Reflection on Open Letter Draft

To start, I reviewed Brandon and Jason's Open Letter drafts.

1. Who is going to be reading this essay?

• My instructor, as well as my peers will be reading this essay, as it is composed and directed towards them. 

2. What biases might my readers have?

• They may be bias to how the course went for themselves and could possibly compare that to my experience. I only praised my peers in my open letter, so I feel that I respected their opinion while still maintaining the purpose of the assignment.

3. What are their values and expectations?

• My instructor and peers expect to read about my experience in 109H and how it relates to past, current, and future experiences I will encounter with regards to writing. I met that expectation by going in-depth into my experiences and how I felt throughout the 5 weeks of 109H. I plan on revising my draft to make sure it is a good analysis and summary of my work, and not just how I felt.

4. How much information do I need to give my audience?

• For this project, I feel that the answer may vary from person to person. Some indivuduals may have had tougher experiences than others in this class, and thus could write 5 pages detailing their hardships and what they had to overcome. On the other hand, some individuals may have thought this class was a cake walk, and only need 2 pages to explain their experiences. Myself, I was in the middle of those two categories. I explained background information from high school and how I was not familiar with the genres we wrote in for 109H. I then explained how I overcame that and turned my old habits into better ones that improved my english grade compared to high school.

5. What kind of language is suitable for this audience?

• For my peers, I feel that a language that incorporates the various writing conventions and aspects we learned about in 109H would be very suitable. We are all comfortable with big words and analyzing experiences, (project 2).

6. What tone should I use with my audience?

• Throughout my draft I maintained a semi-professional, easy going tone. As this was the victory lap for this course, I wanted to make my open letter flow in a conversational way to take a breather from the formal writing we have been doing over the past 5 weeks. I plan on checking over my draft and revising it to make sure this tone is truly maintained.

PixaBay. Open Letter, August, 2012, CC0 Public Domain

My Open Letter

My Adventures Through English 109H

Michael Huebener

To Mr. Bottai and fellow classmates,

July 13th, the day I was dreading for months to come. I had previously attempted English 109H in the spring semester last year, with disastrous results. I was never a good writer; my writing assignments seemed to always turn from writing to anxiety. I didn’t feel that I had that creative touch that was necessary to be a successful writer and keep my readers engaged. In high school I felt as if I skated by and always relied on other projects and assignments to pick up the low scores of my essays. In a composition-based honors english class, I realized that would not be possible. In the spring semester I ended up dropping 109H with a W grade on my transcript. I could not let that happen again and so I enrolled to make it up over the summer. It was a very smart decision, as I learned a lot about writing processes, revision processes, different genres and their context, and how to put all those together to form a solid, well-written piece.

When the summer course started, I went to drop a class that I was enrolled in during the upcoming fall semester, and ended up accidentally dropping the current summer english class. That was roadblock number one! Luckily, the school, as well as Mr. Bottai were extremely helpful and assisted me in getting back into the class, albeit a few days behind schedule. Mr bottai said, “ I’ll make some inquiries and see if we can get you back in (which I would be hugely in favor of, if that’s what you want).”

Now comes the first assignment, evaluating our writing process. In our first blog post, I wrote, “I am mostly a sequential composer with an emphasis on being a procrastinator.” My weaknesses were that I almost always waited until the last day to compose a draft of essays, and would hastily revise it once and then proceed to turn it in. That didn’t work out so well for me, as I received C’s and B’s on all my papers in high school, never an A. I wanted to change that this year, and the required assignments in this course helped me do so. For our first project, a QRG, I drafted my first copy and originally had planned to revise it slightly and turn it in, because that was what I was used to doing. After drafting my first copy, it was time for the peer review process. Nicole provided great feedback in her comments on my draft and made me realize that this was my opportunity to change my writing process and become a better writer. I changed this, I changed that, and voila, I had a final QRG that was much cleaner and well-written than my original draft. The QRG genre was very fun to write in, in my opinion. I had never done that before, as I focused mostly on standard 5-paragraph essays in high school. I found it interesting to break out of my comfort zone, learn the conventions of the genre, and successfully write in it. I always felt that I was adequate at informing audiences on an issue, as it was rather easy to list facts and evidence, so I enjoyed the project one.

Moving onto project two, the anxiety began to rise. I really felt as if I was in over my head and after reading the guidelines, could only imagine what challenges the next two projects would bring. I began to feel uncomfortable and worried that I would not be able to successfully analyze an author’s rhetorical strategies. I still didn’t even fully understand what a rhetorical strategy was! After spending two days just trying to find an article that would fit the requirements of this project, I found myself summarizing more than I was analyzing; falling into the trap of high school writing. This project is where the peer review process really helped me, from my peers’ comments on my draft, and from being an editor myself. Jason provided excellent feedback for me to improve my analysis on, and it helped greatly. Reading and making comments on my peers’ drafts also helped me realize mistakes that I was making myself.  Another aspect that really made me turn into a heavy reviser for this project was the requirement that we had to completely redo our introduction and conclusion. Upon completing the revision process, my anxiety decreased and I felt that my final copy was much improved. While not doing as successful on the rhetorical analysis as I did on the QRG grade wise, it was valuable to me to learn the new genre of analyzing and the conventions that went along with it. I was not familiar with that before taking this course, and 109H changed that.

