Shuford - Portfolio

RC 2001: Introduction to Writing Across the Curriculum
Final Print Portfolio
Jacob Shuford
Appalachian State University

Fall 2015
Final Semester Reflection

PART ONE: Final Semester Reflection
Final Reflection
I feel like, when I came into this class, I was a decent writer. Not great, but
decent enough. This class has taught me a lot about writing, and I am very grateful to
have been able to take it. In some ways, this was one of the easiest classes that I have
ever taken, but on the other hand, it was a little difficult.
In general, I had never really written anything in English classes other than
English related things, so having to write things with a focus on just my major was a new
experience for me. Overall, it was likely a very good experience for me, as Im going to
have to write within my field in the future.
When I think about it, there isnt any single project that I have done this semester
that has really required more critical thinking than the others. In general, the projects
were pretty engaging and thought provoking. In all honesty, I had never had to write
formal papers on non-English related topics before, so these projects certainly required a
different approach than in past English classes. Each of these projects has required a
significant amount of research, but again, it was different than previous English classes
that I have taken. This was all very pointed research, and it required reading a lot of
background information that I wouldnt necessarily have needed were I writing about
another topic. The rhetorical device that I saw most often was the usage of logos, which,
being logic-based, is extremely common in science. Ethos was also used quite often, as
the authors would always try to establish their credibility, an important thing in science.
Other than those uses, though, it was hard to find many interesting rhetorical choices in
articles just due to the fact that they were purely informative.
Nonetheless, I did my best to use some rhetorical techniques in my writing, but it
did prove difficult every now and again. Logos, ethos, and pathos are all pretty easy to
use, but it is difficult sometimes, especially when its not an emotionally charged topic, to
use pathos. The other bit of information that I used quite a bit was to change my writing
style based on who I am writing for. My multi-modal ethnography had a completely
different style of writing than, say, my rhetorical analysis.
Over the course of this year, I would say that my writing has changed, but not by
some huge amount. The changes have been small, but fairly numerous, leading me to
become a better writer overall. When I used to write papers, I didnt really think about
rhetorical strategies much, mainly as I didnt really know much about them. That has
changed now, though. Now, I think about what strategies a piece can use beforehand, and
it makes the writing process even easier now. Also, my works now are a bit better
structured, I believe, and I am more confident about writing. This is a good thing, as I
used to hate writing, and was fairly bad at it a few years ago. This class has helped me
get even better than I was, and that is something that pleases me greatly.
My writing process is now a lot different than it used to be, as well. In almost
every class that I had taken before now, the first draft needed to be an absolutely
complete draft, and honestly, my final draft was never very different from my first one.
Now, though, my first draft is more of an outline, really. Its just some ideas on paper.
Honestly, its a lot easier to get started on a paper, if only because I dont really have to
write it all at once anymore. Being able to use a skeleton-like first draft allows me to
now build up ideas quickly and efficiently, and that makes my job a lot easier. Whipping
Final Semester Reflection

up a first draft is extremely easy thing to do now, and I enjoy the trepidation that I used to
have.
Writing is pretty important to biology, and I learned even more about that whilst
writing for this class. Whenever any scientist discovers something new, they must record
it and write about it in a format so that others can easily understand what they have
discovered. The typical sort of writing done by anyone in the biological community isnt
very fancy, though, as it is mostly just to inform others of a discovery. No rhetorical
concepts are really used in a lab report, anyway. Its just pure information and
observation. Nevertheless, it is important for the writing to exist in the first place, as it is
necessary so that others can replicate experiments to verify their results.
Reports on labwork arent too bad to write, but there is a lot of pressure on
students writing them. In the higher level biology courses as well as in a research lab, a
large amount of emphasis is placed on accuracy and quality of work. If anything, these
reports will be an issue due to how much is in them and the pace at which they are to be
written.
The rhetorical analysis didnt really teach me too much, as I have written them
before. Of course, the idea of a rhetorical comparison was a bit new to me. By looking
at how two different authors writing in two different genres wrote, I was able to
appreciate the scope of writing in biology, which I had never really thought of before.
My composing in the mini-ethnography was way less formal than I was used to
writing, as my website is intended to be for the average person. As such, I attempted to
keep it simple and personable so that it would be easily accessible. Of course, I may
have made it too simple, but the intent was merely to give really base-level information.
Research-based argumentative papers hold a special place in my heart, as I love to
argue. Im not a fan of heated arguments, but I do like calm debates with facts. Research
based argumentation is a very important concept, I feel, as it allows individuals to voice
their opinions in an academic space, as well as use facts to support it. Without
argumentation, not as many topics would be debated or settled today, cementing its
importance.
In all, I think that this class has been very good for me, and I am very glad to have
taken it. In all honesty, I wasnt sure how I was going to feel about it at first, since
English wasnt really my cup of tea. Luckily, it was great, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Rhetorical Analysis First Draft

