I learned that I need to shorten my introduction, elaborate on some of my described textual features, make a more meaningful conclusion and review grammar, spelling and punctuation. I plan to change my paper to accommodate for all the suggestions. The most helpful feedback I received showed me I need to elaborate more on the actual textual features and make my introduction and conclusion more concise and short.


Daily Writing # 14

  • Titles

My articles used titles to highlight the main ideas that would be discussed in the paragraph below. For example the Main titles of both pieces relay the main point and subject of the article; Mangrove Restoration: A Potential Tool for Coastal Management in Tropical Developing Countries and Secure sustainable seafood from developing countries (with a sub title of Require improvements as conditions for market access). The following heading, beneath the main titles, summarize what will described or analyzed. For example the author of the Mangrove piece has a heading of CURRENT EMPHASIS OF MANGROVE RESTORATION  followed by the sub heading Restoration and Management of Physical Habitat Characteristics and then breaks the topic down even more with sub-sub heading that are specific habitats like, Topography, hydrology and erosion.

  • Citations

Both of my articles have their sources numbered in the work cited and cite them as follows;

“Although mangroves have long been considered shoreline protectors and stabilizers (54)”.

Most of the citations referance scientific data, information and/or experiments conducted my reputable organizations or institutions. Interestingly both piece’s do not use direct citations and incorporate the ideas and research of others fluidly into their own writings. The only time direct quotes were used was when the author cited a specific term (usually a scientific term or word) unique to the cited material. I believe the author summarizes rather than quotes because if the author incorporated exact terminology and words he/she would lose the audience due to the technicality of the language.

  • Images

The FIP article uses one graph to present data that exposes the effectiveness of the FIP system which makes for the backbone of the articles argument. the graph show the inefficiency of FIP which supports the authors claim that FIPs need to be improved. This article also includes a picture to make the article more personal and realistic. The image of the indonesian man in his derelict boat surrounded by fish summarizes at a glance what the article is going to be discussing. In the other article on mangroves there are also images of what mangrove research actually looks like and captures some of the steps involved in mangrove study. This helps the viewer understand the processes involved in mangrove research and clarifies procedures that may have been confusing when described in words. this article also includes tables that break information into more digestible segments.

  • Hedging and Boosting

IN The FIP article, the authors held more of an open tone. They used many words like, may, could lead, and can improve though out the pieces and even end with a list of questions. This article attempts to involve the reader more and show there is much room for improvement almost suggesting that audience try to come up with solutions. The other article however, is more direct. While it also uses some hedgers, it uses a significant amount of booster. Through out the piece and especially at in the conclusion, where there is almost a call to action of what we should do.Boosters included, should not, will need to, should be, and promise.

  • Attitude markers

Additionally in the Mangrove piece there were many attitude markers like Unfortunately, and ideally. This added to the urgent and powerful tome of the piece making the writers position on the topic very clear. The more audience engaging FIP article has less attitude marker and comes a cross more as a relayer of information and attempt to solve a problem.

  • Self-mentions and Reader pronouns

In the article on FIPS self-mention pronouns were used to get eh readers attention and therefor placed in sentences crucial to the argument. For example the sentence,”We find that nearly two-thirds of DCFs in FIPs (table S1) have obtained market access but are not yet delivering fisheries improvements” uses we and states one of the driving evidence behind the argument. In the other article self-mention pronouns are used in the same way and used in an attempt to involve the audience; look at for example this case,”We examine briefly the connections between mangroves and fisheries, and outline an ecosystem approach to evaluate mangrove restoration initiative”

  • Directives: How do the authors direct/instruct readers to do, act, or think something?

Many of the boosting terms act as directives and instruct or direct the audience to think of act a certain way. In the end of each article both articles end with a summary of their finding s and WHAT IS NEXT. They give the audience a directive of how to proceed or in the case of the FIP article what questions need to be answered. Take for example in the last paragraph of the Mangrove article when the author directly states we,” will need to focus on the extent and mechanisms…” and, ” such projects will require long-term monitoring…”

  • Questions?

