Group 2: How did Frederick Douglass learn to write? What was his strategy? What does that tell us about his character?

Group 3: Why did his Mistress stop teaching him? How did slavery change her and why???

Group 4: Why was learning to read and write a blessing and a curse? (130)?

Group 5: How did the encounter with the Irishmen impact Frederick Douglass's way of thinking?

He had a second way, which being friends with the poor white boys, and offering them bread in exchange of reading lessons, he called it an exchange of bread, for the bread of knowledge, that means knowledge itself is essential for life and growth. After that, he got a book, entitled "The Columbian Orator", where he found a dialogue that introduced something to his way of thinking, between a slave and his holder, where the slave escaped 3 times, where the slave was surprisingly smart to create his way of escaping.

This tell us about him that he was completely focused on his quest for autonomy, because it was prohibited for slaves to learn how to read, and he found ways to learn by his own way.

Frederick Douglas describes learning to read and write as a curse/blessing because it allows him to understand his environment. Through reading he is able to read the newspapers and letters and be aware of what is happening around him. By writing he can express his feelings and anecdotes, it also opens up doors to his education and understanding of literature.

He describes it as a curse because he learns about slavery and what it means for him, he says that as he learns to read he hates his slave holders and his wretched situation, he specifically uses the word wretched to emphasize how bad his situation is and how he starts understanding that he is seen as a merely object instead of a human being who deserves rights and respect. He also describes this as a curse because since he is a slave he doesn’t have the freedom to express his skills.

Even though Frederick Douglas didn't fully trust the Irishmen, he still took their advice, and this encounter made Douglas want even more freedom

One improvement we think can be done in his work is to really develop more on the issue, why was he not able to learn more languages? why cant he learn more languages as an adult?

this essay is well structured and has a very good imagery but I feel like the text should have more focus on the author challenge and how he can overcome it.

Our grade for this essay is a A-.

2. This is not that bad but also not that good as the first one due that this one has a lack of explosition because the story is too short, at the same time that the conflict is not actually so clear, it is a motivational kind of essay with no clear conflict.

https://www.thedaln.org/#/detail/1924c8ad-e6c6-4680-9a47-eae0fe644893

The first Literaciy Narrative that we found is called "Cooking With My Mom", which was not that great, because it did not include a conflict, it was more of a storytelling video than a Literacy Narrative, it was great to watch because it was well structured, but cannot be named a Literacy Narrative.

https://www.thedaln.org/#/detail/9e48a0ac-ab6d-44e7-9da9-18d2a1e8db09

The second one, called "Cooking with Yaya", started with a great exposition, giving us a metaphor of a pet in a household, because it does not understand anything in its environment. And in the next paragraph, we got presented the conflict, that her father family was Greek. She did not feel that she belonged because she didnt understand almost anything, and it frustrated her. But cooking with her "Yaya", who was her grandma, she found a way to express herself and feel that she belonged, giving a resolution to the text.

Empowered by Dance by Luna McKusick: McKusick expresses her many conflicts of dancing classes by showing the difficulties as she had to put a lot of work into it. Her first hip hop class was not exclusively cultured as it was directed by white women who appreciated culture but didn’t involve in the culture. But her second class helped her and showed her that pushing herself for the audience wouldn’t get her anywhere. Overall her essay is much stronger as she shows us how certain types of people affected how she felt and pushed her over the limits of her liking.

Group 2: How does she Adichie's language and tone contribute to her message/argument? How does she avoid sounding accusatory?

Group 3: How does she build credibility (ethos)? How does she gain the audience confidence and support?

Group 4: Do a visual and spatial analysis of Adichie's presentation. Focus on her choice of clothing and position. How do they contribute to the message/presentation?

Group 5: Adichie delivered this TedTalk in 2009. Is her message still relevant today? Why or why not?

Group 6: Why did Adichie choose a Ted Talk over another form? why not an op-ed?

Other questions:

1) What is the purpose of this Ted Talk? Why did Adichie deliver this presentation?

2) How does power create single stories

Aidichie’s message is still relevant today because stereotyping and biased messages are an enduring issue and societies across the world continue to struggle with stereotypes, misinformation and limited representation.

In today’s society with social media is easier to spread misinformation and social media platform use very specific algorithms that show users content that they have interacted with and this creates and echo effect that doesn’t allow users to look at other perspectives of a story.

