Peer Review 15

For this blog post, I will be peer reviewing Kelly Reager's editorial report 15B that shows a transcript of her video essay. The blog post that I'm referring to can be found here!

• Starting off with what I found really effective: I think the transcript shows a willingness to identify past weaknesses in Kelly's writing and how she has improved and become a better writer over time. I think it's very important to properly identify your strong and weak suits so that you know when you're developing you're writing as opposed to remaining stagnant. Additionally, I think the tone of the transcript makes it sound like the ultimate video essay will be quite relaxed which will make it easier to listen to. Personally, I struggle to incorporate such a relaxed tone in most of my writing, which is why I tend to lost points in regards to how interested the intended audience would likely be. 

• As for the areas with room for improvement: I think that the transcript itself lacked a bit of honest stick-it-to-it regarding the english assignments we've had. Although many of the assignments were likely helpful in improving Kelly's writing in meaningful ways, it'd be helpful to see the aspects of the course that she didn't enjoy as much as well. I suspect that these viewpoints are actually present in the final draft, but that this particular clip just didn't express a negative viewpoint--which is completely fine!

Editorial Report 15A

Well, I've already posted the nearly-final draft of what I have, so there have been plenty of edits and changes since the last time I blogged about it. Without further ado, then, I'll go over one such edit in detail:

• Since my project has been finalized, I don't have small individual clips to present for the editorial report. However, I can say that initially my introduction included a long video segment of me talking. I decided that there was no need to do a video podcast like that in a video essay. 

• Instead, I replaced this video with still images that helped move along my description of the projects we had done. Although I typically don't like replacing video with still images, I think this helps the video essay become more of a story (book) and less of me just talking into a video camera and calling it an essay, which I think is not a typical genre convention when done excessively. 

Open Post to Peer Reviewers (Project 4)

Well, it's time to post what I have. At this point, this version is nearly a final draft because the assignment is due this evening. However, if I happen to get any critical peer reviews I will definitely do my best to update this with such suggestions. So, here is what I have:

My Project

As for answering some questions:

• I would like peer reviewers to know that creating a video essay was a new task for me. I've never made one before. It turns out that the best software I could find was the iMovie, which uses Apple (clearly). I rarely if ever use Macintosh computers, so the whole experience was pretty difficult for me. At the end of the day, getting the technology part down is half of the challenge and I recognize that, but this was pretty rough for me.

• Major weaknesses in this cut include the fact that there aren't as many video clips versus still frames as I would like. Most of the movie involves images with voiceovers and occasional text overlays, but not a whole lot of moving video fragments made the cut.

• Major strengths include...Well, I'm not sure that this is an exceptionally strong video essay in most regards, and that's mostly because I'm a novice who spent a lot of time figuring out how to do every small bit of the video. However, I feel like the greatest strength of this project was how much I learned in terms of making videos. I believe that in future projects I'll truly have a good understanding of where to start, whereas I really had no idea how people made Youtube videos that weren't simply video podcasts. 

Production Schedule for Project 3

Although Project 3 has passed, I did have a general production schedule in mind as I was working on my project. For that reason, I've included a copy of what I did and when I did it for that Project. Here goes:

Time	Activity to Complete
April 5th	Research articles that can be used to show that public school students are harmed by the divestiture of funds into charter schools
April 9th	Create an outline for the essay with evidence and citations included
April 11th	Reformat outline as a preliminary rough draft
April 12th	Post Rough draft for peer editing
April 14th	Make edits as per peer review feedback, and begin to include genre conventions in regards to formatting and works cited
April 19th	Submit final draft of Project 3

Project 3 Research Report

I'm going through some old blog assignments that I forgot to do the first time. For this one, I'm focusing on the research report, where we gathered 10 sources of evidence for Project 3 and analyzed the author and context clues for reliability, and figured out the source's purpose and main audience. Well, here goes, I'll start with the sources I had already gathered for the essay I wrote:

• Is Your A Student Really Ready For College? This article came from CBS Moneywatch and was written by Lynn O'Shaugnessy.
• Lynn seems reliable because she is a consultant and speaker for parents with college-bound teenagers. This seems to indicate that other parents view her as credible, and since parents tend to be heavily invested in their children that is a good sign. Additionally, she has successfully published several guides to getting your kids through college both financially and emotionally, so she is likely well-versed in the topic of high schooler's college-readiness. The fact that the article was hosted directly on the CBS site (cbsnews.com) suggest that a major news source has vetted the author as well. Also, the fact that MoneyWatch typically targets older adults looking to save for financial retirement suggests that this is likely focusing on the parents of college-aged children. The article tries to convince readers that high achieving high schoolers often don't have high GPAs during college, and uses summary statistics as confirmatory evidence. 

• Make College Affordable by Ending Subsidies and Mandates This article came from OnTheIssues, a Libertarian guide for policy makers and politicians looking for the stances of the libertarian party on various issues. One of the authors was Robert Jallon.
• Robert Jallon does not appear to be a particularly reliable source. It was difficult to find alternative articles that Jallon had written in any format, and there is no biography of him listed on the site. For this reason, I wouldn't consider Jallon particularly reliable. However, the news site it is listed on is well known for highlighting the major beliefs of the libertarian party. In addition, these opinions are cited from the 2015 State of the Union Libertarian Response platform, suggesting that they are official party lines. The site is targeting politicians and policy makers who want to make sure they are towing the party line properly, and who may also need statistics to back up the opinions they are stating. The source wants to ensure that freedom of choice is always highlighted in discussions involving education, and that parents should have control over their child's learning. 

• Disengaged Students and the Decline of Academic Standards This essay was written by Paul Trout in 1996 and published originally by the Yale University Press in print edition. 
• Trout is a college English professor at Montana State University. He seems to be a credible source for discussing the decline of student's academic interest and abilities because he teaches such students on a regular basis in his role as a professor. Additionally, he cites several other professors, including another Physics professor at the college, who corroborate his thesis that academic standards are declining. The essay is certainly addressing other college professors and lecturers, because it encourages university-level instructors to not allow their courses to be dumbed down by the demands of students. The essay also addresses college administrators because it suggests that they need to step aside and put less pressure on professors to appease students by weighing student evaluations less heavily. The ultimate aim of the essay is to convince administrators and professors that they need to expect more of their students and not less, and they need to value student evaluations less than they current do. 

• Giving Students Ownership of Learning This journal report was written by Deborah Perkins-Gough in 2008 in the journal Educational Leadership. 
• Deborah Perkins is a senior editor for Educational Leadership, which is a publication magazine focused on improving education. This suggests that she has at least a strong familiarity with the topic at hand because she is likely editing such articles in her day-to-day job. Additionally, Ms. Perkins is a member of ASCD, which is a trade organization dedicated to helping teachers. The article itself is a special report indicating that many students who are achieving high GPAs in high school are still taking remedial courses upon entrance into college. The article is targeted towards high school curriculum creators who are advised to consider upping their standards to better match the expectations of most 4-year colleges. In addition, there is a public policy PSA-vibe to the article, in that it abhors the fact that many students are paying college tuition fees to learn what they should already know from high school. The article reveals that its agenda is to improve high school standards because it cites summary stats suggesting that these expectations are not being met.

