Saturday, September 6, 2008

Journal entry 1

In examing a piece of writing which I composed I decided use an article which I wrote for a physical education class. " Obesity is a spreading epidemic. What is the cause and how can we prevent it?".
I wrote this essay as a research paper to find to what extent the obesity population was increasing in the United States, why this was happening how we can try prevent it. This essay was part of a project that made up a large percentage of my grade which would be sent directly to the University of Cambridge to grade. There for this meant instead of using previous collegues past data. Also I would have to use more recent information due to the main statement in the title, "spreading", meaning its still occuring and figures will be updated.
The writing style I used was more imformative than argumentative because i was providing factual information which could not really be decided by different opinions, unless the data i used false. Writing seemed to be the most appropriate method presenting my point, even though displays could have showed the graphs, putting this information into writing seemed to be easiest way for my examiner to understand the figures also that I understood how to evaluate my own results.
A set guideline was provided on how to write the essay by the Cambridge examination board, which is primarily the basic essay structure of begining the essay with the introduction which provides a general overview of the essay is about. The filling paragraphs which give the essay its structural support, setting out to justify the title. Finanaly the conclusion to finish the essay which is an accumulation of the main points and a personal to response about the selected topic.
Responding to a "rhetorical situation" is a different way of thinking about writing for example, compared to a simple essay. Even though there is still some structure by writing about culture, audience, genre compared to a simple essay with the set paragraph stucture, the analatical point of view of reviewing a past article seems to be less creative and more step by step of how we got the end result. A scientific means of writing it would seem.

No comments: