5 Discussion Form Posts

1.
In high school my I was indeed taught to write five paragraph essays. I had actually
forgot about that until this moment. I was taught that the introduction was the first paragraph, the
body of the essay was the next three paragraphs, and I was to conclude my essay with one last
paragraph as a conclusion. My experience with 5 paragraph essays was overall a positive one I
would say. With that lay out I always knew exactly what was expected of me, and I would
always do fairly well with my writings. I recall learning the five-paragraph system for the first
time in my 4th grade communication skills class. It seemed like a very simple system, easy to
follow, and well designed. I liked the system, and followed it correctly in all of my assignments
that year and earned an A or B, I do not recall which one.
On the negative side however, if I ever felt that I had more to talk about that could not be
summed up with only three body paragraphs, I always felt limited to some degree with my
essays. Breaking out of the 5 paragraph systems to me means more creative ability, more
freedom, something new, and likely something more challenging. While learning a new way to
write my essays I'm sure I will be challenged to learn new methods of writing, and asked to think
differently about assignments. If a higher number of paragraphs is introduced, it will take more
critical thinking and brain storming to supply myself with enough topics for essays I write.
Writing essays in a new format can bring me both more freedom in writing, and possibly more
issues to deal with and account for. Writing essays in a new form could be more fun for me than
writing them in the way that I previously had. Incorporating more than 5 paragraphs into my
essays in the future with be a unique experience regardless of whether I struggle with the new
format or not.
2.
I have very rarely had to respond to another students work in my schooling carrier. In
high school occasionally I was asked to grade another student work, but rarely did we respond
with our own advice to another student. However, in English class, both in this class and in high
school I responded to the work of another student. Overall all I would say my experiences of
responding to another student have been positive experiences. Usually the response includes me
complimenting the student when I can, giving tips when I need to, and having a positive
communication experience. Never, to my recollection, have I gotten into a confrontation with
anyone I was responding to. The most negativity I can recall that came from responding to any
student back in high school, was a small dispute in which the student contended that their work
was not incorrect at all. These small disagreements were easily settled by asking the teacher of
the class about the validity of the work in question.
The only other time I have "responded" to student my age, took place on discussion boards
online about topics like religion, sports, anime television shows, etc. These "responses", quickly
turn into heated debates with everyone believing they are correct. Evidence and arguments are
presented mostly by, foul language and common insults; aside from this the whole debate is
really fun in most cases. I do very well in arguments like these. I put great effort and thought into
the evidence and information I present to my side of the argument. In my history of online
discussion I can only recall myself being incorrect once or twice. The discussions in such
settings are always very heated, very ignorant on the part of some people, and very entertaining.
I enjoy these discussions and occasionally seek them out when I wish to engage in one of these
debates. The last debate I had was with several atheists on Facebook, all up against myself

presenting evidence and arguments for a creator. The debate was extremely long. There was
about 362 comments posted, about half of which where mine.
3.
Reflection is extremely important for many reasons. Reflection is when we look back at
old assignments, or readings, and reevaluate how we feel about a certain topic. When we return
to old lines of thought, and see how our thinking has changed or evolved, that is when true
learning begins. From reflective learning, and reflective inquiry, an individual can learn a lot
about he or she learns. From reflective inquiry we can also get an inside look at the way we think
and how thinking can adapt in only a few short weeks. Keeping a journal of daily thoughts and
ideas, combined with reflective inquiry can truly execrate the rate in which we learn or have
breakthrough ideas. I had a liberal studies class on language last semester that focused very much
on reflective inquiry. We were constantly asked to return to our old assignments are talk about
how our thinking had changed since the assignment. I did not like the assignments because I am
the type of person that puts together a very calculated view on topic when I form my opinion. I
always have evidence and lines of logical reasoning for my opinions and, until the revealing of
new evidence or data; I am very likely to change my opinion. However even though my views on
topics didn't change, slowly but surely I began to see my thinking go more in depth than before
after continuous reflection on certain topics.
In the end I began to appreciate the assignments, and I became more positive about the idea of
reflective inquiry. I began to see the importance of it. I saw it for what it was. Rather than a
mechanism that is their only to make you change your views, ideals, and opinions, reflective
inquiry can help you study your views, ideals, and opinions more deeply. As you remember your
reasons for your views and reflect on them, you can begin to see your own individual way of
thinking. This allows you too understand your views more deeply, and allows you to analyze
why and how you think the way you do.
4.
I agree with Mr. McWhorter's agreement completely. To me he sounds like on of the most
intellectual people I have heard on Ted Talks. I don't see texting as the rapid decline of proper
language and writing skills at all. Rather, as Mr. McWhorter believes, I think texting is simply a
much quicker, much more casual way, to communicate and express ideas. I think that texting is
just a form of a communication that it closer to how we speak. Rather than be rigid, limited, and
full of rules, like formal writing; texting has no boundaries, is free, and can evolve and change as
needed. A system that can grow and change in correlation with the ever-growing understanding
of language and acronyms is much better (it my mind at least) than a system that attempts to
force people to learn the ways of the system.
Is texting a new form of language entirely? or just a solely simplified language of skills one
already posses'? In the earliest days of texting, it was likely simply regular writing reduced in
complexity. As Mr. McWhoter's analogy went, I think people who lived in the 1800's would
indeed understand texting in its earliest days. However, as Mr. McWhoter's pointed out, I don't
think people form the 1800's would be able to understand today's texting. This is evidence that
texting is a new form of language entirely. Each year, maybe each month, new acronyms and
abbreviations that have never existed are being conceived that make texting even more new and
more effective. These ongoing new additions to texting are what I believe makes texting a new
form of language/communication entirely.

In the future, texting will likely continue to grow and evolve. I think with each new generation it
will become more and more complex. It will likely continue to prove it is separate form
traditional language completely. To me, texting represents a form of communication that
incorporates the most information possible into a message using the lowest number of words or
characters. Texting will continue to morph and change, and will help many generations
effectively communicate in the future.
5.
Yes, I do have a 'voice' when it comes to writing and re-writing my papers and
documents. According to the reading, 'voice' is the creative force that drives a piece of writing
forward. It is the expression of the writer's authority and concern (Murray 613). By this
definition it would seem that any individual that manages to complete any work of writing, has a
voice. However I do not particularly like Mr. Murray's definition of voice. I would suggest
including the word revision and correction within the definition. As to say it this way, " voice is
the creative force that drives a writer to revise and correct a piece of writing and moves the paper
towards completion". In this new definition, it seems that a voice is now much more important,
and harder to come by. In this definition only writers that correct their writings as they go along
and revise their writings have a 'voice'; whereas in Mr. Murray's definition (if I understand it
correctly) any fumbling writer who completes a work of writing has a voice that drove the
writing to completion.
As I said I do believe I have a voice when I write. My voice is very confident, and does not
change regardless of the material that I am writing about. If I am writing a formal paper, my
voice remains exactly the same. It leads me to form and opinion on a topic, express my view
clearly, talk about certain subjects, and continually revise as I think and write, and correct any
errors I find or create. My voice does change however, if I am creating something entirely
different, a poem perhaps. When I am writing poems or doing other creative works, my 'voice' is
much more calm, quiet, and relaxed. My voice tends to take a back seat, and casually search the
creative crevices in my mind. Once my voice has located a 'source of creatively' I can begin to
write things such as poems and songs.