PART TWO: Rhetorical Analysis, First Draft
The article written by Caba is far more accessible and understandable to the
general public than the article written by Zamarin and Pesonin. Their article is intended
for a higher level discourse community, being as it was written for other scientists. This
is evident if one looks at the level of language used in the two articles. While some
scientific terms, such as glioblastoma, are used in Cabas article, they are either explained
in the article or a link is given to an outside source that can help better explain the term.
The situation is much different in the professional article on the subject. Zamarin and
Pesonin use uncommon words such as immunomonitoring and oncolysis, which are both
words that the average person would have little or no knowledge about. By not defining
or explaining these words, the authors have established that one needs to be a part of the
scientific community or at least have some knowledge of biological terminology. This
somewhat minor-seeming difference in the articles is quite important, as it shows what
each author expected from the audience.
The arrangement of the two articles is also markedly different, and deserves some
attention. As an actual scientific thesis twenty-five years in the making, the Zamarin and
Pesonin article is an excellent example of how a typical biology thesis or article is set up.
This specific thesis is split up into many different parts. The first part in this case is an
abstract, which describes what the thesis is. Following the abstract is an intro section,
which gives some background info to lead into the various summaries of the effectiveness
of the different viruses on the tumors. This all culminates in a conclusion section that is
cut and dry, which allows the thesis to wrap up. Arranging the article in this way allows
Rhetorical Analysis First Draft

for a clear and concise summation of the information, but it unfortunately leads to it
sounding rather detached and not emotional.
On the other hand, Cabas article is not set up in a manner that is nearly as formal
as the other. As this is not an actual scientific report, but instead an article meant to be
accessible to the general public. Since this is the case, it is not as rigidly structured as the
thesis, and is more freeform as a result. That is not to say that the article has no structure,
its just that the article is less formal and thus more accessible. By being structured more
similarly to any other news article, Caba can keep the article at a level that almost any
discourse group can follow.
While the thesis does not really have any emotionally stirring language, it is still a
strong piece. While this is true, Cabas article manages to find some footing in some
charged language. By beginning the piece with a description of a form of brain cancer
that is often fatal, he manages to paint an emotional picture. However, a couple of
sentences later, Caba mentions that diseases and issues that were a death sentence fifty
years ago arent as much of an issue anymore, which creates a sense of hope.
Rhetorical Analysis Second Draft

PART THREE: Rhetorical Analysis, Second Draft
Cancer is a word that invokes numerous powerful emotions in many people. As so many
have lost loved ones to cancer, it stands to reason that large amounts of manpower, time,
and money are poured into researching ways to cure it. In the past few months, a new
method for curing certain kinds of brain cancer has come to light, and the cure comes
from an unexpected source: Polio. The polio virus and other viruses that are similar to it
are now being modified to mark cancer cells for destruction by the immune system.
Obviously, the word of this breakthrough spread quickly, and the media ran with the
story. The question is, though, how did the media take this information and portray it to
the public? Would the source material fly over the average persons head, or were
changes unnecessary? Those questions and more are to be answered by the analysis of
two articles. The two articles in question include one article written by Dmitriy Zamarin
and Sari Pesonen, which is an academic analysis of the effectiveness of the technique,
and one article by Justin Caba, which is an informative piece.
The article written by Caba is far more accessible and understandable to

the general public than the article written by Zamarin and Pesonin. Their article is
intended for a higher level discourse community, being as it was written for other
scientists. This is evident if one looks at the level of language used in the two articles.
While some scientific terms, such as glioblastoma, are used in Cabas article, they are
either explained in the article or a link is given to an outside source that can help better
explain the term. The situation is much different in the professional article on the subject.
Zamarin and Pesonin use uncommon words such as immunomonitoring and oncolysis,

which are both words that the average person would have little or no knowledge about.
By not defining or explaining these words, the authors have established that one needs to
be a part of the scientific community or at least have some knowledge of biological
terminology. This somewhat minor-seeming difference in the articles is quite important,
as it shows what each author expected from the audience.
The arrangement of the two articles is also markedly different, and deserves some
attention. As an actual scientific thesis twenty-five years in the making, the Zamarin and
Pesonin article is an excellent example of how a typical biology thesis or article is set up.
This specific thesis is split up into many different parts. The first part in this case is an
abstract, which describes what the thesis is. Following the abstract is an intro section,
which gives some background info to lead into the various summaries of the effectiveness
of the different viruses on the tumors. This all culminates in a conclusion section that is
cut and dry, which allows the thesis to wrap up. Arranging the article in this way allows
for a clear and concise summation of the information, but it unfortunately leads to it
sounding rather detached and not emotional.
as the other. As this is not an actual scientific report, but instead an article meant to be
accessible to the general public. Since this is the case, it is not as rigidly structured as the
thesis, and is more freeform as a result. That is not to say that the article has no structure,
its just that the article is less formal and thus more accessible. By being structured more
similarly to any other news article, Caba can keep the article at a level that almost any
discourse group can follow.

