Final Rhetorical Analysis Essay

In our society today, people have the freedom to choose where they get their sources from, whether it be from an online news source or an educative magazine. However, it is actually the way information is portrayed that influences how individuals perceive the subject. For example, between a popular article and an academic research study, there are differences in the way ideas are delivered to the audience. Oftentimes, in popular mainstream articles, information can be easily misrepresented and lost in comparison to the academic research being summarized. Therefore, it is essential for popular media authors to properly portray the scholarly articles that are the basis of their work. In John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health’s piece for Science Daily, “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” the institution accurately represents the main points emphasized by the research done by Julia A Wolfson and co-author Sarah N Bleich in the Public Health Nutrition article, “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” in spite of the differences between the language, organization, and purpose of the two articles.

First of all, in terms of addressing the audience, the two articles contrast with one another. In the popular article, “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” it is intended for the general population to read the paper because anyone who shows even the slightest bit of interest can easily browse and access the piece on Science Daily. Additionally, the wording and terminology used in the article are simple enough to understand and follow along. For example, in the article, John Hopkins Univeristy Bloomberg School of Public Health claimed that “the researchers also found that those who cook at home more often rely less frequently on frozen foods and are less likely to choose fast foods on the occasions when they eat out” (1). The words are not difficult to comprehend and anyone would be able to identify and relate to what the article is trying to state. On the other hand, in Wolfson and Bleich’s research article, “Is cooking at home associated with better quality or weight-loss intention?” there are more complicated words and phrasing like “multinomial logistic regression”, “dichotomous variable”, and “covariates” that help explain the studies in detail (3). The use of sophisticated terminology enables the authors to fully explain their research in the most accurate and detailed form to show the audience how knowledgeable they are in the subject. In addition, it gives other individual readers at a similar level of interest in the nutrition field an opportunity to learn the subject in a precise and efficient manner. All in all, even though both articles have distinct styles in addressing the audience, they both deliver the same message of the health effects resulting from home cooking.

Besides the different uses of diction in the articles, the organization of the two pieces plays a crucial role in getting the information across to the audience. For the popular article on Science Daily, the paper is structured in a simple and straightforward manner. At the very top of the page below the title, John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health conveniently includes a short summary to give readers an idea of what the article will be about. As mentioned in the summary, “People who frequently cook meals at home eat healthier and consume fewer calories than those who cook less, according to new research. The findings also suggest that those who frequently cooked at home — six-to-seven nights a week — also consumed fewer calories on the occasions when they ate out” (John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 1). The summary acts as a helpful preview of what the content of the article would be like. In addition, after several informative paragraphs on the topic of home cooking benefits that enable the audience to easily follow along, the institution includes the story source and journal reference to further give people an idea of where the ideas and sources are coming from. Not only does this show that the popular article accurately summarizes the journal reference using quotes referring to the research article it cited, but also gives credit to the source mentioned at the end of the article. For example, in the middle of the popular piece, it is mentioned that “Wolfson and co-author Sara N. Bleich, PhD, an associate professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Bloomberg School, analyzed data from the 2007-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from more than 9,000 participants aged 20 and older” (1). The John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health give readers a clear idea of the survey Wolfson and Bleich conducted in the journal reference, “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention,” showing that the institution accurately represented the academic research.

In terms of the overall purpose of the two articles, both the popular and the academic piece deliver the same message, but are presented in different ways. In “home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” the popular article emphasizes the importance of diet and health benefits resulting from frequent home cooking compared to unhealthy diets that occurs when one eats out often. As mentioned in the article, “it’s important to educate the public about the benefits of cooking at home, identify strategies that encourage and enable more cooking at home, and help everyone, regardless of how much they cook, make healthier choices when eating out” (John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health,1). The audience is being addressed in a way that has a high possibility of prompting them to take action. The same goes for “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” because in the academic article, Wolfson and Bleich examines national patterns in cooking frequency and diet quality among adults in the US by analyzing data collected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. As we can see, stated in the article, “If a person or someone in their household cooks dinner frequently, regardless of whether or not they are trying to lose weight, diet quality improves. This is likely due to the relatively lower energy, fat and sugar contents in foods cooked at home compared with convenience foods or foods consumed away from home” (Woflson and Bleich, 7). This notifies readers of higher skill in the professional field the clear evidence of the effects of people cooking at home frequently versus people who don’t. Despite the contrasting approach in reaching out to the audience, both articles have the same objectives and purpose in allowing people to realize the significance of frequent home cooking.

