Student+Squillaci,+Troy

= =
 * Viable audio recording programs for Macintosh computers.**

Computers are powerful tools that allow us to create and share media with those around us. Chances are that is some point in time, you will either have the need or desire to create your own work and share it with a community so today I'll be going over a variety of applications for Macintosh computers to make the job a bit easier. This page is going to be dedicated to software that deals with audio.

There are literally hundreds of programs out there that deal specifically with audio. It's easy to get lost and become frustrated when there are so many to choose from so I hope this page will help you narrow in on the one that's right for you.


 * 1. Garageband**

Ever since Apple released iLife back in January of 2003 it has been easy for many Macintosh owners to create and share media. With a low price tag for a variety of applications iLife has become one of the most popular software packages Apple has developed. With the surprisingly successful introduction of the App Store on January 6th, 2010, Apple has decided to sell some of the applications in the iLife software package as individual programs for a lower price. Garageband sells for only $14.99 and is a good program for people interested in capturing their music as they play. While the program is easily capable of recording audio from any old microphone, it has the potential to create different tracks into a song. With such a low price tag, it is definitely a program to consider buying if you have interest in recording your own music. If you have recently (2008 - present) purchased a new Macintosh computer from Apple then iLife comes with it.

Price - $14.99 from App Store Download Page - http://www.apple.com/ilife/garageband/




 * 2. Sound Studio**

Sound Studio is an audio recording/editing program that is known for its ease-of-use as well as it's huge library of effects and filters. It was originally developed by Freeverse (http://www.freeverse.com/) but has recently been taken over by Felt Tip (http://felttip.com/). It has been one of the most popular audio recording/editing programs on the Macintosh platform for several years. At only $29.99, it is worth looking into.

Price - $29.99 from App Store Download Page - http://felttip.com/ss/



Audacity is an open source, multi platform audio recording/editing program. It has an extensive library of effects and filters and is also able to generate some sound effects such as the chirping or a bird. Since its open source, there are constant updates which include even more effects and filters. Audacity is freeware.
 * 3. Audacity**

Price - Free! Download Page - http://audacity.sourceforge.net/



Adobe Audition is a high quality, all around audio program. It is capable of not only recording/editing but has a vast library of effects and filters along with special function such as mixing and sound restoration. It is developed by Adobe Systems Inc. and has been used to fabricate and weave the audio in some of todays movies. Adobe Audition is available for $349.00 but Adobe gives discounts to students so the price can ultimately vary.
 * 4. Adobe Audition**

Price - $349.00 without student discount. Download Page - http://www.adobe.com/products/audition.html



Check out http://www.pure-mac.com/audio.html for a list of audio software for Macintosh.

It is short and I said "poem" rather than "essay" a few times but overall I'm pleased. media type="file" key="English E.B. Comm_01.mp3" width="240" height="20"

You are required to address: -Did the speaker address context? Purpose? Yes, you did talk some about White analyzing him self which could be a purpose. But you never stated the purpose plainly, which makes it hard to be sure what the purpose would be. -Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? YES!! I thought you did great with organizing your commentary. You started off in the beginning letting the listener know how you were going to march though the commentary; this made your commentary very easy to follow as you went on. -What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? What evidence in Whites essay supports your claim that the tone is introspective? Is there any evidence in the text of Whites happiness for the water? Everything was very clear, I can not see the assessor asking much about clarification, however much more evidence will be needed to make your commentary strong enough. -What did the speaker do well? I thought that over all the commentary was very well presented and you were able to use very clear and almost uninterrupted language. Again your structure was perfect; it made the commentary flow with ease. You were able to cover many different topics in your commentary without it seeming rushed. When you talked about the Pivotal theme I thought that was one of your strongest points because your tied it back to the essay as a whole and why it was important that White used it where he did. -What would you suggest for improvement? One of the things that I noticed was that although you don’t say "um", or "like", you do say "you know" a lot. This can cause problems because you are presuming that the listener already knows what you are telling them, which would defeat the purpose of the commentary. Also I thought you could have used a cleaner ending. The last thing that I noticed was that you did not use enough textual evidence for some of your claims, not because they were not true, but some lines from the text would have made your commentary stronger. -What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.) I thought that the commentary was missing some simpler literary terms. Such as the metaphor, or personification that was in the passage. -What would you score them based on the IB Rubric? A-Knowledge of the Essay, I gave you 5/5 because you showed thorough knowledge and understanding of the essay B-Interpretation, I gave you a 4/10 because you only evidence the text twice though out your whole commentary and evidence is a huge part of this score. C-Presentation, I gave you 10/10 because you showed a purposeful and effective structure to your response. D-Use of language, I gave you 5/5 because you have clear and concise language though out the commentary along with a strong and confident voice.
 * Mariah Morrell Review:**