In the FIP article question are very important to the piece and contribute to the conversational tone it holds with the reader. The end of the piece concludes with a list of question for reasons discussed above. In the other article the on;y time questions were asked they were not even directed at the reader. Instead they were research questions posed by the author; they included, “Which species must be reintroduced into an area, and which will come on their own? Is assisted res- toration necessary because the system might move into an al- ternative state, or does it merely speed up the recovery process, or have no effect above natural recovery rates at all?”. These questions helped to clarify what scientists were looking for rather than involve the audience.

  • Shared knowledge

In the Mangrove article quote like, “Although mangroves have long been considered shoreline pro- tectors and stabilizers (54) it is now clear that any protection they might give during storms to habitats and settlements behind them is through the physical resistance they provide while often sus- taining severe damage”, adds upon the reader knowledge. This pulls the reader in when they find them selves agreeing and allows the author to make there point more effective and memorable. In the FIP article the author provides background information to update the reader and then pulls form their new found knowledge through out the piece to engage them.

What do you think may be unique or specializing about writing in your major? For this, consider the use/application of your major (political, applied, or pure science). Is your major interdisciplinary? Is your major very ancient field of study or a recent discipline? These disciplinary factors can often lead to specialized writing conventions.

  • Environmental Studies!

My major is extremely interdisciplinary (That is why I love it!). For this reason writers in this discipline can not go into to much detail (of the biology, phycology, or ecological details of a topic) because the their papers would be extremely long and overwhelm the reader. Its important in this field to have general understanding of many disciplines because they make up the world we live in. However, authors must understand the balance of how much information the should give and when they need to move on.

Scholarly article analysis…


Secure sustainable seafood from developing countries article analysis

SUMMARY: This scholarly article analyzes the benefits, consequences and potential of Fishery Improvement projects (FIP’s) in Developing country’s. As the article states in its intro the demand for sustainable caught seafood is rising rapidly; even stores like Walmart, in the US , and Carrefour in France are only excepting sustainable sourced fish.  This is putting immense pressure on Developing country fisheries (DCF’s) which are only given access to the trade markets f they comply with he suitability requirement of third parties like the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). Of course, many DCF’s are not compliant with initial assessments and join FIP’s in order, where they partner with private companies or NGO’s to work up to the MSC level of sustainability.are put under the microscope. Unfortunately, FIP’s are not doing a very effective job at promoting sustainability because they grant DCF’s access to the market to early which decreases motivation to improve standards.

QUESTION 1: Who are “They”? This article pulls form a myriad of sources but some of the most mentioned “they’s” are the Marine Stewardship Council, Developing country fisheries, Non-governmental Organizations, private sector, The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Fishery, and governments world wide. This quote, “The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Fishery Improvement Partnership Fund estimates that “more than 400 FIPs are needed to meet buyer demand for sustainable seafood worldwide”, is an example of how what they say. It shows how the author addresses what they say and strengthens the argument that the writer is trying to make. In the conclusion there are many “I say ” statements where the opinion and argument of the author’s is more prevalent. For example the quote, “Advocates of fishery management reform and ocean conservation should view FIPs as an opportunity to capitalize on ongoing stakeholder engagement to enact durable reforms, but in ways that take into account characteristics of the social-ecological system”, clearly presents the authors “I say”. This is also an example of how the authors have contributed to the conversation. As concerned environmentalist, they are motivated to make sustainable fishing in Developing countries truly “sustainable”. And they do this by looking at data, and calculations conducted to support their belief that must FIP’s must become more efficient and monitored more carefully by governments and other organization involved in the FIP system.

QUESTION 2: The main research question in this piece is, Are FIP’s promoting sustainable fishing in developing countries? This research question is first seen in the opening paragraph last sentence, “Rapid spread of FIPs, which often operate without transparent and independent assessment, raises questions about their effectiveness as a tool to foster environmental, economic, and social improvement.”

QUESTION 3: This piece doesn’t use extreemly technical jargon or advanced discipline specific vocabulary due to the fact that it wants to address a large audience group. This scholarly article is fairly easy to understand because, it is referencing sources from many disciplines and can not only focus on math for example. It talks about objective data and also social/economic/environmental implications which makes it more likely for the audience to connect and comprehend the piece. There is a fair amount of statistics, “According to the FishSource data library (see supplementary materials), there are >130 fisheries in FIPs worldwide, with DCFs accounting for nearly half”. However, there are also many digestible sentences that provide background information like, “Progress toward sustainability means overcoming difficulties DCFs face in complying with MSC-like standards”.

