I think one of my rhetorical strengths is using different examples as evidences that support my argument. Explaining the examples may be a good reference that supports my claims. Also, citing multiple articles that talk about the same topic and cover the same arguments is very beneficial in delivering the message to the targeted audience and convincing them, because it is showing that other people are getting the same results or thinking in the same way. This also increases the reliability. I also try to compare and contrast the different ideas that I am presenting to give my audience a complete understanding of them, thus persuade my audience. On the other hand, I feel that the language I use is a little bit weak. I do not make a good use of the terminology. Using powerful terms and advanced language is one of the techniques that I need to learn, to use in my writing or even speaking. Another weakness is the transition between the ideas that I talk about. I sometimes jump from one idea to another without considering how smooth the transition is. Organizing the presented ideas is very important when talking about any topic and can make the argument very effective.
With writing like anything practice is the key to becoming better. It is something you do and you learn and become better at with time. I would say I am not a practiced writer. This is my first writing composition class I have taken though out my college experience and I am a senior. Besides this class I have not had to write something that was not purely scientific or research based since sophomore year (and even then it was an English class that did more literature analysis then writing). So I feel as though I have more rhetorical weaknesses than I have strengths. I would say though for my strengths I know how to make an argument and support it. I can find good scholarly information to help back up the claims I am making. I also feel like I know how to find relevant examples to help back up my claim also. For my rhetorical weakness I would say organization and flow are a huge issue for me. I do not find my structure super beneficial to my papers. Also the way I put together my thoughts I feel is very rugged and there is not flow, like I have these point I want to tell you and here they are. I do not feel like I use powerful language to really help get my point across to my audience either. As I read others papers I feel like their ideas just flow all together and all their points come across in a way that is really structured beneficially, when I read my own writing it just does not have the same flow. So I feel as though I am strong at creating claims and thinking of ideas but the words do not translate into my writing in a smooth effective way.
It is not easy to use other language to write something. Because it is totally different from my first language when I want to write something. When I start writing, it will need me take time to consider how can I compose words together to make the article more make sense to audience. To be honest, I only have a little writing experience outside the campus, especially use English to write. So, I feel I have more rhetorical weaknesses than rhetorical strengths. For rhetorical strengths, I would like to say I can find good resources to support the point that I make. Also, when I write a sentence, I can use these resources as examples to explain and help audience to better understand what do I mean for this sentence. For rhetorical weaknesses, I would like to say I can find some good resources to support the argument. But I can put them together perfectly. After writing, when I go back to look my paper again, I find the origination is not good. Because some part looks like not follow logical way which make audience feel confuse. Another weakness is transition. When I go back to read my article, I find I did not to use to much transition words which means audience read my article there are a little transition words to signal them the writer start another point. Sometimes, it will make audience feel confuse about the article.
I think one of my strengths in rhetoric is speaking to an audience. I am usually good about changing my writing style to reflect the audience that I am speaking to. Also using research and citing things to back up my opinions with facts. A weakness is being able to have an argument that connects to everything. Such as in the worknets project it was hard for me to find an argument that reaches each worknet and makes sense. Also my transitions to the paragraphs is confusing sometimes, because I will bounce around and sometimes it might not make sense to the reader.
I think one of my strengths in rhetoric is speaking to an audience. I am usually good about changing my writing style to reflect the audience that I am speaking to. Also, using research and citing things to back up my opinions with facts. Another strength I have, I think, is writing with eloquently. It goes with writing for an audience, but even with my Facebook and Twitter posts that are seen by my friends/family I have written well. Not with slang or any other ways of speaking. A weakness is being able to have an argument that connects to everything. Such as in the worknets project it was hard for me to find an argument that reaches each worknet and makes sense. Also, my transitions to the paragraphs is confusing sometimes, because I will bounce around and sometimes it might not make sense to the reader. Another thing I am bad at with rhetoric is not speaking my mind. I always have an opinion on literally everything and with rhetoric sometimes you can’t do that, it must be strict research and facts and no emotional ties at all. But other than that I don’t understand rhetoric at all, and probably never will.
