From Academia to Social Media

Johannes Murloc, France Flag National Flag France 11/24/2015 via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

I used the author Benoit Pausader, from the Université Paris 13 and Brown University

After researching for a while, I found Pausader on Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, YouTube, and WordPress, along with being mentioned on several other different journals across the country and on international news.

How would you describe the author's social media presence?
The author has an inactive social media presence. For the most part, Pausader just has accounts that he rarely posts on. Around 5 years ago, Pausader posted certain parts of his findings, but now he only partly uses social media just to post about his personal life. From his old posts though, it seemed as though he was interested in the prospect of sharing information through popular websites such as Facebook and LinkedIn, but he seems to have given up on that idea. Many of his old posts are links to his works or comments about other journals posted by his colleagues in France. Furthermore, some of his older posts  are in French,c so its hard to fully comprehend his translated posts, but they're mostly the same.

How does their persona on social media differ from their persona in the pages of the academic journal?
Pausader turns from a normal human being talking about his discoveries and personal life into a machine that spits out data and contextual information. The transformation is quite astounding. In his social media posts, Pausader is mostly formal, but definitely seems passionate  about his life and his line of work. This passion is completely lost in the format of the journal, especially so when most of the journal's writing is mathematical proofs. In essence, Pausader is writing in a whole different language in the journal that his typical English in social media. In short, his persona is completely different as an author than as a professor posting on social media.

Academic Discourse & Genre

Unsplash, Pencil Sharpener Notebook Paper, 10/2/2015 via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

How many different kinds of genres seem to be published in this particular issue of the journal you selected?
There are two different "genres" at work in this journal.
1: A form of mathematical proofs that show how certain formulas in biochemistry can mathematically be equivalent of proportionate to other formulas or ideas in biochemistry or abstract math in general.
2: Occasional explanation on why the authors researched certain ideas. Usually this way of writing is straight up paragraph form, while the rest of its explanation can be found in the form stated above.
There only exist these two "genres" in the journal, everything is organized in a very simple way. I guess that's kind of why I like mathematics.

Differences in the written genres
Unfortunately, there is absolutely zero evidence of any other style of writing or explanation besides the two forms given above, so I shall now describe the characteristics of these two different genres.

The Formula Form
The name is as exactly as it sounds; the defining characteristic of this genre is it's interesting use of mathematical proofs as explanations behind certain theorem that the authors' have been researching into. This is probably the most unique form of writing I've ever seen considering that it barely qualifies as a form of writing. The entirety of its explanation is given by mathematical equations. That in itself is an interesting quality to have as a form of writing. Furthermore, it serves as the majority of the text. The other form of writing is only meant to support the facts given by this form. Everything is surround the cold hard proofs found in the formula form.

The Supporting English
Math can explain a lot of things that occur in everyday society, but its very difficult translating what exactly math is since its such an abstract concept. For example, if a mathematician were to describe a matrix in real life, he would tell you that the matrix could be defined as infinite possible "things" since a matrix has no dimensions and no context, thus maxing it anything as long as it follows the proportions or variables given in its elements. That's where the Supporting English comes in. With the most literal name ever, the Supporting English gives the mathematical equations given in the formula form context so that the equations are no longer abstract but rather applicable.

My definitions
Honestly, I'd have to be pretty silly not to agree with the formal definitions for the genres given above. The math given in the formula form is the meat and potatoes of the whole paper. Without the formula form ,there is no content since all that's left in the documents is the background for the mathematical formulas. The Formula From serves as the explanation on how the authors made their discovery.
In the same way, the Supporting English is necessary for the equations. Without the Supporting English, all that remains are meaningless mathematical equations. The Supporting English form serves as the was of explaining why the authors made their discovery.

Rhetorical Analysis of Academic Journal

Me with physical copy of complicated mathematical proofs

Who are the authors/speakers published in this specific issue of the academic journal you've selected?
There are three authors for the specific piece that I selected:

Yan Guo
Division of Applied Mathematics, Brown University, Providence, RI


Alexandru D. Ionescu
Department of Mathematics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ


Benoit Pausader
Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, LAGA, CNRS (UMR 7539), Villetaneuse, France

All three of these authors are professors from various universities across the world. Most of the academic journals that I've been looking into feature mathematicians from across the world. Math is a bare bones, minimalist, universal language that ca be understood without being hindered by a language barrier. Math is spoken the same in the United States as it is in Russia. This is why the authors are this diverse, and when reading the article, why the writing is so dependent on math. Formulas and proofs dictate the majority of what covers the journal's topic rather than rote language.

Who is the intended audience for this particular journal issue?

The 122 page article is a collection of absolutely disgustingly complicated  proofs, therefore the target audience is very niece. This journal is directed towards people that are very articulate the language and reasoning of math. Anyone else beside someone who is a mathematician, or has some very strong connections with mathematical understanding will just end up very lost within the definitions given in the text. More so, I believe that this journal is meant to inform other notable scholars and professors across the world about certain research that has been conducted by the authors. 

