Writing for Monday, October 21st

Choose ANY essay we've read together this semester. ("Coney Island,"  "Shooting an Elephant," "A Talk to Teachers," "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," "Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter," "Is Google Making Us Stupid," "Don't Blame the Eater," or "Blue Collar Brilliance.") Choose something you liked, or something you hated, or something that made you think, or made you angry, or created any other strong reaction.

Write a short essay of at least 300 words responding to the essay you've picked. Follow these guidelines.

1) In your first paragraph, introduce and SUMMARIZE the essay.  Use paraphrase, not direct quotation. Then write one sentence talking about your response: what you liked, hated, what made you think, etc.

2) In at least three body paragraphs, develop your reaction in more detail. Talk about why you liked/didn't like it, what you thought was interesting/important, etc. Use specific examples from the essay. Again, paraphrase, don't quote directly. The essay you're writing about should be in each paragraph.

3) In your last paragraph, talk about the "so what." Why does it matter if we believe the author's argument? What big moral, ethical, philosophical questions does the essay raise?

In many cases, you'll be able to use the shorter assignments/blog posts as a starting point. Look at my comments and make revisions as you expand your work.

You can post your essay on the blog, type it and print it out, or write it by hand. Take about ten minutes to read over your work. Try reading your sentences out loud and see if they make sense.

Assignment for Thursday, October 17th

For Thursday, October 17th, read Mike Rose, "Blue-Collar Brilliance" (page 243-255 in They Say, I Say), and Tom Bissell, "Extra Lives: Why Video Games Matter" (page 349-361).

For ONE of the two essays, write three paragraphs.

- One that describes the author's main argument. Use at least one of the verbs on p. 39-40.

- One that describes some of the author's most important EVIDENCE or SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS. Use at least one of the transitions on p. 109-110.

- One that describes YOUR OWN OPINION about the argument (yes/no/yes, but).

We don't have class Monday, October 14th or Tuesday, the 15th. Use this time to get caught up on any assignments you have missed: see the posts below. You can do them on the blog or turn them in handwritten or typed.

Assignment for Thursday October 10th

NOTE: You can complete this assignment on the blog, by hand, or type it to turn in.

Write TWO paragraphs responding to Anya Kamentetz's article, "You're 16, You're Beautiful, You're a Voter."

In your first paragraph, SUMMERIZE her MAIN ARGUMENT. Include an introduction of the author and text. Look at the verbs on p. 39-40 in They Say, I Say and use at least one of them in your paragraph.

In your second paragraph, describe one SUPPORTING ARGUMENT, EXAMPLE, ELABORATION or COMPARISON from the article and explain how it relates to the main argument. Look at the transitions from p. 109-110 in They Say, I Say and use at least one of them in your paragraph.

Don't include your own view here; do your best to understand hers, whether you agree or not.


If you still need to do your response to Johnson and Stevens, you can do so on the blog, by hand, or type it to turn in. You will still receive feedback and credit. I am best able to help you the more of your writing I see. See the post below for directions on that assignment.

Reading and Writing for Monday, September 30th

For Tuesday, October 1st, look at two articles from They Say, I Say from our reader's choice poll: "Watching TV Makes You Smarter," by Steven Johnson (p. 277-294), and "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," by Dana Stevens (p. 295-298). Use the book if at all possible, but you if you need to you can find links to Johnson's article  here  and Stevens' article here.

In a post, write a paragraph that describes Johnson's main argument and at least one piece of evidence he uses to support it. In another paragraph, describe Stevens' response to Johnson. What does she disagree with and why? Look at chapter two of They Say, I Say for some guidelines on summary.

In this post focus on these two authors and their ideas. In class, will bring in our opinions and examples as well.

