Haven’s purpose in writing about this seems to be to show how much this generation does write compared to what others have said in articles and research papers. While talking about the impact that the young generation of today has on society, Haven seems to have a respectful tone for what they’re doing, as a young generation, in their writings in order to make her audience feel as though they should respect this generation’s work as well. At the very start of the article, Haven writes, “Today’s kids don’t just write for grades anymore.
They write to shake the world. ” In those two sentences alone there is a lot of power and it immediately grabs one’s attention and forces them to question,” What is she talking about? ” As you continue to read, you get a sense of who her target audience is for this article. “The study [of writing] refutes conventional wisdom and provides a wholly new text for those who wonder ‘whether Google is making us stupid and whether Facebook is frying our brains,’ said Lunsford. Just from reading that you know Haven wants the stigma that this generation is going to shreds through technology to stop and she seems to be addressing those that have so much to say about the young generation taking advantage of the social media available to them. Also, because this article is about technology and its effect on this generation, it could also be addressing people both young and old. After expressing opinion on how today’s children write, Haven starts providing proof to back her statements up.
The place she’s getting her evidence from is a study done at a prestigious university known as Stanford University. In the study 189 students were to gather all the writing they did and out of 15,000 pieces gathered, only 62 percent of the writing was for their work. This is how she proves that the kids of today “write to shake the world. ” To even further prove her point she uses one of the students that participated in the study as an example and almost a symbol for today’s young generation.
She also uses the fact that the student went to get a Stanford’s master degree in modern thought and literature and a master’s degree from the University of Sussex in artificial intelligence to make him seem as though he is qualified to speak on behalf of an entire generation so that the audience feels as though he is qualified to speak on this topic, but are her sources good enough to prove her opening statement? The fact that most of her paper only talks about positive things coming from this generation’s writing makes paper seem a little less convincing that the stigma she’s writing against is false.
However, there were a few things that were from a negative point of view about this argument discussed in the paper along with evidence to back up why one shouldn’t go against her point of view. For example, in the section about redefining “writing” Haven writes, “Some nevertheless insist that writing today sub-standard, littered with too many LOLs and OMGs. However, Lunsford noted that Stanford students were adept at different writing for different audiences. She addresses the critics that complain about the new text terms of this day and age with the fact a specialist in this area says that this generation is able to distinguish between different audiences. So with the question being does Haven tactics work on her audience when trying to convince them that this generation is equipped with great writers, the answer is yes. Her sources come from a liable, trustworthy, well credited place and the evidence she grabs from her sources backup her argument very well.
If anything should’ve been changed about this essay, it’s the amount of arguments she rebuttals. She could’ve found some stronger points that have been made on the other side of the argument, which would have definitely made her a lot more convinced that the source she is using is correct. Overall, as a reader, I am quite convinced that the young generation of today does shake the world through their writing due to the fact they are well adapted to the technology today and the teachings of the past.