Moreover her message will always be relevant because it is always good to look at a story and look at all the perspectives of it to make sure we don’t agree with a false or biased narrative.

But the way she keeps herself from sounding accusatory is by giving an example of when she herself fell for the single story about Mexican immigrants, before visiting Mexico to see its so much more than the stereotypes she was shown. Showing that while its no ones fault for falling for the stereotypes presented with these single stories, since even she has fallen for it before, it is our job to fix this major problem, and become aware that our perception has to widen so we can see that these single stories are only part truths to a much larger story. She isn't quite calling for action, but she is calling for change, and for the people to be informed of the negative impact of the Single Story.

1. Childhood books she read, which were mostly British and American, creating a point of view that books were only about snow, nice weather, full of white characters, and ginger beer.

2. Her coming to America at 19 to study at a university, where she learns that her roommate never knew Nigeria had English as an official language.

3. Learning that Africa was seen as a continent full of beautiful landscapes, sick people with AIDS, poverty, war & animals roaming around.

4. The house boy named Fide, whose family was poor, leading to her mother comparing her not finishing her food to Fide’s family who has nothing. Later to find out that his brother made a patterned basket of dyed raffia, which startled her because she didn’t think that anyone in his family could actually make something.

5. John Locke who traveled to west Africa and referred black Africans as “beasts who have no houses” and “They are people without heads, having their mouth and eyes in their breasts.”

6. Her novel, which her professor stated that it did not have African authenticity due to making characters look more like middle aged men with cars instead of starving people.

7. Her trip to Mexico where she believed that they were “immigrants”.

8. People who made her believe that she had to have a bad childhood to be a good writer.

   
   

How was it created?- We believe it was created by hand, maybe charcoal or pencil. We are not too sure if additional material was used, specifically for the font. It was probably created this way to show boldness and rawness.

How does the author convey her message?- She uses significant words and a specific language which is spanish. The translation to her quote is, “I deserve to be respected”. By using another language she adds unity which is welcoming to the hispanic community. She also adds a bold font in the word “Respetada(Respect)”. This shows she is unapologetic about what she means and what she wants. She also conveys a serious tone by the way the women’s face is drawn. The women is not smiling nor shows much emotion. She has a very serious expression.

We believe putting this artwork around colorful posters has a meaning too. Colors usually represent vivid and happy situations while black and white add a serious tone. This was done to convey her message clearer and receive more attention. The artist uses Pathos and Logos because she does transmit the serious and bold emotion, but it’s also pretty logical that you must respect others and their space.

Who’s the audience?- We believe the targeted audience is street harassers or more directly men. This was done to call out the conflict by pointing out the conflict. We believe there is a reasoning to why only women were chosen to portray this “anti harassment” movement. By this, the artist has stated that the victims are females. The fact men were silenced during this act says a lot about her feelings towards them.

Objective- To stop street harassment in general.

Street Art

Audience is everyone that wants to support the movement against harassment.

Tatyana Faxlalizadeh

Message is to stop the harassment against women.

She posted it in public so everybody could see it. To support the movement against harassment to women.

Choices

One choice is that she chose an "average" and not a specific woman because every woman can experience harassment.

Another choice is that she makes the woman look to you. Making you pay more attention, and hoping that you help the movement against harassment.

She also chose to use clear and strong words, to represent the message, by saying the phrase "WOMEN is not outside for your entertainment" without paraphrasing. And highlighting the word women, putting in bold format.

She uses pathos to make people feel empathy for the women who get harassed everyday and motivate them to stop the harassment that happen to them.

How is image created?

She uses black and white because she doesn't want to make it colorful, it's not about happiness, she wants to represent a serious message.

She uses an easy to read font, so everybody can understand her message.

She puts the image in a blank background, so people can focus on the women and her message.

How does the author conveys her message appeal to the audience?

With a poster for women that goes through harassment everyday and don't say it out loud.

With a woman that seems to be disturbed by her facial expression, and a clear message, for both people that harass and the women that suffer from harassment.

First she chose a black and white portrait so that it stands out from the red background and the art focuses more the attention on the womans faces rather than colors to emphasize individuality over decoration.

Secondly the text that she uses under the image is bold and straightforward the quote " Women are people, not just bodies " is very powerful because it challenges the objectification and dehumanization of women, its a reminder that women are important and that they deserve respect and recognition.

