FALL 2025
ASTR 303
Homework
Homework #1
The difference between temperature and heat is more of a relationship, although there is a distinction. Temperature is a measure of kinetic energy, or the energy being emitted through the movement of particles within an object. Whereas heat is the transfer of thermal energy between objects.
Temperature can be measured using multiple scales, including Kelvin, Celsius & Fahrenheit. These measurement scales can be utilized to determine the amount of kinetic energy stored within an object and its particles. Heat is typically measured in Joules; this system of measurement determines the amount of thermal energy being transferred between objects.
The distinction between red & blue light has to do with an object's temperature. Directly relational to temperature is the color of visible light that is emitted from the object. Objects that emit red light are generally cooler than objects that emit blue light. When speaking of stars specifically; red light ≈ 3,500°Kelvin, while blue light ≈ 45,000°K. Ultimately the difference between red & blue light is temperature.
RWS 305W
Introduce The Self
My name is Andrew (a.k.a. Monk.i.e.) I am currently double majoring in Communication and English, along with finishing up my last two prerequisites to pick up Psychology as my third major starting next semester. I am excited by each major for different reasons, on the simplest of levels I can describe this excitement as this: Psychology is for The Self, Communication is for others, and English is for the masses. In essence, I am excited to continue discovering more about The Self…for me, I am excited to continue learning how to recognize others through their own syntax…for them, and I am excited to share what I learn with anyone willing to ask…for any/everyone. (Although I only know one language so the translation may take some time:)
I have lived enough passed lives in this one body/lifetime to personally recognize the ever-evolving nature of life. What do I mean by that…and where do I start? Two years ago I was arrested for giving mushrooms to an undercover cop. To fully clarify, not selling, giving. Needless to say the court had no grounds and after serving my 3-days while the knuckleheads did their paperwork, I was released with minimal repercussions. At the time I was living on the street, out of a tent mostly and enjoying the sabbatical I had established for myself. Most of my days were invested enjoying the sun at a local beach and sharing my writings with any passerby. I maintained a small booth with bits-and-bobs to spread inspiration to any seeking it. This was the second stint of time I did living on the street, and upon being arrested for the first time in my life, I took it as a sign to go back to school and put a distance between myself and the corruption that lay active within our system. I re-enrolled at San Diego City College, and the rest is mostly history… I currently have 3 Associates Degrees, and multiple certificates that I completed in the last year and a half (all of which I started working on originally in 2019). My goals after completing the 3 bachelors programs, is to move onto a Master’s in Linguistics and a Doctoral Degree in Etymology. Keep going and be the effort that brings fruition to your plans. You are capable and incapable of all that you perceive.
Finding Your Voice
Have we evolved enough to instantly access any and every emotion within a moment's notice? Whether sometimes lusted for, or others undesired, are we capable of receiving all that we want whenever we feel? Do we have the wherewithal to maintain The Self within standards of being that are acceptable for evolution?
Be embraced by the feat of the unknown, smell the rising sun. Check The Self and the insecurities that reside within and leave others to the devices of observation. There is little need for speaking when comprehension is involved. These words are simply markers for personal understanding, as every interpretation is different, no syntax can describe.
Share your perspective of the Infinalaxy and observe the variation expressed. Feel with all your might. As the meek shall inherit all, be the courage humanity so craves. Stay You.
I wrote this on August 18th, 2025; 10 days ago. It felt like the best place to start to give a little bit of perspective on where my head's at:)
I think the difference discussed between these two worlds of language studies is that one is of an individual's shift in personal culture compared to their cultural upbringing; while the other is of a cultural shift within a society. What struck me more than any difference between the readings was more so the similarities. As I started dissecting each reading a bit more and pulling quotations from their original context, the lines began to further blur. What was once a quote from a person talking about their “code-switching” if you will, became interchangeable with someone talking about AI. “My concern was to use ‘appropriate’ language…But I felt separate from the language-as if it did not and could not belong to me. I couldn’t think and feel genuinely in that language, couldn’t make it express what I thought and felt...” (Mellix Pg. 264) Although this is completely out of its original context, I feel like it does a great job of also explaining what someone just starting to use AI feels like, or maybe even someone who just doesn't want to use AI in general.
