My primary audience is other students my age. I wanted to emphasize the photography elements on my website as college students my age are going to be my primarily who highers me for gigs. This is the reason I stylized my website in a modern format and maintained a constant stream of jokes throughout the site.
My secondary audience would be potential employers. They are why I kept the “Work” section serious as that will be where they focus.
Overall I think the website shows off both my skills as a writer and as a photographer while maintaining a lighthearted style that stays true to who I am.
Civic discourse can only happen when there is mutual respect between the participating members. The course design of CAS 137 and 138 has been structured from the ground up to promote civic life and discussion, using methods that include, but are not limited to, the Question of the Day.
CAS 137 and 138 are small classes too with no more than 30 students in a room at any given time. The people on either side of you will be there in class every single day because attendance is mandatory, at least it is if you are concerned about your grade. The Question of the Day is most similar to an icebreaker activity. These activities try to foster connections between a random group of people. By mandating the Question of the Day it reinforces and builds connections between RCL students. I have been in several small classes in my time at Penn State, but I feel closer with my RCL classmates than any other set of classmates so far.
The communal relationship that is fostered in RCL isn’t just for the benefit of freshman becoming friends. There is a civic purpose. I think this is best described in Tymothy Snyder’s On Tyranny; lesson twelve says: “Make eye contact and small talk.” He goes on to elaborate “This is not just polite. It is part of being a citizen and a responsible member of society. it is also a way to stay in touch with your surrounding, break down social barriers, and understand whom you should and should not trust.” Snyder understands that one of a society strongest defenses against tyranny is a social framework between its members. If people trust each other more than the government, then it will be harder to turn people against each other.
In my ECON class, people aren’t friendly with each other in class. Before the Professor’s lecture, everyone is on their phones. Talking with random strangers has become foreign to the detriment of our society. Social media and phone use are the driving method of interpersonal communication. RCL 137 and 138 do not have the same atmosphere as my ECON class.
RCL 137 and 138 forces social interaction on its students via the Question of the Day. This social interaction builds the interpersonal connections necessary for effective deliberation, communication, and persuasion.
Workplan for Advocacy Project:
In the modern college environment aside from some physical textbooks that students need to purchase, most course content is distributed to students via Canvas. These PDF’s can either appear as a nonselectiable picture or as a copyable paragraph of text that can be copied. When writing essays, in general, students would agree that the latter kind of PDF is superior. It allows for easier highlighting of text, an easier insertion of notes, defining of words, and it results in a superior classroom experience for the students.
For my project, I will attempt to get the use of automatic text recognition for PDF’s used/mandated as a classroom teaching aids or supplemental texts.
End of week 1: 4-9-18
Have all basic research done and perhaps call/email a few officials.
End of week 2: 4-16-18
setup/conduct interviews regarding my idea and pitch it to important people.
End of week 3: 4-23-18
Finalize the project, wrapt up any loose ends. Write papers/make a Powerpoint presentation.
Most likely to go wrong:
The worse thing that could go wrong for me would be to fail to get support from the faculty at the College of Liberal Arts. Without support from the faculty, I have no project.
Limit the effectiveness of your project:
This project will at maximum benefit only affect a few hundred students. In each course (at least for RCL) the readings change by about 20% each year. This means without upkeep within a few years the situation will be back where it started.
Contingency Plan:
I will raise awareness for the use of automatic text recognition for PDF’s used as classroom teaching aids or supplemental texts.
End of week 1: 4-9-18
Have all basic research done and perhaps call/email a few officials.
End of week 2: 4-16-18
setup/conduct interviews regarding my idea and pitch it to important people.
End of week 3: 4-23-18
Finalize the project, wrapt up any loose ends
What is the problem or harm you’re addressing?
Online Privacy laws. Basically, how companies get your data, how they can store it, and what they can do with it. What are the key causes?
A user should have direct access to what companies gather about them, have full discloser regarding what has been gathered, and in general maintain in control of what they have shared online. What policy are you recommending? Why should this be done?
More data is shared than ever before online. Without this Why might someone oppose this policy?
Companies see data mining as a valuable research and marketing tool any company that seeks to benefit from a user’s data may oppose having their access to it restricted.
I went to the deliberation “We Are… Free to Speak or Are We?” in Frasure Street Commons. The event’s attendance was high, but the quality of the discussion was in my opinion lacking.
Troubles:
The troubles began with the group’s discussion guide; It was more of a discussion packet. Altogether, the guide totaled over three double-sided pages. The amount of information was unnecessary, and it bogged down conversation throughout the deliberation because in between approaches the group gave the audience time to read the guide. They halted all conversation three times this way over the course of the night.
A deliberation is supposed to have set topics and approaches, but the discussion needs to have some variety to generate new responses to the issue at hand. The leaders of this group seemed like they had planned out a set track of discussion for the group to follow. For a deliberation about free speech, the conversation was limited in what they wanted us to speak about.