Third she places her art in a public building so that everyone who pases by can see it and the East Boston Social Center is a center that provides educational and social programs for the people of Boston and this is important because many of this issues of disrespecting women come from the lack of education from the offenders.

The art was created with black oil pastels or paint, with a white back drop. The black and white presentation is a choice that stands out to us. All of her work is made in black and white, which we believe is so our attention isn't drawn to anything else but the faces she paints, and the words that accompany them. It tells me "This is our message. Pay attention." With no distractions.

The art was also put alongside a mural, with the with the words "The revolution will not be televised". Which may have been unintentional or coincidental, but when I see Tatyana's work that says "Stop violence against women and girls" beside that, it makes me think about how much violence that happens against women and girls isn't televised.

It is often hidden, and not talked about in many communities, especially considering the many domestic violence cases where many victims don't come forward. It isn't televised. No attention is brought to it, and because of that, the violence often escalates into something worse. Despite the fact that cat calling, or certain street harassment isn't direct violence, it is a psychological attack that negatively affects women and their mentality despite how harmless it seems. And these "harmless" words, may, and have escalated into physical violence when women haven't reciprocrated or reacted to it. So Whether that choice of presentation was accidental or not, it stood out to us. Because she took the step, and the call for action, and MADE it televised. She plastered her art on the wall for all to see. Getting the message out there that the violence needs to stop.And she conveys this with a straightforward message, and faces of women and girls that believe in that message.

Her murals cut to the point. The absence of color makes her statement stand out even more. Without color, the painting looks more simplistic, much like what she's telling you. "Stop violence against women. Stop violence against girls. Simple." The capitalization of letters is another appeal to the audience. It isn't capitalization out of aggression. It is out of demand. A call for action. Along with the faces presented, and the fact they're all different girls from different backgrounds, it shows violence can happen to anyone. Anyone you know, anyone you love. Will you help stop the violence, or wait until one of these girls on that mural is someone close to you? Appealing to emotions in way, and morals.

Group 2: Analyze the rising action. What tone predominates during the rising action? What details suggest the tone? Why is it important that Maya receives a lot of gifts and attention?

Group 3: Analyze the conflict. What is the moment with the highest tension and why? How does the tone change from the rising action?

Group 4: Analyze the resolution. How does the Africna American community resolve the tension in the story? How would you describe the ending of the story?

Group 5: Perform close analysis on the visual imagery on page 131 and concluding paragraph "We were on top again.

Group 6: Do a character analysis of Maya. Who is she as a person? Describe her using adjectives and support your responses with textual evidence

1. During the rising action Angelous tone is joyful because of the gifts she received they were high quality and expensive. She and the other graduates were also proud and excited for their graduation ceremony.

2. The details that suggest the tone are the decorations, the clothing, the speeches, the gifts, and the achievements that they have made.

3. It shows how the community values education and how proud they are of there success especially this huge achievement for the black community.

How can we describe the ending of the story? The ending of the story brings a shift from a regretful and shameful tone to a hopeful tone by showing that black people did not have to be ashamed by their race any longer but they could be proud of it.

2) Highest tension and why: Donleavy claims white people had the possibility to be like Galileo and Edison which are famous smart scientists, while he differs and claims Black people can be like certain famous athletes. By this he is trying to say Black people don’t have enough intelligence to do such things. This is the highest tension because the graduates must’ve felt uncomfortable and in shock. At their graduation they are being underestimated and called “less of”.

3) Tone change from rising action: The rising action initiated in a very positive way. Donleavy soon claims he was “glad to be there” just like he was in other schools. The fact he said that was kind of ironic because he had mentioned that the other white schools had better status and equipment. He than began to bash the African graduates by saying that they will never reach the “whites” academic level. This creates a shameful tone because he is underestimating Black intelligence. He’s making the people feel “less of” and seen as “maids and farmers, handymen and washerwomen, and anything higher that they aspired to was farcical and presumptuous.”

She finds comfort in reading and learning, which helps her believe in herself and caused her to be able to graduate on top of her class of high school from all her hard work.

During graduation Donleavy gives a speech that makes Maya be very depressed and after the speech she gets called to receive the diploma she says her name had lost its ring of familiarity and that she had to be nudged to go receive her diploma.

After that Henry Reed gives his speech and motivates her to feel better and feel that the tears that slipped down many faces were not wiped in shame, and we were on top again.