QUESTION 4: The piece is organized more like a social science paper where evidence is directly followed by and interpretation which is then used to defend a claim. As opposed to a Science scholarly article where evidence or experimental data is in a separate paragraph or section from the interpretation.

QUESTION 5: When making claims (I say), the authors uses verbs like,overcoming, foster, encourage, capitalize and adherence most often and uses verbs like, engages, presents, and estimates, when discussing other’s research.

Mangrove Restoration: A Potential Tool for Coastal Management in Tropical Developing Countries article analysis

SUMMARY: This scholarly article I would consider a more “scholarly article” compared to the other piece above which is styled more like a magazine article. It is also structured more like a classic scholarly article. On the other hand it too is different from many other displaces scholarly articles technical jargon because it attempts to engage the reader by making them care about mangroves by proving why they are important. In this article the authors highlight why mangroves are so crucial for ecosystems. It also presents studies on past restoration in attempts to come to a conclusion on the best way to preserve mangroves and the habitats they provide.

QUESTION 1: Who are “They”? the author’s are in conversation with, coastal management in tropical developing counties, organization concerned with biodiversity preservation, current and past organizations working at restoration and also partially the developers, companies, and industries endangering the mangroves . “they say” statements include, “Lewis (19) defines restoration as the retum from a disturbed or totally altered condition to a previously existing natural, or altered condition by some human action” .  “I say” statements are formed more like this,”The main research priorities for mangrove restoration as a tool for ecosystem management will need to focus on the extent and mechanisms through which mangroves contribute to fisheries productivity, and projects which approach the restoration of mangroves from an ecosystem perspective.”

QUESTION 2: The main research question in this piece is, How can we most effectively restore mangroves with the secondary question being, what is successful restoration. These research questions are first seen in the article extract.

QUESTION 3: This piece uses fairly technical jargon when analyzing scientific results from mangrove growth studies for example. However it, like the other scholarly article doesn’t have much discipline specific vocabulary because it is pulling form multiple disciplines.

QUESTION 4: The piece is organized similarly to the above article where evidence is directly followed by and interpretation which is then used to defend a claim.

QUESTION 5: When making claims (I say), the authors uses verbs like, examine, assessing, and alleviate most often and uses verbs like, shows, describing and consider, when discussing other’s research.

Academic Article review…



What is the purpose or main argument of these articles?

  1. The purpose of this article is to analyze the efficiency of FIP’s or Fishery improvement project.
  2. The purpose of this article is to review the fertilizers and feed currently being used in Egypt to determine better, efficient, lest costly and more sustainable aquaclture practices in fisheries in Egypt.

Who is the primary audience? Who may be potential secondary audiences?

  1. The Primary audience would be researchers trying to make fisheries more sustainable. The secondary audience would be the NGO’s, seafood suppliers and people concerned with fishery sustainability.
  2. The Primary audience would be future sustainable aqauculture farmers in Egypt. The secondary audience would be the and sustainable aquaculture researchers and farmers world wide.

Read both articles more carefully and in more detail. Then answer these questions:

