Peer Review 15

At last, the final peer review, the final blog post.

a. I took a look concerning the form of Sofia Haserot's script from her Editorial Report for her podcast segment regarding the Course Final. The script of her podcast, from what I can tell, will use the proper personable tone and diction required for a podcast. Although no transition sounds or any sound effects or intro music are indicated, I presume Sofia will assimilate those components into her final composition. If not, I highly recommend an instrumental of some sort to complement her narration in the podcast. While working with the proper genre conventions, I like the creative way Sofia takes us through her year by telling us the trials and tribulations that came with each project in a chronological manner. Overall, it's looking good, good luck!

b. I suggested some things regarding content for Rigo Avila's Standard College Essay and Open Post to Peer Reviewers. I did appreciate the content throughout but the development of the piece I believe could be better organized. The ideas are there, but the fruition of them is what will elevate this paper to the next level. For this, I would suggest perhaps reading aloud your own paper and just as Rigo said in his last paragraph to be his own critic and take a critical look. The presence of citations and a sophisticated bibliography credits the entire paper which already has adequate conventions of a proper academic paper. I admire the variety of sources from blog posts to TV-show conversations and how they were properly cited. I believe you have the form down, but assorting the content in the form is what will propel this essay. I recommend taking a look at the organizational and developmental strategies discussed in the Student Guide. Nonetheless, great job.

Editorial Report

Audience Questions:

1. The content changed in that I omitted much of the scientific jargon and unnecessary information from my Rough Cut. After creating the video and realizing the overwhelming length (11 minutes), I reevaluated my piece as a whole for the editorial report. Specifically, I found it frivolous to be discussing science and the biology of the brain because it is not pertinent to the self-assessment - it is important for the approach to the project but the delving into detail weakens the entire reflection in my opinion.

2. Form changed in that the length of the script/video was drastically shortened. Keeping it short and sweet and to the point I believe does wonders for the audience so I hope that change in form along with the content editing will strengthen the piece. Each second of the Video Essay should be of compositional value.

a. Selection from Rough Cut (script):

Science explains Charlie Brown’s seesaw sensibility as a fight that is sparked between two parts of the mind when it’s faced with a distasteful activity: a battle of the limbic system (the unconscious zone that includes the pleasure center) and the prefrontal cortex (the internal “planner”). Let us identify both.

What is the limbic system?

The limbic system, one of the oldest and most dominant portions of the brain, is on automatic. It tells you to, say, pull your hand away from a flame—and also to flee from unpleasant tasks. In other words, it directs you to opt for “immediate mood repair,”

What is the prefrontal cortex?

The prefrontal cortex is a newer and weaker portion of the brain. It’s what allows you to integrate information and make decisions. “This is the part of the brain that really separates humans from animals, who are just controlled by stimulus,” says Pychyl. The prefrontal cortex, located immediately behind the forehead (where we tap when we’re trying to think, dammit, think), gets the job done. But there’s nothing automatic about its function. You must kick it into gear (“I have to sit down and write this book report!”). And the moment you’re not consciously engaged in a task, your limbic system takes over. You give in to what feels good—you procrastinate.

When the limbic system wins, and that’s pretty often, the result is putting off for tomorrow what could (and should) be done today.

But why do I keep coming back to something that may temporarily feel good but always ends in more demise than pleasure? If you burn your hand on a stove, you don’t touch it again hoping it’s cold. It’s simple, according to several scientists, it’s pleasure. The small hit of dopamine at the “Ahhh, at last” moment when you conquer procrastination is what psychologically brings us back. In collegiate terms, the euphoric drunk the night before always meets the terrifying hangover the morning after, but you will still drink again.