I feel that one thing that I am proud of when I think of my rhetorical strengths is my evidence. I think that I can usually find good sources that can support my argument. I can go pretty in depth with my research and that allows me to find the best sources for whatever it is that I am writing. I also think that my writing does a good job at targeting the audience. I think that when I write it is usually pretty clear about who I am trying to talk to. Whether it be the general public, or a select group of people. My intro to project for example does a good job I think at showing that it is meant for those interested in physician assistant school. When it comes to my weaknesses I think that one main one is that I don’t put enough of my own opinion into my writing. I tend to keep it pretty factual. Going along with just what my sources have to say I forget to say what I think about those sources. Also I think that sometimes I have a hard time putting my argument into words. I can talk to the audience but sometimes I worry whether they understand what the whole purpose of my paper is. I know what I want it to say but when I go to type it out it doesn’t always sound how I hope it to
Rhetoric, as we all know, is the art of persuasion. Personally, I believe my biggest strength in any rhetorical argument/debate I am in is the same as most mothers, the emotionally side. I like using emotional sources and evidence, statistics, etc, for rhetoric because people can relate to it. Aside from that, however, I'm usually pretty good with public speaking and storytelling, as I find they come to me rather quickly. I do a lot of research whenever I'm doing a project, but that can be just as much of a handicap as an ally to me, as I usually get lost trying to figure out what is useful and what is not. That would be my biggest weakness, sorting out the useful stuff from the stuff that people say "so what?" to. I suppose that's why using emotion is so much easier for me. It's hard to counter a story about an abused child with a "so what" without coming off like a jerk, so many people don't question it as much if maybe the rest of the argument isn't as sound as it should be.
That being said, organization of what is an important piece of information versus what is just a “fun fact” of the topic is definitely my biggest weakness when it comes to the rhetorical. The emotional side of an argument and the act of public speaking, sometimes impromptu, lean more toward my strengths at rhetoric, though I would come across a bit better if I have time to practice.
One of my rhetorical strengths is that I am good at expressing how I feel and giving good examples and evidence to back it up. I have a very strong voice and that is reflected in my argument/thesis. I think it’s important to have a voice in writing because it adds something to the rhetoric. Also if there is no back up or evidence for whatever claims are being made, then there is no purpose to the text. I think another rhetorical strength of mine is transitions within the text. My organization helps the text flow and it’s easy to understand. Proper transitions and topic sentences provide clarity throughout and understanding for the reader. One thing I would like to get better at is expanding my vocabulary. I feel like I am very limited with my word choices and I think if I had broader terminology I would be able to add that to my rhetoric and it could provide more detail and depth to whatever text I am writing. I also think that having a wider set of terms will also make me sound smarter and more knowledgeable of the topic. Also I would like to have stronger grammar and spelling skills. Although these things can be checked through a computer, I think it would save me a lot of time and effort if I already knew the right way to apply them.
I have been in management positions for over ten years now. I have also been an instructor for nearly five years. Accomplishing these things at a rapid pace and performing the duties have helped me develop a few rhetorical strengths and have also highlighted my weaknesses. When leading others I have developed strong persuasion techniques using mainly logos (logic). I have found that remaining humble but confident in what I know allows me to show my knowledge and expertise through logical reasoning. This has led others to place trust in me and allow me to lead them in both a working and educational environment. Being a medical professional who cares for sick and injured people daily I have become very sympathetic and sometimes empathetic toward my patients. This gives me a connection to them which allows me to use rhetoric to help guide their decisionsite about care and treatment. On the other hand, my rhetorical writing lacks argument and sometimes flow. My mind moves much faster than my hands can keep up with and I lose information very quickly due to short term memory problems. I have been involved in a couple of explosions which have hindered my ability to effectively think and write at the same time.
