1.) “I’m looking at the screen,” she says of the image that appeared from her scan, “and my cast, head, and breasts were big blocks of yellow.” This quote is an example of Bogost using rhetorical language to catch the reader’s attention and make them aware of what he is trying to communicate. He does this by using carefully put together, descriptive language to give the reader a real image of what he is trying to say.
2.) “She’s had other problems with the machines, too, including that her mop of thick, curly hair sometimes confuses them. (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.)” Here is another example of Bogost using rhetorical language.
3.) “That idea echoes a popular suggestion to remedy computers’ ignorance of different sorts of people: Increase the diversity of representation among the people who make these systems, and they will serve the population better.”
4.) “But their impact might be a drop in the bucket, given the size and composition of the tech industry.”
5.) “But there’s a risk of tokenization; inviting a black man or a curly-haired woman into the room could make a difference in the design of the systems that produced Webb’s experience at airport security.”
The article begins by introducing a protagonist, Amy Webb who broke her ankle and was forced to use the backscatter machines in the airport that produce X-Ray images of passengers. This was a great way to start off this article because it gets the reader involved instantly introduces what the rest of the article is going to be about. The author then goes on to say how Amy turned that inconvenience of breaking her ankle, into an opportunity to watch how technology like that works.
The next rhetoric device I noticed was how the author explains his role at Georgia Tech in the “Constellations Center for Equity in Computing.” Bogost states how their goal is to increase access to computer science education among women and people of color. Bogost then gives many facts and states that integration is much harder than diversity.
Isbell, who also worked at Georgia Tech thinks that two separate conditions should be met in order to accomplish their goal. “One is that the new folks are both capable and confident. The other is that the old folks are willing.” Using quotes throughout the article is a great way to prove the authors points and convey the message thats being conveyed throughout. In addition to the quotes from Isbell, Bogost includes quotes from Kamau Bobb, the global lead for diversity research and strategy at Google and a senior director at Constellations. Bogost explains how Bobb isn’t so sure the tech industry is willing to diversify. he gives numerous quotes that Bogost includes in this article which helps prove his point and is very effective.
“Their goal is to get more people in the game, not necessarily to change the rules of that game..” This quote really stuck with me. . A rhetoric device is used here to convey Bogost and Bobb’s message. They showed having a very confident tone which. also. helps prove their point.
The article ends with Webb describing how women, people of color and others are being discriminated against when it comes to computing and how it should change.“We’re all discriminated against by computing.” “Anyone who falls outside of that core group of interests are not being represented,” Webb said. The last line of the article was in my opinion a very effective way of closing It out. If Webb is in fact right about all this, “the problem with computing is computing.”
After reading my classmates posts, I found that everyone has different areas of diversity that they are interested in. Some of the issues that stood out to me include equal opportunities for minorities in education, disability and employment, and diversity in higher education. The reason that I found equal opportunities for minorities in education is because being an education major, I have learned that there are some teachers out there who overlook students who are minorities, and do not allow them to have the same opportunities as their peers. When I become a teacher, I never want my students to feel out of place or left out in my classroom because they are a minority. I want each student to feel that they are valued equally as they should be. The issue of disability and employment was interesting to me because I think that research that will help include more people who have disabilities in the workplace is always a good thing. In the future, I hope to see disabilities represented more. The last issue that I included in this post was diversity in higher education. The reason that I thought this was interesting is because I agree, and believe that it is true that people learn better when they are with others who are different. I think that everyone should have equal opportunities, and should not have to defend themselves because they are different. One of the media elements that made an impression on me was the one about equal opportunities for minorities in education. This is because the diagram shows just how unequal access to gifted education programs really is for minorities. This graph stood out to me because it is easy to understand, and is overall very impactful.
In my opinion, Bogost does a great job of transitioning into new ideas. One area of his article that stood out to me because of the transition was when Bogost was talking about diversity being seen as a “pipeline” issue. In this paragraph, Bogost explains that people who have a good background in education have access to more that will allow them to eventually obtain a good job with their connections. He then says that fixing this issue will allow for a workforce that includes different types of people. Bogost set himself up for his next paragraph because that is where he gives an example of an organization that is working on resolving this issue. Bogost further describes the organization by saying, “The center’s goal is to increase access to computer-science education among women and people of color”. This explanation helps the reader to better understand why a center like this is important. Overall, I think that Bogost did a good job of transitioning in this section of the article.
