E-Portfolio

Access the folder here : e-portfolio!

Group Presentation

Group Presentation

Group Presentations 5/1

"Should College Athletes be Paid? - Andrew, Francisco, Ivan
Strengths - There was good background information. There was also very good acknowledgements of the negative sides.
Weaknesses - A lack of practice was evident. Body fiddling was very distracting.
Questions - Say you do get paid..How many practices can you miss before you get kicked out?

"Violent Video Games" - Pavel, David, Forrest,
Strengths - Nice simple slides. No information overload. Good Research Question. Good voice projection.
Weaknesses - A tad bit of straight card reading. Uninterested body language.
Questions - Are there any positive effects that video games may bring?

Group Reviews

"Show Me The Money" - Dana, Thor, Ben, & JB

Strengths - There was a good amount of real life examples that were used to help us understand the issue better. The volume overall of the speakers were good, and the argument was solid, it had me convinced.

Weaknesses - It seemed a bit unorganized at first, with people hesitating to speak. There was some "reading off the slides" going on. A lot of "um, ya know, and uh" used.

Questions - If sports players do get better compensated, wouldn't that mean that it would be harder to get in the team in the first place? (Same as an interview, the higher the pay, the higher the requirements)
What are the requirements to get into college football?


"Fast Food in America" - Matt, Jose, Brett

Strengths - The pacing of the slides were pretty consistent, except towards the end. A lot of the evidence was actually revelant to the majority of us. Good use of calorie intake chart to interact with the audience.

Weaknesses - The research question was pretty common. I think we all know the answer to it. Refrain from cussing in speech. It might a a benefit depending on your audience but, who knows.

Questions - How has the nutritional value of Fast foods changed over the years? Healthier? Worse?

Annotated Bib

Hoover, Brittany. “Study: Medical Marijuana Legalization Doesn’t Lead to More Crime.” UT

Dallas News Center.  27 Mar 2014. n.p. Web. 09 April 2014. <http://www.utdallas.edu/news/2014/3/27-29241_Study-Medical-Marijuana-Legalization-Doesnt-Lead-t_story-wide.html>.

Hoover’s article, “Study: Medical Marijuana Legalization Doesn’t Lead to More Crime,” follows its title in what it discusses. Hoover takes a well believed claim—that “medical marijuana’s legalization will lead to higher crime rates”—and presents information from a UT Dallas study that argues otherwise, making this article a significant source in the research of decriminalizing marijuana. The UT Dallas researchers conducted an observational study, tracking crime rates nationwide between the years of 1990 and 2006; the results show that in the seven crime types studied (“homicide, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and auto theft”), there was no increase in the rates. This is critical in the argument of whether or not marijuana should be legalized, as it gives factual evidence in the change (or lack of) in crime rates instead of mere personal experiences and predispositions to back up claims. The results that this study shows are of no surprise. To have a connection between marijuana legalization and crime rate going up is the contradictory because the majority of marijuana related crimes are simply “possessing” marijuana in the first place. Remove that factor of the policy, basically decriminalizing marijuana, and if anything the crime rates should indeed fall, not rise. There is less incentive to make street deals, less incentive to kill and rob, and overall just less unsafe activity happening in the streets. However, this is strictly truthful only to now. While legalization of marijuana is safe now, as with alcohol, which was also once illegal, it can be abused.

Khatapoush Shereen and Denise Hallfors. “‘Sending the Wrong Message’: Did Medical Marijuana Legalization in California Change Attitudes about and use of Marijuana?” Sagepub. Florida State University College of Criminology and Criminal Justice. 1 Oct. 2004. Web. 8 April 2014.

<http://jod.sagepub.com/content/34/4/751.full.pdf+html>

Both the authors are accredited with Ph.Ds, with Khatapoush as director and Hallfors Senior Research Scientist The paper raises important questions and imposes studies to analyze the new views for younger audiences. As laws in California changed its policies on marijuana, their studies showed changes in the attitudes of young adults. Young adults now had new ways to go about the topic.  The paper states that the allowance of marijuana will not have a negative impact on use, but on view. The stereotype of marijuana will turn into a good one, though truthfully it is like any other strong medicine, dangerous. The studies conducted were extensive in time and length, revealing a part of the demographics of marijuana uses. The main audience intended for this kind of article for those who are concerned about the status of the legalization of marijuana. Also the demographic can include the youth themselves and researchers of the current marijuana policy. Research was conducted primarily through telephone survey data. The author states that further study is required before coming to a clear concise conclusion of how the marijuana policy will affect attitudes toward marijuana. The reliability of the article reiterates itself by stating the fact that the ages of those interviewed are 16 to 25 years old, and that there may be a bias connection between the use of marijuana and attitude. Of the source, there are plenty of tables and graphs, fluctuating on the difference in views and attitudes of California and other states.

Selection, Slanting, and Charged Language."

    The article "Selection, Slanting, and Charged Language," by Newman and Genevieve Birk, focuses on; how who a person is and what they think of a certain object or idea. It influences how someone write about it. That is the principle of one's selection. If somebody is focusing on a topic dealing with a person they don't like, they can choose to word their ideas in such a way that it creates a very negative connotation.On the other hand, if a person is in good terms with the person they are writing about, the same facts will be written with a positive connotation. The facts and the truth of the existence of that person is the same, however the words are changed, or "Charged." The article stresses how simply having the facts, doesn't make what you say true. And also statistics can lie.

Spring Break SWA

I just recently went to Japan town for the first time during the second week of March this year. It was extremely pretty, and proportional, compared to Chinatown at least. I take that back actually, China town was pretty, but Japan town was gorgeous. Though the buildings were plain and silver/gray, for some reason the entire thing just stood out from the rest of San Francisco. The interior, is where Japan town really shines, there’s colors everywhere, Japanese culture, and souvenirs everywhere. It was my friends last weekend before he had to leave to the marines so I thought we could just go somewhere far away and tourist-like for a change. Most of my friends are also into anime and cartoons and whatnot so I figured why not?

The ethnicities there were well varied and had a mix of groups, but I saw a lot of tourists who were Asian for the most part. There are two malls, and between them, stand this Japanese styled tower. You can confirm to yourself that you are in Japan town when you see this structure. Inside the mall, I didn’t actually buy much so of course I’d love to go back and get some of the unique souvenirs I actually wanted, like a Japanese sandal. And if I was handed a free ticket to go any place in the world? I’d go straight to Oklahoma. My father and the other half of my family lives there and I haven’t seen them in a while. I’d love to have a free trip to go and get spend some quality time with them.