Month: June 2020

Posted on

Discussion week of 6/15

  1. When reviewing my classmates’ contributions I could see that many new categories of diversity are discussed throughout these posts. Each topic of focus added to the canon simply because they analyzed a topic that we have yet to discuss. What I found interesting was that before reading the post discussing language diversity, I had not thought the topic was an issue related to diversity. It made me think outside my perspective, and since I know many people with non-native accents it allowed me to connect and empathize. The addition of the article Language Diversity, Non-native Accents, and Their Consequences into the canon was significant to me because it added a unique inclusive perspective of multiple people who struggle with the challenges of language diversity at work. The media element from the same post, which was a TED talk from cognitive scientist and professor Lera Boroditsky, was informative and connected well with the article, working as supportive evidence. After reading all of these posts I can now see how diversity and organizational culture is so complex. Reflecting on the first reading we looked at where there was so many definitions of organizational culture I can see how this came to be due to a extensive list of diverse groups in the world.

3. The transitions that Bogost uses throughout his writing help move along his argument clearly, keeping it focused and concise. Some of the ways he approaches moving between one paragraph and another include a tactic where he seems to begin his paragraphs with a response to the question that the previous posed. The use of language to begin a paragraph such as “But” and “even though” continuously reference the content in the paragraph above giving his writing a continuous flow. To do this he begins his text with the story of Webb, making them familiar with her from the start so that the continuous inclusion of her perspective does not feel random or unrelated to the other facts or opinions he includes.

Posted on

Week of 6/15 discussion

  1. While going through my classmates canon posts, it is clear that there are multiple areas of interests as far as diversity and inclusion goes. What struck me was the post about “Bridging the generational gap” because that has always been something that has interested me outside of this class. I know age discrimination is certainly a thing, both for younger and older people, and it was neat to see this article about different generations working together. One passage from this post that was especially interesting to me was “His last suggestion is to include more technology in the curriculum. One way he suggested doing this is by incorporating fun and engaging games such as jeopardy to keep his students involved”. This stuck out to me because I have always had this assumption about the younger generation being highly reliant on technology, so it would naturally be incorporated into the learning style to keep them engaged. As for the media element that helped my understanding, I really appreciated the bar graph in the article discussing diversity in minority education. Bar graphs are simple, yet they paint a picture that is easy to understand.

3. The paragraph that touches on Webb blaming educational efforts and being obsessed with STEM and disregarding other areas of education is what I am focusing on for this. Bogost uses Webb’s statements aggressively to really drive an emphasis on this. Starting out with “Even though she’d like to see more diversity among tech workers, Webb blames educational efforts like those that Constellations is pursuing for the current state of affairs, at least in part. ” This sets the rest of the paragraph to explain why she thinks we need to do better in terms of educating people, and smoothly transitions to the next paragraph where she can give a counter example. In this case it is China, and how they teach children in a more organic way so that they are more versatile in their education rather than just focusing solely on one area.

Posted on

Discussion prompts, Benjamin Fisch

1.) “Providing a more concrete understanding of what a perceived stereotype threat could be allows the intended audience to reflect and comprehend these said threats whether the individual reading experiences them or not.” This quote from a classmates expanding the canon post really caught my attention. Its interesting to me, because it proves that individuals who haven’t experienced any type of discrimination, can still learn about that type of discrimination. This is important, because if more people are educated on a type of discrimination, the more people will take action, and try to do something about it.

“If a single company sponsors or promotes one specific kind of religion, this is questionable.” I really like this quote from a classmate’s expanding the cannon post, because it made me aware of a new type of discrimination that is being seen in the work place. This type of discrimination is religious discrimination. The author of this quote explores ways in which a religion, like christianity, could become the typical religion of a work place. If this is so, it creates a hierarchy of religions in the work place. If Christians were at the type of this pyramid structure, lets say that Jews are in the middle, and muslims and hindus are at the bottom. The religions below the popular and typical religion in the work place, may face discrimination for not being the typical religion.

The following Ted Talk video really stood out to me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7365IO9l-tw
The speaker identified an example of a law suit between a muslim women and Abercrombie and Fitch. In this example, the women had been denied a position at the clothing shop, because of something as simple as her head scarf. This is outrageous and a clear example of discrimination in the work place, especially religious discrimination within the work place.

