1. technology is low-tech, but important to the job
2. I was surprised that the call center doesn’t automate responses online.
3. Lanham’s attention economy, shows that you entertain customers and customers get the attention of workers.
4. My claim is that Dani is a good worker; however, job doesn’t give much $.

My research question is: How is writing a necessary part of a job in the science-based career of speech-language pathology? I want to know how writing is incorporated into the career of a speech-language pathologist, as this job is considered to be scientific yet creative. I wish to know how writing is important to a job that is not strictly related to English studies. Speech pathology does have to deal with language, which interests me as it is about the vocalization of language rather than the physical writing of words. However, writing is still prevalent in activities related to the job. Writing is necessary to excel economically in this industry. I am interested in how the writing in this industry, which is based in science, differs from creative writing, or whether creative writing is also a component. For the economics of this job, how is writing an important component to making money?

I need to ask a speech-language pathologist about their career by interviewing them on their qualifications. I possibly need to observe the writing process of progress reports for students. I will look at documents of the progress reports but keeping the identifies of the report subjects a secret for confidentiality reasons. My subject writes Indiana Progress Reports, or IEPs, that are records of student’s progress in speech therapy required by the state. Working in a school setting, progress reports on each child who is given speech therapy is required. Each report requires about 2,000 words of writing. I will also look at other types of writing that might be used in this job. Many speech-language pathologists have to give presentations to their colleagues. I will see if the writing used in these presentations is meant to be more eye-catching and keep peers focused on the presentation, or rather to give information like updates. 

I want to ask the following questions:

1. How much by state law are you required to write about each child you work with?
2. Is your writing more creative or scientific?
3. Who reads your reports/is the audience for your writing?
4. Did you know how much writing was going to be required for your career before you went into it?
5. How long does it take you to complete a progress report?
6. What other types of writing are common in your job?

“Recruitment Script”

The project I am asking your help with is meant to educate myself and my peers at University of Wisconsin-Madison about the types of writing involved in various careers, depending on what industry and what job a person has. I want to interview you to ascertain responses to questions about the writing that has been used in your job. I would like to ask multiple questions having to do with your job and the demands of writing. I ask your consent to record our interview for a record documented–the interview will be used for making said essay.

Interview question for the linguistics professor:

Talking about Lanham’s attention economy, how do you make an academic paper interesting to people not of the linguistics profession?

Nakamura’s article made me think of my own experience seeing comments online that are speaking against other commenters who leave criticisms of feminism. People who do not understand feminism view it as a negative concept; I think it’s brave for people to leave comments and express their opinion with the possibility of being criticized by others on websites such as YouTube’s comment section. I think Nakamura makes great points relating to that there is always going to be someone speaking out against social justice or adhering to a negative world concept. She speaks in favor of activism, and therefore in favor of human rights.

I also find it interesting that she points to this as free labor. The connotation of the word ‘labor’ and the anecdote in the beginning of the mass suicide of exploited people as examples of pathos. This gives sympathy to draw attention to the importance of the issues that follow in the rest of the article, so I found her rhetoric to be insightful and useful in communicating the article’s ideas. In addition to the rhetoric Nakamura uses, the idea of free labor also shows that this movement has taken so much effort and yet is still an ongoing battle. 

1. What questions about writing in the workplace or people who write for a living came up for you while engaging with the readings in the last few weeks? (Think back to Mc Millan Cottom’s take on how the new economy is shaping education, Gregg’s argument about the emotional constraints of white-collar work in conditions of flexibility or Brandt’s discussion of writers as the new mediational tools of the information economy. Or you might consider Bourdieu or Lanham’s ideas and how they might say something about what it means to write for a living). Take a few moments to brainstorm a few ideas of potential interesting strands of thinking of questions.
2. Try to turn one of these ideas into a research question. Remember the parameters of a good primary research question: specific, narrow, and discoverable through primary methods (but not too narrow to be Google-able).
3. Consider each of the data collection methods (interviews, observations, and text analysis) and describe how each method would allow you to find out the answer to the question in a particularly way. What would each method allow you to see? What would be the limitations of each? Which methods would be best for answering your research question?

1. I keep thinking about how people get paid as writers–I know some people get paid per word, but others get paid per article or submission. I’m thinking about how people would negotiate how much they make with a boss, or even how they get paid if they are a self-employed writer.
2. How do you negotiate when having writing-per-world-based paid? / Does the amount of money you have every year change based on the amount you write?
3. Interviews let you get to have personal time and develop a relationship with the person you are interviewing. It feels more intimate, and I feel like it lets you get more information out of someone. You are limited in that they can only tell you what they know–you could observe someone’s job, and see something they might not. With observation, you could not have a conversation but you could look and see things the person themselves might not be able to tell you about their relationship with interacting with other people. Text analysis does not let you speak with someone or have a relationship with them. But I feel it does give the most amount of information.

Option 2

I want to be an editor or a writer for either a magazine, newspaper, or publishing house. Writing would obviously be a major task in my job; I would either want to be writing articles, or editing books to be published. Writing would take the form of giving someone else critique’s on their work, which is alike to what some of the writers Brandt interviewed talked about writing in their jobs of being giving feedback or editing someone else’s work. I would want to edit or publish my own texts. I would be writing in a formal setting, either submitting my own work to a publisher, or working for a publisher itself.

build off of ideas in my artifact–in elder’s article–things I agree with? or find what you disagree with, and write own analysis

audience-could be for other people looking to examine the economy of harry potter

build on conversation–write your own analysis of things that he missed

or analysis of the fandom

Tolentino uses rhetoric to show that men attempt to undermine the female voice in order to feel empowered, or continue a system of misogynistic oppression that puts men in power. The exigency shows that women must continue to have their voices heard for any real change to be made. She is purposefully encouraging women to keep talking out, despite the consequence of potentially leading to blackballed by others or the media. She makes a strong case using rhetoric for talking out, despite a women risking her reputation.

Option 2 Freshman year of college, I got an email from my dorm’s house fellow. The audience of the note was all the students on the fourth floor. It read something along the lines of Please DO NOT leave shoes in the hallway. Our cleaning staff cannot vacuum. I realize no one likes tracking water/snow boots into their dorms, but put your shoes inside your dorm at night. Thank you. The last line was added at the end, as was the please in the beginning, both showing said email’s concern. Funnily most students on the fourth floor ended up ignoring the email anyway, and left snow boots in the hallway per winter.

To me this article is about the daily grind that so many Americans experience. It shows the state of our economy as one that favors productivity, rather than happiness or contentment during work. The article to me seemed mostly negative, highlighting our low standards for giving comfort at work. Gregg used the Six Feet Under example to illustrate that even the media and television shows we consume have turned into a depiction of the negatives of office life. I feel this article connects back to our class because it shows that presently, people are less able to do what makes them happy for a living. Instead, they are forced to participate in lowly jobs that end in tiredness and mental health problems, with small contributions to the economy. I also feel this article connects back to our economy being based off of the social aspects of day-to-day life. It also shows that the rhetoric in our emails has become a part of the economy. The subtle rhetoric sent through email is now significantly influencing the workplace. Gregg specifically focused on passive-aggressive messages; to me, these types of messages are hazardous to workplace health, as they convey unintended negativity. To me, this article shows that in our economy, there is more polite but untrustworthy behavior and a tendency towards doing what’s end’s meat rather than what ends with happiness.