Insider Guide Chapter

1. What are the 3-5 most important things that you learned from the chapter?

• All academics use observation for their various different types and methods of research 
• For each academic field, there is a certain standard of writing that one must uphold using rhetoric tools. Various situations call to write in various ways. These types of writing are called genres
• When analyzing a written piece, think about many things such as rhetorical context, persuasive strategies, genre, etc. 

2.     What are some specific tools the writers offer to analyze disciplinary writings?

• Make sure to understand the rhetorical context for the specific piece you are reading about. For example, think about who the audience is, who the author is, the purpose of this paper, etc. 
• If an author is arguing for a certain idea/thought/belief, think about and find the different persuasive strategies they might be using. For example, what assumptions are they making, what are the exact claims they are making, etc. 
• In a written piece, find the genre and understand the writing style (conventions or expectations) it might have 

3.     Analyze the press release and the excerpt from an academic journal article using the tools this chapter offers. (SLR and AATP)

• In a press release, the writer must understand that the audience of the writing will often have little to no background on the certain subject. They were able to focus on these findings and its importance as simplistically as they could for the audience without it being too long winded.
• Many of the information is given in a matter-of-fact way, which is very much expected from an analytical paper about science. All of it is very technical and very specific as to not be confusing or vague. 
• They started with a question to try and grab the audience's attention, which is needed if the audience does not come from a very science invested background.

4.     How effective do you think the writers are in presenting their findings? What do you think about the appropriateness of the language and structure in these two samples? Explain briefly.

 I find that they did a good job considering the complex information they were trying to convey. They were very consistently written, being both technical and very straightforward in the way they were giving information. As well, they simplified it as best they could to a broad audience.