Reflection on Project 2 Draft

Reflection on Project 2 Draft 

Reflection on previous works of writing is an instrumental part in determining how you feel about writing in general. Below is my reflection on my first draft of work for Project 2.

I read and peer reviewed Aaron's rough draft as well as Bailey's rough draft for project two. Both were very insightful and helped me recognize what I need to do to improve my draft for project 2. 

Burton, Gideon. "Peer Review Monster" 1/1/09 via flickr. Creative Commons Attribution.

• Identifiable Thesis:
• I think I have the basis of a thesis down in my current draft but based off of the insightful comments I got I think it is necessary for me to keep working on it to make it have more connotations rather than just being a summary of ideas. 
• Essay organization? 
• Based on comments on my essay as well as having reread it more I think that the body paragraphs of my essay begin with a central point but then have trouble staying focused on that central point. That being said, I think the overall organization is good but the individual paragraphs could have stronger organization. It has become apparent that often I get really close to having a paragraph which effectively speaks to the prompt of the assignment but then sometimes I will lose sight of that which is something I need to fix. 
• Identification/analyzation of the five elements of rhetorical situation?
• I touch on a number of things throughout my essay. I acknowledge the use of logical and emotional appeals while simultaneously recognizing the position of the author in the text. Additionally, recognition of the role that the audience plays was a big part of my writing but I think I could probably intersperse more of the context of the article into my paper. I was under the impression though that we had discussed in class that we should find the more effective rhetorical devices in the article which we are analyzing and then use those? If that is the case I think that by only analyzing the two most effective types of appeals in my article is somewhat effective in order to convey the overall effect to the reader. 
• How and why were certain rhetorical strategies employed? 
• I employed rhetorical strategies of logical and emotional appeals as well as recognition of the article's author. These seemed like the strongest elements of rhetorical strategies within the article and I feel would be the most effective at bolstering the claims of my paper. These were analyzed through direct quotes as well as summaries and the analysis of the implications these had on the reader. 
• Thoughtfully using evidence in each paragraph? 
• I employ a number of quotes throughout my writing but I think I could get better at using paraphrase and summary as well. Quotes are good to be analyzed but I think there is something to be said about a number of different ways of conveying evidence present within the text. This provides the reader with a wide variety of knowledge on the subject and with analyzation of them presents ideas for the reader to think deeply about.
• Leave your reader wanting more? 
• It became obvious to me through the peer review process that my conclusion paragraph is pretty much just a summary of my paper. That being said, I think I will need to rework it in order to make a more effective conclusion that also  makes readers leave thinking more deeply about the topic and eating more in the "so what" fashion.