Depending on the topic, my essay writing will either start with a pen or a keyboard. If it's short and to the point, one to two pages, I will just type away. If it's a little bit longer and has more detail, I will create an outline on paper, writing down my main points, so I will remember everything I want to write about. I will sit at my desk if my room is quiet and put some music on.
I normally start off with an introduction that will capture the reader's attention. Although normally I always end up staring at my computer screen for at least a half hour. So then, I start to write the body of the essay, working on developing my main points and the other information in a very organized way. If something comes to me, I will go back to the introduction.
If there is a paragraph that has information that HAS to be in the essay, but I don't like the actual paragraph and how it was formatted, I will bold the paragraph and come back to it. If I'm stuck on something else or finished with the paper, I will go back to all the things I don't like and try to fix them.
Normally, I will write my entire paper out like it is the finished draft. That way, I will know exactly what I want to say and I can only get better from there. If my ideas aren't almost completely developed, I have a tendency of not remembering what I wanted to say.
I've never actually technically "workshopped" before. Normally, we just have peer review, where you switch papers with someone in your class and they critique it for you. Last semester, I had a really good peer review partner. We not only critiqued the normal grammatical errors and such, but we actually got together and bounced ideas off each other to make our papers better.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
Homework - January 26th
1) A workshop draft shouldn't necessarily have really good structure and good grammar. It should be more a mix of ideas in a general essay form. The main points and details should be there. The purpose is to put your ideas on paper and be able to have it critiqued for a better paper in the end. The audience should be whoever you are writing the final paper for, as well as the people in your workshop group. The purpose and audience for the workshop draft is different because it is more geared toward your peers as far as the audience goes. Also, the workshop draft, like I said before, is just a general essay form of all the information. The final draft should be geared toward a specific audience, not including your workshop group (unless that is the point of the essay). It should have all the important information, main points and details, in proper form, grammar, and structure.
2) If I was in a workshop group with the person who wrote Essay R, I would help him out with his paper by critiquing the spelling and grammar mistakes. Also, I would tell him that he should organize his information in a more "flowing" way so it will be easier to read and so it will make a lot more sense.
2) If I was in a workshop group with the person who wrote Essay R, I would help him out with his paper by critiquing the spelling and grammar mistakes. Also, I would tell him that he should organize his information in a more "flowing" way so it will be easier to read and so it will make a lot more sense.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Evaluation of Essay R
Essay R was written to provide the differences between professional wrestling in the past and present. The information itself is well researched, but the way the writer formed that information into the paper wasn't that good. I would give the paper a C- for the reasons that follow.
The writer probably should've read the Composition at Virginia Tech book before writing the paper. There are many punctuation errors, mostly consisting of the lack of commas. Many of the compound sentences do not have commas conjoining them like they are supposed to. Also, sequence words are supposed to have commas following them and the writer did not put these him. There are a few spelling mistakes which hinder my ability to read through the paper without noticing. The writer also could have used a broader range of vocabulary. The format of the paper wasn't very well organized. It kind of jumped from topic to topic making it a little bit hard to follow.
The writer also could have used a lot more sources. There were only three citations in the paper which seems like he didn't source everything that he researched.
Overall, I could tell that the writer was very passionate about his topic. It was quite informative but because of all the grammatical errors, it wasn't able to receive a grade that, with a little more effort, could have been received.
The writer probably should've read the Composition at Virginia Tech book before writing the paper. There are many punctuation errors, mostly consisting of the lack of commas. Many of the compound sentences do not have commas conjoining them like they are supposed to. Also, sequence words are supposed to have commas following them and the writer did not put these him. There are a few spelling mistakes which hinder my ability to read through the paper without noticing. The writer also could have used a broader range of vocabulary. The format of the paper wasn't very well organized. It kind of jumped from topic to topic making it a little bit hard to follow.
The writer also could have used a lot more sources. There were only three citations in the paper which seems like he didn't source everything that he researched.
Overall, I could tell that the writer was very passionate about his topic. It was quite informative but because of all the grammatical errors, it wasn't able to receive a grade that, with a little more effort, could have been received.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Comp@VT Exercise 2H
1) I imagine that the rhetorical situation . The writer's main purposes seem to be to analyze Gabriel McVey's editorial that was featured in the Collegiate Times. His audience's are his teacher and anyone who didn't read the editorial. I know because the analysis he wrote was for his 1106 English class, also the way he wrote his analysis, it seemed like he was speaking to college students.
2) The genre conventions I recognized in the text are argument, editorial, and report. I wrote two argumentative papers last semester in English 1105. I have written a number of reports for Engineering last semester and in high school. I have read many different argumentative newspaper and magazine articles as well as several editorials and numerous reports. Reports are most familiar to me as a convention.
3) The writer might have used persuasion in his rhetorical analysis. Argument gives the facts about the editorial but doesn't necessarily tell you if the editorial is effective or not. Persuasion also gives the facts but depending on the authors standpoint on the editorial may state more boldly if the editorial was effective or not.
4)The author could have used a different media, e.g. television. He could have read the article and then stated his rhetorical analysis and opinion. This would target audiences that aren't necessarily college students. The author would need to engage his audience more than he would if he just wrote a paper.
5)A teacher might use editorial to teach or inform his/her class. A social worker might use argument to place someone in a spot where they should be rather than a place that isn't safe. A scientist would use a report to express data and maybe an experiment or theory.
2) The genre conventions I recognized in the text are argument, editorial, and report. I wrote two argumentative papers last semester in English 1105. I have written a number of reports for Engineering last semester and in high school. I have read many different argumentative newspaper and magazine articles as well as several editorials and numerous reports. Reports are most familiar to me as a convention.
3) The writer might have used persuasion in his rhetorical analysis. Argument gives the facts about the editorial but doesn't necessarily tell you if the editorial is effective or not. Persuasion also gives the facts but depending on the authors standpoint on the editorial may state more boldly if the editorial was effective or not.
4)The author could have used a different media, e.g. television. He could have read the article and then stated his rhetorical analysis and opinion. This would target audiences that aren't necessarily college students. The author would need to engage his audience more than he would if he just wrote a paper.
5)A teacher might use editorial to teach or inform his/her class. A social worker might use argument to place someone in a spot where they should be rather than a place that isn't safe. A scientist would use a report to express data and maybe an experiment or theory.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)