Catherine Faville
Mr. Ippolito
Current event 13
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
For this current event, i read the article NASA’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-New and unexpected written by Kenneth Chang, the article described how Jupiter is not what we had originally thought. They have found that the interior core is bigger than it was originally thought to have been , also having a strong magnetic field around the planet. All this information was brought to scientist from Juno’s mission, a orbiter that has recently arrived at the planet in july. The orbiter is able to take pictures of the planet, as well as using instruments to look deep within the surface of the planet, scientist predict that they will find a rocky type core like Earth's within the center, or a hydrogen base core.
This article has a great effect on society, this is because this is just another example of how we don't know as much as we think we do about the planets. This new discovery of how the planet jupiter works, as well as the makeup of the planet. This new information will aid scientist in learning more about our own planet Earth by looking at other.
The article did a good job at identifying what scientist were looking for with these new discoveries, as well as giving more details with the science behind the new discoveries, giving the reader more vivid information on the article. However the writer could have added more background information on jupiter itself, so we could compare and contrast what we originally thought to what we now have discovered. In addition if they added why they needed or wanted this new information on the planet.
Bailey Barton
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Biology; Current Event 13
5/29/17
Faville, Catherine. Bronxville HS Core Biology. N.p., 01 Jan. 1970. Web. 29 May 2017.
http://bhscorebio.blogspot.com/2017/05/catherine-faville-mr.html#comment-form
I read Catherine Favilles review on “Nasa’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-new and unexpected’” written by Kenneth Chang. In this article, Chang discussed how new research on jupiter shows different result than we originally thought concerning its structure and more. This research was conducted during the Juno mission. They found that it has a bigger interior core, therefore having a strong magnetic field around the planet.
What i liked about Catherine’s review was that it was very straight forward and delivered the information well. She incorporated science as well as her own thoughts concerning our knowledge on the world, and specifically space. She also did a good job of relating this article back to its effect on society and where it could take us from here.
I agree with Catherine on including more evidence supporting her theme on scientists never knowing necessarily everything and that there is always more information to find in order to improve our current knowledge on the topic at hand.
Alyssa Lee
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Biology 10H
26 May 2017
Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. .
I made the decision to review my classmate, Catherine’s, review of the article “NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the Brand-New and Unexpected” by Kenneth Chang. The article summarizes the findings of Juno, an orbiter that had landed on the Jupiter last July, most significantly that Jupiter’s core is larger than it had once been thought, and that this larger core may be a large factor in the planet’s strong magnetic field. Catherine wrote a brief, concise review that was written in a manner in which it was not at all difficult to understand. Her summary of Juno’s findings and functions that it utilized to attain these results is clear and to the point. Catherine states, “The orbiter is able to take pictures of the planet, as well as using instruments to look deep within the surface of the planet…” Another aspect in which Catherine’s review was excellent was her relation of the article’s topic to the world. She describes some specifics about this particular finding, but she also relates the article to life on a global scale. She states, “This article has a great effect on society, this is because this is just another example of how we don't know as much as we think we do about the planets.” This raises the question of how much humans truly know about our universe, and gives the reader a problem to ponder throughout the course of her review. Catherine also analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the review very well in that she describes the weaknesses and gives ways in which the author could have improved upon their writing. Catherine opines, “...the writer could have added more background information on jupiter itself, so we could compare and contrast what we originally thought to what we now have discovered.” As she offers both the area of weakness and a solution, her argument becomes far more sound and logical.
Although Catherine’s review was very well-written, there are some improvements that could be made. For example, when Catherine describes the findings of Juno, she does not specify the difference in size of the core in question. Depending on what scientists had thought before Juno’s information had been transmitted back to Earth, the magnitude of the discovery could be considered more profound or less so. Due to the fact that Catherine does not offer an explanation, it is unclear as to whether or not this is truly momentous, and adding that information would improve the reader’s understanding of the article. Catherine also makes some continuous grammatical errors, such as when she comments, “...a orbiter that has recently arrived at the planet in july.” Catherine should have capitalized July and written “an orbiter”, but these smaller things do little to take away from the overall reading experience.
