Q&R 2

How would you relate the act of cognition to the act of reading? Do you feel that the two are directly related to one another or should be thought of as unrelated subjects.

I feel that the act of cognition supplements how we read. Cognition is sometimes loosely defined word. In its most basic definition it means the act or process of knowing. Another word used to describe this is perception. In order to be able to fluently understand a text we have to be able to perceive the meanings behind the words, rather than just looking at the actual words themselves. I feel that this skill is necessary to be an efficient reader. This feeds into the topic of knowledge v. wisdom. Knowledge is something that is gained through studying and wisdom is obtained through practice. The two are related to each other, yet to be able to excel it is necessary to practice and therefore gain wisdom.

Q and R 2

Is the rhetorical reading strategy the most important and useful to construct meaning?

I believe this strategy is the most important and useful because it helps us to go beyond the text itself, to understand and analyze the author’s specific purpose, the context of the text, and the real effect it has on the audience it is addressed to. These aspects are so important because when you put them all together, you finally get to the construction of meaning and you also get to understand the sophisticated texts we are faced to in college; and that will be very significant for our education. This strategy also brings together the other two strategies, the content and function/feature strategies, which I think are also necessary but not completely. We have been taught to use the content and function strategies and this has not allowed us to work our minds to our full potential. We have been limited to develop our capabilities to their maximum by using those two strategies. And we have also limited ourselves because we do not go beyond of what we know we can go. The contents and function/feature strategies only help us to get the information of the text we read and that is it; you do not interpret nor find what the author really wants you to know; and you do not get affected by it either. The approach to reading of both strategies is somehow superficial and it limits the knowledge you have to create and acquire. I am not saying that they are not helpful, but when it comes to high-level texts, you need more than paraphrasing or knowing the features and function of a reading. But I believe that we have become passive readers; we get satisfied with little and certain information and we do not want to go beyond the superficial. And it is a shame that these two strategies are taught in high school because we, the students, get used to that limited expectation of ourselves and it is hard for us to construct the meaning of college-level texts. Thus, we find those texts so hard to understand and we get discouraged very soon. I think the rhetorical reading strategy should be taught a little bit more in depth in high school; I do understand that it might be somehow difficult, but it is the best for us as students to get ready for the sophisticated readings we are going to encounter during college and later on in our future. I myself sometimes get identified with those who read because it is a must and who are content and satisfied with getting only the superficial information; and I know it does not have to be like that. Some other times I read because I want to and I tried to deeply understand what the author’s purpose is and the effect he or she is going to have in the audience, and I know I have used the rhetorical reading strategy but in a very minimum way, not as it should be; I did not know I used it until I read the article of Hass and Flower. This article made me realize that there are good techniques to construct meaning when you read and to create knowledge from your readings, and that the most useful strategy would be rhetorical reading.

Q&R 2

How do we read and how do we understand what we are reading?
When you read any piece of material you focus on understanding what the author is trying to say. We read words but reading strategies are important when analyzing what is being represented. My own experience in reading is very similar to my writing habits. I am used to skimming through a text to look for answers related to questions on an assignment. We as readers must identify a piece of information we do not understand. In elementary I was taught to make sense of how the text gives clues to the main idea.
According to flower and Haas the strategies they present have already been introduce to students but not exactly acquired. When I read something that is difficult to comprehend I read aloud and think about what I’m reading as part of “Critical Reading.” Their argument is that students know what words they are saying and they are paraphrasing the content instead of analyzing it to make better sense of it. I feel that I am not guilty but a victim of this issue. We are taught to simplify everything we read instead of being taught how to read and to simplify what we are trying to understand.
Rhetorical reading is a strategy which can help many readers who may not have prior knowledge of the content. When we predict it makes it easier to interpret the text. Hass and flower understand the levels of difficulty can affect how a reader will interpret the information. The research project that they used with the same piece of material with different readers and different reading levels they were looking for what strategies were used to interpret the message.
When we read many questions arise which is part of the reading strategies that is set forth. Content strategies are most commonly used in students and experienced readers. The way we read can’t be right or wrong. The strategies help us make our own opinion in the study rhetorical readers recognize more claims. We are able to recognize certain context which will engage us.
We all have different reasons as to how and why we read. There is a solution to these common misconceptions which is the strategies in which the student can identify the text that they may not fully comprehend.

