Summarize this!
Below is a paragraph from the same article. Do not paraphrase it. Instead, summarize it. Boil it down, in your own words to its major points. It should be a lot shorter than the original. And it should be cited.
The word “sustainability” has gotten such a workout lately that the whole concept is in danger of floating away on a sea of inoffensiveness. Everybody, it seems, is for it whatever “it” means. On a recent visit to a land-grant university’s spanking-new sustainability institute, I asked my host how many of the school’s faculty members were involved. She beamed: When letters went out asking who on campus was doing research that might fit under that rubric, virtually everyone replied in the affirmative. What a nice surprise, she suggested. But really, what soul working in agricultural science today (or for that matter in any other field of endeavor) would stand up and be counted as against sustainability? When pesticide makers and genetic engineers cloak themselves in the term, you have to wonder if we haven’t succeeded in defining sustainability down, to paraphrase the late Senator Moynihan, and if it will soon possess all the conceptual force of a word like “natural” or “green” or “nice.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Erin Crane's paraphrasing exercise
ReplyDeletePlagiarism paraphrasing
The Union of concerned Scientists has estimated that a minimum of 70 percent of the antibiotics in use in America are given to animals being raised on Factory Farms. Keeping a large number of pigs, or poultry, or cows in tiny, dirty confines would be impossible without the regular use of antibiotics to keep the animals from dying from contagious diseases. The fact that they also speed up the animal's maturation also lends itself well to being used in industrial farms, but the truth is that without these drugs, meat production performed on the scale and with the intensity we do, it would not be able to be sustained for a few months, never mind decades.
Legitimate paraphrase
According to Michael Pollan in his article in his article entitled "Our Decrepit Food Factories", a group of scientist called the Union of Concerned Scientists have performed studies into the amount of antibiotics that are used in the production of meat on large scale factory farms. Their figures show that "a minimum of 70 percent of the antibiotics used in America are fed to animals living on factory farms". This large scale production of meat would be impossible without these antibiotics due to the unsanitary conditions in which the animals are kept, which promotes the spread of lethal diseases among the animals. Another benefit to the meat industry is the fact that these antibiotics speed up the rate at which these animals mature and are ready for the market. However, the industrial meat industry would fail within months if these medications were not available. (Pollan)
“Sustainability” has received a workout because the concept is in danger of running away. Mostly everyone is for what “it” means. On a trip to visit a land-grant university’s new sustainable institute, Pollan asked how many school’s members contribute to sustainability. She replied that letters went out on campus asking if anyone was doing research that might help the rubric and everyone replied that they were. The truth is that who working agricultural science today would be against sustainability? When we see pesticide makers and genetic engineers saying they are, you must wonder if we have succeeded in defining it, to paraphrase Senator Moynihan, and if it will soon possess all the conceptual force of a word like “natural” or “green” or “nice.”
ReplyDeleteIn today’s world, sustainability has become an accepted term and idea. Unfortunately the definition leaves room for liars. Many organizations, such as pesticide makers, seem to promote this sustainable way of life, when in reality they are not helping but hurting the cause. The phrase must be clearly defined before we make progress. (Pollan)
In environmentalism, the word sustainability pops up a lot. However, some feel overuse of the word has taken away from its true meaning in the context of environmentalism. Everyone appears to be for sustainability but the word has become so commonplace that it has become watered down and a label for countless ideas. Senator Moynihan believes that when pesticide makers and genetic engineers use the word sustainability, there is no longer any concept of true sustainability, the term has just become a buzzword for any industry.
ReplyDeleteThe word "sustainability" has been thrown around so much lately that the concept of the word is in danger of escaping away in a slew of inoffensiveness."Everybody, it seems, is for it whatever "it" means" reads the excerpt. On a recent visit to a land-grant university's brand new sustainability insitute the host said that most memebrs of the schools faculty were involved. She then went on to say that what kind of person working in the agricultural science today would actually be against the idea of sustainability. When genetic engineers and pesticide makers try and hide themselves behind the term you have to wonder if we haven't defined sustainability 100%. Senator Moynihan said that the term will soon possess all of the conceptual forces of the word like "green"or "natural" or "nice".
ReplyDelete