After reading this review and article, I learned not only about Juno’s mission to Jupiter and its findings, but also about the impact such a discovery will have on humanity. I chose to read this review because I have always found space to be a mysterious and elusive subject that we are still striving to completely understand. It aided me in realizing that we, as humans, cannot assume to know everything, as there are so infinitely many things that are beyond the scope of modern technology and the human mind. I hope to see more advances being made in space in the future, so that we can continue to advance our knowledge of our universe, even if the amount we learn is only incremental.
Caroline Brashear
ReplyDeleteMr. Ippolito
Core Biology
June 6, 2017
Current Event 14 Comment
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
I read Catherine Faville’s review of the article about a NASA mission, which was written by Kenneth Chang. One aspect of Catherine’s review that was well done was that she provided a brief summary about the findings of the mission, which supplied the reader with enough information to understand the article without losing the reader’s attention. Also, she did a good job examining the article’s impact on society; she brought up a good point about the scientific world, which was basically that we don’t always know everything that we think we do, and that there is so much more to discover. Lastly, I think the fact that Catherine chose an interesting article helped her review to be more enjoyable for the reader.
Although Catherine wrote a nice review, there are a few things she could change to improve her work. There are a few grammatical/ sentence structure errors in her piece, so in the future, she should make sure that she proof reads her work before posting it. Additionally, her work could be stronger if she interpreted the article further in terms of the impact of the new information discussed on society.
In reading this review, I was impressed by the new discovery regarding the components of Jupiter’s core. Catherine’s piece interested me because I am interested in space and the study of chemistry, and the article she read discussed both of these things since it was about the elemental makeup of a planet. It just goes to show how much there is to learn in this world, and that as a society, we should keep digging for information on a topic that we are already familiar with.
Luke Redman
ReplyDeleteMr.Ippolito
Core Biology
June 6th 2017
Chang, Kenneth. "Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. . " The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. .
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
For this week’s current event I read Catherine Faville’s review of “NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’.” In the article it talks about the findings of Juno, a space probe that landed on Juno last July. In her review, she provided a brief summary about the findings of the mission, which provided the reader with enough information to understand the article but not long enough to lose the reader in technical talk and long tangents. She also did a great job on analyzing the articles impact of society, where these new findings have challenged the already established school of thought. Finally, Catherine seemed to be very interested in the article itself, which made it more enjoyable for me to read, since I knew that the article review was written by someone who cares about the topic. However, Catherines article had a few flaws. First, she did not include a proper citation, which made the article harder to cite, and the citation is one of the most basic parts of the current event. Secondly, she could have edited the article before handing it in, because there were a few grammatical errors in the review. However, in reading this review, I learned about the new findings of the Juno space probe. I also learned that knowledge is not constant but instead evolving as we continue to explore. Overall, I think that my classmate wrote a good article and I look forward to reading others.
Chang, Kenneth. "Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. . " The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 13 September 2018. .
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
For my current events review I read Catherine Favilles review of the article NASA’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-New and unexpected written by Kenneth Chang. This article summarizes the finding made on Jupiter by the robot Juno. This orbitor made very interesting findings about the planet and its core. It found that the core of Jupiter is bigger than scientists inferred it to be. This means that the magnetic field around the planet is stronger than what it was thought to be. In Catherine’s review she presented the information done by the study very well, it was organized and could be understood easily. Throughout Catherines review she incorporated the science and her own thought about space and the world. Another aspect about Catherines article that was well presented were the effects the findings of Juno will have on how society and where these findings will take us in the upcoming future.