As a writer, I am always trying to improve myself, and I’m working to make my weaknesses my strengths. I think one of my biggest weaknesses is that I lack purpose in my writing. For example in the wiki project, I gave a great overview of the definition of reflection and gave plenty of information on its different uses. However, I failed to compare the two sources, and missed the entire point of the assignment. Oftentimes when I write, I simply write words that really don’t have a flow and don’t form the proper arguments or connections. I think through the worknets project, I was really able to focus and work on making connections throughout my paper. I could also work on adding my own commentary especially to the annotated bibliography project, which I failed to do many times. I think my rhetorical strengths are that I definitely incorporate a lot of evidence, and I also use that evidence at different points throughout my paper. I also think I have a decent vocabulary, and that helps me convey my point effectively (I hope ) to the target audience. I hope that by the end of this class, I can turn at least one of my weaknesses into my strengths.
Any effective rhetoric requires undeniable evidence. I think finding and presenting data in order to support my argument is my strongest rhetorical strength. It’s easier to persuade an audience when there are hard facts backing the thesis. Using information from a multitude of established sources is a sound way to confirm the verity of any argument. While supportive evidence is the easiest rhetorical route, it is also helpful to present information from the other side of your argument and then refute it. It shows the audience that you’ve considered the opposite argument instead of ignoring it or brushing it under the rug. This rhetorical strategy of presenting both sides shows the audience that you are well informed, thus establishing credibility and ease of persuasion. I also love organizing words into fluent yet structured sentences. I consider this a strength of mine, but feel as if I am sometimes too focused on the individual thoughts rather than the composition as a whole. This is one of my rhetorical weaknesses. My thought patterns are a flurry of disorganization, so if I don’t take my time to articulate transitions and connections, my writing can come across as a bunch of individual thoughts. Although the connectedness and arguments seem obvious to me, it is important to state them directly, in order to join all my thoughts and information into a single, reiterated point.
To become a better writer it is important that I evaluate my rhetorical strengths and weakness to identify areas of achievement and opportunities for growth. As a writer, I have felt confident in identifying the audience I want to address and devising an argument with evidence to best convince that audience. While writing, I consider what members of my selected audience will need in order to be swayed to my perspective. Most of my papers ask me to give my opinion on a selected prompt and present it to a skeptical audience. I realize that what will determine the strength of my argument is not just my own experience, I must also incorporate information from outside sources. By citing evidence from well-established authors and scholars, I demonstrate my ability to appeal to the audience’s skeptical mindset and shift it in favor in mine. Although I am confident that I can reach my audience, I recognize I have a weakness in formulating that argument cohesively throughout a paper, especially during first drafts. During the initial writing process, I am still developing the overall statement I want to make, creating a sometimes shaky presentation of my ideas. My supporting paragraphs may seem unorganized or disconnected at times because I do not explicitly state the connections between the argument and its supports. This weakness is a sign of developing writing. Once I have written and reviewed my first draft, I see opportunities for elaborating in most paragraphs. I forget during the first draft to keep in mind that the audience needs the argument laid out explicitly for them. Omitting that information may cloud the purpose of my paper, so it is important that I provide the necessary mapping for my audience to follow the connections between my supporting statements and overall argument.
Rhetoric is something that I have revisited in nearly every writing or literature class in college. It has even appeared in some of my linguistics courses, where I am asked to formulate arguments on a study or language theory. In looking at my strengths and weaknesses in rhetoric, I believe that I'm strong in supporting my argument and formulating a thesis, but not in my organization. If I am able to explore a topic I am interested in, I typically will not have a problem finding a thesis and building on a narrative for my argument. Over the years, I have become especially adept at finding secondary sources. Utilizing my citations and building on focused idea that I enjoy writing about are my best skills in rhetoric. Both my worknet project and my annotated bibliography challenged me to better my abilities in connecting my ideas and points. The latter of which best illustrated my need to focus on organization: while I was able to summarize and connect my sources to my topic, I had a harder time connecting one source to the next. I believe that ultimately, findinding such connections between points comes down to drawing straight from the texts being worked with and used to support an argument.
