Reflection on Project Two

This blog post will look over my own revision process and how I composed the final draft of my last essay.

Hallye Becker, "Screen shot from my computer aka this was too funny to not put on my blog"
October 21st,2015

1. My first draft lacked a lot of evidence and analysis. The transitions were choppy, my introduction was too long, and there was not enough "directness" in me leading the direction of the essay. Since I tend to revise several times, I worked through each paragraph quite a few times to try to really build up the ideas more and more in each revision.                                           
2. The "revised" thesis I wrote was much stronger than the first one I wrote. It was more specific in terms of what I would be discussing in the essay, though even then it needed to have a more "explicit" standpoint. My organization stayed mostly the same, though the transitions and linkage of ideas between them were made more clear.                                                                        
3. These changes were mostly brought about by peer editing. It was pointed out to me some arguments about my audience were unclear or weak, so I reconsidered who the author was speaking for and tried to be more specific.                                                                                         
4. I would argue that these revisions made me more credible. Having a weak rhetorical analysis in a paper directly specified for such would make me look uncertain about the topic I am writing about, and would likely make me look less credible. Good revisions make the author look more credible.                                                                                                                                                
5. This paper is interesting in that you really have to consider two audiences: who the author is speaking to, and who you are discussing this audience for. By having a greater understanding of who the author was speaking for can help me find the right language to explain the rhetoric used, and make the paper more accessible to my own audience.                                                        
6. Some of my sentences were a bit choppy or had incorrect punctuation. My revisions attempted to improve the overall flow of the writing and keep a consistent style that would appeal to my audience.                                                                                                                                              
7. As mentioned before, a clear and well-written paper is likely to be more accessible to a larger audience. I may be able to look at my own writing and understand the argument I was attempting to make, but the reader may end up confused or lost.                                                         
8. I would occasionally refer to the rubric/conventions of this assignment to assure myself I was writing the paper correctly. I rarely had to reconsider my conventions, as I have written several rhetorical analysis papers before, but writing to a very specific audience was new for me.               
9. Each paper I write helps shape and consider my identity as a writer. I would like to consider myself a good writer, but it is noticeable that when an assignment does not have my full interest or investment that my writing falters. I would consider this one of my weaker papers, as I struggled some with finding enough content to argue everything to the extent I desired. I need to be aware that not every paper will capture my full attention, and work to create a strong paper none the less.

Reflection

I read Michael's blog first. He and I agreed on a lot of topics, such as how revision makes us more credible authors and how we felt the changes we made helped address our audience better. However, Michael seemed more assured of his final paper of than I feel about mine. It made me feel like I may need to go back and finish up revising one or two more quick times so that my essay is stronger. Perhaps I'll read his for comparison.
I also read Evan's reflection.  Again, Evan and I agreed frequently. We both felt as though we have a stronger researching background than an effective analysis background, and felt like we focused too much on summarization at times. This will something I will definitely need to work on, because my field frequently requires in-depth analysis. 

Punctuation, Part 2

In this post, I will continue a reflection on the "Punctuation" section of Rules for Writers." I will be discussing the comma, apostrophe, and quotation marks.


The Comma

 A few notable functions in the "commas" section is the option to use a comma only after an introductory clause, listing a series of adjectives, coordinating conjunctions, and more. The restrictive and nonrestrictive elements of the comma is important. Knowing what needs to be separated by a comma (nonessential information) and what does not can make your writing feel more smooth. Commas are also used to separate years from days to indicate time, set off a quote, and isolate nouns to direct attention to who the sentence is addressing.

The Apostrophe

The main function of the apostrophe is matters of possession. It indicates if a noun is possessive by using and " 's" at the end of the word, unless there is an "s" at the end of the word already. In this case, adding an apostrophe at the end of the word will indicate possession. Apostrophes may also be used for marking an omission with contractions. It should not be used to create the plural forms of words, letters of numbers, and do not use it when the noun isn't possessive.  In formal writing, there are some more specific guidelines. They should be used to cite works, but contractions should be avoided entirely in formal writing.

Quotation Marks

Quotations marks are frequently used in literary analysis essays or other scholarly works. Quotations marks are used mainly for quoting other's works. Using proper citation and essential quotes can seriously strengthen a paper, and quotation marks are key to this. When quoting someone speaking, use a "singular" quotation mark (aka an apostrophe ' ) to enclose the speaker's quotation inside the "outer" quotation.  They have other functions as well: titles of papers, words used as words, punctuation, brackets and ellipses.


REVISING

While revising my own draft, I came across a few punctuation errors that were easily fixable. The sentence
"For example, in Spiegelman’s opening line to the interviewer’s question about Maus’s ban, he claims he worries the decision is..." has some unnecessary commas and improper apostrophe usage. The same line could be changed to read 
"For example, Spiegelman’s opening line to the interviewer’s question about Maus’ ban claims he worries the decision is...".  
Another sentence that needed revision is 
"However, it’s linkage to a dark and brutal history has ruined this peaceful interpretation." There is no noun for "it" to take possession of, nor is it a proper contraction of "it is". The sentence should be changed to 
"However, its linkage to a dark and brutal history has ruined this peaceful interpretation."