Although Catherines review was very well written, some aspects of it could have been expanded on. Such as, the findings of Juno, in her review she states that the core is bigger than what it was inferred to be. She could have told the readers how much bigger it was and how much more of a magnetic force it outputs. Though she presented her information very well, there were some grammatical errors; such as “... a orbiter that has recently arrived at the planet in july,”. In this sentence there are two errors, July should be capitalized and it should say “an orbiter.” Another, grammatical error in her review was: “For this current event, i read the article…” In this sentence she forgot to capitalize the pronoun “I.”
One aspect of the review that impressed me was that knowledge is not always stagnant. Skeptical scientist were able to prove that in fact the core of Jupiter is bigger than we inferred it to be. This knowledge lead to the discovery that Jupiter has a stronger magnetic force than what it was thought to be. In conclusion, Catherine Faville’s review on the article Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-New and unexpected written by Kenneth Chang was not only well written, but in fact opened my eyes to importance of space exploration.
For this week's current event assignment I read Catherine Faville’s review on the article, “ Nasa’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-new and unexpected’” by Kenneth Chang. This article is about the Juno orbiter. This orbiter has been finding out a lot of information about the planet Jupiter. Researchers have found that Jupiter has a larger core then we thought and this leads to it having a large magnetic pole. Catherine did an excellent job of creating a brief and straightforward summary. This summary helps the reader get a good idea of the subject matter without complicating things. Also, Catherine did a great job of examining how this observation affects the human race. Catherine brought up some great points such as us not knowing if we are always right. Sometimes we have theories that are not confirmed or correct. Finally, Catherine did an excellent job of making the review simple and easy to read. Catherine did not use that much complex language or go into too much detail. However, that can be a good thing because she is not repeating herself or over-elaborating.
ReplyDeleteCatherine’s review was very good, but there would be a few things I would tweak. One thing I would change is her grammar. At times Catherine did not have commas in the correct space, and this made it difficult to read in certain parts of the review. She also had a few instances where she made silly mistakes such as using a comma instead of a period. Another thing I would have changed is that I would have gone more in-depth with the scientific aspects of Juno's findings. Catherine just said that they found out about Jupiter's core being large, but it would be nice to hear more of the science behind the finding.
I found Catherine's review to be very interesting because I enjoy Astrology as well as Chemistry. I enjoy learning about planets and found it very interesting to learn that scientists are not always correct in their findings. I found this topic of gravitational pulls to be very cool and astonishing. Overall, I enjoyed reading this article, and I hope I will get to read more like this in the future.
Teddy Wardell 9/13/18
ReplyDeleteBio C Odd Current Event Comment
Chang, Kenneth. "Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. . " The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web 13 September 2018...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
For this week's current event assignment I read Catherine Faville’s review on the article, “ Nasa’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-new and unexpected’” by Kenneth Chang. This article is about the Juno orbiter. This orbiter has been finding out a lot of information about the planet Jupiter. Researchers have found that Jupiter has a larger core then we thought and this leads to it having a large magnetic pole. Catherine did an excellent job of creating a brief and straightforward summary. This summary helps the reader get a good idea of the subject matter without complicating things. Also, Catherine did a great job of examining how this observation affects the human race. Catherine brought up some great points such as us not knowing if we are always right. Sometimes we have theories that are not confirmed or correct. Finally, Catherine did an excellent job of making the review simple and easy to read. Catherine did not use that much complex language or go into too much detail. However, that can be a good thing because she is not repeating herself or over-elaborating.
Catherine’s review was very good, but there would be a few things I would tweak. One thing I would change is her grammar. At times Catherine did not have commas in the correct space, and this made it difficult to read in certain parts of the review. She also had a few instances where she made silly mistakes such as using a comma instead of a period. Another thing I would have changed is that I would have gone more in-depth with the scientific aspects of Juno's findings. Catherine just said that they found out about Jupiter's core being large, but it would be nice to hear more of the science behind the finding.
I found Catherine's review to be very interesting because I enjoy Astrology as well as Chemistry. I enjoy learning about planets and found it very interesting to learn that scientists are not always correct in their findings. I found this topic of gravitational pulls to be very cool and astonishing. Overall, I enjoyed reading this article, and I hope I will get to read more like this in the future.