Question #2: How does Truth use the repetition of the phrase "Ain't I a Woman" to make her argument more persuasive?

Question #3: In Paragraph three, Sojourner Truth uses the metaphor of units of measurement? What is she comparing and why? How does this metaphor allow her to challenge sexist beliefs?

Question #4: In Paragraphs four and five, Truth addresses how men have used religion (Christian dogma) to justify female subjugation. How does she challenge this belief system? Does she use allusions to the Bible effectively? Why or why not?

Question #5: what is the tone and style of Sojourner Truth's speech? is it effective? How does the tone change?

Question #6: How does Truth use personal anecdotes to make her point?

She starts by making a comparison between her anecdotes and how women were treated back then, when she says, "That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman?" (Lines 4-6). This contrasts that, in the past, women were helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, born to have "the best" place in society. She didn't receive this treatment, she had to work in the fields, ploughing and planting, even gathering into barns.

Which means that she was doing men's job but not getting the same rights or benefits. She even talks about how strong she was, even stronger than some of the men back there, using a metaphor to it: "and bear the lash aswell" which meant that she could accept painful and harsh situations.

She also uses her anecdotes on giving birth thirteen childs which most got sold as slaves. Crying alone because of her mother grief to show that she was not as strong as man only physically but also mentally because she had faced situation that most men could not handle with.

Truth is comparing the intellect of both men and woman to quarts and pints. She refers to the sterotype that women have less intellectual capacity than men but she is saying that even if they have less capacity, why cant they use of their "limited" capacity, this metaphor is effective because it higlights the difference between how men and woman were treated in society, it shows the belief that women were less smart but it also shows how women were not able to even make use of their rights because of the unfairness in society.

How does this metaphor allow her to chagellenge sexist beliefs? This metaphor allows Truth to challenge the sexist belief that women are biologically less capable than men, she asks the rhetorical question " Wouldnt you be mean not to let me have my little half measure full? She is going along with the reasoning of men that they are smarter and she is asking to be able to make use of her "pint" because if men are naturally smarter then they should not fear the women and let them make use of what their "cup" can hold.

Truth is reminding the audience that equality is not everyone being the same but rather everyone being able to achieve their full potential,everyone deserves to have their fair share in life , no matter their race or gender.

Sojourner Truth used allusions to the Bible and logic to make her point effective for example:

When the men in audience used the Bible to say that women were less important than men, Truth used the same Bible to prove them wrong. She say that Jesus was born from a woman, so women must be important than men. When she says “Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman!. Man had nothing to do with Him.”

So she also said the first woman. People often blamed her for causing the first sin. But truth flips the story around and says if first women god ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down, then all women now together can fix it.

Her argument was simple and logical the audience understood her point easily and saw the flaws in the men’s argument. Sojourner Truth speak knowledgeably about religion, she shows that she, a black woman, was just as smart and faithful as the men using the Bible to argue with her.

For example, this is shown in paragraph two where she says, “That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or give me any best place! And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman?” In this quote Truth explains how “That man over there” says that women need help with many things but Truth doesn’t receive the same cordial treatment even though she is also a woman.

Further into the paragraph the meaning of the phrase “ain’t I a woman” changes. Truth says, “I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman.” Here, Truth uses “ain’t I a woman” to say that she can do as much as a man and should be treated the same way than a man is.

In the last part of the paragraph Truth says, “ I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain’t I a woman?” Here Truth uses “Ain’t I a woman” for a different meaning. To say that she has been through a lot even though she is a woman and is supposed to be treated fairly and she deserves better.

In the second paragraph, Truth’s tone shifts into more challenging as she uses repetition in “Ain’t I a woman?” Repeating these words form a challenging tone as she proves that women are just as capable as men. In the third paragraph, Truth’s tone was more of a questioning tone as she states, “What’s that got to do with women’s rights or negroes’ rights?” as she questions women’s intelligence and if it is any less than mens.

As for the fourth paragraph, Truth’s tone was very powerful where she brings Christ into the speech. She states, “Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! God had nothing to do with him.” This tone makes the audience more persuasive as many are very religious. Finally, in the fifth paragraph, Truth’s tone was very inspiring as she ends by encouraging woman to act together and change the world, stating “If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back..” This tone leaves the audience feeling motivated.