Beginning project three, I was more confident than I was on the previous two. We were on the home stretch of completing this course and I could see the finish line! I was pleasantly surprised to see that we were able to pick our own genre and decide for ourselves how we wanted to complete the project. This let me unleash the minimal creativity that I had, and I really enjoyed the outcome! I used prezi for my public argument, so while I cannot show you a draft, my final version came out exactly how I wanted it. In the instructions, we were told to “You should consider the genres you encountered throughout your research as “examples” for this project.” During all of my research for the controversy surrounding the legalization of marijuana, 75% of the articles I read were news articles published in national news outlets. I wanted to mimic this appearance and create a newspaper article for my public argument, and prezi gave me the power to do that.

Now that I’m on the victory lap of this course, I can look back and reflect on how I have improved and where I have not improved. I feel that my writing process has turned into a heavy reviser, a needed improvement from my procrastinating ways. I found that planning heavy and revising heavy resulted in higher grades for my projects, while doing one copy without major revisions resulted in a low grade (project 3). The procrastinating approach did not work for this course, and I am going to evolve my writing and focus solely on heavy planning and revising over the next few years and in my other classes. I feel that I have the knowledge to go through with this change, and it needs to happen in order to be successful later in life with my career. While learning a lot over the past 5 weeks, I do feel as though I am still in the process of learning all of the clarity topics and incorporating them into my writing. I do not want to be viewed as a 30-year old who cannot properly compose a piece of writing, so I am going to take the skills and information I learned in this class, and always go back on it when I have to write in the future.

A happy student,

Michael Huebener

Flickr. The harder the battle, The sweeter the victory, March 4, 2013, Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

Draft of Open Letter

Here is my rough draft of my open letter. It is not completed, but has some meat to it. I'm looking to know if it is headed in the right direction, or if I need to change anything substantial. Please look out for too informal writing, as well as any grammatical errors or areas that don't flow well.

You can view my rough draft by clicking this link.

The highlighted areas are where I will provide links to previous assignments, and will be completed for the final copy.

Flickr. Editing a Paper, January 26, 2008, Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

Extended Annotated Bibliography

Marijuana legalization doesn't increase crime

This article was published on MSNBC on 4/15/14. It talks about the legalization of marijuana in the states that it is currently legal in, and the resulting effects of that ruling on crime. It goes on to explain that crime has actually fallen in Colorado since the legalization of recreational marijuana, after many thought it would go up. This article will help in explaining that legalizing marijuana leads to decreased crime levels and provides examples to back up the information.

 Delmore, E. (2014, April 15). Study: Marijuana legalization doesn't increase crime. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

-------------------

The economic effects of legalizing marijuana

This journal was published on the University of Utah USpace Institutional Repository database in May of 2012. It is a scholarly article that goes in-depth explaining the elasticity of demand for marijuana if legalized, along with pricing and taxation, social costs, enforcement costs, and a wrap up. I received a lot of information from this source as it is several pages long and provides clear and detailed facts with evidence. This journal will help in explaining to my audience the economic benefits of legalizing marijuana.

 Glauser, D. (2012, May 1). The economic effects of legalizing marijuana :: IR - Theses & Dissertations 3. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

------------------

23 Health Benefits Of Marijuana

This article was published on Business Insider on 4/20/2014. It is an in-depth review of the health benefits marijuana provides. This is a large aspect of my public argument and will come in handy with providing information and facts on the health benefits of marijuana. It gives proven benefits along with personal patient stories.

 Loria, J. (2014, April 20). 23 Health Benefits Of Marijuana. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

------------------

How legalizing pot could save America's economy.

This article is a more general overview of the economic and social benefits legalizing marijuana would bring to the United States. It was published on TheWeek.com on 11/9/2014 and covers a wide range of topics. It goes on to explain tax benefits, as well as other economic benefits, those with a monetary value along with those without. It compares the criminalization of marijuana to prohibition, and explains how that did not work at all. This article will be helpful in further providing facts and evidence to my audience of the economic benefits of legalizing marijuana.

 Smith, S. (2014, November 9). How legalizing pot could save America's economy. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

-------------------

Flickr. Citing Your Sources, December 3, 2014, Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

My Public Argument

Here is the Prezi presentation of my Public Argument on why marijuana should be legalized. I hope you enjoy it! =]

You can access my presentation by clicking this link.