The first rhetorical move I noticed in Bogost’s “The Problem With Diversity in Computing” is that right off the bat, he has a protagonist, Amy Webb, in this article. I didn’t know who she was until I read further on, and as the reader, the feeling I received from the first paragraph was intriguing and curious as to see where the writer will lead with this. He connected these first few sentences to go on and explain how someone like her wasn’t present in the room when these systems were designed, so I found this connection to be brilliant.
The second is when Bogost introduces the Constellations Center for Equity in Computing, because this is an aspect to the article that the reader may be unfamiliar with. Bogust explains his role there and the center’s mission, so he uses this school to strengthen his point that there needs to be growth for the tech population. He does so by saying “Adding more black engineers from Atlanta schools to that mix will certainly help push the numbers up incrementally.” He also proves this point by including a statistic about Google’s employees, so this backs him up with an actual fact.
Third, Bogust writes about Charles Isbell, who brings up an interesting point: diversity vs. integration. This is a comparison which I’ve never heard about before and honestly found it so fascinating. How he brings in Charles as a source to quote their conversation gives the reader the opportunity to expand their knowledge on a topic that isn’t talked about enough. Bogoust makes it clear that both integration and diversity need to be met if we, as one, want to accomplish the universal goal of expanding those within the tech field.
A quote by Bogost which really stayed with me was “Their goal is to get more people in the game, not necessarily to change the rules of that game.” It is evident that rhetoric is used here to convey this idea to the reader. Bogost has a powerful and confident tone in this statement. He says this after introducing Kamau Bobb, so with this statement he reflects on what Bobb’s opinion of this topic.
Lastly, Bogost ends the article by saying “The problem with computing is computing.” Here, he backs up Webb’s point that everyone outside of the computing field is discriminated against. Going on to compare computing professionals acting tribe-like and only sticking to who’s inside their circle is a great use of rhetoric to make this connection.
The article starts out by introducing a protagonist, Amy Webb, and right off the bat she is injured- a broken ankle. This injury is used to grab your attention immediately so you’re enthralled in what is being said. Bogost then uses Webb’s injury to connect the dots of how her injury produces the inconvenience of her having to go through x ray machines that highlight areas of her in big yellow blocks. This leads her to showing how technology does not take women into their creative processes, and as an end result they are treated very differently, unfairly even.
A second instance is Bogost explaining that Webb encountered other problems while being in this situation with a TSA agent, the physical characteristic of having big, curly hair. Webb says “She’s had other problems with the machines, too, including that her mop of thick, curly hair sometimes confuses them.” Bogost then uses a connection to a colleague, which makes the reader take a claim like this more seriously. It’s bad enough when it happens to one person, but when more people are added into the fold, especially when you know these people, or the author knows them, it makes this much easier to physically identify with.
Bogost uses the sentence “Computers have started issuing prison sentences” as an eye catching phrase that surely pulls emotion out of the readers. At first glance one might think that this is used a metaphor of some sort, but it’s actually much more than that. The link that is offered in this article takes you to another article- one that shows how criminal sentencing uses Artificial Intelligence to deem someone high risk for criminal behavior, and how terrifying that concept it.
Bogost (and Webb) criticizes the fascination with STEM education, and the pipeline of education to workforce as part of the problem with why these fields aren’t very diverse, but beforehand, theres a qualifying statement “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 is used to sort of soften the blow for the criticism that is to come.
Another very interesting, but simple line that stuck out to me from this article touches on the differences between humans and machines: “Critical thinking is what the computers won’t be able to do,” This is a short, simple statement that has a lot to unpack. In one sentence this sort of sums up why Artificial Intelligence\, and technology might not be so helpful, because it leaves out so much (or even all) of the human element, and therefore it cannot truly do ther job that it is asked to do.
The introductory paragraph to Ian Bogost’s article “The Problem with Diversity in Computing” exemplifies the story of an injured Amy Webb and features her firsthand experience facing the ignorance of computer software. This is the first rhetorical move Bogost makes, and it introduces an issue the majority of people don’t have to worry about, but should care about. People of color, especially black and Latinx, and women face an inclusion problem that can have severe consequences when computer software is relied on in countless fields.
“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,” Bogost states his position at Georgia Tech to inform the reader of his legitimacy of the information he is sharing. Following this quote, Bogost expands on how the computer-science center at Georgia Tech is working towards expanding access to computer-science to people of color and women, and their ongoing funding going to public schools in Atlanta for computer-science classes.