Overall the use of questions and quality of discussion was rather poor. Every time the conversation went the slightest bit off that track, a group member would ask a question that brought it straight back to the set plan of discussion. Throughout the deliberation, conversation didn’t occur between participants. As soon as someone was done speaking one of the leaders would interrupt and ask a pointed question that tried to made one point or another. This back and forth between leaders participants created an unhealthy environment that stifled participation instead of promoting it. It didn’t help that the questions were usually playing “Devil’s Advocate” and attacking the previous response. The leaders would constantly ask “So, where would you draw the line as to what is free speech?” They almost never got a response. The point of the whole deliberation should be a start to a discussion on free speech. Nobody is going to be able to tell the group leaders what Penn State’s policy should be as a single response.
The approaches were as follows: Pros, Cons, Policy at Penn State. None of these topics are approaches. As the whole deliberation was supposed to be about policy at Penn State, no approach seemed different from another. The conversation never changed, it was merely handed off to a different group of people who continued the same discussion from before. Becuase the topic never changed by the end of the conversation people seemed tired of the topic.
Positives:
Even though the discussion guide was far too large to be useful as a handy reference during the deliberation it was well researched and provided a large number of relevant facts. It would be a convenient source to have about free speech even after the deliberation was over. The group also included a works cited page at the end of the packet they handed out.
In defense of the deliberation leaders, freedom of speech is a hard topic to discuss. Nobody in America wants to be seen as “against freedom.” Thus any discussion of what should and shouldn’t be allowed will be hard. I think I have made it clear that there was room for improvement at the deliberation I attended, but it wasn’t objectively bad.
One April day, at my western Pennsylvanian high school, I walked through the large double doors, and into the imposing brick structure with significantly less sleep than the 8-10 hours recommended for boys my age. In spite of my sleep, my mood stayed cheery, I asked questions in class, and I spend fifteen minutes talking to a seemingly random lunch lady. My friend (who had been similarly sleep-deprived that day) finally questioned: “Do you run on fairy farts?”
First off, as an extrovert, I talk to everyone. Spending fifteen minutes with a lunch lady is nothing. One time, I spent over an hour with a guy I met in a coffee shop. Another time, after stopping by a food truck and chatting up the chef, my morning was consumed figuring out how exactly one gets a degree in restaurant management. He was so passionate about his career, I just didn’t want our talk to end. The same passion he has for food, I have for talking.
When I strike up a conversation, I don’t think about how long it will take. I just talk. The value I want is the flow of information and ideas. Even if the other person has opinions that are different from my own. In the end, my dedication to conversation and extraversion means that talking to friendly strangers I didn’t intend to meet ends up takes a good portion of my time.
Some people go through life like a horse with blinders on. They always look straight ahead and don’t stop to talk to passers-by on their way to there destination. I do not, and I feel my life is better as a result. I learn new things, expand my network, and get connected with people I otherwise never would have met.
Conversations are a two-way street. So, I try to make sure the value of the talk is shared among its members. Talking to other people brings me joy, Hopefully, whoever I am talking to feels some of that joy too.
No, to answer the previous question my conversations are not run on “fairy farts.” I just believe in the power of giving others time.
One of the best feelings in the world is that of being valued and appreciated. If a person feels like someone values who they are, feelings often become mutual between parties. Humans wish to be respected by their peers and vica versa. Many a friendship, job, and employee have disappeared because this respect becomes lost.
The most direct way to obtain this respect is to give people time. When I strike a conversation up, I don’t think about how long I can talk for. I just talk. I treasure the flow of information and ideas. When presented with an alternate method of thinking I consider what is said and then respond. These methods hold true for almost every conversation I have. And they result in a fair amount of my time is consumed by conversations with strangers that I never intended to meet.
As an extrovert, I talk to everyone. People I disagree with and people I support are treated the same during a conversation. I will be more likely to talk to my friends than a stranger, but once in the middle of a conversation, I will dedicate myself to the task of making their opinion valued.
Some go through life with their blinders on like a horse. They always look straight ahead and don’t stop to talk to passers-by on their way to there destination. I do not, and my life is better for it.
One day I had stayed up to late into the night–an all too common experience for me during high school. I drank no caffeine, asked questions in almost every class, and planned to stay after school for three hours of stage crew. My friend finally cracked after watching me spend fifteen minutes talking to a lunch lady: “Do you run on fairy farts?”
No, I don’t run on fairy farts. I just believe in the power of giving people time.
Civic Issue
1. Social media invades and monopolizes time for almost all generations at every stage of life. It has been instrumental revolutions and grassroots political movements, but it also has been used for cyberbullying and the spread of sensationalized journalism. The invasiveness and addictiveness of social media will continue to be a hotly debated issue and as such could be a potential civil issue blog topic.
2. University is for many families another mandatory step of life. More people, from more cultures, are in universities than ever before and thus grades become an even more important distinguishing factor. With the mounting pressure on grades, Academic dishonesty at the Univesity level is a major issue. My civic issue blog could explore the development and any potential solutions to solve academic dishonesty.
