For Profit Universitites

I found it very interesting how schools would trick students into starting classes with their university even though they knew that the students would not be able to pay the tuition. I think this method is absurd and heartless. These universities are being selfish and have no consideration for anyone else. After watching these videos, my impression of non-profit universities has completely changed. I knew that these schools were very expensive, but I did not know that they tricked students into enrolling even though they had no way of affording classes. I would want to learn more about how these schools persuade students so easily into enrolling and attending their schools even though the students know that they do not have to money to pay for classes. I feel like the thought of not being able to pay for the school would make me think twice before enrolling if I was one of those students.

Public Thinking Rough Draft

Clive Thompson is the author of the book Smarter Than You Think, which contains the excerpt “Public Thinking” as one of its chapters. The purpose of his project is to answer the underlying question of “how has the evolution of public writing affected and influenced people’s thinking?” Thompson’s main argument is that public forms of writing and speaking change humans’ cognitive behavior.  Through various sub claims, such clarified thinking, audience effect, multiple effect, and memory, Thompson backs up his main argument to make people understand and believe the points he is trying to make. In my analysis of Thompson’s text, I will examine and break down those sub claims to further understand his main argument. 

Thompson claims that public writing clarifies thinking. Some forms of public writing are written in a way that helps further understand specific topics or helps clarify what the writer is actually thinking. Thompson states that, “Professional writers have long described the way that the act of writing forces them to distill their vague notions into clear ideas…This is why writers often find that it’s only when they start writing that they figure out what they want to say,” (51). In other words Thompson believes writing out what people are thinking onto paper helps them actually form out what they are trying to get across to others. He refers to the poet Cecil Day-Lewis as a form of evidence when she says, “I do not sit down at my desk to put into verse something that is already clear in my mind. If it were clear in my mind, I should have not incentive or need to write about it…We do not write in order to be understood; we write in order to understand,” (51). This quotation by Day-Lewis supports Thompson’s claim about how writing out one’s thoughts helps to formulate what needs to be said because it shows that even well-known writers have a hard time trying to get their point across without writing it down first. This claim is relatively effective because others can easily relate; many people struggle with trying to develop what they are thinking, and writing things down makes things easier to formulate a point. 

Thompson also introduces the idea of “audience effect”. He argues that, “the cognitive shift in going from an audience of zero (talking to yourself) to an audience of ten people (a few friends or random strangers checking our your online posts) is so big that its actually huger than going from ten people to a million people,”(56). Audiences help to clarify thinking even more. Thompson uses statistics to support his claim because studies have been carried out that reveal what affect an audience has on analytic or critical thought. As stated in “Public Thinking”, “…the effort of communication to someone else forces you to think more precisely, make deeper connections, and learn more,” (55). Thompson validates his statement using observational testing research. The research emphasizes the affect of an audience on people’s thinking. He acknowledges the experiments done in 2008 by a group of Vanderbilt University professors on small children. The testing groups included dozens of four and five year olds, and the tests challenged their cognitive behavior using various tactics of how people may think. They called for the children to look at a sequence of patterns and to predict what the next sequence would be. The tests would become more and more difficult each time the child too the test. Three versions of the same test took place. The first test involved having the children solve the puzzles quietly on their own, while the second test required the children to explain their thinking into a take recorder. The final test had the children explain to their mothers what their thinking was on how they were going to solve the puzzles. The tests concluded that the children who explained their thinking to the audience of mothers did the best, while the children who solved the puzzles on their own quietly did the worst. This experiment helped prove that the act of articulating their thinking process aloud helps people think more critically and identify things more clearly. Because of the many examples that appeal to various audiences from teenagers to writers and publishers, Thompson is more effective in getting his point across.

Memory is another sub claim that Thompson analyzes. He states how, “writing about things has other salutary cognitive effects,” (57). Writing about things so that it is more easily remembered is also known as the “generation effect.” Thompson describes a piece of evidence from 1978 when two psychologists tested people to see how well they remembered words after they had written them down versus people who just read the words and tried to remember them. The people who had written down the words did better in the experiment. The strategy of writing down text to memorize the information is more beneficial than just reading because generating text yourself “requires more cognitive effort than does reading, and effort increases memorability,” (57) according to researchers. This strategy proved to be highly advantageous to people who were attending school. This claim by Thompson was effective because it is relatable to a wide range of people both in school and in the work field. 

Thompson also brings up the idea of the multiples effect. The sub claim of the multiples effect means that several accounts of the same discovery occurred to different people. Thompson has various forms of evidence to backup his claim, such as the discovery of oxygen and sunspots. He believes that the products of our environment result in the multiple occurrences of the same discoveries. He defends his thoughts by stating, “The things we think about are deeply influenced by the state of the art around us: the conversations taking place among educated folk, the shared information, tools, and technologies at hand,” (59). This quotation supports the idea that discoveries of the same topics had reoccurrence because as time goes on, technologies and our environments start to evolve and become more advanced than years past; therefore, newly acquired technologies help researchers come up with details about some of the same topics that have already been introduced to the world but now there is more updated information that can be shared. Thompson confirms his claim of these newly advanced technologies being the reason why multiple discoveries occurred by stating that “If four astronomers discovered sunspots at the same time, it’s partly because the quality of the lenses in telescopes in 1611 has matured to the point where it was finally possible to pick out small details on the sun,” (59). Due to Thompson’s diverse examples to help justify his claim, his strategy proved to be very effective in gaining support. 