After analyzing the rhetorical features common to both the popular and academic articles, it can be concluded that even though there are many differences, the two writings still resemble one another. Through examining the various style, page layout, and objective John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health’s “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows” and Julia A Wolfson and Sarah N Bleich’s “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” both have, we are able to identify how the popular article accurately represents the academic article it cited.

Sources

Popular source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117084711.htm

Academic source: http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FPHN%2FS1368980014001943a.pdf&code=2b124f9f3e509c7aff41ae708a1ef5e1

Works Cited

Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health. “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 17 November 2014. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117084711.htm>.

Julia A Wolfson, Sara N Bleich. Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention? Public Health Nutrition, 2014; 1 DOI: 10.1017/S1368980014001943

Edited Rhetorical Analysis Essay

In our society today, people have the freedom to choose where they get their sources from, whether it be from an online news source or an educative magazine. However, it’s actually the way information is portrayed that influences how individuals perceive the subject. For example, between a popular article and an academic research study, there are differences in the way ideas are delivered to the audience. Oftentimes, in popular mainstream articles, information can be easily misguided and lost in comparison to the academic research being summarized. Therefore, it is essential for popular media authors to properly portray the scholarly articles that are the basis of their work. In John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health’s piece for Science Daily, “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” the institution accurately represents the main points emphasized by the research done by Julia A Wolfson and co-author Sarah N Bleich in the Public Health Nutrition article, “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” in spite of the differences between the language, organization, and purpose of the two articles.

First of all, in terms of addressing the audience, the two articles contrast with one another. In the popular article, “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” it is intended for the general population to read the paper because anyone who shows even the slightest bit of interest can easily browse and access the piece on Science Daily. Additionally, the wording and terminology used in the article are simple enough to understand and follow along. For example, in the article, John Hopkins Univeristy Bloomberg School of Public Health claimed that “the researchers also found that those who cook at home more often rely less frequently on frozen foods and are less likely to choose fast foods on the occasions when they eat out” (1). The words are not difficult to comprehend and anyone would be able to identify and relate to what the article is trying to state. On the other hand, in Wolfson and Bleich’s research article, “Is cooking at home associated with better quality or weight-loss intention?” there are more complicated words and phrasing like “multinomial logistic regression”, “dichotomous variable”, and “covariates” that help explain the studies in detail (3). Not only does the use of sophisticated terminology enable the authors to fully explain their research in the most accurate and detailed form to show the audience how knowledgeable they are in the subject, but also give other individual readers at a similar level of interest in the nutrition field an opportunity to learn the subject in a precise manner. All in all, even though both articles have distinct styles in addressing the audience, they both deliver the same message of the health effects resulting from home cooking.

Besides the different uses of diction in the articles, the organization of the two pieces plays a crucial role in getting the information across to the audience. For the popular article on Science Daily, the paper is structured in a simple and straightforward manner. At the very top of the page below the title, John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health conveniently included a short summary to give readers an idea of what the article will be about. As mentioned in the summary, “People who frequently cook meals at home eat healthier and consume fewer calories than those who cook less, according to new research. The findings also suggest that those who frequently cooked at home — six-to-seven nights a week — also consumed fewer calories on the occasions when they ate out” (John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 1). The summary acts as a helpful preview of what the content of the article would be like. In addition, after several informative paragraphs on the topic of home cooking benefits that enable the audience to easily follow along, the institution includes the story source and journal reference to further give people an idea of where the ideas and sources are coming from. Not only does this show that the popular article accurately summarized the journal reference using quotes referring to the research article it cited , but also gave credit to the source mentioned at the end of the article. For example, in the middle of the popular piece, it was mentioned that “Wolfson and co-author Sara N. Bleich, PhD, an associate professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Bloomberg School, analyzed data from the 2007-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from more than 9,000 participants aged 20 and older” (1). The John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health gave readers a clear idea of the survey Wolfson and Bleich conducted in the journal reference, “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention,” showing that the institution accurately represented the academic research.