What is the context surrounding this particular journal issue?

Going along with the intended audience, this journal, the Annuls of Mathematics is meant to be read and understood. The content contains very beautiful but complex theories that root together mathematical ideas to one another; the journal is retelling the learnings of the authors in a language only a few select few can fully comprehend. The journal is meant to inform, nothing more, nothing less. It acts as a newspaper for the mathematical community of some sorts.

An example of the content of the journal:

∂tn + div((1 + n)v) = 0, ∂tv + v 

∇v + ∇n = − [E + v × B] , 

∂tB + ∇ × E = 0, 

∂tE − C∇ × B = (1 + n)v,

Contextually, this theorem is showing the qualities of "one-fluid models with nontrivial magnetic fields". The variables are assigned their normal values for this branch of science. Its context like this that give the journal its niche audience.

What is the overall message of the journal issue?

The message is meant to inform the audience about the findings that the authors have discovered. In this specific journal, the authors are showing their audience the Global solutions of the Euler-Maxwell two-fluid system: a complicated mechanism that related to biochemistry. The authors' specific opinions are hard to decipher considering the content of their journal, therefore the authors' intent must be to inform

What purpose is the journal issue trying to achieve?

Just like the message of this article, the purpose is to inform various scholars across the world about certain topics of research that have been occurring in various categories. In this case, its the two-fluid system.

My Major

Mira DeShazer, Math Statistics Business Analysis, 1/15/2016 via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

I am a mathematics major with an emphasis on science (this means i want to work in the field of math instead of become a teacher).

What do students in your program or department learn how to do?
Students in my department figure out what they wan to do. Every math major with an emphasis in science needs a minor within the sciences (in my case its computer science). Through this minor, they can focus on whatever field they choose while also having the title of mathematics majors. It seems like a weird system, but by the time the students realize what they want to specialize in, they can focus on that branch while also knowing the mathematics that makes up the idea.

What do people who get degrees in this field usually go on to do for work?
As stated above, this depends on the minor that the student chooses. For example, I am a computer science major, so I'll probably become a computer programmer some company or possibly go to graduate school depending on what opportunities are presented. Another popular minor is engineering. Engineering minors work as, well, an engineer. It's specialization like this that makes it impossible to find some sort of general idea for where math major go after college.

What drew you to this field?
I've always been a jack-of-all-trades type of character, but I haven't really been truly passionate about anything particular since I started high school. I didn't really know what I'd major in when college came around. Math has always been my best subject by a small margin, so I figured why don't I major in the stuff? And here I am today. Unfortunately, it's a pretty pathetic reason to be majoring in math, but right now I really like the major and the department, so I'm probably gonna stick with it the whole way through.

Name three of the leaders/most exciting people involved in this field right now in 2016.
Terence Tao Website - Probably one of the youngest leaders in today society in accordance with math is Dr. Tao (for mathematics this is pretty young surprisingly). His work in harmonic analysis and number theory has opened up a new wave of up and coming graduating mathematicians from California.

Grigori Perlmann Wikipedia - He was a huge influence in the field of Riemann sums, and today has recently retired from the field. His contributions cannot be understated however; he has been nominated for many mathematical achievements throughout the past two decades, but has declined almost every single one of them, no matter their prestige and honor.

Bill Velez  Website - The undergraduate head for the department of mathematics. This is the man that showed me what my opportunities were after I decided to choose my mathematics major. Furthermore, he gave me a blueprint for my school schedule so that I could finish my major in three years. He's not as active in the community anymore, but for me, he's one of the most exciting people involved with mathematics.

What are the names of three leading academic/scholarly journals in your field?
Turns out there is a website that ranks, by popular vote, the most influential journals for certain fields in the sciences. The top three for math are as follows:

1: IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (USA): This journal records breakthroughs in technology and math. The journal has a large focus on computer science as it's main output for information.

2: Molecular System Biology (UK): Don't let the title fool you. This journal is actually based mostly on the mathematical implications of molecular biology. Published by the Nature Publishing Group, a company that is well-known for their literary contributions to the field of science.

3: Annals of Mathematics (USA): A journal focused on the abstract applications of mathematics. Published by Princeton University,the journal isn't for the faint of heart; its writing is straight up cold, raw data.

My Interviewees on Social Media

Gerd Altmann, Mobile Phone Smartphone, 8/25/2014 via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

Names of each Interviewee
Kristen Cherney - actuary at Scottsdale Insurance Company
Theodore Laetsch - Math Professor at University of Arizona

Before I start, I would like to note that I found nothing for Laetsch on social media what so ever. After an hour of searching I decided that enough was enough. And of course, since neither interviewee had any articles on social media, he have zero social media presence. I have a pretty good understanding of why this is the case though.