Passion Blog
1. I am currently in the middle of reading The Power Broker by Robert A. Caro, and by “in the middle” I mean only 7% of the way through the book. A winner of the Pulitzer Prize, The Power Broker, is the biography of renowned urban city planner Robert Moses. As one of the single most influential men of the past century, his actions have directly shaped the road network of America forever. In this blog, I would hope to go section by section — as I read the book — in an effort to explain who Moses is, what he has done, and why he did it.
2. In the past year, I read two influential books that changed my life. They are Zen in the Martial Arts and The Art of Time. Each passion blog post I would break down 1-2 concepts I learned from one of these books (or any other influential books I read) and share it with my readers.
Reflection
Last semester, I put in the effort to make all of my blog posts presentable and turned in on time. This semester, I want to go beyond that. To be proud of my work and want to share what I have written rather than thinking about it as just “one more chore.”
With regards to framing and execution, my previous semester’s effort was passable. My formatting was great, so I plan to keep it the same. The only thing I will focus on is making sure that each post truly does build and connect with the others to make a cohesive work that ads value. In contrast, last semester was a bunch of loosely related mumbo-jumbo under the same roof.
In preparation for this TED talk, I tried to learn from the mistakes of my previous speech in CAS 137 by prepping earlier this time. I made sure that I was working on this speech at least a week in advance whereas for my first speech I only had given myself a few days to prep.
The hardest part for me was the selection of a topic that would be catchy enough to stick and hadn’t been done before on the TED stage. Eventually, mine came to me, and I got to work. As my topic was a highly personal one filled with stories and I only had a limited time frame, I didn’t devote as much time to research as I should have. I just used one source in my works cited, and it was a reasonably unscientific one too. Never the less I think it worked out in the end because of the sheer amount of content I needed to cram into my 4-5 min. speech. Reflecting back, while more research could have happened, I feel that it wouldn’t have taken a prominent place In my talk anyway and would just feel slightly out of place.
Once my speech topic was chosen, I started to prep my speaking and refine my delivery of the message. The rehearsals occurred mainly in my dorm room and the library. Sometimes I would be alone, and other times I would be joined by one of my peers. This rehearsal schedule was sufficient for me to familiarize myself with my material although it could have been increased if I had started earlier.
Aside from going to office hours on the day of my speech, I failed to take advantage of my professors time to help me perfect my speech. He helped me restructure my speech slightly, and he offered me suggestions about my vocal tone. His advice to make the speech more conversational probably helped me improve my speech more than any other last min changed.
I finished my powerpoint at the same time as my first draft, so it underwent revisions just like the speech. I tried to make the powerpoint simplistic and professional from the beginning, but even at that, I found I needed to cut some stuff out to enhance the flow and clarity of my message.
In general, to strengthen my future talks I should:
1. Go to the professor’s office hours before the day I speak
2. Conduct more thorough research
Analysis:
My first impression of my speech left me feeling saying the speech “isn’t bad” but needs room for improvement.
The Good: I liked the conversational speaking style that my professor recommended to me. It made me seem like less of a robotic salesman. I also appreciated my use of two stories. The stories were, in my opinion, the most influential part of my talk. I felt like they connected with the audience more than any other part of my presentation. I also knew the stories better, and I was less prone to making a mistake when recounting one. It was only when I went into the other parts of my speech that I started to the have minor memory problems. I also liked how I made eye contact most of the time. Having the back row stand was a good idea.
The Bad: During the conclusion and my mid-introduction of the topic, I messed up slightly. I got myself on a small tangent which was harder to recover from. Ideally, this could have been averted with more private and group practice. Also, I could have introduced the two graphs I had more funnily and perhaps not used the phrases “crazy stupid hat” and “talking out of my butt.” When I think about my speech now those two lines, stand out to me the most and they don’t convey my message at all. Hopefully, they added to the conversational and light-hearted tone of the whole speech.
My TED Talk is going to be on the differences between name brand and generic items. In all aspects of first world life, there are name brand products everywhere. From the medications we take to the cereals we eat, there will always be a ton of different “brands” or types of products to try. But what exactly separates the “Premium” brand from the “Generic?” Why is “Crispy Puffed Rice” less appealing than “Rice Crispies?” These are the types of questions I would like to propose and answer in my TED talk.
To start off my talk I will begin with a discussion of economics and how mass producing a product works. This will give me a firm base for which to elaborate my further arguments on as my audience will now know the motivations behind why companies might make deals for generic branding.
I will shed light on some common products that are exactly the same thing though perceived differently by the general population. I will look quickly at how psychology influences our choices and decisions when purchasing all kinds of items. I will bring up a few experiments that have been done regarding branding and discuss a short general overview of the research done on the topic. This part will not be super in-depth as I want to mainly focus on the real world examples that eh audience can relate too.
I will even put in a few case studies about how marketing and “Branding” is sometimes more effective than the product itself. By showing these examples I will further establish my point with my audience as they can relate to these examples. Perhaps they have even used these exact products before. This personal connection will let the audience resonate with the message and hopefully allow them to recall it when they are in the store and making these important decisions.