3.) The following is the closing line of a paragraph written by Bogost. “That makes diversity a necessary but insufficient solution to social equity in computing systems.” The following is the beginning of the next paragraph. “For years, companies and educators in the tech sector have framed diversity as a “pipeline” problem.” The transition seen in this example by Bogost is smooth. A reason why this is a great transition, is because Bogost ends the paragraph expressing how diversity in the tech industry is a problem. Then, the next paragraph is related to the end of the prior paragraph, because Bogost writes a sentence that will lead into explaining a potential solution for this issue. So, Bogost ends one paragraph by identifying the issue of diversity in the tech industry, and starts the next paragraph by offering a solution for the problem. This makes for a smooth and effective transition.

Posted on

Discussion Posts- Isaac 6/15

  1. While reading the posts from my classmates I began realizing a pattern in what is taking place in our world. The population of the world is continuously growing exponentially, and where there was once a large barrier separating our world there is now connectivity that engages everyone into the global network. Through solid research, there is an endless list of minority groups and subgroups who face serious disadvantges in all aspects of life. The ideology behind a homogenous world can not work with such a connected population, and where there was once separation between cities and countries there is now a thorough mix of personalities and people spread around the world. 

I found myself struggling with pulling certain quotes or passages that align with many others, because everyone has found a new dark corner that needs attention. It seems like our world strives for the future but we are forgetting about who we may be leaving in the past. The disadvantaged groups such as women, people of color, neurodiverse individuals, and the LGBTQ+ community have struggled for centuries for an equal opportunity in life. The role that social media and the internet has played in connecting people with their minority groups and forming communities has been crucial, and the tools have given people who are born into a life of struggle a helping hand in a difficult world.

This class discussion has enabled me to peek behind the curtain of many industries I’m not fully engaged in, although most have the same underlying issue of the outdated organizational culture. The bar graph that reflects the racial proportions of the students in a school district and in the Gifted and Talented Education Program helps the reader visualize how much a person’s physical appearance can affect their lives. I found this post the most engaging because of how important the life of a child is; it is the time in a persons life where they learn what it means to be a person in our society, and to give a child a skewed perspective of our world can seriously hinder their chances at a successful life.

 

  1. The first rhetorical move I picked up on in Ian Bogost’s article was the writing style that uses smaller paragraphs to organize the information as it descends toward the conclusion.  This style of writing allows a reader to skim the article over with ease, and is a more practical set up for displaying the information. 

 

“But that’s an aspirational hope. Tech-industry diversity is improving, but it’s still pretty terrible. Women, black, and Latinx representation is particularly poor. That makes diversity a necessary but insufficient solution to social equity in computing systems.” 

 

This paragraphs only goal was to act as a transition between two longer informative paragraphs. It acts as a cushion between the two, and is made up of conclusion statements for the previous paragraph and introductory statements to open the reader up to what is next. Bogost uses this same method on a smaller scale as well. When two paragraphs involve each other they don’t need a transition paragraph, but they use a concluding/introductory statement or two at the beginning of the second paragraph. This is roughly the same idea as a transition paragraph just on a smaller scale. 

Posted on

Bogost’s Use of Rhetoric – Mikhail Khramov

Without even reading the article, the use of rhetoric becomes obvious from the name of the title. With the title such as The Problem with Diversity in Computing there is a heavy implication on the content of the article. The very first assumption that one would make is that the author is going to argue that there is a lack of diversity in the tech sector and that that is either bad, good, or neither. But, the title’s main rhetorical quality comes from The Problem with Diversity, the reader can assume that the content of the article will argue the previously mentioned lack of diversity, or that the article will discuss the idea of diversity in and of itself. Because the issue of diversity has a large presence in the cultural zeitgeist, such an inflammatory title captures the mind of the reader.

The rhetorical quality in the first few paragraphs primarily acquires a metaphorical slant. Professor Amy Webb’s inconvenience at the airport led her to notice that the computerized x-ray machine puts a yellow block over the chest of women. It is then stated that the reason for this yellow block is that the x-ray cannot detect the difference between the underwire of a bra and a legitimate weapon. This literal yellow block then acquires its metaphorical quality as it is used to represent the inconveniences of technology that underrepresented groups face. And this then leads into the point that the reason technology inconveniences underrepresented groups is because technology is primarily created by a small homogeneous group of people who do not necessarily concern themselves with the differences of underrepresented groups.