In terms of the overall purpose of the two articles, both the popular and the academic piece deliver the same message, but are presented in different ways. In “home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” the popular article emphasizes the importance of diet and health benefits resulting from frequent home cooking, compared to unhealthy diets that occurs when one eats out often. As mentioned in the article, “it’s important to educate the public about the benefits of cooking at home, identify strategies that encourage and enable more cooking at home, and help everyone, regardless of how much they cook, make healthier choices when eating out” (John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health,1). The audience is being addressed in a way that has a high possibility of prompting them to take action. The same goes for “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” because in the academic article, Wolfson and Bleich examines national patterns in cooking frequency and diet quality among adults in the US by analyzing data collected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. As we can see, stated in the article, “If a person or someone in their household cooks dinner frequently, regardless of whether or not they are trying to lose weight, diet quality improves. This is likely due to the relatively lower energy, fat and sugar contents in foods cooked at home compared with convenience foods or foods consumed away from home” (Woflson and Bleich, 7). This notifies readers of higher skill in the professional field the clear evidence of the effects of people cooking at home frequently versus people who don’t. Despite the contrasting approach in reaching out to the audience, both articles have the same objectives and purpose in allowing people to realize the significance of frequent home cooking.

After analyzing the certain rhetorical features both the popular and academic article share characteristics of, it can be concluded that even though there are many differences, the two writings still resemble one another. Through the various style, page layout, and objective John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health’s “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows” and Julia A Wolfson and Sarah N Bleich’s “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” both have, we are able to identify how the popular article accurately represents the academic article it cited.

Rhetorical Analysis Essay

In our society today, people have the freedom to choose where they get their sources from, whether it be from an online news source or an educative magazine. However, it’s actually the way information is portrayed that influences how individuals perceive the subject. For example, between a popular article and an academic research study, there are differences in the way ideas are delivered to the audience. Oftentimes, in popular mainstream articles, information can be easily misguided and lost in comparison to the academic research being summarized. Therefore, it is essential for popular media authors to properly portray the scholarly articles that are the basis of their work. In John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health’s piece for Science Daily, “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” the institution accurately represents the main points emphasized by the research done by Julia A Wolfson and co-author Sarah N Bleich in the Public Health Nutrition article, “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” in spite of the differences between the language, organization, and purpose of the two articles.

First of all, in terms of addressing the audience, the two articles contrast with one another. In the popular article, “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” it is intended for the general population to read the paper because anyone who shows even the slightest bit interest can easily browse and access the piece on Science Daily. Additionally, the wording and terminology used in the article are simple enough to understand and follow along. For example, in the article, John Hopkins Univeristy Bloomberg School of Public Health claimed that “the researchers also found that those who cook at home more often rely less frequently on frozen foods and are less likely to choose fast foods on the occasions when they eat out” (1). The words are not difficult to comprehend and anyone would be able to identify and relate to what the article is trying to state. In contrast, in Wolfson and Bleich’s research article, “Is cooking at home associated with better quality or weight-loss intention?” there are more complicated words and phrasing like “multinomial logistic regression”, “dichotomous variable”, and “covariates” that help explain the studies in detail (3). Not only does the use of sophisticated terminology enable the authors to fully explain their research in the most accurate and detailed form to show the audience how knowledgeable they are in the subject, but also give other individual readers at a similar level of interest in the nutrition field an opportunity to learn the subject in a precise manner. Even though both articles have distinct styles in addressing the audience, they both deliver the same message of the health effects resulting from home cooking.