The majority of his research is from the 70s and 80s, and he is an old-fashioned teacher. He prefers everything hand-written rather than electronic. He is an endangered species in respect to his perspective on being connected with technology, but he doesn't appear anywhere on the Internet because his prime was before the internet. He did his research and his teachings without the aid of technology, and he hasn't changed his ways since then. This is the reasoning why Laetsch is absent from everything related to social media.

Cherney, on the other hand, has personal accounts for Twitter and Facebook, These accounts aren't really for her work, but for her personal life. Actuaries posting about their current jobs is pretty scary for the companies that hired them. Therefore, I really didn't find anything on social media in respect to my interviewees.

My Interviewees as Professional Writers

Steve Buissinne, Calculator Calculation Insurance 7/9/2014 via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

Note: Since Cherney is an actuary that works for a company, she doesn't really have "works" or "publications" per say, but she has recounted some of the work that she has done for her company. These will be the placeholders for the publications because, in essence her work and Laetsch's (professor) publications symbolize the same things.

The Interviewees and a summation of their publications
First is Dr. Theodore Laetsch of the University of Arizona Math Department. Laetsch hasn't been with the University of Arizona for his entire career, but I found works by him dating back to 1970. Laetsch has authored about many fields in math, but is probably most renowned and well-known for his research on relations and characteristics of eigenvalues (specific hidden values in matrices that can be found through one of the annoying math processes ever in college level Linear Algebra). Besides this work, Laetsch has also dabbled in specific mathematical properties such as lower bounds, boundary values, and nonlinear equations (just to name a few, listing them would be too much).

Kristen Cherney, as stated in the before blog post and above, is an actuary for the Scottsdale Insurance Company. Actuaries, in general, are workers that analyze risks and their potential consequences (positive or negative) for a specific company. Cherney is something called a "non-life" actuary. This category specializes in analyzing damages in properties, such as automobiles and homes.

Two Publications
Laetsch: Eigenvalues and Linear/Nonlinear Comparison
Cherney: No published works (see note above)
There is obviously a huge difference in the published works in that Cherney doesn't have any to speak of (since her job doesn't require her to do so) while Laetsch has had published works dating back to the 70s up until a few years ago (he is currently not researching anything). If there is a difference to speak of in Laetsch's research and Cherney's experience, however, its that Laetsch is looking at mathematics in a more abstract way while Cherney is applying these concepts first-hand in real-worked scenarios. Laetsch lays the blueprint was Cherney builds from the concpets.

Context
Laetsch's research articles and papers and Cherney's work experience both have one contextual thing in common; they both have a specific audience targeting specific events. Both the actuary and the professor write/work in order to inform their audience, whether it is a dollar amount on a claim or abstract relationships between numbers is the contextual difference. Overall the context of their work completely differs from one another. Cherney works in order to satisfy the general public by helping assign a dollar amount to potential risk in respect to material possessions for a set amount of time. Laetsch works in order to inform a small part for the math community his personal findings on the broad idea of mathematics that may be influential beyond the boundaries of a time limit. Everything besides the fact that Cherney and Laetsch do their work to inform is different from a contextual standpoint

Message & Purpose
As stated above, each person is trying to inform their audience of something. Take Laetsch's eigenvalue work for example. From page 6 to page 9, he shows a theorem in which infinite amount of cones may contain the "superstition" quality. Putting context aside, Laetsch is using this theorem in order to prove something to his audience rather than give his opinion. His theorem doesn't take his own personal opinion into account; it only spits out his findings in cold hard numbers. Cherney's work is the same way. Everything can be assigned a dollar amount, and Cherney can quantify this using her knowledge as an actuary. Both of them show their work with cold hard numbers, and their message tells their audience that its difficult to argue against that sort of language. Furthermore, both of them achieve their purpose in the same way. Laetsch uses cold hard number to prove his theorem are correct, while Cherney uses cold hard numbers in order to prove that certain material items can be replaced/fixed through a certain dollar amount.

My Interview Subjects

Fotocitizen, Microphone Mic Vocal Media Mike, 2/1/2016 via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

To knock out numbers one, two, and three...

Dr. Theodore Laetsch of the University of Arizona Math Department

    PhD from the California Institute of Technology

Kristen Cherney, actuary for Scottsdale Insurance Company

    Note: Actuary is one of the most common post-college jobs for math majors

    Undergraduate degree for Arizona State University

    No higher education to speak of, but is in the process of taking her actuarial exams

4: Laetsch - 40 years across various universities

    Cherney - 5 years at the same business

5:

  

Dr. Theodore Laetsch in the flesh: Website

I unfortunately don't have a picture of Kristen currently: Website

6: Laetsch - March 3rd, 4:00 p.m. (schedule may change, but will happen in the next week)

    Cherney - February 26th 11:00 a.m. (Phone interview)

List of Interview Questions

1: Why did you decide that math was the branch that you wanted to study/work in?

2: How did you end up in the position(job) you are in today?

3: What is your favorite thing that you've researched/worked on?

4: What is your least favorite thing you've researched/worked on?

5: Do you like working on pieces by yourself or with your colleagues?

6: What do you think is your most important piece of work and why?

7: What field of mathematics do you feel your most knowledgeable in?

8: What do you recommend to future mathematicians looking into your field?

Brutally Honest Self-Assessment

Birgit Forster, Relief Statue Face Sculpture, 7/30/2015, via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

1. How are you feeling about the project you just submitted for assessment? Give me your raw, unvarnished opinion of your own project overall. 

To be honest, I'm so excited that's its done with that I literally have no feelings for the project I just turned in. I'm just so glad it's turned in. If I had to stake an opinion though, I'd say that the project is in the best shape and form its ever going to be in. I'm nervous and scared about whether I left "this" out or could've added a couple of "these things", but honestly I believe that my Quick Reference Guide is the best it'll ever be, and there's nothing gained over worrying over something that can't be changed.

2. What are the major weaknesses of the project you submitted? Explain carefully how and why you consider these elements to be weak or under-developed.

Considering that my controversy was a 50 year long affair, finding stakeholders, let alone applying them to the article was torture in its own right. I mustered what I could, but I still felt as though my Quick Reference Guide was lacking in that department. I couldn't find any way to add to this category without going too far off the topic of the Math Wars. I mentioned stakeholders and their relations to the controversy, but it felt as though that wasn't enough. I felt as though that was my weakest component.

3. What are the major strengths of the project you submitted? Explain carefully how and why you consider these elements to be strong or well-developed.

The sheer amount of information and statistics I gathered for this project is my pride and joy in respect to Project 1 of English 109H. I felt as though I almost overdid it on the amount of information I gathered for the Math Wars. If anything, the audience is going to walk away with some sort of nifty education statistic or trend they didn't know before.

4. What do you think of how you practiced time management for Project 1? Did you put enough time and effort into the project? Did you procrastinate and wait till the last minute to work on things? Share any major time management triumphs or fails.... 

Waiting to the last day on Week 2 was the worst. 32 ounces of Red Bull carried me through a Sunday where I wrote 10,000 words in 10 hours; I think waiting to the last day for 9 blog posts was a little extreme to say the least, but I have a sense of pride for accomplishing such a feat, however silly it may be. Needless to say, my time management was lacking in every department, but I'm the type of person that finds trouble in being motivated with such a long time to do any sort of work. I suppose my procrastination worked out in the end considering I turned in all my assignments on time, but I still think that I lose potential when I wait until the last minute. The conflict between this potential and lack of motivation always ends up with me waiting to long to make a decision and rushing to finished the thing on the last day. I put all of my everything in that time however, and I do think the project turned out well because of the effort I had to force into myself from a time constraint standpoint.

Ramblings aside, I think I handled time poorly, but when I worked it was 110% for every moment I had my blog open

Local Revision: Variety

Fathromi Ramdlon, Legal Illegal Choose Choice, 12/23/2015, via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

1: From what I can tell, I have quite a large variety of sentence structures I choose from. I mostly use compound sentences, but complex and simple sentences appear more than once in a while throughout the guide, so I feel as though the assortment of my sentences is good. One thing of note is my excessive use of the semi-colon. I love the semi-colon; it connects two ideas, such as a term and a meaning, into a single thought or, in the case of syntax, sentence. As much as I love this punctuation, I feel as though I need to relax on this trait since semi-colons are hardly used at all outside of my writing. I feel as though my use of the semi-colon may be so excessive it becomes distracting.

2: The beginning of the guide had great transitions between pictures, videos, hyperlinks, and actual analysis, but as the article continue, I ran out of sources to choose from and insert. The transitions are healthy at the beginning, but near the end of the guide, I feel as though there is just a bunch of reading for my audience. The paragraphs themselves work out really well because of the organizations of the guide via key questions. These questions guide the writing from one point to the next really appropriately, so I don't want to mess with that part of my organization.

3: One of my main weakness is my inappropriate use of vocabulary. I try too hard to be like Jane Austen or Aldous Huxley, and often go off in a quasi-poetic style of writing. This isn't really fitting for a thing like the Quick Reference Guide of an educational controversy, so I feel as though I actually need to cut back on my vocabulary. And example of my overindulgence is my verbs list; I use a surplus of specific active verbs in my writing. Although I stated I wanted more of these verbs, I don't want more colorful writing throughout the entirety of my piece since it may take away from my goal of purely informing my audience. My use of colorful verbs are for clarity of language while my use of colorful vocabulary will only hinder translating this clarity into actual cold hard statistics and information.

Local Revision: Pronoun Usage

Narciso, Word Cloud Words Cloud Tag, 3/1/2015, via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

1: I honestly don't like using pronouns too much in my writing, and considering that my 8 page Quick Reference Guide only had a handful of pronouns was satisfying. One thing of note is that none of my pronouns were personal pronouns. Usually the typical example of a pronoun would be me, I, he, she, the sort of words that describe people; however, there were zero in my guide. This is quite a concern, since this implies that my guide isn't talking about people involved in the Math Wars nearly enough. This is even more of a concern considering how pivotal a role like a stakeholder is for this guide.

2: There are zero instances where I talk to my audience directly. I chose this style of writing since my main purpose is to inform them on what the Math Wars are an for them to form their own opinion off of what they read. Mentioning events that could relate to the audience may alter my goal of the audience forming their own opinion, instead creating their feelings because of the way I worded an event. I want this guide to be as unbiased as possible, so I believe keeping the audience out of the syntax is key to achieving this goal.

My Pronouns

Karolina Grabowska, Wooden Letters We Word Wall, 6/9/2015, via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

these (test scores)
this (1st  recent survey)
this (2nd recent survey)
this way (New Math)
thing (general problem)
This year (1989)
these (principles)
it (mathematics as a subject)
it (New Math)
It (a potential solution to the Math Wars)
it (MathLand)
it (MathLand)
they (replacements for MathLand)
this (survey done by NAEP)
this (lack of action)
this (2006 NCTM document)

Tally Count:
this - 7
it - 5
these - 2
they - 1
thing - 1

Local Revisions: Active and Passive Voice

Dianne Hope, Collaboration Collaborator Book, 12/27/2015, via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

Active (Specific):
focuses
respond
recites
states
reformed
update
kicking
inform
surrounding
pose
implement
believes
describes
contradicts
sparked
divided
scrambled
resenting
basing
adopted
changed
stated
kicked
occurred
implemented 

described

balanced
achieved

shown
searched
provided
remained 
passed
designed
emerged
pounded
rose
entwined
calmed
touched 
eliminated
limited
called
taught
summed
criticized
involved

Active (General):
remains 
learning
help
create
understand
shut
testing
searching
replace
shows
be
putting
come
touches
Say
talks

comes
bring

stayed
began
caused
worked
created
came
wrote
used
showed
seemed
happened
brought
taken

Passive:
are not learning
are
was
were

are still published

was testing

was concerning

was published

was getting

was outraged

was implemented

were not followed

were used

1: The large majority of my verbs are action verbs that are very specific. Of course, this list doesn't constitute the number of times I used each verb, but even with the number of times I used linking verbs such as "was", "were", and "are", I calculated that there appear to be more specific action verbs in my draft. Overall, however, there is a nice blend of verb types in my project. In my writing, I mostly have action verbs, so the trend of a majority of these types of words isn't surprising, but I'm glad that some linking verbs are included since it prevents the piece as a whole from just being specific action after specific action. This is a QRG, not a cooking recipe.

2: From what I see, I might want to make it so that there are less general active verbs and even more specific active verbs. After reading my guide over, I didn't like how a good majority of the general active verbs were handled in my writing, so maybe I could tweek my writing to be more specific in its descriptions.

Local Revision: Tense Usage

Gerd Altmann, Board Blackboard Words Force, 1/12/2016, via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribtution License

Present Tense:

has 
remains 

are

is 
focuses
learning
remains
are
learning
respond 
recites
states
reform
update
help
create
kicking
inform
concerning
surrounding
replace 
understand
shut
testing
searching
pose
shows
putting
be
come
implement
touches
believes
describes
talks
contradicts
basing
Say
resenting
comes
bring

Past Tense:
stayed
began
adopted
changed
was
stated
shown
passed
kicked
occurred
implemented 

published

described

followed 
balanced
achieved

were

sparked
divided
scrambled
came
searched
caused
provided
remained 
worked
created
designed
emerged
pounded
rose
entwined
wrote
used
showed
calmed
touched 
eliminated
limited
called
taught
seemed
summed
happened
brought
criticized
involved

taken

Future Tense:

1: I use the present tense the most in my draft, but I had a near equivalent amount of verbs that were in the past tense as well.

2: Considering that I had no future tense verbs in my draft, it's safe to say that my quick reference guide seemed to allude to the Math Wars as a past event. Furthermore, the excess amount of past tense verbs help show the Math Wars as something created and already past..

3: From what I see, the past tense verbs mostly apply to how events that can be applied to the Math Wars were founded, while the present tense verbs were used for how the same events are having repercussions in the present time. Overall, the flow between the two tenses works out very well.

4: My use of present tense verbs isn't much of a crescendo per say, but an observation. A great majority of my present tense verbs aren't action verbs, so they work as a way for the reader to observe the events rather than vicariously understand the macrocosm of the Math Wars.