Overall Score 24/30 ANDIES REVIEW: -Did the speaker address context? Purpose? Yes, you did a great job setting the stage for your commentary. You did not explain the purpose up front but it did trickle out as you went along. -Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? Yes, you told us up front how you were going to approach the commentary and that was very helpful and kept everyone on the same page. -What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? I would definitely ask for more exact evidence to support your claims. Age? Why and where did you get that this hobby was not safe because of his age? -What did the speaker do well? You had a very clear and understandable voice. You did a good job at analyzing and pulling apart the passage for us. You brought up some very interesting literary devices, such as epiphany, which was very refreshing and helped me see deeper into the meaning of the essay. You were very relaxed and it seemed like you really had your thoughts put together nicely. There were a couple 'um' but i don't think it really disturbed the commentary. I really enjoyed that you talked about the 'writers voice' and how it connected well to the readers. -What would you suggest for improvement? More literary devices, go back to the basics, metaphor, connotation, denotation, ect. More exact textual evidence if you can find it, such as, instead of 'in the last tow paragraphs...' say 'in lines 40-52, "....." which shows us how White portrays ...' just to give clarification, and to show that you know your stuff. You said 'you know' a lot, and we don't know, so no more of that. -What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.) As I said before, go back to the basics, metaphors, more literary devices. -What would you score them based on the IB Rubric? A- 5/5- you really knew what you were talking about and explained it well. B-5/10- I thought you did a good job on finding evidence to support your claim, even if it wasn't an exact quote you gave us an idea of it. But exact quotes would have been definitively more helpful. And I think you got the point of the story across, eventually. C-9/10- Your voice, recoded, sounds really good. The only problem I had is the 'you know', you cannot assume that the reader knows what is going on in your head. So explain what you mean. D-9/10- You used appropriate language, not too many unnecessary words. Again you could have used more literary devices.

Overall score: 28/30 **Please be sure to write your name under your comments in order to be given credit for your work.**

Peer Review Rubric: -Did the student provide helpful information in a clearly written response? -Did the student offer praise, where appropriate, in a clearly written response? -Did the student offer hypothetical questions? Peer Review Value= _/30 (this is for BOTH passages)

Cerebral Hamlet Commentry by Troy Squillaci

This commentary is one minute over the allowed timeframe but I see it as in improvement over my six and a half minute commentary on E.B. White.

media type="file" key="Cerebral Hamlet – Troy Squillaci.mp3" width="240" height="20"

Thank You for Your Pains Commentary by Troy Squillaci

media type="file" key="Much Ado Commentary – Troy Squillaci.mp3" width="240" height="20"

