Prewriting for OP-ED

Audience for Op-Ed:
TCU, specifically students.
Venue: The TCU Daily Skiff


The general tone is argumentative, but with support. In the four op-ed pieces I read from the Daily Skiff, all were arguing for their point, whether it was for the legalization of marijuana or the elimination of hassleing celebrity moms. However, these arguments were supported with good concrete evidence, which added support and substance for the writer’s argument. It is interesting how short they were. The pieces ranged from 300-400 words, and for that small amount of space, they all seemed to get their individual points across.

My topic covers the proposed plan to take the place of the current “post season” system, the BCS. I would like to take it and really focus on the fairness of this new plan, and truthfully, will it be any better than the current one right now. This new idea involves having a committee decide the eight teams that get to compete in a playoff for a national champuionship, and I wonder how this idea is not going to be just as arbitrary as the current BCS system. I think adding evidence of teams who have just missed the cut in the past should beef up my argument, and with all of these good teams, how does one pick one over the other…how will this new system be different…focusing on the fairness aspect should allow for some great discussion.

There will obviously be some great consideration and deliberation about this proposed idea, but just saying that will not be good enough. Each conference will have to check out this proposed idea from the MWC, and really and truly ask the tough questions. What has halted ideas in the past, and what just might kill this one is money. All the bowl games, from the biggest, like the Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl, to the smallest, like the Papa John’s Bowl and the Poinsettia Bowl, ALL bring in tons of money for schools, the venues, and sponsors. It is going to be extremely difficult and near impossible to have this cash flow be unaffected if college football goes from having over 30 bowls, to seven bowls. Significant money will be lost, and that is not okay for sponsors, venues, or schools.

I think all the rhetorical appeals will be covered, but I think I will focus on pathos and logos the most. It happens virtually every year: someone’s team gets left out because of some stupid loophole, and instead of cheering for their team in a championship game, they have to watch them play a meaningless game, where instead of national praise and glory, they get to play for a gym bag filled with sweatshirts and an iPod nano. I think college students on this campus will identify most with this because their school, might finally have a way to avoid getting the shaft year in and year out. Logos will be useful because there will still need to be facts presented. You argument based on opinions can only take you so far. There must be concrete evidence to support my claims, and I intend to do that.

I think I touched on this in the last answer, but personal experience will definitely play a huge role because like I said, everyone has been disappointed because of a stupid rule that has prevented their team from going to the big show. Concrete evidence will ultimately be the best source because it is extremely hard to argue with facts that back your claims. Also, talking about previous plans in college football and why this system has yet to be replaced will add further backing to my points.

I think the only research I need to do concerns specifics with regard to teams who have “gotten the shaft” and not gone to a bowl because of an unfair rule. Texas Tech, Texas, TCU, Utah, and others have all received a harsh end to an excellent season. Looking up more details on the proposed plan might help as well.

Author's Note for First Draft

Completing my first draft, which ran a bit over six pages, I realize I will need to be more specific to get a full eight pages. I think what I have so far is good, and I think there is a solid balance of analysis and summary.

My citing seems to be okay, but I think that is the biggest mechanical part I need to fix and/or check over. All in all, my biggest challenge that lies ahead is expanding on what I already have to achieve the page limit. I know I have enough information, I just need some guidance to find other ways of elaborating on my topic, and also suggestions on what I might be forgetting or leaving out.

Prewriting

Prewriting for Rhetorical Case Study

What connects my sources?

All of my sources focus on how TCU did in its recruiting efforts this off-season. Compared to years past, TCU has had great success, and a trend in my sources is how different recruiting is for TCU now, compared to say five years ago. TCU is now legitimately competing with the powerhouses like Texas and Oklahoma for top tier recruits. In years past, TCU had to take a back seat to schools like these, and they would have to pick over what was left behind. Now, they are getting some of the best this country has to offer, and kids are seeking TCU out more as well. All of this is mixed in all four of my sources. Some go more in depth than others, but the general ideas are definitely covered.

Summarize into two sentences or so:

TCU is becoming a major player in the recruiting process because of its consistent success in recent years. This success is allowing for TCU to compete with powerhouse schools, and actually swoop in and take recruits who might have considered bigger schools. Also, kids are starting to consider TCU themselves.