• The Common Core Explained This QRG is written by Catherine Gewertz in the magazine Education Week.
• Catherine Gewertz's LinkedIn profile suggests that she is an Education Week associate editor who studied at Stanford University. The fact that Ms. Gewerz is an editor at Education Week suggests that she likely has strong familiarity with education-related matters, including Common Core. Additionally, her rise from staff writer to associate editor at the magazine means she has made a career working on education-related news. It can be seen that the QRG is not completely unbiased: there is a clear agenda to encourage parents and students to accept the common core standards as a way to even the playing field across states. Additionally, Ms. Gewertz hoped to make the new common core seem like it raises the bar in terms of expectations from students. The articles is targeting parents, students and teachers who are unceratin about whether common core standards are a good thing for their local school, and it tries to convince them that it is while explaining how the common core would work.

• College Rankings List by USNWR is a ranking submitted by US News and World Report editors (individual authors are not listed)
• Since this ranking does not have an individual author claiming ownership, I cannot evaluate the credibility of the individual person. However, the US News and World Report ranking is widely known, and the magazine is considered a credible news organization. Additionally, their methodology is widely available to the public, although some question whether their methodology has any objective basis. In this particular case, the rankings provide many important details about many colleges for high school seniors looking to attend colleges. It may also be targeting students seeking graduate or medical degrees, as there are separate ranking systems for these narrower fields as well. In my particular case, I used this as a source to identify the selectivity of elite schools and to confirm that the past couple years have been some of the most selective years ever. 

• The Truth About College Acceptance Rates: How Low Can They Go? is written by Kat Cohen in the Huffington Post College column.
• Kat Cohen is a college admissions counselor who frequently contributes to the Huffington Post. She has also written several books on the college admission process. This makes her both a reliable source but also a potential liability in terms of bias. On the one hand, Ms. Cohen is very familiar with the college admissions process as it involves both her writing job and her counseling career. On the other hand, though, she is deeply invested in getting people to buy her books (the title of the article is even a play on one of her book's title). This article was targetting parents of high school students who may be unaware of how competitive college admissions processes have become. This has an ulterior motive of also encouraging these parents to buy her book on how to better the odds for such students. 

• Charter Schools are Hurting Urban Public Schools is written by Niraj Chokshi for The Washington Post, a well known newspaper publication company.
• Niraj Chokshi is a general assignment reporter for the Washington Post. This does not necessarily lend him any specific credibility in regards to the clash between charter schools and public school systems. However, the fact that he was hired by the Washington Post suggests that 1) he is likely a highly skilled journalist and 2) his findings are fact-checked and edited by other personnel in the organization. For this reason, the post itself is considered very reliable even though the author himself is not necessarily so. In this newspaper article, Niraj Chokshi is targetting a fairly wide audience that reads the daily paper. This is not intended primarily for those alreayd heavily invested in the debate, because it goes over the basics in terms of the demographic and financial shifts that are pushing people towards charter schools and the financial effect this is having on public schools. Here, the people of Philadelphia are likely intended readers, because the focus is unexpectedly on philadelphia public school systems, which would seem to be a fairly niche are for such a widely read newspaper.

Rhetorical Analysis of Project 3

It's a bit late in the game for me to be analyzing the rhetorical strategies in project 3, since I've completed the project itself, but in order to properly complete the assigned blog posts I'm going to throw it back to mid-April and try to give an assessment of what Project 3 was all about:

• For Project 3, I drew on my personal experiences as a TA in chemistry. Since I've gotten to see a lot of freshmen students coming straight out of high school, I felt like I had an unusually good understanding of how prepared high schoolers are for college-level chemistry. That is why I felt it was appropriate to talk about how the achievement gap for high-schoolers is likely exaggerated and being used as an excuse for why public schools are being replaced by charter schools.

• To be honest, my personal bias in this project was somewhat limited. I don't have particularly strong opinions about charter schools versus public schools. However, when I did the research into the effects that shutting down public schools has on urban students, I felt like spending more federal dollars on charter schools likely punishes those students. At that point, I started thinking about whether this transition from public to charter school was really necessary, and the people who would actually be interested in making that change. However, I am quite liberal socially, so I am certainly opposed to most conservative libertarian viewpoints, so using them as a scapegoat in this argument likely stemmed from that bias.

• My audience for project 3 was primarily liberals who support the creation of charter school systems. I was appealing primarily to them because I was targeting those who might be swayed by people posing arguments in favor of charter schools that really have an alternative agenda in mind. I assumed that my audience was against such notions as liassez-faire capitalism and the privatization of education. Thus, by trying to show how the charter school debate is being used to privatize education, I assumed this would be viewed as a negative by most readers.

• After reading my essay, I would want my audience to oppose the creation of additional charter schools with federal funding. Perhaps just as importantly, I would want them to ee how the unpreparedness of high schoolers for college is primarily a myth (at least from my perspective). Students today are diligent and in a highly competitive environment that likely hasn't been emulated before. Instead, this type of propaganda is spread to continue divesting money away from poor-performing schools and towards high-achieving schools that supposedly are underpreparing their students for college. For this to work, I needed them to understand what the propaganda being spread is, and how this is being misinterpreted today as pro-charter schools when it's really anti-urban students.

• For this project, I used the standard college essay genre. The audience definitely expects my sources to be cited at the end of the paper, with citations in-text. Additionally, they expect a title that describe the purpose of the essay but is still relatively catchy. A double-spaced paper is likely appropriate (and it is the style I chose). Finally, there should be an introduction that clearly states a unique thesis, so that the essay is not merely descriptive but rather argumentative. I think important conventions in this genre include the argumentative nature of the thesis that allows for a strong viewpoint. Additionally, the active citation of sources adds credibility to the format, because it is presented in-text and these sources are immediately accessible. 

• There are certainly historical events that were relevant to my project. The enormous rise in the number of charter schools and their relative proportion of the education budget has had a tremendous toll on public school systems. This effect on public schools has particularly hit certain communities hard. When I researched the topic, I found that Philadelphia was particularly affected and I focused on that city's school system for several of my statistics. I was able to find many media sources focusing on the controversty, including the Washington Post, Huffington Post, Education Week and CBS

Peer Review 14

For this peer review, I focused on Nick Hernandez's plan to create a Quick Reference Guide to the personal project. I thought this was a very interesting genre and format to use for the final project, and I was very curious as to how he would do it. Here is a link to Nick's plan.

• Although there is not a complete project up for Nick, I would recommend he consider what he wants the 'guide' to be about. Since this will partly be a how-to (in the sense that it's a QRG) and partly be a self-reflection from the point of view of the assignment, I thought the most important aspect of the project would be finding a way to mesh these two things together. A self-reflective QRG would have to be unusually focused, because many of us are doing video essays which give a little more leeway to maneuver between different topics that we want to address. However, that could be a positive because the QRG won't let you meander around aimlessly--there has to be a focus to what you are writing about.