Thompson’s main claim is that public forms of writing and speaking have affected humans’ cognitive behavior. He provides many examples that support his beliefs through his various sub claims: clarified thinking, “audience effect”, memory, and multiples effect. By writing thoughts and ideas down, many writers have been able to formulate the idea that they want to present to their audience. Writing things down helps to clarify what the writer is thinking. Thompson believes that the “audience effect” helps people to improve their articulation process, as shown in the test that took place by the group of children in the Vanderbilt experiment. The improvement of the children’s articulation also help to clarify ones thinking. The act of writing things out helps to improve one’s ability to memorize things. Thompson provides information about tests that have shown that the act of writing things down helps to improve memorization; this is also known as “the generation effect.” The idea of multiples effect relates to how multiple occurrences of the same discoveries were taking place. Thompson expresses how he believes that these occurrences happened due to the environment and improvements in technology. Researchers were able to uncover new details about already known topics through the use of the advanced technology of their time. Through the many sub claims that Thompson provides, he effectively supports his main claim of how public writing has affected human cognitive behavior. 

Body Paragraph

Thompson claims that public writing clarifies thinking. Some forms of public writing are written in a way that helps further understand specific topics or helps clarify what the writer is actually thinking. Thompson states that, “Professional writers have long described the way that the act of writing forces them to distill their vague notions into clear ideas…This is why writers often find that it’s only when they start writing that they figure out what they want to say,” (p. 51). In other words Thompson believes writing out what people are thinking onto paper helps them actually form out what they are trying to get across to others. He refers to the poet Cecil Day-Lewis as a form of evidence when she says, “I do not sit down at my desk to put into verse something that is already clear in my mind. If it were clear in my mind, I should have not incentive or need to write about it…We do not write in order to be understood; we write in order to understand,” (p.51). This quotation by Day-Lewis supports Thompson’s claim about how writing out one’s thoughts helps to formulate what needs to be said because it shows that even well-known writers have a hard time trying to get their point across without writing it down first. This claim is relatively effective because others can easily relate; many people struggle with trying to develop what they are thinking, and writing things down makes things easier to formulate a point. 

Revised Intro and Body

“Public Thinking”

Clive Thompson is the author of the book Smarter Than You Think, which contains the excerpt “Public Thinking” as one of its chapters. The purpose of his project is to answer the underlying question of “how has the evolution of public writing affects and influences people’s thinking?” Thompson’s main argument is that public forms of writing change humans’ cognitive behavior. Through various sub claims, such clarified thinking, audience effect, multiple effect, and memory, Thompson backs up his main argument to make people understand and believe the points he is trying to make. In my analysis of Thompson’s text, I will examine and break down those sub claims to further understand his main argument. 

Thompson claims that public writing clarifies thinking. Some forms of public writing are written in a way that helps further understand on specific topics or helps clarify what the writer is actually thinking. Thompson states that, “Professional writers have long described the way that the act of writing forces them to distill their vague notions into clear ideas…This is why writers often find that it’s only when they start writing that they figure out what they want to say,” (p. 51). In other words Thompson believes writing out what people are thinking onto paper helps them actually form out what they are trying to get across to others. He refers to the poet Cecil Day-Lewis as a form of evidence when she says, “I do not sit down at my desk to put into verse something that is already clear in my mind. If it were clear in my mind, I should have not incentive or need to write about it…We do not write in order to be understood; we write in order to understand,” (p.51). This quotation by Day-Lewis supports Thompson’s claim about how writing out one’s thoughts helps to formulate what needs to be said because it shows that even well-known writers have a hard time trying to get their point across without writing it down first. This claim is relatively effective because others can easily relate; many people struggle with trying to develop what they are thinking, and writing things down makes things easier to formulate a point. 

Rough Draft Intro and 1 Body Paragraph

Clive Thompson is the author of the book Smarter Than You Think, which contains the excerpt “Public Thinking” as one of its chapters. The purpose of his project is to answer the underlying question of “how has the evolution of public writing affects and influences people’s thinking?” Thompson’s main argument is that public forms of writing change humans’ cognitive behavior. Through various sub claims, such clarified thinking, audience effect, multiple effect, and memory, Thompson backs up his main argument to make people understand and believe the points he is trying to make. In my analysis of Thompson’s text, I will examine and break down those sub claims to further understand his main argument. 