Her tone is effective in appealing to the logic of the audience, and allowing them to feel the way she feels on a deep level. She has done as much, if not more than any man. She's experienced the terrors and lashings of slavery, and has "borne thirteen children" yet had to endure the loss of almost all of them being sold off. She details her life struggles with a serious tone of slight sadness and anger, to show that she herself is living prove as to why women are just as worthy, if not slightly more worthy to civil rights as men are. Yet her tone conveys that she's fed up with no one listening or paying attention to the simplicity of this.

With her next metaphor comparing the cups, saying that of women are only able to hold a pint, but the cup of men are able to hold a quart, asking "wouldn't it be mean not to let me have my little half measure full?", being almost like a breakdown of why their reasoning to not give women their fair share of rights is simply childish and mean. She further explores this through her references to the Bible where her emotions of sadness at the loss of her children, turn into frustration. Sojourner argues that man had nothing to do with the birth of Christ, yet they use him being a man as a reason as to why women don't deserve the same rights as men. So Sojourner brings up the fact Christ came from a woman. Connecting to the audience with her logical statement that men had nothing to do with Christ, yet somehow they still get the credibility for it.

Sojourner remains very direct throughout her speech, going on to say if the first woman God made had turned the world upside down, then men better let woman get it right side up again. Concluding her speech with a very evident tone of frustration that developed throughout, closing with "now old Sojourner got nothing to say."

This combined with her opening of "Well, children" shows she felt she had to break these very simple things down as if the audience were children, who needed a thorough explanation as to why their views made no sense, and once she got to the end, she was fed up with their lack of understanding. Developing from a serious, emotional tone, to one that was full of frustration and annoyance. From beginning to end though, Sojourner Truth was very direct with her way of speaking.

Group2: What is "Simulation Justice?" To help you answer this question look at the paragraph where she writes "Online spaces offer the hopeful fiction of a tangible cause and effect..."

Group 3: Why does she compare internet users to "fearful Davids" and "hammers in search of nails?"

Group 4: What is cancel culture? Why does Roxane Gay call it "inhumane?" What do you know about cancel culture?

Group 5: Towards the end, Gay writes "...[people] seek control and justice online." Why do we do that? Can the internet afford justice? Is there such a thing as internet justice?

Roxane Gay believes that people are so awful online because of the influence and power that they have on the internet. Gay believes that people have little generosity on the internet. She states that when people have a big platform, they are quick to be “cancelled.” Gay also claims that online engagement starts to become fueled and more aggressive.

Roxane Gay’s argument is effective because she uses her own experiences. She doesn’t blame technology for these things, but she also blames herself. She states that it feels uncomfortable to have some power online because it feels “foreign.” Also, she has a tone to her that sounds honest. This makes the argument more effective because the audience can relate and understand the argument more.

- The internet can afford justice to certain point. For example: bringing awareness to the Sudan and Gaza suffering but aren’t actually stopping it. Yeah the protests and donating somewhat help but the government doesn’t care to actually stop what’s going on.

- There is something such as internet justice but it’s based on the situation. If it can easily involve attacking the other side or cancelling, it is doable but if it a political matter, it only brings attention and goes away after a bit.

- Cancel culture is when people in the internet criticize or "cancel" someone based on a singular opinion or idea that they disagree with. It usually happens to companies, or creators. When its a company, the term "boycott" is used.

Why does Roxane Gay call it "inhumane"?

- Roxane Gay calls it inhumane because there is no reason to why people cant have their opinion. People can also change ideas throughout time because of different influences. Cancelling people just because you have another idea of things makes no sense. It is not right to do so. Everyone should be entitled to their own opinion.

-What do you know about cancel culture? I know about two big cases of " Cancel culture " one with kanye west when he started sharing controversial opinions on Twitter and adidas ended his contract and people started boycotting him, also the most famous case is the one of Charlie Kirk, who used to shared his viewpoints on political matters in the internet and many people thought that his opinions were very controversial and someone killed him over this. This is an example of how radical cancel culture can be, is an example of what happens when people in the internet disagree with what you say.

The first example is a biblical allusion, the "fearful Davids" make a reference to when a little and weak guy, called David, had to face an enormous and strong guy, like a monster, called Goliath. So, calling us the fearful Davids, makes a reference of our opinions. When we share them, we can face monsters, like people attacking us because of what we said, a reference to Goliath. In other words, Goliath are the issues in the real world, we and our opinion are the fearful Davids. The internet is the place when we are able to fight Goliath or real life's problems because we get the strength to actually express or fight for our opinions.