Re-edited Selection:

Science explains Charlie Brown’s seesaw sensibility as a fight that is sparked between two parts of the mind when it’s faced with a distasteful activity: a battle of the limbic system (the unconscious zone that includes the pleasure center) and the prefrontal cortex (the internal “planner”). When the limbic system wins, and that’s pretty often, the result is putting off for tomorrow what could (and should) be done today.

b. Selection from Rough Cut (script): "Ring a bell? It’s a monologue we all experience in some form, an agonizing internal conversation that usually gets the best of us. It’s the cyclic form of self-torture that goes by the name of procrastination. And that’s where things start to get interesting: Procrastination is so relatable, so universal, because the human brain, it turns out, is wired for it.

As I sit here frantically and ironically submitting my English 109H course final and completing my Psychological Statistics and Measurements final exam, I ponder: there has to be a reason procrastination is so attractive, so universal to the human mind.

It is no coincidence every other college student I pass grimaces at the 10-page paper or cumulative assessment that was assigned much too long ago due tonight. All semester, Sean has stressed involvement and knowledge and moreover passion within our disciplines and majors. So without further ado, here is a neuroscience-oriented reflective self-assessment.

Re-edited Selection:"Ring a bell? It’s a monologue we all experience in some form, an agonizing internal conversation that usually gets the best of us. It’s the cyclic form of self-torture that goes by the name of procrastination. And that’s where things start to get interesting: Procrastination is so relatable, so universal, because the human brain, it turns out, is wired for it.

As I sit here frantically and ironically submitting my project and completing my final exam, I ponder: there has to be a reason procrastination is so attractive, so universal to the human mind.

* LIGHT BULB *

It is no coincidence every other college student I pass grimaces at the 10-page paper or cumulative assessment that was assigned much too long ago due tonight. All semester, Sean has stressed involvement and knowledge and moreover passion within our disciplines and majors. So without further ado, here is a neuroscience-oriented reflective self-assessment.

Open Post to Peer Reviewers

For my self-assessment, I will be creating a relaxed, personable Video Essay to reflect on this past semester and my realizations and how they will be applied in my endeavors going forward. This is the script (rough draft) for said project:

"Ring a bell? It’s a monologue we all experience in some form, an agonizing internal conversation that usually gets the best of us. It’s the cyclic form of self-torture that goes by the name of procrastination. And that’s where things start to get interesting: Procrastination is so relatable, so universal, because the human brain, it turns out, is wired for it.

As I sit here frantically and ironically submitting my English 109H course final and completing my Psychological Statistics and Measurements final exam, I ponder: there has to be a reason procrastination is so attractive, so universal to the human mind.

* LIGHT BULB *

It is no coincidence every other college student I pass grimaces at the 10-page paper or cumulative assessment that was assigned much too long ago due tonight. All semester, Sean has stressed involvement and knowledge and moreover passion within our disciplines and majors. So without further ado, here is a neuroscience-oriented reflective self-assessment.

Science explains Charlie Brown’s seesaw sensibility as a fight that is sparked between two parts of the mind when it’s faced with a distasteful activity: a battle of the limbic system (the unconscious zone that includes the pleasure center) and the prefrontal cortex (the internal “planner”).

What is the limbic system?

The limbic system, one of the oldest and most dominant portions of the brain, is on automatic. It tells you to, say, pull your hand away from a flame—and also to flee from unpleasant tasks. In other words, it directs you to opt for “immediate mood repair,”

What is the prefrontal cortex?

The prefrontal cortex is a newer and weaker portion of the brain. It’s what allows you to integrate information and make decisions. “This is the part of the brain that really separates humans from animals, who are just controlled by stimulus,” says Pychyl. The prefrontal cortex, located immediately behind the forehead (where we tap when we’re trying to think, dammit, think), gets the job done. But there’s nothing automatic about its function. You must kick it into gear (“I have to sit down and write this book report!”). And the moment you’re not consciously engaged in a task, your limbic system takes over. You give in to what feels good—you procrastinate.

When the limbic system wins, and that’s pretty often, the result is putting off for tomorrow what could (and should) be done today.

But why do I keep coming back to something that may temporarily feel good but always ends in more demise than pleasure? If you burn your hand on a stove, you don’t touch it again hoping it’s cold. It’s simple, according to several scientists, it’s pleasure. The small hit of dopamine at the “Ahhh, at last” moment when you conquer procrastination is what psychologically brings us back. In collegiate terms, the euphoric drunk the night before always meets the terrifying hangover the morning after, but you will still drink again.

