From the Mind of Lauren Ridge
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
My Experience with the Rhetorical Analysis
I honestly enjoyed working on this rhetorical analysis. At first, I struggled to see passed who the speaker was and what message he conveyed in his speech. However, rather than just observe the opinions of these speakers as one would observe a piece of art, it was exciting to dig deeper into each speech. It was fun to discover both the strengths as well as the flaws scattered throughout them. I felt like a detective searching for clues as to how each piece was constructed. I can't seem to stop doing it either! Every time I listen to a song or speech, I pay close attention to details such as rhetorical devices and the overall flow of the piece. Overall, it was a great learning experience. There are still many bits of rhetoric that I fail to uncover, but with practice I hope to learn more and better understand the messages of the world around me.
The Final Rhetorical Analysis
Ta-da! She's finished! What think ye?
Courting America
with Words
Many see the rhetoric of politicians as
the frantic hurling of pistols and grenades in order to get their way. However,
we forget that these individuals are not trying to slaughter their audience;
rather they are attempting win their approval. They are like two boys competing
for a girl. They put on their best cologne, present flowers and chocolates, and
do everything within their power to win the heart of their desired lady. The
man who pleases her the most wins.
Politicians do the very same. However,
instead of presenting themselves to their audience with roses and delicacies,
they come to them prepared with carefully organized rhetoric. We see this in
the case of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2006 and 2007 as they compete for
the same girl: the religious community in America. These two politicians make
appeals to Americans in different ways just as two gentlemen will court a lady
by using different methods. In competing for the same girl, which of these men portrays
the better suitor?
Obama makes the first move toward
his audience in a direct manner. He forms his speech around the argument, “Any reconciliation between faith and democratic
pluralism requires some sense of proportion…Religious leadership need not
accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they should recognize this
wisdom in their politics” (The New York Times). In an attempt to appeal to such
a religious audience, stating this thesis up front is clearly a terrible idea. This
is why Obama strategically waits until the middle of the speech to address his
argument rather than bring it up at the very beginning. He creates a large
buffer for this thesis by discussing his own personal experience with religion.
This is a very effective way to level himself with his audience. Had he not
done this, he would have easily been talking down to them and thus would not
have pleased them in the slightest.
Obama continues
to please his audience by immediately mentioning the opposing view of his ideas.
In doing this, he acknowledges that there is another side to the issue and
rebuttals that with his own experiences and reasoning. His rebuttals to
counterarguments are almost always references to the Bible. This is the perfect
tool to use in appealing to his audience because the Bible is an enormous part
of their lives.
As he finds
additional ways to relate to his audience, Obama also does much to level
himself with them, which helps to capture their attention and appeal to them. He
doesn’t use flowery language; his word choice is very direct and he speaks
clearly to them. He becomes even more personable to them as he relates a number
of personal experiences with his own conversion. He even uses words like
“folks,” which is common jargon used by this particular audience. Although it
is informal, it appeals to them because, again, it levels himself with them and
makes him seem more like their friend.
Obama excels
in terms of portraying himself as a real and appealing person to his audience.
However, he also has his occasional missteps. Some of these, though seemingly
small, have a profound effect on the reader as well as the listener. No romantic
date is ever absolutely perfect, and neither is a speech.
One of these
blunders is found in his repetition of the phrase, “And that night, before I
went to bed I said a prayer of my own” (New York Times). He uses this phrase once,
inserts another sentence, and then repeats the phrase. Although repetition is
not necessarily improper, and normally is used to emphasize a point, Obama’s
use of it undermines his argument more than anything. The phrase is repeated
too soon. Not only that, but the phrase itself is much too long to make a
rhythmic, smooth repetition. It is more obnoxious than anything, which
distracts from his argument and takes from his credibility as a well-educated author.
Obama slips again when
he talks about receiving a negative note from a doctor concerning some of his
views that were written on his website. He says, “In
fairness to them, my staff had written them using standard Democratic
boilerplate language to summarize my pro-choice position during the Democratic
primary” (The New York Times). He then goes on to explain how he changed the
language on his website after this discovery. In mentioning that his staff had
written the offensive material, he deflects the blow to himself and throws his
staff under the bus due to something for which he was responsible. This shows
that he is not willing to accept his own mistakes. It is almost childish. It
damages his argument because the audience cannot take him very seriously. For
all they know, he may throw them under the bus for something too.