Production Schedule

Since this project is a video essay, I'm going to need to spend some time learning new skills. For example, I don't really know how to use video-editing software, and I'm not particularly adept with recording devices as is. So, I expect that some of this project will be devoted to simply learning as opposed to creating the final project. With that in mind, I've posted a production schedule below:

Time	Activity
May 2nd	Checkout Library Recording equipment. Get any takes where I will be in the recording
May 3rd	Begin to gather images that will be part of the video and piece together. Add voice-over and background music
May 5th	Learn to use video editing software and create a final draft of the video
May 5th	Post video to blog site so that peers can review
May 6th	Submit final D2L copy at 3:30 to the Dropbox

Content Outline

It's time to begin preparing for Project 4--the final project of this semester! I am pretty excited to be nearly done with college altogether, and am starting to become more focused on activities beyond this semester. However, it's crucial to piece together a presentable project, and here's an outline of what I hope to accomplish:

Introduction
In the introduction, I'll introduce myself and describe the purpose of the self-reflection project. I might highlight some key things that have happened over the semester and what I have learned from them, but this would be a broader focus that I would expand upon in the body sections


Body Section 1
My first point would discuss how my writing has changed in the past 3-4 years, and how that has affected my writing in this class. For several years now, my writing has been almost exclusively focused on science. I write a lot of lab reports for classes, manuscripts and abstracts for work, and formal and informal emails. However, I no longer write exclusively for the sake of writing and I haven't written creatively in a very long time. This has affected my writing style both negatively but also positively as well.


Evidence: I will show samples of my writing today and compare them to blog posts and submissions from peers to show that perhaps my writing is a bit more rigid than it needs to be for these type of assignments.

Body Section 2
My second point would discuss how my writing developed during the actual course. I want to focus specifically on how my style changed and how I was able to become more personal in my writing. I think this was a prerequisite to developing the personal style  needed for a self-reflective essay such as this one.

Evidence: Refer to the original QRG, show how it was actually more formal than the standard college essay I wrote for Project 3 which should likely have been the one with a more academic tone.

Body Section 3
My third point is still a bit undefined, but I am leaning towards including some collaborative activities we did as a class and addressing how (or whether) these helped me become a different kind of writer. I think this body section is an opportunity to gather what we've done as a class throughout the semester and try to figure out whether all the work was worth it--what did we really gather from everything?

Evidence: TBD

Conclusion
Since this is a video essay, the conclusion will focus on summarizing what I've learned this semester. The conclusion may be the time that I actually present footage of myself as well. 

Peer Review 13B

For this peer review, I focused on Ben Barnett's edit as described in his 13th editorial report (link). There is no title yet to his project, because it is not a final draft, but the blog itself was titles Editorial Report 13. I focused on content in this review.

• I thought Ben did a great job of explaining a fairly difficult topic--the energy release in nuclear reactors--using layman's terms. Since his audience likely includes peers like us, who are for the most poart unfamiliar with the nuclear energy business, it was very important to find a way to avoid jargon. I was very impressed with this and it made me realize how important it is it to take the time and explain your topic in simple terms that are readily understood.

• If I have any critique, it's that Ben's cut is a bit difficult to put into context. This may become much clearer when I can read the entire essay, but it's unclear to what extent the energy release in a nuclear reactor really proves that certain terrorist cells can or can't create weapons-grade nuclear warfare. It would be nice to see more evidence focused on this aspect of the content. 

Peer Review 13A

• I don't have a lot of time left since I also need to complete my project by tonight! However, I went ahead and did a peer review of Alec Eulano's QRG titled 'An unpopular opinion protecting unpopular opinions'. A link to the actual essay in hyperlinked above! In my review, I focus on the form of the guide, and whether it matches the conventions of a QRG.

• I particularly liked the layout. Right away, there were photos showing a vocal battle between two groups of protestors. The image gave a sense of the topic (about protection of speech in contreversial issues) and also made it clear that this wasn't simply a standard college essay. There were several images throughout the QRG, as well as some blown-up quotes. 

 

• However, since a QRG often references statistics, it would have been nice to see a graphical representation or some tabulated data that is referred to in the actual project. Overall, I really enjoyed reading the QRG, and I admired the way it included a lot of images to back up the written content. It made me realize that my lriginal QRG lacked some of those graphical interfaces that keep the reader's attention.

Reflection on the Local Revision Process

So, it is finally time to submit Project 3 and move on with our lives. However, before we call it quits, I wanted to quickly go over what went well and what didn't with the editing process this week:

• As for successes, I was very proud of how quickly I managed to catch up with everyone else. I had fallen a bit behind on blog posts a couple weeks ago. In the past two weeks I have completed my blogs and managed to write an entire standard college essay after completing my research.

• There were certainly some challenges. All the catch-up work that i had to left me feeling a bit pressed for time. It made the blog posts less than enjoyable to write, because it felt more like a content requirement than something that I could truly utilize. This leads me to my next point:

• I hope to come away from this with a better sense of time management. This project was less enjoyable for me than previous ones because it required everything except for the final draft to be viewed as busywork. I'm mostly just writing to be done.

• I am very pleased with my final output. I think my essay needles down to a very particular message which I struggled to intiailly find. I'm very pleased with how things turned out.

Editorial Report 13b

In this editorial report, I am including some of my old content and comparing it to what I have in my upcoming draft. There have been some signficant changes made since last week, so it is a pretty robust update:

The Rough Cut
This essay will be about the college-readiness of high schoolers, with a specific focus on preparedness for science courses. There are many who claim that high schoolers are unprepared for the challenges of college and therefore advise that high schools be fundamentally altered: either by incorporating a common core curriculum into schools, or by allowing parents to freely switch public schools via the creation of a charter system, etc. In this essay, I argue that such moves actually harm students more than they help them. 

The Revised Version
 

There’s a popular myth floating around that high schoolers arrive at traditional four-year colleges unprepared. Strong evidence appears to support the claim: in 2010, 29% of four-year college freshmen enrolled in a remedial course1. Among all college attendees, only 56% graduate within six years. An overwhelming majority of these students arrive with high school GPAs over 3.0, and 95% do nearly all the work required by their high school. In sum, these statistics paint a picture of mediocre high schools funneling students through their system, providing meager academic support, and setting their students up for failure. Data like these are often used to present the crumbling state of our public schools and to suggest that a major overhaul of our high school system is required. One major overhaul typically mentioned involves increasing the number of charter schools available in a community. In this paper, I argue that the underpreparedness of high-schoolers is exaggerated and used as a propaganda tool by conservative libertarians. By insisting that high schoolers are unprepared for college, they advance their agenda of closing public schools in exchange for charter schools that exclusively target these college-bound high schoolers and ignore low and average-achieving students. 

• The major changes here have been both in content. I restructured the introduction (and the entire essay) to focus more on what motives people have when they claim that high schools require restructuring. Thus, I no longer suggest that a solution is bad, but rather than a solution is coming from ulterior motives. 

