Discussions With the Dean

When I first met Dean Brady, I was intimidated to say the least.  His extensive list of credentials had me mind boggled and very much in awe.  However, I soon discovered that he was an incredibly welcoming, friendly, and engaging mentor.  I recently had the pleasure of discussing fellowship opportunities with the Dean, and the discussion got me thinking about the image I want to portray for graduate school applications.  Coincidentally, Dean Brady mentioned keeping an online portfolio of my work that I could include in such applications.  Therefore, this eportfolio is the perfect opportunity for me to start gathering my work for opportunities after Penn State.

Applying the rhetorical situation of graduate school applications to my eportfolio will result in a professional yet unique and personal compilation of my best works.  My portfolio will have to represent a well rounded, polished, qualified, unique, and compelling person.  To achieve such a representation, I will utilize a sophisticated presentation that manages to convey my personality as well.  This could consist of an elegant format with personal touches such as endearing photos or anecdotes.

I hope to incorporate my pieces into this theme of professionalism and personality.  Therefore, I plan on dedicating a page to works such as my application essay to the Presidential Leadership Academy and my rhetorical pieces that convey my aptitude for critical thinking and analytical skills.  Another page will hold more light-hearted woks that express my interests and writing abilities.  This page could include my passion blogs and satirical pieces that I feel represent my writing style (I like to be a little sassy in my writing if I can get away with it).  I plan on including relevant pictures that showcase my brightest moments in life and compliment my pieces, as well.  It will be difficult to find the perfect combination of professionalism and personality, but I believe such a combination will appeal to graduate schools the most.  My goal is to come off as more than just a polished robot, but not as a schoolgirl blogging for the fun of it.  Let me know if you have any suggestions please!

Any Helpful Hints?

Unfortunately I’m still a little torn when it comes to this advocacy project.  Now that PSU women’s basketball is no longer participating in the NCAA tournament my original idea is not as relevant.  I wanted to start a campaign to promote the creation of brackets for the NCAA women’s basketball tournament, but the kairos is not appropriate anymore.  My second choice was a TED talk about the benefits of supporting Penn State Women’s Soccer and culturally applying the Title IX Act.  This would be an easy way to really explain my ideas, express my reasoning, and connect with my audience.  However, a TED talk would not have the “spreadability” of a medium such as posters.  Within our group discussions about the advocacy projects, it was suggested that I start a campaign involving such a medium to make it easier and more enticing to attend women’s soccer games.

One way to do this would be to promote raffles that gave away prizes such as pizzas or merchandise (which would be only be supplied upon attendance at a game).  Methods such of this are already in use for the promotion of sporting events so I would have to get creative.  I could also get really obnoxious.  I’m still in the brainstorming process when it comes to organizing a campaign that would be unique enough to distinguish itself from such campaigns already in use.  Basically, I would have to make posters that really stood out and captured the attention of my audience by paying close attention to the rhetorical situation.  On the other hand, a TED talk could accomplish all my goals without limiting the time I had to capture my audience’s attention as much.  I like the idea of doing something new, but a TED talk really does seem like the best option.  I’m hoping I’ll just be hit by the perfect idea when I start to get down to the nitty gritty details of the project because right now I’m not sure what I want to do.  Please chip in with some thoughts and suggestions!

Advocacy Project Options

I’m kind of excited about this advocacy project.  It’s not everyday that you get to start your own campaign (even if it is a fake one), so I’m approaching this assignment with some enthusiasm.  My enthusiasm was bolstered even more during my conference with Professor Babich today as we discussed some possible project options.  These options included a Ted Talk, a video, and a Women’s Basketball NCAA Championship bracket campaign.

 

Option 1:  Last semester I did a TED Talk on the paradigm shift of societal perceptions of women in sports.  My persuasive essay is on making the Title IX Act a cultural success (encouraging society to support women’s collegiate sports as much as men’s), so I was thinking I could do a TED Talk Part 2 on women in sports.  I like this idea because I would be forming my own TED Talk series on a topic I am passionate about.  In this TED Talk, I would focus on what the average Penn State college student could do to contribute to enhancing the cultural application of Title IX.  The talk would be framed as one of the TED talks that happened at the recent Penn State TED Talks conference, therefore keeping it focused on a Penn State audience.  I like the idea of being able to express my enthusiasm directly to my audience without any other necessary medium than my voice in this option.