strong piece. While this is true, Cabas article manages to find some footing in some
charged language. By beginning the piece with a description of a form of brain cancer
that is often fatal, he manages to paint an emotional picture. However, a couple of
sentences later, Caba mentions that diseases and issues that were a death sentence fifty
years ago arent as much of an issue anymore, which creates a sense of hope.
In all, while these two articles are, at least on the surface, similar due to shared
topics, they are very different in content. Beyond just the intended discourse
communities, the two articles use different methods of conveying the information, as well
as establishing authority in different ways to create two very different pieces. While they
use different strategies, the two articles are appropriate for their individual purposes,
which were very different in the first place.
Rhetorical Analysis Third Draft

PART FOUR: Rhetorical Analysis, Third Draft
Cancer is a word that invokes numerous powerful emotions in many people. As
so many have lost loved ones to cancer, it stands to reason that large amounts of
manpower, time, and money are poured into researching ways to cure it. In the past few
months, a new method for curing certain kinds of brain cancer has come to light, and the
cure comes from an unexpected source: Polio. The polio virus and other viruses that are
similar to it are now being modified to mark cancer cells for destruction by the immune
system. Obviously, the word of this breakthrough spread quickly, and the media ran with
the story. The question is, though, how did the media take this information and portray it
to the public? Would the source material fly over the average persons head, or were
changes unnecessary? Those questions and more are to be answered by the analysis of
two articles. The two articles in question include one article written by Dmitriy Zamarin
and Sari Pesonen, which is an academic analysis of the effectiveness of the technique,
and one article by Justin Caba, which is an informative piece.
In general, the article written by Caba is far more accessible and understandable
to the general public than the article written by Zamarin and Pesonin. Their article is
intended for a higher level discourse community, being as it was written with the intent
for other scientists to read and analyze it. This is evident if one looks at the level of
language used in the two articles. While some scientific terms, such as glioblastoma,
are used in Cabas article, they are either explained in the article or a link is given to an
outside source that can help better explain the term. The situation is much different in the
professional article on the subject. Zamarin and Pesonin use uncommon words such as
immunomonitoring and oncolysis, which are both words that the average person would

have little or no knowledge about. This helps to reinforce the idea that the two articles
were written with very different discourse communities in mind. In a more specific
comparison, Caba begins his article with Brain cancer, also known as glioblastoma, are
the last two words any patient wants to hear from their doctor, (Caba, 2015), while
Zamarin and Pesonins article begins on a far more technical note with Replicationcompetent (oncolytic) viruses (OV) as cancer immunotherapeutics have gained an
increasing level of attention over the last few years while the clinical evidence of virusmediated antitumor immune responses is still anecdotal. Multiple clinical studies are
currently ongoing and more immunomonitoring results are expected within the next five
years (Zamarin & Pesonin, 2015). These drastically different approaches to beginning
the articles help to really illustrate the intended difference in discourse communities.
In addition, the arrangement of the two articles is also markedly different, and
deserves some attention. As an actual scientific thesis many years in the making, the
Zamarin and Pesonin article is an excellent example of how a typical biology thesis or
article is set up. This specific thesis is split up into many different parts. The first part in
this case is an abstract, which describes what the thesis is, as well as the purpose.
Following the abstract is an intro section, which gives some background info to lead into
the various summaries of the effectiveness of the different viruses on the tumors, as well
as to inform those who are not quite as familiar with the topic as the authors are. This all
culminates in a conclusion section that is cut and dry, which allows the thesis to wrap up.
Arranging the article in this way allows for a clear and concise summation of the
information, and it, like many other scientific articles that have come before it, sounds
detached and impersonal.
10

as the other article. As this is not an actual scientific report, but instead an article meant
to be accessible to the general public, it makes sense that it is not set up in the same way.
Since this is the case, it is not as rigidly structured as the thesis, and is more freeform as a
result. That is not to say that the article has no structure, its just that the article is less
formal and thus more accessible. By being structured more similarly to any other news
article, Caba can keep the article at a level that almost any discourse group can follow. In
addition, the more easygoing language aids in the less formal tone. If the article were to
use more technical wording, similar to Zamarin and Pesonins article, reading it would be
a more daunting task for the average person to read.
strong piece. What it lacks in emotional appeals, it makes up for with sound logic and
facts. While this is true, Cabas article manages to find some footing in some charged
language. By beginning the piece with a description of a form of brain cancer that is
often fatal, he manages to paint a picture of what the diagnosis of such a horrific disease
may look like. As he said, Patients who have received this diagnosis have likened it to a
death sentence (Caba, 2015). By likening the diagnosis to death, Caba gives a glimpse
of the relative hopelessness that a cancer patient is likely experiencing. However, a
couple of sentences later, Caba mentions that something else that used to be a death
sentence is now the hopeful cure for modern issues. The idea that something that used to
be horrible and deadly, such as polio, can now be used to help people gives a small
glimmer of hope for those who are dealing with modern problems. Later, Caba talks
about how this treatment could theoretically be applied to other cancers, which while not
11

an emotionally charged statement by itself, could get an emotional response from
someone who is suffering or has a loved one that is suffering.
What it lacks in emotion, Zamarin and Pesonins article contains a great deal more
information than Cabas does. By getting in-depth with the descriptions of each and
every virus tested, including polio, reovirus, herpes, and many others, it establishes that
extensive testing has been performed with each one. This evidence helps to build the
credibility of the authors by showing how much testing is backing up their statements.
Caba also builds credibility for himself as well, albeit in a different manner. By citing
and quoting the research team from Duke, which is a very trusted institution when it
comes to cancer-related research, Caba makes his points seem more valid, as accredited
researchers are backing him up.
In all, while these two articles are, at least on the surface, similar due to shared
topics, they are very different in content. Beyond just the intended discourse
communities, the two articles use different methods of conveying the information, as well
as establishing authority in different ways to create two very different pieces. While they
use different strategies, the two articles are appropriate for their individual purposes,
which were very different in the first place.
12

