PB3A

Abortion is a very heavy topic than can affect many people’s lives.  Although it is a big topic of debate, it is very relevant in today’s society.  When studying the scholarly article, “ Are all Abortions equal? Should there be Exceptions to the Criminalization of abortion for Rape and Incest?” I noticed certain moves the author used in order to affect his audience, who is most likely well educated.  When analyzing the scholarly article to find out what makes it appealing to a highly educated audience, I contemplated how it could be changed to reach out to younger, and older audiences. 

            The scholarly article, “ Are all Abortions equal? Should there be Exceptions to the Criminalization of abortion for Rape and Incest?” uses very high-level language that can sometimes be hard to understand.  For example the author writes, “I will be unable to fully consider the tort analogy in this constrained space but instead offer a few points why I disagree: first, many of the reasons why tort law may want to limit emotional distress injuries strike me as less applicable here.” This statement has a big vocabulary and would probably not do too well if trying to reach a young audience.  There are several ways in which this article could be changed to meet a younger audience.  First of all, to reach an audience of young adults, the author should use information that is relevant to them.  Adding in some statistics such as, the number of teens getting abortions, or sexual assault rates in high schools might intrigue the reader because of the relevance to their own life.  Lowering the vocabulary to a level they understand would also help them be more interested.  One more way to make this article more appealing to a younger audience would be to make it shorter.  The article now is sixteen pages with two full columns on each page, not including the references.  Even if the article was easier to understand, I don’t believe a young teenager would be willing to continue reading that long of an article. 

            Considering how this scholarly article can be changed to fit a younger audience, we must now consider how it can reach an older audience.  Depending on whether the older audience is well educated or not would determine the high-vocabulary level.  One way I believe changing this article to reach an elderly audience would be to once again state how it is relevant to them.  They may believe this topic is no longer than large of an issue to them, but giving some statistics of how much rape/assault happens in each state, or several cities could be a wake up call to how much these things are happening every day.  With data like that, the older audience is certain to be more intrigued and willing to educate themselves in order to help stop it.  One more way this article could be changed in order to appeal to an older audience would be to list the risks of this problem in the future, if it doesn’t stop.  This information would most likely appeal to older people because they have more capability of taking action, or donating money more than a younger or teen audience.  

Painting Trees

All of the artists made the decision to teach their audiences how to paint certain things by ding it themselves.  However, they each used different tactics to do so.  In the first video the man threatened the audience.  In the second and third video both men were helpful and kind toward their audiences.  The artists described their moves very specifically by using descriptive words for exactly what they are doing with their paintbrush, and also exactly what type of motion to do in order to create the image they are portraying.  All of their styles I would call detailed and meticulous.  

1) I think I did a better job on writing paper two than writing paper one because I had a better idea of how to use evidence and how to outline my essay.  When I first started writing, it look me a long time to organize my ideas because the prompt was so open ended I didn’t know what specifically to write about, or make my argument about.  It took a little bit of time to figure it out, but I think I improved from WP1 because I learned how to organize my essay better by looking back at the highlighting activity. 

2) I liked yesterdays digital peer/reader review better than the hard copy one because I could more efficiently type my responses and be able to finish all my comments.  It was also easier to be able to click on a specific part of an essay and leave my comment.  Also, when correcting my final draft I could easily pull up the google doc of my essay and make corrections right where people wrote comments by, rather than trying to read of a piece of paper someones bad writing.

3) One helpful comment I received was just a few sentences pointed out that didn’t really make sense that I hadn’t realized before.  When I went back and read them out loud I realized they needed to be changed.  Its nice to be able to have a fresh set of eyes look at my paper to point out things I wouldn’t notice.  I also got a comment about making sure to explain the “so what” more which was very helpful to know tat I should explain that more.