Alternatively, “You’re not talking to [someone] that values truth. You’re talking to [someone] that only values what sounds plausible.” (Jackson, Feb 2025) Again, this is completely out of context, fully intentionally and I changed the word “something” to “someone” to prove my point. If this was said to Barbara Mellix about her family members it would have fit the context. Although it is a harsh reality, with the understanding that Ms. Mellix wanted to become a professor, and standards of language had been established for specific settings; her family did not value her truth of wanting to become an educator (even if that was expressed through “code-switching”), and only that which was plausible was deemed fit language for a young black girl.
Since as early as 1726 the idea of, “common sense is not so common” was publicly expressed by Nicholas Amherst, an English poet and political writer. The attitude can still be felt today. I don’t think AI has created any new situation, I think it is a different perspective of the same situation humans have always been in. Rather than embrace our flaws as our own, we tend to project them onto some outside entity. “That’s why AI is unbeatable at pattern recognition but fails at common sense.” (Jackson, Feb 2025) The students who “rely too much on the internet, social media and now AI…” did not invent these things. Nor do they have much in the way of a say for how they are to be further developed. How am I to reflect poorly on those for which they were given? I think language, self-expression and critical thinking have evolved and will continue to. As Barbara Mellix said, “...always be venturing into new territory, feeling one’s way at first, then getting one’s balance, negotiating, accommodating, discovering one’s self in ways that previously defined ‘others’.” With personal experience I can tell you that no matter where you find The Self within the hierarchy of the moment, you will always be participating in the “highbrow form of violence, this slamming against perplexity.” (Mellix, Pg. 266)
I had little in way of argument for most of Ms. Mellix’s perspective except for the experience that speaking in a “customary way was inferior [to standard English]...We felt foolish, embarrassed, somehow diminished because we were ashamed to be our real selves.” (Mellix, Pg. 260) This feels more culturally driven than anything else… As I would ask her, what is our “real self” if we are not “discovering one’s self in ways that previously defined ‘others’?” (Mellix, Pg. 266) Expanding your vocabulary allows you to express The Self differently, this does not mean that you are different, simply more defined. On the other hand I have a lot to say about Juliana Jackson’s work as it seems to just take the societal perspective of AI and magnify it, rather than using a microscope to dissect it. In the simplest of terms, how can something, “mimic human thinking and problem solving abilities… and be inspired by the [structure of the human brain].” (Jackson, Feb 2025) Yet we expect AI to “value truth”. For those old enough Jack Nicholson said it best, “you can’t handle the truth.” And I mean this in the most sincere way possible, we don’t want it. We collectively want to be spoon fed sugar-coated daisies. This is not new, this is reality. If every single one of us knew the truths we desired, every single one of us would have a broken heart; that would be more dastardly than any tyrant in global control. Not knowing some truths leaves us open to dream, and with that comes ambition through which we can achieve.
I think literacy and language mastery are a tool, and as such can be utilized as a weapon within a certain grasp. The task is upon the individual to decide whether to create or destroy. As with all things in life, mindset & perspective have the potential to make or break one’s personal & professional outlook. Choose wisely.
