Indianapolis Children's Museum: Label Rich Environment for Fluency in English

The Indianapolis Children’s Museum consists of diverse, accessible, and comprehensible exhibits for most, if not all children of any age. The colorful lobby entices those who enter the museum and sparks an interest as to what the rest of the facility offers. Each exhibit successfully encourages a pluralistic notion of a diverse culture that each visitor brings to their experience. The museum’s structure consists of wide halls, large bathroom stalls, and elevators which increases accessibility for the disabled. Overall, the Children’s Museum excelled with offering pluralistic exhibits with special attention on comprehension and accessibility, under the prerequisite that the child or visitor speaks fluent English. Unfortunately, English Language Learners would experience a sense of difficulty in understanding the material and labels within the exhibits due to a lack of secondary languages present.

Although the exhibits provided profound insight of social injustice, racism, religious matters, and accessibility, at the same time lacked any resources for English Language Learners regarding labels, sound, and live performances. The website did not provide any links for the assistance of ELL comprehension, nor did the exhibit display secondary languages on the text illustrations or offer the live performance in any other format aside from English. While the exhibits were profoundly effective in regards to portraying a diverse society, it sincerely lacks the efforts of comprehensible materials and ancillary resources for ELL.

The Children's Museum is a public institution that offers multiple forms of enrichment activities and experiences, however, it is not assessable to all individuals due to the lack of secondary languages offered on bathroom signs, etc. This is a public concern and should cater to a diverse group of learners, not exclude other nationalities because of language barriers.

Teaching the Moves of the Critical Essay- Joseph Harris

Prior to attending Joseph Harris' lecture Teaching the Moves of the Critical Essay, I had already been introduced to his book, "Rewriting: How to Do Things with Texts", and was greatly influenced by his work in my own writing and critical reflection. He briefly touched upon each 'move', which he addresses in his book. However, his lecture provided a more nuanced understanding of his text's purpose as well as it's meaning. The first point he offered is that he begins at the point where he expects that his students or readers to have already done their research, so that writers may say something that the text doesn't. It was extremely helpful to have a starting point in which Harris' moves benefit the most. He provided his audience with an outline of his text's main points, however he allowed those concepts to come to life during the workshops that he introduced with several of his moves. The workshops allowed for the diverse audience to speak with individuals to hear, learn from, and speak our ideas and compare similar or dissimilar thoughts of the workshop in arriving at final conclusions. He encouraged others to speak and offer their opinions during the workshop.

Personally, I received wonderful and beneficial insight from attending Harris' lecture. His experience and insight of critical writing assisted my own writing in my historical-causal analysis, specifically in terms of incorporating other sources to add to personal claims and concepts. 'Thinking with another writer' along with 'moving ahead' were two moves which illustrated what Harris articulates with the 'forwarding' move. His lecture and workshops were all helpful and insightful pieces of resources in revising my research project.

The 11th Hour Screening & Panelists Discussion-Our Finest Hour

As a required assigned movie screening, w350 as well as C204 attended a film and panelist discussion centered on environmental issues of natural solutions and consumerism. 'The 11th Hour' is a documentary narrated by Leonardo Dicaprio and captures over 50 voices from experts largely knowledgably about environmental issues and the matters surrounding the environment's current state of crisis. The film juxtaposed the current state of crisis with suicide, in that, the environment will survive--humanity may not, due to the human notion of superiority of nature. As humans, we often forget about the natural world and have a sense of separation from nature. Heather Reynolds, an associate Professor of Biology and one of the panelists introduced the concept of limited resources and the idea that if humanity does not redefine the sense of prosperity than the abundance will cease and resources will become extinct. At the time of industrial revolution, the idea of ‘limitless resources’ became a trend and through time dominant institutions formed a deadly cycle that may ultimately, “kill off the host [planet]”.

The exposure to chemicals and other poisoning agents are suspects of cancer and is unfortunately increasing the incidents of deaths and illness, which are all consequences from the pollution and damage humanity has caused to natural resources. The film depicts the harsh consequences for humanities actions with severe temperature changes which ultimately link to a rise in natural disasters. An expert in the film noted, “it is predicted that by the middle of the century over 150 million people will become refugees from natural disasters.”

The film and each panelist attempted to raise awareness of the effects of environmental damage and the severe consequences we will face if humanity does not change daily habits, alter our notions of wealth and success, and modify current building designs to more sustainable model. The film predicts that if humanity rebuilds and restructures our current ways of living, we can reduce our damaging footprint by 90%.

I felt the film screening and discussion provided vital information and offered pivotal evidence for a crisis that most of society ignores and places the responsibility in the hands of someone else. This screening proposed that the problem and solution should be addressed and altered by all citizens in hopes to increase the longevity of the earth.