  1. In the Fishery scholarly article the author broke the writing into a introduction describing the problem at hand, a brief analysis of the studies done to determine developing countries fisheries sustainability under the FIP system and then concludes with a description of how the FIP system must be improved in order to remain “sustainable” and gives suggestion on how to do so. This structure along with clear heading helps break down the main ideas the author want the audience to walk away with. This helps the secondary audience (who are not concerned with the details) quickly retain get the main points of the piece. Whereas the primary audience benefits from the structure by easily being able to sort where information is located. The author includes a lot of data from credible sources such as the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s Fishery improvement partnership fund. Not only does this break up the text it also strengthens the augments made immensely. Facts like 2/3 of the DCF’s (Developing Countries Fisheries) in FIP have market access have not made any improvements.  Convincing the audience of the inefficiency of the program and the need for change. This data validates to both the primary and secondary audience that the sources can be trusted and the author is credible. Primary research questions include; Are FIP’s progressive systems toward fishery sustainability? CAn we improve the FIP system? Are local markets being harmed of benefited for FIP’s and fisheries in general? The author supports his claims to answer these questions with his gathered information and studies on fisheries in developing and non-developing countries. Evidence is provided by credible governmental agencies. The author states, “Rapid spread of FIPs, which often operate without transparent and independent assessment, raises questions about their effectiveness as a tool to foster environmental, economic, and social improvement.” which introduces his main concern with FIP’s and why he sees his research important today. The author sees the FIP system as a opportunity for sustainability if improved from its current status. However, he additionally adds qualify statements like,”But FIPs may do little for environmental, economic, and social sustainability without investments in understanding the social-ecological systems in which they operate. ” to address the other side of the argument against FIP’s.
  2. In this article on the sustainable development of aquaculture in Egypt, the author did a great job at clearly stating the objectives of writing the piece. She breaks her article into ordered segments laid out in the table of contents helping both her primary and secondary audience navigate the her research. Also because her primary audience is farmers interested in being more sustainable she makes her research more attractive by giving an overview/history of aquaculture and reviews some of the basics. As opposed to just jumping straight into her research and using hard to pronounce scientific vocabulary that might scare off non-experts. research questions in this article include but are not limited to; What is the best feed and feeding schedule for particular aqauculture farms? What is the most cost effective feeding and fertilizing method and supply?  How do farmers compensate for the increase in demand for fish? How do we protect poor farmers from exploitation? The author sights many other sources who deal with are involved in fish farming in egypt including charts and data sets to help bolster her claims. The author researched previous studies to provide evidence rather conducting her own experiments. She crafted original ideas by combining multiple studies, facts and analyses. The research is important because, “The rapid growth of the sector is expected to continue due to the availability of aquatic resources and energy inputs, including feed and fertilizer resources.” and in order to sustain production and not harm the farmers and environments involved we must be carful how we move forward in this industry. At the end of the article the author lists all the limitations and concerns she has for aquaculture in Egypt. She takes into consideration things like, “Lack of extension services to advise farmers on pond fertilization, feed formulation and manufacture. ” and, “Limited research on fish nutrition, feeding and fertilization strategies. ” to highlight there is still mush to be studied and acknowledge she can only  make suggestion at this point rather than provide definite solutions.

Daily Writing that I wasn’t sure what to title….

The caption word limitation and audience’s attention span forced me to be concise and make my sentences matter more. To make my sentences, “matter more” I tried to include not too much, yet, not too little, facts and information, while keeping the captions entertaining and funny. In my second draft I really focused on moving away from the academic narrative I, as a student, have been trained to use and embraced my own voice. I was challenged in this assignment to  contribute  new and unique posts to this social media platform. To overcome this challenge, I brought myself and my stories and ideas to instagram. I made my post more interesting and personal by adding my experiences and beliefs.

I learned a lot about the the (environmental advocation) instagram discourse community. I learned this community in particular rewards differences. In a time of racial and sexist discrimination differences are devalued and threatened. However, the community I became a part of in this assignment is founded on differences and cultivates uniqueness.  For example, as a follower I was drawn to accounts that strayed from the monotonous format (look at this pretty picture, here’s a superficial caption and clever pun) and was intrigued by refreshingly rebellious accounts that threw in their own edgy opinions and experiences.  I loved this assignment. The analytical process of evaluating and revising my work really led to improvements in my writing style and made me more aware of my rhetoric. I also learned that writing is very tailored to you audience and you purpose. 




My classmates said my strengths included, strong message, good pictures, nice blue theme, thoughtful and detailed captions and facts. I also thought these were my strengths..

My classmates identify the length of the caption and the essay like tone as the weakness of my project. I was also concerned that the length of the cations would discourage viewer to read the whole caption. I also thought some of my images could have been higher quality. Additionally, I thought my pictures were to saturated with color and it took away form the aesthetic of the account.

I plan to reduce caption size, and make sure my captions are concise and do not have a essay like tone. I want to incorporate more personal stories and my own artwork. I’m also planning on posting more frequently and making my captions briefer.