Analysis of Professional & Academic Writing: The Lens Is Communication
There are many forms & manifestations of writing in lexical paradigms through human existence. Professional & Academic Writing is one such model that has evolved from this rich history. There are multiple hotbeds of the timeline of civilization within which Writing has naturally excreted; including Ancient China & Mesoamerica. One of the earliest known, common understandings of writings’ initial inception, is that of legend. The Egyptian God, Thoth, is recognized as the deity that gave mankind this new technological advancement, Writing; around the year 3200 BCE, in the form of hieroglyphs. Although some forms of written language can be traced to Mesopotamia around 3400 BCE within the Sumerian Cuneiform, as well. However, written language as we commonly recognize it today did not appear until nearly 1900 BCE when the Proto-Sinaitic written language emerged from the mines of the Sinai Peninsula. Wherein the local Canaanite & Semitic workers adapted a form of writing from the thousands of available Egyptian hieroglyphs–down to a simple 22–that represented sounds in their native tongue; this was the first common ‘alphabet’. From this moment, Communication & Writing were revolutionized. Within a few hundred years of this revelation cultures & civilizations all around the Mediterranean and neighboring lands had adopted & adapted their own versions of semitic & phonetic written language. All-of-which, in some way or another, has led to here & now and this paper about professional & academic writing through the lens of Communication Studies. Holy Metatrons’ Ampersand.
Utilizing a framework constructed in tandem with the Teresa Thonney study; Teaching The Conventions of Academic Discourse and Lumen Learnings’ College Writing Handbook: Exploring Academic Disciplines we will investigate how scholars within the study of Communication formulate arguments and inform their audience accordingly, utilizing Professional & Academic Writing. Our sample of articles from the discipline of Communication include; Why Communication is Important: A Rationale for the Centrality of the Study of Communication by Sherwyn P. Morreale, et. al. published in the Journal of the Association for Communication Administration in January 2000. Similarly, the Western Journal of Communication published, Communicating In and Through “Murderball”: Masculinity and Disability in Wheelchair Rugby in 2008 by Kurt Lindemann & James Cherney. These two articles are a premier example of professional/academic writing in relation to our current view point; as they include a specific perspective from the discipline of Communication, as well as a broader resemblance to other industries professional/academic papers through the construction of their delivery. Although these papers exemplify the general consensus of organization & context, and we could dissect the inner workings of each major point Teresa Thonney has made, we won’t. We will be exploring how these authors establish credibility as seen in the writing and use of language, syntax, and other features of professional/academic writing by focusing on the sentence-level writing to identify and comment on the conventions authors use to establish their ethos or credibility with their audience. We will reflect on this work done particularly in Communication through this kind of discipline-specific scholarship & discourse in the samples given. “New knowledge about the world is typically produced when a practitioner builds on a previous body of work in the discipline, most often by advancing it only slightly but significantly. We use academic and professional disciplines to conduct persistent, often unresolved conversations with one another.” (Lumen Learning, Pg. 8) The analysis conducted herein will continue to establish further comprehension of concepts & theories with Communication & Writing that have been present for centuries.
The study of Communication can be traced through millenia. One of the earliest massively published works on the matter, Rhetoric the treatise of Aristotle was written around the 4th century BCE and is still studied to this day in regards to the art of persuasion and similarly, connecting with ones’ audience. “Each reader, regardless of academic background, needs a solid understanding of how rhetoric works. Each reader has been trained to use a specific disciplinary lens that causes certain passages to rise to prominence and certain insights to emerge. But the real power of disciplines comes when these readers and their readings interact with each other.” (Lumen Learning, Pg. 13-14) There are three major parts to this concept of rhetoric: Logos, Pathos & Ethos; the latter of which we will focus on now. Credibility & ethical appeal are crucial components when communicating our ideas & thoughts if we are to resonate with, and move our audience to action & emotion. In line with these teachings, Aristotle defined 3 components to empowering ethos within communication; phronesis, arete & eunoia. Each of these aforementioned concepts entwine to establish a rhetor’s credibility & ethical appeal.
