This is a collaborative blog post created by Daniele Narciso, Rebecca Gramling, Kristin Schoch and Jazmyne Rodriguez. This week our group trekked onward through the collaborative research project process. During class we had the opportunity to workshop our projects and were fortunate to make a lot of headway. The first thing we worked on was our primary research question. Since our project goals have shifted, our primary research question changed significantly. Originally we were going to research consumer understanding of food labels and ingredients but instead we have decided to research the health effects of Red Bull energy drink both with and without alcohol. The next thing we worked on was developing supplemental research questions. The result was pretty interesting because, while being on topic, our questions ranged in nature from marketing questions to questions about specific ingredients. We are excited to see where these questions lead us. After developing our research questions we began to tackle our abstract. In all honesty, we were a little worried about the abstract and how to approach writing it. However, it turned out to be much easier than we anticipated and we are confident that it gives our readers a great overview of our project. Of course, we realize that our abstract will have to be revised as we continue on in our process. Finally, we discussed what work needs still needs to be done. Since we plan on conducting field interviews, we scheduled a date and time to do so. We also confirmed the current division of labor so that we were each reminded of what still needs to be done. As far as collaboration is concerned, the way we are currently working could be described as a mix between hierarchical and dialogical. It is hierarchical because a lot of the labor is still divided and to be put together at a later date. However, it is also dialogical because during our workshop session, we worked as a group to revise our primary research question, develop supplemental questions, and create an abstract. During this process we bounced ideas off one another and each brought our own unique schemas to the table. After doing this we revised our data to reflect our discussions.
This blog was written collaboratively by Kristin, Rebecca, Jazmyne, and Daniele for our Collaborative Research Project. Over the past week or two, we have been getting our ideas for the assignment off the ground. Our ideas have taken shape and changed direction once or twice already. After last week’s class meeting, we have settled on a more concrete topic. Together, we will be doing a ten minute documentary on Red Bull energy drinks. We will be focusing on its contents, its effects, and the possible dangers of mixing it with alcohol. Since its major consumer seems to be young adults and college students, this age group will serve as our main audience. As we are still in the early stages of development, we have not begun work on the project. We are in the preliminary stages of researching and drafting. So far, we would look at our group’s arrangement as a hierarchical structure. Our work thus far has been very divided and individual. We have yet to meet as a group outside the constraints of Tuesday at 5:20. Our team shares many of the characteristics of a hierarchical group. We have divided tasks among members. For example, the last time we met, we determined who would research what particular subtopic. Kristin will be researching the effects of Red Bull mixed with alcohol, Jazmyne will be studying the effects of it by itself, Rebecca will be researching its ingredients, and Daniele will be learning about health facts concerned with the drink. Daniele is also interested in finding out more about Taurine, a chemical found in Red Bull. In this respect, we have divided our research tasks and goals. We will independently search books, the internet, and other sources for information. In terms of our blogs this week, we decided to create them collaboratively. We work very well with one another and are always sure to spread the workload evenly. While we don’t necessarily have a “leader”, we all seem to be leaders of ourselves. We all know that our group members will hold ourselves responsible for contributing to our share of the final outcome. Each of us will bring our own findings to the table and combine our results. When we reach this point in the project, it is our assumption that we will become more dialogic in nature. Because we are creating a documentary where we will be conducting interviews, we would imagine we will be doing more “round table” discussions and work. Even though we haven’t met as a team yet, we are all very close to one another both in and outside of academia. We have already been exchanging text messages and emails in correlation with the project. We are all easily accessible individuals who will be there to help one another in our discoveries and inquires about Red Bull. We are excited to see how our Collaborative Research Project takes shape.
The following is a collaborative blog which summarizes the article How Big A Problem Are Energy Drinks, Really by Richard C. Senelick, M.D., and connects it to our collaborative research project. The authors include Daniele, Jazmyne, Kristin and Rebecca. The article begins with a quote by a college senior who drinks red bull and coffee on a daily basis while in school. She describes what the appeal is for some other students that she knows and goes on to explain the impact it has on her personally. This was especially intriguing to us because we plan to interview Rowan students about their experiences with Red Bull, and this could be used as a guide to construct some of the questions we can ask to ensure that we get useful information. Senelick gives us some more information about the student he has quoted before diving into the article. This made us think about how we will conduct our interviews. Should we ask students for some basic information about themselves to ensure we are getting data from a variety of different types of students? Should we go into the task of conducting interviews with specific criteria in mind? Senelick gives a list of the ingredients found in typical energy drinks. He explains that energy drinks are unique in that they are considered health supplements, and therefore not regulated by the FDA. He also describes how the marketing of these products is geared towards young people and then made easily accessible to them. This is something that we need to think about as we consider how we want to inform our audience. Some students might not think about FDA regulations at all, but some might just assume that any food or drink item that they buy in the store has been FDA approved. We also found it interesting that since these drinks are categorized as supplements, the companies that make them do not have to prove that their product works or that it is safe. This is definitely something that would we like to research further. Senelick draws attention to the differences in adults and adolescents that make consuming these products more of a concern for young people. What could work for an adult could cause adverse effects for an adolescent. Because there is no warning label requirement, the appropriate age range for consuming these energy drinks is not specified. Senelick’s concern is for children and adolescents, the way these drinks are marketed to them and the easy access they have to large quantities of potentially harmful substances, like caffeine. He worries about the ingredients for which the effects have had no scientific studies conducted. He is advocating for more responsible labeling and regulations in order to protect young people. This is also an aspect we could study further. How would those we interview feel, knowing that there are ingredients that could have unknown effects? How much information will we be able to find on these ingredients in our own research? Should an ingredient be considered safe for consumption if there is limited information on it? While this article only contains a small amount of the information that we need, it has given us many things to consider and research further.
My group has created the assigned blog posts for this week collaboratively and they will be posted later, but this one's all me. This seems to be the semester of the group project. Having worked in a variety of groups in the past several weeks, ranging in size from a reasonable 3 to a monstrous 6, I will list here what I have identified as the 4 main types of collaborators. I am using the term 'collaborators' lightly, as you will see. It's all in good fun, so please receive it in that spirit.
The first type of collaborator is the invisible man. This collaborator cannot be reached via email, text or even face to face conversation. This person gets all of the same emails and texts as the rest of the group, but never replies, and then shows up a few hours before the assignment is due asking what's going on. This person also has a tendency to ask annoying questions that are clearly spelled out on the assignment sheet, or have already been answered in the class that all of you sat through mere days before. This collaborator also tends to contribute his/her assigned portion at the last possible second, often ignoring agreed upon deadlines and deciding that they would like to add something to an already completed section.
The second type is the Idon'tgiveashitter. This collaborator ranges from the hard worker to the half asser, but after their portion is complete the result is always the same. These collaborators tend to hand in their assigned portion early and evaporate into thin air. Whether they have given you shitty work and disappeared before you can ask them to make corrections, or given you excellent work and then disappeared before you can ask them for more, their goal is to do what they were assigned and move on to more important life events. He/she is very hard to collaborate with because when it comes to making changes, big or small, that could improve the project, they just don't give a shit.
The third type of collaborator is the hopelessly dependent. This person needs the group to hold their hand through every step. They often ask you to look over what they have done, ignoring the fact that at some point you have to work on your own part as well. This collaborator is in contact way too much and answers any communication from you within seconds. He/she will often ask if there is anything more that they can do, and although there is more that they can help with you find yourself saying "no" because this would mean more work instead of less.
The fourth and final type of collaborator is the dictator. This collaborator does not like any idea unless it originated in their own brain. He/she assigns work to each group member, although they have not been assigned the role of leader. He/she might look over a nearly complete assignment and decide that changes need to be made. This collaborator might also take perfectly good work and change it until it sounds exactly like them. They act as if every grammatical error is a lightning bolt to the brain stem, and constantly complain that no one else is contributing although they prefer it this way.
Personally, I can find pieces of myself in all of these collaborators from various project situations. How about you?