I think one of my rhetorical strengths is using different examples as evidences that support my argument. Explaining the examples may be a good reference that supports my claims. Also, citing multiple articles that talk about the same topic and cover the same arguments is very beneficial in delivering the message to the targeted audience and convincing them, because it is showing that other people are getting the same results or thinking in the same way. This also increases the reliability. I also try to compare and contrast the different ideas that I am presenting to give my audience a complete understanding of them, thus persuade my audience. On the other hand, I feel that the language I use is a little bit weak. I do not make a good use of the terminology. Using powerful terms and advanced language is one of the techniques that I need to learn, to use in my writing or even speaking. Another weakness is the transition between the ideas that I talk about. I sometimes jump from one idea to another without considering how smooth the transition is. Organizing the presented ideas is very important when talking about any topic and can make the argument very effective.
ReplyDeleteWith writing like anything practice is the key to becoming better. It is something you do and you learn and become better at with time. I would say I am not a practiced writer. This is my first writing composition class I have taken though out my college experience and I am a senior. Besides this class I have not had to write something that was not purely scientific or research based since sophomore year (and even then it was an English class that did more literature analysis then writing). So I feel as though I have more rhetorical weaknesses than I have strengths. I would say though for my strengths I know how to make an argument and support it. I can find good scholarly information to help back up the claims I am making. I also feel like I know how to find relevant examples to help back up my claim also. For my rhetorical weakness I would say organization and flow are a huge issue for me. I do not find my structure super beneficial to my papers. Also the way I put together my thoughts I feel is very rugged and there is not flow, like I have these point I want to tell you and here they are. I do not feel like I use powerful language to really help get my point across to my audience either. As I read others papers I feel like their ideas just flow all together and all their points come across in a way that is really structured beneficially, when I read my own writing it just does not have the same flow. So I feel as though I am strong at creating claims and thinking of ideas but the words do not translate into my writing in a smooth effective way.
ReplyDeleteIt is not easy to use other language to write something. Because it is totally different from my first language when I want to write something. When I start writing, it will need me take time to consider how can I compose words together to make the article more make sense to audience. To be honest, I only have a little writing experience outside the campus, especially use English to write. So, I feel I have more rhetorical weaknesses than rhetorical strengths. For rhetorical strengths, I would like to say I can find good resources to support the point that I make. Also, when I write a sentence, I can use these resources as examples to explain and help audience to better understand what do I mean for this sentence. For rhetorical weaknesses, I would like to say I can find some good resources to support the argument. But I can put them together perfectly. After writing, when I go back to look my paper again, I find the origination is not good. Because some part looks like not follow logical way which make audience feel confuse. Another weakness is transition. When I go back to read my article, I find I did not to use to much transition words which means audience read my article there are a little transition words to signal them the writer start another point. Sometimes, it will make audience feel confuse about the article.
ReplyDeleteI think one of my strengths in rhetoric is speaking to an audience. I am usually good about changing my writing style to reflect the audience that I am speaking to. Also using research and citing things to back up my opinions with facts. A weakness is being able to have an argument that connects to everything. Such as in the worknets project it was hard for me to find an argument that reaches each worknet and makes sense. Also my transitions to the paragraphs is confusing sometimes, because I will bounce around and sometimes it might not make sense to the reader.
ReplyDeleteI think one of my strengths in rhetoric is speaking to an audience. I am usually good about changing my writing style to reflect the audience that I am speaking to. Also, using research and citing things to back up my opinions with facts. Another strength I have, I think, is writing with eloquently. It goes with writing for an audience, but even with my Facebook and Twitter posts that are seen by my friends/family I have written well. Not with slang or any other ways of speaking. A weakness is being able to have an argument that connects to everything. Such as in the worknets project it was hard for me to find an argument that reaches each worknet and makes sense. Also, my transitions to the paragraphs is confusing sometimes, because I will bounce around and sometimes it might not make sense to the reader. Another thing I am bad at with rhetoric is not speaking my mind. I always have an opinion on literally everything and with rhetoric sometimes you can’t do that, it must be strict research and facts and no emotional ties at all. But other than that I don’t understand rhetoric at all, and probably never will.