There are many avenues available to pursue this endeavor of connection & understanding with an audience; concerning professional & academic writing though, as Karen Bennet says… “[there is] remarkable consensus [in regards to] general principles, methods of textual construction, and the kinds of grammatical and lexical features to be used.” (qtd. In Thonney, Pg. 348) Communication is no different when it comes to this idea. Both of our samples include reference to similar lexicons. Theory, culture & application are all discussed through lenses of disability & sports and the study of Communication itself; each formatting & constructing positions of credibility within their respective audiences. Furthermore, the samples chosen respond to and elaborate the upon a conversation that previously lay before them; as Teresa Thonney says, ““By referring to what others have said about a topic, writers accomplish two things: they show that they are addressing an issue that matters, and they establish that there is more to be said about it.” (Thonney, Pg. 349) Morreale, Osborn & Pearson implement the use of gathering multiple works and synthesizing the meanings into a cohesive reasoning of the importance of the study of Communication. Teresa Thonney goes on to further explain that “academic writers state the value of their work and announce the plan for their papers.” (Thonney, Pg. 350) Similarly Lindemann & Cherney incorporate discussions about previous studies involving disability & communication separately and the importance that their piece brings to uniting these concepts together while inspecting them cohesively. Altogether these two sample pieces utilized many of the concepts expressed by Teresa Thonney and Lumen Learning to establish ethos through credibility & ethical appeal within their respective audiences.
Although some may disagree that there is no “one defined way” in which to write & communicate, there are definitely frameworks & tools available to construct well-articulated professional & academic writing pieces. “Regardless of the discipline you choose to pursue, you will be arriving as an apprentice in the middle of an ongoing conversation. Disciplines have complicated histories you can’t be expected to master overnight. But learning to recognize the long-standing binary oppositions in individual disciplines can help you make sense of the specific issues, themes, topics, and controversies you will encounter as a student and as a professional.” (Lumen Learning, Pg. 10) Ultimately professional & academic writing has a formulaic approach, beginning to comprehend the ground work that has been established in this one discipline alone will further empower any scholar in the pursuit of education. As was discussed, every discipline of study has a lens through which writing is involved, the sharing of information & knowledge is primarily shared in this way and as such it is vital to the progression of experience. Continue investigating the things that inspire & intrigue you, as they will lead to all your passion. Remember the path of least resistance may not be the simplest, however it is the most rewarding.
Sample Letter Analysis
Through multiple forms of appeal, rhetorical strategies and stylistic writing the authors of these 6 sample letters attempted and often succeeded at persuading their audience as to why to join the critical discourse community being promoted in each instance. The turnover rate for this success is purely subjective and a fictional percentage, that I choose to believe is true, simply based on a broadly objective analysis of each sample letter. The writers sampled here deliver an exposé of strengths & weaknesses to examine. Although these are ‘students’, the delivery & expertise with which they command their respective knowledge base is a respectable feat. More specifically, these are quite technically savvy fields being discussed: Computer Science, Civil & Computer Engineering, Nursing, Interior Architecture, and even the lowly Kinesiology; meanwhile, the authors were able to disseminate information to potential Major candidates in a way that was reasonably articulated and simply understandable. Furthermore, the strengths of these Letters of Recommendation far outweigh any weaknesses they may exhibit.
On a broad spectrum and to begin a bit in the land of the abstract… The first strength I recognized quickly became a double-edged sword of the author's weakness, as the use of industry specific ‘jargon’ was heavily present in most of these papers. Although it was refreshing at first, the excessive use of ‘jargon’ throughout most of these papers became encumbering whilst reading through them. It is understood that in order to share a brief but informative paper, one must inherit the language of the field within which is being represented; however, being able to express similar concepts in ‘plain English’ exhibits another level of comprehension that was felt to be lacking within these works.
The most inherent strength that I noticed was the structure & delivery of each Letter. Each paper is meticulously planned out with an order-of-operation that plays hand-in-hand with the main objective of writing these Letters of Recommendation in the first place; to continue the critical discourse (ideas, language, maintaining & extending the group's knowledge and of initiating new members into the group) required of any “large bodies of knowledge” (Foucault) and the community within which that knowledge resides. I am further impressed with the overall attention to detail, and the depth of information provided in such a few short pages of research. Each author was able to draw the reader in and create the internal dialogue; “is this the Major for me?”
