- The main search tool I have been using when researching sources is the SU library databases. I have found this to be the most useful because I know it is credible and that I have access to all of the information that is on it so there is no need to click through to make sure I can get onto the web page. It is efficient leaving me with more time to focus on the sources I am choosing between rather than searching aimlessly. The search screen includes all the databases found along with a feature that allows you to search by title subject area or content type narrowing the results down so that they are just what I am looking for. One other resource I have been using is Google Scholars which focuses on the scholarly literature available. Google Scholars is a bit more open-ended, with less specific filters to search by. While I trust this source because I know it is pulling from publications based on the results of research or studies I get stuck scrolling through pages due to the limited filters making me feel as though my time is being spent searching rather than analyzing the actual content.
- Along with a primary, and scholarly source I would like to include
a secondary source. Since I am focusing my research on
empathy, including sources that are specific to perspective and
help with understanding is key. I would like the voices of diverse
individuals to be shown through primary sources since they are
usually first-hand experiences or observations. While primary
sources can give a direct point of view and opinion it is also
important for me to search for secondary sources, such
as an analysis of the topic, that has less personal bias than a
primary source to provide context and give another perspective.
Lastly, a scholarly source adds credibility through data and facts
from a professional on the topic. These three sources give a voice
to the people being discussed, those analyzing the topic, and the
scholars researching and collecting the data. I will find these
sources by searching through the SU library database,
Google Scholar and any other resources I find through my peer’s
posts.
Week of 6/22 Discussion Post
- I decided that I want my topic to be about inclusive education, so the first thing I did was search inclusive education in Syracuse University Library Summons. A wide variety of articles, books, and other scholarly journals came up, but nothing was exactly what I wanted. I made my search a little bit different by saying that I wanted a journal article, and searching inclusive education benefits. The advanced search was helpful because it allowed me to be more specific, and find some articles that could be a great source. Although I found many great articles by changing by search only a little bit, in the past, I have found it helpful to really take advantage of the advanced search section. For example, you can specify the area of study, make sure the article is current, and even filter your search so that you have only peer reviewed articles. Overall, I like to do my research using the Syracuse Library Summons because of how easy it is to work with.
- I think that one important thing that I can do in order to represent different voices is find sources that are written, or have input from various people who are involved in inclusion. For example, I could find an article where a student who has a disability shares his/her experiences with education, whether it be in a special education classroom, or a general education classroom. Also, I think that it would be interesting if I could find an article that includes the experiences of a child who does not have a disability in their inclusive classroom. Experts, teachers, and school administrators could also be a great resource because they have had experiences with so many different kids. Overall, I think that it is really important to collect sources that include input from various people instead of just showing one side of the argument or one person’s perspective. In order to find these sources, I will do research, and use available filters in order to find what I need.
Discussion Week of 6/15
- When actively analyzing the constructs of organizational culture and workplace values we are always brought back to the central ideas of diversity and inclusion within communities. When attempting to grow from prejudice and discrimination against factors such as race, gender and disability we must find the internalized problem and study inclusion tactics that will help workspaces become more diverse spaces. One article that I believe really added to the central idea of the canon was ““Workforce diversity and organizational performance: a study of IT industry in India”. This article not only highlights the lack of diversity within certain environments but brings light to the companies that lack diversity and the steps that can be taken to resolve each issues. I think it’s important that this article not only targets the injustice faced but provides methods on which positive changes can be made.
3. In Bogost’s article on Diversity in computing he begins his article focusing on an issue that has been disputed for years and tackled by various consumers, in this case a woman going through airport security. Bogost builds an argument on one problem that correlates to a wide scale issue of lack of diversity within tech culture. He also emphasizes how there should be more representation within an industry that affects the lives of so many individuals. Although he spends the first half of the article addressing the central issue, he makes a very seamless transition when he explains to the audience how he personally plans to fix it with his own team of researchers. Bogost establishes his credibility within the audience when 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.” With this statement he transitions to telling the readers how he and other workers plan to do their part and get down to the real issue within the computing world.