In the following blog post I will discuss my ideas for the Collaborative Research Project that I will create for Writing Research and Technology. I will create this project collaboratively with Daniele Jacob, Jazmyne Rodriguez and Kristin Schoch. Since this project involves some aspect of the food industry, an area that impacts all of us, I would like to explore an area that I can benefit from having more knowledge about. My idea involves exploring food labels and the ingredients listed on them. I often find that a lot of the ingredients listed on products I buy regularly are ones that I cannot pronounce, let alone identify. With that in mind, I would like to explore what some of these ingredients are. I want to be able to identify the ingredients in terms that I can understand, through my own research. Some of the questions I would like to be able to answer are: How would you describe the ingredients laymen’s terms? Are they harmful? Are they healthy? Are they ingredients that would be undesirable to consumers? In addition, I would like to explore what consumers would do if they had more knowledge about these ingredients. Would they continue buying them? Would they look for purer alternatives? Would they be more concerned with taste than quality? I would like to do this exploration by passing on the information that I have learned about the ingredients to consumers and observing their reactions, as well as ask them questions about their reactions. Another idea I would like to explore is looking exclusively at the labels of foods that claim to be “all natural” and/or “organic”. I have heard a lot in the news lately about the standards of organic food and how the requirements are not as stringent as consumers would like to think they are. I would like to see how many of the ingredients that would not be considered “all natural” by average consumers if they knew what they were. I believe that this research, seeking to answer these questions, would be informative and useful to consumers who care to know what is in their food.
The following was created for Writing, Research and Technology, which I am taking at Rowan University and is a description of different types of collaboration and the circumstances under which I have used some of them. This information is based off my reading of "Collaborative Writing in Composition Studies" by Sheryl I. Fontaine and Susan M. Hunter. I identified 3 types of collaboration within the reading. The first was called "hierarchical", in which a group is asked to collaborate but instead divides the work between members, going off to complete assigned tasks on their own and then putting all parts together in the end to create one project. The author defines this as being more "cooperative" than "collaborative" because it does not require the members of the group to make adjustments in order to accommodate the ideas of others. All members work independently for the most part and only need to "cooperate" to decide who will complete what task and put all finished products together. This is the type of collaboration that I have experienced most often. Both in school and at work, it seems that most people feel that it is easier to work independently. Most often, it is in school that I experience this form of collaboration, since as a group we have to work within the various work schedules and locations of all of the group members, despite having the same class schedule. I prefer to work this way because of the bad experiences I've had with trying to mold ideas together, especially when there are multiple strong personalities involved and I did not get to choose my group. The second type of collaboration was identified in the text as "dialogic". This involves no clearly defined roles as group members adjust and make themselves available for all tasks they are needed for as collaboration unfolds. This is the type of collaboration I have experienced the least. I have had a couple of groups that meshed very well and were able to truly collaborate from beginning to end. This has happened almost exclusively when I was completing projects for church. I think that whether this type of collaboration is possible has less to do with schedules and planning and more to do with the flexibility of the group members. Fontaine and Hunter agree that this process is easier when writers are more open to the idea of collaborative, group writing and are able to let go of the idea of the "lone writer." The third and final type of collaboration discussed in the text was identified as "scaffolding". This involves the use of the different strengths of all of the group members to create together what could not be created individually. No single group member's voice can be identified as all members work together to create a new voice. This is the most ideal form of collaboration since it involves using the strengths a group has to offer and making up for individual writer's weaknesses by allowing all gaps to be filled in by the appropriate group members. I have experienced this form of collaboration when completing projects for church, and most often when working on projects for work. It is ideal to have group members who can supplement your weaknesses and vice-versa. This is the form of collaboration that I hope to be able to achieve when completing the collaborative research project. After seeing the different types of collaboration laid out, I feel better prepared to try and model the appropriate behaviors outlined in order to have the best final product possible. More specifically, I will try not to immediately divide up my group's tasks so that I can work independently. Instead, I will try to make use of the benefits that working collaboratively, instead of just cooperatively, has to offer.