References:

 Delmore, E. (2014, April 15). Study: Marijuana legalization doesn't increase crime. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

Flickr. Lemon Kush Day 64, September 24, 2010, Attribution 2.0 Generic

Flickr. Medical Marijuana, March 25, 2009, Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic

Glauser, D. (2012, May 1). The economic effects of legalizing marijuana :: IR - Theses & Dissertations 3. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

Loria, J. (2014, April 20). 23 Health Benefits Of Marijuana. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

Smith, S. (2014, November 9). How legalizing pot could save America's economy. Retrieved August 3, 2015.

WikiMedia Commons. Marijuana Party of Canada Logo, 2008, Public Domain

PixaBay. One Hundred Percent, June, 2014, CC0 Public Domain

Reflecting on My Writing Experiences

1. At the start of this course, I assumed that we would have to read several novels in very short fashion and then write traditional 5 page essays on them. I was enrolled last year in 109H during the school year, and the first week we had a 5 page essay due. I assumed this class would be a repeat of that.

2. The most important lessons I have learned are simple. As a reader, read over the text multiple times. I cannot count how many errors I have found when peer reviewing after reading several times, or the improved knowledge I gained from reading confusing sentences over a few times. As a writer, revise, revise, revise. The first copy is usually going to be crap, as good as it sounds in your head. It is important to revise after receiving feedback from peers.

3. Having assignments that required us to narrow our thinking down and brainstorm as writers definitely helped in this category. Without the required assignments in between the drafts and the final projects, I feel my writing would not have improved as much, at all.

4. Peer-reviewing was one of the best parts of this course. I learned a lot about my own writing from my peers, and I hope that they learned a lot from me as well. I tried to use constructive criticism as much as possible and praise where it was needed.

5. I never looked much at the discussions tab, but I can say that my instructor was one of the most helpful and understanding professors I have ever had. The individual conversation was great and extremely helpful in completing this class. (So helpful that it even convinced me to write a teacher review for the first time). =]

6. I kept to myself for this class mostly. My parents were very busy moving over the past few weeks and my friends, well, who really cares about papers over the summer if it's not necessary for them?

7. For each project, I took the feedback I received from my peers and instructors and revised my drafts where I saw fit. I then would have my sister or someone read it over one more time and catch any glaring errors or areas for improvement. After that was all done, I added pictures, made the format clean and crisp, and hit publish.

8. Another one of my favorite aspects of this class: the use of different genres throughout the course. I really enjoyed not writing standard 5-paragraph essays all month. It was fun and exciting to do the QRG, as well as the analysis, even though that is not my forte.

9. Never signed up for 109H during the 16-week semester. I would take that back in a heartbeat. I ended up with a W after dropping past the deadline. I would re-do this 5 week class any day.

10. College writing is a big part of my life now. As I will be involved with it for the next 3 years, it is important that I learned valuable lessons from this class and can apply them to my future classes. After college as well, I feel that I will be better prepared to tackle business writing from the lessons I learned in this course.

11. The single biggest thing I learned during this course is that one draft is never enough. I learned so much from the revision process because I was forced to do it, however, I enjoyed doing it. I have never been required to complete that many revision activities, and I feel that it turned me into a better writer overall.

12. I knew I wasn't the best, at all. The beginning of the course reinforced the idea that I was a procrastinator, as I had an enrollment issue and technically procrastinated on a week's worth of homework (that was not fun). Throughout the course, however, I learned that I wasn't that bad after all, and that writing wasn't always an uphill challenge.

13. The second project was my least favorite, and it is because I am so used to writing persuasive papers or informative essays. Having to write what the author was thinking and feeling was very challenging for me and I still do not feel as if I did it correctly.

14. I feel that I am successful in writing essays that develop analyses with evidence drawn from the text, as well as practicing researching, reading, writing, and revision strategies. To go along with that, I feel that I am successful in creating multiple, meaningful revisions of writings, and using the conventions of scholarly research, analysis, and documentation. I do not feel that I am successful in analyzing texts through critical thinking, and deploying strategies to consider a text's purposes, audiences, etc.

Flickr. The Writing Process, May 17, 2010, Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic

Revisiting My Writing Process

In my first blog post, I wrote about how I was a sequential composer and a procrastinator.

At the start of this course, I was not fully aware of the amount of time it was going to take to complete the assignments. I received the email regarding the 27 hours a week of homework, but that was impossible. After 5 weeks, I fully believe it.

I had to change my perspective as a procrastinator to a heavy planner during this course. If I didn't plan ahead for my assignments, I would have never gotten them all done on time and correctly composed.

Moving forward, I definitely see myself continuing this notion of being a heavy planner. It has helped me map out my required tasks, and I feel less stressed when I lay everything out. I would like to continue on that path for the next 3 year of college and carry it over to my other classes.