This is a mistake that
Mitt Romney avoids as he too presents himself to religious society in America.
His speech is built up to emphasize his thesis, “I will not separate us from
'the God who gave us liberty.' Reason and religion are friends and allies in the
cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day” (NPR). This
is an excellent thesis to use in order to attract his devoutly religious
audience. He constantly discusses this thesis, but he also makes a point to
acknowledge, like Obama, the other side of the issue. In a way, he uses this as
a springboard to add more strength to his argument.
Although
Romney does not use as many personal experiences as Obama, he relies heavily on
the use of various rhetorical devices to drive his point across. He uses language
that is very poetic and metaphorical. For example, in the beginning of his
speech, he creates an antimetabole when he declares, “Freedom requires religion
just as religion requires freedom” (NPR). Not only does it add to his
credibility as an intelligent author, but it also creates a figurative picture
of the hopeful future that these religious leaders desire. It is rhythmic and
poetic, mimicking the smooth speaking style of a religious leader. It
emphasizes his point and creates power in his argument. It is soothing to the
ear the same way a romantic ballad is lulling the listener.
Romney’s political
ballad continues as he repeatedly gives examples of actions done and statements
made by well-known American leaders such as Samuel Adams, John Adams, and
Abraham Lincoln. These references serve to back up his arguments. After all,
who would disagree with someone as legendary and influential as Abraham
Lincoln? With this in mind, Romney uses multiple citations from these leaders and
thus his arguments ring true with his audience. They are more likely to agree,
which wins more approval in his behalf.
Romney’s clever
rhetoric powerfully launches its Cupid’s arrows. It directly hits and wins the
heart of his primary audience when he mentions a variety of faiths such as
Christians, Muslims, and Jews. This is a very smooth move because his audience
almost entirely consists of these particular faiths. Overall, Romney does much
to create a convincing argument as well as a powerful one.
However,
Romney’s love-arrow barely misses the heart of his secondary audience. He addresses
religious groups, but never says anything about those who are without religion.
The speech is entirely directed to those who believe in God, but Romney makes
no attempt to even mention the atheists and agnostics who also make up a large
portion of the United States population. They are completely ignored as a
secondary audience. Even Obama made a mention of these people in his own
speech. Had Romney done this, his argument would have been much more convincing
to the primary and the secondary
audience.
Romney makes
another serious misstep when he states, “Almost 50 years ago another candidate
from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for president, not
a Catholic running for president” (NPR). Who exactly is this candidate from
Massachusetts? Romney never mentions him by name. No one has any idea if he is
a Republican, Democrat, honorable individual, or a questionable figure. No one
even knows the name of this mysterious candidate. Has Romney left out these
details “just because” or is he trying to use an example from someone
untrustworthy in order to build up his own argument? This lack of details
creates a sense that Romney is hiding something, which engenders a feeling of
distrust in his audience. Everyone knows that a dating relationship cannot
survive while harboring even the slightest lack of trust.
Like the
analysis of two eager boys, we see both the strong points and the weaknesses of
these politicians. Obama’s approach presents reason while Romney’s radiates
power. In the end of this romantic competition, it appears that Obama makes the
better appeal and thus portrays the better suitor. He wins the heart of both
audiences, while Romney mostly appeals to one. His offerings of clear, sincere,
and straight-forward arguments are more attractive than Romney’s rhetorical ballad
and slight secrecy. Obama’s use of language brings him level with his audience,
making him more of a real person and a trustworthy friend to them. This does
much to win the fancy of the primary audience as well as the secondary audience.
In this case, less truly is more. Obama’s sincere, straightforward approach
wins him the hand of the fair lady while Romney’s rhetoric-packed ballad leaves
him singing the blues alone. Barack Obama’s manner of appealing wins the heart
of the girl we all know as religion in America and America as a whole.
Works Cited
Obama, Barack. "Obama’s 2006
Speech on Faith and Politics." The New York Times. 28 June 2006.
Web. 3 Feb. 2016.
Romney, Mitt. "Transcript: Mitt
Romney's Faith Speech." NPR. 6 Dec. 2007. Web. 2 Feb. 2016.