 

Option 2: This option consisted of making an advertisement video for a Penn State Women’s Soccer Game in the spring.  We have a spring schedule that many people don’t know about so I would incorporate my persuasive arguments about supporting PSU women’s soccer and create a video encouraging attendance at an upcoming game. I would post this to my Facebook wall and the PSU women’s soccer Facebook page.

 

Option 3: This option is my favorite.  I would make posters and pamphlets encouraging people to support women’s basketball, specifically PSU women’s basketball by making a bracket for the Women’s Basketball NCAA tournament.  I would spread the flyers throughout the HUB and places where students are very active.  I think this could be a fun way to encourage culture support of Title IX without being to dull and boring.

 

Option 3 is what I’m leaning toward so please let me know if you have any advice or if you like my other ideas better! Thanks!

Persuasive Essay Outline

Persuasive Essay Outline-

Penn State Women’s Soccer: Give us a Chance

 

Rhetorical Situation:

Kairos: Our success in the past NCAA national tournament and Big Ten Championships.

Civic Issue: Changing attitudes about female athletics in comparison to male athletics.

Audience: Penn State student body.

Medium: Article in Onward State.

 

Intro:

-state common inaccurate perceptions of female sports

-contradict these statements

-introduce success of PSU women’s soccer & own involvement in collegiate athletics

-this will establish ethos

 

Thesis: While female collegiate athletics are growing and improving, the portion of the population that is not directly involved is not showing their support and important advances have yet to be made.  Do your part; you can change the attitude toward female collegiate athletics by supporting Penn State Women’s Soccer.

 

Body:

-Connect intro to current attitude toward collegiate female athletics (% allocated to football)

-describe why this needs to change

 

Body:

-use statistics of growth of female collegiate sports (Title IX)

-establish logos

-state why these changes still aren’t enough

 

Body:

-introduce success of PSU women’s soccer

-describe how this success should make supporting the team a good investment

-use enthusiasm and joy of winning to establish pathos

 

Body:

-relate supporting PSU women’s soccer to doing civic duty of changing attitude toward female athletic sports (we want to match men in equality in collegiate sports)

 

Body:

-discuss further positive benefits of supporting PSU women’s soccer and therefore women’s collegiate athletics in general

 

Conclusion:

-discuss the possible future of collegiate women’s athletics and relation to pro sports (WPSL) if attitudes continue to change

 

6th Paragraph:

-pride in PSU women’s soccer

-discuss in detail accomplishments

-draw on community and facts of success to bolster support

 

…….

 

Here’s the deal.  Even if you don’t like soccer that much or still have doubts about female collegiate athletics, you owe it to your school to attend the events of Penn State Women’s Soccer.  It’s a matter of pride.  Do you think Michigan State or Ohio State would look the other way if their women’s soccer teams were the runners up of the National Championship?  I don’t think so.  You wouldn’t possibly let those other Big Ten Schools show more pride than us would you?  Then let’s start showing some more support people!  Fourteen consecutive Big Ten Championships, a National Final appearance, and a 10-0-2 home record should be enough to rowdy up any Penn State student no matter his or her athletic preferences.  Do your part; change the way our student body views Penn State Women’s Soccer and you’ll be changing the attitude toward female collegiate athletics as well.

Persuasion Essay Topic

I’m actually looking forward to this assignment after dealing with the deliberation project.  My reason? The persuasive essay can be written about something we have passion for, and that creates a much more enjoyable writing atmosphere in my opinion.  I thought about the topic I wanted to use over break, and came up with one that has been in the back of my mind lately.  My inspiration for this topic came from an article I read for my civic issues blog about the present state of our society.  In this article, the writer discussed how the fast-paced relentlessness of our society and the constant presence of corporate greed are creating a lower quality of life.  I couldn’t agree more.  From my own experience as a high-achieving college student, I can claim that there is too much time spent working and too little time spent enjoying.  For instance, the only time I take a break from doing work or working out during each day is to eat (and I am usually doing work during this time as well).  I’m scared that this lifestyle will continue after college, but I can’t see change occurring anytime soon.