Thompson claims that public writing clarifies thinking. Some forms of public writing are written in a way that helps further understand on specific topics or helps clarify what the writer is actually thinking. Thompson states that, “Professional writers have long described the way that the act of writing forces them to distill their vague notions into clear ideas…This is why writers often find that it’s only when they start writing that they figure out what they want to say,” (p. 51). Writing out what people are thinking onto paper helps them actually form out what they are trying to get across to others. He refers to the poet Cecil Day-Lewis as a form of evidence when she says, “I do not sit down at my desk to put into verse something that is already clear in my mind. If it were clear in my mind, I should have not incentive or need to write about it…We do not write in order to be understood; we write in order to understand,” (p.51). This quotation by Day-Lewis supports Thompson’s claim about how writing out one’s thoughts helps to formulate what needs to be said because it shows that even well-known writers have a hard time trying to get their point across without writing it down first. This claim is relatively effective because others can easily relate; many people struggle with trying to develop what they are thinking, and writing things down makes things easier to formulate a point. 

Exploring Thompson

Two questions that I would ask Thompson about his text are “Do you know if Okolloh ever wrote her book?” and “How did Lunsford conduct her research to find out that current college students are not as undereducated as people may think?” I am curious about what Okolloh wrote her book about and how long it ended up being. I am also fascinated about how Lunsford realized that current college students are not as under knowledgeable as people think. 

One persuasive argument was when Thompson brought up the theory of multiples. This theory would not have been brought up if scientists were more connected and could communicate easier to each other. Thompson provided various amounts of evidence to back up his claim such as the scientists that discovered oxygen and the mathematicians who discovered logarithms. Another argument that was persuasive was Thompson’s claim about how current college student are not as under educated as people may think. This claim was persuasive because it related to a wide audience and had evidence from a well known and leading researcher, Andrea Lunsford. Lunsford provided statistical evidence for Thompson to use to back up his claim about current students. An argument that was less persuasive was when Thompson brought up how people used to write letters to each other in the past but they only wrote three or four letters a year. This claim was just a small detail under his claim of how the mail system became a powerful mode of expression. 

I think that Thompson opens up with the experiences of Okolloh to show readers that casual writings that people post online have a greater impact on other than people may realize. This example connects with Thompson’s claims because he states how normal people, such as bloggers, have a big influence on their readers. Posting as little as one’s opinions on a topic online can be spreading awareness and can gain support of many people. 

Response to “Public Thinking”

The larger question that Thompson is trying to answer is “how has the evolution of public writing influenced people’s thinking?” A quote that best answers this underlying question is when Thompson says, “The truth is, whatever new digital tools come around, curious people are going to colonize them. We’re social creatures, so we think socially,” (Thompson 69). This citation best answers Thompson’s question because he has given multiple points of evidence throughout his writing that public writing has help shaped how people have come to think. Public writing has allowed people to express their opinions on topics and have given them an outlet to show others what they think. There are endless amounts of upcoming technologies that will help further people’s pubic thinking and this citation supports the idea that people will take advantage of those new tools. As time has gone on people have become more and more interactive with one another and with the new technologies people are becoming more and more connected. 

One of Thompson’s claims is that author’s public writings have affected others more than the author may realize. He backs up his claim by introducing an internet blogger named Okolloh who has been making posts online about new information and her opinion on Kenyan politics. According to Thompson, “After a few years, she’d built a devout readership, including many Kenyans living in and out of the country…Okolloh wrote anguished posts, incorporating as much hard information as she could get. The president imposed a media blackout, so the country’s patchy Internet service was now a crucial route for news. Her blog quickly became a clearinghouse for information on the crisis,” (p. 46). This quotation is an example of how big of an impact an author can have on his readers. Okolloh did not know that her post meant so much to her readers and was shocked when asked to write a book. 

Another claim of Thompson’s is that public writings and communication play a big part in helping the public stay connected. He brings up how many well know scientific discoveries have occurred multiple time throughout history. For example, oxygen was discovered in 1774 by Josef Priestly in London and also by Carl Wilhelm Scheele in Sweden several years earlier (Thompson 59). Thompson states how if these scientists had know about one another’s discoveries then multiple accounts of the same discovers would not have occurred. A quotation that relates to this claim is when Thompson states, “And making connections is a big deal in the history of thought- and its future. That’s because of a curious fact: If you look at the world’s biggest breakthrough ideas, they often occur simultaneously to different people,” (p. 58). 

A third claim of Thompson’s was that students of the current generation are not lacking experience in advanced writing; their writing abilities have not lowered as much as others may think. He challenged how some people think that “college students today can’t write as well as in the past” (p. 66). He found out through one of America’s leading researchers, Andrea Lunsford, that current students’ error rate have barely risen at all. She explained how freshman comp essays are over six times longer than they were back then and how they are now more complex due to the change in topics that essays are written about. Other studies have also been done on how younger generations instant message. Studies have shown that only three percent of the words used were IM-style short forms. A quotation that supports Thompson’s claim is when Lunsford says, “Students essayists of the early twentieth century often wrote essays on topics like spring flowers, while those in the 1980s most often wrote personal experience narratives. Today’s students are much more likely to write essays that present an argument, often with evidence to back them up,- a much more challenging task,” (p. 66). This quotation exemplifies how topics of writing have change and how current topic provide students with a more advanced and challenging argument to write about.