Editorial Report 13a

In this blog post, I give an example of some revisions I made to the raw content I previously had. Since I did not complete blog posts last week, I don't have particuarly raw content that I can refer to. Instead, I will describe the raw content I had a few days ago and then show a revised copy below it.

The Raw Content
The paragraph I show below refers to my personal experiences TAing chemistry students and their relative preparedness for college material. Although they come from diverse backgrounds in terms of chemical knowledge, a large majority of them have the toolkits necessary to learn. Some spend more time on chemistry and thereby succeed, whereas others don't care as much. However, very few of them are incapable of understanding chemistry if they sit down and make an effort.

The Final Cut
As both a student and chemistry teaching assistant at the University of Arizona, I have seen the effects of this trend in action. When my class starts their introductory course, their foundation in chemistry varies widely. Some students have never taken a chemistry course before, whereas others have completed an entire Advanced Placement curriculum. In the first lab report, those with the strongest background tend to do best, and those with little experience in chemistry fare poorly. By the end of the semester, background knowledge in chemistry is a terrible predictor of success in the lab. What this suggests is that different high schools may have different curriculums, but they graduate students who can think and learn. College freshmen have the toolkits to study, learn material, and think about science in ways they haven’t done before. These toolkits are far more important than the random knowledge they did or did not collect while in high school. The ability of students to overcome a deficit in chemistry and ultimately do well in a tough college course demonstrates that many of them are arriving with these toolkits already intact.  

• As you can see, my paragraph became far more developed. Earlier, my intended audience was almost more directled at myself and what I planned to do with the paragraph. By this point, I have adjusted my audience to more directly represent peers, Sean, and others who may read this at large. 

Reflections on the Editing Week for Project 3

I'm feeling pretty good about getting several blog posts done, and this is certainly an imporveoment over last week where I got a zero on several assignments. However, I still have quite a ways to go to finish a solid draft of my essay, and several other students already have a completed draft uploaded to their blogs. With that in mind, I'll go over the week in a bit more detail:

• As for successes, I found that completing the blog posts was a pretty big task. They take a while to write and I don't really enjoy them--I find them a bit irrelevant for the final product. However, completing them is a huge factor for my grade so I am glad they got done.

• I was also presenetd with some challanges this week. Namely, it was difficult to complete editorial reports considering I had relatively little of my essay complete. However, I feel confident that this Sunday and upcoming week I will be completing a solid rough draft that will allow me to focus on revisions over the weekend. 

• For me, next week is crunch time. There isn't much time to get the essay done, and I would like to accumulate a couple more sources before I really dig into the rough draft. Thus, this week will entail doing a bit more research and completing a solid draft. Then, this weekend, I will revise and complete the project for final submission the following Sunday.

• At this point, I'm a bit nervous but mostly feeling like I want to get moving. I know that completing blog posts next week plus moving forward in the project will require a lot of work. I also have multiple final exams for labs, and additional lab reports and a must-pass Hebrew proficiency exam that are all required for graduation. Thus, I know that English can't be my top priority, but I hope that I can still complete a solid end product with the spare time I have. 
• 
  

Peer Review 12B

In this post, I focused on Payton's video essay on Kesha. In the review, I focus on form. I thought it was an interesting video essay that was clearly still a rough cut but well on its way to being a finished product. Payton's video essay can be found here, and it is currently untitled. Well, let's delve straight into the questions:

• I suggested that Payton might want to include more background music in the video essay. Today in class, we watched a video on a sexual assault awareness video prompting and encouraging college students to sign the pledge to prevent sexual assault. The video's emotional appeals were particularly effective, in my opinion, because the background music was moving. This is a touch that has a strong impact in video essays, and Payton's video essay only included music in the introductory segment.

• This is a suggestion that matches the expectations of a video essay. Although this is not touched upon in the student guide, our example video essays presented on D2L all include music as a strong component. For this reason, I consider it a really vital genre convention that cannot be ignored. 

• I really liked how the video essay focused on a relatable topic that targeted a wide audience. The focus is on Kesha, which is a famous celebrity that is well-known to nearly all viewers of the video essay. In addition, Peyton does a good job of including herself within the video format so that the author is incorporated into the material. 

Peer Review 12a

In this peer review, I focus on Sienna Willis' standard college essay titled "I'm Not a Barbie Girl but I live in a Barbie World." The essay focuses on barbie dolls and the new introduction by Mattel of three body types: 'tall,' 'petite,' and 'curvy. Her essay can be found here!

• In this review, I mentioned how there could be more content explaining whether she thinks Mattel has gone far enough, and what further steps could be taken. I was really impressed with the form of the essay, but I didn't walk away with a full understanding of what Mattel should be doing further to avoid hurting the body image and perception of young females who buy their products. 

• Although this doesn't directly address a student guide topic, it indirectly relates to using proper sources in your writing. In this particular case, Sienna did a great job including outside sources, but I don't think she used her own experience sufficiently. She didn't completely exploit the fact that she is a female who has personal experiences with Mattel Barbie doll products. Although, to be fair, her introduction definitely mentions her own personal connection to the topic.

• I think Sienna's paper really felt got me caught up in reading. I wasn't extremely critical while reading her essay, because she immediately caught my attention with an introduction that reminisces about her experiences as a seven year old girl. Because of the personalization of the essay at the beginning, it becomes a much easier and more enjoyable read. 

Open Post to Peer Reviewers

It's time to publish what I have, which isn't much quite yet. I've included a working hyperlink to my rough draft essay right here. I'll briefly go over what I expect next week and the post-production process to look like:

• I want anyone reading my essay to know that it's still a work-in-process. There are  a lot of revisions necessary, and I even plan a little bit more research before I really have a working rough draft done. With that in mind, I know that i'll have a busy week ahead.

• In the rough cut, I think the biggest weakness right now is clarity and length. I know what my topic is about: the decline in college preparedness among freshmen entering college today. However, the details of how I will prove this argument is still being worked out, and the essay itself is not long enough as is right now. 

• As for strengths in the rough cut, I felt that I did a good job of introducing the topic. My introduction paragraph was worked on extensively and I think I incorporated myself into the essay with losing the academic tone necessary for a standard college essay. I think it's important in this paper for the audience to know that I have a stake and a fairly unique perspective, so that this isn't simply a paper from the perspective of a professor or a student exclusively. 

Editorial Report 12B

In this report, I focus on editing the content of my opening statement for my college essay on the preparedness of freshmen college students today. My original opening statement is presented here, and the updated content is here.

• In the revised selection, I changed the content's focus away from exlusively myself. Originally, I discussed how my experience as a general chem TA and as a general chemistry student years ago helped me perceive the difference and change in student caliber over time. However, I realized that this introduction made it exclusively about my perception, whereas I really wanted a broader message about the way professors and teachers are viewing incoming students arriving at the university today. For that reason, I included quotations from outside sources as well. 