Blog Post Week of 6/15 – Toni
In Bogost’s article I do not get a firsthand sense of whether he agrees or disagrees, neither in the beginning nor at the end. In fact, I don’t see much of a point of view of his at all. He even ends with a question that comes across as an incomplete sentence. I suppose he could be quite a rhetorical genius in this regard, as I did not feel he was arguing, persuading or had any agenda whatsoever, other than displaying information effectively. And by effective, I mean, easily palatable and interesting for most any reader. He is telling just what is needed from the personal experiences of Webb and how her questions formed and took her research up stream, to technical jargon that is supported by confident quotations. However, he is neither agreeing nor disagreeing nor agreeing and disagreeing at the same time. Or I cannot find places that allude to this in the piece. He gives us a lot of good information, and I was given what I needed to follow along and continue to gain curiosity by what Webb and other’s like Bobb were arguing, both of whom were very clear on their points-of-view, in helping us to understand (lack of) diversity in tech; Bogost doesn’t even seem undecided. It seems he does agree with both, he agrees with the problem and he also agrees with how they both disagree. However, even when he’s speaking of his own association with holding faculty positions at Georgia Tech’s Constellations Center for Equity in Computing, he gives the goals of the center and lists activities. He states they have merit, but also mentions their impact might be a drop in the bucket. Again, in this passive way there isn’t directly persuasive or argumentative rhetoric. While we read in TSIS this week, that it helps the reader organize around the reading if they know your argument from the start, I am basing this largely on that. I will say, I did not need his argument to remain fascinated with the information, the examples he chose, and the quality of the writing is simple to follow, but I don’t see HIS argument in this; I hear him supporting other peoples’ arguments at the same time. I am not discounting this, and it reminds me of in Chapter 4 in TSIS, where they are referencing new students not feeling they can be a part of the conversation because they don’t know enough to argue. While I don’t think Bogost has much of an “argument” and therefore I am not sure where to go with the question of the rhetoric shifts of his argument, but he is part of the conversation. He’s broadening the conversation by researching, speaking with and illuminating those whom have very strong arguments for what they know, and passing it on in palatable way to the rest of us.
Discussion prompts for Week of 6/22
This week’s work centers around focusing and surveying, and we’re going to stick with that theme in discussion. I’d like you to consider an analogy to photography here. When you’re getting ready to take a picture, you need to make a whole lot of decisions. That starts with deciding what your subject is going to be–what you’re going to focus on. In the course of making that decision, you’re also weighing what else is around that focal point, deciding what to include and exclude based on how you frame the image (whether and how much you zoom, how you refocus if you do zoom in, and deciding whether and how to overlay filters and other effects).
That’s kind of how research works–figuring out what’s worth focusing on requires a lot of surveying the landscape to see what’s out there and what’s interesting, and then making a series of decisions about how to compose a final image that you think others will want to see. We’re entering the surveying phase now–looking to see what’s out there and then deciding where to focus and how to frame the shot.
Please respond to both of the prompts below by the end of the day on Wednesday, 6/24, and then tune back in later in the week to respond to a couple of your classmates’ posts.
- What search tools have you tried, and what are you noticing about them–how they work, what kinds of sources you turn up with different tools, what specialized features (i.e. Advanced Search features) seem especially helpful? If you’re running into roadblocks, explain what you’ve tried, so we can offer suggestions to help you keep moving forward.
- Plot some research goals for yourself. As you can see in the unit 2 assignment sheet you will need to have at least 1 scholarly source, and at least 1 primary source (check out the post below for a rundown of what constitutes a primary source). You’re welcome to include a variety of sources beyond that, but will want to ensure that your sources represent a range of different viewpoints and contributions. What kinds of texts are you hoping to find? Which fields and voices do you want to make sure are represented? How will you work to find them?
A refresher on source types:
Overview for Week of 6/22
I’ll be getting you feedback on your recent posts and on your focusing flowchart within the next 24 hours, so please be on the lookout for that, and use that to get started on your research for sources for your research portfolio.
Read on for the particulars of what’s due this week, but first, let me give you a bit more of the Big Picture of Unit 2.