So what does this have to do with me? Well, I am king procrastinator myself. Applying psychology and neuroscience and just science overall to day-to-day life is what ignited my passion in this field in the first place. So, sitting here, analyzing my behavior through a scientific method has done exactly what I wanted to achieve in this course: furthering my passion as an academic writer and a critical thinker. Understanding why it is that you do fascinates me, and that is true for this semester as well.

At the beginning of the semester, Sean made us promise a few things. Here is my vow to terminate my habits of procrastination in our first ever blog post.

It reads…

It was optimistic, it was good-hearted, but it didn’t exactly pan out the way I envisioned. Did I procrastinate? Too, too many times. Did I learn? Yes. That is what is important to me. There were many late nights, many late submissions, many late blog posts, many last-minute triumphs, and everything in between. My work ethic and habits globally improve but locally I was still at the tail-end of every deadline. But that’s ok. Learning the universality of the science and psychology in myself and my peers regarding procrastination did more for me than a lot of the busy work that’s been handed to me in my academic career. So, thank you, Sean, for the platform that gave me this enlightening realization and really furthered my passion regarding knowledge, science, biology, the brain, and really all my academic and career endeavors. In special regard to writing, I, for the first time, witnessed the true importance and vitality of the entirety of the writing process. Although procrastinating my way through at each deadline, I am retrospectively appreciating every rough draft, every local revision, every tidbit of feedback from my peers, and truly the entire process. In years past of my academic career, submitting at 11:58 PM was sort of the name of the game for me. Not saying that won’t happen again, but what I will say is the writing process will be incorporated entirely before the 11:58 submission because I understand the first draft will never be the best draft. I’ve learned the beauty of assimilation of your peers and yourself into your work, the importance of what is around you and the knowledge your environment can instill in you and your work. I have learned a lot about myself as an academic writer and a student, my endeavors, my work, my discipline, and much more that I thank this course for and that I will apply as I progress as a writer, a student, and moreover a person. Thank you."

Audience Question: The production phase was much more constrained because of the strenuous finals period but nonetheless, I managed to find a way to complete everything in a timely manner and now as I am finishing up the final touches for my final assessment, a.k.a. post-production, it is going just as a I thought it would: stressful. Considering my traits as a perfectionist and dire need for an A-grade in this course (so borderline, so stressful), I am second-guessing myself like never before but I hope the genuine nature of quality of my piece will resonate well with my peers and Sean. Here's to a great semester, thank you.

Peer Review 14

a. I chose to review Nick Hernandez's content outline for Project 4 and make an outlining suggestion considering our positions in the process of composing. After reviewing his outline, I not only ascertained what mindset my peers had approaching this project but the variety of different sorts of reflections that can be made regarding the past few months. The development of the piece I believe is lacking because of the overall flow, or lack thereof, as it is hard to see the assimilation of the three talking points after a brief skim however the detail he delves into should be appreciated. It gave me insight to things I could talk about for my final project but the personal and informative tone Nick maintains throughout his piece is brilliant for a piece of this type. He addresses the audience in a very inviting tone and his presence as an author with a purpose is very clear. There is no concrete evidence, however, a reflection's overall nature does not mandate specific sources or evidence as it is all narrative.

b. Outside of my section, I reviewed Sarah Hansen's  production schedule for her Video Essay. Considering I am in a similar position with the same genre, I thought it would be useful to both her and I to conduct this peer review. Much of her timetable is left up in the air, as is mine, but in regards to the resources, I believe she has all what she needs. One thing I took notice to was her attention to detail such as a consistent outfit to construct fruition for her final project, this is something I will take from her project and assimilate in my own. I recommend iMovie for this project as a resource to edit and properly construct an effective Video Essay. Time-wise, I would suggest dedicating a full day to editing and a few for filming, just as we would for any normal essay. I believe we are utilizing a similar approach and per the Student Guide, it is vital to allow for a revision time period so that is my final recommendation.

