Making Moves Just For You

The audience plays a crucial role in determining how a paper is written. Authors usually
tailor their writing in a fashion that is understood for their intended audience. But, not only are
the papers structured around the audience, the audience determines how persuasive the essay is.

Comment [1]: Sutherland,

Name/course/date at the top of your papers -standard operating procedure.
Also, I don't love this title -- it doesn't key me in
on what your paper is about.
Comment [2]: Yaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwww
n.
Comment [3]: This is true!

The level of persuasiveness is founded on conventions, location, moves, and general

Comment [4]: ?

understanding of the topic that the readers are reviewing. By examining three different
disciplines (Science/Teaching, Theoretical/Philosophical Education, and a popular news station
journal) papers with their desired audiences in mind, one can see how the level of persuasiveness
can vary in comparison to one another.
The scholarly article, Twitter in the Higher Education Classroom: A Student and Faculty
Assessment of Use and Perception, is a piece of research with an analysis of social media use as
a teaching aid. A common structure that research papers follow is IMRAD. IMRAD is an
organizational tool that creates sections (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), but not
only does is allow for easily identifiable categories it makes the piece cohesive. The piece

Comment [5]: Sutherland, I need more

direction here -- to use your word "founded,"
what is *your argument* founded on? What,
within these pieces, gives you clues to the
pieces persuasiveness? And... are you just
trying to convince me that they have "vary[ing]"
levels of persuasiveness? Does that pass the
"so what? who cares?" test??
One last note: you haven't introduced your topic
at all -- I don't know what topic you'll be
analyzing. :/
Comment [6]: This doesn't give me much
direction in terms of how this source/paragraph
relates back to your argument?

becomes cohesive by following the sequence of events as how they were conducted when the
experiment was occurring. From the structure alone one could infer that the piece was written by
researchers and is directed for other researchers. This article could be useful for professors that
are interested in using new instructional methods; they also would have access to this piece.

Comment [7]: Two thoughts:

Another population that could benefit from this piece would be app developers, specifically

1, How does structure relate back to your

argument? Why are you bringing structure into
this?

Twitter, because they could update the app differently to further increase the results from the
study. The information that is found in the essay would be most valuable to other researchers
rather than the general public. The researchers do not have to be within the same discipline
because the information from the study could be useful for other fields and guide that audience in

2, I think you can get all of this information

across in 1 sentence, 2 lines.

their research. IMRAD structure is a good organizational tool that could be understood by the
general public but the content that builds the paper would not be as useful for them.
Looking at the structures of the other scholarly piece, How to Effectively Use Social
Media as In-Class Teaching Tools, and a non-scholarly article, Should Teachers Be Using Social
Media in the Classroom?, are written in a relatively generic way. This is because both pieces are

Comment [8]: This 2nd paragraph is *loaded*

with fluff.
Cut to the meat, Sutherland. What are you
trying to convince me of, and what evidence will
be most effective for you to base your claims
on?
Comment [9]: Do these two sources belong in
this same paragraph? B/c they're both
"generic"?

publications within magazines. Granted, the scholarly article is published in a peer reviewed
I don't feel like you made the case that the
previous scholarly source was NOT generic.

report on theoretical reading improvements for varying levels of instructions journal (Project
Also: is "generic-ness" a part of your argument?
If so, I don't think you previewed it.

Innovation 2014), it has similarities that closer resemble a general magazines layout compared to
the IMRAD structure found in many scholarly articles. The non-scholarly article was published
on PBSnews.com; this public website published the article with the public in mind because it
follows the conventions people expect to see in public informational/news report; such as being
short and addressing the issue without much foundation for the claims that are being made.

Comment [10]: What's your goal for this

paragraph? It confused me a bit...

The most notable convention of the PBS article is the inclusion of quotes from an outside
source. Most, if not all, news sites include using eye-witnesses, sources, and people as evidence
in the material that is being written. In this case however, the authors are the sources. The
authors of this piece are/or were teachers and have opposing views on social media use in the
classroom. This move of using oneself as the only source for one particular view point is
acceptable for location and audience that it is directed at. Technically, the article is citing two
sources, the two teachers, creating an unbiased representation of the topic at hand. But, within
either the yes or no argument there are no other sources besides themselves. This move of
only referencing one person is acceptable in this article because of its location and audience.
There is not an expectation for a journalist report to be 100% correct or cover all the variables

Comment [11]: OK, I think you're getting at

something significant here -- something that
could raise the stakes of an argument -- but I'm
not quite sure what you mean here. Your use of
"location" is throwing me for a loop.
Comment [12]: Does this actually *create*
bias?

contested in a controversial topic. Journalist reports are supposed to bring attention to news that
is fluctuating in society, impartially or not, making credibility a minor concern for this article.

Comment [13]: This paragraph isn't superclear to me, Sutherland. What's the major point
you're trying to get across here?

On the other hand, credibility is one of the most important conventions of a scholastic
report. One way scholarly reports build credibility is through the tone and language used in the
paper. Credibility is desired in these reports because many times they are a basis for other
researchers work. Not only does the research done within in the study need to be credible, the
way in which it is presented and reported needs to be credible. The choice or move to include
only formal language is crucial because it is expected that people that are creating these reports
are educated and would only use such language. Reports are meant to just present the

Comment [14]: What research *was* done?

What *are* the variables being measured?
You're spending a lot of time/space on some
vague, general stuff here, Sutherland -- the
format, the structure, the credibility...
Where is there purposeful, significant evidence
of this in the pieces you've read/studied? and
why's it all matter?

information at hand; this strict idea also limits the use of informal language. That is, there is no
need for fluffy or extra language, the only language that is necessary is the kind that will get
the facts of the report across. You would not expect to see language like jumping on the social
media bandwagon, sneak a peek at an ex-boyfriend, or has turned us all into self-absorbed
eighth graders in either of the scholarly articles unlike how these quotes are found in the nonscholarly piece (Goble & Leicht).
In the beginning of the How to Effectively Use Social Media article the author
makes the claim, Every day all across America teachers assign their students stories to read and

Comment [15]: Is this the one written by

teachers? It's unclear.
Also: Can you work in a transition from the
previous paragraph (and the ideas in it) to this
paragraph (and the ideas in it)?

summarize. Unfortunately, many of these students find this to be an exercise in futility. Lacking
the skills to effectively analyze the material, these students often struggle to properly summarize
what they have read because they have never mastered the correct techniques to do so

Put another way: why place this paragraph

*here*? How/why does it build off of the last
one?
Dropping that kind of language/explanation into
your sentence here could help me see how the
parts fit together -- that is, how your argument is
unfolding.

(Simplicio 142). This move of introducing the problem before introducing what the paper is
about or establishing a claim makes the paper credible because it shows there is an actual
problem that needs addressing rather than proclaiming a solution to a problem that does not

Comment [16]: This seems to be a recurring

thread in your paper. Whenever you spot a
recurring thread, consider making it an explicit
part of your argument/thesis.

necessarily exist. It also creates a sense of momentum and direction as described by

Birkenstein & Graff (107). Fluidity is created by the format of having an introduction (gives the
reader an idea of what is to come), evidence (to prove to the reader that there is legitimateness),
and lastly his analysis based on the information provide. In a way, this order follows the same

Comment [17]: You're coming back to

order/sequence/structure too -- is this a part of
your main argument?

organization as IMRAD. The way in which the information is relayed to the reader is effective
because it sets up for the next piece of information.

Also, I need you to help me understand

how/why you're analyzing this. Help me SEE
what you want me to see and/or what you're
seeing.

Although, as I stated earlier, one of the scholarly pieces does not follow the IMRAD
structure, which is uncommon because as a scholastic piece it is believed that the article should
lay down the facts, but in this case the article has an agenda of convincing its audience to support
social media use. The audience is understood to be for educators because of the location in which
the article is published, Project Innovation. The author uses the move of presenting only
information that strictly confirms his claim rather than providing other factual pieces of

Comment [18]: What info?

Comment [19]: What facts?

information that could contradict his proposed belief. The entire essay contains evidences as to

Comment [20]: What evidence?

why social media should be used, except in the last two paragraphs. The closing statement is
where there is a direct indication on his stance, They can either ignore the importance of the

Comment [21]: Who is they? Can you hit on

an audience-related note here?

emerging technological and social media trends, or they can learn to harness them as effective
teaching tools. Smart educators will choose to embrace the changes (Simplicio 144). Not only is
the author sharing his opinion he is also insinuating his beliefs towards the reader. By saying
smart educators he is passively inferring that educators that do not alter the ways in which they
teach are not then smart, this move is effective because the educators reading this article
may be more willing to adapt to this style of teaching if their smartness or ability to teach is
going to be question if they do not. As Bunn states, techniques that are effective for one genre
may not work well in another because this genre is suppose to be scholarly and has the

Comment [22]: Nice! Well said.

presumption of sharing factual knowledge this passive aggressive undertone does not seem as
suitable in this text as it would in, lets say, the non-scholarly piece (Bunn 77). There are
different settings and context in which a suggestion as such would be more appropriate or
effective.
The other scholarly pieces uses the move of providing suggestions, but not to impose a
certain belief on the researchers reading the paper. The suggestions found in Twitter in the

Comment [23]: Such as?

Comment [24]: This is interesting -- worth
making a more explicit part of your argument?

Higher Education Classroom are to guide further studies. These suggestions could almost be
seen as suggestions to the researcher himself, Future studies should build on this exercise using
various other social media outlets. In addition, studies should address increasingly specific
pedagogical hypotheses; these techniques and experiments would have been conducted granted
the resources and money (Bernot & Jacquemin & Smelser 27). By adding unbiased and research
driven suggestions the scholarly piece is able to retain its credibility.
In class we discussed a particular move that involved making statements that leave
room for variabilityhedged claims. If one were to not use hedged claims the piece would come
off as aggressive and lacking knowledge because it does not allow room for possible errors. This
concrete move is visible in Should Teachers Use Social Media in the Classroom? The author
of the no portion of this article states Kids today are addicted to technology, A bored
teenager no longer has to listen to adult conversation in the car, and it has turned us all into
self-absorbed eighth graders claims like these can easily be refuted. The fact that these claims
clearly have an opposing side is not the main issue, by using this move it makes the author
appear less educated compared to those that choose to include words that dilute their extreme
claims. Reading this piece with so many harsh lines-drawn facts that clearly are not evidently
true makes most readers less inclined to take her side on the issue. Yes, the context in which it is

Comment [25]: <~~~~ Huge.

You might want to ditch the "structure stuff" and
zoom in on this.

written does allow for the author to play with the claims she is making and should be read with
a grain of salt, but the author should still be cautions of the audience and the possible perception
that is created. The claims she is making are borderline insults because of the negative
undertones that are associated with them, this is the biggest issue with making the claims totally
inclusive.
Most of the time writers are writing to get a message across to a certain group of people
because this is the largest reasoning behind writing audience perception should be the largest
concern for the writer. Finding a balance between what the writer wants, the reader wants, and
what the reader expects should create a harmonious paper that suits everybodys needs.

Work Cited
Bernot, Melody and Jacquemin, Stephen and Smelser, Lisa. Twitter in the Higher Education
Classroom: A Student and Faculty Assessment of Use and Perception Journal of College
Science and Teaching. 43.6 (2014): 22-27 Web. 3 May 2016
Birkenstein & Graff. As a Result- Connecting the Parts.

Bunn, Mike. How to Read Like a Writer. Writing Spaces: Reading on Writing Volume 2.
2011. Print
Goble, Don, Leicht, Gail. Should teachers be using social media in the classroom? PBSnews.
Org., 1 Oct. 2014. Web. 3 May 2016
Simplicio, Joseph. How to Effectively Use Social Media as In-Class Teaching Tools. Project
Innovation, Inc.: Reading Improvements 52.4 (2015): 142-144 Web. 3 May 2016

Writing 2 Feedback Matrix for WP2

Table of Textual Features and Qualities
Did Not Meet
Expectations
Thesis Statement

Use of Textual Evidence from

Genres

Met
Expectations

Exceeded
Expectations

Use of Course Readings

Analysis

X
X

Organization/Structure
Attention to Genre/Conventions
and Rhetorical Factors

Attention to Moves

X/XX

Exploration of Disciplinarity

Sentence-level Clarity, Mechanics,

Flow

Comments and Grade

Sutherland,
Check out my comments for some ways on how you can
improve this for your portfolio. Overall, I think you need
to get (a lot more) super-clear about what, exactly, your
argument is. Then, once you do that, think hard about
how you can back up your claims with textual evidence.
Get specific. Be direct.
One last observation: I felt that your paper was just a tad
bit all over the place. Try to take a step back and see
how the pieces of your paper, paragraph by paragraph, fit
together. What is each individual paragraph
accomplishing? Creating a reverse outline could really
help you do that.
This is a good start, and Im expecting you to nail this
come portfolio time.
Z
7/10