• In the revision, I also altered the form slightly by making it a bit more formal in tone. The original tone was more personal and less removed, which made it more approachable but also slightly different than a typcal college essay. After reading more genre examples and considering their conventions, I decided that following the expectations of the genre would require a more academic and a bit of a distant voice, so I altered the presentation to match that convention. 

Editorial Report 12a

In this post, I'm beginning to edit the original segments of the essay I am writing on the decline of academic preparedness among freshmen entering public colleges today. I am a bit behind in the creation of raw content, so I am focusing on clips from news stories that I plan to incorporate, and how the sources I chose to keep have changed from when I started. Here is a link to an original news piece that I considered, and here is a revised source that is slightly more on point.

• As can be seen by comparing the two pieces, the focus shifts from merely presenting an argument to incorporating a counterargument. The second clip incorporates an older source from 1997 making the same claim that the quality of students entering college is deteriorating. Since the caliber of America's workforce really hasn't been steadily declining over 20 years, it seems safe to say that this is a plausible counterargument showing that professors have always been making the claim that students aren't as good as they used to be. 

• Technically, the form wasn't significantly altered here, because the focus was on my sources. Thus, until I get a complete working segment of my actual essay, I cannot alter the form. However, I believe the two sources will be used in different forms in the essay, because the presentation of a counterargument will be done in an anticipatory tone that tries to diminish the evidence, whereas the original content will be presented as evidence backing my claim. 

Peer Review 9B

For my first peer review, I focused on Cheyenne's podcast (linked to here). I decided to focus on the form of the podcast itself. Since it was posted on the Google Drive, I wrote my comments as part of this blog:

• Cheyenne's podcast (which is untitled at this time) focused on the various genres used by both Spanish lecturers and researchers. She focused specifically on book reviews, book chapters and articles--which embody the typical type of writing done by Spanish language professors in her field. An important component of the form for a podcast is its use of background music, introductions and inflection in the voice. I think it was very clear that Cheyenne was enthusiastic about the topic and it clearly reflected in the current product. Her enunciation was clear and the purpose of the podcast was fully described and could be understood by listeners outside of our classroom as well.

• My suggestion for improvement would be that Cheyenne may wish to narrow the focus of her study a bit. The podcast feels a tiny bit scattered simply because there are many directions which she delves into. Since the focus of this project is exclusively on the genres used and the rhetorical strategies these genres employ, it could easily be toned down a bit. Also, I think the background music could be turned up a bit as there is typically a bit of white noise going on in most podcasts that I listen to. 

• The guide places a heavy emphasis on tone as it relates to form. I think that in this particular aspect Cheyenne really shined, and it inspired me to get out of the monotone voice that I had been using for the podcast and try to portray my enthusiasm a bit more. We all had the opportunity to talk about the topic/field we were most interested, so it should be a fairly easy adjustment to make. 

Peer Review 9A

For the peer review of a student in our section, I chose Sienna's podcast (found here). Her podcast was posted on SoundCloud, and it was titled 'English 109H Podcast'. I focused on the form of the podcast for this review.

• Sienna's tone and voice was relaxed and personal, which helped the audience associate with what she was presenting and kept interest levels up. This is extremely important in a podcast that is focusing on a fairly bland topic: namely the different genres and media used by professionals within the veterinary field. Although the topic could not be controlled, Sienna did a great job converting an otherwise boring topic into an interesting listen.

• The tempo of the podcast was in line with expectations I'd gathered from other podcasts. Although she spoke at a very appropriate pace, I think it would be best if the background music was a bit softer so as not to distract from the content. At some points, I found myself listening to the introduction a bit more than the actual genres used in her field. Although the levels could be adjusted, the general format used was in line with what I was expecting and easy to listen to.

• I was very impressed with how Sienna captured the rhetorical situation of the various genres. She went into fairly good detail about how the different genres actually identify and adjust their strategies to different contexts, which is a point I could certainly improve in my podcast. 

Editorial Report 9B

Much as in Editorial Report 9A, I selected a separate clip that I posted about a few days ago and edited it to improve the form and content. Again, let's start by quickly reminding you of the past product, and show you how it has changed this week:

Selection from a rough cut
Here is a link to a clip from last week's rough podcast: Rough Cut

Re-Edited Selection
Now, here is a link to this week's clip with some new segments: New and Improved!

So, what are the content changes? I took Dr. Nicole Achenbach's interview and slightly increased the amount of content present. Specifically, I included a section where she described the details of the forms she fills out for each patient she sees. I thought it might be a bit too detailed, but after consideration I decided it was a great example of the a type of genre that many people aren't very familiar with: namely, the clinician's notes. 

How about the changes in form? I tried to include a longer pause at the end of the Dr. Achenbach's segment, to give a bit of rest for the listener. I have seen many podcasts posted, especially on NPR and other radio segments, where there are significant rest breaks of nearly 20-30 seconds that let the listener collect their thoughts. I thought it would be helpful to take a similar approach.

Editorial Report 9A

This week, I've been focused on revamping my work that I posted about a few days ago. Today, I'm gonna sample a bit of audio that has been worked on. First, I'll start by quickly reminding you of the past product, and show you how it has changed this week:

Selection from a rough cut
Here is a link to a clip from last week's rough podcast: Rough Cut

Re-Edited Selection
Now, here is a link to this week's clip with some new segments: New and Improved!

So, what are the content changes? First of all, I whittled down Dr. Armstrong's interview from an aggregiously long 13-minutes to a far more palatable 2 minute clip. It's still likely a bit too long, but I believe what remains of the interview can be broken apart throughout the podcast but maintained in its entirety, because it's all relevant.

How about the changes in form? I also included an introductory 30 second bit that slowly fades out at the beginning, much as most podcasts have an intro musical segment. I also transitioned out of Armstrong's interview with a similar increase in musical intensity followed by a fade out, and then the beginning of a new segment.

Open Post to Peer Reviewers

It's time to post a rough draft so that everyone can see what's been done. Without further ado, here it is:

Rough Draft of My Podcast on the Genres in Medical Research

You may be wondering what I'm hoping to get out of the peer reviews. Well:

• First, I want people to know that this is still a work in process. I'm aware that there are some moments that cut out and fade in at inappropriate times. Although helping me be aware of those is definitely helpful, I would still prefer some alternative feedback as well.

• As for some major weaknesses, I think I will want to add additional clips from Dr. Achenbach. She is still underrepresented in the podcast, and my goal is to make both voices heard equally. Namely, I'd like Dr. Armstrong (who is representing medical research) and Dr. Achenbach (who is representing the experiences of a clinican) to have equal say in the times of genres that they are using on a regular basis. I expect that these will be quite different.

• As for things that are going well: I am quite pleased with the amount of footage I currently have. The podcast is already reasonable in length, and htere is more to come. This should make the editing process a lot simpler, because I think it's easier to cut down on a long product then to try to squeak by with enough content on something that is too short. 