DeleteI feel that one thing that I am proud of when I think of my rhetorical strengths is my evidence. I think that I can usually find good sources that can support my argument. I can go pretty in depth with my research and that allows me to find the best sources for whatever it is that I am writing. I also think that my writing does a good job at targeting the audience. I think that when I write it is usually pretty clear about who I am trying to talk to. Whether it be the general public, or a select group of people. My intro to project for example does a good job I think at showing that it is meant for those interested in physician assistant school. When it comes to my weaknesses I think that one main one is that I don’t put enough of my own opinion into my writing. I tend to keep it pretty factual. Going along with just what my sources have to say I forget to say what I think about those sources. Also I think that sometimes I have a hard time putting my argument into words. I can talk to the audience but sometimes I worry whether they understand what the whole purpose of my paper is. I know what I want it to say but when I go to type it out it doesn’t always sound how I hope it to
ReplyDeleteRhetoric, as we all know, is the art of persuasion. Personally, I believe my biggest strength in any rhetorical argument/debate I am in is the same as most mothers, the emotionally side. I like using emotional sources and evidence, statistics, etc, for rhetoric because people can relate to it. Aside from that, however, I'm usually pretty good with public speaking and storytelling, as I find they come to me rather quickly. I do a lot of research whenever I'm doing a project, but that can be just as much of a handicap as an ally to me, as I usually get lost trying to figure out what is useful and what is not. That would be my biggest weakness, sorting out the useful stuff from the stuff that people say "so what?" to. I suppose that's why using emotion is so much easier for me. It's hard to counter a story about an abused child with a "so what" without coming off like a jerk, so many people don't question it as much if maybe the rest of the argument isn't as sound as it should be.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, organization of what is an important piece of information versus what is just a “fun fact” of the topic is definitely my biggest weakness when it comes to the rhetorical. The emotional side of an argument and the act of public speaking, sometimes impromptu, lean more toward my strengths at rhetoric, though I would come across a bit better if I have time to practice.
DeleteOne of my rhetorical strengths is that I am good at expressing how I feel and giving good examples and evidence to back it up. I have a very strong voice and that is reflected in my argument/thesis. I think it’s important to have a voice in writing because it adds something to the rhetoric. Also if there is no back up or evidence for whatever claims are being made, then there is no purpose to the text. I think another rhetorical strength of mine is transitions within the text. My organization helps the text flow and it’s easy to understand. Proper transitions and topic sentences provide clarity throughout and understanding for the reader. One thing I would like to get better at is expanding my vocabulary. I feel like I am very limited with my word choices and I think if I had broader terminology I would be able to add that to my rhetoric and it could provide more detail and depth to whatever text I am writing. I also think that having a wider set of terms will also make me sound smarter and more knowledgeable of the topic. Also I would like to have stronger grammar and spelling skills. Although these things can be checked through a computer, I think it would save me a lot of time and effort if I already knew the right way to apply them.
ReplyDeleteI have been in management positions for over ten years now. I have also been an instructor for nearly five years. Accomplishing these things at a rapid pace and performing the duties have helped me develop a few rhetorical strengths and have also highlighted my weaknesses. When leading others I have developed strong persuasion techniques using mainly logos (logic). I have found that remaining humble but confident in what I know allows me to show my knowledge and expertise through logical reasoning. This has led others to place trust in me and allow me to lead them in both a working and educational environment. Being a medical professional who cares for sick and injured people daily I have become very sympathetic and sometimes empathetic toward my patients. This gives me a connection to them which allows me to use rhetoric to help guide their decisionsite about care and treatment.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, my rhetorical writing lacks argument and sometimes flow. My mind moves much faster than my hands can keep up with and I lose information very quickly due to short term memory problems. I have been involved in a couple of explosions which have hindered my ability to effectively think and write at the same time.