Works Cited
Zamarin Dmitriy and Pesonen Sari. Human Gene Therapy. August 2015, 26(8): 538-549.
doi:10.1089/hum.2015.055.
Caba, J. (2015, March 31). Once-Deadly Polio Virus Could End Up Curing Brain Cancer
[VIDEO]. Retrieved September 2, 2015, from
http://www.medicaldaily.com/polio-virus-may-cure-brain-cancer-thanks-geneticre-engineering-327620
13
Rhetorical Analysis Fourth Draft

PART FIVE: Rhetorical Analysis, Fourth Draft
Please replace the contents of this page with the fourth/final draft of
your Rhetorical Analysis.
14
Rhetorical Analysis Reflection

PART SIX: Rhetorical Analysis Reflection
This first essay was a bit of a first for me. After all, every other time that I have
had to analyze a piece of writing during my school career, it was somehow English or
history related. Never before had I had to analyze a scientific article, which made this
assignment far more interesting.
A biology thesis and a biology article are both very similar and very different, as I
quickly discovered while researching these specific texts. The biggest takeaway that I
got from these two was that true scientific writing is almost detached. There is no
emotion, just pure logic, which makes good sense. The scientific community doesnt
really care about all that fluffy stuff anyway. Unlike an article, which is purely accessible
and not super rigid, a thesis or theory is always highly structured, with a very clear
purpose, which is why I enjoy writing them.
Looking back on the assignment, while I dont think that I would structure it
much differently other than rearranging a couple of sentences, I do know one thing that
Im going to change. Overall, the analysis is a little stiff-sounding to me, and I think that
Ill change that by trying to use more transitions to make it flow better overall.
In general, I would describe my writing process as sporadic. Very sporadic. I
cant write a paper in one sitting, if only because my attention span isnt that long. If it
were creative writing, that would be an entirely different story, though. I can write
fanfiction for hours on end, after all. Every single one of my paragraphs is written
separately, that way I can focus on writing just one at a time. In between writing
paragraphs I like to take a break and watch some TV or something similar. Not much of
15
Rhetorical Analysis Reflection

my first draft is really intact anymore. Instead of just transferring paragraphs, I wrote
them all over again, often times keeping the original spirit but completely changing the
wording.
My emotional arguments could use a bit of improvement, but that is also slightly
due to the detachment having to do with a biology thesis. Nonetheless, I attempted to
create an emotional appeal by talking about the horrors of cancer and the effects on loved
ones. In my analysis, I believe that the most compelling piece of evidence that I used
was the difference in tone and wording that the two articles had. After all, the very
different ways that they talked were indicative of the difference in discourse
communities.
If I could go back right now and change my paper, I think that the biggest thing
that I would do to fix it is work on the wording and flow a bit. After all, its hard for a
paper to be good if it doesnt flow well. Also, if I were to go into the field of biology
research, which is likely, I dont think that Ill have to change my writing style very
much. I had to change it for this paper, after all. I do a better job when writing in a
detached manner.
16
Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part One

PART SEVEN: Multimodal Ethnography, Reflection One
When I began to work on this project, I had a fair number of ideas on what to do,
but a lot of them were pretty ambitious. For example, one of the ideas that I had was to
make an RPG Maker game. Quickly, I realized that this was a pretty poor decision, as
programming it was going to be a nightmare. After thinking about it a little more, I
realized that I was still unsure of what I wanted to do in biology, and that there were
likely others who felt the same way. Thus, I felt that compiling lots of information about
biological fields and jobs so that others could look at it was a good idea.
So, as I wanted to compile a lot of info, and I wanted it to be visually appealing, I
decided to make a website, using Weebly as a platform. Weebly was my choice because
it has a nice visual setup, and I already feel comfortable with it. So far, it has been
smooth sailing, and Ive actually quite enjoyed myself so far with the project, as I have
learned a lot from it.
Currently, there have been very few issues at all with the project, as Weebly is a
nice setup. It is extremely user friendly, and it is easy to link the pages in a logical
manner. Research has gone well, too. Being able to use the resources that the various
faculty members in the Department of Biology provide to inform students of their fields.
From there, I look at the websites and articles that they have linked, and then I find
similar articles on other fields. The nice thing is, as biology is such an important and
growing field, information about related jobs is readily available.
In general, I am quite pleased with the direction that the project has taken. In
doing all of this, I have learned about many fields that I have never even heard of. Some
17
Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part One

of the lesser-known fields are very interesting, and if I can inform even one person about
them, I feel like my site is doing something. I dont really know when I will stop, or
what exactly the end result will look for, though. As I find all of these different fields, I
keep finding more and more to add. Eventually, Ill have to call it quits, and just stop.
Still, I feel that it is a pretty good database, and I may keep it going after this class is
done.
While I got to read some interesting things for project one, I have enjoyed this
project quite a bit more. Being able to learn about so many people and what they do for a
living has been absolutely incredible. Some of the research that I have done has actually
convinced me to switch my major over to the other biology major, so that way I can work
with plants. By far, the most interesting thing that I have learned through this project, is
just how important botany is to the world.
18
Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part Two

