My claim is that advancing technologies, like those represented in the utopian novel Brave New World, are a danger to the way society functions.
Although police procedural television shows, such as CSI, Law and Order, etc., are a realistic approach to entertainment, the use of forensic evidence and practices portrayed in the shows lead to misconceptions by the viewers about actual law and court practices.
Because of the increasing number of orphans around the world, all "stable and able" people in the US should adopt a child, either domestically or internationally. Rebecca Griggs
Although political correctness has been championed in the past, it is no longer beneficial to protect due to the suffocation induced on the freedom of speech by its implementation.-Evan Ledet
Although there should be some changes in our health care system of today, the health care reform proposed by President Obama is not the best way to help the citizens of the United States.
My claim is that if steroids are banned and other non-inflammatory drugs have regulations set on them , the horse racing industry will be much safer for the horses and it will gain some integrity back.-Nicholas Roger
Rebecca,I believe your claim might need a better "bridge" of reasoning. If I were an "able and stable" person, why would adopting a child be a good solution? What if i am a bad parent? Why couldn't I just give money to charity?These questions might be better answered in the paper than in the main claim, but that's my suggestion. Ultimately, I would like to see a more direct connection - in the claim - of how adopting would bee an effective method of helping a growing number off orphans.Maybe something like: "...or internationally. This will provide orphans with proper parenting, which will lead to less orphans in the world."-That was the best suggestion I could think of...hope this helps!
My claim is that crude oil in still the most important resource availabe and althoughh alternative methods of oil usage have proven to be somewhat successful, they are still not reliable
This comment has been removed by the author.
My claim is that The Daily Show with Jon Stewart has a heavy influence on its viewers political views, and the way that they view other news media networks.
Although this concept was once looked down upon for being a nonstandard way of design, green architecture has been accepted as a smart and logical way of construction allowing us to support a healthier economy, community, and environment all within the limits of nature compared to traditional design methods.
My claim is that the media over-exploits the issue of climate change in their reports, and this bias incorrectly shapes our opinions of the subject.
The use of excessive police force when dealing with African-American criminals has become a huge problem in our society and can be prevented with measures taken by those in charge.
If America is considered to be the "land of free" then why do the majority of women constantly feel pressure from the American Society to possess a certain body image.-Blanche Lambert
Although the American circus has declined in popularity in current times, it has affected our culture positivly because it has changed what we expect from our entertainment.-Nicole Bekemeier
The attack on hunting will hurt the animals and the economy more than hunting could ever due, because of the amount of money spent on hunting products and money donated by hunters for conservation
From what I see, most of the claims proposed are well articulated only needing the rest of the paragraph to fully express theme of the remainder of the essay.a few suggestions,Jordan: In your claim, I'd like to see something that distinguishes The Daily Show from other news media (Don't other news media networks influence viewers political views?)Ben: Be a little more specific, if possible. I feel as if that claim is too broad on the effect end. (Danger to the way society functions? what danger?)
If our country was founded on equal rights for all, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then why are many citizens denied their constitutional right to become parents through adoption or surrogacy because of their sexual orientation?
