Author: Scott Firman

In class on 2/22 we discussed the skills of using text to think about and using a text to think with. When using to think about, you illustrate using examples and contextualize using historical/statistical information. When using research to think with, you can authorize, borrow, and extend information.

In looking at applying this to my unit 3 project, I would say the most useful tool here would be extending. Extending your research and putting your own spin on it seems like the best way to create your own effective research piece. While I also borrowed and authorized from other authors, I believe extending my academic source was most effective in creating my own piece.

In class on 4/4 we discussed writing as a conversation. Instead of simply regurgitation of information we need to look at academic writing as a conversation and the writer as a player in this conversation. We converse because we think what we have to say is important and our effectiveness relies upon how we work with other’s conversational contributions. Key moves include:

• explaining your reason relative to others
• explaining your reason
• offering something new to conversation.

What i want to add to this list is countering. This could obviously fall under the categories of explaining your relative reason or offering something new to conversation. However, from what we have learned in class recently, it seems to me like countering is an important enough move to earn it’s own spot on this list.

This is an opinion pages “Room for Debate” as the New York Times calls it. Included in this room for debate are multiple authors discussing many topics, or “debaters”. I will specifically look at Yael Lehmann’s piece because she discusses the topic of food availability which I believe has been something very relevant to our class discussions. Lehmann is executive director of “The Food Trust”, a nationally recognized non-profit organization who’s mission is to ensure everyone has access to affordable nutritious food as well as information to make the right decisions.

In this piece, Lehmann does not deny the importance of nutrition education. She realizes the importance for education but also recognizes that if healthy food is not available, people won’t eat it. She see’s this as a ‘common-sense conclusion’. A recent study in New York found that accessibility to supermarkets had a positive and consistent correlation to reduction in obesity.

Lehmann also mentions evidence from a Philadelphia school district in which they replaced junk food in vending machines with options such as 100% juice and healthy snacks. This allowed the students to use the nutritional education from the classroom and apply it to their own lives. “And the result? A documented 50 percent reduction in the incidence of children becoming overweight.”

Yael Lehmann makes a simple, but extremely logical and relevant argument in this piece.

David Tuller wrote this piece in the opinion pages of the New York Times as a former student of Public Health at U.C. Berkley. There, he wrote for a general interest magazine. He is now the academic coordinator for UC Berkley’s joint masters program in public health and journalism.

Tuller wrote this article and told a story of his time at Berkley writing for the magazine. He described an article that he thought to be a great piece. His editor thought otherwise. When Tuller reviewed the piece, he saw what his editor was talking about. The piece was “stuffed so full of cumbersome language, weighty arguments and important data” that the good stuff fell off the page. Now, Tuller teaches Journalism students how to write and provides them with 2 rules that he outlines in this piece:

1. He bans formal references. This works because it makes the writers prove their claims should someone challenge them.
2. Bans the use of acronyms for a couple of reasons. First, because they can get out of control and second, because some acronyms have multiple meanings.

He also repeats basic rules before each assignment.

• Tell the most important things first
• Keep it simple
• Use the active voice
• Be Specific
• Take things piece by piece

How to become a part of the conversation

• We converse because we think what we know matters
• Effectiveness relies on how your contribution works with others
• Key moves:

o   Explaining your position relative to others—agreeing, disagreeing, “yes, but…”

o   Explaining your reason

o   Offering something new to conversation

Subordination v. Coordination

• I thought the paper was good but it needs some work

o   Uses coordination…equal importance between 2 independent clauses

o   Job of the independent clause is to carry the main idea

o   Dependent clause gives ‘bonus information’

o   Put your point of emphasis in the independent clause

Comma-Splice run on sentence: joining independent clauses

• Comma with conjunction (and, but, for, so, yet): shows a close relationship
• Semi-colon: closely related
• Period: adds greater emphasis on each idea
• Colon or dashes: very close relationship in that one half defines the other

This piece dealt with the public health issue of food accessibility. The use of research was highly prevalent in the development of the filmmakers arguments. They used interviews, first-hand filming of families, stats, news clips, and more. They covered their research in a variety of communities and backgrounds to show the widespread nature of the problem. It also worked similarly to the New York Times commentary we looked at in class. The use of many experts points of view allowed the creation of a single voice preaching an argument. One of the main arguments made through these voices is that the ‘cost of hunger’ is much higher than what the government spends on food stamps. There are so many more ‘overhead’ costs to hunger, including healthcare costs for those who are malnourished from essential nutrients.

