Author: doherty.d

The group that worked on the public initiative proposal for WP3 ran into trouble regarding some of the element definitions. The first change they made was to eliminate the sub-elements of action and execution had definitions so similar it only made the schema confusing. They decided to remove them from the schema and just allow for the text to be written beneath the approach section. They also decided to make the “who”, “what” and “when” attributes under the scope section mandatory to make the purpose section clearer. They also made the feasibility sub-elements; social, economic and environmental, to type attributes under feasibility.

I am not surprised by the confusion between the action and execution sub-elements as our group was only able to agree on the difference in definition and use of the elements after much debate. It is easy to understand why a new group working with the schema would struggle to understand the difference between the two. I agree with their change to eliminate both attributes as I believe it will make writing the approach section seem less choppy. Making the who, what and when attributes mandatory makes sense as well as they would be included in all proposals as they convey the most essential information concerning a public project. They also suggested adding a clear definition for scope that makes it clear what information it should include. I disagree as it would be somewhat redundant as there shouldn’t be a need for any additional text under scope. The scope is by definition the who, what, why, when and how of the project. Any information under scope should be covered by one of those attributes.

Their change of making the sub-elements of feasibility to type attributes was actually a reversal of a change we made in our revision process. We encountered some schema errors when we had them defined as type attributes as it only allowed for a single feasibility entry with one sub-type. To correct this issue, we decided to change the attributes to sub-elements. In addition to fixing the schema error, this change allowed for a single feasibility paragraph in the case that the proposal was not meant to be as long as a fully developed proposal. Each sentence within that paragraph could then be defined under the appropriate tag, such as social or economic.

The also suggested adding a global reference element that would work with the bibliography to add citations within the proposal. This would give the argument more credence as it would allow for statements within the proposal to be immediately supported by a reference, which a reader could then go to to look up more information that supports the claims made by the author.

Overall, I agree with the changes made by the group to the schema as I believe they will allow for a more streamlined writing process. I agree that there is not a significant difference between the action and execution sections and would leave their changes in the schema. I would not change the scope definition and I would revert the changes made to the feasibility section as I believe it allows for a more flowing argument in the feasibility section.

The schema of the edutainment blog proved difficult for me to use in my writing process. Do to the lack of required elements built into the schema, I was often unsure of what I should include in each section of the blog post. I began writing my post within XML and composed my entire first draft in that manner, leaving many errors in the document unaddressed at the time. I was more focuses on determining the specific content that I wanted to discuss in the post, and did not really focus on what elements in the schema each part of the blog best represented.

I didn’t find the schema constraining, but I felt very unsure about how to use it most effectively. I was surprised when errors started popping up as I did not believe certain elements were required in each section. I have since gone back and am working to address those issues. I have since decided to write my post in a word document to decide how I want to organize it and will then work to incorporate it into the existing schema. I believe that writing it this way will allow my post to have better flow and determine which scientific information is necessary to include.

Reading my peer’s post and his peer review of my own work really helped me determine what I needed to do to improve my own blog entry. Leo first determined what content he wanted to include in his post and I realized I should have created an outline outside of XML, to determine how in depth I wanted to discuss the mechanics of solar panels. I also have yet to find visuals to go alongside my explanations and know I need to include them in my final draft.

I think the schema could be made clearer by listing what elements are required in each section, and those that are optional. Using a schema I did help develop proved much more difficult as I did not have a great understanding of the specific elements in the schema. I was unsure how the schema should be constructed and how the optional elements in the background and answer sections were usually arranged. I think a more careful study of the schema before I started writing would have been very helpful to me in my writing process, instead of doing it in the reverse order.

• List required elements under each section/add a place within the schema to make it clearer.
• add clearer definitions to each of the optional element to help the writers understand how they are typically used and in what order

The schema figured very prominently in my writing process as I used it as a guide for planning the outline of my public initiative proposal. I used the element definitions to decide which content was appropriate in each section and they helped me understand how each section related to the others. The schema was an asset for this writing project but I did not feel that differently when using it to write my proposal.  I have written experiment proposals for my other classes so I was fairly comfortable with the genre, using the schema as a guide.

The most difficult aspects of XML have to do with the formatting for me. I find it takes some time getting used to the formatting system and I had to frequently go back to look at examples of how to insert citations and other information in the document. I found the definitions of the elements extremely helpful in my writing process. While our group tried to define each element in the schema, it really made made me think about each section of a proposal and about what content should be included in it. Determining the difference between and objective and a goal, or subject history and the current conditions gave me a much better understanding of a genre I thought I already understood very well.