My claim is that education on computer security and cybercrime is the key to keeping peoples' personal and financial information from falling into the wrong hands on the Internet, and for giving people the mechanisms by which they may prevent themselves from falling victim to online scams and malicious social engineering.-- Brandon Ross
My claim is that is the use of partially hydrogenated oils (trans fat) in restaurants were banned, the health status of America would improve.erin king
After reading all the claims, I only have a few suggestions. Everybody's was good, however:Ben: Maybe you could list some specific technologies that have an effect on us.Rebecca: In your claim maybe say why it would benefit us and the world to adopt.Jordan: In your claim try and pick a side that you are on. How does The Daily Show influence us? Negatively or positively?-Nicholas Roger
These all sound great, assuming everyone's claim has information to back it up. I am not very good at critiquing, but I will try. Here's a few things I noticed: Ben: That sounds like a really great topic! I think Nicholas is right... maybe address some ways they have an affect on us, and how that could worsen in the future? I am sure you will probably address this in your essay, though. (I have not read that novel. Maybe that would help me better understand your claim?)Erin: When you say 'health status' do you mean like obesity rates, heart disease, all of the above? Just in restaurants or in all food manufactured? I am looking forward to hearing more about this... it's definitely an applicable subject.Ryan: I think we will probably have some of the same research! :) I am going to look up a little on this issue, too (for the adoption part). I like this topic. But since you stated it as a question, maybe your claim could be that you think all people (regardless of their sexual orientation) should be allowed to become parents ... because this country is founded on equal rights, etc. If I come across some good research on this I will let you know! Blanche: I think maybe the same thing with Ryan's claim is with yours. I don't know if this is right, but I am thinking a claim should be stated like, "here it is! This is what I claim!" You know? so maybe something like, "Based on the idea that America is the "land of the free," I CLAIM that the American society is corrupt, because women feel pressured to look a certain way, etc., and... (why)." I think you pretty much had that stated in your question, it just has more power behind it stated like a fact. I don't know if that matters or not... just an idea. :)Erik: When you say "attack on hunting," do you mean the idea of trying to make it illegal? I am a little confused by your claim. When you say that the attack on hunting will hurt the animals, is that because they would be overpopulated? I understand that a hunting ban could hurt the economy, but what does that have to do with money being donated for conservation? I am just confused...??? Are you FOR or AGAINST the attack on hunting? I think maybe stating that in your claim would help? Raffeal: Thanks for the tips!! Those are all great things I didn't think of, and I will definitely be addressing them in the essay!I hope this helped?
Hi, all:Nick and Bec have the right idea about how to go about responding to claims. Just responding here and make suggestions for everyone in one reply.
That should have been respond in the second sentence.
My Claim, though it is late is that: ,is to study the Chevrolet Corvette because I want to learn how racing has demanded a world class, and balanced sports car in order to help my readers understand the America’s need for speed and how it relates to our competitive nature.Joey
After reading the claims and comments I dont really have anything new to say. They all seem pretty good so Ill try my best to throw out some pointers.Ben: Maybe state how it is a danger, and also possibly narrow it down to a particular part of society. I think that just society as a whole is pretty broad.Rebecca: I feel like yours is very demanding when you say that all stable and able people should adopt. Maybe switch it to where its stating that its a good idea for the stable and able to consider. And also maybe state why it's a good thing to think about adoption.Katie: Im sure you will do this in the paragraph, but maybe briefly state a main reason why Obamas plan wont workNicholas: Instead of just saying "it will gain some integrity back" try to elaborate more on the positive affect it will have.Korey: I would try to name a few ways alternative methods are not reliable. Maybe say "are not reliable due to things such as..."Jordan: Maybe try to talk about a specific group of viewers instead of all of its viewers. Also I would compare it to similar shows and how it's impact compares to them.Christian: State a few examples as to what our opinions may be on the subject.Amanda: I wouldn't just say "those in charge", try to specify which positions in particular.Blanche: I feel like your claim is a question, and a good one too, however your claim will come from you answering that question.Nicole: Try to give a broad example of what it is that we expect from our entertainment that came from the circus.Erik: I just dont see how the attack on hunting can harm animals more than killing them through actual hunting. If you want to keep that part in your argument you need a better reason than just conservation, otherwise I wouldnt even mention the well being of animals in there.Anthony: Like Blanches claim, you have a question in it. I would try to have the answer to that question to state why you believe in what you are writing about.Erin: I would try to state a couple of ways in which Americas health status would improve if trans fat was banned. I hope these comments helped. For the people that I didnt comment on, it was because I couldnt come up with anything for you to change.