In the next few years of college and beyond, I want to completely remove myself from the procrastinator category. It is crucial to be well-planned and prepared when looking for employment and working towards your career, and I want to start that now. This course definitely helped in that regard by forcing me to start planning rather than procrastinating.

Pixabay. Writer Writing, February, 2015, CC0 Public Domain

Punctuation, Part 2

The Colon:

• I had previous knowledge of when to use a colon before a list or quotation, and reading Rules for Writers reiterated that. However, what I learned was that you should not use a colon between a verb and its object. I have made that mistake before and now I know not to. In my project, I used a colon in this fashion: "The article states: "The central finding gleaned from the present study was that...""

The Apostrophe:

• I always knew you used an apostrophe to show possession and also to turn words into the plural form. What I didn't know, is that you should not use an apostrophe to form the plural of numbers and abbreviations. I have always used an apostrophe when doing that, such as "the 1980's were a time known for..." or etc. Now I know that is not correct.

End Punctuation:

• End punctuation is pretty simple. The biggest take-away from this section for myself was the use of the question mark. I am sometimes guilty of using the question mark at the end of an indirect question, or a polite request. Rules for Writers says that that is not necessary, and now I know not to make that mistake again.

ClipArt. Punctuation Correction, June 28, 2015, Public Domain

Draft of Public Argument

Here is the rough draft of my public argument. The format is a Prezi presentation, so please comment on this post with any concerns or tips you may have. My goal is to make it an informative, persuasive news article so any suggestions you have on that will be helpful. Please watch for sentence flow as well as grammar mistakes, and anything else you see. Thank you.

You can view a draft of my project by clicking this link.

Pixabay. Copy, August, 2014, CC0 Public Domain

Reflection on Project 3

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

• The biggest revision was the change of format. When I started the project, I had planned on doing a scholarly article type feel. While researching more articles on the issue, I found many short, informative news articles that related to my topic and I decided I wanted to do that format instead.

2. How did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

• My thesis statement remained the same throughout the project, that being I was pro-legalization and was going to write on that stance. As for organization, the type of essay remained the same, being an informative and persuasive stance, yet my mode of delivery changed from a scholarly article to a news article.

3. What led to these changes?

• I wanted to change my purpose of just informing, to informing with a creative and interesting mode of delivery. Scholarly articles are boring, I want my audience to recognize my information and remember it. Not just skim over endless lines of text.

4. How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?

• While going from a scholarly article to a news article may decrease my credibility as it is less professional and exact, I feel that the formatting and overall design of the project refutes that. It is clean, crisp, and easy for the audience to understand and believe.

5. How will these changes better address the audience?

• My audience will be able to better understand the information and take more away from it. As my target audience is those who are also pro-legalization, I'm hoping this format reiterates my ideas in their head to match theirs and remind them as to why marijuana should be legalized.

6. How did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

• Starting from a scholarly article, I had long and complex sentences using complicated words. After I changed to a news article, I "dumbed" it down by reducing the length of my sentences and using easier to understand words as news outlets usually do. I did this in order to appear to a variety of readers.

7. How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

• These changes better outline the information and make it clear what the reader is reading about. My headings are bolded and outlined, and informs the reader exactly what that section is going to talk about. This makes it better to understand the overall purpose of convincing my audience that marijuana should be legalized.

8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?

• This was my first time using Prezi for a project, so the learning curve was definitively there. It took me a few minutes to get situated with the Prezi engine and understand how everything works and how to edit my project.

9. How does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?

• After three projects, I still recognize that I am the procrastinator type. I plan ahead what I am going to write and make minimal revisions. Reflecting on my writings makes me realize this and I think if I'm ever going to change the way I write =[. Practice makes perfect though, right?

Flickr. John Dewey, April 7, 2011, Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

Reflection on Project 3 Draft

To start, I reviewed Mark and Brandon's projects. My comments for Mark's project are on his blog comments section, while I used google's commenting feature for Brandon's project.

I changed my whole project and am working on publishing a readable, substantial draft. I will update this post when that is done.

Pixabay. Reflection, September, 2014, CC0 Public Domain

Punctuation, Part 1

1. Unnecessary Commas:

• I learned that you should not put commas between compound elements that are not independent clauses. I sometimes do this in my writing to put a break in the reading, but now I know that it is not grammatically correct.

2. The Semicolon:

• Semicolons have always been tricky for me. I never know when to use them and when not to use them, even what they are used for. I tend to shy away from them if I can. After reading this section I learned that you typically use them to connect related independent clauses that are not joined by a conjunction. The book gave great examples that I can relate to and now I know when I can use a semicolon by referring to these examples.

