WAW #10: Web Style Writing Guide

The Web Style Writing Guide is an extremely useful tool to creating written works on the web. It breaks down each style and explains how the appearance and set up of a website or blog can help for a more efficient affect on viewers.

Photo taken from Google Images

The most important thing that stood out to me when reading this writing guide is how to write for certain genres on the web such as Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and many various others. When writing you should write for your audience and your medium. Depending on your medium your own ideas or options could be limited, with Twitter you only have 140 characters to get your message across!

This idea is highly translatable to rhetorical velocity! By writing to your genre you are also taking into account the medium being used and deciding in what way you can get your ideas or information to others in the most efficient and quick way. There is even great advice on how I could potentially make even this blog a great source of interaction between others if I wished. If you would like to read more about Web Style Writing and view the guide go follow this link: http://writingspaces.org/wwsg/genres

WAW #9: Peer Reviews

I have been a student since 1995... over the years I have been involved in numerous group projects and have written several papers that were to be reviewed by my peers. Sometimes I have received great feedback that has helped me greatly, but more often than not peer reviews have been useless to helping me correct or fix my work. Honestly, when I was younger and I heard "Today we will be doing peer reviews" it often became translated to: "Today we will goof off, doodle pictures, and write smiley faces in red pens telling someone they did a good job without reading anything."

I want to create a process to where there is a greater emphasis placed on the importance of peer reviews and the advantages that they could potentially hold. The honor system no longer works in my opinion when it comes to such things, I think a system of accountability would be much more beneficial.

The way that this would work would be that it is set up in a way that requires the peer reviewer to put effort into what they are doing. Whether it be through web response or a interactive sheet to fill out, and this review would be reflective on the reviewers own scores. By having to be accountable and having retributions if you are not, it places emphasis on the importance of why you are doing the review. Peer reviews were created to enhance the quality of work, not to be a means of slacking.

WAW #8: Policy Revisions

I am currently a Senior at Eastern Kentucky University, while being here I have been encouraged to appreciate and honor academic values, have intellectual honesty, and respect for others. An area that this involves greatly is through plagiarism. EKU has created an Academic Integrity Policy that outlines the core values that students attending school should have. It also includes potential sanctions and actions that could occur if proper conduct is broken.

The Academic Integrity policy is extremely beneficial for students, but there are some places that seem to be a gray area leaving one to be confused. When given the opportunity to revise this policy with a group of my peers we felt that overall the policy was great. It contained a lot of information and easily broke the process of handling academic dishonesty well. The main issue that we found would be the true definition of triviality.

In the Academic Integrity Policy states: "A case may be dismissed if it is found to be trivial. A trivial case is one with no possible consequences to a matter of legitimate concern of the academic community or one with no tendency to undermine trust within the community."

The revision that should be made to this is to be more specific about what type of cases are considered to be trivial, and what about them makes it trivial. EKU could even go one step farther to show examples of potential trivial cases. When looking up the definition of trivial it means of little value of importance. Who decides what is considered important or unimportant? Shouldn't all academic dishonesty be alerting and important? It's confusing the way that it is now, and needs to be clarified, so by giving more information it could eliminate uncertainty. If yo"u would like to read more about how EKU is striving for honesty you can go to: http://www.studentrights.eku.edu/academic-integrity-policy"

WAW #7: Style VS Substance

I remember when Lady Gaga's music first came out. EVERYONE WAS FREAKING OUT and saying that she was this amazing artist and would continuously rant on and on about how wonderful her work was. All year, music critics claimed she held the potential to be the "Next Madonna" or "Next MJ"... So, I when I finally researched what all the hype was about I found myself disagreeing.

Here’s why: Style Vs. Substance.

It is evident that Lady Gaga possesses her own personal and unique style. She is not lacking in creativity of style either, she is definitely one of a kind in her elaborate costumes and hair designs. What I believe made me dislike her was her lack of substance. I mean, she is not as terrible with substance as an artist such as Ke$ha is, but the majority of her songs originally were just catchy pop songs that she paired with strange music videos to create attention.

It worked. She is extremely famous, has numerous albums and several videos. Her fame can be accredited to the way our society works, but I certainly believe her style played a major role into helping her achieve her fame.

Writing about Writing #6 Rhetorical Velocity

Have you ever watch a video on YouTube and within days it seems like EVERYONE has seen it, and those who haven't are considered behind the game? Or other times when you read a really great book and when you go to speak about it no one has a clue what you're talking about? It all boils down to Rhetorical Velocity... or how fast something travels through the world.

"Rhetorical velocity – Rhetorical velocity is, simply put, a strategic approach to composing for rhetorical delivery. It is both a way of considering delivery as a rhetorical mode, aligned with an understanding of how texts work as a component of a strategy. In the inventive thinking of composing, rhetorical velocity is the strategic theorizing for how a text might be recomposed (and why it might be recomposed) by third parties, and how this recomposing may be useful or not to the short- or long-term rhetorical objectives of the rhetorician." - Jim Ridalfo

When creating something the thought of who is going to see the creation and the rate that they see it comes into play; the speed of the rhetorical velocity is all dependent on the medium used. When posting something on the internet it is very easy for it to be re-posted, shared and linked to many others in a quick amount of time. When writing a paper or book the speed of rhetorical velocity is much slower due to the process of editing, revising and publishing the material written or created. The same could be said for a painting or sculpture, unless the a photo has been taken of the artwork, which could be posted in a newspaper, magazine or the internet, allowing more eyes to see the piece. You must think of many factors. Who is going to see this? how fast will publication be? Who may be interested?

Jim Radalfo came up with a great diaphragm posted below to help explain rhetorical velocity in a simpler way.

Sometimes it feels that the rhetorical velocity of a creation could be a toss up because something that is really great could be out shined by something that is absolutely terrible... like Rebecca Black's music video "Friday"... but we won't even go there! One of my favorite videos that has a fast rhetorical velocity rate are below. These girls made it to the Today Show because of their adorableness. Enjoy!