Overall most of everyone's claim is well stated. Below are a few suggestions for some of the claimsBen: Since I have not read the novel you mention in your essay I was a little throw off by your claim. Therefore, just make sure you brief the reader on the book before stating your claimShawn: I am excited you read your paper, GREAT claim!Becca: I think you could make you claim have more of a "punch" maybe add a little emotional languageEvan: Pretty good claim-- the only thing you could do is maybe add another element to your claimKatie: I think you could intensify your language just a bit. Similar to Becca you could give it more of a “punch”Nicholas: I like how you use the word “integrity” and I think you could put more focus on the integrity aspect.Korey: I fell like your claim was like a “cliff hanger” I wanted to know since the other methods are not reliable what next…Jordan: I believe you could expand your claim a lot. You need to catch your reader’s attention so they know that is your claimKplath: ummm… can’t say much, but AWESOME claimChristian: Your claim may be a little to broad maybe you show considered narrowing so howAmanda: you could tweak your language a little to make your claim easier to understand. (Ex. Maybe use authority and instead of “those in charge”)Nicole: I the wording of your claim a lot- good claimErik: just check the usage of some of your words and the spelling—common proofread mistakesAnthony: Good Claim—I like the questionBrandon: good claim, maybe do a little re-wording to make the claim flow betterErin: You could expand your claim more; therefore, it would catch the reader’s attention and they would know that was your claimI hope these tips and ideas help! I think everyone is going to have really interesting papers:)-Blanche Lambert
Shawn: I like the claim, and I think it is very specific, and follows the X, Y, and Z formula very well. The only thing that you may want to add in the claim is an example of a misconception that people make about law.Rebecca: I like that you mentioned the guideline of “stable and able,” but I think you should also mention why, even if the families are able, they do not want to adopt a child. I think you have a very interesting topic, and the strong claim that you make for it really caught my attention.Evan: I think you set your claim up very well, but the first thing that came to my mind when I read it, was that the way you worded the sentence, almost came off as trying to be “politically correct.” Now, if I really look at it, it is just a well-written sentence and I’m not suggesting you “dumb down” the sentence, but maybe there is something you can do with the wording. Also, I know you are using South Park as a example for your claim, so you may want to incorporate the show in the claim.Katie: The only thing I can suggest to add to your claim is an opinion of change to health care that you think needs to be addressed, which makes Obama’s plan not the best. Nick: I think you did a good job stating why your claim is significant for the betterment of horse care, and the reputation of horse racing, it might benefit you to include why it is morally significant to human society to stop using steroids in horse racing.Korey: You made your claim very easy to understand, and did a good job of stating the other side that challenges your main argument. One thing that you could add to the claim is an example of an unreliable alternative method for oil.Jordan: I feel as though the claim might be a little vague. One thing you could do is include what type of political views are represented on the Daily Show. Also, you could add an even though sentence to the beginning, like even though the Daily Show is not a real news show, it still influences viewers.Kevin: I think your claim pretty much covers all the parts that a claim needs to include, you did a good job stating the although, the reasons to your claim, and the significance of what green architecture brings. My only suggestion is to use the term green architecture in the introductory sentence instead of the word “this”. Christian: In the first part of your claim, it might be a good idea to include what aspect of climate change the media is exploiting.. I am assuming its global warming but maybe you should just make it clear. Also, you might want to state what the incorrect opinion that the bias creates actually is.Amanda: Instead of saying, “can be prevented,” in claim, it would help make your argument sound stronger if you said, “should be prevented.” Also, You could add why it s significant to society to prevent the excessive police force.Blanche: I like the way you set up your claim because it really stands out to me as a strong argument. One thing you could include in the claim is how the pressure to maintain a certain body figure as a negative affect on the way women feel.Nicole: The only thing that I could suggest to include in your claim is to include a couple quick examples of how the circus affected our culture in a positive way.Erik: I think you have a very interesting topic, and you use some good examples by describing what the hunters give back to the economy, but in the beginning of the claim you should state what the “attack on hunting” actually is.Anthony: I think you pretty much explained all the parts of your claim, and did a good job stating the significance, and examples to support the claim. So, I’m not sure what you could add to improve your claim.Brandon: Your claim is very specific, and covers all the information that you seem to want to argue in your paper, but you might be able to include the other side of the argument in the beginning of the claim.Erin: The second part of your claim could be elaborated on a little by including what specific health factors would be improved if the use of trans fat in restaurants was banned.