Sophie Tran's review: You are required to address: -Did the speaker address context? Purpose? Yes, you addressed context, you positioned the extract in the scene; Benedick has been eavesdropping on some friends who want to trick Benedick into falling in love with Beatrice. As for purpose, it wasn't stated explicitly (i.e. this is the focus of my commentary), but right after you addressed context, you briefly explained the beginning of the extract and said it was a turning point in Benedick's outlook on love, so I took your purpose to be an explanation of how this extract was a major turning point of the play and why it was important. However, you were merely addressing Benedick's soliloquy as a turning point, not the extract as a whole, so purpose, though partly understood, is not clear. Later, you said the extract helps with the progression of the play, so perhaps your purpose was to explain how this extract is especially important for the play's progression, but this was said after your dissection of the extract (but before literary devices), and purpose should be stated before you closely analyze the extract. -Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? You said you were going in chronological order though you may need to jump back and forth if necessary--you did follow this organizational principle to analyze the entire extract, but then you started talking about literary devices, which you did not mention you would be referring back to at the beginning. You just needed to explain your approach to literary devices at the beginning as well along with your plan of going in chronological order. -What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? You said in a comedy there needs to be progression/interaction between characters in order for it to have humor (around 6:25). How is humor generated through interaction between characters? You said the themes of trickery and deception warp the characters' beliefs, and that's where the humor arises, but why is character INTERACTION necessary? How does tension move the play forward? You said it is one of the main forces that progresses the play, but HOW does it advance the plot? -What did the speaker do well? You addressed context well--it did not seem like too much, and it gave me a clear idea of exactly where this passage was in the play. You easily identified Benedick's monlogue as a turning point in the play, a change in his mindset, and you recognized the importance of such a turning point and reiterated it several times. You brought up the importance of interaction between characters. You also brought in the idea of humor and the fact that Much Ado is a COMEDY which is important to keep in mind. You talked about the themes of trickery and deception. You talked about the many different tones in the extract, you brought up tension, though did not elaborate how it advances the plot, and you also made an interesting point about star-crossed lovers. It's an interesting turning point when, out of two people who share a mutual dislike, one is being deceived. Your voice is also very clear, good enunciation usually, and few 'um's. -What would you suggest for improvement? Vocabulary, while good, could still be improved upon, made more formal. Purpose/focus should be stated at the beginning. When you explain your organizational approach at the beginning, make sure you include the fact that you would later go on into literary devices, themes, etc. You could say you will be going through the passage chronologically and then thematically, perhaps. For epiphany, tones, theme of tension...I don't believe they should be called literary devices. Yes, they are literary terms, but they are not devices such as metaphors or similes that are clearly implemented by the author and can be clearly excerpted. It was fine to say you were talking about literary devices on the whole, but when you kept repeating that this was a literary device, it distracted from the actual importance and effect of what you were talking about i.e. epiphany, tones, tension. Regarding the epiphany, it's a good observation that Benedick is having an epiphany, this epiphany is the turning point of his outlook on love, and you included other information like Benedick was accepting new ideas, but you have already talked about Benedick's soliloquy at the beginning, and so perhaps you should have called it an epiphany in the first place so that you didn't have to go back to it later and instead you could just lightly refer to it. You said Benedick is still being witty but meanwhile he is pulling information out of Beatrice, and this aggravates her, and it leads to the metaphor. You don't have to elaborate much, you already talked about the metaphor, but remind us what the metaphor was and why it's important that Benedick's inquisitive tone aggravates Beatrice and in turn leads to this metaphor. Is this important at all? If not, leave the second mention of aggravation leading up to the metaphor out. -What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.) You covered literary terms and themes pretty well, the only thing that I think was missing was a little more analysis of the 'thank you for your pains' and 'If it had been painful, I would not have come' interaction. It's an important part of the passage simply because of the weight Benedick puts on those words. Though you quoted some of Benedick's interpretation of Beatrice's reply, I think you could have gone further in depth on their dynamic in that interaction of 'thank you for your pains'. -What would you score them based on the IB Rubric? Criterion A: 5 You seem to thoroughly understand the extract and its themes and its importance, contextually, in the play. Criterion B: 9 Good awareness of literary features and their importance, supported by textual evidence. There were some parts that needed clarification (see questions I would ask for clarification) and a tiny bit of room for improvement as stated earlier... Also, your purpose should be more clear earlier on. Criterion C: 8 Organizational structure could have been improved to be more purposeful and more convincing, effective, and clear. Criterion D: 5 Language was not perfect, but quite good--no significant problems, though register was not always formal enough. Total: 27/30 Good job! ~Sophie Tran **Please be sure to write your name under your comments in order to be given credit for your work.** You are required to address: -Did the speaker address context? Purpose? I addressed the context of the extract and picked apart the meaning for the majority of it with the support of textual evidence. I also said why it was purposeful and linked it to overarching themes in the play. Also I stated why it provided progression in the play. -Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary? I stated that I would be going in chronological order which I did follow for the first half of the commentary. When I reached the literary devices and the small description of star crossed lovers, I veered off course and did not stick to the organizational principle that I mentioned at the beginning. -What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR? -What did the speaker do well? I believe that I addressed the context well (with the exception of the last chunk) and went into detail when speaking of literary devices, star crossed lovers, and Benedick's main soliloquy. -What would you suggest for improvement? I think that I could have improved on my language – some words such as "basically," "kinda," and "guess" were not appropriate for the commentary. Also I would reorganize and add a few points to my structure – it was okay, but I feel that I could have made it more clear for the audience if I stated it better. The only other issue I had was how I repeatedly stated connections between Benedick and Beatrice's love when describing the literary devices, one time is enough and I could have just briefly touched on them without taking away from the commentary. -What did the speaker forget to address? (lit terms, themes, etc.) I touched on the last fragment of the extract, but I think I could have gone into more detail about how this interaction between Benedick and Beatrice contributes to the play as a whole with the support being a small boat of love floating in a sea of pain. -What would you score them based on the IB Rubric? Total Score: 24/30 Self Review by Troy Squillaci
 * Pretending to be an instructor* : You brought up tension as one of your literary devices and said it plays a major role in progressing the poem, but how do it accomplish this? Can you elaborate on what you said earlier about the interactions between Benedick and Beatrice?
 * 1) Knowledge and Understanding: 5/5
 * 2) Interpretation and Personal Response: 8/10 – Lack of addressing the last fragment of the extract in detail.
 * 3) Presentation: 8/10 – Structure could have been improved on and needed less repetition.
 * 4) Use of Language: 3/5 – Bad.