Besides the different uses of diction in the articles, the organization of the two pieces plays a crucial role in getting the information across to the audience. For the popular article on Science Daily, the paper is structured in a simple and straightforward manner. At the very top of the page below the title, John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health conveniently included a short summary to give readers an idea of what the article will be about. As mentioned in the summary, “People who frequently cook meals at home eat healthier and consume fewer calories than those who cook less, according to new research. The findings also suggest that those who frequently cooked at home — six-to-seven nights a week — also consumed fewer calories on the occasions when they ate out” (John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 1). The summary acts as a preview of what the content of the article would be like. In addition, after several informative paragraphs on the topic of home cooking benefits that enable the audience to easily follow along, the institution includes the story source and journal reference to further give people an idea of where the ideas and sources are coming from. Not only does this show that the popular article accurately summarized the journal reference cited as quotes taken from the research article throughout the paper, but it also gave credit to the source mentioned at the end of the article. For example, in the middle of the popular piece, it was mentioned that “Wolfson and co-author Sara N. Bleich, PhD, an associate professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Bloomberg School, analyzed data from the 2007-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from more than 9,000 participants aged 20 and older” (1). Not only did the John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health give readers an idea of the survey Wolfson and Bleich conducted in the journal reference, “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention” it cited, but shows that the institution accurately represented the academic research.

In terms of the overall purpose of the two articles, both the popular and the academic piece deliver the same message, but are presented in different ways. In “home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows,” the popular article emphasizes the importance of diet and health benefits resulting from frequent home cooking, compared to unhealthy diets that occurs when one eats out often. As mentioned in the article, “it’s important to educate the public about the benefits of cooking at home, identify strategies that encourage and enable more cooking at home, and help everyone, regardless of how much they cook, make healthier choices when eating out” (John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health,1). The audience is being addressed in a way that has a high possibility of prompting them to take action. The same goes for “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” because in the academic article, Wolfson and Bleich examines national patterns in cooking frequency and diet quality among adults in the US by analyzing data collected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. As we can see, stated in the article, “If a person or someone in their household cooks dinner frequently, regardless of whether or not they are trying to lose weight, diet quality improves. This is likely due to the relatively lower energy, fat and sugar contents in foods cooked at home compared with convenience foods or foods consumed away from home” (Woflson and Bleich, 7). This notifies readers of higher skill in the field the clear evidence of the effects of people cooking at home frequently versus people who don’t. Despite the different takes in approaching the subject being written out for the audience to read, both articles have the same objectives and purpose in allowing people to realize the significance of frequent home cooking.

From analyzing all these rhetorical features in both the popular and academic article, it can be concluded that even though there are many differences, the two writings still resemble one another. Through the various styles, layouts, and structures of “Home cooking a main ingredient in healthier diet, study shows” and “Is cooking at home associated with better diet quality or weight-loss intention?” we are able to identify how the popular article accurately represents the academic article it cited.

Edited Problem Essay

Dear fellow UC Davis students,

Unfortunately, in the short amount of weeks that I’ve been here, I have witnessed the same thing repeatedly almost every single day. Whenever people go to any of the three dining commons on campus, a lot of food ends up being wasted and thrown away. This is a highly serious issue because we cannot afford to take any of the food provided for granted.

First of all, just think about the countless number of people in other impoverished countries facing starvation and hunger due to lack of nutrition. They would go to the extent of risking their own lives just to find food in order to end their struggles of survival. Now, look at us. It’s a vast difference because we don’t even have to worry about not having anything to eat. If you try imagining how it feels to walk a mile in their shoes, you will understand right away. Please, if we all just take a second and reflect on the actions that we make, I’m sure that we can slowly lessen the severity of this problem.

Apart from putting our minds on the unfortunate individuals in poor countries, think about the money and resources used to produce all the food that we end up tossing out without a backward glance. That’s just unidealistic and unwise. When we waste food, we seem to forget about the hard-earned money we are wasting along with it. A big proportion of the students at this university pay a large amount of tuition that goes into the meals that are offered to them every day, but if we end up throwing away food due to lack of consideration and thought, a whole bunch of money will be wasted in the process. The school shouldn’t feel obligated to spend extra dollars just to buy more ingredients and produce food that many of us don’t even appreciate and value. In addition, a lot of the food in the dining halls are locally grown here on campus, so it is highly wasteful and unsustainable for people to carelessly discard uneaten and untouched food that took an immensely long time to produce. It’s necessary to consider everything needed to make the food we all eat every day and to cherish what the school provides for us.

Not only do each and every one of your actions affect the environment, but also other individuals as well. The workers in the dining commons have to go through the extra trouble just to clean up everyone’s uneaten or untouched food. A larger amount of water also have to be used to wash the overwhelming amount of plates and utensils that many of you guys end up taking. It’s clearly not right for us to inconvenience the dining commons employees with our mess and we should all know better than to give unnecessary work to others.

I feel very passionate about this particular topic because I had seen the excessive waste of food everywhere growing up. Whether it be a fast food restaurant, diner, buffet, or the school cafeteria, the same thing occurs over and over again. Many people, of all ages, would indifferently toss out scraps of perfectly fine meals. Even though they spend the money to buy these various foods, it doesn’t stop them from discarding what they did not finish eating. Just looking at the overflowing stacks and piles of wasted food in the trashcans tugs at my heartstrings. I realize that it is human nature to be easily tempted by delicious food, but that is no excuse to excessively grab more plates than your stomach can digest or buy more food than you can possibly even handle. Unbelievably, we waste forty percent of our food in just the United States alone. It’s about time we set our priorities straight and decrease the amount that we waste.

Even though this issue has been brought up and recognized continuously by our society, the problem will not be solved unless we change. We should take action and start from our very own campus because we depend on it the most. To start off, every time any of you guys go to the dining commons, be sure to look carefully at the menu to decide what you like and will finish eating. It only makes sense to take whatever is needed and nothing more, to satisfy your hunger for the current time being. It’s honestly not a difficult task because everyone should have the conscience to be mindful of what’s right and wrong. I highly doubt that dumping so much valuable food into the trashcan will make anyone feel good about themselves. Going through the trouble of getting a lot more than you can possibly consume is not worth it. Now, I do realize that some of the dishes in the dining commons are already prepared beforehand, but the small portions should not be too hard to finish. In addition, they provide samples of the various dishes at their dedicated stations so that students can have a taste test before they decide to get the food. UC Davis encourages the reduction of food waste through several programs, so it only makes sense if we students start to acknowledge the seriousness of this problem and begin to make a difference.

All in all, instead of blindly ignoring the issue that has been widely viewed in the world today, it’s best to rethink our morals and thoughts. In order to change the world for the better, preventing the waste of food is one of the best actions to take. After all, it’s never too late to start improving the way we live our lives.

Best,

Sydney Tsao

Problem Essay

Dear fellow UC Davis students,

Unfortunately, I witness the same thing repeatedly almost every single day in the short amount of weeks that I’ve been here. Whenever people go to any of the three dining commons on campus, a lot of food end up being wasted and thrown away. This is a highly serious issue because we cannot afford to take any of the food provided for granted.

First of all, just think about the countless number of people in other impoverished countries facing starvation and hunger due to lack of nutrition. They would go to the extent of risking their own lives just to find food in order to end their struggles of survival. Now, look at us. It’s a vast difference because we don’t even have to bother worrying about not getting anything to eat. If you try imagining how it feels to live in their shoes, you’ll understand right away. Please, if we all just take a second and reflect on every action that we make, I’m sure that things will turn out very differently.