Terms for "blue collar brilliance" by Mike Rose and "Extra Lives: why videogames matter" by Tom Bissell

In “Blue-Collar Brilliance” by Mike Rose, I have selected two terms which are Affirmation and Diverse. Affirmation means the action or process of affirming something or being affirmed which is state as a fact; assert strongly and publicly. Affirmation means to me that when a person is proving him/her argument with strong facts in public (meaning everyone). For example, John F. Kennedy argues that the Americans should fund for nuclear fallout shelter program to increase. He prove his statement by facts like it’s better for everyone to be prepared in case a bomb drops in New York City which cause mass of distortion and kill everyone in sight which he shared this strong information to everyone. Another term is Diverse. Diverse means showing a great deal of variety or very different. Diverse means to me  a good deal of being different in many ways like jobs, home, schools, and the person self of being good or bad. For example, James Feldman has a job in technician which he has a good deal of getting paid more than his old job like in Toys ‘R’s selling Barbies all day with low paid. In “Extra Lives: Why Videogames Matter” by Tom Bissell, I also selected two more terms which are Mired and Aggravated. Mired means cause to become stuck in mud. Mired means to me when some person is having a bad day and not really in a good mood. For example, today went terrible because it started to rain and my books got ruined when while Ronald McDonald stood there and started to stare at me, which is creepy. Another term is aggravated which means (of an offense) made more serious by attendant circumstances (such as frame of mind). Aggravated means to me when someone is getting angry or frustrated by something uncomfortable from a person. For example, I’m so annoyed that my sister keeps bothering me and won't leave me alone. This is frustrating when younger siblings bothered old siblings because they are in boredom of watch “Dario the explorer” 

            Is Watching TV Make Us Smarter?

 In the article “Watching TV Makes Us Smarter” the writer Steven Johnson’s argues that watching TV in a way can develop our brains and improve our thinking skills. Johnson’s supported his main point by claiming that some dramas such as, 24 episodes, involves a lot of thinking to understand what is happening. He states that people need to pay attention, to make inferences and to keep a track of the shifting social relationships in order to make sense of any complex TV drama such as, 24 episodes. In other words, he wanted to say that watching TV puts our brains in charge and  make us think hard about what we are watching to connect the events and get the show’s point. Moreover, the author indicated that watching TV shows or playing video games can benefit different generations of people. For example, he mentioned that a parent and his kids can learn different technological skills or terms by watching a particular show or playing a specific video game.

         

Dana Stevens in “Thinking out Of the Idiot Box” is taking the opposite side of what Johnson’s think. She believes that watching TV cannot people smarter. She claims that people choose what they watch based on advertisement not on what is more suitable and beneficial for them. She thinks that this kind of shows just block people brains and make them dis-sociable and inactive in the community around them. It also make them addictive to watch more and more without thinking what is good for them. 

By Nour.

You're 16, you're beautiful and you're a voter by Anya Kamenetz

In the essay "you're 16, you're beautiful and you're a voter the author Anya Kamenetz believes that if people regard teenagers as adults they will be more responsible. She suggests that the government should reduce the voting age to 16 years old. She claims that if 16 years-old are old enough to do other things like drive, work, go to school then they are old enough to vote. In addition the author argues that 16 year-old who want to vote they should first pass a simple civics course. Furthermore she emphasizes that voting is a privilege and responsibility besides a right.

Anya Kamenetz explains that in reality 16 years-old can have their credit card, as well as have experienced drinking. They are already considered as adults in some cases, so why not have the chance to vote. The author also supports her main idea by stating that if they are old enough to have a learners permit they should have the right to vote.

Reading and Writing for Monday September 30th

Watching TV Makes You Smarter by Steven Johnson

   Watching TV makes you smarter its Steven Johnson's passage title and also his main argument. By watching television we are developing our brains. The author is supporting his argument specifically on page 279 in the very first sentence where he is referring to the hit drama 24, he is stating that anybody who is watching 24 must pay attention, make inferences and track shifting social relationships in order to understand 24. Moreover he claims that you have to put your mind to work, you have to think very carefully and you have to connect the events in order to comprehend the hit drama. In addition on page 294 the author mentions that by watching TV not only kids get the change to learn but also grown ups. They can decipher all the new technological terms and meanings and both kids with parents can have fun by playing a game on Television or by watching a movie.

