Chapter Four, Lemke, made some important points about learning style. Visual rhetoric is not implemented as often or as effectively as it could be because educators feel that such information (audio, videos, etc.) are not literary enough to be considered anything other than a guide. The curricular learning paradigm sets benchmarks in learning, certain aims and texts that must be read at certain points. Students rebel and, in the end, they are only familiar with a few texts and the principles of the middle class. Interactive learning is more individual-based, and focuses on allowing learners to decide what they want to read and become educated about. For this reason, they would be able to have more direct contact with visual rhetoric and would likely absorb the information and be able to implement it better. Chapte Five, Bernhardt, was actually kind of old territory for me. It was the basis of a lot of what I learned at UT in the journalism program that image and words can be used differently, but both are necessary and must be equally respected. Also, that in order to effectively convey information, we must be a respectable source but not view ourselves as superior to our audience. Language should not be ostentatious or unnecessarily coded and structure and short, direct sections or blocks of text should be used so that the reader can focus on his/her interests and absorb information quickly. Chapter 27 dealt with things such as the difference between a memorial and a monument and the interpretation of visual rhetoric (in this case the Vietnam Veterans Memorial) through preconceived notions. That people were offended by the memorial being black (consequently negative), close to the ground, and more "feminine" than other structures shows the most common biases people had toward the structure and its young, Asian female creator.