PART EIGHT: Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part Two
This second project has overall been a very interesting and yet odd experience for
me. At first, all seemed to be going pretty well, the website was taking shape, and all
seemed to be awesome. Unfortunately, some issues arose, and the site is now nowhere
near complete. This will be talked about a bit more later on.
When I first began to brainstorm this project, I had a lot of ideas bouncing around
in my head, but most of them were pretty poor ones. Making a biology board game
wouldnt have been an easy task, and neither would the other main idea of making a short
video game using the software RPG Maker VX Ace. After thinking for a bit, I realized
that I still didnt really understand what on earth I wanted to do in biology, and I assumed
that a lot of other people had similar concerns and issues. Thus, I decided that a website
was likely the best way to organize and display the information.
In the end, I ended up doing a fair bit of research, and it ended up being a lot more
than I originally thought it was going to be. As I looked at a lot of jobs, I found some
related ones, and they seemed pretty interesting. As I found more and more, I realized
that I didnt really have time to put all of them onto the site. To start the research off, I
decided to look at the faculty pages of a lot of professors in the biology department to see
what their specific fields of interest were. Luckily enough, most of them had links to
articles and information about their respective fields. Using these links as a jumping-off
points, I began to research other fields, and then began to write the information down in
word documents for later transfer.
Overall, the voice on the website is fairly detached and in the third person. This is
because the site is supposed to be a purely informative piece. As it is not artsy, like a
poem or a board game, there is no need for flowery language or being vague in wording.
As a purely academic source of information, my website uses a rather unemotional tone.
However, I made sure to avoid the usage of a lot of large words and language that novices
wouldnt understand, or at the very least, I made sure to explain what those things meant.
If I had to give this project a genre, I would say that it is in the informational and
educational genre. In the end, I feel that this was really the only genre that I could make
this project. Overall, I feel that it works well in such a way. Originally, as I mentioned
before, I was planning on making a video game. If I had continued along those lines, it
would likely have been a narrative experience of a new biology student and his/her
adventure in biology. Quickly, I realized that would have been way too in depth of a
project, and it likely would be difficult to grade.
The format that I chose to use for this multimodal project was the website
construction platform Weebly. As I had already worked with Weebly previously, I
assumed that this project would be easy to complete. Unfortunately, this was not the
case. One day, while working on the website, my computer died. When I plugged it back
in and booted back up, a large portion of the website had become corrupted, as it was all
open at the same time on my computer. The website has still not fully recovered.
As I was compiling the information, I decided to organize it in a logical manner
before putting it on the website. By dividing up the various jobs by broad categories, I
was able to make putting the info on the website far easier. This organizational style is
19
Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part Two

useful for the audience because it allows them to find certain fields that they may have
heard of before and maybe find some related ones. Organization is a key element of any
website. After all, if a visitor to a website cant find anything, they will never want to
come back or use the site. That is the exact opposite of what a website is supposed to be.
In doing this project, I learned many things about biology that I dont think that I
would have learned otherwise. For example, biochemistry is currently one of the fastest
growing fields in science due to the demand of the pharmaceutical industry right now.
Also, the study of fungi is not called fungology as I originally believed, but is actually
called mycology. However, the thing that I found most interesting during my research
and that I found out the most about was about plants. Funnily enough, I have changed
which kind of biology major I am because of this project. I used to be a cell and
molecular biology major, but have changed to an evolution and ecology major so that I
can study plants more. Plants are very interesting, and I am curious to see how botany
ends up for me.
If I could re-do this project, I believe that I would use a different web platform.
Apparently, Weebly has a really horrible data recovery function and doesnt automatically
backup the data while working. This led to a lot of heartache when my computer died
and I lost so much. Other web platforms have pretty good data recovery, so perhaps that
would have helped out a lot.
In all, though, when this website is fixed and done, I think that it will be a pretty
nice resource for students that do not know what they want to do for a living. Hopefully,
I can have everything fixed and up in a few days and have the entire website fixed and
mostly done. For the first time ever, I have quite enjoyed working on a project and
researching it. Then again, biology is my passion.
20
Major Issues Paper, First Draft

PART NINE: Major Issues Paper, First Draft
Genetically Modified Organisms in America