Thinking Outside the Idiot Box by Dana Stevens

   Dana Stevens is totally disagreeing with Johnson's main idea that TV makes us smarter. We can understand hers denying by the very first sentence "Does watching TV make you smarter ?" "Duh, I dunno".
Stevens on page 298 is supporting that a lot of people are choosing what they like to watch based on what is popular and based on all the advertisements. Also she challenges everyone to just turn off the television for one week and she is saying ironically that no one will get any dumber if we spend our time by doing something more creative. Furthermore she believes that a kid who is new to this world spends his free time by reading a book or by playing with his friend, he might not even want to watch television after all.

   

Blue-Collar Brilliance

    In the passage, "Blue-Collar Brilliance," which written by Mike Rose, he believes that if people work without plan everyday, then it will affect people's work in future. Also, when people depreciated the knowledge that they have to learn, they limited themselves in education and opportunities to be successful. Therefore, people can't follow up the cultural divides because they are not smart and push themselves to learn the knowledge everyday.

     According to the example of the passage, people have to learn the experiences and knowledge while they are working. For example, Mike Rose's mother, who work as a waitress in a coffee shops, is a smart woman. Waitress is one of difficult jobs because she has to remember the orders belong to which customer. Also, she has to know the system of store because she has to answer any kinds of question from customers. On the other hand, she has to run to carry plates and cups with her body. Most important, she learned the culture of people, and she knows how deal with different kinds of customer; she organized what to do in order. 

      I agree with the author's statement that if people didn't work smart, they would be unsuccessful. I work as a cashier in a Chinese restaurant, it's also one of difficult jobs to do. For example, I have to talk to 2 phone at the work, and I have to organize the order at the same times. Most important, I have to remember price of each order; I have to remember what people like and dislike in the order. Also, I have to know how to talk to people who is crazy. It's like a big system that contain many staff, and I have to organize it in order.

teens rights

In “You’re 16, You’re Beautiful and You’re a Voter” by Anya Kamenetz, she suggests of young teen age people who are the age of 16 should have the right to vote like everyone else, are likely voting for president, mayor or someone else. She continue elaborate that the age of 16 who are working should get a credit card to show how responsible they truly are which means as adults. She argues that young people are eligible to work, drink, and to get married like getting a first time job working in McDonalds; taking people’s order in a young age shows potential in their life work as a teenager. She highly believes that people of the age of 16 are able to get their driving license which shows that they can prove they are highly responsible as adult to vote as their rights.

She clearly point out some facts that people in their teens are getting their permit test to be able eligible to get very own driver license like showing a high rate of level responsibly of taking a New York state exams in each school grade that is given to them. She also include that people in age of 16 should take the civics test which is similar to a citizenship test should able to pass the exam and able to vote. But teens should be advice about drinking alcohol tests for drinking.

You are 16, you’re are beautiful and you are a voter:

In the article “you are 16, you’re are beautiful and you are a voter” the writer “Kamenetz” is trying to state that the government should lower the voting age to 16 years. She argues that young people who smoke, drink, and can get a credit card, should be given the chance to vote.  She believes that giving this right to young people will make them think more serious. She also thinks that this in a way will improve the sense of responsibility inside them toward their future’s decisions.  

 The author used some points to support her idea about lowering the voting age to sixteen. For example, she mentioned that young people especially the ones who work have the right to get credit cards. She also indicated that teenagers can get their driving permit at the age of sixteen as well. Another point the author went through was teenagers who want to vote should pass a civics course in order to get a permit to vote. In other words, she is trying to say that teenagers and young people who can do and get the things that I mentioned earlier, should get the chance to give their views and to participate in elections. 

By Nour Rizk.