The hammer looking for nails is a metaphor for people or groups looking for other people to attack, specially in the internet where they face few or none repercussions. The nails are the opinions of people and the hammer are those groups of people looking for mistakes, or different ideas to attack them. Because as we all know, hammers are made to bury, to smash the nails, so the metaphor used by Ms. Gay says that people that only use internet to attack others, can be seen as hammers, and the affected by these as nails.

Group 2: According to Turkle, what are the effects of cell phones on human behavior? Please be specific and provide evidence.

Group 3: Why is face to face conversation important? According to Turkle, what skills do we need to be fully present in a conversation?

Group 4: According to Turkle, how do we reclaim conversation? What specific behaviors is she advocating?

Group 5: Unpack the following quote: "Our phones are not accessories, but psychological potent devices that change not just what we do but who we are." Paraphrase the quote, explain its significance, and react to it.

Having a conversation face to face is important according to Turkle, when you interact with another person you can reclaim solitude and hearing them out on what they have to say. “Conversation is the antidote to the algorithmic way of looking at life because it teaches you about fluidity, contingency and personality. Turkle uses the study by Yalda T. Uhls in 2014 where children attend a device free outdoor camp where after a while without devices they are able to read expressions much better than the other group who wasn’t able to read these expressions as well. Face to face conversation in intimate settings lead to people being better at inner dialogue, reclaiming solitude, listening to ourselves, not silencing ourselves.

This is important because it shows that phones do more than help us with daily tasks. They can change how we pay attention, how we talk to others, and how we see ourselves. The quote reminds us that technology can shape our lives in big ways, even if we don’t notice it. Knowing this helps us be more careful about how much time and power we give to our phones.

We think the quote is true. Phones are useful, but they can also control our habits and emotions. Sometimes we check our phones without thinking, compare ourselves to people online, or get distracted from real life. This quote makes me think about how important it is to use my phone wisely and not let it change me in a negative way.

Her argument through this text is clear. Phones have weakened our empathy and conversations with people, and we should put our phones down and reconnect with face-to-face conversations. In the text she mentions a study made in 2010, that says, "In 2010, a team at the University of Michigan led by the pshycologist Sara Konrath put together the findings of 72 studies that were conducted over a 30-year period. They found a 40 percent decline in empathy among college students, with most of the decline taking place after 2000." This gives a key hint, most of the declining in empathy was placed after 2000, years were phones were starting to be popular. Specially smartphones with text applications that can simplify a conversation, where you didn't even have to see the person you were talking to. Clearly changing the way people were used to have conversations.

In the same text, the author states, "In one experiment, many student subjects opted to give themselves mild electric shocks rather than sit alone with their thoughts." This shows how people reject to have inner conversations with themselves, even rejecting just thinking alone. Because when you have your phone, you do not have the need to think alone. With your phone the topic varies over the time, so your mind is distracted from overthinking.

Also, there is an important quote that presents a key idea, which says, "Our phones are not accessories, but psychologically potent devices that changes not just what we do but who we are." It is clear, phones do not change just our activities, but who we are. What it means? That our habits, our day by day, everything, including our behavior. It makes us dependants on our phones, as we cannot connect with people without it. Without our phones, we are nobody, because every connection we have, is around it.

And by doing so we get to know ourselves more and in turn we can be more secure about ourselves and have more topics to talk about when we are having a conversation.

She says that “when we are secure in ourselves, we are able to really hear what others have to say.” This shows that to recall conversations we need to have an inner process that involves self-confidence and self-awareness and the way to do that is to be with yourself and reflect and get rid of distractions like a phone.

Another way that Turkle says that we can reclaim conversations its by using technology in a wat that we can control it and not get distracted by it, we can use features like “Do not disturb” so that we can focus on specific tasks and not get distracted in things like social media or other things that we dont need.”

Turkle states, “technology is implicated in this assault on empathy. We’ve gotten used to being connected all the time, but we have found ways around conversation…The capacity for empathic conversation goes hand in hand with the capacity for solitude.” This quote explains how technology replaces real conversations and without real conversations, people don’t tend to understand each other’s emotions. Turtkle explains that when people use technology, they are escaping solitude which makes it harder for them to make real connections.