Production Schedule

Here is my final production schedule for my final project, AT LAST! 

Production Report

Audience Questions: 

The form of my content that I will share later in the week will be based on the Video Essay genre. The usage of textual, visual, and auditory elements makes this project unique in its conventions.

Production is ongoing as I am struggling to find the proper equipment and proper software/tools to adequately create a high-quality draft.

Outline Item a.

Adaptation of Outline Item a.

Outline Item b.

Adaptation of Outline Item b.

Content Outline

Opening Section: Introduction to semester-in-review.
Body 1: Previous habits of procrastination
Body 2: Reflect on vow to eliminate procrastination from work habits.
Body 3: How the efforts panned out
Conclusion: What I learned, how I will apply it, and my brutal self-assessment.

Peer Review 13

A Local Reflection

1. After globally revising last week, taking a look at the local aspects of my composition I believe really refined my composition to the fullest achievable extent. Finding grammatical errors and properly formatting my citations as well as my works cited page probably did a lot for the form grade of my project, which is very important to me.

2. A personal challenge for me as a perfectionist was mustering up the courage to click submit as I am dangerously close to a B and an inch away from an A so I am really putting my all into this and I know when I click submit that is when I will be able to say I did my all so I am really trying to put maximal effort into this.

3. I think next week, being the production phase of our final project, will be the best of the year as we have a more lenient, relaxed feel and more control of creation in regards to final assignment.

4. I am feeling better about this project than any other project I have completed for this class this semester.

Editorial Report

Both of my Editorial Reports (a) & (b) [selections can be found by clicking links] can be found here... More revision, more blog posts, more work, more reading, here you go. 

Rough Cut:

Re-edited:

1. My content changed when I re-edited it in regards to grammatical, punctuation, and citation errors. I revamped the mechanics of the essay to sharpen its corners in every aspect. 

2. The form changed in that because of the insertion of punctuation and citation the writing became more succinct and sentences became shorter with more interruptions which provides clarity but may have indirectly hindered the flow. We will see what Sean thinks as I am interested to find that happy medium between clarity and choppy.

Revised Post to Peer Reviewers

Fine Cut of my public argument essay!

Audience. Amid my post-production phase of this project, I found that much of my anticipation from the preceding week was true in that the bulk of the cognition required for this assignment is completed. My accomplishments throughout this semester have brought me to this point and I believe I have mastered a personal system for this specific process and hope to follow it throughout my academic career to produce better compositions.

Academic. After reviewing my rough cut, I believe I have eliminated many of the illuminated weaknesses and hope to only have strengths remaining. If not, I would be more than appreciative of any peer's comments in regards to something I missed or did incorrectly. The information needed to accurately assess this public argument is presented in the academic essay.

Peer Review

Reflection on Production

Last production phase? Last reflection.

1. The major success of the week I thought was the inclusion of peer review and additional refinement even before publication of my rough cut which was unique to this process more than the others. For instance, the preliminary editorial report required a revision before even going out to my peers for revision.

2. The challenge of this week was the timing and assimilation of this course's workload with my other courses which are just as strenuous as the semester comes to an end and many professors are squeezing in every last nugget of work they can. My timeliness was in question but as always I am hoping Sean is valuing quality over a time stamp on a blog post.

3. I think next week will go much smoother based on my skimming evaluation of the process work required next week.

4. I am feeling the best about this project so far compared to the other three as I am writing in my comfort zone and genre as well as writing something I am knowledgable and passionate about.

Open Post to Peer Reviewers

To begin, here is the Rough Cut of my public argument for the Project 3 assignment.

Audience: I anticipate the post-production process to be much more relaxed as much of my organization and content-production process work has been completed, especially in regard to the Standard College Essay genre. I accomplished a lot in a timely manner and I am slowly but surely creeping towards my primary goal when entering this class: to stop procrastinating. 