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Newer Draft of the Rhetorical Analysis
Is is better? I sure hope so!
Many see the rhetoric of politicians as
the frantic hurling of pistols and grenades in order to get their way. However,
we forget that these individuals are not trying to slaughter their audience;
rather they are attempting win their approval. They are like two boys competing
for a girl. They put on their best cologne, present flowers and chocolates, and
do everything within their power to win the heart of their desired lady. The
man who pleases her the most is the winner.
Politicians do the very same. However,
instead of presenting themselves to their audience with roses and delicacies,
they come to them prepared with carefully organized rhetoric. We see this in
the case of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2006 and 2007 as they compete for
the same girl: the religious community in America. These two politicians make
appeals to Americans in different ways just as two gentlemen will court a lady
by using different methods. In competing for the same girl, which of these men
wins?
Obama makes the first move toward
his audience in a more direct manner. He forms his speech around the argument,
“Any reconciliation between faith and democratic
pluralism requires some sense of proportion…Religious leadership need not
accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they should recognize this
wisdom in their politics” (New York Times). In an attempt to appeal to such a
religious audience, stating this thesis up front may not seem to be the best
idea. This is why Obama strategically waits until the middle of the speech to
address his argument rather than bringing it up at the very beginning. He
creates a large buffer for this thesis by discussing his own personal
conversion. This is a very effective way to level himself with his audience.
Had he not done this, he would have easily been talking down to them and thus
would not have pleased them in the slightest.
Obama continues
to please his audience by immediately mentioning the opposing view of his
opinion. In doing this, he acknowledges that there is another side to the issue
and rebuttals that with his own experiences and reasoning. His rebuttals to
counterarguments are almost always references to the Bible. This is the perfect
tool to use in appealing to his audience, because they live by the words and
stories of the Bible.
As he finds
additional ways to relate to his audience, Obama also does much to level
himself with his audience, which helps to capture their attention and appeal to
them. He doesn’t use flowery language; his word choice is very direct and he
speaks clearly to them. He becomes even more personable to them as he relates a
number of personal experiences with religion and his own conversion. He even
uses words like “folks,” which is common jargon used by this particular
audience. Although it is informal, it appeals to them because, again, it levels
himself with them and makes him seem more like their friend.
Obama excels
in terms of portraying himself as a real and appealing person to his audience.
However, he also has his occasional missteps. Some of these, though seemingly
small, have a profound effect on the reader as well as the listener. No romantic
date is ever absolutely perfect, and neither is a speech.
One of these
blunders was found in his repetition of the phrase, “And that night, before I
went to bed I said a prayer of my own” (New York Times). He uses this phrase
the first time, inserts another sentence, and then repeats the phrase. Although
repetition is not necessarily improper, and normally is used to emphasize a
point, Obama’s use of it undermines his point more than anything. The way it is
used here makes it seem as though one is listening to a broken record that
repeats itself because the phrase is repeated too soon. Not only that, but the
phrase itself is much too long to make a rhythmic, smooth repetition. It is
more obnoxious than anything, which distracts from his argument and takes from
his credibility as an intelligent author.
Another is when he
talks about receiving a negative note from a doctor concerning some of his
views. He says, “In fairness to them, my staff had
written them using standard Democratic boilerplate language to summarize my
pro-choice position during the Democratic primary” (Obama). He then goes on to
say how he changed the language after this discovery. In bringing up that his
staff had written the offensive material, he basically deflects the blow to
himself and throws his staff under the bus for something for which he was
responsible. This damages his argument because it shows that he is not as
willing to accept his own mistakes.
Religious
society in America is also addressed by Mitt Romney, who takes a different
approach. His speech is built up to emphasize his thesis, “I will not separate
us from 'the God who gave us liberty.' Reason and religion are friends and
allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day”
(NPR). This is an excellent thesis to use in order to attract his devoutly
religious audience. He constantly talks about this thesis, but he also makes a
point to acknowledge, like Obama, the other side of the issue. In a way, he
uses this as a springboard to add more strength to his own argument.