I also appreciated the fine line of formality that could be felt throughout most of these works. From speaking in a tone of authority whilst listing off classes & curriculum that may be encountered, to whole-heartedly spotlighting faculty and their research with simple & elegant career profiles, each author wrote to the reader with a sincere hope & tone of inspiring them to join in their critical discourse community!
I believe each of these papers had their own strengths and weaknesses; from the logical appeal of how the degrees could help an individual obtain certain goals, to the emotional appeal of “why this is the industry for you”--each author targeted specific audiences with meticulous attention and gave great credence to the departments and institutions that make this education possible.
Join Your Critical Discourse Community: Communication, at San Diego State University
What are you going to do with that degree? You’re going to end up waiting tables. If it’s not STEM, it’s a waste of money & time. All common concerns… all boring. Before going further with any of that… Congratulations on the acceptance to continue your higher education! Let this be a Major milestone on your journey to discovering The Self and that which is personally desired. If your only concern is a job or career after graduation, then you may have been misguided somewhere along the way. Through no fault of your own, or any one specific person's doing (barring John D. Rockefeller), our collective educational goals in westernized civilization have been led astray. If you are seeking your passions then no level of standardization will obstruct the path. If you are looking for the means by which to share your passions with the world, whatever those might be, the art of Communication will usher the way. As an ever-evolving and seemingly everlasting human tradition the art of Communication has been essential for our species survival & ultimate mastery of the mortal plane; however immaculate or disturbing that may be. Although there may be disagreement between certain outcomes, the means have created endless possibilities for human existence and the potential for evolution is ever-present simply due this one tradition. Embarking we’ll discover a rudimentary understanding of the possible Communication Major curriculum to be encountered, profiles of faculty/staff & their research conducted, and an available extracurricular activity & student organization here at San Diego State University (SDSU).
As one-of-seven schools within the College of Professional Studies and Fine Arts (PSFA) at SDSU, the School of Communication was originally founded in 1927 as a public speaking department. The School of Communication About Us section goes on to further explain, “Most recently, in 2007 the School of Communication split from what became the School of Journalism and Media Studies (JMS).” (About The School, 2025) Similar small changes over time have created varying fields of study within which scholars can pursue specific courses of education at PSFA; let’s bring the current focus back to the School of Communication.
The first Major requirement that Communication scholars will encounter within the School of Communication at SDSU is Conceptualizing Communication (COMM 300) in which we are introduced to a range of theoretical frameworks that have shaped the study of modern Communication. Social Judgement Theory developed by Muzafer Sherif is one such framework that Communication scholars utilize. This concept explains how we judge persuasive messages based on our current position. Our ‘anchor’ being that which our ego primarily agrees with, falls within our Latitude of Acceptance; or that which we already believe or most closely resemble. Our Latitude of Non-Commitment, or relevance to us, determines if we are impartial or not. Whereas our Latitude of Rejection can create a Contrast effect, wherein if a message falls here, we see it as further from our ‘anchor’ (Littlejohn, 2023). All of which will empower any scholar to understand how we are persuaded. Furthermore, COMM 300 is a prerequisite for the next course to be introduced… Segway!
As we begin further investigating Communication we will discover Foundations of Critical and Cultural Study (COMM 441) wherein Communication scholars learn how to conduct relevant & investigative criticism of an artifact or text for the purpose of cultural analysis. This class focuses within the medium of writing and how to rhetorically analyze an artifact or text for the purpose of understanding the conditions of its creation and the goals of its existence; both socially & culturally. The main project in a course like this is a 5-6 page written analysis (Goehring, 2015). The scholar will investigate an artifact or text through a critical lens to better understand the social & cultural context of its creation and more so to respond to the question; why was this artifact or text created?