3. Other Punctuation:

• More specifically, the use of dashes and brackets. Again, I tend to stay away from these as I do not fully understand the proper use of them. From reading this section, however, I have a better understanding of when it is acceptable and appropriate to use dashes and brackets. I can use brackets to show the topic of a quotation when the context does not give it away like the original article would.

Flickr. Punctuation Saves Lives, September 30, 2011, Attribution 2.0 Generic

Reflection:

I reviewed Brandon and Mark's drafts for punctuation. While reviewing them, I noticed a bunch of great examples of punctuation that were grammatically correct. Brandon uses an ellipsis perfectly in this quote: “They’re more likely to have vaccine concerns and to ‘perceive fewer benefits associated with vaccines,’ a study found--despite the scientific evidence…” The quote continues on, yet for his project, only that part is necessary so the ellipsis is used. For Mark's project, his use of a semicolon further tought me the correct way of using one. He writes, "22 workers were found to be contaminated after the release; however, the department of energy found that..." His clauses are independent, yet related so they are able to be joined by a semicolon.

Outlining My Public Argument

Introduction:

• Think about your situation or kairos:
• As the legalization of marijuana has been at the forefront of debate in the past half decade, it is a very current issue. Legislation is changing rapidly for different states regarding recreational and medical marijuana, and I feel that this would be great way to introduce my issue. I want to draw on current events and discussions regarding it, and mentions of it in the news.

Body Section:

• Argument 1: Marijuana has positive health benefits
• Criticism: Smoking can cause lung cancer and the long-term health effects of marijuana are not well understood. 
• Topic Sentence: Marijuana's use as a therapeutic drug has been proven countless times for the treatment of glaucoma, the slowing of cancer, reduced seizures, and relief from pain caused by multiple sclerosis.
• Evidence: National Eye Institute: "Studies in the early 1970s showed that marijuana, when smoked, lowered intraocular pressure (IOP) in people with normal pressure and those with glaucoma."

• Argument 2: Marijuana's legalization could bring huge tax benefits to the U.S., helping the economy.
• Criticism: Marijuana would be too hard to regulate and tax efficiently.
• Topic Sentence: Legalizing marijuana in the U.S. could bring much needed tax income and help improve the overall economy.
• Evidence: Average annual trade in marijuana is estimated at $113 billion, which represents nearly $45 billion in taxes slipping through our fingers, according to Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron.

• Argument 3: Marijuana's legalization could decrease violent crime associated with it.
• Criticism: Legalizing marijuana will increase crime and thieves will target dispensaries.
• Topic Sentence: Legalizing marijuana will help bring an end to the violent crimes committed by those who sell and distribute the drug illegally, as consumers will have easier and more convenient methods of acquiring the drug.
• Evidence: But a new report contends that fourteen years later, even after Colorado legalized the sale of small amounts of marijuana for recreational use on Jan. 1 of this year, violent and property crime rates in the city are actually falling.

Conclusion: 

• I plan on using the Positive Consequences strategy to reiterate to my audience the positive consequences that legalizing marijuana could have on the U.S. This will further convince them to take my side of the debate. I will restate my main points and wrap up my argument with a take home line.

Pixabay. Draw, May, 2015, CC0 Public Domain

Paraphrasing a Source

Original Section:

Legalize It -- The Economic Argument

For example, a big point of contention is whether usage will go up. Opponents of legalization tend to argue that usage will skyrocket, while proponents tend to argue that most people who would want to smoke marijuana are already smoking it now. Both arguments imply that more usage is a bad thing. If it is, you have to make that case, while keeping in mind that the 19 million monthly marijuana users in this country probably enjoy it. (And 32 million Americans partook at least once in the past year.) It's not free, they run the risk of arrest for possessing it, there are legal substitutes out there like alcohol; and yet they choose to consume it. 

My Paraphrase:

An argument facing the legalization of marijuana is the issue of whether or not usage of the drug will increase. Pro-legalization debaters refute this claim by arguing that users of the drug are most likely already using it, legal or not. They back this up by saying although the drug is illegal, the current users of it enjoy it, regardless of the law, and an increase in usage, if it were to happen, would need strong evidence showing that it is bad. 

Wikipedia. Communication Emisor, June 15, 2007,  Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported

Considering Types

After reading the five basic types of an argument, I found that:

• A Proposal Argument would best suit my cause for this project. I am proposing a change to current laws while arguing about a controversial issue, marijuana legalization. It states, "this argument analyzes a particular problem, and then develops a proposal for addressing the problem in its thesis." This is exactly what I plan to do with my argument.
• Along with that, the Position Argument type would fit my project well. I am taking a position on the issue of legalization, and defending why I believe it.
• As for arguments that would not work well for my project, the Refutation Argument would not be a good choice for me, as I do not want to refute my own claims and evidence. I am for the pro-legalization, not pro-outlaw. It states, "...is devoted almost entirely to refuting an idea, opinion, or argument..." That is not what I want to achieve with this project.