Also, Turkle states, “Conversation is kept relatively light, on topics where people feel they can drop in and out…People keep the conversation on topics where they won’t mind being interrupted. They don’t feel as invested in each other. Even a silent phone disconnects us.” In this quote , Turkle explains that people avoid deep connections because they expect to be interrupted which makes the conversation weak. For example, people checking their phones mid conversation makes people less connected and engaged.

Finally, Turkle states, “The app way of thinking states with the idea that actions in the world will work like algorithms: Certain actions will lead to predictable results.” Turkle explains that technology make you expect things in life which are not real. Turkle explains that people think life should work just like apps and that distracts people real life experiences.

group 2: What did the study with researcher Karen Lunsford reveal? Be specific. Why is the study important? What are your reactions to the findings? Do you agree/disagree?

Group 3: Lunsford refers to various accounts of the state of literacy among students as "scripts" and "stories." What is the CONNOTATION of these words? Assess Lunsford argument. How well does she counter these stories that argue that students brain-damaged by technology?

Group 4: Ah you say, but these are students at Standford" (6). Is Lunsford wise to introduce a NAYSAYER at this point in her argument? Why or Why not?

Group 5: Having devoted her entire essay to student writers, Lunsford refers to their teachers in the last line. Is this an effective way to conclude her argument? Why or why not?

And why is the study important?

The study is important because it shows how writing has evolved and people are learning new ways to write literature. This includes using such things as technology to advance literature in a new direction. Also because of how integrated technology is, people have now started to use different styles with different circles of people.

What are your reactions to the findings? Do you agree/disagree?

We mostly agree to the findings because this is only focusing on the writing aspects and not the entirety of literacy. Technology could still harm the illiteracy of students in a way to where they may become illiterate.

1.5~This assesses Lunsford argument by showing that youth are more than what many people believe of them (“stories” and “scripts”). She provides evidences that people are writing even more nowdays and making no more mistakes than what people made in the past. That supports the argument that internet help people to read and write more because they are exposed to more people and varied points of view which can be reached by reading.

2~ Lunsford opposes the dominate belief by providing accurate analysis and facts. The general “myth” is that new generation students have become illiterate due to the invasion of technology. Lunsford provides a statement which claimed that “students today are writing more than ever before”. This automatically proves the dominant belief not accurate. Further on, Lunsford also quotes “spelling, the most prevalent error by over 300%—now presents much less of a problem.” This identifies a major improvement which existed before and the new generation was able to overcome. Overall, Lunsford successfully counters the popular myth of current illiteracy by providing real facts.

She then procceds to refute this objection by carrying out the research with students writing from all regions of the United States, from two-year and four year from big schools and small schools and private and public schools.

and demostrating that both research show similar findings.

As she writes "In short, we found that students today certainly make errors--as all writers--do--but that they are making no more errors than previous studies have documented. Different errors, yes--but more errors, no." this shows that while technology has changed the mistakes that students are making it has not increased the amount of errors that they are making therefore their quality of work has stayed the same over the years.

This study is important because it shows that students today are not worse writers. Instead, they are writing even more and making about the same number of mistakes as students in the past. It reminds teachers that writing changes with time and that technology affects how students write.

We mostly agree with the study because students today write a lot, even if their writing looks different. Technology helps with things like spelling, so errors are not worse than before. Overall, we think students aren’t weaker writers they’re just writing in new ways that match today’s world/technology

Referring to the teachers in the last line is an effective way to conclude her argument.

Why?

Because it kind of give a reason of why the students use so much technology nowadays. We have to read a little before: "What students need un facing these challenges is not a decision or dismissal but solid and informed instruction. And that's where the real problem lie..." Lunsford refers that the teachers are not doing an excellent job instructing the students, so they have to find other ways to improve their abilities, and they rely on technology; Lunsford encourages teachers to include more multimortal ideas, exposing the students to diverse types of genres and literature. So the students can adapt to different requirements of writing styles when it's necessary for them, because it's not the same texting a friend that doing an essay for a regent exam, it adds flexibility.

Group 2: Haidt and Twenge say that Instagram has had "particularly strong effects on girls and young women (6)." What are some of the effects and causes?

Group 3: Haidt and Twenge introduce a NAYSAYER in paragraph 7. How and how effectively do they deal with this "powerful" opposing argument?