Copy for Paragraph Analysis 2

This blog post will have a link to a detailed paragraph analysis on my rhetorical analysis paper.

After reading and analyzing my essay, it seems pretty clear that I definitely need to put more work into the analysis of this. While each paragraph has a fairly clear main point, not all of them are very well developed and could use more evidence. The internal organization is pretty straight forward as a "point by point" sort of essay. However, paragraphs could use smoother transitions and link ideas more strongly between them.

It can be found right HERE.

Revised Conclusion

This blog post does the same thing as my previous one, in which I threw out my old introduction and started from scratch. This time it will be my conclusion.

Again, I added a link HERE to view.

Revised Introduction

This blog post will take my old introduction and thesis and throw it straight into the garbage. Which is probably a good thing.

Here's a mouse in a trash can. Get it? Because the paper is on 'Maus' and I threw my old thesis...nevermind. I think I'm funny.

Mestdagh, Mia and Steve "Mouse in the trash can" June 15, 2006
Attribution sharealike

Since my introductions ran a little long, I added a link HERE to view my new and old introductions.

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

This blog post will look at the drafts I read for the last post ( Swati's draft and Victoria's draft.) and compare them to my own. Admittedly, I have had a very busy few weeks and have not had time to write a very complete draft yet. I will fix this very soon.

Mancini, Anderson. "Reflection" November 19th, 2008
Generic License 

Do you have an identifiable thesis?
Yes. While it is not as strong as Swati's intro and thesis, there is a a direct claim I am making about my paper. It needs more strength and detail added to it and should be more "explicit".

How have you decided to organize your essay?
 My organization is very similar to Victoria's and Swati's. I chose for each paragraph to have a specific discussion of a device my author used. By organizing it by rhetorical device, it keeps a flow to it that avoid confusion.

Did you identify and analyze several important elements of the text's rhetorical situation?
 My elements are identified, but as of right now my draft is still basically in the "outline" phase. To be on par with the other essays I have read, I need to add much more analysis and thought to my text.

Did you explain how these strategies were employed?
Roughly, yes. My outline has "evidence" attached to each of my arguments. Swati did a very good job of just looking at what the author did to reach their audience and how they used their rhetorical devices, and I should look to her paper for some guidance.

Are you thoughtfully using evidence?
 Look above. My paper needs a lot more thought. Both Swati and Victoria did a fairly careful analysis of how the evidence was used to create a point.

Do you leave your reader wanting more?
I would say yes. Right now because my draft is very very rough. Half-jokes aside, Swati's paper definitely wanted to make me read more about her topic and field. Mine is weak, but hopefully can garner the audience's interest.

Punctuation, Part 1

This post will review topics covered in the "Punctuation" section of the 'Rulers for Writers' book.

The Semicolon

I chose this section due to the fact that I occasionally confuse the use of semicolons versus colons. Semicolons are used for closely related clauses that have a clear relation without a conjunction necessarily being required, and require two independent clauses. It essentially takes the place of the omitted conjunction. It can also be used for items in a series that has internal punctuation. Transitional phrases for semicolons are preceded by the semicolon and are usually followed by a comma. While I was aware of most of these things, a review of what semicolons should and should not be used for was a good refresher.

The Colon

Again, I decided a review of this form of punctuation would be helpful for me. Colons are used after an independent clause to draw attention to the next thing that will follow. That could be a list, an appositive, a quote, or a summary/explanation. It also has conventional functions. A greeting in a letter, telling time, proportions, titles and subtitles, bibliographies, etc. It is different from the semicolon, because the colon must be preceded by an independent clause but does not necessarily need one after.

Other Punctuation

This includes dashes, slashes, parenthesis, etc. Dashes are used to set aside/bring attention to information that needs emphasis, introduce a shift or a dramatic change in tone or thought. Parenthesis offer supplemental information, while brackets are used for things like paraphrasing. Slashes were ones I was less familiar with. Slashes can be used to separate up to two or three lines of poetry. More than that should become a quotation, which I did not know. That is their basic proper grammatical use.


REFLECTION

I first read Swati's draft. Not only was her essay very thorough and well-written, she had nearly flawless usage of of the punctuation I reviewed. For example, her use of parenthesis was well used to give extra information. " 'But growing usable tissue in the lab is notoriously difficult; the advent of 3-D printers that can print ink made of cells has offered a ray of hope” (para. 12)' " Her addition of the parenthesis to lead the reader to a specific paragraph was very well done.


I also read Victoria's draft. Victoria had good punctuation, and even used colons in her title like I reviewed in this section. Her title "Stem Cell Controversy: Ethics or Science?" uses the colon perfectly. It gave me ideas of how to use the colon similarly in my own paper. She had some small comma errors, but nothing that was unfixable or clearly wrong.