1. How does the writer reflect on the interview process? Are the internal thoughts of the writer towards the informant expressed? Quote at least 3 examples.
-She should try being a little bit more daring during the interview process. She asked questions that people would ask in normal conversation like, "Were you nervous to join the architecture program?." I feel like that's something my mom would ask me when If I came home for the weekend. She asks, "Were you nervous, like, when you first walked in?" When reading, I felt like I already knew the response before continuing on. He replies by discussing the seat assignment. I think its just a universal truth that you better pick your seat wisely because you have to be around those people all semester.
2. What differences in terms of race, class, gender, etc. are discussed regarding each informant? List examples from each interview segment.
-The first informant is her friend and i would assume is her age. She didn't provide much information on the second informant.
3.How does the writer characterize his or her informant? Do you think there should be more physical description, material description, background, or nonverbal communication to better understand the person and interaction?
-She did a great job of providing a visual picture of the first informant using many descriptive words, however didn't seem to do the same for the second informant. Maybe describe the nonverbal communication a little bit more? Don't neglect the second informant
4. Do the informants seem to be full characters you could describe with unique worldviews? Quote any examples that helped you know the informant’s worldview.
-I would have no idea what type of worldviews these people would have. I could assume based on the description she gave about Alexander- "It's age could symbolize how down to earth Alexander is" that he is probably very chill and has mellow worldviews, although i wouldn't even be able to assume Kileys.
5. Each interview should be distinct from the other and in narrative form. What is the story being told about each interview? Describe them separately here.
-The first informant is interviewed in Lizzie's dorm room and she talks about how she has been good friends with Alexander for a couple years now. I didn't notice the second interview take on a narrative form.
6.What is the thesis for interview 1? What is the thesis for interview 2? Are these theses truly theses—that is, do they make surprising and specific claims that need support to be accepted by an audience? If not, what’s the problem?
1- I found it neat that the different architecture students could all get along with each other, yet at the same time form smaller groups within each other.
2- can't put my finger on it
They aren't very surprising.. I would say the facts are self-explanatory or could be assumed fairly easy.
6.Does there seem to be a balance of summary and quotation? Or does one mode seem overused or underused?
-I would say there is a good balance between summary and quotation.
7.For each interview, what do you think the writer most wanted to know?
-The basic facts of the subculture of architecture
8. What is the verbal art discussed? Do you think it fits the criteria of verbal art? What’s the deeper level of meaning for the culture?
-I didn't see anything about verbal art. She said that she looked for some and couldn't find any. She provided a description of his outfit and that this indicated he was down to earth, but didn't connect that with the subculture.
9.What new knowledge do you have after reading these interviews? What would you still like to know about the culture?
-I learned that a lot of people don't know anything about the architecture program?
10. On your copy cross out any portions of the paper you think are irrelevant to understanding the informant, the culture, or the writer’s perspective. Don’t be shy. The writer doesn’t have to take your advice.
Comment on the organization. Does it seem to be working?
-It's organized. but I only found one thesis.. I think that there should be a thesis after each interview and then a paragraph combining the too or similarities/differences of the two interviews
Comment on the writing style. Is it gripping enough to hold an average reader’s attention?
-I enjoyed her style of writing and word usage. It held my attention
What’s the single most important thing this writer could do to improve this paper before it’s graded?
-just add more detail and put more interesting facts that I would have never thought of
No comments:
Post a Comment