You're 16, You're Beautiful and You're a Voter

     In the passage which written by Anya Kamenetz, as saying that teenagers could be voter as 16 years old. she believes that teenagers can rise up fast if parents treat them as adult. In addition, government should lower the laws for voting age to 16. Also, the legal age should not be fixed, it should be flexible for teenagers by practicing and educational.

    teenagers can rise up fast if parents treat them as adult. There is a example to support the author's idea, Voting is one of the way to test teenagers because they have to take the exams to get the qualify to vote, and teenagers can learn the responsibility to vote by taking the exam. Since they are taking the exams, they learn from the exam at the same time. Also, it improves teenagers brain function because they have to struggle with the questions. However,teenagers have to think in deeply and work they brain truly. This is example to show that if parents allow their kids to practice things which are adults did, teenagers will become a adults fast, and they will get knowledge more than other teenagers.

Watching TV Make You Smart or Not?

      According to the article which is written by Steven Johnson, watching TV can make people smart in different way. The violent television dramas and juvenile sitcoms are the example of experience for people because people have the ideas to deal with the situation as the TV in their life. Also, people will be attention, patience, retention in their life by watching TV because they have to figure out what will happen after a action of the TV shows. these are the point that Johnson figures out, he believe that people can learn whatever they want in TV, and watching the events happen around the world if people sit in front of TV.

        In "Thinking Outside the Idiot Box," written by Dana Stevens. She believe that watching TV can't make you smart. For example, she points out the 24, which prevents people thinking too much, and it's not really connected to people's life. Also, people forget what they have to do while sitting in front of TV, and becoming isolation(stop communicate with social). Most important, watching TV is kind of poison for people to be addictive that people want to watch more and more.

         I agree with Johnson's point that people can learn many things from TV, and the things happened around the world because we can watch the news on TV, but I also agree with Steven because many children addict to watch TV and they forget to do things they need.

Steven Johnson VS Dana Stevens

        Watching TV Makes you smarter by Steven Johnson tells about how TV is good for you and helps you understand the world around. People are getting smart by watching TV's shows drama like "The Sopranos", "24", and many more. He describes that watching TV shows can bring knowledge in different genres in drama, action, romantic, horror, social life, sci-fi, mystery, supernatural, and a lot more. His argument is that TV brings good understanding the sequences and relation that has brought in our societal. "The intelligence arrives fully formed in the words and actions of the characters on-screen." This states that each character bring intelligence about the world and use action to entertain the audience to understand societal and get the viewers to learn the information that is given to them. Johnson describes TV is good for you and can help learn about the topic your research on history or something else that the teacher has given the assignment which you have to work.

            Thinking outside the Idiot Box (Does watching TV Make You Smarter? Duh….I dunno) by Dana Stevens tells how TV does make you smarter but plan dumb by watching TV everyday which does not give people intelligence but instead make people stupid by watching and not forcing on the real world. Her argument is that TV is virus; that cause people to watch more TV and not realizing it that is bad for them. “Watching TV teaches you to watch more TV” this statement shows that watching TV does not give you knowledge but gives you the craving to watch more TV while it detects your memories of education and your plans of what were you suppose to do in this hour like hanging with friends at the bar or telling your wife the great new that you have been promoted in your job. Stevens describes Johnson’s article how he mistaking the meaning of intelligence and given the people the wrong idea of watching TV makes you smart which Johnson quoted “You no more challenge your mind by watching these intelligent shows than you challenge your body watching Monday Night Football…..The intellectual work is happening on-screen, not off” TV does not make people smarter by watching TV every day, it only gives children the wrong idea of learning education on TV and not about to learn it in school from real experiences in the child life of learning. TV only give answer and not able to find the answers by hand or study it for memory.   

            I agree with Johnson’s statement “is the kind of thinking you have to do to make sense of a cultural experience” and Steven ‘statement “a truth already grasped by the makers of children’s programming like Teletubbies, which is essentially a tutorial instructing toddlers in the basic of vegging out” They prove good points that TV has good connections to our world but not so good on given Children’s education by watching TV all day. Yes, it can be useful and learn more about the socially that we live in but can damage the human brain and can make people blind by watching too much TV.