My Verbs

Willi Heidelbach, Font Lead Set Book Printing,, 4/11/2015 via Pixabay, Public Domain Distribution License

has 
stayed
remains 
has

are

began
adopted
changed
is 
was
stated
focuses
focuses
learning
implemented 
has
remains
are
learning
was
was 
passed
shown
shown 
are 
occurred
respond 
kicked
published
recites
was
described
states
followed 
balanced
achieved
were
sparked
divided

was
is
scrambled
reform
update
came
searched
caused
provided
help
create
are
inform 

published
concerning
surrounding
remained 
worked

replace 
update
created
was
was
designed 
understand
emerged
pounded
were
was
shut
rose
testing
searching
entwined
wrote
used
showed

calmed
pose
shows
created 
eliminated
are

is 
touched 
putting

be
created
come
implement
update
touches
are 
limited
come
is
believes
describes

come
called
talks 
taught
contradicts
basing
resenting
summed 
created 
implemented
have
seemed

Say
happened
existing
is
brought
bring
criticized
shown 
were 
could've
comes
is
are
kicking
taken
is
work
involved

was - 8
are - 7
is - 7
has - 4
created - 4
come - 3
update - 3
were - 3
shown - 3
have - 2
focuses - 2
learning - 2
implemented - 2
published - 2
remains -2 

Local Revision: Wordiness

Unsplash, Pencil Sharpener Notebook Paper, 10/2/2015, via Pixabay Public Distribution Domain License

Old Paragraph:
New Math, by definition, was a new system that, as stated above, focuses on "investigation and discovery". In normal human terms, new math focuses on the processes on how to solve a problem a certain way instead of learning the concepts behind a problem. This system has been implemented in public school ever since the 60s. The term "new math" has since expired, but the basic concept remains the same; students are not learning the reasons and concepts that make up math. At first, there was a great improvement in math comprehension when New Math was first implemented, but as time has passed these numbers have dropped. Recent studies have shown a noticeable decrease in math comprehension at all grade levels from K-12 such as this one or this one. 2015 in particular has shown a significant drop in test scores. The Math Wars are the debate over whether or not this way of teaching should be updated/changed.

New Paragraph:
New Math was a new system that, as stated above, focuses on "investigation and discovery"; new math focuses on the processes on how to solve a problem a certain way instead of learning the concepts behind a problem, and has been used in public schools since the 60s. The term "new math" has since expired, but the basic concept remains the same; students are not learning the reasons and concepts that make up math. Over the past few decades recent average test scores have dropped drastically, and new math is the main suspect. This trend applies to all grades K-12, and 2015 in particular has shown a significant drop in test scores. The Math Wars are the debate over whether or not this way of teaching should be updated/changed.

I like the new paragraph better since I shaved off a lot of the unnecessary jargon in the block paragraph. I actually liked the old paragraph as it was, but it seemed to overstay its welcome because of its length. The new paragraph doesn't fit my style of writing as much, but it finds power in its brevity. 
In short
Strength: Gets to the point in a more efficient way.
Weakness: Doesn't fit too well with the rest of the writing.

Peer Review #2

Wokandapix, Pencil Writing School Education 8/11/2016 via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

I graded Ben's QRG and James' QRG. Read their drafts here; they seem like swell young men.

1: I learned that my project doesn't seems very gray compared to the 3 other QRG's that I read. I originally chose to review only the QRG not only because I have a good idea on what they're supposed to look like, but to also make improvements on my own piece. Probably the biggest thing that I learned from peer reviewing is that a QRG doesn't necessarily have a set outline. When I was making my first draft, I often checked back on the references given on the website on previously made and professional QRG's just to get a feel on what they look like. Honestly, I felt as though I suppressed a lot of information because I thought there was a set guideline, but now I know for sure that this isn't the case. All the projects I reviewed have their own feel to it, including my own

2: Three issues I have in my project

1. Not enough information about the stakeholders. I felt as though I skimped out on the implications that the stakeholders had on the Math Wars as a whole. I want to include more about the people and groups that were involved with this issue for my final draft
2. It looks kind of sloppy. My QRG looks more patched together than anything. I want to fix it so that the final draft actually looks official instead of composed of these "patches"
3. More solid evidence. A lot of the writing in my draft is my opinion and interpretations of the Math Wars. I want to get more facts on the matter

3: Three strengths I see in my draft

1. Hyperlinks. Good god I have so many hyperlinks. I have more than enough outside sources to satisfy the most fascinated of readers.
2. Style of writing. I shouldn't say "style", but my standpoint from my guide. I like my place as a database as the author. I don't really draw conclusions from the data I present; I instead let the reader decide his/her own opinion on the matter. That's something I really like about my draft.
3. Questions. I feel as though I have adequate as useful questions for my draft. I don't think I should touch that aspect of it; the writing of the guide is organized well.

Peer Review 1

Unsplash, Laptop Hands Computer Technology, via Pixabay 2/3/2016 Public domain Distribution License

I peer reviewed Brady Thomas' draft on drones and geofencing. Here's my rubric. I mainly chose Brady's piece since, like him, I also created a Quick Reference Guide. Interestingly enough, both his and my guide looked considerably different from one another. The main thing I saw was that Brady focused more on the context of what drones were as a whole, while I talked almost entirely about the controversy without worrying too much over context (to be fair on myself, my draft was over math education, and most of everyone in the world has some sort of experience with education). Furthermore, his guide looked a lot prettier than mine. He kept his information spread out, short when possible and sweet. Mine, on the other hand sometimes wandered off onto an seemingly endless road of drivel. I feel as though I should take this information and add it to my draft; I should condense the sheer amount of information about the controversy and give some more background on the issue as a whole. 