A prime example of this type of Critical & Cultural Study is demonstrated by Dr. Damariyé Smith an Assistant Professor of Contemporary Black/African American Rhetoric and Media Studies within the Schools of Communication and Journalism & Media Studies at SDSU. Through his critical essay, “Hussle and Motivate: An Afrocentric Understanding of Constitutive Rhetoric Toward Economic Empowerment in Nipsey Hussle’s Victory Lap Album”, Dr. Smith evaluates Nipsey Hussles’ Victory Lap Album (artifact) through the intersection of identity, afrocentricity & constitutive rights (critical lens); wherein he dissects the storytelling of Nipsey Hussle as a means to communicate an “identity of economic prosperity” for his audience (Smith, 2023). Through this rhetorical analysis Dr. Smith is able to interpret multiple social & cultural perspectives that interact between an artifact and a certain contextual paradigm; further amplifying the conversation and applying Communication theories to decipher the communicator, the receiver, the message and the medium being utilized.
Professor & Director of the School of Communication, Dr. Heather Canary has another exemplary tenure. Whether it's teaching COMM 300 (Conceptualizing Communication), 490 (‘off-campus’ Internship), 496 (Experimental Topics) and 499 (Special Study) or completing her own research in organizational, family & health communication, Dr. Canary strives to engage within the Communication critical discourse community in such a way as to be inspirational to any scholar that discovers her. Most importantly she is a mentor & guide to multiple graduate level students while completing their masters theses, directing scholars in their research and ensuring the highest standards of rhetoric are maintained (Canary, 2025) Alongside her catalog of personal research she is also the Principal Investigator (PI) for multiple grant initiatives at SDSU, including: “The School of Communication Iterative Approach to Curriculum Revision” (2021-2023), “Initiative for Strategic Communication and Learning” (2019-2022), and “Mapping the Genetics Communication Circuit: Genetic Counseling, Family Conversations, and Information Seeking Behaviors” (2018-2024). Through her continued effort Dr. Canary proves time-and-time again that her presence is critical within the School of Communication.
There are many opportunities for scholars to get further involved with the School of Communication at SDSU. An example of an extracurricular activity & a student organization that are available are the Aztec Forensics Speech & Debate Team and Lambda Phi Eta (LPH) respectively. John Loo, Interim Director of Forensics writes about the SDSU Speech & Debate Team; “we believe that our Forensics program provides an intercollegiate competitive experience that has lasting positive impact in the way our students view their own capabilities and skills to chase and achieve their ambitious dreams!” This idea, along with the team's mission statement: “Dedicated to developing a community of courageous advocates, critical thinkers, and compassionate competitors” gives a glimpse of the perspective this team shares (Speech & Debate, 2025). Along with traveling & competing at a collegiate level, Communication scholars will be given the opportunity to put their skills & knowledge to the test in live debates that will better prepare them for future circumstances of necessary reasoning.
Founded in 1985 and recognized nationally in 1994, LPH is the Official Communication Honors Society of the NCA. With over 500 chapters nationally, and a “mission that includes promoting academic excellence in communication studies, fostering interest in the communication field, facilitating discussions and exchanges of ideas, and building strong relationships between faculty and students” (Student Organization). The purpose of the organization is, “recognizing, fostering, and rewarding outstanding scholastic achievement in the field of communication” (Lambda, 2025). Gain personal notoriety through association with such prestigious organizations.
If your only concern is a job or career after graduation, then fine… Here are some industry analytics & statistics for graduates with a Communication degree. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 55% of those employed within the Communication Industry require a Bachelor’s degree, while 24% of scholars achieved an advanced degree. The median wage was $65,000 and 32% of graduates were in an occupational group labeled “other” (2023). Forbes lists “10 Careers in Communication You Should Consider” as: Communication’s Director, Public Relations Specialists, News Analysts/Reporters & Journalists, Editors, Writers & Authors, Market Research Analysts, Marketing/Social Media & Human Resource Managers and Broadcast Announcers & Radio DJs (2025). The purpose in sharing such a wide range of perspectives & data is to illustrate the expansive potential that a Communication degree brings. Envision the future that may come to form from all this engagement; all because you joined your critical discourse community: Communication, at SDSU.