I believe I broke up the content of my proposal well and that each section in the document serves a specific purpose. However, I did struggle with the length of the proposal as they are typically much larger than the 1000 word requirement from this project. I tried to reduce or summarize certain sections of this proposal and I was often unsure about which information to include and which to omit. It was an interesting editing process that really made me think about my word choice and forced me to get to my point quickly, using concise sentences. I think the assignment allowed me to analyze the genre very thoroughly and I have a much better understanding of both XML and the public initiative proposal than I had before.

The Edutainment blog post was the most interesting genre to me as it combines humor and science in a very unique way. I have read a fair amount of these blog posts throughout my time at Northeastern on topics related to my major of chemical engineering and others. This genre would be useful to me as I often have trouble explaining what my those in my field do to my family and friends. While I was on co-op, my younger brother frequently asked the question “So what do you actually do again?.” I had explained that I was working on process validation studies several times now, but couldn’t articulate my job description well enough in colloquial terms for him to understand my responsibilities. The edutainment style of a response specializes explaining complex scientific subjects to the average person without an extensive background. If I were to master the skills of this genre, I would have a much easier time explaining to my friends what chemical engineers typically do in their fields.

I doubt I would ever use an edutainment style post in my remaining academic career as most of my classes would require a more formal genre to summarize the projects I am apart of, but I could utilize it later in my professional career. If at my future job I was ever asked to do an interview with a journalist or news station I would want to utilize some elements of the edutainment genre to make the subject more entertaining and accessible for the average viewer. My goal would likely be to spark interest in whatever I was working on and a formal report analyzing the results in a very technical manner would not inspire any curiosity in the average person. By making the subject fun and using analogies to describe the science going on, it may generate the uptake of the audience (the general public) to do some more research into the subject or inspire a younger generation to choose a scientific field of study.

From the schema template, I learned that the genre of an edutainment is not very rigid and is designed to be flexible to suit the writing style of any particular author. The edutainment post also relies heavily on the use of graphics and other visuals to break up the text and present information in another way to the reader. It is somewhat unclear to me how long these edutainment posts tend to be. I have seen many that vary in length from a few cartoons being used to explain a scientific fact to a long article broken up with various images.

The tone of my classmates’ edutainment posts are informal and humorous. They make the subject matter interesting by not using a serious tone throughout the work and the use of graphics made it easier to stay interested in the subject. To complete my own version of this genre I will first need to determine if I will have time to do so, as the edutainment post seems like it could take a significant amount of time to do properly. However, if I find a subject that I am comfortable with, I believe I will be able to draft a decent edutainment post without too much trouble. The largest issue will be finding cartoons/images that go along with the subject well, as I do not have the time or the artistic talent to create them myself.

I used the schema to organize the content of my proposal and also as a reminder as to what information was necessary/required in a public project proposal.  I felt the schema was appropriate for the rhetorical situation as I attempt to convince the audience that the MBTA has serious issues related to its subway and that it would be in the benefit of the city to resolve them. The schema did at times feel constraining as it did not allow for multiple paragraphs within a section and allowed only one feasibility section. However, we did not intend for this to be the design of the schema and plan to correct these issues. One thing I though about was that most proposals would include some form of data and the schema does not currently allow the presentation of that data in a table or graph as visuals often have more of an impact on the audience

The schema helped me separate which information I thought would be appropriate for the introduction and that which belonged in the background. The definitions and elements within the background schema made it easier to draft my proposal and saved me some time in the decision process. I think my peer review partner struggled like I did as to how much information to include in the schema, as the proposal is meant to be a much longer document where as writing project 2 is meant to be around a 1000 words. We both struggled with how much detail should be used and both made some vague statements at times in an attempt to summarize our arguments. I found the schema designed in small groups easier to use as it was more aligned with what I was trying to do, which is to be expected when only five people designed the schema compared to the whole class.  I found the definitions acceptable in the schema, but would be open to revising them a bit if others in my group thought it necessary.

The genre’s that proceed the creation of a public initiative proposal can vary based on the specific situation the proposal is meant to address. Often there are informal discussions among town officials or the public that first identify a problem and then determine if it is something they could address. After this informal discussion, town officials may decide to hold an official meeting about the problem and may invite the public to attend to voice their concerns and have their opinions be heard. A town meeting or Town Hall is a genre that is meant to convey information to the public, but also allows town officials to gauge the mood of the town related to certain issues. The uptake of a town meeting is that town officials can expect to learn the opinion of the general public, and the public can expect the town officials to take into consideration their desires when making decisions on behalf of the town. Based on what is said in the meeting, officials can determine if the public cares about the topic, what the public thinks should be done, and how much support/resistance town officials can expect when addressing the issue at hand. Once this information has been obtained, town officials can create the genre of a public initiative proposal that takes into account the general public’s opinion while suggesting a way to fix the problem. Also, a town may determine that a problem exists but is unsure of how to solve it. They would then create the genre of a Request for Proposals (RFPs), which would directly result in the creation of proposals that suggest methods of solving the problem and take the uptake of the RFP (that is the problem statement) into account.