The idea of a select group creating widely used tech is then supported with the idea that “companies and educators in the tech sector have framed diversity as a “pipeline” problem.” Wherein a group with the right educational background gets the right training leading to the right college and eventually leading to top tech employers. Again, Bogost uses a metaphor to explain the ideas of diversity. However, this metaphor is not used in a serious manner to support the argument that Bogost wants to make. Instead the metaphor is primarily used to address the initial assumptions that the reader might have from reading the title. Thus with this use of the metaphor Bogost leads the reader to question their previous assumptions and to continue reading the article

After the use of the “pipeline” metaphor, Bogost begins to heavily rely on the rhetorical use of quotations in order to reveal the true meaning of the article. The first example of this is with Charles Isbell who says “is: Are we interested in diversity, or are we interested in integration?” This quotation sets up the idea that diversity in the tech sector is not just about having a wide range of backgrounds, but rather creating a diversity where people from different backgrounds have the power to influence technology. Quotations are used further to argue that the current state of diversity in technology is primarily concerned with creating a larger labor pool instead of creating diverse opinions in tech. This argument becomes presented as the “economic” argument, while the argument for giving more power to diverse peoples is presented as the “moral” argument, with the former being more compelling to tech giants. Finally a consensus is reached that in in order for tech giants to expand, they will require diversity in the positions of power. The use of these quotations and the argument that they make is a major departure from the original assumption created by the title. Using the title and the article itself Bogost is first able to draw in the reader but then presents a competing argument for something different.

Finally Webb gives her opinion, stating that everybody is inconvenienced by modern tech because the culture that surrounds tech is highly competitive and exclusive. The inconveniences of modern tech are not founded in differences of race,gender, or nationality but rather the isolated nature of the tech community. The rhetorically, the final paragraph is used to present the closing argument in complete contrast to the assumptions created by the title.

Posted on

Bogost Rhetorical Moves

In the first two paragraphs of his article, Bogost retells the story of Amy Webb who had the unfortunate experience of breaking her ankle which lead to her using a backscatter at the airport. In this experience, Webbs breasts were signaled as a weapon, however only to find out this was caused by the underwire in her bra, but the machine unfortunately can not make this distinction. Bogost utilizes this story to introduce his point seamlessly as Webb herself said that the reason this happens is because someone like her was not in the room when the machine was designed. He uses purposeful rhetoric as he placed her experience as a way to highlight that many inventions and devices would be suitable for the larger population if there was more diversity in the workplace. By taking an emotional approach, he is able to emphasize the importance of his point.

Bogost further develops his point by transitioning to how lack of diversity in larger companies is derived from the kind of education their employees are exposed to. Bogost uses comparison  of a University program and diversity count, to the demographic of an employer like Google. He analyzes how Georgia Tech has a center to promote women and people of color into overwhelmingly majority employers and promotes higher education to those who thought they may never have it, but for example Google employees who are white and asian is over 95% . He further develops his point by saying that although inviting individuals who are black or have curly hair would change the programs that are being developed, it would change it for the better and avoid problems that Amy Webb experienced in the airport.

In the next part of his article, Bogost uses a series of quotes by Amy Webb, whom the reader has become familiar with and other individuals who further enhance his idea. In using first hand accounts and direct quotes from individuals, Bogost is able to draw the reader in and develop his article into one that resembles a conversation between him and the audience. He uses a series of quotes to resemble a conversation between him and the individuals he is citing, as well as speaking to the audience in person. In doing so, the reader is more likely to be persuaded into agreeing with his points as the sources he uses are notable and used in a comprehensive way.

Bogost again connects one point to another seamlessly as he includes another rhetoric move by using a rhetorical questions. For example, his integration of the Charles Isbell quote ‘ “The real question,” he told me, “is: Are we interested in diversity, or are we interested in integration?” ‘ draws the reader to think about what he is presenting. In choosing to include Isbell’s rhetorical question, Bogost is able to persuade the reacher and have the audience think critically about diversity and whether what we actually mean when we say diversity inclusion.