The use of survey data is used to solidify key examples of Bogost’s argument. He addresses Google’s workforce which is made up of 95% White or Asian people, this fact adds to the idea that systemic privilege prevents minorities from being given the same opportunities in the computing industry. Data collected from China is used as well, “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,”. The addition of this fact is used to inform the reader on steps that are already being taken to improve computational skills elsewhere in the world. China makes up roughly 18% of the global population and is a leading country in the computer-science industry, the steps they are taking education-wise are important to know because of how large of an impact China can have on our world.
In Ian Bogost’s article, quotes from his colleagues are used to develop an emotional aspect that is less informative, and more compassionate.“The integration of women, people of color, and other underrepresented voices would mean that the behavior of the entire industry would change as a result of their presence in that community. ‘Diversity is just membership,’ Isbell said. ‘Integration is influence, power, and partnership.’” The quote opens the reader up to a new definition of diversity, where organizations in our current culture are obligated to diversify their workforce, although many are reluctant to fully integrate the minority groups because of the prejudices they have towards them.
The last statement made in Ian Bogost’s article provides the reader with an idea where deeper thinking is necessary. “That culture replaces all knowledge and interests with the pursuit of technological solutions at maximum speed. “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. Instead, the problem with computing is computing.” The quote follows a series of paragraphs addressing the economic mentality of many of the large companies that run our computing world. In the post-industrial capitalist world, we tend to forget about the moral codes we stand by personally, and to combat the ongoing inclusion issues in the computing industry, we must stop computing for computing’s sake, and start computing for our fellow human’s sake.
Exploring the long-term understanding of stereotype threats to women and people of color, the article “Contending with Stereotype Threat at Work: A Model of Long-Term Responses” strongly correlates to our further discussion of organizational culture and diversity within the workplace. Theorizing based off of psychological thought and previously acquired studies, five notable professors and doctoral candidates create a theorized “model” to potentially lessen this perceived stereotype threat. Focusing on three core coping mechanisms used when faced with a threat – fending off, discouragement, resilient – the authors provide their own analysis of the said response and provide a variety of ways to manage the response. 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. From the model constructed, the authors were able to conclude that employees who fit the demographic minority experienced both positive and negative consequences of stereotype threats. The model provides analysis of the coping mechanisms most commonly used by the demographic minority, and from the findings, companies can better support those who feel threatened and can foster a more inclusive and diverse working environment. The video I have attached to this elaborates more on stereotype threats providing another perspective on how these threats can affect groups of people. While also connecting to self-fulfilling prophecy, the video elaborated on how these threats can be useful to those who threaten others with the goal of wanting to feel better about themselves, hence explaining where the source of the stereotyping may come from.
When reading Ian Bogost’s article, “The problem with diversity in computing”, I noticed that he used a lot of examples and rhetorical moves in order to get his point across. Bogost begins his article with a story that is easy to understand, which is how he introduces his topic. Bogost jumps right in instead of explaining his topic; the first sentence in the article is “When Amy Webb broke her ankle, she was forced to hobble around on a walking boot”. This sentence does not make it seem like Bogost is going to be talking about diversity in technology, which allows the reader to remain interested in the article, and makes them want to keep reading.
The second rhetorical move that I noticed was the use of logos, which is a way of persuasion using logic. Bogost uses logos throughout most of the article by stating facts. For example, while talking about diversity and access to education, he states that at Google, “more than 95 percent of technical workers are white or Asian”. Facts often convince readers to agree with what an author is saying.
A third rhetorical move that I saw in Bogost’s article was personification by using the words, “Computers have started issuing prison sentences” when talking about technology not being able to predict diversity. Obviously, computers cannot literally issue prison sentences, but this use of personification allows the reader to see the importance of this topic.
Furthermore, Bogost uses repetition in order to emphasize the point that technology tends to leave diversity out when talking about Webb at the airport. Bogost quotes Webb, then further explains her point when he says, “someone like me wasn’t in the room” when the system was designed, or when it was trained on images of human forms, or when it was tested before rollout”. Repetition of the word “when”, followed by an example is powerful here because it shows just how much diversity can be ignored.
Finally, I found that Bogost tends to use certain words that draw the reader’s attention. For example, he talks about how tech-industry diversity is improving a little bit, but he uses negative words in order to make a few sentences stand out. Bogost says, “Tech-industry diversity is improving, but it’s still pretty terrible. Women, black, and Latinx representation is particularly poor”. The words “terrible” and “poor” used while talking about the same point help the reader to understand how bad the situation really is, because these words draw attention.