Most of the claims posted seem to work for the assignment. This is just some of the things I noticed that could use some work:Ben: I think your idea is great, but the claim could be a bit more specific. It could help if you name specific technologies, as some readers may not have read that novel, although I’m sure you will mention this in your paper.Rebecca: The only suggestion I could think of would be to add a reason for this increase in orphans, such as: “Because of the increasing number of orphans around the world due to..., all "stable and able" people in the US should adopt a child, either domestically or internationally. ”Christian: I feel that it would help if the claim would be more specific. How exactly is the issue exploited by the media, or what are some of the incorrect opinions formed by this?Erik: I agree with Rebecca. What exactly is this ‘attack on hunting?’ Maybe you could elaborate and be more specific in stating this in your claim. You mentioned that this would hurt the animals more, how exactly?Erin: I’m sure it will be mentioned in your paper, but if trans fats are banned, what, if anything, could be used to replace them. Also, are you focusing on food just from restraunts or all food in general?For those that I didn’t comment on, I couldn’t find anything major that needed to be said, that wasn’t already covered by the previous comments above.-Shawn Mitchel
I think everyone s doing a great job on their claims. The few suggestions I have are as follows:Clair: I love the topic of health care because it is a current and very important issue right now. Are you only going to focus on the President's errors or the countries overall healthcare problems. There are major problems with the healthcare system and I think all issues should be addressed.I agree with the other students about the suggestions for Ben's and Eriks's claims. I think addressing the specific types of technologies and how they effect us will make the issue clearer. For Erik, I think it is confusing but I understand what you are saying. It just needs to be reworded. As far as my claim, I want the adoption process to be tailored to couples of the same sex to address the policies and laws that may be against it. In doing so I address the inequality issue. I will readdress the claim to for it to a statement. Thanks for the advice everyone!
Rebecca: You kinda make it sound like forcing people to adopt children even if they dont want to. Maybe you should say all stable and able people should be allowed to or encouraged to adopt children. You can't take away peoples free will.Korey: Maybe you should talk about if you think that using crude oil is a good thing or if something else should be more beneficial.Jordan: Maybe you should sayn in what way that it influences the views.Christain: By climate change do you mean global warning? You should probably state that more straightforeward.Erik: "The attack on hunting" sounds kinda strange, I think you should rephrase that in some way.I thought everyone else's was really good. I particularly liked the way Anthony phrased his.-Nicole Bekemeier
Ben: I'm not sure if narrowing your claim would make it too hard to find enough research, but by maybe stating specific dangers in the way society functions might help your reader understand what the novel is about if they haven't read it themselves. Bec: I know your because is "the increasing number of orphans around the world," but maybe adding a little statistic of the effect of the increasing number of orphans would help the reader see the importance in your topic more. Nick: By changing the first part of your claim from an "if" to an "although" might help your claim. Something like "Although the reputation of the horse race industry has been tarnished by steriods or other non-inflammatory drugs, by banning or putting regulations on these things would help this industry gain back its integrety."Jordan: Maybe by claiming how the show affects the viewers political views (makes them more conservative/liberal) might help your reader understand a little bit about the show even if they have never seen it.Christian: I think by adding an "although" statement to the beginning of your claim would help. Maybe like "Although the media is constantly bombaring the public with the negative aspects of climate change..."Amanda: Maybe by stating the reasons this has become a huge problem in our society in your claim, it would help. (You are probably stating this in your essay.)Erik: I think if you stated what the attack on hunting is, it would help. (Is it the ban on hunting?) This would probably help direct your reader's focus.Anthony: I think what you have posted is a great attention-getter and could be used as the first sentence of your paper, but I think your claim should be a statement. By rearranging your statement a little bit, it would help the reader see what you will talk about in your essay, instead of them answering the question and formulating their own opinion after only reading that question. Brandon: Maybe by stating the alternative method of security used to protect their information that is used today would help your claim; this could help formulate the "although" part of your claim.Hope this helps some of you. -Katie Clark