Public & Political Policy through the lens of Enoch's, "Becoming Symbol-Wise"

Jessica Enoch examines Kenneth Burke's pedagogical theory as well as the subgroups he proposed as a means for educational institutions to 'cancel off' destructive ambitions by teaching students what it means to be 'symbol-wise.' Enoch expresses the vital need for students to adopt, "a reflective attitude that curbed those competitive 'tendencies' that could cause 'the kind of war now always threatening'. Professor Robert Bullard exposes a unique side to the government's reaction towards disaster areas and the lack of support and aid African American neighborhoods received after such disasters. He expresses several facets of the issues African American communities endure, he states that African Americans receive, " less help than whites when it comes to this whole idea of loans, grants, something as simple as ice and something as simple as shelter."

In the context of Enoch's concept of transcending an analysis to critically reflect upon it's purpose and meaning, Bullard presents his argument in such a way that promotes critical reflection among his audience to accept the 'hidden' and 'unexposed' truth of the aid which was not given to most of the African American communities. In other words, Bullard offers a nuanced approach to the effectiveness of organizations such as the Red Cross and the government's aid. Enoch shares her understanding of Burke's articulation of his theory of critical reflection and expresses his practice, "not only adds a rhetorical nuance to the idea of praxis but that also transform the relationship between action and reflection itself." Bullard's persuading approach forces his audience to 'step back' and critically reflect the issues 'behind the scene' of the disaster areas in regards to the lack of assistance the government provides. Bullard's public rhetorical speech presents a third piece of the puzzle, which is the reality of the issue media conveniently ignores, therefore people who are not directly effected by the disaster's aftermath have preconceived notions of the clean up process and aid provided by the Red Cross and other similar organizations.

Lastly Burke's approach to his theory of symbol-wise practices were developed to, "bridge the gap between 'literature' and 'life' and argued that literature was 'equipment for living.'" Which is why Bullard's argument relates to Burke's overarching idea of 'closing the gap'. Although Burke's context was in regards to literature, Bullard attempted to close the gap between reality and false notions of the aid and assistance, his vehicle was a public discursive speech attempting to shed the light upon the reality of the situation.

Part Two: In regards to the historical-causal analysis, I would like to pursue the discourse which relates to the notion of a woman's struggle to balance her multiple roles, more specifically, the forces against a woman in receiving her education and then progressing onto an successful career. I believe that I will be able to locate a vast variety of resources pertaining to the history of a women's education and the adversities which they face. I will structure my research and topic to relate to a predominately female audience who are not confident in stepping out of their boundaries to increase their human and social capital due to conflicting responsibilities. I would argue that the issue is a current phenomenon, which relates to a specific population, with a rise in increasing conflicts and adversity.

Levels of Conflict

Question One

Conflict: Curfew

My parents were conservative extremists! I could not attend school dances, movie theaters, or simply—spend the night with a friend from school. My dad had good intentions, however he would not let me explore the world because of the mistakes he made when his parents allowed him free reign. I once asked my father if I could stay the night with a friend from church and his response was, “that’s where it starts. You will end up pregnant and on drugs.” There isn’t a good response for that kind of remark, so I gave up on any hopes of a social life. A specific issue we clashed the most was the strict curfew my parents assigned. When I first started driving, my curfew was ten o’clock. When I turned 18, I prayed my dad would have some revelation with his extremist ideas and revoke any curfew. He didn’t agree with that idea, instead he pushed it back an hour; my curfew was 11 at age 18! In Kaufer’s terms of policy conflicts, our conflict was a differing opinion of local value. Kaufer explains this level with the example of the conflicting values of the size of the car. In my father’s case, his idea and value of the time I was home was different than mine because he did not agree with ‘young’ women staying out in the dark. I did not think on those terms, rather wanted to experience good times with my peers. My father’s idea of the specific topic of curfews was that there was a correlation between evening time and assaults against women. I hoped to ‘resolve’ the conflict with my defense of age and experience.

Question Two (analogies and conflict levels)


Savio’s analogy of Mississippi and civil rights in relationship with his remark, “in the world but of the world” illustrates the overwhelming issue of the power given to a minority of society. The allusion is forwarding from the Christian conception of the faithful figure of the church. These analogies work together to progress Savio’s argument of the ‘factory’ products of the University. Any actions that goes against the University’s status quo is denied because it advocates a need for change—a concept which the University does not accept due to the bureaucratic mentality. Savio’s argument is closely related to Kaufer’s policy conflict level of conflicting global values. I present this assumption because there is not an obvious solution. The administrators are not accepting of compromise and/or resolutions to the University’s troubles. Savio mentions, ‘sit-ins’ advocating a radical change, in his specific example he was describing an argument against discriminatory hiring practices. The administrators immediately stopped the sit-in because, as Savio explains, “it goes against the status quo of which the university is a part."