Although
Romney does not use as many personal experiences as Obama, he relies heavily on
the use of various rhetorical devices to drive his point across. His language
use is very poetic and metaphorical. For example, in the beginning of his
speech, he creates an antimetabole when he declares, “Freedom requires religion
just as religion requires freedom” (NPR). Not only does it add to his
credibility as an intelligent author, but it also creates a figurative picture
of the hopeful future that these religious leaders want to see. It is rhythmic and
poetic, mimicking the smooth speaking style of a religious leader. It
emphasizes his point and creates a power in his argument. It is soothing to the
ear the same way a romantic ballad lulls the listener.
Romney repeatedly
gives examples of actions done and things said by well-known American leaders
such as Samuel Adams, John Adams, and Abraham Lincoln. These references serve
to back up his arguments. After all, who would disagree with someone as
legendary and influential as Abraham Lincoln? With this in mind, Romney uses
multiple and thus his arguments make more sense to his audience. They are more
likely to agree, which wins more in his behalf.
Romney’s clever
rhetoric powerfully launches its Cupid’s arrows. It directly hits and wins the
heart of his primary audience when he mentions a variety of faiths such as
Christians, Muslims, and Jews. This is a very smooth move because his audience
is almost entirely consisting of these particular faiths. Overall, Romney does
much to create a convincing argument as well as a powerful one.
However,
Romney’s love-arrow barely misses the heart of his secondary audience. He addresses
religious groups, but never even mentions those who are without religion. The
speech is entirely directed to those who believe in God, but Romney makes no
attempt to even seem to glance at the atheists and agnostics who also make up a
large portion of the United States population. They are completely ignored as a
secondary audience, and Cupid’s arrow wizzes past them. Even Obama made a
mention of these people in his own speech. Had Romney done this, his argument
would have been much more convincing to the primary and the secondary audience.
Romney makes
another serious misstep when he states, “Almost 50 years ago another candidate
from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for president, not
a Catholic running for president” (NPR). Who exactly is this candidate from
Massachusetts? Romney never mentions him by name. No one has any idea if he is
a Republican, Democrat, honorable individual, or a questionable figure. No one
even knows the name of this mysterious candidate! Has Romney left out those
details “just because” or is he just trying to use an example from someone
untrustworthy in order to build up his own argument? This lack of details creates
a sense that Romney is hiding something, which creates distrust in his audience.
Everyone knows that a dating relationship cannot survive while harboring even
the slightest lack of trust.
In the end
of this romantic competition, it appears that Obama makes the better appeal and
thus portrays the better suitor. His offerings of clear, sincere,
straight-forward arguments are more attractive than Romney’s rhetorical ballad.
Obama’s use of language brings him level with his audience, making him more of
a real person and a trustworthy friend to them. This does much to win the fancy
of the primary audience as well as the secondary audience. In this case, less
truly is more. Obama’s sincere, straightforward appeal wins him the hand of the
fair lady while Romney’s rhetoric-packed ballad leaves him only singing the
blues alone. Barack Obama’s manner of appealing wins the heart of the girl we
all know as religion in America and
America as a whole.
Works Cited
Obama, Barack. "Obama’s 2006
Speech on Faith and Politics." The New York Times. 28 June 2006.
Web. 3 Feb. 2016.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/us/politics/2006obamaspeech.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&>.
Romney, Mitt. "Transcript: Mitt
Romney's Faith Speech." NPR. 6 Dec. 2007. Web. 2 Feb. 2016.
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16969460>.
Monday, February 8, 2016
Thesis Proposal for a Rhetorical Analysis
Now, instead of making the argument, I will be analyzing the arguments of others to decide which is created the best. Here we go!
Of the four speeches that we read in
class, I feel that I am most intrigued by the speech given by Barack Obama as
well as the speech by Mitt Romney. I have decided to analyze these two speeches
because they were given around the same time. Obama and Romney, being from two
different political parties, have some very different views concerning religion
and politics. This causes me to believe that they have similar jargon and
background knowledge, thus making their speeches more similar in that sense. I
want to find the rhetorical devices used in each speech and determine which
rhetorician is the most effective. Since the audiences were religious leaders,
I want to decide who makes a better appeal to his audience.
In order to do this, I plan to first analyze
what the writer did well. Romney enhanced the overall flow of his speech with
repetition and rhythm. Obama made an appeal to his ethos by relating personal
experiences. These, among others, were things that each author did to
strengthen his argument as well as improve the quality of his speech.
