March 9, 2013
Department of English
University of Washington
Ever since I studied abroad in the U.S., improvement in argumentative writing was the most difficult part as an international student. While I naturally acquired listening and speaking skills as time passed, writing required me to practice it for betterment. In high school, I had trouble in English literature class because it was difficult to fully express my thoughts through in writing in English. Calculus was a clear cut for me with concrete answer while author’s theme in novel was ambiguous to define. After 10 weeks of Eng111 class with you, my ability to analyze complex text has been improved, and I write papers that have clearer claims with supportive stakes. All my papers deal with genre/audience awareness and creating strong arguments to get my point across. Through writing essays on developing complex claims that matter, being able to argue them, and revise them so that they are polished ended up me fully understanding the outcomes and how essential they are to writing worthwhile papers.
Short Paper1 was the most enjoyable assignment because it was about telling my own magical experience not having required format. I met Outcome1 through short paper1 as I addressed genre and audience awareness by applying conventional tone in overall diary entry as if audience is my lifelong best friend: “Today, instead of complaining of mom like I always did to you, I wanna…that made me realize mom’s great love.” I also conveyed my story in depth by creating helpful visuals, such as picture of my mom and me, so that it can help bring up the image of close relationship of mom and me. Although I believed I understand genre and audience awareness, after peer review and catalyst review, I discovered that I still missed audience awareness while telling the story so I mainly concentrated on revising for audience. To engage audience in more familiar tone, I put some sentences begin with “You know” to demonstrate previous knowledge of audience and intimate relationship. Beyond your comment, I strengthened relationship with audience even more by fabricating a story, such as “You were so surprised and eventually we cried together…haha what a best friend.” Surprisingly, as a result of 10 weeks of this course, I was able to find out my weakness on audience awareness that I had not realized at first time. At a time breaking down second paragraph as you advised, I reread my paper and noticed that I put too much detail that sound redundant. Hence I omitted some unnecessary parts of the story, especially in paragraph 2 and 3 instead I added more audience engagement. This paper becomes basis for following papers because it allowed me to thoroughly understand Outcome1, the demands of a particular genre and audience that are necessary for academic writing.
Initially, I found Short paper2 challenging to write because it was difficult for me to analyze Suvin’s claim and stakes in his writing. As I mentioned, I had hard time compiling a complex arguments in writing since high school. To be expected, my first draft of Short Paper2 was weak; I missed some of Suvin’s points and poorly analyzed the difference between SF and each of realistic/non-realistic genres: “Non-realism literature is different from Science fiction although it offers strangeness to readers. Literatures of non-realism genre such as folktale, myth, and fantasy have strangeness but since it is totally impossible and unrealistic, it does not lead readers to cognitive estrangement and critical thinking.” Before I began revising, I reread Suvin’s essay and notes that I took in class to get a guideline for revision. Through peer review in class, I was able to map out necessary points of Suvin’s essay for critical summary that I initially struggled with. As a result of revision, my final draft fulfilled Outcome 1,2, and 4 as I clearly incorporated Suvin’s claim and abridged his main points in my own words, which is the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document