening skills. I often find myself dominating conversation and talking at people, but this has noticeably decreased during the Animas River Spill project.
I think that we need to cease the pointing of fingers and begin fixing the problem. As Ashley Trusler so well stated, “The river is my heart”. The Animas River is the heart and soul of our community, and anything that can ensure it’s safety is essential. For me, this could be the superfund and similar programs, or the Animas Stakeholder’s Group. However, the Stakeholder’s Group seems to be the most probable entity to provide solutions.
The concept of a superfund seems unlikely. As we were told many times during our trip to Silverton, the superfund was never officially proposed to the Silverton Board. It’s due to this that I feel that the most appropriate solution would be the continued effort of the Animas Stakeholder’s Group, potentially expedited with external funding. Without this funding, the Stakeholder’s Group has made immense progress, but they’ve taken thirty years to do it. I believe that with more resources, the Stakeholder’s Group would be able to make immediate impact on the issue.
I think that the most interesting part of this project was learning how passionate people are about something we often take for granted. Because the river has always been there, we don’t really think about it much until it’s bright orange. It’s really amazing to see how during dramatic events such as the river spill, people are no longer individuals, and begin to work as a community. It always amazes me how humans can adapt and collaborate to achieve a greater goal.
Seminar pre-write:
- How was our community affected economically by the spill?
- What, if any, future economic impacts will there be?
- Could the spill have been prevented and if so how?
- In what ways did the the EPA benefit and lose from the spill? (Was the spill an accident?)
Seminar Self-Assessment:
For the perspective category, I feel like I met all of the requirements, and offered interesting perspectives to the conversation. It is because of these reasons that I’m going to give myself a 3/4 for that category. However, I had a lot less evidence than I could have had. I only cited one piece of evidence during the seminar, but I did cite it multiple times for various scenarios and used hypothetical situations. An excellent example of this was when I mentioned that frogs could be a good indicator that the water was poisoned. Because of this, I feel I deserve a 2.5/4 for the evidence category. I also feel that I exhibited strong communication skills, invited others into the conversation, and attempted to return to the original question several times. I believe I deserve a 4/4 for the communication portion of the rubric. I also made several fairly abstract connections during the seminar. Due to this, I give myself a 4/4 in the connections category. Finally, I posed several original questions to the group, pulled others into the conversation, and attempted to help others understand points made by various students. It is because of this that I’m giving myself a 4/4 in the leadership category.
Overall scores:
- Perspective: 3/4
- Evidence: 2.5/4
- Communication: 4/4
- Connections: 4/4
- Leadership: 4/4
I feel like I did a good job of stepping down for today’s seminar. That’s something I usually have a lot of difficulty dealing with. As someone with extremely strong opinions, it’s often very difficult to let others speak. I find myself talking at people, not with people. This is a skill I hope to continue improving in the coming months.
Project Reflection:
The interview was by far the easiest part of this project. However, it was also the most enjoyable part. I really feel like I got a lot of insight from my interview, and it was a great way to wrap up the project. I actually wasn’t aware that there were alternative programs to superfund until my interview. I think that overall, this process has really helped my listening skills. I often find myself dominating conversation and talking at people, but this has noticeably decreased during the Animas River Spill project.
I think that we need to cease the pointing of fingers and begin fixing the problem. As Ashley Trusler so well stated, “The river is my heart”. The Animas River is the heart and soul of our community, and anything that can ensure it’s safety is essential. For me, this could be the superfund and similar programs, or the Animas Stakeholder’s Group. However, the Stakeholder’s Group seems to be the most probable entity to provide solutions.
The concept of a superfund seems unlikely. As we were told many times during our trip to Silverton, the superfund was never officially proposed to the Silverton Board. It’s due to this that I feel that the most appropriate solution would be the continued effort of the Animas Stakeholder’s Group, potentially expedited with external funding. Without this funding, the Stakeholder’s Group has made immense progress, but they’ve taken thirty years to do it. I believe that with more resources, the Stakeholder’s Group would be able to make immediate impact on the issue.
I think that the most interesting part of this project was learning how passionate people are about something we often take for granted. Because the river has always been there, we don’t really think about it much until it’s bright orange. It’s really amazing to see how during dramatic events such as the river spill, people are no longer individuals, and begin to work as a community. It always amazes me how humans can adapt and collaborate to achieve a greater goal.