The Blog post written by Catherine Faville about the article NASA’s Jupiter mission reveals the ‘brand-New and unexpected written by Kenneth Chang. This article is about how scientists discovered the interior core of Jupiter is larger than it was previously said to be, causing it to have a stronger magnetic field. The information was received by the Juno Orbiter which landed on Jupiter in July. it can take photographs of the planet as well as use tools to look into the core of the planet. In the article it is stated that Scientists believe the core of the planet will uncover a rocky earth like core with a hydrogen base.
ReplyDeleteCatherine did a really good job of explaining what the purpose of the article was without using too many words or complex and hard to comprehend thoughts. . When she wrote “They have found that the interior core is bigger than it was originally thought to have been , also having a strong magnetic field around the planet.” It got the main idea through the readers head and kept it simple to refrain from losing the reader's attention. Faville also managed to tell the reader the worldwide effects of the article. When she stated “This article has a great effect on society, this is because this is just another example of how we don't know as much as we think we do about the planets.” she once again provided simple yet powerful summary of the effects on society this article plays a role in. she reminded the reader that there are always new things that can be discovered and studied. Faville provided the reader with some critique about the article which creates a sense of honesty to the reader. When she provides some constructive criticism which states: “However the writer could have added more background information on jupiter itself” it inspires the reader to read and study more about the topic. The reason I chose this article was because I took interest in the way Catherine Faville was able to provide a solid review of the Kenneth Chang article without losing the reader's attention with unneeded words and complexicality. By using simple sentences with powerful Key words she was able to get the point needed across.
As a whole, Faville did a great job getting her overall point across, but looking closely into the article entails some grammar and sentence structure mistakes. Many times throughout her review there are either missing words or punctuation. When Catherine wrote her article one sentence said:” This new information will aid scientist in learning more about our own planet Earth by looking at other.” It ended without completion. Although keeping it simple kept the reader's attention throughout the review, it also would of been nice for the writer to of gone a little bit more in depth about the discovery on Jupiter. When Faville states that “They found out things about Jupiter's core” it would of been much more insightful for her to include some background information along with some more context about the new discoveries made.
Overall, Catherine Faville represented and reviewed the article in a very straightforward and impactful way by telling us how the article has a worldwide affect but does lack some grammatical checking and is lacking Background information and additional insight into the topic
Chang, Kenneth. "Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. . " The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web 13 September 2018...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIsabella Bouvard
ReplyDeleteCore Biology 10H|C-Odd
Chang, Kenneth. "Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. . " The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 13 September 2018. .
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
I reviewed Catherine Faville’s post on the article“NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected” by Kenneth Chang for this week’s current event assignment. This article describes the Juno Orbiter and its journey studying the large planet of Jupiter. It has been researching this planet very much in particular, as scientists have found that Jupiter has a larger core than we initially thought it did which therefore concludes that it has a large magnetic pole. In this process, researchers have also discovered that Jupiter has more of a “fuzzy core” than the original assumptions of hydrogen and rock bases. In her response, Catherine created a concise summary as to what the article states, and went into depth about the impact it has on the human race however pertained to keeping the response simple and not overly complicated for the reader to understand. She explains how we do know a fair amount about the universe surrounding us, although there are still many discoveries scientists are yet to make. This can also help us with discoveries within our own planet as well, which is a very good point to bring up. Catherine made sure that the reader would be able to digest a fair amount of information without having to to provide the entirety of details that were mentioned throughout the article.
Although this was a very well written summary, there is a couple things I would suggest that could be changed. For example, she brought up some very good points in the second paragraph that she could have expanded upon a little more. In the second paragraph, she describes that “This new information will aid scientist in learning more about our own planet Earth by looking at other.” I feel as if she could’ve added a couple more lines to go into more depth on this note. There were also some grammatical errors throughout her summary as well: as in “the writer could have added more background information on jupiter itself”, the first letter (J) should be capitalized because it is a proper noun (the name of a planet in this instance). Also, in “For this current event, i read the article…” The “I” should be uppercase because it is a pronoun. Some of the sentences also seemed to drag on a bit, she could limit the amount of words and details put into every sentence and make them separate in some cases.