The following is my understanding of what it is to be a reflective and reflexive researcher after reading "Turns of Thought: Teaching Composition as Reflexive Inquiry" by Donna Qualley for Writing, Research and Technology, a class I am taking at Rowan University. My understanding of being a reflective and reflexive researcher is that it involves the examination of our own thought processes and beliefs, and how they influence our processing of information. The reading more adequately describes reflexive research as involving "... a commitment to both attending to what we believe and examining how we came to hold those beliefs while we are engaged in trying to make sense of an other." In other words, a reflexive researcher would not simply research, but also explore how his/her method of processing information will influence how he/she will absorb the information gained from research. While an individuals background, culture and experiences influences their thought process, the individual is usually unaware of the impact of such influences until he/she is compelled to examine them. As experienced by the author, this self-examination often occurs when we are taken out of our comfort zones and integrated with those who do not share a similar way of thinking due to cultural and background differences. That is why it is important to be reflexive when researching. Researchers should not let their own thoughts cloud the analysis of data. The ultimate goal of reflexive researching is to examine our thinking processes so that we can make adjustments to our way of thinking and come to better conclusions by, as Qualley states, "... deepening, complicating, challenging, or transforming what we currently understand." I am guilty of being a closed-minded researcher. I find out what I find out, and simply add it to my memory bank. I am not asked to examine how I processed researched information very often. Reflexive researching as Qualley described it, can make me, or anyone, a more adequate researcher and writer.
The following is my understanding of qualitative research and narrative inquiry after reading " An Introduction to Qualitative Research" by Beverley Hancock and Situating Narrative Inquiry, part 1 of "Handbook of Narrative Inquiry" by D. Jean Clandinin. I understood qualitative research to be research that seeks to understand human behaviors and the reasons behind those behaviors. While quantitative research deals with measurement, qualitative research deals with why the world works the way that it does. When doing qualitative research it is not the researcher's goal to manipulate or interfere with the situation that is being observed. Researchers collect information through the process of either encounters, observations or interviews which are "time consuming" in nature according to Hancock. It is the researcher's goal to understand how people arrive at opinions, feelings and decisions based on what they experience. I understood narrative inquiry to be a more specific form of qualitative research. It involves seeking to understand human behaviors as described through stories, or narratives. Like qualitative research, the researcher does not seek to find out what happened, but the meaning that a person took from an event and why. This information will help my group when completing the Oral History Project by providing us with understanding of what we should and should not do when collecting data, understanding our purposes for data collection and understanding what we are listening for. It will also help us to properly interpret data and include the proper information when interpreting. Interviews usually involve a question answer process that answer what happened. These readings were important to help us understand that we are seeking to discover what an individual's reaction is to what happened.
The following blog post was created for Writing, Research an Technology which I am taking at Rowan University. After watching the movie Food Inc. we were asked to choose and consider 3 questions from a list of 17 questions based on issues that were discussed in the movie. I have included the questions that I chose and my opinion on what the answers are/should be. 3. Whose responsibility do you think it is to inform us about what is in our food? Is it our responsibility to find out, the producer's responsibility to make it more clear, or both? Why do you think so? I chose this question because it is one that I feel very strongly about. In the past, I have stopped eating certain foods after finding out what was in them. I believe that many educated consumers would do the same thing once they knew exactly what was in their food. I think it is the producer's responsibility to inform us about what is in our food. As a consumer who has no choice but to purchase food to survive, allowing these companies to turn huge profits, the least they can do is make consumers aware of what they are putting in our food. Producers should make the composition of ingredients, as well as the process they put these ingredients through before they are put in our food, a matter of common knowledge among consumers. They appear to have made profits their main concern and in the mean time they have lowered their regard for the consumer. Seeing how producers fight to limit what must be on food labels in Food Inc. indicates that they think they might lose sales if consumers were better informed. These companies have the funds and resources to inform consumers, and it is my opinion that a percentage of profits should be dedicated to doing just that. 4. Kevin's mother says, "Sometimes it feels like industry was more protected than my son." What do you think of her words?I think that she means since her son could die from eating a hamburger and the company that was responsible for the tainted meat could remain open, even if they showed consistent issues with food safety, that the government seemed to be more concerned with protecting the rights of the industry than making sure that innocent consumers, like her son, were protected from becoming ill and/or dying just because they purchased something to eat. I think she is right. When a child, or anyone, dies as a result of eating something that should never have made it off of the kill room floor, it is the government's responsibility to protect the consumer from having this happen again. The government should not be concerned with the rights of the company at the point when consumers are found to be in danger, especially when they have been put in danger multiple times by the same company. 9. Do you think healthy eating should be a right, a responsibility, or a privilege?I think healthy eating is a right. As discussed in the movie, healthy food is much more expensive than unhealthy food. As a result, poor people tend to eat less healthy foods, sometimes having to make the choice between life-saving medications and fruits and vegetables. I do not think this is fair. I have often heard my parents discussing how easy it is to find a coupon for a bag of chips, when there is never a coupon that can be used for fresh produce. As discussed in Food Inc., since it is more profitable for companies to sell non-fresh items, they have no motivation to lower the cost of produce. I believe this imbalance should be corrected, especially since these packaged foods are killing us. It is not okay for the poor among us to not be able to eat in a way that is beneficial to their health. I believe this is especially true in a country that prides itself in the rights of its citizens. There is no reason why companies should be able to make billions selling food when all citizens do not have proper access to any kind of food that they want to buy. If profits have to be lowered to accomplish this, so be it.
