Course Reflection

Dear, Professor Linda Bay

I believe that I will be the best choice to teach english 106 at Purdue. I am a great writer as well as having a wealth of knowledge in many genres of writing. Being able to research about a topic is a major strength of mine. When I do research for a paper I go on many levels of research; primary, secondary, and tertiary. There is always information out there about topics in the world, enough to get really in-depth, and that’s what I strive for. I want my facts to be straight as in not having biases or not fully complete information. That being said, if I were to teach english 106 i would base the course heavily on research. Without some sort of research in a paper I believe that there is a flawed position in it. Some assignments I would have are newspaper type journals/articles, a research paper pertaining to the use of primary sources and statistics, and multimedia projects with topics that could be researched. Technology is another big deal for me, the use of it allows for the ideas of many people across the world. It is almost how every student learns nowadays. So something I would do to enhance this method is to have students do a paper about a way how people learn a language or grammar through the internet. Instead of reading a book like “They Say, I Say” I would have them research about how people can use the internet to practice their english and use those techniques within their paper, giving them practice on how to use proper English in papers they write.

A method that I would use to evaluate students work is their use of English and the research they included and how effective it was in their writing. If they use their research in a way that doesn’t contribute to their reasoning and thesis, they will not do well in my course. The main objective of the course that I hope to teach is that research should be the basis of their paper and how to use the research affectively. Research will always make your paper seem more reasonable and more believable with facts or other’s opinions to back up your own. I hope that my writing skills and the way that I teach will allow me to teach english 106 at Purdue University.

Sincerely, Benji Bevins


On Tuesday October 15, 2013 my class went to the HSSE library in the Stuart Center of Purdue. I went to a presentation that was presented by Profesor David Hovde. Before the presentation started there was a video being played that showed life at purdue around the 40’s or 50’s. There was a moment when they showed all these people out on the football field playing music. I was wondering why there was so many people at the stadium because nowadays you could hardly find half that amount of people in the stands. It was interesting to how many people actually went to football games back then

At some point during the presentation Profesor Hovde showed an Iron object and mechanical devices that students made throughout the classes they had back then. It was surprizing to me that there used to be a class where you learn how to mold and make objects with iron. It does not seem like colleges would have a classes like that, but I guess thats what was popular back then. Also, how people in classes years ago would make their own blueprints and the classes years to come would have to build that object; cool to see the progression in technology.

At the end of the presentation Profesor David Hovde talked about what students would do on their free time. I was shocked when he said that freshmen and sophmores would literally brawl over a water tower to put up their class year on it. It just does not seem possible that Purdue University would have suported those types of things, fighting and people getting hurt. Though I do wish that we could still do that in a more safe manner.

Thoughts on “Are politics behind DOD’s initial call to suspend football games?”

This is an article that I had come across in yahoo news. This articles states the the government is wanting to suspend the air force vs navy and army vs boston college games. Jay Hart believes that they are wanting to do this because the government want to get the publics attention, a political “power play”, that if things are not resolved soon it will be the end of the world. There was one problem with this, these athletic programs are not funded by the government. So the government could not shut the games down.

I am glad that the government was not allowed to suspend these games. If a reason for the government to try and make a political move on athletics because on the fact that people simplyh watch them, it will only make people more angry. It would make most people and players angry about the fact that they could not watch or play the game because most americans will not in the short term be affected by government shutdown. All in all, it makes me happy to say that the government cannot touch something that is not theirs.–are-politics-behind-potential-shutdown-of-college-football-games–224519088.html

Rhetorical Analysis of Hungry For Change

 Apples and Bananas: A Rhetorical Analysis on Hungry For Change

            Food is everywhere and a part of everyone’s daily lives. People eat every day, healthy or processed foods, this all depended on people’s knowledge of diets. The directors, James Colquhoun and Laurentine Ten Bosch, were originally nutritionist but turned to filmmaking, and became inspired to make Food Matters and Hungry for Change. The films gave off messages of you are what you eat, and breaking the mold from modern diets and industrialized foods.