The filmmakers used these people and their family as a ‘research source’, one example being the before and after approach with Barbie. The audience expected that Barbie’s struggles would have gone away after receiving a full time salary. Much to the surprise of the viewers, her struggles continued because she no longer qualified for food stamps. This was a highly effective strategy by the filmmaker to show the inefficiencies in the government support of hunger.

This is one specific example but it is the one that stood out to me as most effective. This was a bold strategy to shape their argument even further. Overall, I believe the film did a nice job throughout to clearly shape its’ argument and use overwhelming research to grab the attention of the audience.

1. Im interested in where these issues and conversations bump into each other: how effective do family members find hospice care? how much confidence do they have in this form of care?
2. Useful search terms: hospice care, public health, effects on family
3. Here’s an article I found: Family evaluation of hospice care: Examining direct and indirect associations with overall satisfaction and caregiver confidence, Written by Jason M. Holland in the Palliative and Supportive Care Journal.
4. The research in this piece uses a lot of data and numbers. The piece goes on to contextualize this data and research by the end of the piece. A large portion of the piece is explaining how exactly the research worked. At the end, there is a results section as well as a discussion section. This is where the contextualizing of the research and data takes place.

 

 

 

http://nq5hl7cp9d.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Family+evaluation+of+hospice+care%3A+Examining+direct+and+indirect+associations+with+overall+satisfaction+and+caregiver+confidence&rft.jtitle=Palliative+and+Supportive+Care&rft.au=Holland%2C+Jason+M&rft.au=Keene%2C+Jennifer+R&rft.au=Kirkendall%2C+Abbie&rft.au=Luna%2C+Nora&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.issn=1478-9515&rft.eissn=1478-9523&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=901&rft.epage=908&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017%2FS1478951514000595&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=53224718&paramdict=en-US

Unit 2: Where we’re headed

• Locating and using research
• End goal is your “Research Brief”

o   very focused analysis of a single scholarly article that connects with questions you are becoming interested in as a result of your service work

Scholarly Texts

• Author is expert in the field
• Style is academic

o   Narrowly defined purpose and audience

o   No need for general audience appeal

• Research is significant and well-documented
• “Peer-reviewed”—other certified experts in the field have endorsed

 

Chapter 2, “Rewriting”

Forwarding

• When responding to a text, your not sending a response back to the author, instead you are forwarding information to others
• Content can change depending on who is forwarding information and who is receiving forwarded information

 

Forwarding depends on:

• Coming to terms with the text

o   Define the project

o   Note keywords/passages

o   Assess the uses and limits (what’s useful? what are some issues?)

• Recirculation—-“rewriting”

 

Moves in using research

• Using texts to think about

o   Illustrating- examples

o   Contextualizing- historical/statistical

• Using texts to think with

o   Authorizing- validation through expertise

o   Borrowing- using other’s theories/terminologies

o   Extending- putting your spin on concepts from other texts

 

Getting ready to turn in Research Brief

• Choose topic
• Find articles
• Read to be conversant
• Figure out genre
• Write it

http://www.who.int/phe/publications/PHE_2011_global_strategy_overview_2011.pdf?ua=1

 

http://www.who.int/globalchange/publications/factsheets/el-nino-and-health/en/

Being a resident of Syracuse, one of the biggest public health related issues as I was growing up was the pollution of Onondaga Lake. This article on Syracuse.com (from Oct. 9, 2015) states that, according to the EPA, the Mercury levels in the lake are lower than projected when the $451 million plan was approved in 2005. Onondaga lake is an urban lake, thus linking it directly to the topic of Syracuse’s public health.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2015/10/epa_honeywell_onondaga_lake_cleanup_dredging.html

 

 

Heroine is a public health epidemic that has been spreading on both a national level and locally in Syracuse. The annual number of deaths from heroin use in Onondaga county has increased from 1 in 2010 to 26 in 2014. This topic directly relates to our class discussion in that the heroin use can be strongly correlated to the environment of Syracuse. The astounding poverty levels often drive victims to cheap drugs such as heroin while at the same time preventing them from any treatment for using, addiction, and even overdosing. This syracuse.com article notifies of a public forum held in Syracuse to discuss one of the most serious health concerns of the community.

http://www.syracuse.com/health/index.ssf/2016/01/heroin_prescription_painkiller_epidemic_in_onondaga_county_focus_of_public_forum.html