Apart from putting our minds on the unfortunate individuals in poor countries, think about the money and resources used to produce all the food that many of us often toss out without a backward glance. That’s just unidealistic and unwise. A big proportion of the students at this university pay a large amount of tuition that goes into the meals that are offered to them every day, but if we end up throwing away food due to lack of consideration and thought, a whole bunch of money will be wasted in the process. The school should feel obligated to spend extra dollars just to buy more ingredients and produce food that many of you guys don’t even appreciate and value. In addition, a lot of the food in the dining halls are locally grown here on campus, so it’s highly wasteful and unsustainable for people to carelessly discard uneaten and untouched food that took a really long time to produce. It’s highly important to consider everything needed to make the food we all eat every day and to cherish what the school provides for us.

Not only do each and every one of your actions affect the environment, but also other individuals as well. The workers in the dining commons have to do extra work just to take care of everyone’s uneaten or untouched food. So much more water also have to be used to clean up the overwhelming amount of plates and utensils that many of you guys end up taking. It’s clearly not right for things to turn out this way. We should all know better and to reflect on the mistakes that we make.

I feel very passionate and heated about this particular topic because I’ve seen it everywhere when I was growing up. Whether it be a fast food shop, restaurant, buffet, or the school cafeteria, the same thing occurs over and over again. Many people, of all ages, would indifferently toss out scraps of perfectly fine nourishments. Even though they spend the money to buy these various foods, it doesn’t stop them from discarding what they didn’t finish eating. Just looking at the overflowing stacks and piles of wasted food in the trash cans tugs at my heartstrings. Even though I realize that it is human nature to be easily tempted by delicious food, but that is no excuse to excessively grab more plates than your stomach can digest or buy more food than you can possibly even handle. It’s unbelievable that we waste forty percent of our food in just the United States alone. It’s about time we set our priorities straight and make a difference, striving towards lessening the amount that we waste.

Even though this issue has been brought up and recognized continuously by our society, we should really take action and start from our very own campus. To start off, every time any of you guys go to the dining commons, be sure to look carefully at the menu to decide what you like and will finish eating. It only makes sense to take whatever is needed and nothing more, to satisfy your hunger for the current time being. It’s honestly not a difficult task because everyone should have the conscience to be mindful of what’s right and wrong. I highly doubt that dumping so much valuable food into the trash can will make anyone feel good about themselves. Going through the trouble of getting ahold of a lot more than you can possibly consume is not worth it. Now, I do realize that even though some of the dishes in the dining commons are already prepared beforehand, the portions are not too much so it shouldn’t be too hard to finish. UC Davis does encourage the lessening of food waste through various programs, so it only makes sense if we students start to acknowledge the seriousness of this problem and begin to make a difference.

All in all, instead of blindly ignoring the issue that has been widely viewed in the world today, it’s best to slowly rethink our morals and thoughts. In order to change the world for the better, preventing the waste of food is one of the best actions to take. After all, it’s never too late to start improving the way we should live our lives.

Best,

Sydney Tsao

Edited Literacy Narrative

I still have a vivid memory of the day my dad introduced me to a computer. He quickly taught me the basics of how to use the foreign, new electronic device, and I was immediately captivated by it. At first, I would only play games that didn’t require much understanding, but I slowly began to learn how to type through the Mavis Beacon tutorial guides, allowing me to discover a whole new method of communicating. Many years later, I now realize how big of an impact technology had in shaping my life.

The computer not only introduced me to various social media, but also e-mailing, video chatting, browsing the web, and instant messaging. I was in a world of constant change and development where digital literacy was becoming more prominent. Day by day, I would rely more and more on this advanced technology. Soon enough, I constantly needed it to webcam my long distance relatives living all the way in Taiwan, e-mail questions to my teachers, look up information, and chat with my friends. I always had trouble opening up and making new friends due to my shy personality, so I began getting to know more people through Facebook groups and chats. I would socialize and message with classmates I don’t get to talk to as much. This had allowed me to gain confidence and directly communicate with people more easily.

A few years later, I received my first smartphone. I had continuously pestered my mom about getting me a better cellphone because other classmates had better models than my boring and old flip phone, so she finally caved in and bought me this luxurious new product. Acquiring this electronic device was another huge turning point in my life.

