Chapter 13

Review: On The Comedy “Warm Bodies”

            The first thought when you see the commercials are great another “Twilight” type of movie. But on closer inspection it is not all that bad; in fact it is funny in its quirky way. All the moaning and groaning and slow shuffling from the zombies is hilarious. The fact that there are even zombies populating a large majority of the world is crazy. Science proves that it is impossible to do, but that is what makes it funny and enjoyable to watch. At the movies you can just forget about everything and get lost in a movie. Yes, it is silly and the fact that a flesh-hungry zombie reverts into being human again and falling in love is preposterous, but this movie will keep you laughing the entire time that you are watching with its dry sense of humor and here a grunt, there a grunt, everywhere a grunt grunt. And do not forget about the bonies they are creepy looking and add to the whole movie’s action/comedy act. Who doesn’t love a cheesy love/action/comedy mix for a Friday night date?

Looking From Multiple Perspectives

McKemy Junior High must reconsider its decision to cut music programs.

1.   Board of Education (Big honchos that have the say on whether to keep the music programs or not.)
2. Principals and staff (Such as teachers etc. They have more of a voice on whether to keep it or not especially the music teachers, but not as much as the one of above.)
3.   Students and their parents (They get affected because the some students will want that program and the parents will have to deal with the child being sad. The parents have more of a voice than the students, but not as big as the two above.)

ASU’s dry campus policy is injurious to the students and should be amended.

1.   Board of education (Big wigs that make the campus “dry” or not)
2. ASU Police and other staff (Like professors etc.)(They are the enforcers and have a big voice in the matter.)
3.   Students (They are affected because they are not allowed to drink even if they are of age. Their voice matter somewhat, but not that much.)
4.   Parents (They are the most concerned and their voices will be heard.)

I propose that the ASU adopts a stricter campus security in order to keep vagrants and other potentially dangerous individuals off the school grounds

1.  The person that has a proposal is also being affected by the vagrants and other dangerous individuals. This is why he is proposing a solution to make ASU stricter place.           
2. ASU Police and other important administration people (they are the people that can actually do something about the problem) 
3. Vagrants and other potentially dangerous individuals are the ones being affected.

STEP TWO: Develop Context: how do these stakeholders interact with one another? Do they have the same interests, attitudes, or ideas? What do they agree on and what do they disagree on? Pick one of the debates from the first page and develop a profile for each stakeholder: what are their commonly held values, objectives, or beliefs? What kinds of information or experiences get factored into their decisions?

#1- This stakeholder in this example is in defense for the students and the music teachers. By keeping the music program in the school, it shows that they care about the students’ needs and wants and know that by keeping the program, it will more than likely keep the kids out of trouble. All three stakeholders give off a vibe of wanting to help the students and it is usually for their best interest. For this proposal, by keeping the program keeps everyone happy.

#2- The proposal here is that the dry campus policy is “injurious” or harmful to students because students will drink whether there is a policy or not. And since the added danger is there, it makes students want to drink even more just because they are not allowed to. Whether the dry campus policy is “amended” or not students will still drink. So it doesn’t really solve anything because there will always be students that disobey laws or policies, even if it is bad for them.

#3- The proposal is about a stricter security so that vagrants and other dangerous individuals can    no longer roam the ASU campus. So in this situation the students and faculty will be safer, but the less fortunate have to find other places to roam. This stakeholder here is like the others for the benefit of the students, but the only downside is that the less fortunate have to live/eat somewhere else.

STEP THREE: Research: What would be the best method to represent or address these perspectives in a proposal essay?

#1- I love music myself and if I did not have music in elementary or high school, I would be a sad individual. Everyone listens to music. The only difference is the type of genre one listens to. By taking the program away it would have impacted the students in a negative way because they would have been heartbroken over the loss of the program. By keeping the program, the staff and parents know where their kids are and they know that it is keeping them out of trouble. Yes, it would cost a little more out of everyone’s pocket, but the students would be happy. And that is what we want.

#2- People drink and that is a fact. Some are of age some are not. But one thing is certain a dry campus is the best way to go. The fact that there is a policy will deter some students into not drinking and that is all we can ask for. For this proposal they should research whether having a “wet” campus is the same or worse.

#3- With a stricter campus/security people will feel safe when walking at night or just being by themselves. But the essay should also touch on the fact that walking alone is never a good idea or putting oneself in harm’s way is also not a good idea. If people were more aware and/or alert to their surroundings, less violence would occur and people would still be safe without wasting more money on security. Walk in groups and do not be irresponsible or reckless.

SRC Proposal

I read the proposal about what the new charging fees for using the SRC and the classed that they offer should be. Besides from the grammatical errors, I do agree with the argument being made. Students are being automatically charged for the use of the SRC and a good majority does not use it, so they end up paying for something that they are not putting to use. The people in charge of the charging fees should look at this proposal and make it happen. The writer makes many valid points about there are only a certain number of class and even smaller openings for them. An ASU student is a student first and a fitness buff second. The people in charge of the fees and classes should take into account that a lot of students have class and not everyone has the same schedule.

The writer does a great job in giving the reader actual facts and hard evidence about what should be done about the charging fees and the number of classes that they offer and when they should be offered. I think that the writer should have had actual quotes from students that use the SRC facilities and students that do not have the time to because it conflicts with their classes. Adding these testimonies probably would have made the argument much stronger.

In the paper, the writer interviewed the Campus Recreation Director, Tamra Garstka and she thinks that it would be a good idea to make these “combo packs” for students attending ASU and she also says why students get charged each semester and also makes a valid point that the staff have to get paid and they have to pay to maintain the SRC. The audience seems to care about her workers and maintaining the facilities and that is great, but making the “customers” happy should also be a main concern of hers as well. She shows a little bit of pathos, but enough for me to run to the SRC and join any classes. Plus, none of them would fit my schedule.

I would rate the author’s ethos a seven or eight. She makes a lot of valid points and has many sources to back up her claims. She has the Campus Recreation Director and quotes the Arizona Constitution about education and how that correlates to students staying fit and healthy. I am going to assume that the writer is an athlete or just like to work out in general and that is why she wrote about the fees and that there are not enough class openings for the fun activities that the SRC offers. So in my opinion, since she cares about her health and well-being, in a sense she is looking out for her fellow classmates.

From the assignment sheet proposal on Blackboard, she does a pretty good job in following what the assignment asks, but she did not have all the sources that would make her paper better. For the most part she gets her point across and also relates to other students that feel the same way about the classes and the fees that are offered at the SRC.

            The writer does use the Arizona Constitution as one of her stronger sources and the Campus Recreation Director as another. The writer also looked up how much the SRC makes in a year and how many people use the facilities. So she did do good research, as I stated in a previous paragraph, the paper would be much stronger if the writer incorporated a student’s thoughts about what should be done or how they feel about the fees and classes.