In this Unit, you will be assembling a set of sources–representing a mix of voices of various stakeholders, a variety of source types (including primary, scholarly, and others), and a range of perspectives. Your primary tasks in this unit will be making decisions about what sources to include and becoming conversant with those sources. In this unit, we’ll focus on these elements:
- locating sources (working with the SU library databases and other tools)
- evaluating sources (assessing their value, credibility, and utility to your project)
- writing about your sources (in a couple of note-taking and discussion exercises, and in longer annotations that are part of your portfolio)
You’ll be building a research project with these and other sources down the road in Unit 3. This unit will let you take your time developing a strong foundation for that work, so that your research can be intentional, critical, and productive (and not just quote-dropping or patching together other people’s words and ideas). This will allow you to make something new, a valuable contribution to the world of knowledge on the subject you choose to explore.
So, here are this week’s tasks.
Reading:
- “Four questions to protect your organization’s culture during COVID-19
- chapters 6 and 7 of TSIS
- chapter 2 (“Forwarding”) of Rewriting
Writing and discussion work:
- 2 note-taking exercises (1 due Wednesday, and the other due Sunday)–this begins with you locating possible sources, and then working with 2 different techniques spelled out on this notetaking techniques handout
- discussion posts (your posts due Wednesday, replies to classmates’ posts due Saturday). Here’s the link to the prompts:
Discussion Week of 6/15
- I think the most fascinating commonality that was beaming through everyone’s canons was the focus on improving the diversity within the workplace. Although, I found it fascinating how many combatting demographics there are when promoting this said diversity. Even the smallest of differentiators like religion, age, maybe even hair color/texture can certainly be looked at when addressing the success and diversity of a company. One of the most captivating media pieces I found, which had me think about organizational culture in a different way, was classmate Bryan’s TED Talk link focusing on how language changes the way we speak. I find that this was something that I simply overlooked, how the transmission of conversation within a workplace should be diverse and reach to many demographics not just focusing on one.
3. The paragraph I decided to focus on was a huge traditional paragraph, in my opinion, that changed the course of the article. The paragraph starting with “Webb says her airport experiences can be…” all the way to “…and they will serve the population better” was a seamless transition. Introducing the article with Webb’s personal experience was a great way to captivate the attention of the reader, hoping that it may be a somewhat relatable experience or one that the reader could place themselves into Webb’s shoes. This paragraph brought together Webb’s personal story and how demographically skewed computer systems are programmed to be in a manner that was almost undetected. Bringing the key points of Webb’s story to mind as they aligned perfectly with the purpose of the article is certainly not easy, but the way Bogost blended these two together is astounding.
Blog Post week 6/15
I think immediately at the start of the blog post, one of the first uses of rhetoric that helped me was in the first paragraph. When introducing Amy Webb, Peterson grabs the attention of the reader with a common issue that many have experienced, in this case it is getting injured and having a boot. This helped to place myself in the shoes of Amy Webb and understand where the foundation of the article is coming from. The next piece of rhetoric was something I found I could connect to was when Amy described how she noticed the other women walking through the scan at the airport and seeing that all of them had the breast area glowing yellow. This was an observation that allowed me to picture the incriminating evidence Amy found, being that all these women passing through airport security were found to have glowing areas of yellow in the breast region. I found it fascinating that it was small inconsistencies with the system’s scanning that marked whether an area should be considered searched or not. This was further understood when mentioned how “curly hair” may also show up as a yellow area of concern on a security scanner, although many people like myself have curly hair, allowing myself to understand that these small inconsistencies most likely affect a large population of people who do not have straight hair and even more with those who do have breasts. Later leading into the topic of the article, being that computer analysis systems should be more diverse, I found it quite interesting when Webb decides that an example to look up to is China as it draws the reader in as to why this is the case that there is a better way to educate. They way China is educating their future generation is a bit different than the USA, as these young children are being taught the “new basics of knowledge” pushing for studies of reading and writing over coding. I think it is also evident that when in the concluding paragraph, the reader is drawn in again by the claim that this underrepresentation of minorities and women is an issue, but “not a fundamental one”. This claim in interesting as it pushes not that the public is not represented, but that the real problem is “computing with computing”.