Two Things I Want to Avoid

1: I want to stop having my pieces wander off into speculation and keep itself dedicated to cold hard facts.

2: I want to avoid putting in giant blocks of texts into the guide; it makes the whole thing unappealing and uninteresting

Two Things I Want to Add

1: I want to add more visual elements; I feel as though my pictures are just thrown into the guide.

2: Similar to the first claim, I want to maybe add more meaningful links. I didn't use all of my sources from my sources blog post, so I want to integrate these if possible.

Draft of Project 1

The Math Wars - Half a century old and still no end in sight

by: Jackson Starmer

The concept of the Math Wars has, diligently, stayed under the radar of public eyes for decades upon decades. A large majority of the public still remains unaware of a multi-generation controversy that has the entirety of education in the United States at an unending stale mate.

What are the Math Wars?

The root of the Math Wars began in the 1960s, during the height of the Cold War. In the background of nuclear arms races and engineering phenomenons, the US government adopted a small, but interesting policy that changed the common core curriculum for mathematics across the nation. This new policy is known as "New Math".

New Math has entered the English dictionary as the following definition because its roots as a 1960s ideal

New Math, by definition, was a new system that, as stated above, focuses on "investigation and discovery". In normal human terms, new math focuses on the processes on how to solve a problem a certain way instead of learning the concepts behind a problem. This system has been implemented in public school ever since the 60s. The term "new math" has since expired, but the basic concept remains the same; students are not learning the reasons and concepts that make up math. At first, there was a great improvement in math comprehension when New Math was first implemented, but as time has passed these numbers have dropped. Recent studies have shown a noticeable decrease in math comprehension at all grade levels from K-12 such as this one or this one. 2015 in particular has shown a significant drop in test scores. The Math Wars are the debate over whether or not this way of teaching should be updated/changed.

When did this all start?

The drop in test scores occurred somewhere in the 1980s. Here's the thing though; most people, even organizations directly responsible for recording these statistics didn't even respond to the drop until 1989. This year kicked off the beginning of a two-sided war, with the publication of Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics, a book published by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). The book recites the dropping test scores, no holds barred. Needless to say, the public was slightly outraged by the whole nationwide dropping test scores issue.

Vargazs, Magyar, Folder Book Books Bookmark Office 11/13/2015 via Pixabay Public Domain Distribution License

The book itself described six principles that should be followed in regards to math education: 

• Equity
• Curriculum
• Teaching
• Learning
• Assessment
• Technology. 

As cheesy as these principles sound, the book states that if these six principles were not followed and balanced properly, then a good mathematical education couldn't be achieved. Furthermore, there were five process standards that should also be put into consideration.

• Problem Solving; to challenge the extent of which a student's knowledge reaches
• Reasoning & Proof; to have the student understand the concepts that make up math
• Communication; to make the student have the ability to know the material well enough to vaguely teach others the same basic idea
• Connections; to have the student make connections from one concept to the other
• Representation; to make sure the student can switch between the abstract and the material

These principles and standards sparked a small nationwide call for an educational revolution and divided the field of mathematical education into two halves: aadvocates and critics.

Why such a fuss over such a small matter?

Considering that math is only one subject in public school, why was it getting so much attention in the late 80s and 90s? The most probable answer is that there was NO answer. Government officials, university professors, teacher unions, and organizations scrambled to find a way to either reform the entirety of New Math or update it, but for years no one came up with a solid solution. The NCTM was a special case; this organization never really searched for a solution they caused. Instead the NCTM provided information in the form of journals that could possibly help other organizations and schools create a viable solution. These journals are still published today, but don't necessarily just inform people about the Math Wars.

Furthermore, the NCTM's book was published right after the Tiananmen Square riots, so the overall image of a nationwide public revolt was slightly concerning to say the least. Much like recent phenomenon fads such as The Harlem Shake and Gangnam Style, the public hype surrounding the Math Wars died out after a year or so. The issue as a whole still remained present though, and certain interested group still worked for a potential answer.

What were some of the answers that people came up with?

To be completely honest, there weren't a lot of groups that were successful in producing a new curriculum that could help replace or update New Math. It wasn't until around 1997 when Creative Publications, a book publisher out of all things, created an online resource called MathLand. MathLand was a step in the right direction; it was an extra-curricular online program designed to help students, mostly at the K-3 level, understand the conceptual basics of math better.

Clark, Gary MathLand Levels 2-3, 3/20/2000 via flickr Public Domain Distribution License

Critics of MathLand emerged from the shadows and pounded it for its lack of serious application and its weakness of being extra-curricular. If a replacement for the holes of New Math were to be found, they shouldn't be extra-curricular like MathLand was. MathLand was eventually shut down in 2007.

There were other aspiring programs that rose to the challenge however:

• TERC's Investigation Program
• Western Michigan University's Core-Plus Mathematics Program
• Michigan State University's Connected Math Program
• University of Chicago's Everyday Math Program

Furthermore, the government was frantically testing and searching for answers to this growing drop in mathematical prowess that entwined the nation. The American Mathematics Society wrote a 1997 report about California's struggles to find a solution to New Math. Certain tests, such as the Interactive Math Program (IMP), were used to compare the competency of 4th graders between 1995 and 1997. The results showed, as expected of the trends of New Math, a negative trend between math comprehension and time.

What about today?

The Math Wars today have calmed down slightly, but still pose a reasonable threat to the mathematical community as a whole. A certain recent study done by NAEP shows another decrease in math comprehension in both 8th graders and 4th graders. Not only this, but the emergence of third-party technological resources have created a threat to the actual need of a revamped common-core curriculum. Websites like KhanAcademy and WolframAlpha have basically eliminated the need of common core curriculum since both conceptual data and specific calculations are available to ANYONE FOR FREE. 

The United States Department of Education is in hot water from this issue  as well. Throughout the lifespan of New Math, the department hasn't touched the issue, instead putting the responsibility of common core curriculum to other programs: 

"To date, 45 states and the District of Columbia voluntarily have opted to participate in the Common Core State Standards Initiative. The federal government has not been involved in the design of these standards, which were developed in a partnership between the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association."

Furthermore, there has still yet to be any closure on the Math Wars in general. Despite other programs created by organizations (listed above), the United States Department of Education has still yet to come up or implement any sort of reform or update in regards to math common core curriculum. Notable math scholar Bill Quirk touches on why this is the case. There are just too many more important factors to deal within the field of American education than that of the Math Wars. The shrinking supply of teachers, the shrinking supply of educational funds (again, Department of Education needs more funding), and the shrinking tradition on knowledge all have limited the possible educational maximums that can come from the united States' current situation. This, however, is just a limiting factor; Quirk still believes in form. In fact, Quirk describes people that believe in keeping New Math this context:

"Although the anti-content philosophy is over eighty years old, it was largely held in check until the 1960's. But we now have more than 5 million people who are directly employed as part of our American education establishment. Many of these accepted the anti-content gospel and never experienced the process of "going deep" into a knowledge domain. At best they are "generalists". These self-described "reformers" are threatened by knowledge experts and empowered by the devaluing of knowledge. Over the last forty years they have labored to undermine the concept of knowledge transmission, relentlessly promoting social changes that trash the very concept of a shared tradition of knowledge"

Probably the most interesting thing to come out of recent times is NCTM's 2006 journal, called Curriculum Focal Points. The journal, more or less, talks about a new list of topics that should be taught from pre-kindergarten through 8th grade. Their new information slightly contradicts the ideals brought up in their infamous 1989 paper, basing it more off of individual progress rather than the teacher effective teaching all students in the same way. The Chicago Sun Times, resenting such a contradiction from the fires starter of the Math Wars, summed up this new document as the following:

"..the NCTM council has admitted, more or less, that it goofed"

These standards created by the NCTM have been slowly implemented into the common core curriculum, but have no put an solid conclusion to the Math Wars. In fact, the journal has only seemed to slightly re-ignite the passion for reconstruction.

Also, what's the deal with the stuff going on online?

Say hello to the future of education. Well, at least say hi to biggest thing that's happened to accessing information since the creation of Google: Khan Academy

Twitter feed of Khan Academy. The company broadcasts its lessons over several platforms, not just its main website

Dominating the study habits of procrastinators across the globe and existing as one of the best general references for heavy studiers is Salman Khan. He has unintentionally brought the Math Wars to an unexpected halt. This halt may actually bring an end to the half century long conflict. The impact of online resources have originally been criticized heavily by conservative advocates pf the current New Math program, but the success that Khan Academy has shown universally throughout schools cannot be denied. Perhaps the delayed actions of the government were the best course of action that the United States Department of Education could've taken. The end of the Math Wars may comes from the hands of a single man, but nothing is written in stone quite yet.

In conclusion, the Math Wars are still alive and kicking, and no notable action has taken place in a considerable amount of time. What's even more curious though, is how passive the entirety of the United States seems to be about the decline in education. Sure, there are people who work to improve this factor, but even the government seems involved in such an long-lasting issue.

Peer Review Paragraph:

So what'd you think? Finding specific events and specific information for my topic was very difficult, so this is the best I could muster. I wish O could add in more events and people in particular, but I want to know if you guys feel the same way as well. Furthermore, I felt as thought I didn't implement pictures, quotes, and especially the social media post in very well, so please tell me if those feel off at all. Finally, I want to know if you guys actually learned anything from the guide. Some of you may not be interested in a topic like this, but I want to know if you at least got something out of it.