This critical analysis essay is intended to provide feedback on the process of writing my informative review essay. It is a reflection and measure of how well I retained the importance of language in scientific writing.
1. What might the title and title format imply? Bold text heading, title in the form of a question, or sarcasm depicted in the title. Is there a hierarchical structure in the format?
The title of my informative review is: “Cloning: A Regenerative Revelation or aSci-Fi Curse?” By establishing the title in the form of a question, the paper implies that the readers are supposed to make a decision for themselves.Additionally, by having the title compare two things that are vastly positive and negative, clearly there are options to be weighed and much to be considered, further adding to the curiosity of the readers.
2. How do your visual images help your audience adapt to scientific ideas or terms?
By including a diagram of how therapeutic cloning works, a complex scientific process is now simplified. Furthermore, the readers are not bombarded will a variety of scientific terms and unfamiliar words, and their understanding is enhanced through visual aids.
3. Are there any words or formalities your audience might find confusing?
Much of the paper is easy to understand. However, I think there are a few terms, such as “somatic” that not everyone will be familiar with. To combat this, definitions and synonyms were used throughout the paper.
4. What linguistic ideologies might the audience hold?
One linguistic ideology the audience may hold is that healthcare providers can always be trusted. After all, doctors and researchers are there for our health and to improve our quality of life, so patients are naturally inclined to believe that they will have our best interests. However, it’s important that the informative review includes details of how that isn’t the case–whether that be through evidence of structural racism, or recklessness in the research field.
5. Explain how you address memories of structural racism or classism in science attributing to peoples’ distrust in science.
I address structural racism by using it as a reason for the shortcomings of therapeutic cloning. Seeing as how cloning is still extremely unfamiliar, patients are naturally inclined to protect themselves. Structural racism is important in this conversation because it is evidence that patients were not always granted this privilege of protecting themselves, and instead were vulnerable at the hands of healthcare providers and researchers.
6. What informal terms, slang or colloquial phrases are you assuming your audience knows?
One informal term used in my paper was “sci-fi film.” By including this as a pop culture reference, I appeal to my audience’s entertainment interests and, in a sense, translate terms used in fiction to the field of scientific research.
7. Are there examples recounting real-life experiences that might resonate with your audience?
In my discussion of the risks of therapeutic cloning and structural racism, I referenced the case of Henrietta Lacks as well as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Doing so provides evidence of the poor relationship between people of color and researchers, and strengthens the argument of why cloning may not always be reliable.
8. Does the essay format help or impede understanding?
I believe it can help the audience’s understanding of therapeutic cloning because the topic is first introduced and defined, then the benefits are discussed, next the detriments, and then it concludes by letting the audience make a decision for themselves whether to trust the procedure.
9. What do citing sources imply about the information you are sharing?
Citing sources implies that multiple perspectives were considered and used.Instead of relying on one source, which might not have the right information, other sources are used to confirm/deny the facts presented.
10. Describe the secondary audience least likely to read this article and explain why?
Researchers are least likely to read this article because they are most likely well versed in the process of therapeutic cloning, and have made the decision for themselves to rely on it.
11. How might you make this information more accessible to audiences who don’t read the New York Times?
The informative review can be published to multiple news sources and websites so that those who rely on other sources of information are likely to access it.
12. How might you present this information differently to second language learners? (Language, format, and medium(video/poster/flyer/essay) Explain your response.
I think larger texts, and minor editing so that easier words are used can benefit second language learners. A summary–whether that be through text or video–can also help them understand the gist of my informative review.
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