One possible answer to our societal attitude of “go go go” could be government regulated “off days” from work each year.  This solution may seem unrealistic and absurd, but it would lead to more family time, more recreation time, and hopefully a happier population.  In my opinion, this would in turn lead to greater compassion and an overall higher quality of life.  I would use statistics about our quality of life as logos, my own work ethic as ethos, and the appeal of a happier society as pathos.  The biggest downside to this topic would be finding enough conclusive supporting facts.  If you have any suggestions on how to approach this topic please let me know!

In order to advocate my topic choice, I would create a magazine article insert containing perhaps a chart or images describing our deteriorating lifestyle.  If this topic does not prove to be a good choice for this paper I am considering the topics of increased U.S. government action towards promoting women’s rights abroad and decreased homework in the collegiate environment (obviously there would be other changes made to counteract this action).  Please share any advice or thoughts you have!

Civic Issues Forum Evaluation & Moderator Philosophy

Civic Issues Forim Evaluation

No society is perfect.  However, a higher level of societal success and productivity can be attained by utilizing deliberation.  Especially within the realms of politics and civic issues, deliberation can be imperative to improvement.  While deliberation is not difficult to engage in, it requires several criteria in order to be constructive.  Socially, deliberation requires evenly distributed opportunities to speak, mutual comprehension for all participants, open-minded attitudes of participants, and respect.  Analytically, a strong information base, recognition of key values, identification of a variety of solutions, determination of tradeoffs of solutions, and the ability to make the most advantageous solution are all required.  The Civic Issues Forum on sustainability was very successful in the social category, but was not fully adequate when it came to the analytical components.

The forum was introduced with a moderator’s description of sustainability, the focus of the deliberation.  Next, each participant stated his or her own key values at stake in relation to sustainability.  This step related to the analytic component of identifying key values, and was moderately successful.  It was recognized that many participants held common ground when it came to the reasons why they felt impacted by sustainability.  For instance, key values such as the concern for future generations and the desire to maintain the natural beauty of earth were reoccurring themes.  However, it was often difficult for participants to state their key values while withholding their opinion on the matter, and in this aspect the determination of key values was not properly attained.

Once the key values at stake in relation to sustainability were confirmed, the deliberation could begin for each of the three options presented.  The three options (and the packet that described them) provided the information base for discussion, as well as personal research and experiences.  While more substantial research relevant to each of the options could have been performed, the participants were very effective at utilizing personal experiences and knowledge bases for speaking points.  Overall the success of this analytical aspect of deliberation could have been higher because greater information would have led to more concrete solutions.  However, personal experiences such as recycling plans in high schools provided the basis for very constructive reflection.

Personal experiences also ensured mutual comprehension by making perceptions and perspectives relatable for all participants.  In this area, the deliberation achieved great success.  When a participant did not understand a concept, an anecdote such as a participant’s experience with the change in seat belt usage helped confirm comprehension.  Each participant respected the experiences shared by the others, which exemplified the high level of respect maintained throughout the deliberation.  When participants disagreed, they expressed their reasons for differing opinions through educated explanations.  At times, excitement led to raised and overlapping voices.  However, this was never the result of a lack a respect as much as fervor about the delusional tone of one of the options (option three to be specific).

Frustration with the options was a ramification of the tradeoffs that were identified for each of the options.  When the forum weighed the pros, cons, and tradeoffs of each solution an excessive amount of cons was established.  This aspect of analysis was very productive as the forum discussed in detail every possible downside of each solution.  When it came to the third solution of altering American culture, the forum was so impacted by the tradeoffs that it deemed the solution completely unrealistic.   The recognition of the many cons of each supplied solution led the group to create many of its own options.  The variety of these solutions made it apparent that the forum attained success in the analytic aspect of deliberation relating to identifying a broad range of solutions.  For example, the forum introduced solutions such as increased youth education, improved recycling programs, and a combination of option two and three.  Overall, the forum was very adept at brainstorming possible solutions.

Throughout the brainstorming process, each participant voiced an opinion yet still considered the ideas of others.  These were the most successful deliberative components of the discussion.  The diversity and productiveness of the forum were mainly due to these components as every participant willingly and equally contributed various ideas.  These ideas were met with acceptance and enthusiasm, which made way for compromise and awareness of new solutions.  For example, one participant originally believed that government regulations would be the best solution, but altered his belief after hearing his peer discuss the economical ramifications and implications of this solution.  Other participants learned new methods for achieving sustainability through their peers, such as oil made from recycled bottles and windmill stations in the ocean.  The ability of each participant to take in the opinions and ideas of others made the forum a very informative and productive deliberative environment.

While the deliberation process ran smoothly and efficiently, difficulties were faced when it came time to decide on the best solution.  This was a weakness of the group because no single solution could be decisively stated as the best.  However, the forum did come to a consensus on the lack of a superior solution, the necessity of including education in the solution, and the possibility of combining options 1 and 2 to achieve the best solution.  Common ground was established on the fact that the topic was not controversial enough to create great disparities in opinions.  This lack of controversy allowed the group to be much more successful in the social components of deliberation than a controversial subject might have.  Overall, the deliberative nature of the Civic Issues Forum on sustainability was efficient, productive, informative, and successful.

Moderator Philosophy

While it would be ideal for deliberation to proceed without moderation, this ideal is unrealistic in the face of conversational tendencies.  These tendencies include getting off topic, speaking over others, and utilizing misinformation.   To counteract such occurrences, a moderator is imperative to the success of deliberation.  As a result of my own experience as a moderator, I determined the principles that guided my moderation approach and discovered my own unique moderation characteristics.

I based my moderation style on the forum’s habit of losing focus and its need for a deliberation instigator.  The group found it difficult to maintain productive debate on one option at a time; therefore I felt it was my duty to keep the group focused on the topic at hand.  The debate also tended to lose its lively voice at times, so I would formulate provoking questions to keep the deliberation flowing.  These moderation principles helped characterize my style by encouraging me to take an authoritative role as moderator.  In this role, I enabled the deliberation to continue without lapses or lulls by quickly stepping in when I felt the debate was losing productivity.

While my quickness to step in was a moderator strength of mine, it contributed to my weaknesses as well.  For instance, I found it very challenging to maintain an unbiased voice and refrain from voicing my opinion.  To combat the urge to speak my mind, I focused on encouraging others to voice their opinions on subject matter I found relevant to the option at hand.  In this way I could shape the discussion without actively participating.  Overall I believe I gained valuable experience as a moderator that will be relatable to everyday deliberation.

Still Not Looking Good

People really like to hear themselves talk.  I commented on an article about women serving on the front lines in the military, and I couldn’t get anyone to engage in productive deliberation on the topic.  I wasn’t rude or condescending, yet I wasn’t boring either.  However, no one commented back explaining his or her views on the subject.  Instead, people simply posted short decisive statements with no give or take.  The article was written by a male veteran who was very encouraged by the progress of women in the military, and the piece had a very positive vibe.  Unfortunately, the responses showed that not all veterans were as open-minded or encouraged by this progress.  Some just responded by stating that they were experienced veterans and couldn’t disagree more.  It surprised me that veterans, who were very impacted by the subject, were not willing to discuss and debate on it.  Another factor that disappointed me was the assumption of many veterans that they were experts on the subject simply because they had been on the front lines.  It’s these types of assumptions that lead people to refrain from productive debate because they believe that they are already right.

So far this project has had some pretty disappointing outcomes.  Instead of democratic, positive, and respectful debate I am coming across criticism and argument.  Come on people, where is the rhetorical discussion that makes up the foundation of this great country?  Is it so rare for people to have productive political debates or is it just the online aspect that makes debate so difficult?  It would seem like an impersonal setting would make debate easier, but is the opposite true?  These results are disparaging and I’m hoping I’ll see some better responses in the near future.  If you guys have had ay success please give me some tips on how to engage others in a positive manner!