Blog #4
ReplyDeleteAs a writer, I am always trying to improve myself, and I’m working to make my weaknesses my strengths. I think one of my biggest weaknesses is that I lack purpose in my writing. For example in the wiki project, I gave a great overview of the definition of reflection and gave plenty of information on its different uses. However, I failed to compare the two sources, and missed the entire point of the assignment. Oftentimes when I write, I simply write words that really don’t have a flow and don’t form the proper arguments or connections. I think through the worknets project, I was really able to focus and work on making connections throughout my paper. I could also work on adding my own commentary especially to the annotated bibliography project, which I failed to do many times. I think my rhetorical strengths are that I definitely incorporate a lot of evidence, and I also use that evidence at different points throughout my paper. I also think I have a decent vocabulary, and that helps me convey my point effectively (I hope ) to the target audience. I hope that by the end of this class, I can turn at least one of my weaknesses into my strengths.
Any effective rhetoric requires undeniable evidence. I think finding and presenting data in order to support my argument is my strongest rhetorical strength. It’s easier to persuade an audience when there are hard facts backing the thesis. Using information from a multitude of established sources is a sound way to confirm the verity of any argument. While supportive evidence is the easiest rhetorical route, it is also helpful to present information from the other side of your argument and then refute it. It shows the audience that you’ve considered the opposite argument instead of ignoring it or brushing it under the rug. This rhetorical strategy of presenting both sides shows the audience that you are well informed, thus establishing credibility and ease of persuasion. I also love organizing words into fluent yet structured sentences. I consider this a strength of mine, but feel as if I am sometimes too focused on the individual thoughts rather than the composition as a whole. This is one of my rhetorical weaknesses. My thought patterns are a flurry of disorganization, so if I don’t take my time to articulate transitions and connections, my writing can come across as a bunch of individual thoughts. Although the connectedness and arguments seem obvious to me, it is important to state them directly, in order to join all my thoughts and information into a single, reiterated point.
ReplyDeleteTo become a better writer it is important that I evaluate my rhetorical strengths and weakness to identify areas of achievement and opportunities for growth. As a writer, I have felt confident in identifying the audience I want to address and devising an argument with evidence to best convince that audience. While writing, I consider what members of my selected audience will need in order to be swayed to my perspective. Most of my papers ask me to give my opinion on a selected prompt and present it to a skeptical audience. I realize that what will determine the strength of my argument is not just my own experience, I must also incorporate information from outside sources. By citing evidence from well-established authors and scholars, I demonstrate my ability to appeal to the audience’s skeptical mindset and shift it in favor in mine. Although I am confident that I can reach my audience, I recognize I have a weakness in formulating that argument cohesively throughout a paper, especially during first drafts. During the initial writing process, I am still developing the overall statement I want to make, creating a sometimes shaky presentation of my ideas. My supporting paragraphs may seem unorganized or disconnected at times because I do not explicitly state the connections between the argument and its supports. This weakness is a sign of developing writing. Once I have written and reviewed my first draft, I see opportunities for elaborating in most paragraphs. I forget during the first draft to keep in mind that the audience needs the argument laid out explicitly for them. Omitting that information may cloud the purpose of my paper, so it is important that I provide the necessary mapping for my audience to follow the connections between my supporting statements and overall argument.
ReplyDeleteRhetoric is something that I have revisited in nearly every writing or literature class in college. It has even appeared in some of my linguistics courses, where I am asked to formulate arguments on a study or language theory. In looking at my strengths and weaknesses in rhetoric, I believe that I'm strong in supporting my argument and formulating a thesis, but not in my organization. If I am able to explore a topic I am interested in, I typically will not have a problem finding a thesis and building on a narrative for my argument. Over the years, I have become especially adept at finding secondary sources. Utilizing my citations and building on focused idea that I enjoy writing about are my best skills in rhetoric. Both my worknet project and my annotated bibliography challenged me to better my abilities in connecting my ideas and points. The latter of which best illustrated my need to focus on organization: while I was able to summarize and connect my sources to my topic, I had a harder time connecting one source to the next. I believe that ultimately, findinding such connections between points comes down to drawing straight from the texts being worked with and used to support an argument.
ReplyDelete