From then on, I would often use my phone instead of the computer, which allowed me to communicate with people faster. Whenever I chat or e-mail my friends, I could just simply check my portable phone for any new messages. I also began to use Instagram, a popular social media where people share photos for everyone else to see. Through this application, I started to gain interest in uploading unique pictures and writing impressive captions. Without being aware of it, I began to think from another perspective and look at things in a new light by finding inspirations from quotes and pictures people posted on social media. I became increasingly aware of how I wanted to write and think. Furthermore, I began to focus on choosing my words more carefully to make them sound the best they can be.

Having both my computer and smartphone made me become more exposed to a wider range of knowledge. Being able to easily access information allowed me to do quicker research and get tasks done in a more efficient manner. Occasionally when I had trouble identifying or recognizing a word, I would just pull out my phone from my pocket to look it up online. This reliable device by my side gradually enabled me to learn faster and develop a wider range of vocabulary. Often times, I would incorporate what I gained through the use of technology into my assignments and communication with others. For example, I would be sure to design clear and comprehensive PowerPoint slides that allowed the audience to fully understand what I was trying to present. From then on, I was able to develop better writing skills and voice out whatever I wanted to say in a concise manner.

It is easy enough to say that technology has changed my life for the better. Not only did it strengthen my connection and communication with others, but gave me the opportunity to explore and discover myself. I learned the style and manner I like to write in, speak with others, and complete tasks. Even though many people think otherwise, I believe that using my computer and smartphone has been a very positive experience for me.

Literacy Narrative

I still have a vivid memory of the day my dad introduced me to a computer. He quickly taught me the basics of how to use the foreign, new electronic device, and I was immediately captivated by it. At first, I would only play games that didn’t require much understanding, but I slowly began to learn how to type through the Mavis Beacon tutorial guides, allowing me to discover a whole new method of communicating. Many years later, I now realize how big of an impact technology had in shaping my life.

The computer not only introduced me to various social media, but also e-mailing, video chatting, browsing the web, and instant messaging. I was in a world of constant change and development where digital literacy was becoming more prominent. Day by day, I would rely more and more on this advanced technology. Soon enough, I always needed it to webcam my long distance relatives living all the way in Taiwan, e-mail questions to my teachers, look up information, and chat with my friends. I always had trouble opening up and making new friends due to my shy personality, so I began getting to know more people through Facebook groups and chats. This had allowed me to gain confidence and directly communicate with people more easily.

A few years later, I received my first smartphone. I had continuously pestered my mom about getting me a better cellphone because other classmates had better models than my boring and old flip phone, so she finally caved in and bought me this luxurious new product. Acquiring this electronic device was another huge turning point in my life.

From then on, I would often use my phone instead of the computer, which allowed me to communicate with people faster. Whenever I chat or e-mail my friends, I could just simply check my portable phone for any new messages. I also began to use Instagram, a popular social media where people share photos for everyone else to see. Through this application, I started to gain interest in uploading unique pictures and writing impressive captions. Without being aware of it, I began to think from another perspective and look at things in a new light by finding inspirations from quotes and pictures people posted on social media. I became increasingly aware of how I wanted to write and think. Furthermore, I began to focus on choosing my words more carefully to make them sound the best they can be.

Having both my computer and smartphone made me become more exposed to a wider range of knowledge. Being able to easily access information allowed me to do quicker research and get tasks done in a more efficient manner. Occasionally when I had trouble identifying or recognizing a word, I would just pull out my phone from my pocket to look it up online. This reliable device by my side gradually enabled me to learn faster and develop a wider range of vocabulary. Often times, I would incorporate what I gained through the use of technology into my assignments and communication with others. For example, I would be sure to design clear and comprehensive PowerPoint slides that allowed the audience to fully understand what I was trying to present. From then on, I was able to develop better writing skills and voice out whatever I wanted to say in a concise manner.

It is easy enough to say that technology has changed my life for the better. Not only did it strengthen my connection and communication with others, but gave me the opportunity to explore and discover myself. I learned the style and manner I like to write in, speak with others, and complete tasks.