Flickr. Deep Life Quotes, April 15, 2012, Attributuon-NonCommericial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

My Rhetorical Action Plan

Wikipedia. PDCA Cycle, November 20, 2008, Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported

1. Audience:

• Knowledge: My audience knows that marijuana is currently illegal in most situations and states in the U.S. They get their knowledge from news outlets as well as [mostly] online articles regarding the issue. Older generations have the opinion that marijuana should be outlawed and banned, while younger generations are more open to talk about legalizing it.
• Values: My audience is going to be geared more toward an audience that wants to see the legalization of marijuana happen, so they value the freedom of choice regarding their body and use of the drug.
• Standards of Argument: I want to use scholarly articles as well as articles that have done studies regarding the effects of marijuana on the human body, as well as an economist's point of view regarding the benefits marijuana can bring to the U.S.
• Visual Elements: The images associated with this debate are basically images of pot leafs. If you google marijuana, 95% of the image results will be pot leafs. I will try to have more professional and persuading images in my argument, if I can find them.
• Purpose: My [intended] audience is reading my argument because they want to see the legalization of marijuana. I am trying to encourage them to act on their beliefs, and go public with their opinions and ideas. We want to challenge the long-held viewpoints that marijuana should be outlawed.

2. Genre:

• I plan on using a scholarly article type format to effectively persuade my audience and appear professional in my argument. It is designed to appeal to to credibility and logic, and I intend to do that with my use of facts and evidence.
• This genre could be used in any format, for any debate or controversial issues. You can see this genre being published in encyclopedias, as well as online databases and scholarly websites.
• I plan on relying heavy on ethos and logos for this assignment. I want my audience to view my argument as credible and logical, so that they can be better informed on the issue and make the correct decision regarding their opinion.
• I plan on keeping the use of images minimal, as this genre is typically more focused on informative text rather than images, and I do not feel that there are many professional and persuading images related to this topic.
• I want to use a conversational style in my argument, while also keeping it formal and informative. I feel that this will be the best style to persuade my desired audience.

3. Responses/Actions:

• Positive Support: My audience feels the same as I do and reiterates their positive stance on the legalization of marijuana due to my awesome argument =]. This will hopefully convince them to go public with their opinion also. The more voices heard, the more likely lawmakers will listen.
• Negative Rebuttals: My audience that is not pro-legalization will not accept my argument and claims, and could rebuttal all of my arguments with arguments and facts of their own. My article could also not be seen by many, and a negative effect would be that my opinion is not heard and others are not informed.
• The most important negative rebuttal would be a selected audience refuting my claims with evidence of their own. I chose this topic because of the many articles on the pros and cons of legalization. There are many articles to support it, which I will use, but on the other hand, there are many articles to refute it.
• Raise Awareness --> Inform others of the positives of legalization --> Make them think the same as you --> They in turn, voice their own opinion as well --> Lawmakers hear these voices --> Laws are changed.

Analyzing Context

1. There are two main perspectives on the legalization of marijuana, those who support it, and those who don't. There are many arguments and valid statements from both sides which makes it an interesting topic.

2. The pro-side believes that marijuana is not harmful at all and will only benefit the U.S. They argue the economic benefits as well as the medical benefits from the legalization, as well as the right to do with one's body as they choose. The side that does not want it legalized argues the negative health benefits, as well as the crime associated with the drug, and the detrimental effects it could have if legalized across the country.

3. Both sides agree that each side has factual and effective arguing points. They also agree that this issue is at the forefront of debate and this decade will see the biggest change and reactions regarding the legalization of marijuana.

4. A large ideological difference in the debate is the issue of using marijuana for medical purposes. Those who successfully use the drug and see positive side effects support it greatly, and there is a group believes the medical benefits are a hoax and the side effects are minimal.

5. Marijuana is not in everyones ideas and beliefs. Each side does not ask their audience to take action, as not everyone in their audience beliefs in the drug and its uses. Currently, the arguments of this debate are tailored toward a smaller audience of the U.S.

6. I am going with the pro-side. I am taking this side because there are tremendous amounts of information and articles available that show the positive benefits of the drug and give great examples supporting it. I feel that with these examples I will be able to design an effective public argument that convinces my audience on my side of the debate.

7. The legalization of weed for medical and recreational purposes has happened mostly in this past decade and this generation of humans. Prior generations were taught that marijuana is bad and illegal, and they hold dearly those beliefs. The pre-determined belief of older generations that marijuana is bad will be the single largest threat to my argument, in my opinion.

Wikimedia Commons. Context, April 22, 2009, Public Domain

Analyzing Purpose

1. The goal of my public argument is to (attempt to) effectively convey the pro-side of legalizing marijuana. I want to clearly outline the positives of it, and in a matter that outshines the negatives associated with it. I have lots of articles with solid evidence on why it is a good idea and it is my idea to formulate all of that information into one argument. I want my readers to feel the same way as I do with a pro-stance after reading my argument.