Week of 6/15 Discussion
Clearly we all took the Expanding The Canon assignment seriously. It’s always fun when everyone gets to chose subjects which are close to their hearts, intellectually stimulating, or in the best cases, both. I was particularly struck by Samantha’s post about religion in the workplace. Despite having been raised Roman Catholic, I am not a particularly religious man. I am, however, a huge fan of Christmas. I have a tattoo on my chest of Santa Claus for crying out loud!I
It’s my love of Christmas that got me thinking as I read Samantha’s post. For ten to eleven months of the year, there are no hints or signs of religion at my workplace. Then, come mid to late November, Christmas decorations are hung everywhere around the office. There are some decorations for Chanukah and Kwanzaa, but they are dwarfed by the blinking lights, trees and ornaments throughout the building.
Everyone at work is well aware of my fondness for Christmas and as such, for the past several years, I have been responsible for organizing the office holiday party. This is typically a non-denominational event which usually involves drinks and dinner somewhere. This past year, however, my boss wanted to do something different.
She was enamored with the idea of riding around to see holiday lights displays. I loved the idea, and quickly looked into hiring a bus to drive us around certain neighborhoods known for their displays. A colleague suggested I hire a party-bus that featured karaoke, so that everyone could sing their favorite Christmas carols while we rode around town. While I understood her intention, I wasn’t quite sure that was the best idea. The idea behind the holiday party is to be as inclusive as possible. Asking people who don’t celebrate Christmas, and are perhaps unfamiliar with Christmas carols didn’t seem particularly sensitive and inclusive.
I ultimately decided to get the karaoke bus, and it seems I didn’t have anything to worry about. The people who chose to sang ended up picking rock & pop songs. The only holiday song that ended up being sung was “Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer.” Perhaps I got lucky, or perhaps other folks were being more mindful and inclusive than my fears had been giving them credit for.
For me, the “flashpoint” of Bogost’s article is the moment when Amy Webb blames our recent cultural obsession with STEM education for the current lack of diversity in computing. Given that the conventional wisdom du jour has been a focus on getting more kids – and in particular – girls and minorities into computing via STEM education, to have that quote from an NYU professor, which follows Bogost’s own self-identification as a professor of computing and liberal arts at Georgia tech is particularly powerful.
At the end of that passage, the reader is now asking themselves, “Well, if these guys don’t think getting kids into STEM is going to solve things, what will?”. Bogost now has the rest of the article to attempt to answer that question.
Prompts 6/18
- One particular media element which I found significant from this assignment was Dan’s attached TEDTalk named “How to Make Millennials Want to Work for You.” This really made an impression on me because although I’m not considered a Millennial, I still learned about the upcoming adjustments in the workforce and how businesses and older employers need to adapt for this generation and the upcoming generation, Gen Z. Just as Dan said in his post that there is a disconnect in Gen Y and Gen X, I think it’s important to note that there may also be a disconnect in Gen X and Gen Z. When the speaker of the TEDTalk explained the topic of money vs. meaning, this thought really sat in my brain for the next few minutes after watching. I came to the realization that working unhappily without a purpose really would serve me no motivation in life, so I’m grateful for watching this because I definitely learned something valuable. I am seeing the idea of “diversity and organizational cultural” differently because this video really took me back to week 1 when we read the several different definitions on what organizational culture is, and which one I most identified with my own definition of it, comparing that to what I think it is now. Just a few weeks ago, my knowledge on this subject matter was little to none, however that’s changing with every single reading and prompt I write.
- Bogost uses several transitions throughout his article to develop an argument and lay down the groundwork. One passage that I’d like to focus on is his transition between the paragraphs in the middle of the article beginning with “Even though she’d like…” and “Webb points to China…” Here, Bogost effectively points out an issue that Webb sees with diversity in the computing industry. When Bogost mentions that Webb says “Critical thinking is what the computers won’t be able to do,” he purposely sets up this statement to then lead into a solution in the next paragraph. By explaining that Webb thinks of China as an alternative, this moves forward with Bogost’s groundwork and addresses a strategy of having a possible AI textbook for preschoolers.