Organization Technique:

I am going to start with the smallest (local) medium, and then I will work my way up to the biggest (national) medium. Seeing how TCU’s recruiting was covered in the Daily Skiff, to the Telegram, and on to ESPN. Taking in and dissecting each one, and giving my analysis of each. Then, after all four have been covered, I would kind of take a compare and contrast approach, analyzing why coverage was the way it was, etc.

I think this approach would be effective because it covers all the bases, and it is in a consistent, almost chronological approach, from most coverage, to least, or smallest medium to biggest. It allows for separation of the sources and it still leaves an opening to come back in and tie it all back up together.

How am I going to transition from source to source?

I think the flow is going to be fairly simple because I am going to take it source by source, starting with the skiff, explain why the coverage was so big and elaborate, and then going into the Telegram article. With that, I would relate it back a bit to the Skiff article, because there is heavy coverage in both, but I would showcase the differences in the two, because a college newspaper is going to be a little bit more favorable and generic in some cases than a city newspaper, in a huge market. From there I would go into the first ESPN article, which is actually a blog. I would transition with how the coverage changes a bit, but is still quite similar, and from there to the fourth source, I would make a point to show how little coverage there is, especially compared to the first source. Mostly though, I would make it a simple transition from source to source and I would do the majority of the comparing and contrasting when I am done revealing each source. That way I could jump from local to national, and so on. It would much more confusing to do that if all sources had not been established and presented. I feel like this would create good flow that would make the paper an easy, somewhat interesting read for the reader.

In class writing on research (pre-writing)

Some concerns I have about my research:
My main concern is that my sources might be a little too similar. But, I think the similarities are okay because the differences lie in how my topic is covered in the different areas of the media.

I feel like I could have a few more specific sources related to my topic as well.

However, I do feel satisfied with what I have, and I think it will make for a solid paper. Although the information is similar, the way it is presented and covered is definitely different.

Four Questions:

I feel like all of my sources are primary because they come from the media. My topic is analyzing how TCU football is covered in the media, and all my sources stem from that.

I chose my sources because they cover college, local, and national mediums. I have one from the TCU Daily Skiff, two from ESPN.com, and one from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. They cover all the bases so to speak, and they are all geared toward what I am trying to argue.

I narrowed my topic to how TCU was covered during the signing of recruits process, and the aftermath of that. All of the sources focus on that, and they evaluate how TCU did in regard to other schools. In different ways, they all explain how TCU is no longer the David in the fight...they are becoming the Goliath.

All sources had legitimate factual and statistical evidence to support the ranging opinions made about why TCU has potential to do some damage next year. No where in any of these sources was there rambling and nonsense. It was all good opinions that had sufficient back up to the claims the different authors were making.