This article was very interesting for me, as I really like the mystery that space can present in certain cases. I like to learn how scientists can do further research and correct previous assumptions that may not have been correct to begin with. These scientists utilized skepticism with their findings, and discovered multiple occurrences that contradicted what they might have thought. This article made me think about all the things out there that we may presume is correct because scientists said they are, however might not be what we think is at all. I hope to read more articles as this one in the future as it was very well written and engaging.
Olivia Conniff
ReplyDeleteBiology 10H
10/10/18
Mr. Ippolito
Chang, Kenneth. "Chang, Kenneth. "NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 05 June 2017. . " The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 May 2017. Web. 13 September 2018. .
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
I chose to read Catherine Faville’s review of the article, “NASA’s Jupiter Mission Reveals the ‘Brand-New and Unexpected’.” The article itself was about how an orbiter, Juno’s mission, revealed new information about the planet Jupiter. It explained how the orbiter took pictures of the planet as well as used special tools in order to look deeper into the surface of the planet and find out more about its structure. The information that was revealed by this orbiter was that Jupiter’s interior core was actually much larger than it was thought to be. Catherine Faville went into depth about the article as well as the information it conveyed to the reader.
Personally, I believe that Catherine did an excellent job of reviewing this article. She successfully explained the essential idea of the article using clear and simple language. Furthermore, she gave helpful and constructive criticisms that the author of the article could use to better their writing. Catherine also did a great job of explaining the impact of these newfound discoveries on society. When she stated, “This article has a great effect on society, this is because this is just another example of how we don't know as much as we think we do about the planets.”, it clearly showed an in depth understanding of what the author intended for the reader to take away from the article.
While the review was well written over all, there are few areas that could be improved. First, I think Catherine could have expanded a bit more the points that she brought up in the second paragraph. I really enjoyed what she said about how these new findings are an example of how we don’t always know as much as we think we do, but I feel that she could have elaborated a bit more on that. Also, I felt that I would have understood the article much better, and what she was talking about in her criticisms, had she used a quote or two from the article.
Overall, I found this article review to be extremely interesting. I really enjoyed learning about how what we think may be true, is not always, especially when it comes to space and its mysteries. I chose to read this article review because the words “brand new” and “unexpected” really caught my eye. This really changes my perspective about all the observations we have made about space over time. Any one of these observations could possibly be untrue, or not completely true. This causes me to believe that anything about space that we think we know, could be the opposite.
Riley Morgan 1/13/19
ReplyDeleteCurrent event
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/science/nasa-juno-spacecraft-jupiter-storms.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fspace&action=click&contentCollection=space®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
The review by Catherine Faville written on the article “Jupiter Mission Reveals the Brand-New and Unexpected” by Kenneth Chang describes how jupiter is not what we had originally thought. She talks about how the interior core is larger than scientists had previously studied it was. It also has an extreme magnetic field around the planet. She talks about how all of this information was received from Juno’s mission whose an orbiter that arrived on the planet in July. The orbiter takes pictures and looks into the Earth's surface according to Catherine’s description. She says that scientists think they will find a core similar to Earth’s.
Catherine did a great job telling people about the article but she did not go in depth. She did not really mention names and she did not give any quotes from the article she was writing from. This is really a generalization about the article and I feel as if it does no cover the material needed.
I did however like how she explained the articles affect on Society. She said that it is just an example of how little we know about other planets and Galaxys. She says the new discovery “will aid scientists in learning more about our own planet Earth by looking at each other. I also liked her description of the events she named even though it was very brief. I liked how she complemented the article by saying it gave a lot of details and background information.
I chose this article because I find it so interesting learning about our galaxy and I have learned a bunch of new information about it from reading this.