Reflection on the Editing Process for Project 2

It's time to reflect and look back on the work accomplished so far for Project 2. At this point, I have several edited clips that I've meshed together into a basic podcast that is ready for more precise editing next week. Let's jump right into the audience questions:

• I have successfully completed a couple clips that highlight my interviews with Dr. Armstrong and Dr. Achenbach. The two clips I've shown are still relatively raw footage of the actual interviews, but I was able to successfully place them onto an AudioCast Player and begin the editing process. At this point, I have the tools to continue cutting and pasting clips, adding background music, and performing transitions between segments.

• I still have quite a ways to go, and this will present a challenge. The current clips I have are primarily raw footage of the interviews I conducted along with some introductory music and rudimentary transitions. This is nowhere near a final product, so there is a still a lot of work to do. However, I have taken a lot of time this week to learn the skills I need to apply some editing work next week.

• With that in mind, next week should be a lot smoother. The hardest part of this project was mastering the audio podcast format. Specifically, I needed to self-teach myself the editing and software skills necessary to make a podcast where I have control over the content (rather than using large blocs of interview and allowing it to control me). At this point, I am ready to move forward.

•  Although most of the project remains ahead, I feel like what remains is fairly easy to accomplish. As I mentioned above, the hardest part was gaining the know-how to complete the assignment. At this point, I simply need to get things done, and I'm not too worried about that!

Production 8b

In this post, I continue to work on transforming the outline into audio content. Today, I focused on editing the raw content from my interview with Dr. Nicole Achenbach, an orthopedic physical therapist at Desert Palms Clinic in Tucson, AZ. Below is the outline excerpt that I'm focusing on:

• Evidence: Nicole Achenbach, a clinician, has yet to expand into medical research at all even though she is considering it within a hospital setting. (Use clip of her discussion of the role of a clinician's note)
•  Her role as a writer and publisher is still limited to private, internal dissemination with the intent of performing medical professionals directly collaborating with her. There is yet to be a wider audience.

• In this audio clip, I discuss with Nicole the role that writing plays in her day-to-day work environment. This is an opportunity to highlight the different genres used by practicioners like Dr. Armstrong, who are medical researchers, and clinicians like Nicole, who research far less frequently. The edited clip was uploaded to SoundCloud and is linked to below:

Link to podcast sound bite of my interview with Dr. Achenbach.

Audience Questions

1. To meet the expected genre conventions of a podcast, I included introductory music to transition into the interview. I also carefully selected clips that maintained the focus of my interview, this allowed the form to help transition from the beginning of the podcast where the theme is introduced to the raw content involving my interview with Nicole. 
2. The production of this section was fairly straightforward. The content is still a bit raw, but the combination of the two clips I created in Production 8a and 8b have given me a decent start on the editing process. 

Production 8a

In this post, I begin to complete the tasks that I discussed earlier. A portion of my previous outline discussed evidence from Dr. Armstrong that demonstrates the way Twitter, LinkedIn, and other social media platforms are being used by medical researchers to discuss their up-to-date research findings. I've posted an excerpt from this outline below:

The Outline's Excerpt:

• Evidence: Dr. Armstrong uses many informal outlets (blog, Twitter, Facebook). These do not focus on his personal life, but instead are often links to ongoing diabetic foot research and occasionally to his own work as well. (Use clip of Dr. Armstrong describing facebook as a tool to reach a larger audience and make them aware of ways to avoid ulceration,etc.)

Below, I've linked to a clip from Dr. Armstrong that discusses the way he uses social media in his day-to-day professional life:

https://soundcloud.com/eyal-ron-581854533/new-recording-95

There are two key points I want to address regarding the clip:

1. First, the free-wheeling style that shows an extended clip from Dr. Armstrong's interview lets his voice shine through. Although at other points in the podcast I will try to let my own decisions strongly shape the content, I wanted to give Armstrong a chance to describe the importance of social media on his own terms.
2. The process of creating this content was fairly straightforward. I have found a program that allows me high editorial control for what I'm doing. Although I haven't dubbed background music into this particular session, I have not had any trouble in doing so for other pieces. It will still be necessary to trim down this content as it is currently far too long. 

Reflection on Editing the Interviews

The week is over and the interviews are complete. It's time to reflect on how things went so far:

• As for successes: the interviews provided a lot of good, raw content that is relevant to the topic. Dr. Armstrong discussed the way the genres you use may change over the course of your career, as the physician researcher transitions away from writing the specific content to organizing the overall studies. Additionally, Nicole showed the clinical side of medical communication that was less focused on research goals.

• What about the challenges? Besides completing the interviews, I did not get a chance to begin the editorial process yet. Because of that, I don't have a lot of content to begin organizing and meshing together in GarageBand. Thus, there's a lot of work left to be done in subsequentl weeks, including the need to learn how to use the software I'm working with. I've never had to do such extensive editing in a non-writing based medium, so I expect this to be difficult moving forward.

• Thinking towards next week, it'll be important to learn how to work with GarageBand, or to search for PC alternatives that may be easier for me to work with (because I'm not particularly accustomed to Macintosh either). Additionally, I'll need to think about how to mesh together the primary source materials with the information I gathered from secondary sources.

• I'm mostly concerned about the technological barriers for this project. Actually portraying to the listener/audience  the various genres used in medical research shouldn't be a big problem. In other words, the content will be fine. However, the form is difficult: creating a 10-minute, well-edited podcast will require some tech skills that I don't currently possess. All in all, I'm aware that it'll be a burden to complete this project, but I could see it providing some usable skills for the future, too.

Production Schedule

It's time to begin planning out how the actual podcast will be executed. Here is a list of some steps I plan to take to fulfill the outline obligations:

What is Done	Date	Location	Resources Needed	Date Completed
Review the two interviews. Look for key clips from DGA interview showing poster presentations, oral conferences and peer-reviewed manuscripts are key genres. Edit GarageBand to exclude digression/stories that aren't relevant	11-Mar	Library	Desktop Macintosh, GarageBand, iPhone interview clips sent to email
Include my own interview of the topic. So far, I only have interviews from my two interviewees. I'l need to introduce the purpose of the podcast and lead into the primary sources.	21-Mar	Library	iPhone, study space, noise-free environment
Lay over Music and background effects: there should be no eerie, noiseless background between speakers. This will require multiple layers on GarageBand, and I don't currently have the know-how to execute this.	25-Mar	Library	Desktop Macintosh, GarageBand, Speaking to library personnel if necessary, researching on YouTube for information
Include my secondary sources: published journals and other workable genres need to be tied into the primary sources (i.e. the interviews). This requires major editing.	26-Mar	Library	Desktop Macintosh, iPhone, GarageBand

Content Outline

It's time to begin preparing for the podcast production. Before we can begin actually creating a podcast, though, let's start with an outline of how it should flow. An outline of the podcast's content is shown below:

Outline for a Podcast on the Styles of Media Used in Medical Research and Clinical Practice

Introduction

• Begin with a short musical introduction

• Introduce myself (name, role in the podcast), the purpose of today's podcast
• The purpose is to better understand the media that medical practitioners use on a day-to-day basis

• Discuss the wide variety of possible formats availabe to a researcher in this day and age: Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, journals, poster presentations, conferences, internal meetings, etc. 
• The question is which of these are actually used often?