Lastly, another rhetoric movement that Bogost uses to amplify the point he has developed throughout his essay, is the use of irony and repetition. To conclude his essay framed around diversity in the computing world, he states “Instead, the problem with computing is computing.” In his last paragraph, Bogost suggests and supports the idea that inclusion in the computing industry goes farther than the organizational culture, the issue is within the center of the job field. The issue, he concludes, is with the actual computing. With the integration of Amy Webb’s narrative points, he is able to emphasize that the issues within the system itself which is able to reflect the larger society.

Posted on

Week of 6/15-Bogost Rhetorical Moves

Bogost starts off his article not by immediately addressing the problem but by introducing the character “Amy” as someone the audience can relate to. He uses the rhetoric method of introducing the most important topic to the audience first in order to keep them engaged with the argument being made. In TSIS it is highlighted that when constructing an argument it is important to first introduce the opinions of the general public about idea you are trying to convey.

Bogost in order to cement his influence to the audience and prove that he is a credible source provides his own background information. He says “Among them is the Constellations Center for Equity in Computing at Georgia Tech, where I hold faculty positions in the colleges of computing and liberal arts.” This helps show the audience that not only does he work with a group of qualified individuals but that he is dedicated to perfecting the system.

Bogost introduces the quote “For years, companies and educators in the tech sector have framed diversity as a “pipeline” problem.” and implements a rhetoric device outlined in TSIS. It is explained that when addressing a problem experienced by the general public you and generalize it to show that it is affecting a large scale of people. This one view has become the standard ideal but addressing it on a larger scale can help challenge such a widely accepted belief.

When the author includes the quote “(My colleague Hannah Giorgis, who also has a lot of curly hair, confirms that she, too, suffers a cranial pat-down every time she goes to the airport.)” He implements the opinions of others experiencing the same issue in hopes that the in the audience will feel a personal connection. By using quotes throughout the passage he is able to show that he cares about the opinions of others and wants their input when attempting to solve the problem.

When Bogost finishes off the article he ends by saying “Anyone who falls outside of that core group of interests are not being represented,” Webb said. If she’s right, then the problem with computing isn’t just that it doesn’t represent a diverse public’s needs.” When he does this he appeals to the audiences sense of advocacy and their need to feel represented in all environments. He asks the audience whether they wish to see progressive change and by engaging with them he paves a path for making changes in the future.

Posted on

Bogost Blog Post

The title from Ian Bogost’s article, The Problem With Diversity in Computing is a great example of how authors use rhetorical moves within there writing. The title is clear in stating the simplest point that Bogost connects back to throughout the text, which is problems with diversity in computing. A simple title gives the reader context making them comfortable immediately with the reading, it allows them to anticipate what else the article will discuss. The short description below the title “Tech’s discriminatory culture might never change, no matter how many women and people of color are invited into the room” note the potential conclusion that the article will come back to, beginning with the point of the article might seem like the author is giving away the ending, but it is a great strategy to convince the reader to keep reading and find out why the author makes this claim. 

The introduction paragraph tells a real story of Amy Webb who broke her ankle and had to wear a boot making her notice that her trip through PSA was riddled with problems due to the computer systems “not anticipating all the types of people who might use them.” The use of a real-life example connects the reader to the article because since most people have experienced going through TSA they can put themselves in the shoes of Amy Webb allowing them to understand what she went through creating an emotional appeal. That emotional appeal engages the reader, which is helpful when the goal is to persuade them. Using language like “all the types of people” also foreshadows that the article will discuss inclusion. 

Throughout this text, the author provides evidence to back up his claim by linking other articles that support the point. The addition of linking googles diversity report in a sentence that states “At Google, for example, more than 95 percent of technical workers are white or Asian” reassures the reader that the author is using correct data and allows them to follow emphasize the key points through other sources. 

There is plenty of facts and opinions from other experts on this topic such as “Kamau Bobb, the global lead for diversity research and strategy at Google and a senior director at Constellations”. The use of credible people agreeing with the author’s points gives the article credibility itself. Bogost also continues to use Webb’s narrative and what she concluded from her experience, as evidence keeping that connection with the audience that was developed in the first paragraph. Bogost uses Webb’s because the audience is aware of why she would think this way given they already know her story “Webb points to China as an alternative. There, kindergarten-age students nationwide will begin studying a textbook this year that’s designed to teach students the new basics of knowledge they need to succeed in a computational future.” This evidence is credible because it can be understood why Webb believes this. The article even concludes with a quote from Webb followed by the author stating “If she’s right”. The use of a statement like “If she’s right” poses a question the audience might have while reading this article. Following that up with “then the problem with computing isn’t just that it doesn’t represent a diverse public’s needs. Instead, the problem with computing is computing” provides the audience with the answer to that “what if” type of question leading the audience toward a distinct point to conclude.