After this analysis, I want to point out
mistakes that each one made. I don’t mean that they spelled incorrectly or used
a semicolon instead of a period in the wrong place (although I will point out
those if I find them). Both are effective, but they did use devices that
weakened their arguments. I want to find these throughout both speeches and
decide which made the most grave of mistakes.
In analyzing these good characteristics
as well as bad ones, I think that it will help me to determine which made a
better appeal to his audience. Thus, I will decide which is most effective. I
plan to focus more on the rhetoric used rather than the arguments made.
Friday, January 29, 2016
My Experience with the Opinion Editorial
Well, I must say, that was quite an experience. I think I struggled the most with constructing a solid, specific argument. In the end, it still seemed to be pretty vague. That is something that I would definitely like to improve. I also hope to improve the way that I make a call to action. In my rough draft, it just ended. One could read it and then ask, "What's the point? What do I do with this now?" I needed to think of some kind of invitation to the reader. This taught me how little power there is in a piece of writing that only informs. Raising awareness is not enough. I never knew that before, and it makes a lot more sense to me now. That's something I will need to remember in further assignments and works of writing.
I really enjoyed thinking of experiences and arguments to make to defend my topic. It was fun to research certain statistics. I think working on this opinion editorial really taught me more about online degree programs. Not only that, but it taught me how to make concrete arguments. It can't be vague! It must be very specific and you must have a plan of action. I enjoyed learning about that during this writing process.
I really enjoyed thinking of experiences and arguments to make to defend my topic. It was fun to research certain statistics. I think working on this opinion editorial really taught me more about online degree programs. Not only that, but it taught me how to make concrete arguments. It can't be vague! It must be very specific and you must have a plan of action. I enjoyed learning about that during this writing process.
Here it is! My Opinion Editorial--
Empowering Students Everywhere to
Change the World
Nelson Mandela boldly declares,
“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world ("Education for All (EFA)").”
Who wouldn’t want a better world? In that case, if we want it to change and
improve, we need more people to become educated. It makes much more sense,
then, that we give more people the ability to obtain a formal education and receive
a degree of their choosing. The problem is that this is not always possible.
This world has become an increasingly demanding and difficult place to live. Many
lack the time and ability to dash back and forth from work and family to
classes and exams. Can I even mention how impossible it is to complete homework
in this type of situation? For many, this type of lifestyle is overwhelming. There
must be some sort of alternative option available.
That’s where online classes come to the
rescue! Some universities are even offering degree programs online. These are
not just programs that offer some college credit; rather, they are programs
that offer college degrees. Although
they are very beneficial, there are too few. They are often misunderstood and not
well supported. Courses are offered, but not enough for students to earn
complete degrees. Even our very own BYU has room to improve in terms of these
online programs since it doesn’t offer degrees in all fields of study. This
must change. These online degree programs need to be better understood, created,
and more readily available to the public. Why? It is because they are simple
and much more convenient. There is no dashing to and from a campus with these
programs. Everything needed is there at home on a computer. This is the only
difference between online courses and classes on a campus. Students can benefit
just as much from online coursework as they can from traditional campus
schooling. Thus, there is really no need to fear online degree programs and
they should be more accessible to the public.
To some, there is still a cause for
concern. There are many educators who believe otherwise, arguing that complete
online programs make it so that students don’t learn how to collaborate with
others as they would in a traditional program offered on a university campus.
I, however, beg to differ.
I have had my fair share of college
courses online. A graphic design class that I took during my first year of
college required that I post my projects online and then visit a certain
webpage once a week to chat with the instructor as well as with the other
students. We vocally critiqued the work of each other, shared thoughts and
ideas in terms of improvement, and received feedback from the instructor. We
all lived in completely different areas across the United States, yet we were
brought together through an online course by collaborating and constantly
communicating. I was amazed how much I learned from that experience about
working with others as well as graphic design itself even though the course was
online. I have no doubt that other programs can do the same for others as they
did for me.
Although students may have a wholesome
collaborative experience through complete degree programs online, many are very
skeptical of academic honesty. If there are more of these programs, it makes
sense that there will be cheating. This may be true, but online programs
actually share the same problem as all
colleges, including prestigious universities. David L. Jaff, MS, of Stanford
stated that between 75 and 98 percent of college students admitted to cheating
in high school (Jaff). There was even an incident in which dozens of Harvard
students were caught cheating on an exam (Pérez Peña, 2013). In that case, why
point fingers at only online courses? Cheating takes place on all college
campuses. It isn’t solely an issue online. When this is understood, the concept
of online degree programs appears much less questionable and much more
appealing to those desiring to offer them.