All of these claims sound really interesting and I’m looking forward to reading the papers. Some suggestions I have areBen: Maybe be more specific with what exactly the dangers are and how society is affectedShawn: Why does it matter if viewers get a distorted view of how justice cases are handled? Isnt there a warning provided before each show to let the people watching know they events and people aren’t based on reality?Rebecca: While this sounds like an amazing thing for people to do, it doesn’t sound too realistic, what if a couple if “stable” because they don’t have children?Katie: This sounds really interesting since I have only heard what the proposal is, but have not done any further researching to find out more about the topicNick: I don’t know much about steroids, but how would sports be affected, that’s a huge entertainment industry for the worldKorey: Just because all the new aren’t “reliable,” how much does this really affect people, how does this compare to the negative affects of crude oil?Jordan: Is this a good or bad influence?Kevin: This sounds like an interesting topic, the argument is stated clearlyChristian: Maybe be more specific of what kind of climate issuesAmanda: Does this happen everywhere or just in certain areasBlanche: I don’t really see the connect between freedom and body image, but this would probably be explained in the rest of the paperNicole: This is a really interesting topic, you’re claim is good because it is specific and to the pointErik: Maybe be more specific with who is being hurt with the hunting bills, will the economy be hurt as a whole, or is it just the hunting industry itself and different sporting good stores?Brandon: How would this be possible? Would each company/organization with secure online accounts have to provide their own mechanisms or education, it would become very cumbersome for people with more than one online account
I agree with Anthony that everyone is doing a bang up job. Ben's is in need of a little work along with Rebecca. I feel both need to get a little more detailed so that the reader fully understands what they are reading. Erik I love your topic on how the attack on hunting hurts the economy and animals more than it helps. -Joey Busbice
Ben: I would try narrowing your claim a little, it might make research a little too hard thoughRebecca: I would make it a little more specific as to who should adoptKatie: This sounds really interesting, your claim is very well stated, and should make for a good paperNick: I would try making your claim a little more concise and specificAnthony: I agree, I think your claim should be more of a statement and a little less of an attention getterAmanda: I am a little confused by your claim, but I'm sure it will be explained in the paperBrandon: I am a little skeptic of yours, but I think it could make sense with more knowledge from your paperBlanche: I feel that you made a very good argument in your claim, should be really good-Erik Ross
Ben: You should be a little more specific with regard to the “danger” that society might face as technology advances. Danger in what way? Danger in that society will be demanding more than it can produce? Danger in that we will become too lazy to make any further progress? Danger in that we will all lose control and kill each other? “Danger” is a fairly broad word, and could be replace with a more specific phrase.Shawn: Perhaps reword your thesis a little. You might be using words incorrectly, or, rather, could possibly choose more suitable words to describe your thoughts. Otherwise, good.Bec: Perhaps it is a little broad, though I don't see how you might be able to narrow it any further. As I said in our group, as you do research, you will likely find ways you can narrow your thesis a little bit.Evan: You might consider rewording your claim a little. Sometimes smaller words, though less impressive to read, fit better than bigger words. Additionally, speech is a broad term, freedom of speech a broad issue, and the “suffocation” of a freedom might be broader still. You can go in all sorts of directions there, and thus might consider narrowing your thesis a little.Katie: “Best” is a word that can have multiple meanings. It can mean “most moral”, it can mean “most pragmatic”, it can mean “most enjoyable”, it can mean “most efficient”, as well as just about anything else. You should qualify the term “best” in a way that makes it clear in what way the proposed healthcare plan is not “the best”. Also, “some changes” is rather vague, and, unless you planned on describing in what ways changes are necessary, I would suggest perhaps not even mentioning the need for “some changes”.Nicholas: Your thesis is very specific, which is a good thing. I cannot see anything in need of changing.Korey: It's sort of difficult to catch, but you're almost talking about two different things in your claim. In the first half, you claim that crude oil is the most important resource available, and yet in the second half you are talking about alternative uses of oil. Alternative to what? All you were saying is that oil was important, and weren't talking about any specific uses of it. You might consider “bridging” the gap between the two halves of your thesis by perhaps saying something along the lines of “...and the way it is currently used is the best/most efficient/most profitable way of using it...”.Jordan: Good. Though, despite the fact that it is shown on Comedy Central, The Daily Show is still a political show, and, like all political shows, it aims to have a heavy influence on its viewers' political tendencies. So it's already assumed that The Daily Show would have a heavy influence on its viewers, and I'm not really sure how demonstrating that it does so would really gives us any useful information. Know what I'm saying?Kevin: I'm a little wary of your use of “smart and logical”, as that is a fairly vague way of using those words. Additionally, I'm not sure what your claim is. Are you claiming that it has become accepted? If so, by whom? And at what point was it not accepted? Or are you claiming that, because it is accepted, the proclaimed benefits of green architecture must be true? You need to elaborate on that a little more and clearly state your claim.Christian: You should elaborate on “over-exploits”. In what ways does the media exploit this? What media? Can you give more specifics about what is being said and by whom? Who is “our”? Certainly we do not all consume the same media. Your topic is a little broad and vague, and you should consider giving more specifics in your thesis.(Continued below...)