2. Plausible Actions/Reactions

• The audience sides with me and also agrees that marijuana should be legalized in the U.S.
• The audience sides with me and agrees that marijuana should be legalized only for certain purposes, eg. medical, etc.
• The audience becomes aware of the issue and does further research themselves
• The audience does not side with me and is not convinced that it should be legalized.
• Not plausible that the entire audience agrees or disagrees with me.

3. If people were to be informed of the benefits of legalizing marijuana for the U.S., they might be inclined to raise public issue of it and convince other individuals of the same thought. This leads to a public movement which has the possibility of changing laws if it is large scale.

4. The number one group of people I want to reach are those who are dealing with medical issues that could benefit from the use of medical marijuana. Medical marijuana has been proven to be effective at treating certain illnesses, including glaucoma, Schizophrenia, and many more. As marijuana for medical use is still not legal in every state, that would be my biggest achievement to see. If all else fails, I would love for the U.S. to legalize medical marijuana in every state so that those suffering from illnesses that are not effectively treated using traditional medicine can find relief from their pain and suffering. If I can persuade individuals on the benefits of medical marijuana for those who need it, I feel that they could theoretically have the power to have their voices heard and laws changed.

Wikimedia Commons. Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose, September 11, 2014, CC Attribution 2.0 Generic

Narrowing My Focus

Several of the questions I developed for this project stood out to me for various reasons.

1. What are the social and economic benefits gained from the legalization of marijuana?

2. What are the health implications?

3. What does marijuana's illegal role play in the contribution of violence and crime in the U.S.?

I thought that these three questions cover the most stuff and offer a broad range of discussion to be had. In order for marijuana to become legal, there has to be a benefit to the U.S. Along with that, is it safe for the public? Knowing marijuana's role on human health will be a huge factor in determining the legal status of it. Lastly, I want to know if legalizing marijuana will reduce the crime rates and violence in this country that is often fueled by drugs and gangs trafficking them. Will legalizing marijuana, and making it easier to obtain through legal methods curb the violence?

Wikimedia Commons. Narrowing of road ahead on both sides, October 23, 2010,  Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported

Project 2 Final

Should Marijuana Be Legalized In The United States?

Michael Huebener

Pixabay. Marijuana Leaf, April, 2015, CC0 Public Domain

Legalizing marijuana in the United States is a topic that many have voiced their opinion on in the past decade. Over the course of the past few years, advances have been made and marijuana has become legal in several states, including Colorado and Washington. The question now is whether or not the legalization of marijuana will benefit or be detrimental to the U.S. Economists deal in the sector of determining if the net benefits of a certain action outweigh the net negative benefits. One of those economists, Ranjit Dighe, provides readers with ideas and examples supporting his pro position on the legalization of marijuana in the U.S. He appeals to his audience's values and beliefs, while retaining his own personal bias in order to let the reader decide for themselves whether or not they think believe marijuana should be legalized.

To get a grasp on how Dighe will appear credible in his argument, we will look at his background and credentials, and how he explains the issue while also appealing to the values and beliefs of his audience. Dighe is a Professor of Economics at the State University of New York at Oswego. He teaches economic history with a focus on financial crises. To understand the way Dighe laid out his article, we need to look at the projected audience and context. This will inform us on which rhetorical strategies he uses and why. The former would most likely be business students, who are taught to present information quickly and informatively, with as few words as possible. Dighe does not drag on stating information that is not relative to the topic at hand, which is his stance on the pro-legalization of marijuana. As this article was published in the Huffington Post, it also has to appeal to a mass variety of individuals as that is a daily publication read by millions across the country. Information has to be clearly laid out, while not sounding too technical where someone would need to be an expert to interpret the information. Dighe accomplishes this in his sentence, “Proponents point to higher tax revenues, "pot tourism," and lower law enforcement costs. Opponents claim that medical costs will go up and workplace productivity will go down” (2014). This sentence briefly states what the article is going to cover, while establishing a non-technical tone that can be understood by readers of all levels. Dighe uses the article to state his view in the debate, and provide examples of how the legalization of marijuana will benefit the U.S. while outweighing the negative costs associated with it. He informs his readers on his stance while appealing to their current culture and beliefs without forcing an opinion on them. He provides clear transitions on his arguments of the effects marijuana will have on this country, and gives his audience the ability to decide for themselves if the U.S should go ahead with the green light, or keep marijuana in prohibition.