• Introduce the guests: Dr. David Armstrong -- orthopedic surgeon specializing in diabetic foot, and Nicole Achenbach, PT, DPT -- a physical therapist at an orthopedic outpatient clinic in Tucson, AZ. 

First Point: Informal channels such as social media are becoming more relevant as professional outlets

• Evidence: Dr. Armstrong uses many informal outlets (blog, Twitter, Facebook). These do not focus on his personal life, but instead are often links to ongoing diabetic foot research and occasionally to his own work as well. (Use clip of Dr. Armstrong describing facebook as a tool to reach a larger audience and make them aware of ways to avoid ulceration,etc.)

• This shows that these social media sites are becoming less 'social' and more about professional development. Armstrong uses Facebook and Twitter in the exact same way that professional used to exclusively use LinkedIn. There is no longer a fine distinguishing line between a doctor's professional world and his personal life. 

• Evidence: The rise of 'informal' publication of medical trial results on blogs and other sites that are not peer-reviewed. (Discuss secondary sources)

• More and more medical researchers are publishing the journal articles and informal reports they read via online blogs, or via Twitter. This is increasing the availability of information, but it also limits the ability of editors trying to ensure the validity of new data and information.

Second Point: The role of a medical researcher in the context of writing and publishing changes dramatically over the course of their career.

• Evidence: Dr. Armstrong began career as a primary author directly involved in the research. Today, he guides young doctors and often acts as a collaborating author (last author) that is a mentor and overseer of the research.  (Use clip of Dr. Armstrong discussing how he has a larger legacy left behind as an overseer of research and a mentor to future researchers)

• A medical researcher must make the transition from an author and data collector to an editor in a supervisory role. This transition is not always seamless or desired, but it allows one to have a greater influence on the future of medical research when it is done well.

• Evidence: The average age of authors submitting abstracts, poster presentations and manuscripts as first authors is much lower than the average age of authors presenting at national conferences and submitting manuscripts as a collaborating author. (Cite secondary sources)

• This shows that the trend towards an editorial role extends beyond just Dr. Armstrong's experience. In addition, it appears that poster presentations and abstract creation--the tell-tale signs of someone in the middle of an actual research project--is more often created by young researchers. Again, this suggests that most active research is led by experienced clinicians but run by younger doctors. 

Third Point: There is a wide gap in the role writing plays for a clinician as opposed to a medical researcher. 

• Evidence: Nicole Achenbach, a clinician, has yet to expand into medical research at all even though she is considering it within a hospital setting. (Use clip of her discussion of the role of a clinician's note)

•  Her role as a writer and publisher is still limited to private, internal dissemination with the intent of performing medical professionals directly collaborating with her. There is yet to be a wider audience.

Report on My Interviews

So, I finally completed my interview with Nicole Achenbach this morning, which means I have now finished recording the podcast with both Nicole and Dr. David Armstrong. Before I start working on the podcast itself, I wanted to quickly outline some important genres I discovered, and the expectations I have for the podcast moving forward:

• First, there are a wide variety of formal and informal genres within the medical literature. Dr. Armstrong uses all sorts of genres, including social media platforms like his diabetic foot blog, as well as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. However, most of his efforts go into more formal work such as peer-reviewed journal manuscripts and oral presentations at internal meetings and international conferences. Nicole, who focuses more on direct patient care and less on medical research, often writes clinical notes directed at both physicians and any future reader of the patient's medical history. She often writes to inform and with the specific intent to maintain a paper trail that can be followed in the future. Ultimately the three most common genres appear to be:

• Clinician's notes: these are often formal in the sense that they are part of a patient history, but often use shorthand and abbreviations. Dissemination of these notes is limited, and the audience is narrow--typically other doctors or medical professionals.

• Journal Manuscripts: these are manuscripts that are submitted for peer-review and usually have a delay of 6-12 months between submission and publication time. These can range from literature reviews that aggregate other people's work to novel clinical trials. Each trial must choose a single journal to be published in, so all manuscripts are unique.

• Oral Presentations: these are given at conferences or at internal meetings. The audience varies widely from colleagues around the world during international meetings to peers at the hospital when the meeting is internal. 

• With this in mind, there are some unique challenges to each genre. The clinician's note is often completed during clinical appointments. This means the clincian is multi-tasking by attempting to run through a differential diagnosis while simultaneously keeping track of everything that was done. This often requires shorthand notation that can be readily understood by other professionals, and there is always the possibility that such notes will be used in courtroom settings. A journal manuscript is often carefully reviewed for accuracy in the statistical analysis. It also requires one to match their article to the rules and regulations of the particular journal they submit to. Since multiple submissions may be necessary, and each journal has its own criteria, this type of article may have to be rewritten multiple times. An oral presentation comes with all the typical issues associated with public presentations: you must present to a wide audience in a live session. 

• Beyond the challenges, these genres can be largely rewarding. There are the personal rewards to publishing: each journal manuscript or oral presentation is a potential CV and career builder for a medical researcher. In addition, presenting at a conference can get your research out to a general public that is interested in cutting edge research and may be interested in collaboration. Finally, a clinician's note is very important to keep track of the procedures and care that has been provided to a patient so that all medical professionals whom are working together with a patient are aware of what is being done.

• Some of these genres are often found in mass media as well. An oral presentation has a specific connotation in medical research, but it has the same procedure as any other meeting or presentation. In that sense, we all do oral presentations frequently. A journal manuscript is far less likely to be found in mass media, but many other professional fields use similar peer-reviewed processes with detailed results and conclusions found in a study that can be replicated. 

Academic Discourse and Genre

Now that I've found a journal to analyze more closely (the New England Journal of Medicine's latest volume, published in February 2016), I wanted to browse through it and get a sense of the different genres found within. Here's what I found:

• There appear to be three different primary genres in the New England Journal of Medicine. 

• The heart of the issue represents 'Journal Articles' which are full-length submissions to the journal that include an introduction, experimental section, a results and a full discussion about cutting-edge research being performed by medical researchers. 

• At the beginning of the journal are News Stories, which are typically written in a journalistic format targeting a wider, more general audience that appreciates medical news updates. A reader interested in the news stories won't necessarily be able to follow the more in-depth research papers found in the journal articles. 

• After News Stories are presented, but prior to the Journal articles, are a series of 'Letters' to the Journal, which represent long abstracts of ongoing research. This is usually slightly more current work that is still being performed and hasn't been fully analyzed. Rather than a full manuscript being presented, these usually just include major details of what has so far been discovered in an ongoing clinical trial. 

• So, what defines these genres? A Journal Article seems to me to be primarily defined by its ability to encapsulate the entire scientific process. A Journal Article's experiment can be replicated by anyone because the experimental section is outlined in detail. These are the type of experiments that can ultimately get aggregated in a literature review. A New Story, in contrast, is more like a quick reference guide or headline story for a layman audience. It is defined by its accessibility, its short paragraph structure, and its author is typically not the principle investigator of the study. Finally, a Letter resembles a short article, but it highlights primarily the conclusions that can be drawn from an ongoing study. It is the most cutting edge, but it is not fully replicable because an experimental section is not necessarily included.
  