Amanda: Could you perhaps put a time frame on your claim? When was it not a problem, and when did it become a problem? I think the issue of police brutality is a little broad, and certainly its incidence varies from region to region. Perhaps you could narrow it down some by specifying a time or place.Blanche: Your claim is supposed to be a statement, not a question. You could do that with a little bit of rewording, though. Who is “the American Society”? Certainly not I nor most people in our class feel they are pressuring anyone to possess a certain body image. Are we therefore not part of the American society? You should better explain who in society might be responsible for the “pressuring”.Nicole: Good, I like the circus. Maybe you could explain “affecting our culture positively” a little more, as it is somewhat of a vague statement.Erik: Perhaps elaborate on what you mean by “hurt”. Certainly you are not speaking about physical pain. Otherwise, good, though perhaps a little broad.Anthony: I am not certain that the Constitution grants anyone the right to be a parent; the term “Constitutional right” has a very specific meaning, that is it is a right enumerated in the Constitution. Additionally, your claim is supposed to be a statement rather than a question. You could perhaps reword it into a statement by saying something like, “I want to demonstrate that gay and lesbian couples can raise children as well as straight couples, because I want to prove that is is morally wrong to disallow them to raise children simply due to their sexual orientation.”Brandon: Well your topic is just rubbish! Oh, wait, that's me...– Brandon Ross
I'm sorry, Erin, I missed your claim. I could've sworn I was the last person to post. I think it is a good topic, though when you are talking about statistics on as large a scale as the whole of the United States, you are bound to run into some issues. Would health improve for everyone, or only people of a certain economic status? Would it improve in all regions? I can't give you much of a suggestion for how you may revise your claim itself, because it is concise and specific. However, I think the sheer scope of what you will be researching – the health of a country as a whole, the way trans fats affect an individual's health and metabolism, perhaps even how banning of fatty foods in restaurants affects the availability of high-fat foods, as well as opposing views in all of these matters – might be overwhelming for you. Other than that word of warning, I have no advice.
Please forgive me for quadruple-posting here... I also missed Joey's claim. Perhaps I should actually read the whole thread of comments before I post, huh? Your claim is very specific, which is a good thing. Would you be talking about everyone in America, though, or only a certain kind of person – perhaps someone with a keen interest in cars? Is there any way you can narrow down what sort of groups of people relate the Chevy Corvette with their “need for speed”? Other than that, good.
Ben: I think your claim is good. It's cut to the point. Suggestions: Be more specific with "danger".Rebecca: I like your topic. Population Growth Rates are a rising issue.Suggestions: Be more specific with "stable and able". Maybe your setting your claim up this way so you can discuss the specifics of "stable and able". If not, try to include specifics like qualifications or guidelines that consider a person/couple " stable and able".Shawn: Good topic, good claim. It's pretty straight to the point. My only suggestion would to maybe shave down some wording if you feel that is even necessary.Jordan: I like your topic. Sadly, some people think The Daily Show is real news haha. I'm glad you're doing your paper on this. I'm curious to see how this goes. Suggestions: Be more specific with the viewer'S ( Who is the show trying to reach out to?) and be more specific with the affects the show has on other media networks. (what kind of affects? are they negative/ positive?).Blanche: I like your claim. It's specific and it brings up a great issue.Suggestions:Your claim seems like a question, reword into a statement if you feel it is necessary.Nicole: Very interesting topic. I would like to see the research behind this topic. Suggestions: Be a little more specific about it's positive effects and maybe try to specify a certain type of entertainment if necessary? (Live, Exhibition, Mass Media...).
My claim is that the negative human impacts on bears around the world outweigh the positiive ones and steps need to be taken to lessen these negative impacts.
Andrew "A.J." Hubert