Question Four (stasis and ethos construction)


Professor Bullard’s inclusion of causal arguments regarding the issue of post-disaster clean up enables the audience to recognize the reality of the situation, beyond Bullard’s personal opinion and/or experiences. His strategy presents his claims as reliable evidence against the racial discrimination for the government’s responses. Bullard attempts to argue the personal issue of race and government by presenting the ‘behind the scenes’ of the government’s response after hurricane Katrina. His method of persuasive ethos greatly impacts the audience’s reaction regarding the government’s response of current and past disasters.

Ipads, Kindles, Digital Books...The Future of Reading

Internal Medicine Associates recently launched a new online Patient Portal. The portal allows for patients to request appointments, view reports, and update personal information-via the internet. Many patients are frantically calling due to concerns with the new digital medical system. My point is that the future of communication, reading, receiving news & information, and even health care notifications are rapidly transferring to the world of digital systems. Jonah Lehrer confirms his fear of the conversion of digital reading within his scientific blog, "The Future of Reading." Lehrer’s begins by expressing his love for reading and fascination with books. In Fahnestock’s article, “The Stases in Scientific and Literary Argument”, Fahnestock states, “scientific articles occupy the first two stases. They are concerned with matters of fact, definitions, and cause.” (432) I will use Fahnestock’s idea of scientific arrangement as a lens for analyzing Lehrer’s article.

Scientific arguments are largely concerned with discovery and matters of fact. In Lehrer’s opening sentence he offers the audience a fact about the movement of digital reading, “I think it’s pretty clear that the future of reading is digital.” He then progresses his argument by stating, “It’s never been easier to buy books, read books, or read about books you might want to buy. How can that not be good?” The second stasis Lehrer’s argument works within is through definition. He examines the different forms of technology and defines their abilities to make reading and perceiving content effortless for the reader. Lehrer’s concern is, “making content easier and easier to see-could actually backfire with books. We will trade away understanding for perception. The words will shimmer on the screen, but the sentences will be quickly forgotten.” He then provides vast methods and explanation for his argument by forwarding researching conducted by neurologist, Shanislas Dehaene. The research he includes offers the explanation that the brain has “two pathways for making sense of words, which are activated in different contexts.” The ventral pathway is activated by familiar passages of prose. The second pathway is the dorsal stream- which is activated when is forced to pay particularly close attention to the sentence. He concludes with a proposal for the future direction of digital reading and e-readers, “we alter the fonts, or reduce the contrast, or invert the monochrome color scheme. Our eyes will need to struggle, and we’ll certainly read slower…We won’t just scan the words-we will contemplate their meaning.”

"The Future of Reading" by Johan Lehrer, The frontal Cortex Science Blog (8 Sept 2010)

Binary Society: Sept. 11 and 9-11

The American society holds 9/11 to be the most devastating day in the history of the United States. An article which begins by “September 11” undoubtedly persuades a [an] audience to devote their efforts and become actively involved with the article’s endeavors. Quindlen follows this persuasive beginning by describing her son’s birthday. The audience is left feeling somewhat uncomfortable and unsure of the direction of the article’s intent—the audience is quickly placed in the reality of the devastating event of 9/11 then shifted to an unknown world of her son’s birthday—one who must share his day of celebration with the most destructive event in history.
Quindlen tackles one of the most complex issues in society, and yet evolves extremely compelling and simple questions throughout her text. Quindlen’s skillful elocutio is one in which she includes multiple layers of rhetoric. She presents many rhetorical questions throughout the article, “Who are we now?”— Which leaves the intended audience feeling guilty or even at fault for this terrible disaster. The country, she explains, is “now,split in two”. Her argument seems as though she considers our country as a binary society. Facing this tragic ordeal, we somehow manage to deal with the simplistic happenings of our everyday life- “life goes on.” Time was the healing remedy after 9/11, Americans examined ourselves and goals a bit more precisely, called family and friends more often but as Quindlen states, “The edges softened…Time passed.”
The article’s content, when examined within the context of Kinneavy’s article, is overtly complex and argues against the static categories presented by Kinneavy. With an immense array of evidence, Quindlen’s article complicates Kinneavy’s cut and dry explanation of the categories within the aims of discourse. She begins by presenting the article as an expressive move—including her child’s birthday, his personal experiences. The next paragraph shifts to the rhetorical questions-“Who are we now?” She then progresses towards a more political approach by stating, “We are people whose powers of imagination have been challenged by the revelations of the careful planning, the hidden leaders, the machinations from within a country of rubble and caves”
Although this article is less than two pages, it is full of discursive acts which could be unpacked into several pages of explanation. However, for this specific intent, I will argue that Quindlen’s aims of discourse complicate every aspect of Kinneavy’s diagram regarding the purposes of composition. The genre of this article involves multiple layers of discourse and is profoundly blurred between each category of discourse. I think her article reaches slightly/immensely in each one of the genres of discourse.


"One Day, Now Broken in Two" by Anna Quindlen, Newsweek.