My Discipline

Since the focus of this project is on how people in my field communicate among various audiences, it's important to get a sense of who is in my field. For the purposes of this project, I chose medical care and research as my field, rather than chemistry. For that reason, I answer a series of questions about students and professionals in medicine, particularly in the areas of medical research and clinical care:

• So, what do students preparing for a career in medicine learn to do? Students in medicine need to learn to diagnose patients, communicate effectively with people who need to trust them, and learn to set up experimental trials and conduct studies. 

• Medical students who get a degree have a wide variety of options available. Many will become clinicians, either in primary care or in one of dozens of sub-specialties. Others may become full-time researchers within the medical field, or they may choose to switch to a career in health library science, consulting, or executive positions within hospital settings. Typically, medical schools seek people who want to be practicing clinicians who treat patients. 

• I was drawn to this field because I believe medicine is the rare intersection of hands-on practice and the interaction with real people. It also provides avenues for both research and teaching in the future, which I have really enjoyed as a teaching and research assistant. The hours are terrible but it looks to be extremely rewarding.

• Who are the exciting leaders in this field? I think this is a fairly subjective question, so I will answer with my personal favorites. I think Dr. Marvin Slepian, who helped introduce a working artificial heart and is currently affiliated with the local Sarver Heart Center is a fascinating cardiologist. As for famous organizations, the American Diabetes Association is intimately involved both in primary care as well as playing a large role for certain orthopedic surgeons who specialize in common issues like diabetic foot issues.

• What are the major journals in the field? The three most famous medical journals are, by far, the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and the British Medical Journal (BMJ). The NEJM and JAMA are published in the United States, whereas BJM is published in the United Kingdom. 

My Interviewees on Social Media

To get a sense of the informal social media my interviewees are using, I searched for them on popular social media networks such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, Reddit, and other common blogging and sharing sites. Here's a quick recap on where you can find these medical professionals:

• What social media networks do Nicole Achenbach, PT and Dr. David G. Armstrong use? Nicole Achenbach is found on Facebook and LinkedIn, but not on any other social media sites examined. She appears to use Facebook primarily as a social tool among friends, while LinkedIn is rarely updated. David Armstrong uses nearly every social media site examined, including Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Tumblr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

• How are they using their accounts? David Armstrong primarily uses his accounts professionally. His LinkedIn constantly updates with links to ongoing research in diabetic foot journals. The same is true for his Twitter and Facebook accounts. His YouTube videos are often quick posts of himself and colleagues chatting or preparing for surgeries outside of operating rooms. These are often more collegiate, but they are still in office settings. In contrast, Nicole Achenbach does not appear to use any social media sites for professional development. Her LinkedIn is not updated often, and her Facebook posts target friends and family. 

• How do their social media posts differ from their tone in academic journals? In some senses, David Armstrong's tone doesn't change dramatically between academic journals and social media posts. Both focus extensively on diabetes care and management. He is far less formal in his YouTube postings. However, his online blog and twitter updates often hyperlink directly to peer-reviewed journal articles. In this sense, he uses social media as a tool to draw a larger audience to more formal manuscripts. Nicole Achenbach, on the other hand, is professional, formal and PT-focused in her literature review. On Facebook, however, she is less formal and uses it in a social environment. Thus, her audience is completely different between the two media. 

My Interviewees as Professional Writers

To further acquaint myself with my interviewees, whom I will be interviewing this week, I went ahead and found their CV and publication pages to see what they've been recently authoring. Here is what I found:

• Dr. David G. Armstrong publishes extensively. In the past twenty years, he has had over 425 peer-reviewed publications. Most of these are full-length manuscripts; however, many are also abstracts. In addition, he frequently is a keynote speaker at major conferences on diabetes and the diabetic foot. He occasionally participates in poster presentations as well, although this occurred more frequently earlier in his career. Nicole Achenbach, PT, DPT does not formally publish frequently. She had a literature review on the physiology and treatment of cellulite which she authored during her time at the University of New Mexico. She writes formally on a daily basis in the form of clinician's notes, but she does not actively participate in medical research since she is a care provider.

• Nicole has only published the single literature review. Thus, I cannot provide an additional research manuscript that she has authored. The lit review shown above is written as a professional manuscript. It summarizes the current research literature to determine the causes of cellulite as best understood today. In this sense, it operates almost as a QRG, but for professional PT peers. 

• Dr. Armstrong has many examples of his publications available readily online. Two particular examples include his systematic review on Preventing Foot Ulcers in Patients with Diabetes, and his clinical trial on Off-loading the Diabetic Foot Wound: A Randomized Controlled Trial. The first is a systematic review intended to aggregate the current research and prevent summary results indicating the best clinical methods for reducing ulceration risk. In contrast, the randomized controlled trial focuses on one clinical trial, led by Dr. Armstrong, that tries to quantify the effect of proper offloading on wound sizes. The systematic review ranks the trials and tries to determine how reliable the data is. In contrast, the randomized trial does not self-assess itself as much, and includes a more optimistic tone in terms of the ability for off-loading to improve wound care.

• Let's quickly describe the context for each work. Nicole's literature review was written in 2012 while she was a doctoral student at the University of New Mexico. The review targets professionals in Physical Therapy field who seek to better understand the physiology and causes of cellulite buildup. It is not intended for a lay audience. It appears to be written as a Master's thesis, and was likely a required document for completing her higher education degree. Dr. Armstrong's first paper was actually written by a resident whom he likely mentors. In that systematic review, written in 2011, Dr. Armstrong served as the corresponding author. In contrast, the other clinical trial was authored by Dr. Armstrong as the primary author and was written in 2001--far earlier in Dr. Armstrong's career. At this early point, he was still an up-and-comer and likely did not have the sway to publish a literature review, which often requires a request by the journal that ultimately publishes it. 

• So, what is the message of each piece? Nicole's literature review concludes that cellulite buildup can often be misunderstood to arise inevitably during significant weight loss. However, there are proven techniques in PT that can minimize cellulite buildup and that this build is often unnecessary. Dr. Armstrong's systematic review's message is that many publications have to be somewhat discredited if they are not performed using gold-standard experimental procedures. In addition, the conclusion is that foot ulcer prevention requires proper off-loading and plantar pressure redistribution.

• Finally, what is the purpose of each piece? Nicole's lit review is targeting PT professionals, and it is hoping to convey to them their role in preventing unnecessary cellulite buildup. It is also serving as a quick reference guide for physical therapy students who may need to brush up on the physiology of how cellulite develops. Dr. Armstrong's literature review hopes to assist clinicians in treating patients who have diabetes and peripheral neuropathy. Ultimately, such lit reviews can aggregate the knowledge of many studies without forcing clinicians to read each individually.