Posted on

Bogost’s use of rhetoric

Bogost begins his article with an anecdote about a woman’s negative experience going through airport security. By “wagering” that most of his readers will have had similar experiences, he gets them to immediately identify with the subject of the story. He uses the familiar – going through airport security – to introduce a topic which is likely less familiar to readers, that of the consequences a lack of diversity in technology has had –  and will continue to have – on society.

Bogost uses the readers’ expectations against them. The title of the article,  “The Problem With Diversity in Computing” is only a slight hint; this article is actually going to challenge conventional wisdom.  He first introduces that conventional wisdom by using a version of “they say”. Rather than claim these positions as his own, Bogost presents them as those of companies and educators in the tech sector.

Bogost then shares that he teaches at Georgia Tech as part of the Constellations Center for Equity in Computing. One might assume that he will wax poetic about the great things they’re doing. Instead, he turns that assumption on its head, arguing that programs such as the Center are insufficient. In fact, the expert Bogot introduced in the first paragraph, Amy Webb, is described as being concerned with the current strategy for improving diversity with its current focus on software development.

Broadening the conversation to include different perspectives, Bogost includes quotes from Charles Isbell, the dean of computing at Georgia Tech, and Kamau Bobb, global lead for diversity research and strategy at Google. He weaves these quotes with quotes from Webb, as if he were a facilitator or host at a conference, rather than the author of a magazine article.

In his last paragraph, we finally get to read Bogost’s own opinion. After circling back to his opening paragraph by quoting Webb, he uses his last two sentences to respond directly to her position. He also leaves us with a heck of a closing statement: “The problem with computing is computing.” While the turn of phrase may come off a bit glib, it certainly leaves the reader with plenty to think about long after they’ve finished reading.

Posted on

Week of 6/15 – Bogost Rhetoric

A recurring rhetorical strategy Bogost applies is in crafting a descriptive narrative. The earliest example we see is when he describes NYU professor and author Amy Webb looking at a TSA security screen with her “cast, head, and breasts [as] big blocks of yellow.” Any immediate response in reading this would itch for an explanation serving to keep the audience curious and invested in the storyline.

Bogost signals that “she had other problems with the machines, too, including that her mop of thick, curly hair confuses them.” He even goes onto mention that another colleague too received similar treatment issuing a “cranial patdown.” This conversational tone keeps a reader-friendly framework to appeal to his intended audience of a publishing blog/ journal webpage. More importantly, however, is understanding that Bogost’s decision to introduce more people/ issues into the eclectic mix suggests that maybe the issue with tech, as we come to find out, isn’t a specific a lone case, but rather a familiar situation recognized by many others.

Later on we begin to understand where Bogost stands on the issue which is best interpreted under one of TSIS’s template of “Okay, but…” It’s evident when he mentions the “Tech industry diversity is improving but it’s still pretty terrible.” Acknowledging what they (the tech industry) say moves the anecdotes Bogost gave with a larger subject the readers can process in mind. In doing so the rhetoric behind the title of his article gains scale presenting the issues and insufficient solutions we’re currently at.

Following the ‘they say’ format, Bogost is also seen challenging the conventional wisdom of diversity and inclusion. He’s explicit in saying “the thinking goes…” when describing how the people with the right educational background, connection, and  access will, “produce the workforce that Webb and others are calling for.” This claim reinstates the negative consequences a lack of computational diversity presents with its logistical train of thought.

And finally, he rounds out his argument sharing insight of his own experience on the subject. By introducing himself as a faculty position holder at Georgia Techs Constellation Center for Equity in Computing, Bogost appeals to audiences who may have questioned his accountability or reason to write on the subject. He adds to the conversation sharing data, statistics (such as the one on Google), and other scholarly directors/ leaders  perspective in the field opening lines for a fruitful discussion and strengthening his credibility with broader audiences.