While the genre of a public initiative proposal is fairly straightforward in it seeks to address a problem while convincing the general public that the solution it outlines is the best option. In addition to defining a solution method to a problem, the content of a public proposal may be affected by the uptake of the genre’s that preceded it. For example, if at a town hall meeting citizens expressed concern that the road repairs would create bad traffic delays during rush hour, the proposal may include a section detailing the detour route that would be used during construction with data showing that it would only create a few extra minutes of travel for the average commuter. Alternatively, the town may decide that the citizens concern is valid and as a result, the construction will only take place at night when few people are on the road. In both of these examples, the genre of the proposal was affected by the uptake of the genre that came before it.

The creation of a proposal could result in many various genre’s including a town vote on whether to implement the proposal, construction bids for the work detailed in the proposal or the development of a schedule for the activities outlined in the proposal. A vote on the proposal would spark a debate on the benefits of implementing the proposal contrasted with the costs of the project and any inconvenience it may create. The public would use the uptake of the proposal, which is the arguments  for implementation, and either be convinced that the project is necessary or decide it is not.

For writing project 2, our group chose to analyze proposals for public projects.  As proposals is a very broad genre that includes proposals for experimental design, construction bids and proposals for a change in laws, our group decided to focus on public initiative proposals.  Public Initiative Proposals are those projects that aim to serve the community by improving some aspect of life, whether by solving a current problem or introducing something new that will better the quality of life.

The genre of a public proposals interact with many other assemblages of texts that occur both prior to and after the generation of the proposal. Public proposals can either be generated by a city/town or submitted to the town for consideration.  The governing body of the town may identify a project that they wish to implement and generate a proposal to present to the public to persuade the town’s population to support their project. Before generating the proposal, the town will often ask the public for their insight to understand their needs, concerns and ideas about project. Once this data has been collected, the town generates the proposal with this feedback in mind and often submits it for a vote of public approval. Once approved, the project commences based on the criteria established in the proposals. Throughout this process, a representative body of the town will frequently communicate with the public, to convey updates on the project and to alleviate any concerns that arise.

Alternatively, a town may recognize a problem that must be addressed, but lacks the resources to solve it on their own. Often a town will produce a Request for Proposals (RFPs), which outlines the problem and asks for outside companies to submit proposals to address their concerns. An RFB is a common text that will prompt the generation of a proposal, and will always come before a proposal sequentially. Any proposals that the town receives are often discussed and voted upon at a Town council meeting, where both the Town Officials and the general public can voice their opinions and vote on the various proposals.

When a public initiative proposal is viewed under Spinuzzi’s genre ecology framework, it is easy to see the complexity of the genre. Their is some sequential activity such that a RFP will always come before the generation of a proposal as it prompts the generation of that genre, but many other texts occur in a overlapping fashion. Public opinion is collect both prior to the generation of a proposal and after work begins. The recognition of a problem or a potential improvement will mediate a discussion among the town’s population as to how to best approach it, and result in an interaction between the town and outside companies. The town may submit a RFB (request for bids) to various companies to perform that work, which will result in some companies submitting a detailed outline of the cost of their services. In addition, a proposal will often result in the generation of genres unrelated to the actual work detailed in them, as marketing campaigns are generated alongside proposals by those promoting them in order to sway public opinion. These could include flyers, commercials, or speeches in favor of the change and highlighting the benefits of project.

For design entry 3, I compared Oliver Scott’s annotated bibliography to my own.  Oliver and I essentially identified the same problem, global sustainability. Oliver specifically focused on the wasteful habits of the current American population and spent time discussing what had changed since World War II; when Americans willingly went without goods and comfort to ensure the success of the war effort. Since then, he argues Americans either don’t care that sustainability is an issue or haven’t fully recognized the problem we face. I focused on the need to develop large scale renewable technology and the economic issues these projects must overcome to be successful.  Oliver’s discipline of computer engineering allowed him highlight specific technologies within the field of automated trash sorting that will help improve the efficiency or reliability of these systems to reduce wastefulness.  I read Oliver’s problem statement prior to knowing his discipline of study and was surprised to learn he was a computer engineering major as he took a very historical and analytical approach to his problem statement. Oliver’s commentary about what had changed in American society in just a few generations was very interesting and he seems to suggest that since society as a whole does not care enough to reduce waste, we must turn to technology instead.