Annotated Notes

Unit 1 Annotated Notes
I did my first observation on January 30, between 10:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. I started in the café area, and there were around seven people there. Some were studying, chatting, or waiting in line for a snack. Only three were actually studying. I actually saw my professor talking with a friend, and one person was on the phone the entire time I was in this section. I feel like this space offers an atypical study environment in that you are not barricaded in a room or sitting at a desk. There are café tables, TVs, and food to create a coffee shop feel, and with so many people coming in and out, you do not feel as though you are “studying.” Food and drinks offer a break to those in this area, and the computers in there allow you to research if you need something else for your studies. Also, this is somewhere you can eat and not feel self-conscious about it. In other areas you might feel you are being to loud or bothersome, but for those in this area, they felt none of that.
Next, I visited the loud section, and there were around 50 students studying, at the computers, meeting in groups, or getting help at the computer desk. It was a bit quieter than usual, but being early on a Friday, that was understandable. It was funny to see what those on the computers were doing because many were not doing work. People were looking at Facebook, ESPN.com, and many other non-educational sites. This area offers more meeting and study space, and a nice escape/resource with the computers. It is a quick in and out for students coming in between classes to print something off, and in this area, you can really do any type of work. The pods offer a place to do group projects, and with so many different places to study (at the computers, tables, pods, lounge chairs, etc.), the environment suits any studier. Also, while I was there, I saw a guy recognize a classmate, and they began to work on homework together. They were probably meeting each other there, but that is a big plus for this area. It serves as a great place to meet because there are so many resources available for whatever you might be working on.
Lastly, I went to the quiet section. Around 20 people were in there, all were studying. I think this is definitely the most typical “studying” place. There are some lounge chairs, but mostly it is filled with desks, and dividers for intense studying. Sitting there, I found it a little more difficult to focus, and I noticed that was true for others because every sound and ruffle of a paper can be heard. There is virtually no noise, so when something happens, everyone can hear it. Someone was eating, and you could tell the others were not happy about it. For those who come here, complete focus and no distractions is what they seek. It is ironic too because I think in some ways, they get the exact opposite. The littlest sound can throw you off, and it can really create a distraction. The basement is even more secluded and quiet. The quiet section definitely has the biggest “library” feel out of the three areas.
My second observation occurred on Sunday, February 1 from 11:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. I started in the café again, and there were about eight students in there. Only two were actually studying though. Two were playing chess, and the others were talking or waiting in line for snacks. This was only a few hours after the Super Bowl, so for a Sunday night, the library was quieter than usual. But there was not too much studying going on in this area. The café is more of a social space than anything else, and it helps those who like the commotion and people going back and forth. It is a place people can go and feel like they are doing something to get work done. Many have problems studying in their rooms or at their houses, so by going to the library, they are actually feeling like they are doing something, and getting their work done at the same time. However, in this area, that can become a problem because people often get distracted and socialize more than study.
Next I went to the loud section, and here I was able to talk to a student about her library experiences and how/why she chooses the library. She prefers the loud section over any other sections because it offers a background noise that can be blocked out with music, and it helps her focus more. For her, it is a happy medium between the too noisy café, and the too quiet section. She will go to the café to meet people and converse, but not to study. She does feel that the loud section can become too noisy, but she thinks the 24 hour operation has helped spread out how many are there at the same time. She cannot study at her house because she gets too distracted, so the library is good because it creates a study mindset for her. She also talked about how much time she would kill between classes, and she sees this more of an occurrence this year than in the past. With the main gone, this is really the most central place to go, and it provides easy access for those who are off campus to meet with others. She also thought it helps her and others going here because it does feel like you are doing something and also getting your work done, sometimes. She definitely agreed that at times she has come to just socialize and sees that others do that as well. The rest of the loud section was not too loud, probably because of the Super Bowl. Many either did their work earlier, at home, or did not do it at all.
Finally, the quiet section was just that Sunday night. Only about ten students were studying, and all were either studying or reading. No noise was acceptable. This is definitely for the hardcore studier, and the simplest noise gets everyone worked up. It works for some, but for me, it would not be an option.

Arguments of Fact and Definition for Space

I felt like there were many arguments of definition in the library. By designating certain areas as loud or quiet, students know where to go if they want to be in either environment. It is not necessarily an argument of fact, but it is understood that when students enter the library, certain areas are going to be louder or quieter because the library has defined them as such.

Also, when a student enters a specific area, his/her definition of loud or quiet is definitely different from someone elses definiton. So, that is an addition to this argument these spaces are making in the library.

Chapter 1: Is everything an argument

I thought it was interesting that you can have so many different types of arguments. I have had my fair share of arguments, but I never really stopped and thought about what category they fell under. The author(s) do a great job at convincing the reader that everything really can be an argument because if you break down each situation, sign, statement, etc., there is some sort of reason behind everything. Most people, like me, might not go that in depth when considering if the choice of food they ate at lunch is an argument, but if you look close enough, it is. If I chose to eat a filling breakfast that included eggs and oatmeal, instead of a pop tart, I would be doing this because I thought the latter would not fill me up. They used so many examples that included simple thoughts that backed up many things they said.

As interesting as it was to hear how some of the simplest things or choices we make can be considered arguments, I thought it was a little much to think that every single thing I do is an argument. I respect their examples and reasoning, but I do not agree that every possible thing is an argument. Sometimes I choose to do something because I want to. It is something I feel. It could be playing a game, going to a movie, or eating at a restaurant. When I do these things, I do not take the time to consider other options, and rule things out, I choose what I do because that's what sounds good at the moment. I do not argue it against something else.