It Got Awkward

So funny story guys…I may have used a guy’s name for my online deliberation discussion identity, which could have possibly led to a women ranting at me about considering the feminine perspective of abortion.  Yes, that did happen and I’ve decided to go with it. 

My nickname on the soccer team is Petey because my last name is Peterson, and now it’s beginning to transition to just straight-up Peter.  Therefore, as I was considering what username to put for my interactions on the Time website, I figured I would use Peter instead of my regular name (to keep my identity safe just in case).  Unfortunately, I didn’t consider the rhetorical situation of my online deliberation (gender rights including topics such as abortion).  Therefore, when it came time for people to respond to my prompt on an article discussing abortion, I received some pretty funny responses…

Dear Peter and all men willing to fight for these women

Think with your heart and mind for the woman… all of the women that will have to face that horrible Truth. That it was not just a blob of tissues… It was HER VERY OWN CHILD that she terminated! OUCH!!!!

 

Obviously that wasn’t the political discussion I was expecting, but it actually turned out to be very interesting.  At first I felt pretty awkward being considered a guy, but then I decided it could be a sort of rhetorical experiment to engage in such a gender-based issue as the opposite gender.  I’m still expressing my viewpoints, but I’m letting my fellow debaters educate me as if I did not have the perspectives and intuitions of a female.  For instance, the statements above are from a woman who tried to get me see the situation from the eyes of a woman, although not in a way I would have anticipated.  The woman’s story and opinion turned out to be different from any opinion I had heard on abortion before.  When she was younger, the woman believed in abortion and experienced one herself.  However, when she got older she came to realize it was a traumatic and emotionally scarring incident that she would never recover from.  In fact, the woman now argues that abortion shouldn’t even be a legal option because the ramifications are so drastic for women who experience it.  I am grateful to this woman for sharing her story because it opened my eyes to a new argument against abortion I had never continued.  I hope my online deliberation continues to inform, educate, and enlighten me.

Facebook is a No-go

After our class discussion on online deliberation, I thought it would be interesting to consider starting a deliberation simply on my Facebook page.  However, as I scrolled down my newsfeed, I saw some posts that turned me off from this idea right away.  Reading through the political opinions of my friends, I realized how difficult it is to state a political opinion on a social media site without generating aggressive or affronted responses.  Unfortunately, many people take political statements on Facebook personally.   In many instances, this is understandable considering the tone of the original post, but many times people turn a peaceful and observational comment into an argument instigator.

Analyzing different political conversations on Facebook has convinced me that the main issue leading to confrontational comments is a lack of educated and informed reasoning behind the statements.  Unassuming statuses that contain well-developed theories and research-backed information are much less likely to attract negative responses.  Instead, these types of statements are more likely to lead to contemplative and productive discussions with open-minded people.  I think that I could create such a post that would lead to effective deliberation for this assignment, but I think it would be a risk.

Rather than rely on social media to sustain a substantive discussion, I’m going to stick with my original pick.  The Times forum may not be as timely and interactively reliable as Facebook, but it seems much more likely to involve engagement from more informed and solution-oriented people.  I’m not a confrontational person, and I’d prefer to stick to an environment where people are more likely to view statements more objectively.  Obviously when it comes to opinions on confrontational subjects that is almost impossible, but I’m optimistic that I’ll be able to avoid being called a “mindless uneducated nincompoop” on the Times forum.  Of course, I don’t think anyone would actually use that insult but I’m willing to believe that people can get pretty creative with their name-calling these days.  Hopefully, they’ll stick to being creative with the solutions they suggest in response to my prompts instead.

Time to Choose a Deliberation Site

Time Opinion

My civic issues blog revolves around gender equality and rights, therefore I focused my efforts on finding an online deliberation forum that offered opportunities to discuss these topics.  The Opinion section of the Time Magazine website provided multiple articles and post on domestic and international gender issues that saw many recent comments.  In light of these characteristics, I chose the Time website in order to give myself the best chance to engage in lively deliberation on the civic issue of my choice.  I may have to create my own posts and comment on multiple posts to achieve the required interactions for this project but the site looks promising!