Group 4: "So what can we do?" How and how well do the authors answer this question with regard to cellphones? Point to specific passages in the text that support your assessment.

Group 5: Where and how do Haidt and Twenge analyze cause and effect to back up their claim that "smartphones don't just affect individuals, they affect groups" (13)? Point to specific passages in the text.

Group 6: As Sherry Turkle wrote in her book Reclaiming Conversation, life with smartphones means "we are forever elsewhere?" Analyze what this phrase means.

-Social Media’s like and retweet buttons become algorithmicized. This means that people will see others include their opinions and they will add more comments onto it. The text states, “Facebook added the like button, Twitter added the retweet button and, over the next few years, users feeds became algorithmicized based on “engagement”, which mostly meant a post’s ability to trigger emotions.” This means that people will post things just to trigger others into retweeting or liking just to insert their thoughts.

-Social Media’s like button makes more conflict because your followings list on social media can see what you like. For example, in a relationship, a boy can like a girl’s pictures and his girlfriend may not be fine with that so that creates conflicts. Social Media’s retweet button also makes more conflict because it becomes an open conversation for everyone’s opinion. For example, on Twitter, Nicki Manaj and Cardi B had an argument and fans would retweet to add more fuel to the argument.

-Social Media adding these buttons has just made it a more negative place to add your thoughts. Even with a simple retweet or like, it can turn into something bigger and

ruin relationships.

Haidt and Twenge write "One important step is to give kids a long period each day when they are not distracted by their devices." the author answer to this question is that kids should not have their devices in school because this distract them from learning, the authors say that without their devices in school students can "practice the lost art of paying full attention to the people around them--including their teachers." this means that without their phones students will be more invested in what they are learning and they will be more succesfull at understanding their school work and their teachers.

Furthermore Haidt and Twenge write "A second important step is to delay entry into social media, ideally keeping it entirely out of elementary and middle school" they write this to prevent young students to be exposed at the social media world in which there are a lot of unfiltered information and they can be exposed to harassment or cyberbulling.

This brings us to their next point, Haidt and Twenge write " The platforms should--at a minimum-- be held legally responsible for enforcing their stated minimum age of 13" Here they say that companies should have more legal consequences if they fail to enforce their age limit policies so that when they see the repercussions they will put more effort into enforcing their policies.

We believe that points 2 and 3 are realistic and should be implemented in our society because if we prevent kids from having access to social media at a young age they will be protected from all the cyberbullying and unfiltered media that there is on the internet.

As for the first point we believe that this solution is not realistic, we should teach teenagers when to put their phones away, this way they can reinforce their self control while still having access to their phones in case of emergencies.

They effectively deal with this “powerful” opposing argument by introducing the term loneliness which they stated wasn’t the same as depression, just correlated. They also used the PISA (program for international student assessment) that surveyed 15 year olds from different countries since 2000. To oppose against the argument they reported that in “36 out of 37 countries, loneliness at school increased since 2012.” This shows how they used loneliness to connect depression, showing that teenagers in other counties also experience mental health issues.

It states “Teenage loneliness was relatively stable between 2000 and 2012, with fewer than 18 percent reporting high levels of loneliness. But in the six years after 2012, rates increased dramatically. They roughly doubled in Europe, Latin America and the English-speaking countries, and rose by about 50 percent in the East Asian countries.” With this evidence, the authors present that in every part of the world, after the rise of the phones, the loneliness increased too.

Haidt and Twenge analyze cause and effect to back up their claim that “smartphones don't just affect individuals, they affect groups” when they use relevant testimonies and other authors claims. They refers to Sherry Turkle coined claim, “we are forever elsewhere.” Supporting their claims that interactions are made difficult as they “transformed peer relationships, family relationships and the texture of daily life for everyone—even those who don't own a phone or don't have an Instagram account.“ showing that it is harder to communicate in the world outside the smartphones, impacting even those who share no common ground with the smartphone world.

Haidt and Twenge also analyze cause and effect to back up their claim that “smartphones don't just affect individuals, they affect groups” by mentioning that the impact of smartphones is deeply affecting social interactions. Mentioning the testimony of a Gen Z Canadian college student who witnessed his own generation “sit in complete silence, absorbed in their smartphones, afraid to speak and be heard by their peers.” This has led to a “weakening of self-identity and confidence” compared to “empty calories” as smartphones are not being consumed healthily.