            Hungry for change uses this concept and takes it a step further. They had a goal to spread ideas of how diet and food industries have corrupted our food and bodies. They wanted for people to break free from these modern dietary habits, starting from Colquhoun’s dad, and to have a natural detoxifying diet that puts you at the roots of healthiness. They did so by the rhetorical usage of logos (logic); stats of unhealthiness, ethos (expertise); using experts’ thoughts and personal experiences, and pathos (emotion); making you feel disgusted to try and persuade towards a natural diet. Through the use of these the directors are trying to persuade people who currently are unhealthy or on a ‘bad diet’.

Ethos: Health and Nutrition Experts

            Everyone that had said something in the documentary were either nutrition or health experts, have doctorates, had personal experiences, or were well-known establishments. No one would question what a person with a doctorate or master would talk about. The directors made it clear to everyone what the speakers’ merits were by showing who they were while they were talking at the beginning and mid-end of the film. When Doctor Mercola talked about how food industries put toxins in foods to make them more appealing. They gave his stats as being an osteopathic physician. People are most likely to believe him than a guy on the street saying to a person eating pizza that that pizza was engineered for you to eat. Also, when Doctor Northrup said that sugar is worse that cocaine; if there wasn’t a ‘doctor’ in front of her name viewers might have chuckled a little bit. The directors didn’t want you to forget their authority of nutrition so that why they showed their merits towards the end also.

            Believability of how food can affect and change people was also achieved by using personal experience. Kris Carr, who was diagnosed with stage four cancer because of her unhealthy lifestyle and when Jon Gabriel says that the atkins diet didn’t worked for him, so he stayed fat until he started juicing. Reality is a real enforcer when trying to convince people to live healthier. Instead of just using facts, real experience makes it palpable. The stories were put there to make it like if Carr can change her situation around, getting rid of cancer and only eating fresh produce, then people will start to think that they will be able to do it to.

Logos: The Statistics of dieting and the food industry

            One of James Colquhoun and Laurentine Ten Bosch’s reasons for making this was to shed some truth about what actually goes into your mouth. They did this by the use of logos, factual information. They often used facts for the base of their discussions.

            There were moments in the documentary that when they would put up quotes on the screen that showed facts about dieting and food. One quote was “The average American consumes more than 150 pounds of sugar and sweeteners each year” (US Department of Agriculture) or “68% of US adults are overweight or obese” (Journal of the American Medical Association). These were meant to be eye openers to the public in saying that look at all these things people are eating and how most of it are made up of toxins and trans-fats.

            The documentary used pictures and graphs to grab attention. Daniel Vitalis goes in on to talk about hunters and gatherers and modern society. That the hunters and gatherers diets had high protein and modern society has low protein and high calorie intake. His stats were turned into a visual representation and show how big of a gap there is. When there is a graph that shows how unhealthy people are, there will be more of a reaction and action. Some scenes in the film show processed foods like diet cola and how many calories there were in each item. They made these facts frightening so people would face the truth; speakers said that most people ignore the facts.

Pathos: emotions of people

In order for someone to change health wise peoples’ emotions and sub-conscious have to be in favor of it. A way the directors manipulated peoples’ emotions was with their control of pathos. They tried to get the audience to sway to their side of eating healthy by making them disgusted and sympathize for what people have gone through, and make them realize that this could be them if they don’t change.

            A powerful emotion that gets people to get their life turned around is through disgust and fear. The way the people talked about processed food in the film would make anyone disgusted about themselves and the food they eat. As when Wolfe says propylene glycol, which is in blueberry muffins and baked products, are used to clean out peoples’ colons. Toxins like this one and high fructose corn syrup is what goes in everyday products and it enters the body which can cause problem such as diabetes and cancer. Also, when Dr. Northrup says when people buy a child cereal it’s like you’re injecting heroin into them. This would statement comparing sugar and drugs; it would get people to start thinking that sugar after all is a drug because a helpless child was involved. There was an underlying message of if people don’t eat detoxifying foods and keep putting toxins into the body—the body will never become healthy. 

            When Frank goes on talking about the overweight problems he had in his past he began to cry. He said he had depression and some thoughts of suicide. This was to put things in perspective for the people out there that had weight problem so they could relate to his problem and sympathize for him. This would gain those people that had weight problems trust in ways of how to get healthy, juicing.

Conclusion: Juicing is a Solution!