I plan on making my captions more entertaining by adding personal stories and my artwork and incorporating my own unique and quirky writing style. I’m going to have a more consistent caption structure to make reading easier for viewers. And I hope to pick less talked about environmental topics to set my instagram apart from the many other environmental advocation accounts.

Prep for WP2…

Draft grading contract

  • Students should, post 2x per day for the duration of WP2, do there best to obtain followers (30+), put time into making their photos clean, professional and beautiful, write captions that effective use textual features like # and @  .

Rhetorical strategies plan

  • I plan to craft elegant captions that transmit information while giving the viewer a very positive experience, obtain 50 followers or more, post interesting, awe inspire photos all with a professional and clean account appearance. ˜Additional strategies are discussed below in how to make a account better.

WP2 will be done in the social media genre of instagram. The purpose will be to educate, inspire and show what viewers can do to help save the oceans to save ourselves. The target audience will be people with little knowledge of the importance of the ocean and the endangered state it is in.

A C project would have brief captions, use hashtags, receive ten to twenty likes and a comment every now and then. The account would have nice pictures relevant to the purpose and some sort of ascetic appeal overall. It would incorporate the common textual features such as hashtags and using the @ feature to site of reference. In addition the account holder would post once a day.

Qualities that may pull your grade down include, inconsistent color theme, captions that don’t stick with tone of the account, failure to make the account interactive, lack structure and are dry (don’t give the reader an experience), bad quality photos, unoriginal ideas, bad grammar and spelling,  and, small amounts of followers and comments.

Qualities that may pull your grade up include, being unique with your ideas photos and captions, commenting on other accounts to attract followers, and interacting with followers that comment on photos, good enhancement editing of photos,  and interaction, regular posts with well planed, intelligent and fun captions.

Signs and qualities that may make a truly excellent project include all the above and providing the viewer with opportunities to have a voice by making your site a platform for discussion.The posts would also make the audience laugh,want to take actions and keep reading.


Source 1: Santa Barbara Channelkeeper’s instagram page which is focused on “Protecting and restoring the Santa Barbara Channel and its watersheds through science-based advocacy, education, field work and enforcement”. I hope to use some of the information and research the channel keepers are doing and also promote their message and instagram.   

Source 2: KEIKO is “An organization providing strength in numbers for marine conservation efforts worldwide”. I hope to use KEIKO’s information regarding marine protection to help myself learn more about whats going on in ocean conservation and better inform my followers.

Source 3: Im planning on referencing alternative eco friendly materials that replace things like plastic. Evocative is one company I plan on promoting in order to show my viewers the creative ideas circulating. “Ecovative is a leading biomaterials company growing safe, healthy, and certified sustainable MycoBoard™ panels and MycoFoam™ packaging”.

Source 4: I will reference the Australian Marine conservation Society website for information on the great barrier reef and the danger it is. I will use these fact to connect coral bleaching to the larger issue of ocean warming and acidification which is threatening ecosystems and our own livelihoods.

Source 5: I hope to use Veta la palma’s incredible story of successfully creating a sustainable aquaculture farm that not only benefited the threatened wetlands in spain but also produces fish  for the global market.


Why we write..

 We write we try to persuade an audience. Whether this may be persuading them to think a certain way, have a particular opinion or care about a topic the goal of writing is to communicate ideas one has to others. We use textual features of certain genres that we think will most efficiently get to the audience we want and most effectively transmit the purpose for our writings.

Writing is a communication tool that allows for people to organize, promote or share their ideas beliefs and so much more. I’ve learned there are many different styles of writing that an author can choose to use in order to better communicate their ideas. Whether you are taking notes, writing a scientific essay, shooting of a text or crafting a poem you write a certain way to a achieve a certain goal. For example, note taking could have textually features such as bullet points, titles, incomplete sentences ect; however it accomplishes its purpose of helping you retain and remember information. Its  hard to say exactly what writing does because we use it as a tool for so many things.

Literacy is the ability to read and write. Depending on how well you use textual features and master a certain, style or genre can determine your level of literacy and demonstrate how well you understand writing.