Kantz_Discussion930

Kantz Reading Discussion

Kantz is arguing that work must be done on the theoretical pedagogy of research papers and that previous work into how student do synthesis tasks has not helped teachers understand.

Kantz is speaking to an audience of teachers and calls on them to teach the complicated issue of understanding sources and how they relate.

Kantz uses the idea of Encoder, Decoder and Reality to explain the rhetorical situation.

Discussion Questions: 1. Kantz contends a fact is a claim that an audience will accept as being true without requiring proof, although they may ask for an explanation. He also contends an opinion is a claim that an audience will not accept as true without proof, and which, after the proof is given, the audience may well decide has only a limited truth. From what Kantz is saying opinions and facts become what they are by the audience's discretion. - Kyle Prince

1. I believe that Kantz tries to express to student that facts don’t always tell the truth and aren’t always a 100% correct. By reading and understanding the facts you can get an opinion on the subject and then make an appropriate argument to the factual texts instead of reading them merely as a set of facts to be learned. - Nicolette

1.  Kantz contends that arguments, facts, and opinions are in a sense what you make of them; there are many sources available for just about every topic in the world but if you look at something differently than the person before you could come up with completely different facts. That doesn’t mean anyone is wrong just construing things differently. Kantz states it perfectly, “Many students do not understand that facts are a kind of claim and are often used persuasively in so-called objective writing to create and impression.” When it came to Shirley’s paper she wrote a narrative and was unsure of what was actual fact, she could have instead used the changing of facts based on who was writing as an ideal stand for an argument. In her situation there was no solid source of information so she attempted to look for what she believed and use that, she was so determined to find the “Facts” she missed out on a great argument. -Felicia

2. Kantz lists that students dont know, misunderstand, or don't comprehend what facts and opinions really are and that the only difference between them is how they are recieved by the audience or decoder. Kantz also says that students readers don't consider the consider the bias, intended audience, and sources of the author when reading their material. While reading this article, I realized that a lot of the points she was making about how student readers see the text they read are very true and correct. After reading the article, I feel that I now know what facts and opinions really are. I also understand the importance of asking myself questions like, "Am I your intended audience?" - Kyle Prince

2. Kantz lists that students don’t know, misunderstand, or don’t comprehend about how texts work because for one many students like Shirley misunderstand sources because they read them as stories. Secondly because many students expect their sources to tell the truth; hence, they equate persuasive writing in this context with making things up. And lastly many students do not understand the facts are a kind of claim and are often used persuasively in so-called objective writing to create an impression. - Nicolette

2.  Her number three point is especially true to me, when I write a paper I get so caught up on what is fact and what is not I forget to really look at the rhetors and their bias’s. People construe facts for their own meanings and sometimes looking at that will give you a much deeper insight then just knowing the basic who, what, where, when and why. -Felicia

.2. Kantz says that students comprehend or understand the text they read because they dont try to find the little details that are hidden in the text. They often look at the obvious thingd that are stated n the text.-Omar

4. I do not think Kantz contradicts herself when she says that we should think of sources neither as stories nor repositories of truth because they are a mixture of both. Initially they are the raw truth, but as the rhetor adds their bias and twist the vision to complete their objectives and goals some of the truth is lost. As a result, the truth becomes an obscure story. - Kyle Prince

4. No because sources are not necessarily stories nor are they the complete truth. This is where a sort of critical reading has to come into play; you have to acknowledge where truth might lie and where bias is construing facts in a certain favor. Sometimes however understanding where this bias comes in to play provides a deeper and more solid view of the event then just reading a source as a complete story or as a factual reconstruction. -Felicia

4. No, because there is a grey area. And there are other factors. In Shirley's case her problem was perspective and bias. Sometimes people have stories that they have altered and claimed to be the truth and sometimes the complete truth can be hard, even impossible, to uncover. This is why Sources should be analyzed for credibility. - Ellie

4. I dont think so because sources arent always true. They could have made up something up that they claim is true.-Omar

6.Kantz ideas will and have changed my approach to researched writing and using sources. Her ideas have me asking many more questions about the material I read for research papers, especially encoder- decoder questions. I will be more driven to identify the authors bias so that I can see both what the author intended for me to see and the real truth, so that I can analyze them more thoroughly. - Kyle Prince

6. Definitely Kantz has made some points clear to me that I never thought about before. In general her points seem like common knowledge but I can’t ever remembering reading a historical review and thinking about possible bias from the author or looking for a difference in telling based on who was telling. I hope to put Kantz’s ideas into effect because in my opinion they will lead to a much more thorough understanding of the events and the bias that surrounds the event. -Felicia