Some may even dare to accuse students taking
courses online of being “lazy.” This is often false as well as a dangerous assumption,
especially in the situation of my friend, Daina. She is a good friend of mine
who was recently diagnosed with Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, also
known as POTS. Because of this disease, she is plagued with constant and
extreme stomach pain, an abnormally rapid heartbeat, circulatory complications,
and persistent fatigue. She is unable to stand for long periods of time and
walking is often difficult for her. She is only twenty-one years old and wants
to attend culinary school. Unfortunately, this disease has confined her to her
home and attending classes is not possible. What would she do without online
courses? She is currently taking these classes, which help her to keep her mind
sharp and even distract her from her constant discomfort. She doesn’t know for
sure how long she will suffer this way, but thanks to online degree programs,
she could still be able to earn a degree even as sick as she is. The trick is
presenting an entire program for her to earn that degree and not simply to take
classes in order to avoid boredom.
She is not the exception either. Another
one of my friends was also confined to her bed because she suffered from
stomach paralysis. Although she was always in bed, she was still able to earn
her high school degree through online programs. She was able to achieve this
dream before she passed away only a few months later. How devastating would it have
been to be kept from achieving such a dream simply from being too sick to
attend classes? Many share these same circumstances, and it is only fair that
they too be given a chance to change the world and reach their dreams through
their education. It is possible through online school programs. However, it cannot
happen if these programs are not accepted by our society and made publically
available.
In essence, preparation for receiving a
degree online is not much different than receiving one on a college campus.
They enable students from difficult situations to access the schooling
necessary to obtain a degree. They also present a good, collaborative environment.
The only difference is that these classes take place within the walls of one’s
own home. They give many who want to be at school, especially those who are
ill, the chance to still make their dreams a reality. Let us give to as many as possible the
opportunity to achieve their goals and earn a degree. There may be some of
these programs, but there are not nearly enough. They that do exist are not
supported enough by the public or by educators. They are therefore not nearly
as effective as they could be.
It is time for us to come together as
students and fight for these programs. Even BYU has limits to its online
program by only offering degrees in some areas, but not all. We must create
programs for more areas of study and
make them accessible to more potential students. Let us do our own research and
learn of the benefits that come from these programs. Once understood, we must
begin more of these programs. We cannot do this without the support of our university’s
administration and staff. Let us go directly to the schoolboard as well as to
the professors with this plan to improve. We have the desire, and they have the
power to make it a reality. Joining together as faculty and students will
provide us with all of the tools necessary to create, enhance, and make
available these online degree programs for everyone. By doing so, we are better
able to accomplish as Nelson Mandela said and help change the world.
Works Cited
"Education for All (EFA)." Resources
for Speakers on Global Issues. United Nations Resources. Web. 29 Jan. 2016.
<http://www.un.org/en/globalissues/briefingpapers/efa/quotes.shtml>.
Jaffe, David L. "Academic
Cheating Fact Sheet." Perspectives in Assistive Technology. Web. 26
Jan. 2016. <https://web.stanford.edu/class/engr110/cheating.html>
Pérez Peña, Richard. "Students
Accused of Cheating Return Awkwardly to a Changed Harvard." The New
York Times [New York] 17 Sept. 2013: A12. The New York Times. 16
Sept. 2013. Web. 26 Jan. 2016.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/education/students-accused-of-cheating-return-awkwardly-to-a-changed-harvard.html>.
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Here's the Rough Draft...
The more I think about this, the more passionate I feel about it!
Since practically the very moment that
we are born, the concept of getting an education is drilled into our minds.
Hearing this as children is often boring and pointless. However, as we grow, we
understand more and more the need to further our educations. Why? Because, as
Nelson Mandela boldly declares, “Education is the most powerful weapon which
you can use to change the world.” Who wouldn’t want a better world? In that
case, if we want this world to change, we need more people to become educated.
Does it not make more sense, then, that we give more people the ability to
obtain a formal education and receive a degree of their choosing?
The problem is that this is not always
possible. This world has become an increasingly demanding and difficult place
to live. Many lack the time and ability to dash back and forth from work and
family to classes and exams. Can I even mention how impossible it is to
complete homework in this type of situation? For many, this type of lifestyle
is overwhelming. They have no choice but to give up.
That’s where online classes come to the
rescue! Some universities are even offering degree programs online. With these
programs, there’s no dashing to and from a campus. Everything needed is there
at home on a computer. It’s simple and much more convenient! Not only that, but
online courses also allow students of whatever background to learn more about
the use of technology, which is much needed in this day and age.
To some, this is a cause for concern. Although
I find it to be an excellent idea, there are many educators who believe
otherwise, arguing that complete online programs make it so that students don’t
learn how to collaborate with others as one would in a traditional program
offered on a university campus. I, however, beg to differ.
I have had my fair share of college
courses online. A graphic design class that I took during my first year of
college required that I post my projects online and then go on a certain
webpage once a week to chat with the instructor as well as with the other
students. We vocally critiqued the work of each other, shared thoughts and
ideas in terms of improvement, and received feedback from the instructor.
Although we all lived in completely different places across the United States,
we were brought together through an online course through collaborating and
constantly communicating. I was amazed how much I learned from that experience
about working with others as well as graphic design itself even though the
course was online. I have no doubt that other programs can do the same for
others as they did for me.
Although students may have a wholesome
collaborative experience through complete degree programs online, many are very
skeptical of academic honesty. This may be true, but online programs actually
share the same problem as all
colleges, including prestigious universities. David L. Jaff, MS, of Stanford
stated that between 75 and 98 percent of college students admitted to cheating
in high school (Jaff). There was even an incident in which dozens of Harvard
students were caught cheating on an exam (Pérez Peña, 2013). In that case, why
point fingers at only online courses? Cheating happens on all college campuses.
It isn’t solely an issue online.
Some may even dare to accuse students of
online programs of being “lazy.” Try telling that to my friend, Daina! She is a
good friend of mine who was recently diagnosed with Postural orthostatic
tachycardia syndrome, also known as POTS. Because of this disease, she is
plagued with constant and extreme stomach pain, an abnormally rapid heartbeat,
circulatory complications, and persistent fatigue. She is unable to stand for
long periods of time and walking is often difficult for her. She is only
twenty-one years old and wants to attend culinary school. Unfortunately, this
disease has confined her to her home and attending classes is not possible for
her. What would she do without online courses? She is currently taking these
classes, which help her to keep her mind sharp and even distract her from her
constant discomfort from POTS. She doesn’t know for sure how long she will be
this way, but thanks to online degree programs, she could still be able to earn
a degree even as sick as she is.
She is not the exception either. Another
one of my friends was also confined to her bed because she suffered from
stomach paralysis. Although she was always in bed, she was still able to earn
her high school degree through online programs. She was able to achieve this
dream before she passed away only a few months later. How devastating would it have
been to be kept from achieving such a dream simply from being too sick to
attend classes? Many others share these circumstances, and it is only fair that
they too be given a chance to change the world and reach their dreams through
their education. How so? It’s easy – through online school programs.
In essence, preparation for receiving a
degree online is not much different than receiving one on a college campus.
They make students who live in more difficult situations much more able to
access the work necessary to obtain a degree. They present a good,
collaborative environment while teaching them more about technology. The only
difference is that these classes take place within the walls of one’s own home.
They give many who want to be at school, especially those who are ill, the
chance to still make their dreams a reality. Let us give to as many as possible the
opportunity to achieve their goals and earn a degree. By doing so, we are
better able to accomplish as Nelson Mandela said and help change the world.
Works Cited
Jaffe, David L. "Academic
Cheating Fact Sheet." Perspectives in Assistive Technology. Web. 26
Jan. 2016. < https://web.stanford.edu/class/engr110/cheating.html>
Pérez Peña, Richard. "Students
Accused of Cheating Return Awkwardly to a Changed Harvard." The New
York Times [New York] 17 Sept. 2013: A12. The New York Times. 16
Sept. 2013. Web. 26 Jan. 2016.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/education/students-accused-of-cheating-return-awkwardly-to-a-changed-harvard.html>.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)