Food is obviously very important to people, as it sustains them, and allows them
to perform the tasks that they need to complete. Unfortunately, there never seems to be
enough food for everyone, and thats a problem. Luckily, scientists have discovered a
new way to make hardier, more plentiful crops: Genetically modified organisms, or
GMOs. GMOs are organisms, plants in this case, that have had genes from other
organisms implanted in them with advanced biotechnical techniques. Of course, people
have been modifying crops and livestock for quite some time, as selective breeding is
technically a form of genetic modification, but the advent of genetically modified
organisms was the first time that people had actually changed organisms at a genetic
level. While the idea of being able to produce more food in less time seems very
desirable, there are a number of concerns surrounding the ethics of genetic modification
of plants and animals, as well as about whether these modifications are safe or not.
Nonetheless, these potential risks do not outbalance the benefits and help that genetically
modified foods provide.
For thousands of years, people have been using a technique called artificial
selection to modify organisms by causing certain traits to be passed on. Evidence of this
can be seen throughout the animal and plant kingdoms. For example, by breeding only
21
Major Issues Paper, First Draft

cows that produce more milk than usual, the trait will become more common. Over
multiple generations, the milk-producing trait will become more common, and it will
eventually become the most common normal trait. By repeating this basic process over
and over again, people have been modifying organisms to better aid humanity.
Regrettably, this process is limited in that it can only be applied to natural variations and
genes (Alford). As it inserts genes from other organisms, genetic modifications are now
being used to help modify these species far more than could be done naturally.
In other words, genetic modifications, which are normally performed on bacteria,
crops, and livestock, allow scientists to add beneficial traits from one species to members
of another species. This opens the door to all sorts of exciting and innovative new
possibilities. These modified organisms are desirable for many reasons. Some of these
organisms may be more resistant to pesticides or frost; crops could have a higher yield, or
they could have higher nutritional value. By inserting these new genes, the organisms
can be used far more or more effectively, which would benefit people significantly (Field
Research). The benefits go beyond agriculture, as well. Modified bacteria can grow
human insulin, for example, or could produce valuable drugs for less money. These
benefits, plus many more that have yet to be fully researched are a great boon to mankind
22
Major Issues Paper, Second Draft

PART TEN: Major Issues Paper, Second Draft

Food is obviously very important to people, as it sustains them, and allows them
enough food for everyone, and thats a problem. Luckily, scientists have discovered a
new way to make hardier, more plentiful crops: Genetically modified organisms, or
GMOs. GMOs are organisms, plants in this case, that have had genes from other
organisms implanted in them with advanced biotechnical techniques. Of course, people
have been modifying crops and livestock for quite some time, as selective breeding is
technically a form of genetic modification, but the advent of genetically modified
organisms was the first time that people had actually changed organisms at a genetic
level. While the idea of being able to produce more food in less time seems very
desirable, there are a number of concerns surrounding the ethics of genetic modification
of plants and animals, as well as about whether these modifications are safe or not.
Nonetheless, these potential risks do not outbalance the benefits and help that genetically
modified foods provide.
23

and over again, people have been modifying organisms to better aid humanity.
Regrettably, this process is limited in that it can only be applied to natural variations and
genes (Alford). As it inserts genes from other organisms, genetic modifications are now
being used to help modify these species far more than could be done naturally.
they could have higher nutritional value. By inserting these new genes, the organisms
can be used far more or more effectively, which would benefit people significantly (Field
Research). The benefits go beyond agriculture, as well. Modified bacteria can grow
human insulin, for example, or could produce valuable drugs for less money. These
benefits, plus many more that have yet to be fully researched are a great boon to mankind
Despite the staggering number of benefits that GMOs provide, many people still
wonder if they are necessary or not. After all, one of the reasons that people around the
world today dont have enough food is because of the distribution of food production.
24

The problem is, the human population is growing very quickly, and quite a bit more food
will have to be grown in order to keep up with the demand that is coming with that
increase. In fact, if the rate of population growth continues at the current rate, the UN
has estimated that we will need to grow 70% more food by 2050 (Alford). A fairly
simple way for that increased demand to be reached would be to simply grow more
GMOs. As these organisms are heartier and have a higher yield than unmodified crops,
they are a logical solution for the impending food shortage.
While this is all well and good, there are many people that are concerned about
the idea of humans consuming these organisms. A large number of those against GMOs
believe that all GMOs should be labeled so that those who dont want to ingest them.
Unfortunately, in countries that have implemented this idea, most people will not buy the
genetically modified foods, causing the price of unmodified products to rise. Another
potential problem with genetically modified organisms is that the modified organisms
could potentially exhibit undesired traits. Placing genes from one organism into another
could cause the modified organism to genetically code for certain proteins from the other
organism. While this doesnt seem to be an issue at first glance, this protein could be an
allergen, causing the modified organism to have the allergenic properties of the original
owner of the gene (Schneider). In addition, the modified organisms could have
completely new allergenic properties, or could cause some mutations to the bacteria that
naturally reside in the human gut.
25

Despite these few problems with genetically modified organisms, their benefits
far outweigh the negatives. With their better survivability, longevity, and higher yields,
GMOs are the most cost effective and better at feeding people. If humanity continues to
grow at its current rate, more food will be needed, and these genetically modified
organisms are one of the best ways to get that food. While they may have a few issues,
they are effective and a good way to make more food.
26
Major Issues Paper, Third Draft

PART ELEVENT: Major Issues Paper, Third Draft

Food is a very important resource to people, as it sustains them, and allows them
enough food for everyone, and food shortages are becoming far more common in some
parts of the world. Through much effort and experimentation, scientists have discovered
many new ways to make hardier, more plentiful crops: Genetically modified organisms,
or GMOs. GMOs are organisms, which are most likely to be plants, which have had
genes from other organisms implanted in them with advanced biotechnical techniques.
Of course, people have been modifying crops and livestock for quite some time, as
selective breeding is technically a form of genetic modification, but the advent of
genetically modified organisms was the first time that people had actually changed
organisms at a genetic level without thousands of years of selective breeding. Using
genetic recombination, the traits of an organism can be changed instantaneously. While
the idea of being able to produce more food in less time seems very desirable, there are a
number of concerns surrounding the general practice of genetic modification of plants
and animals, as well as about whether these modifications are safe or not. Nonetheless,
these potential risks do not outbalance the benefits and help that genetically modified
foods provide.
27

and over again, people have been modifying organisms to better aid humanity since
ancient times. Regrettably, this process is limited in that it can only be applied to natural
variations and genes, so introducing new genes is not something that is possible when
artificial selection is performed (Alford). As it inserts genes from other organisms,
genetic modifications are now being used to help modify these species far more than
could be done naturally.
they could have higher nutritional value because they produce more vitamins than usual.
By inserting these new genes, the organisms can be used far more or more effectively,
which could benefit people significantly (Field Research). These benefits go beyond
28

agriculture, as well. Modified bacteria can grow human insulin, for example, or could
produce valuable drugs for less money. These benefits, plus many more that have yet to
be fully researched are a great boon to mankind
world today dont have enough food is because of the distribution of food production.
The problem is, the human population is growing very quickly, and quite a bit more food
will have to be grown in order to keep up with the demand that is coming with that
increase. In fact, if the rate of population growth continues at the current rate, the UN
has estimated that we will need to grow 70% more food by 2050 (Alford). A fairly
simple way for that increased demand to be reached would be to simply grow more
GMOs. As these organisms are heartier and have a higher yield than unmodified crops,
they are a logical solution for the impending food shortage.
believe that all GMOs should be labeled so that those who dont want to ingest them can
avoid them. Unfortunately, in countries that have implemented this idea, most people
will not buy the genetically modified foods, causing the price of unmodified products to
rise. Since this label is on the foods as a warning label of sorts, people are likely to want
to avoid the products altogether, creating a negative stigma. Another potential problem
29

with genetically modified organisms is that the modified organisms could potentially
exhibit undesired traits due to the close proximity of certain genes on chromosomes.
Placing genes from one organism into another could cause the modified organism to
genetically code for certain proteins from the other organism. While this doesnt seem to
be an issue at first glance, this protein could be an allergen, causing the modified
organism to have the allergenic properties of the original owner of the gene (Schneider).
In addition, the modified organisms could have completely new allergenic properties, or
could cause some mutations to the bacteria that naturally reside in the human gut. Yet
another concern is that these organisms that are made to repel and kill their predators
could get out into the wild. Unchecked, these organisms would quickly grow and
overtake their new environments, similar to what kudzu has done in America. If
genetically modified plants are to be used as a main new source of food, great care must
be taken to ensure that they do not enter and destroy ecosystems around the globe.
Despite these few problems with genetically modified organisms, their benefits
far outweigh the negatives. With their better survivability, longevity, and higher yields,
GMOs are the most cost effective and better at feeding people. If humanity continues to
grow at its current rate, more food will be needed, and these genetically modified
organisms are one of the best ways to get that food. While there may be a number of
concerns related to the usage of GMOs, responsible and careful treatment and care of
them could easily increase the food supply of the planet.
30
Major Issues Paper, Fourth Draft

PART TWELVE: Major Issues Paper, Fourth Draft

Food is a very important resource to people, as it sustains them, and allows them
enough food for everyone to be able to eat well, and food shortages are becoming far
more common in many parts of the world. Through much effort and experimentation,
scientists have discovered many new ways to make hardier, more plentiful crops:
Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. GMOs are organisms, which are most
likely to be plants, which have had genes from other organisms implanted in them with
advanced biotechnical techniques. Of course, people have been modifying crops and
livestock for quite some time, as selective breeding is technically a form of genetic
modification, but the advent of genetically modified organisms was the first time that
people had actually changed organisms at a genetic level without thousands of years of
selective breeding. Using genetic recombination, the traits of an organism can be
changed instantaneously. While the idea of being able to produce more food in less time
seems very desirable, there are a number of concerns surrounding the general practice of
genetic modification of plants and animals, as well as about whether these modifications
are safe or not. Nonetheless, these potential risks do not outbalance the benefits and help
that genetically modified foods provide.
31

and over again, people have been modifying organisms to better aid humanity since
ancient times. Regrettably, this process is limited in that it can only be applied to natural
variations and genes, so introducing new genes is not something that is possible when
artificial selection is performed (Alford). As it inserts genes from other organisms,
genetic modifications are now being used to help modify these species far more than
could be done naturally.
possibilities, and thus, these modified organisms are desirable for many reasons. Some
of these organisms may be more resistant to pesticides or frost; crops could have a higher
yield, or they could have higher nutritional value because they produce more vitamins
than usual. By inserting these new genes, the organisms can be used far more or more
effectively, which could benefit people significantly (Field Research). These benefits go
32

beyond agriculture, as well. Modified bacteria can grow human insulin, for example, or
could produce valuable drugs for less money. These benefits, plus many more that have
yet to be fully researched are a great boon to mankind
world today dont have enough food is because of the distribution of food production. A
major issue, however, is that the human population is growing at an alarming rate, and
quite a bit more food will have to be grown in order to keep up with the demand that is
coming with that increase. In fact, if the rate of population growth continues at the
current rate, the UN has estimated that we will need to grow 70% more food by 2050
(Alford). A fairly simple way for that increased demand to be reached would be to
simply grow more GMOs. As these organisms are heartier and have a higher yield than
unmodified crops, they are a logical solution for the impending food shortage.
believe that all GMOs should be labeled so that those who dont want to ingest them can
avoid them. Unfortunately, in countries that have implemented this idea, most people
will not buy the genetically modified foods, causing the price of unmodified products to
rise. Since this label is on the foods as a warning label of sorts, people are likely to want
to avoid the products altogether, creating a negative stigma. Another potential problem
33

with genetically modified organisms is that the modified organisms could potentially
exhibit undesired traits due to the close proximity of certain genes on chromosomes.
Placing genes from one organism into another could cause the modified organism to
genetically code for certain proteins from the other organism. While this doesnt seem to
be an issue at first glance, this protein could be an allergen, causing the modified
organism to have the allergenic properties of the original owner of the gene (Schneider).
In addition, the modified organisms could have completely new allergenic properties, or
could cause some mutations to the bacteria that naturally reside in the human gut. Yet
another concern is that these organisms that are made to repel and kill their predators
could get out into the wild. Unchecked, these organisms would quickly grow and
overtake their new environments, similar to what kudzu has done in America. If
genetically modified plants are to be used as a main new source of food, great care must
be taken to ensure that they do not enter and destroy ecosystems around the globe.
Despite these few problems with genetically modified organisms, the potential
benefits far outweigh the negatives. With their better survivability, longevity, and higher
yields, GMOs are the most cost effective and better at feeding people. If humanity
continues to grow at its current rate, more food will be needed, and these genetically
modified organisms are one of the best ways to get that food. While there may be a
number of concerns related to the usage of GMOs, responsible and careful treatment and
care of them could easily increase the food supply of the planet.
34
Major Issues Paper, Fifth Draft

Works Cited
Ahmed, F. (n.d.). Detection of genetically modified organisms in foods.
Trends in Biotechnology, 215-223.
Alford, Justine. "What You Need To Know About Genetically Modified
Organisms." IFLScience. 26 Aug. 2014. Web. 22 November 2015.
Burton, M. (n.d.). Consumer attitudes to genetically modified
organisms in food in the UK. European Review of Agriculture
Economics, 479-498.
"Field Research." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 8 Nov.
2014. Web. 22 November 2015.
Holst-Jensen, A. (n.d.). Sampling, detection, identification and
quantification of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Food
Toxicants Analysis, 231-268.
Schneider, Keith, Rene Schneider, and Susanna Richardson.
"Genetically Modified Food1." EDIS New Publications RSS. Web.
22 November 2015.
35

Shuford - Portfolio

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Shuford - Portfolio

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

RC 2001: Introduction to Writing Across the Curriculum

Final Print Portfolio

Appalachian State University

Final Semester Reflection

Final Semester Reflection

Rhetorical Analysis First Draft

Rhetorical Analysis First Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Second Draft

The article written by Caba is far more accessible and understandable to

Rhetorical Analysis Second Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Second Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Third Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Third Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Third Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Third Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Third Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Fourth Draft

Rhetorical Analysis Reflection

Rhetorical Analysis Reflection

Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part One

Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part One

Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part Two

Multimodal Ethnography Reflection, Part Two

Major Issues Paper, First Draft

Genetically Modified Organisms in America

Major Issues Paper, First Draft

Major Issues Paper, Second Draft

Genetically Modified Organisms in America

Major Issues Paper, Second Draft

Major Issues Paper, Second Draft

Major Issues Paper, Second Draft

Major Issues Paper, Third Draft

Genetically Modified Organisms in America

Major Issues Paper, Third Draft

Major Issues Paper, Third Draft

Major Issues Paper, Third Draft

Major Issues Paper, Fourth Draft

Genetically Modified Organisms in America

Major Issues Paper, Fourth Draft

Major Issues Paper, Fourth Draft

Major Issues Paper, Fourth Draft

Major Issues Paper, Fifth Draft

Вам также может понравиться