Flickr. Maryjane 420, April 19, 2010, Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic

A main argument in the debate of legalization is the issue of public safety regarding marijuana usage. Are the effects harmful to humans and will it have a negative impact on the U.S. healthcare system? Dighe’s states “Ample medical evidence suggests that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol, and in a recent New Yorker interview even President Obama concurred” (2014). He adds more to this claim with “Marijuana has not been found to be physically addictive, and addiction rates of any kind are lower for marijuana than for alcohol, tobacco and harder drugs” (Dighe, 2014). The New Yorker is a credible source, and the author uses this rhetorical strategy of ethos to show readers he is not just voicing his own personal opinion. This makes the reader open to accepting the information much more as it is backed by scientific studies, as well as credible figures such as President Obama. Another claim made by the author is “as a drug that is typically smoked, marijuana could lead to lung cancer and other health problems, but unlike tobacco cigarettes, marijuana is typically consumed in small doses and has yet to be linked to a single death” (Dighe, 2014). Dighe’s appeal to logos is prevalent here. It is common logic that smoking is harmful to the lungs and may lead to lung cancer, but he refutes that knowledge with the claim that marijuana has never been linked to the cause of a death, which shows the audience it is a safe drug. These statements and viewpoints of the author give the audience a start to deciding if they believe marijuana should be legalized or not.

As an economist who generally writes for an audience geared towards business issues, Dighe uses his knowledge in the field to go in depth regarding the net benefits and net negative benefits of an idea. This is to appeal to his business audience’s desire to see the pros outweigh the cons, and thus make the topic at hand an economical business decision. Dighe first appeals to his readers who are not in the business background by informing them that economics does not just have to include monetary figures. He states, “There is more to economics than dollars and cents” as well as, “An economist would say, go ahead and legalize marijuana as long as the expected net benefit of doing so is positive (and perhaps only if the risks of a net negative benefit are not too high)” (Dighe, 2014). After informing readers of that, he continues his claims of showing that the benefits outweigh the negatives and with that, includes this: “the net benefits of decriminalization appear large, but the net benefits of legalization look much larger. Open and regulated markets are safer than black markets, and our judicial system is clogged enough already with real criminals” (Dighe, 2014). This statement is a strong appeal to logic as it is known that transactions on the black market and those involving drug dealers can be dangerous and turn for the worse. Along with that, America’s prison systems are overflowing with harmless “criminals” who have been arrested for minor possession or usage of marijuana. Dighe adds to the credibility of his argument by including: “Because of the huge personal and social costs of criminalizing the recreational behavior of tens of millions, about a dozen states have already "decriminalized" marijuana” (2014). This augments the economic perspective of his readers and enforces the idea that legalizing marijuana would economically and socially benefit the status of the United States. Comparing these benefits to the negatives will allow the audience to further decide what they think is best for the U.S.

Flickr. Peace, Love, Cannabis, May 15, 2012, Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic

One of the major factors an individual takes into account when deciding a side on an issue, is how it appeals to their emotions. Dighe’s inclusion of pathos in his article is strong and present. In his first example, Dighe explains how his neighbor, who was an elderly man, received a one year sentence in prison after being arrested for marijuana possession. He then furthers that explanation with, “His imprisonment has been devastating to his wife and family, has deprived the community of a good and well-liked neighbor, and has made him a convict or ex-convict forever” (Dighe, 2014). The author uses a personal story to really hammer in the emotional effects that the criminalization of marijuana has on the U.S. This makes Dighe’s audience think, “what if that was my own husband or son?” Of course you would not want a family member imprisoned. This notion appeals to the reader’s emotions and further backs up his idea that marijuana should be legalized. To add to the emotional appeal of his readers, Dighe states “This benefit goes way beyond the criminal justice system's costs of enforcing pot laws. It is about the ability of those 19 to 32 million users, their families, and friends to live normal lives” (2014). (19-32 million being the number of people who smoked marijuana in the past year, according to a nationwide study). This use of pathos adds to the credibility and character of the author by showing that he is concerned about the incarceration and criminal labeling of nonviolent, innocent human beings whose lives are affected by the justice system’s harsh laws regarding marijuana. All these examples bring together Dighe’s argument as to why marijuana should be legalized in the U.S., while still allowing the reader to decide their side of the debate for themselves.

With an elaborate use of rhetorical strategies, Dighe's article is able to appeal to his audience's values and beliefs, while not veering from his focus on why marijuana should be legalized. The author appeals to older generations by not insulting their beliefs that marijuana is harmful and illegal, but effectively conveys his claims without forcing an opinion on his audience. Dighe's article outlines the economic net benefits of marijuana legalization in a manner that outweighs the net negative benefits. He provides personal stories, factual claims, and credible information in order to appeal to ethos, pathos and logos. He does this while sneakily persuading his audience by his easy-going tone and concise method of presenting his information.

References:

Dighe, R. (2014, January 30). Legalize It -- The Economic Argument. Retrieved July 22, 2015.