            The documentary, Hungry for Change, enacted great detail into the toxic molecules that go into the body and what dangers come with it. James Colquhoun and Laurentine Ten Bosch definitely got their message across. They interviewed people with credibility in nutrition that talked about the hard truths of what the food industry has done to our foods and diet. Showing that all industries want is more money and obese people actually want and try to get healthy but food industries keep them away from their goal. Like most health films they are effective because of the horrifying facts they use (logos), showing that people actually get through unhealthiness (ethos), and relatable emotions that makes people think if they can do it I can do it too using their methods (pathos).  

Food: The Root of all health hazards (Review on Change for Hunger)

Food: Good or Bad?

            Food is a part of everyone’s daily life. We all have to eat every day whether it is healthy food or food that is terrible for our bodies. This is where the movie Hungry for Change comes in. The directors, James Colquhoun and Laurentine ten Bosch, beautifully describe how dieting and the food industry are deceptive; a complete health and wellness documentary. They unfold the deep secrets of food in modern day. This movie tears apart to what we know about nutrition and pounded it into your brain, with this came repetitiveness.

            Hungry for Change, is about the corruption of the food itself within the food world. Speakers of the documentary implored that food choices you make are not by choice but by addiction, factors for obesity and diabetes. Companies nowadays put chemicals into their food that make people want to crave their products more. Medical experts stated, chemicals like sweetener, MSG, and corn syrups lead to addiction of foods. The food industry covers up how unhealthy their products are. Such as when a box of cereal says fat free. True, but sugar turns into fat when entered into your body. Experts would advocate that you should eat local foods (juicing), foods with high nutrition, and in return you will become more healthy.

            What is great about this film is that it brings out the ugly side of dieting and food marketing. They explore the facts that dieting does not bring healthiness and how chemicals like sugar are a drug. According to Northrup, “We need to realize that sugar is a drug just like heroin.” Both ‘drugs’ are addictive and bad for your health. The way the speakers talked about what is really in food and the reality of dieting, left me disgusted. I felt like I just wanted to stay away from unnatural sugars (impossible), and juice vegetables. The directors sent out a very strong message about healthy eating and wellness, but often repeated the same ideas, spanning sometimes half an hour. This can leave you being bored if you don’t care about your health.

            This movie is at the top of the health and wellness genre. They imbed you with terrifying facts about food, then leading to be happy and healthy. If you want your eating habits to change I suggest you watch it.

The truth about “Saving Private Ryan: It’s hell”

“Saving Private Ryan” is not just another war movie; it showed the true horrors of war and all the things soldiers had to deal with during WW2, as to be similarly expressed by Hunter. This movie goes along the lines of a war epic. Stephen Hunter believes that the movie “could be called the last example of that vanishing category, the unit tribute film (1998).” I believe that this film could be a tribute film to WW2 veteran, but it won’t be the last. There always could be another WW2 movie that is just as great and still show gratitude to what the veterans had gone through. None the less the movie gave an in depth persona to how it felt like to be in WW2.

As Hunter talks about the battle on Normandy he says, “Spielberg’s ability to capture the palpable madness of all this borders on the incredible (1998).” He describes the vividness of soldiers being blown up, body parts flying around, and bullets flying everywhere. I cannot agree with Hunter any better. On Omaha beach the allied forces were just being outgunned by machine guns surrounding the entire beach. The immense size and horror of this battle and other battles gave way for what people would do for their country. Hunter and I both agree that soldiers must be willing to die and kill for your country (1998).

            Hunter says “It’s mean, terrifying, exhausting and quip less. There’s no spunk and very little humor. Morale is nonexistent (1998).” I also agree with Hunter in that Saving Private Ryan shows aspects of true war. War is not supposed to be fun, when you see people die next to you it creates doubt. To be in war is like hell. Look at Miller, throughout all the battle almost all of his squad and friends had been killed, what treacherous thoughts might have gone through his head. The darkness of war overpowers any kind of good feelings or atmospheres.

            Miller’s squad ventures on quest to go find Ryan. “Spielberg expertly configured battle scenes- while at the same time keeping precise track of the overall story situation (Hunter, 1998).” I agree in that the plot never lost track, but I don’t see how it’s any different from other wartime movies. They had an objective and they did it, the same with “Platoon” or “Hamburger Hill”. The wars are what give the raw emotions to the plot. It’s not that the movie’s plot is any better; it’s that the gruesome battles allowed the characters to show more suffering and torture.