Oliver broke up each part of his citation into separate lines which made it easier to read and seemed better organized than my own, which I left in a varied paragraph format. Oliver and I used the tags in about the same way, but he consistently broke up the citation into several more parts, often using two or three types of the summary element. As a result, I thought his document was well organized and would prove to be easy to code. Oliver also did not try to explain the specific technologies that he mentions in the annotated bibliography which I think works better than what I did in my own bibliography. If this annotated bibliography was written alongside a larger work, I would not have written as extensively, as I felt the need to explain the technology in order for the average reader to understand. While I liked Oliver’s organization, I believe having the 5-6 element tags can cause the annotations not to flow well and make the transitions from one section to another somewhat difficult. I struggled with the transitions in my own annotations and I consistently used 3-4 tags. If I could change anything in my own bibliography I would better organize my citation sections and reduce some of the content in the annotation regarding the technology.

While completing Project 1 I felt like XML was a hindrance to my writing process as I constantly had to stop and consider which element or attribute best fit each part of the annotation. I often found that parts of the annotation could be categorized as either a general summary definition, an approach or some combination of both.  The mark-up schema was useful for ensuring I completed all required parts for each citation, but this could have been achieved by following a checklist and completing this assignment in a standard word processing format. The mark-up schema made the annotations somewhat choppy as it was difficult to add sentences that allowed for transition between two sections as they did not often fit well within an element.

XML proved to be a fairly straightforward mark-up system and I was able to navigate fairly easily with very little prior experience working with similar technology. I found that the hardest part of the technology was understanding how to sync Oxygen and Github and upload my completed file. However, this should be much easier in the future now that I have done it once.

The schema proved to be somewhat restrictive as I was writing the annotated bibliography as some types of writing, such as research reports or a thesis had not been defined within the schema, but this could be easily resolved by adding those types into the element. While developing the schema in class, I believed that the more specific the schema could be the easier it would be to create the bibliography. I found that the broader types of elements that were built into the schema allowed for an easier flow of writing as I was not worried about the constraints imposed by the schema.

I believe the social action of the genre of an annotated bibliography is for the author who cited the sources to provide some justification as to why he thought they were valuable to reference in their work. The short annotations along with the citations allow the audience some insight into the author’s thought process as they developed their project and the arguments they attempt to make in their piece of writing.

Oxygen is a fairly straightforward system to use and I believe their is some benefit to the development of a schema before beginning a writing project in order to create a basic outline for that piece of work.  However, I do not believe actually writing the project in Oxygen has any added benefit after the initial schema is created.

The principles and concepts of chemical engineering can be applied over a wide array of issues and fields of study. This has resulted in chemical engineers working in many different fields ranging from pharmaceuticals, energy, micro-technology and even the food processing industry. The industry a chemical engineer enters is often dictated by the region of the country they are from. For example, chemical engineers in New England most commonly work in the pharmaceutical industry or for one of the many biotech companies founded in recent decades. Engineers in on the Gulf Coast will typically work within the Petroleum industry, while those in the Midwest enter the food processing industry, working for companies like General Mills.

One of the fastest growing industries in the country is renewable energy. There are many types of renewable energy, such as hydroelectric, solar, wind and geothermal, which all have positive and negative elements associated with them. Hydroelectric is cost efficient and can generate vast amounts of electricity, and as a result has already been widely developed across the country. Future developments are met with some resistance as the dams needed to generate the power can alter the local ecosystem. Wind and solar are both considered somewhat inconsistent sources of power generation as they are weather dependent. Geothermal has the largest potential for power generation out of any of the renewable fields, but can only be developed in very specific regions of the world that have the higher volcanic activity required to generate geothermal power. In addition, the initial cost to find a suitable location and construct an operational geothermal power plant are extraordinary.

Cities require large amounts of power to operate effectively. While residents of cities consume power at comparable rates to their suburban counterparts, the dense population center results in much larger total consumption per square mile. In addition, the city itself consumes much more power to operate public services, such as street lights, transportation systems and other required functions. In an attempt to reduce Boston’s carbon footprint, civil authorities and the public have sought ways to introduce more renewable energy sources to the city. Chemical engineers are well suited in their discipline to assist in this endeavor.

Boston’s geographical location eliminates geothermal and hydroelectric power as realistic options, leaving solar and wind power.  Solar power has far more potential to provide a significant portion of Boston’s required power. Solar panels can be installed almost anywhere the sun normally shines, but are expensive and have low energy efficient, usually around 15-20%. Chemical Engineers are working to develop more efficient solar panels, using micro-technology to change the surface that the sun’s photon’s interact with on the panel which has had considerable success on a small scale, increasing the panel’s efficiency to 40%.  In addition, chemical engineers are working on advanced storage systems to hold excess power that is generated during the day for later use. These storage systems, such as ion flow batteries, allow for a cheap and cost effective method of storing energy in a reversible chemical reaction, that can easily be scaled to suit any amount of power storage.