The author of my article is named Aaron Hicks, and he, with the help of four individuals – Cassie Price King, Elizabeth H. Rickert, Amanda D. Nelson, and Lucretia McCulley –published Religion and the Workplace: Pluralism, Spirituality, Leadership. This is an eBook from EBSCO, and I will be working with the Part II segment of the book for this assignment, which includes Chapters 5 and 6 named “Being religious differently” and “Religions of the workplace.” Hicks is a professor with an undergraduate degree and graduate coursework in economics, a Master of Divinity degree, and a Ph.D. in religious studies. The author’s religious tradition is Presbyterian (Protestant, Christian). Before he began writing Chapter 1 of this book, Aaron clarified his opinion to the reader by stating how faithful Christians should have no interest in imposing their beliefs or practices upon others and they should want to receive no advantage in public life or the workplace because of their religion.
The author’s objective in Part II of this section of the text is to offer distinctions, concepts, and comparative examples that demonstrate how religion is present in contemporary workplaces. The audience of this text includes scholars with specialized knowledge in religion, specifically those who have prior background discussing religion and the workplace. This work is intended for both scholars and practitioners, though, because the point that Hicks emphasizes in his introduction before beginning to write is that he intends for his criticisms to be constructive and hopes that “ensuing debates will contribute to workplace policies and cultures that respect, on equal terms, employees of all backgrounds.” (Hicks, 2003, p. 4)
The purpose is to analyze current realities in the workplace in relation to religion and spirituality, and Hicks does so by first pointing out how individual and institutional expressions of religion differ. That is, most approaches to religion and spirituality in the workplace often underemphasize religious diversity. Religion in the workplace is often seen as religion of the workplace, and the author makes an important point that the corporate leader cannot play the role of a spiritual guide or guru to his or her workforce. If a single company sponsors or promotes one specific kind of religion, this is questionable. One quote by the author which supports his reasoning and argument on why companies can’t openly express one religion over any other is “It may be easy for Christians to downplay the significance, for example, of subtle messages in the workplace that convey the privileged status enjoyed by Christian symbols, ideas, or holidays, but for Jewish, Muslim, and atheistic co-workers these messages are overtly present and reinforce their experience of marginalization.” (Hicks, 2003, p. 133) Additionally, public life impacts the workplace as the chapters explain. Religion plays many roles in American society, and many employees who are Christians have admitted that they receive or have received preferential treatment at work and in society. These discussions of spirituality tend to marginalize those who are atheists or adherents of many religious backgrounds, causing those who feel pressured by society to divorce their religious / spiritual commitments from all aspects of their public lives.
Providing equal representation for minorities in all levels of education has continuously been a concern in public and private school education programs. This form of racial exclusion which is encountered in the lives of adolescents comes to the surface in an article titled “Gifted Ethnic Minority Students and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis”. This article boils down the prejudice encountered in the lives of minorities that are excluded from accelerated education programs.
The analysis was presented by three PhD professors, Malik S. Henfield, Hongryun Woo, and Na Mi Bang who focused their studies on the education and development of minority students in school settings. It was published by the Gifted Child quarterly in 2017 but can be found on the Syracuse Libraries website.
This study was conducted in order to investigate racial bias against minorities being chosen for gifted education programs. It has been a constant theme of teachers overlooking minority students and not being able to depict them from other students. “It noted that African Americans, for instance, comprise 19% of the nation’s total school population, yet represent only 10% of students in gifted education programs.” With a general disregard for these students and a lack of representation in these programs, once they reach college, they find themselves falling behind tremendously and taking extra classes to keep up.
This article’s main purpose was to highlight the academic differences between minority and regular students and explore the rates of academic success for those involved in the programs. It “examined the effects of gifted education programs on the outcome vari- ables of academic achievement and ability.” It also depicted how classroom and educational program diversity could help students with less opportunities excel and flourish in restricting environments. The article compiled the reports of smaller studies that failed to accurately dictate the rate of success for these students within each program.
This analysis was so important because it highlighted the injustice not only faced by these young kids but how they can fall behind later in higher education and in the workplace. It shows us that it isn’t only a problem in this circumstance but that we must acknowledge minority students at all levels of education. For example, with a school as big and diverse as Syracuse University it is important to allow minorities to take rigorous classes and to be encouraged to join leadership programs. This topic would help acknowledge and spread awareness on making classrooms and workplaces more inclusive and inviting areas.