Author: Much of the needed information for this project is presented in the essay itself. This is a re-edited version of my rough cut so any weaknesses, please point out to me! My major strength would be the organization as the multitude of controversies build to the looming and ultimate conclusion of the academic essay.

Editorial Report

1. The content between my two selections from my rough cut and my revisions bear identical similarities, but the form and style between the two is what differentiates. I believe my content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited selections because the notorious verbosity of my usual writing is cut to a minimum where the information is being succinctly communicated but the sophistication of the piece is still in tact.

2. The form changed in that rather than having a plethora of verbose, elongated compound-complex sentences and an absence of punctuation, the final project will be more clear and less overboard in its delivery. This is new ground for me in my writing career so we will see how it pans out both in terms of grading and the process work..


a.
Selection from Rough Cut: First Body Paragraph

Qatar's controversial hosting of the 2022 World Cup sparked a long-ignored flame that is corruption among the higher-ups in FIFA and global juggernauts alike across the globe. The world could not deny the glaring mark of bribery on the 2022 World Cup. First alleged in May of 2011, FIFA and then Vice President Jack Warner internally investigated Mohammed bin Hammam’s, President of the Asian Football Confederation, role as Qatar’s proxy to ‘buy’ the World Cup bid via payment to executive officials sitting on the selection committee. It was then ironically discovered FIFA’s very own VP, Warner, was compensated with $2,000,000 in return for Qatar’s success in obtaining the World Cup bid. 

Re-edited Selection

The controversy regarding Qatar’s role as host of the 2022 FIFA World Cup ignited instantly following FIFA Sepp Blatter’s announcement on December 2^nd, 2010. This newest tremor in the world of soccer sparked a long-ignored flame that is corruption among the higher-ups in FIFA and global juggernauts alike across the globe. The Qatari bid at first glance seemed innocent and groundbreaking for the sport, but as the veil lifted, the spiders hidden in the selection committee’s closet came spiraling out. Qatar officials spun the troubling allegations as actions of envy and malice conducted by jealous, competing countries; but, the world could not deny the glaring mark of bribery on the 2022 World Cup. First alleged in May of 2011, FIFA and then Vice President Jack Warner internally investigated Mohammed bin Hammam’s, President of the Asian Football Confederation, role as Qatar’s proxy to ‘buy’ the World Cup bid via payment to executive officials sitting on the selection committee. It was then ironically discovered FIFA’s very own VP, Warner, was compensated with $2,000,000 in return for Qatar’s success in obtaining the World Cup bid. Additionally, it was discovered that the previously mentioned bin Hammam had allocated nearly $5,000,000 to Football officials to vote for Qatar during the selection process (Wright). Soccer, a global sweetheart, had just gone behind the back of billions.

b.
Selection from Rough Cut: Conclusion

Is it illegal? Is it discriminatory? No, but it is time to act. The overwhelming number of troubling and outrageous controversies is not something to be considered a norm of for a world-renowned organization such as FIFA.  The 2022 Qatar World Cup’s overwhelmingly corrupt nature and obvious detriment in face of its small reward has yielded nothing but scrutiny from millions and malice by many, the call for action is here, and the time is now.

Re-edited Selection

Those who object the notoriously controversial nature of the 2022 Qatar World Cup claim the illegality of stripping a country of its hosting rights and the discriminating-bias of the media towards Middle Eastern countries and its people (Davis). The false claims of an absence of legal grounds and the fallacy in associating a Qatar World Cup with the progressive society in our world is what is fallaciously dignifying the Qatari bid for the 2022 World Cup. The overwhelming number of troubling and outrageous controversies is not something to be considered a norm of for a world-renowned organization such as FIFA. The accumulation of economic, sociocultural, and geopolitical detriment should be an alarming sign for those responsible to strip Qatar of its bid. The 2022 Qatar World Cup’s overwhelmingly corrupt nature and obvious detriment in face of its miniscule reward has yielded nothing but scrutiny from millions and malice by many, the call for action is here, and the time is now.