            The movie’s subject, which is not heroism, is duty (Hunter, 1998). On one hand that’s true, but on the other it could be both. The squad did what they were told no matter the consequences, but also took a lot of kahunas to do what Miller had done, not being a coward. In the end Hunter shows how realistic and terrifying the movie is, but can be overly opinionated about some ideas.    



Reference Page

Hunter, Stephen. July 24, 1998. Spielberg’s War: It’s Hell. The Washington Post: National. Retrieved September 3, 2013 from

World War Z: Zombie Greatness?


Zombie Plague  

The film “World War Z” was directed by Marc Forster. He tried to base his movie on a book with the same title that was by written by Max Brooks. This movie is good action, adventurous, and zombie sci-fi; hence the Z standing for zombie. With Brad Pitt as Gerry Lane, the main character, Forster puts twists and turns in his path so that nothing seems what it really is. In that World War Z did have the upmost detail with the aspects of zombies, but missed some aspects from the source it came from and ideologies from genres that are supposed to make up the zombie film.

The film starts out with Gerry Lane, an ex- United Nations employee, with his family having a good time. Like any other zombie movie a pandemic starts, everything starts to get out of control. They are in New York City trying to escape the zombie pandemic; he and his family ended up getting help from an old friend of Lane’s from the UN. Lane now in debt of his friend has to travel the world, with time against him, in search for a cure. Him and a group of men are led into countries where are thought to be the origin in order to find a cure, but only to find infestations of zombies. They are in a fight against time; trying to find a cure all the while trying to stay alive.

Zombie films are meant to have a lot of zombie horde fighting interaction. World War Z showed ample examples of this. Such as when Lane was in Jerusalem; there was a giant wall that protected them from zombie attacks. Zombies only attack in this film when loud noises are present. Well people got too loud within the city so zombies started to scale the wall and started panic, with everyone running around and zombie hordes engulfing people. Most of the scenes of zombie human interactions were like a war zones, people running scared.



There is always an adventure that occurs with most zombie type movies. This is basically what the whole movie is, Lane trying to find a cure. This happens in the Resident Evil films, people from Raccoon City trying to escape the treacheries of zombies. Never able to find an actual cure for the disease, but what’s weird is that in the movie Lane actually does. Zombie adventures usually end up worse than what they started at. When it seemed like Lane was at his bottom something happened. World War Z shows differences from a usual Resident Evil or 28 Weeks later survival type movie, but it’s what sets this movie apart.

Some things did not work out so well with this movie. Sci-fi zombie films most likely than not have horror in it. It did not seem like there was any sort of horror in the movie. Yes there was deep and loud music at intense moments, but that does not make it terrifying. This movie is more for the action and adventurousness than trying to scare people. You would be freaked out if you were Lane, having a wall of zombies wanting to get you. But were all in the audience and that’s more thrilling for us then trying to scare. I will have to agree with one critic, David Nusair, in that some parts of Lane’s adventure were a little ‘dull’. Besides the action happening around them there was little juice at the soul of the journey. It was almost like all the zombie actions held the main attention of people, not the sequences of the journey. It’s like people would remember zombies flying out of the plane, but not Lane’s crew telling about the origins.

World War Z puts a twist on the zombie genre. Lane’s journey is overshadowed by zombie action but who doesn’t like zombie fighting. The movie is still able to give a good storyline that has its leading points. When paired with the heavy packed zombie action it leaves for a movie. All in all, I would recommend this movie to anyone who likes complete zombie chaos.

“Nature is a Murderer”

-Scientist in World War Z


A brief time at Purdue

Before I came to Purdue I was afraid that I would not have enough time to do any extracorriculars at Purdue. That it was just going to be all homework and no play. Well I was dead wrong. Yes, there is homework but theres ample amount of chances that you can have fun and do activities.

Lets take today as an example. After all my morning classes I had to finish up a little physics homework, but after that I had nothing to do. I had most of my homework assignments done for the week. So a person I had just met from my physics class was going to the rec center. I suggested that we should play raquetball, a sport that neither of us had any experience in. We sort of did a ‘went as we go’ thing when it came to the rules. The way we played might not have been completely the correct way to play raquetball, but it sure as hell was fun. We did get really sweaty and a little banged up, it was totally worth it though. So this short anecdote was suppose to show you that there is always a time to have fun even with school work pressing on your shoulders.