Q&R 2

How do we read and how do we understand what we are reading?
When you read any piece of material you focus on understanding what the author is trying to say. We read words but reading strategies are important when analyzing what is being represented. My own experience in reading is very similar to my writing habits. I am used to skimming through a text to look for answers related to questions on an assignment. We as readers must identify a piece of information we do not understand. In elementary I was taught to make sense of how the text gives clues to the main idea.
According to flower and Haas the strategies they present have already been introduce to students but not exactly acquired. When I read something that is difficult to comprehend I read aloud and think about what I’m reading as part of “Critical Reading.” Their argument is that students know what words they are saying and they are paraphrasing the content instead of analyzing it to make better sense of it. I feel that I am not guilty but a victim of this issue. We are taught to simplify everything we read instead of being taught how to read and to simplify what we are trying to understand.
Rhetorical reading is a strategy which can help many readers who may not have prior knowledge of the content. When we predict it makes it easier to interpret the text. Hass and flower understand the levels of difficulty can affect how a reader will interpret the information. The research project that they used with the same piece of material with different readers and different reading levels they were looking for what strategies were used to interpret the message.
When we read many questions arise which is part of the reading strategies that is set forth. Content strategies are most commonly used in students and experienced readers. The way we read can’t be right or wrong. The strategies help us make our own opinion in the study rhetorical readers recognize more claims. We are able to recognize certain context which will engage us.
We all have different reasons as to how and why we read. There is a solution to these common misconceptions which is the strategies in which the student can identify the text that they may not fully comprehend.

Q&R 2

How do we read and how do we understand what we are reading?
When you read any piece of material you focus on understanding what the author is trying to say. We read words but reading strategies are important when analyzing what is being represented. My own experience in reading is very similar to my writing habits. I am used to skimming through a text to look for answers related to questions on an assignment. We as readers must identify a piece of information we do not understand. In elementary I was taught to make sense of how the text gives clues to the main idea.
According to flower and Haas the strategies they present have already been introduce to students but not exactly acquired. When I read something that is difficult to comprehend I read aloud and think about what I’m reading as part of “Critical Reading.” Their argument is that students know what words they are saying and they are paraphrasing the content instead of analyzing it to make better sense of it. I feel that I am not guilty but a victim of this issue. We are taught to simplify everything we read instead of being taught how to read and to simplify what we are trying to understand.
Rhetorical reading is a strategy which can help many readers who may not have prior knowledge of the content. When we predict it makes it easier to interpret the text. Hass and flower understand the levels of difficulty can affect how a reader will interpret the information. The research project that they used with the same piece of material with different readers and different reading levels they were looking for what strategies were used to interpret the message.
When we read many questions arise which is part of the reading strategies that is set forth. Content strategies are most commonly used in students and experienced readers. The way we read can’t be right or wrong. The strategies help us make our own opinion in the study rhetorical readers recognize more claims. We are able to recognize certain context which will engage us.
We all have different reasons as to how and why we read. There is a solution to these common misconceptions which is the strategies in which the student can identify the text that they may not fully comprehend.

Q&R 2

After reading this piece, how did you feel about your way of reading? What strategies did you use when reading before you read Haas and Flower's article? Do you think you will apply to the strategies mentioned in the article (Content, Function/feature, and Rhetorical) and read differently from then on? Compare your skills in reading to those required by Haas and Flower and explain how your own style of reading can affect your style of writing.

I realized many things after reading Haas and Flower's article, such as the importance of how one reads and how they attain information from what they read.
I felt my manner of reading was not enough even if I mainly used the strategy of observing how the author tried to persuade his audience and what skills he used in order to do so (mostly the choice of words, syntax, and tone).
My way of reading will remain the same -when discussing strategies- however, I will try to comprehend a text by constructing "multi-faceted representations" which I know will help me organize everything into simpler, understandable information.
My skills in reading compared to the article's requirements were poor and what I read was vague for me after seeing how the words are used. This reflected difficulty in my writing skills because I wrote -unsure of what words to write to make my text effective- to the point where I confused my audience.

Q&R-1

State one “common misconception” about writing that this article attempts change. How did it change your view of writing?

This article concentrates on de-categorizing writing and informing students about the different misconceptions about the study of writing. In an effort to teach us, FYC professors or any writing professor assumes that what we learn in that one semester in their class will automatically carry over to all other subjects. In reality, every subject has its own distinct style of writing that does not apply with FYC. The misdirection of FYC is that academic writing is universal and that any thing you learn in FYC applies in all other subjects. It is difficult to help students understand writing with the system that is currently in place because it is taught mostly in English departments. Professors from other courses expect or assume that the style of writing you learn in FYC applies to what they’re teaching. Professors are also subconsciously forced to teach writing based on their own experiences and cultural differences.

Before I read this article, my idea of writing was based on what I was taught in high school. There I learned correct grammar skills and how to correctly write a sentence. I was given prompts and asked to expand on the ideas of them. In my past experiences I was taught that the longer my composition, the better my score would be. I used to write as much as I could just to make the three-page goal that was set for me. I know now that what I was taught then does not completely apply in college. This article helped me change my view of writing by showing me that even though we’re taught a certain style of writing in FYC we should not use it as our foundation of all of our writing tasks. Writing should not be taught as a single subject; it should be taught on all courses. Practicing different styles of writing will help us better understand the subject as a whole. In reading this article, I understand that writing should be expressed in our own words and that even though were taught how to write, we shouldn’t use those principles as the basis of every subject. This article teaches us about the reality of writing and the flaws that our currents system has in how we learn writing skills.