1 files changed, 100 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/markley/portfolio/01_cover_essay.html b/markley/portfolio/01_cover_essay.html
index f27a370..90648c1 100644
--- a/markley/portfolio/01_cover_essay.html
+++ b/markley/portfolio/01_cover_essay.html
@@ -110,4 +110,103 @@ and the workplace.</li>
 </tbody>
 </table>
 
-
+<p>
+The references I'm creating in the digital reading journal feeds into
+the reading responses, which are essentially final artifacts.
+The reading responses are one to three page essays about how the content
+and concepts in books we've read for class relate to health as a
+collection of social ideals.
+The reading responses are exercises in critical thinking, and those
+ideas are channeled into an argumentative essay.
+The questions are phrased such that a student must take a stance like
+"strangeness is a sign of moral contradiction" (the stance I took in
+the first reading response) and defend it.
+Rhetoric is useful here, and tailoring the language style to the
+audience and the situation means a formal style of argument where
+organization is critical.
+</p>
+<p>
+<!--
+    What kind of rhetoric is required for the essay? How is it different
+    from the digital reading journal?
+    What changes could I have made to fit the rhetoric better in either
+    one?
+    ?How could I have improved my process?
+        Talk a lot more about the revision activities.
+    Hmm..what is the kind of understanding that I develop with health?
+    As a proxy for social norms, what does that tell me about general
+    critical analysis?
+    Okay so this class has taught me about analyzing the implicit claims
+    and social structures. Also "language, knowledge, and power"
+-->
+Organizing the essay means ordering the ideas, with transitions, inside
+paragraphs and selecting the right subtopics to focus on creates a much
+stronger argument for the thesis of the essay, and the revision
+activities are about this aspect of text organization.
+They build on the reading response essays by asking students to review
+the paragraph structure (in terms of abstraction from direct evidence to
+general claims) and how well those paragraphs put the argument forward.
+With unlimited time, I might have improved my reading response essays
+further with these techniques, but these are valuable to me going
+forwards as a formulaic way to review part of the quality of an essay's
+rhetoric
+</p><p>
+The reading responses are process documents in one other way: they are a
+segment of the semester-long process to fully understand the ideal of
+health.
+This course introduced me to this incredibly comprehensive system of
+"process," and I think it's an incredibly useful lens for writing and
+research, so I will try to frame larger writing projects I have in terms
+of a more effective process than "just write it."
+</p><p>
+The Process and Rhetoric Outcomes are very important for developing a
+presentable piece, but the major ideas of the course are backed by the
+Critical Thinking Outcome.
+Health is one possible lens for social analysis, but it's a particularly
+wide-reaching one because health is essentially a linguistic proxy for
+social norms---the healthful is the socially normative.
+However, the power dynamics (black-white, female-male) we studied are
+general rather than medicine-specific, and analyzing society through the
+lens of privileged and unprivileged.
+One tool for reviewing social systems that I found very valuable from
+this course is how culture pervades language and reflects the status
+quo.
+See the portrayal of Hyde as disgusting, hideous, and <em>unhealthy</em>
+in the first Reading Response as an example.
+This portrayal reflects a culture which views moral virtues as first and
+foremost to leading a good life.
+Hyde, the person made of pure evil, was a murderer and a thief, which
+makes him an unhealthy person---which is why a drug regime and eventual
+demise are associated with the indiscretion of becoming Hyde, like a
+poetic punishment.
+</p>
+<iframe src="https://hrhr.dev/essayone" height=600 width=800></iframe>
+<p>
+The specific theme of health is fairly domain-specific, but these
+modes of thinking are general.
+When an author talks about a character or any other element of the story
+with language like Robert Louis Stevenson uses, it is clear that the
+character is meant to be a figure of whatever the author considers to be
+ultimate evil, which differs culturally.
+I also analyze language in the second reading response essay, but I use
+it to talk about the implied social claim against experimenters from
+<em>The Island of Dr. Moreau</em> to argue about the experimenter's
+psychology or at least the public perception thereof is one tied down to
+rules-based thinking.
+I argue that the reason experimenters don't become Dr. Moreau vivisector
+types is that they are bound by laws, threats to remove funding, and
+strict social norms on consent.
+I use the implied moral feeling on experimenters of <em>The Island</em>
+to disambiguate why doctors abuse African-American patients the way they
+do according to <em>Medical Apartheid</em>.
+I conjoined these analyses with a third argument about the nature of
+experiment to show that experimenters, by default, want the most control
+they can have over their experiments, and ethical concerns take a
+backseat.
+</p>
+<iframe src="https://hrhr.dev/markley/essaytwo"></iframe>
+<p>
+<!-- most important concepts, strategies, skills, practices, approaches
+that you acquired, in relation both to the course outcomes and to your
+own priorities as a student.
+I'm talking about rhetoric and process. Have mostly talked about DRJ-->