The following has been written for Writing Research and Technology at Rowan University and is meant to explain how the use of technology has impacted my writing.
So far in this class there has not been a single print assignment. All of our assignments have involved reading something found online and creating tweets, a website, blog posts, and, so far, one project based on these readings. We were thrust into this world of technology immediately, and it is my opinion that this was the only way to do it. Some of the things we have been required to do are not unfamiliar to me. I have used twitter for a class, created a website for another and even kept a blog on Tumblr for another. The similarities end there. I was never before required to do all aspects of classwork online on a website that I created for myself.
The use of Twitter was the easy part. I have only used twitter for school, but I have used it previously. Although I prefer to use Facebook, the small amount of characters was not a surprise, and I got used to it again pretty quickly. The only part of twitter I have not enjoyed is having to make my account public. I have been followed by several people I don't know in the past few weeks, which adds to my concern of how many people are reading this blog and the other things I will post to this site. In some ways Twitter provides an advantage, especially when I don't feel like writing much. I am forced to choose my words carefully and I can only post so much.
Having created a website previously did not help me when creating this one since they are completely different formats, but I was able to appreciate how simple it was using this site and I was more aware of what my website would need. I have appreciated creating all assignments on this site because everything I have done and will do for this class is all here in one neat package. All completed assignments are added to my site live and easily changeable if I notice mistakes or just want to improve something I've done at some point in the future. While you would think that putting all assignments online would cause a feeling of finality, it has the opposite effect. Instead of handing in one final paper that cannot be edited once it is out of my hands, I can improve upon my assignments all semester.
The most noticeable impact that technology has had on my writing is that I am more guarded about what I write, since I know that many people have access to it. While my audience would normally include my professor and a maybe a few classmates, I now consider that many others (who may or may not know why I'm writing the things that I am) could potentially read anything I write. This knowledge has caused me to want to steer clear of anything that would be too boring or unimpressive. I feel immense pressure with each blog post that I complete. While part of me believes that this is good practice for writing professionally, the part of me that sees this as yet another stumbling block that distracts me from the purpose of the assignments. I cannot tell yet if this has made my writing better, worse or unchanged, but I am sure I will appreciate this aspect of my writing experience much more in the future.
I have had mixed results when creating my twitterive. The twitterive could not exist without technology, but I have also found that it can be a distraction here. I have had trouble finding the right balance of technology and narrative. At first I used too much technology, and now I am struggling to add the right amount of narrative to compliment it. On the positive side, I have enjoyed not having limits on how to express ideas. Instead of just words, I have videos, or screen shots, or sound-clips, or pictures, and the list goes on. I am only limited by what my imagination can come up with. I have been afforded an opportunity that no paper project would ever allow. I only see positive results coming from this, since I will be able to think of various ways to express myself and engage my audience in the ideas I am trying to convey.
Overall, I feel that the benefits to working exclusively online outweigh any of the discomforts that I've experienced. This experience will be invaluable in the very near future since the use of technology is becoming more and more pervasive in all areas of life. Having to think a certain way when creating assignments is good practice for this future. I have already begun to change the way that I think about writing as a result of this experience.
|
RSS Feed