ePortfolio reflection

Student:
I think that the writer seems to be a good student. Looking through the blog, I can see that the writer has read the necessary material, and responded to it in his own opinions. His opinions seems well crafted and seems to argue against many points that may have been discussed in class. The author also seems to grasp the concept of blog posts as time goes on. Navigation of the blog is also very easy, and there are no glaring errors or horrible formatting that would make potential readers exit out of the blog. Perhaps the student could have picked a more exciting theme for the blog, but I also think that the theme fits in a formal class setting. Overall I think the blog shows the work ethic of a strong student.

Writer:
As a writer, I think that the author of the blog has progressed and improved his writing skills. It is clear that the author's analysis skills have improved as the blog progressed. The author of the blog also seems to write a consistent amount for each reflection to the reading he has done. Although the amount written seems to decline slightly with time, the opinion and reflection seem to be of the same or more in strength. Overall, I think that the writing was good/proficient, and have some room to improve to become an excellent writer.

Researcher:
As a researcher, the author presents well that he is very interested and invested in his line of work. Comparing the lengths of writing between the research posts and reflection posts, it is evident that the research posts are more in depth and interesting. The research process is clear and the navigation of the process can be easily seen on the sidebar. Reading through the author's process, it is evident that the student spent enough time on each step, and put some time and effort in his research. Overall, I think the research done was good and shows how the author progressed as the research continued.

Improv Games VS Freshamn Showcase

Building Freshman experience and the value


In the beginning, I honestly thought that the improv games were a complete waste of time. Because our professor is not a theater teacher she had a difficult time to convey the actual importance of the games. I finally understood the meaning and the values of the games only after Louis came in to talk to the class. However, by the time Louis had came in to speak, more than half of the semester had passed. This left a rather unsatisfying feeling towards the improv games. Had I understood why we were constantly spending 10+ minutes of our time doing silly things, I may have a better opinion on the improv games. To me, the overall value of the improv games was lackluster. I didn't know what or why we were doing these 'meaningless' games.
In terms of building a freshman experience, I don't think that the improv games did a great job. Perhaps the fact that most of the class knew each other from the first semester, we didn't really feel like we were breaking new walls to express ourselves. Having the improv games done in the first semester where everyone is a stranger may be a better alternative.

The Freshman Showcase was, to me, something with a lot of potential that had been wasted. Many groups were not graded or given any sort of compensation, which led to the lack of interest in the research that had been done; our group had the exact same feeling. However, I do not think that forcing the showcase to be a major part of the humanities grade would be a good thing either. The great thing about the showcase was that the research did not feel forced. We did not feel any sort of pressure with what to do with our topic, or what direction we should take. I feel that, in research, this is something that is immensely important. Research shouldn't be done because you were forced to for a good mark; research should be done to cultivate and seek knowledge.
Overall, the value of the freshman showcase was slightly higher than the improv games. Presenting our topic in front of distinguished faculty and other judges provided a tension and nerve that should be experienced by all students. The showcase presented an excellent platform for students to experience how to maintain strong eye contact while presenting without feeling uncomfortable or nervous.

The Left's 'Inequality' Obsession

This article gave an interesting perspective on income and how people perceive income in relation to others. The article provided insightful arguments and statistics that provided a lot of food for thought. In the article, Brooks mentions that it is not economic inequality that frustrates Americans, but a perceived lack of opportunity. I thought this was very interesting. I guess that it is hard to compare with another if that opportunity that was available was vastly different. In the article he also cites a study which showed that people would like to earn relatively more than others even if it meant that they would be earning less. Participants would rather make 50,000 a year when colleagues earn 25,000 instead of earning 100,000 while colleagues earn 200,000.
I would probably choose the 100,000 job because I do not care too much what others make. One of my favorite comedians, Louis C.K., put it this way: "The only time you should look in your neighbor's bowl is to make sure that they have enough. You don't look in your neighbor's bowl to see if you have as much s them."

Serving in Florida

"Serving in Florida" is the first chapter of Nickel and Dimed, which follows Barbara Ehrenreich, the writer and narrator of the book. She is a writer who decides to start a "low-wage life" in order to investigate and document the lifestyle. The "American Dream" was what first caught my attention. Living a "low-wage life" is pretty much how I imagined it to be. No health care, no stable place to live in, a horrible job and employee, and a lot of traveling. Reading Ehrenreich's description of the workers of Hearthside and their situations gave me a grim picture on how little money can get. In other words, how much money is needed to live a 'comfortable' lifestyle.

The one quote that really caught my eye was an interview question: "Would I turn in a fellow employee if I caught him stealing?" I don't know if I could risk my job or position, especially if I was living in poverty, to help or save a colleague like George. Overall, I think that the excerpt was an interesting read. Ehnrenreich being the writer and narrator did give me some doubts on her writing. I've always learned to be skeptical of stories written only through the perspective of one person; there is more than one side to the story.

Reverse Outline

It is estimated that there are currently over thirteen million children under the age of five that die from illnesses that could have been easily treated (“Right to Healthcare around the Globe).

This program will be targeted for users that are in areas that lack resources.

Currently, in order to aid countries or areas, we need to spend a lot of resources to get doctors across the globe, in working order, with some sort of medical facility.

So why choose an automated program over a medical professional?

The program will be operated based on two main users: the patient and an administrator.

One of the biggest challenges that must be overcome is the relationship and connection between software engineers and medical professionals.

A machine learning AI used to create an automated medical diagnosis would close the gap between many areas.

Reading this made me realize that my initial plan for the progression of the paper did not match what I ended up writing. I can now clearly see the progression of ideas I want, and I have added paragraphs that I realized were missing. 

Peer Review to Raul

Hi Raul,

Here are some of my thoughts on your paper, and where I think you could improve.

In the introduction, you take way too long to get to your points after stating your main point of the paper. It made the paper seem boring and hard to read as I was unsure what the paper was going to be about. In addition to this, I think that your argument is a little lacking. Instead of asking so many questions in the opening paragraph, it may be better to first state your argument, and briefly explain your statements. 

I also think that you should stop asking so many questions, and instead boldly state your arguments.

You do not have a title for your paper.

You also make many claims that seem to not be backed by evidence or any sources. List the sources you used to make the claims in the paper. Without it, how am I supposed to believe that what you are saying is true?

You also do not fully analyze the quotations that you pull out from sources. I think that you should expand upon what the quote means, and what it signifies. 

Is there a counter-argument to your paper? It may strengthen your points if you can include a counter-argument, and refute it. 

You also have many grammatical errors, and run-on sentences littered throughout the essay. I suggest you read over the paper and revise these mistakes. 

Your work cited page also seems empty. Find more sources, and add them to your works cited page and paper. 

Hope this helps,

Taiga Akiyama