I was not sure how to add in a transition word to make my writing flow together and where I did decide to add transitions in my paper, they would be the same one, which made my paper sound repetitive. In the first essay I wrote called, “Helping Others While Helping Yourself” I struggled with my transitions greatly. In the first and second paragraph I used
In my argument essay, I tried to voice a strong opinion, but fell short. Although our process analysis essays and cover letters haven’t been graded yet, I believe that I portrayed a more confident tone and style in those than I did in my argument essay. While writing those particular essays, I focused more on meeting the requirements sufficiently and voicing my opinion effectively. I believe that gaining this kind of insight on essay-writing is a reflection of improvement in my writing skills and overall
In term of organization and coherence, as Ha commented I also believe that I managed to keep a good flow of idea and to keep all my ideas on topic. Normally, writing an essay of this length ( 1000-1500 words), I would unconsciously go off topic resulting in a misleading essay. Therefore, Ha’s confirmation of my coherence is really satisfying. Nevertheless, as Ha mentioned in her analysis, my use of linking words is mechanically and repetitive. This may be cause by my inflexibility in words choice and lack of time to carefully examine my essay since I started working on the essay quite late.
After receiving the prompt for this essay, I hurried to the books to find textual evidence. Looking back at my decisions now, I believe that I should have spent more time brainstorming the essay so that I would not be stuck in the middle of the essay, not knowing what to write. Because I used up so much time writing my essay, I had little time to edit and revise my essay thoroughly. I was only able to skim through it, leaving numerous amounts of errors in my essay. Additionally, I would say that my essay 's quality is poor because of the lack of analysis, the lack of organization, and the grammatical errors.
This is where I learned the most about myself as both a writer and a reader. Initially, when writing my first draft, I focused on just the most prominent aspects of the article such as how Schulz framed her argument through a story and kept things factually and historically based rather than outwardly asserting her bias. Both subjects became the crux of my analysis, but my original draft lacked the analysis aspect a bit in that I had to dig deeper and provide better examples to support my stance. For example, in my original draft I focused a bit too much on bias and went to the extreme of saying that Schulz kept all bias out of her narrative and kept it completely objective. After further digging into Schulz’s background, and for what publication this article was established under, I had to rephrase this subject to acknowledge the bias but counter-argue why her credentials does not devalue the points she makes in “Citizen Khan.” I was prompted to reevaluate the phrasing and depth of the topics I addressed in my analysis by the comments on the first draft by my Professor.
It was difficult for me since one of my weaknesses in writing was to decide on the content before writing. It could take me hours to do this. Therefore, most of the time, I dealt with this by running away from the decision and just writing freely. This course taught me the process of writing, which as it was written in the article is it divided to three main stages: prewriting, writing and revising. Before rushing to the actual writing, there was the first stage, prewriting.
The first essay in my portfolio is the “Non-Academic Discourse” essay. This essay was very hard for me to write because I don't have many communities outside of school so I really had to think about what I should write about. When I was writing this paper I was really trying to focus on my punctuation which has been probably the hardest thing for me to understand in English. After writing this essay, I learned that I really need to focus on many things in my writing such as my transition, punctuation, and format.
Although I feel that my speech had a strong structure, I do feel that my slides and I could have done more to make the presentation better. I think that I did not present enough information with slides or press the importance of the ones I did use enough. I also feel that I sped through my presentation too fast and should have tried harder to slow down so that my audience could follow along easier. I also had trouble with remembering what it is I needed to say once I stepped in front of the class, even after many practices rounds with my roommate and study group. This caused me to frequently look at my note cards, taking away from my eye contact and physical gestures.
Discuss – Overall, this speech was challenging from start to finish. Developing a concise and compelling speech was not an easy task. I recorded it so many times by the time I was finished with the speech I felt extremely tired. In the end of this assignment, I felt confident about the subject content and how I delivered my message. Area of improvement – An area of improvement is to be able to record a speech like this in a smaller time-period.
The last new strategy that I tried was referring back to my readable plan, which helped me immensely when I forgot what strategy I was going to use for a section, or when I found a different strategy to use, it helped to look there to see the other strategies I had already used. My readable plan was also helpful when going back to the sources I had found already and seeing if I wanted to use them still or if I needed to find new
I’m fairly confident that I at the very least passed the test with a 3, maybe even a 4. I think that I did as well as I usually do on multiple choice, which hopefully means that I got more than half of them right, but there were more than a few questions that I had trouble with and I ended up not being very confident with my answers for them, however on the whole I think I did alright. For the essays, I spent WAY too much time on the DBQ (I went into the rhetorical analysis time in order to finish it) and I didn’t do a very good time synthesising and using the sources. I’m fairly certain that I answered the prompt thoroughly, but I relied too much on outside information and didn’t use many quotes from the sources. For the rhetorical analysis,
When I thought about my essay I realized I never truly revised my essays, I just cleaned it up a little then turned it in. Making sure there is minimal grammar errors is important, because it will make it easier for the readers to understand the essay, just like the sentence and thesis errors. When I would review my drafts for each essay, I started to look harder for these errors with each essay as the class progressed. I started to find more and more errors that I know I would not have found in the beginning of this class. There is an article that helped me learn to truly revise my essays, the title is, “Revision Strategies of Student Writers”, it is by Nancy Sommers.
I was a bit brought down because I didn’t get my interview. Fortunately I was still able to do a survey and get the perfect amount of results. I feel like my paper is very powerful. I tried to improve my word choice and language so that I wouldn’t get a lower grade like we discussed. Also in general I am just really exited for this topic.
I incorrectly assumed that rhetorical analysis would parallel the methods of analysis of graphs or free-body diagrams so on my first rhetorical analysis essay I struggled. Given complete freedom in an analytical situation, I panicked and consequently hit writer’s block. I have been used to analyzing data within the constraints of physics, not analyzing non-fictional prose within the constraints of my own judgment. As one could probably infer, I did not do well on that essay. Resilient, I immediately became determined to improve and conquer the rhetorical analysis, partly because to remove the atrocious grade from my report card.