Learning Outcome 1: I have learned that drafting and revising are essential in writing an effective essay and I have definitely improved in this area. While I was writing my first draft of Project 2, I thought that I knew what my argument was and which sources I wanted to use. It was during/after peer review when my views changed and I began revising. Specifically, I changed my thesis. This resulted in exchanging one source for another to better fit my thesis and facilitate the discussion. I also found that I was not analyzing the quotes nor explaining how the quotes relate/do not relate thoroughly enough, so I focused on improving that. Other things I focused on during the revision process were restructuring some sentences and changed some of the words I used. During peer review, someone commented that the way I phrased some things in my essay were confusing. I reworded the sentences to help the reader understand and get my point across. Someone also commented that I had described something in a way that was not necessarily true. I changed the language so that it would be correct. During this revision process, I learned that it is not detrimental to change your opinions and sources while writing and it may even be beneficial.
Learning Outcome 2: I believe that my ability to select, integrate, and explain quotes has improved. This can be seen in my final draft of Project 2. When it comes to selecting quotes, I looked for ones that supported an argument or offered a different perspective to facilitate a discussion. For the text-on-text moments in Project 2, I chose the two quotes used in paragraph 2 because they are similar in thought but have slightly different messages. I also had this idea in mind when selecting quotes for the third paragraph. In terms of integration, I wrote topic sentences that were general, yet related to the main idea of the quote(s) being used and gave some context of the quote so that the transition was not so jarring. Lastly, I analyzed quotes by explaining in my own words what the author might have meant and how it relates to my own argument, i.e. whether I agree or disagree with what the author is saying. That can be seen in the fourth paragraph of Project 2. The process for analyzing text-on-text moments was slightly different. I explained the meaning and relevance of the first quote in my own words and added a transition into the next one. I explained the second quote and discussed how the two authors are similar or different in their beliefs. Being able to explain others’ thoughts and connect them with my own has helped me strengthen my argument in this writing assignment.
Learning Outcome 3: My annotating process now is slightly different from my process in high school. In high school, my English teachers made it very clear that annotating a text requires more effort and highlighting something seemingly important. However, there was really no application of this idea until my senior year. During that year, my English teacher taught us these active reading methods and required us to thoroughly read and annotate a few sources that we were to use for a research paper and submit them to her. Because this was a graded assignment, I made sure to add notes or connections that corresponded with things that I highlighted. In this process, I found that it helped me understand the sources better and therefore strengthened my writing later. Throughout this semester of college, I strengthened the annotating strategies learned in high school. Specifically, I have learned to look for a thesis or language that is geared toward a certain idea or opinion. Looking at Gilroy’s piece, I find myself asking the same/similar questions she lists in the first paragraph when I read a text. I used this strategy while reading “What the Crow Knows” by Ross Andersen, as shown in the samples, and it helped me to see the main idea or message in the essay, i.e. why that essay matters. In addition to this, I find both highlighting and making notes in the margins to be helpful. While reading, I keep in mind that I might have to use the essay as evidence to support a claim in a future writing assignment. I also used this strategy while reading Andersen’s piece. I will write down a brief analysis, opinion or question beside the highlighted section so I do not forget the connection I made when I go back to the text. Overall, I now find myself more invested in reading the text when I am actually looking for certain things and addressing questions I have prior to reading.
Learning Outcome 4: I think I have definitely improved in revising my own essays and reviewing other students’ essays. As opposed to peer review in high school, I found that my ability to analyze the weaknesses of my own and other students’ writing has become stronger. I learned to focus on the students’ analyses of sources/quotes used and suggest how they can clarify or further explain things if need be. I also found myself paying more attention to paragraph structure and organization of information as I continued to review others’ essays. An example of this can be seen in the samples; I suggested to Steven that he should use a different quote in one of his paragraphs because the topic being discussed did not particularly match with the quote that was used. Reviewing others’ writing also helped me in my own writing. Peer review offers an opportunity to see things from different perspectives, which often times changed the way I thought about something or gave me ideas as to how I could improve my essay. Overall, the peer review processes throughout the semester allowed me to strengthen my ability in thinking critically about others’ writing as well as my own.
Learning Outcomes 5 and 6: I do not think I had any particular problems with adhering to MLA format. In terms of Project 2, the heading is formatted with the correct information, page numbers are formatted correctly, the margins are one inch, the sources are cited correctly, and so on. Pertaining to local revision, I find that my skills have improved. As mentioned in Learning Outcome 1, I changed some of my sentence structures in Project 2 because some of my explanations were worded in a way that did not make sense. There are also very few spelling errors, if any. I proofread to make sure that the authors’ names and all words were spelt correctly in the essay. In addition to this, I think that I became stronger in my ability to avoid run-on sentences by breaking them up and explain things using fewer words. Overall, I think my ability to avoid format and sentence-level errors is best exemplified in paper 2.
