Topic question: What can be done to sustainably remove The Great Pacific Garbage Patch and other large floating masses of waste from the oceans?
Who are these people?
When there is a problem being researched and advocated for, who is responsible? Certain groups of people referred to as discourse communities are known to invest their time in topics that spark their interest. A discourse community can be defined as a group of individuals that have a shared goal or purpose that have adopted unique methods of communication suitable to their genre. My topic question deals with pollution in the oceans and how we can take steps toward a future consisting of clean, serene waves. While considering discourse communities that would be intrigued by this topic, I found a large variety of groups but decided to narrow the list down to the three I believe are most significant. These three are environmentalists, marine conservationists, and environmental engineers.
Why are they stakeholders?
Each of these discourse communities has different shared goals. Environmentalists are concerned with the protection of the environment’s health as a whole, marine conservationists focus on the protection of the seas, and environmental engineers develop solutions to environmental problems using the principles of engineering. Although each group has a different main goal, they can all agree on one thing: environmental issues are incredibly significant and must be solved as soon as possible. In the present day, each of these discourse communities is adamant to remove or significantly reduce the amount of waste in the oceans in order to protect marine life. Knowing this has allowed me to decide that these communities could be considered stakeholders for my research paper. Not only are they already invested in solving my chosen topic, but they are always searching for new solutions in hopes to find one that works as well as they’ve dreamed.
What can they do in response to your findings/proposals/concerns?In order to tackle an environmental issue, several steps must be followed. In a novel titled Ecological Knowledge and Environmental Problem-Solving: Concepts and Case Studies, a scientific framework for settling environmental crises is provided. The first step involves identifying the problem and sharing the ultimate goal researchers have along with identifying “the components of the environment perceived as valuable…” (National Research Council 1986, 105). This step is usually carried out by a scientific researcher or an individual concerned with an issue they have encountered in nature. This step is being carried out by me preparing a research paper. According to the novel mentioned above, “Identifying environmental goals is complex and requires input from the public and from scientists” (National Research Council 1986, 106). This is where the environmentalists and marine conservationists can come in and bring more awareness to the topic at hand. Not only can they help advocate the issue to gain more support towards carrying out the solution, but they can also contribute more scientific knowledge to my findings. Another vital step in the process is referred to as scoping. This is when all interested parties are brought together to discuss their views before major actions are initiated (National Research Council 1986, 105). The National Research Council of 1986 adds that “Early scoping can help to identify the important issues and potential environmental effects associated with planned actions” (107). This can be done by bringing together the stakeholders and formulating an exact plan for reaching the final goal. The environmental engineers can then sketch any models necessary and ensure that any technology needed for this project is environmentally friendly. In short, environmentalists and marine conservationists can bring awareness to my concerns as well contribute any more useful scientific knowledge. Environmental engineers can help strategize a fully working system while also ensuring that all equipment utilized is sustainable. With each of these stakeholders working with me, my end goal can be reached swiftly.
Part 2: Genre Analysis
Where do these stakeholders get their information?
In order to decide how my findings should be displayed, the genres my stakeholders practice must be determined and evaluated. Writer Anis Bawarshi defines genres as “language forms that have identifiable and changing roles in interpersonal relationships and in larger collective texts” (550). This means that genre is a fluid concept that helps individuals predict the conventions of texts as well as conversations based on who the participants are. As genre determines the format and language used in a specific rhetorical situation, its consideration is vital when conducting research. All of my stakeholders are scientists. Science is a subject that is based on observation, research, and factual evidence. With this knowledge, it is clear that my concerns must be presented in a formal manner with evidence supporting my claims. In an article published by the University of California, Berkeley, the factors scientists consider when evaluating ideas are listed. Scientists look for evidence that is based on a large sample of observations and that can prove how two factors correlate with each other and a change in one causes a change in the other (“Convince Me: How Strong is the Evidence?”). They also are drawn to articles that have evidence to back up each claim and look for claims that are supported by multiple sources (“Convince Me: How Strong is the Evidence?”). Scientists practice in the genres of research papers, lab reports, and scientific journals. These are all genres that rely on a large collection of data and various forms of evidence. In Laura Bolin Carroll’s essay titled Backpacks vs Briefcases: Steps Toward Rhetorical Analysis, she discusses three methods of persuasion. She states that researchers must consider their audience when they write, likely leaning on logos, an argument from reason that appeals to the audience’s intellectual side, to convince their readers (52). I will have to implement logos in my writing in order to convince scientists, who value facts over all else, to invest time into my project. I will also have to include various forms of evidence ranging from statistics to images, and to written forms of documentation.
Which genre is most suitable?
The genre I found most suitable to present my information is a research paper. A research paper is typically composed of five main sections: introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. I will be talking about the issue at hand in the introduction section as well as why I am determined to solve it. In the methods section, I will be discussing how and where I got my information from as well as how credible these sources are. Including this information would show my stakeholders that I am well-informed on this topic and gathered information from a wide array of trustworthy sources. In my results section, I will be exploring my findings and reveal what can be and what cannot be done to solve the issue at hand. In the discussion section, I will speak more in depth about the options we have to deal with the pollution problem. The conclusion section will be composed of a quick summary of my findings and the solution that is most probable. The entire paper must be written using a formal voice and all sources will be cited in MLA format using plentiful in-text citations. Presenting my topic question in the form of a research paper while relying heavily on various sources of evidence and the logos appeal will likely allow me to convince my stakeholders to carry out my solution of choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment