Reflection on Project Two

In the post below, I will be answering questions to reflect on project two.

Traveling Man. "Havasupi Falls, Grand Canyon." May 16, 2014 via Wikipedia.  Public Domain Dedication.

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

From the first draft to the second, I completely rewrote my introduction and conclusion. In addition, I revised grammar and my sentence structure. I feel as though rewriting both my introduction and conclusion strengthened my essay. 

2. Point to global changes: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

I rewrote my thesis twice when I was revising. I tried to make it more specific to give the reader a better sense of direction for my analysis. I addition, I reorganized the content in each paragraph to make it more coherent and logical. 

3. What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?

After reconsidering the topic of the project, I decided to change aspects of my paper. I tried to ensure I stay on topic and analyze exactly how the author presented her argument and whether or not it was effective. In addition, I reconsidered my audience, which also led me to revise my essay a little. 

4. How do these shifts affect your credibility as an author?

I think reconsidering the purpose of the project solidifies my credibility because I am accomplishing the goal. In addition, by gearing my analysis to a specific audience, I was able to include information they can understand, thus strengthening my credibility even more. 

5. How will these changes better address the audience or venue?

My revision will make more sense to the audience. In addition, they accomplish the goal of project two which better addresses the overall purpose. Because of this, I was able to make an effective analysis. 

6. Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

I tried to vary my sentence structure throughout the paper. Also, my style is very analytical which I think suits the project being it is a rhetorical analysis. Because of this, both my sentence structure and style appeal to the intended audience and allow an effective analysis. 

7. How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

By making revisions with the audience in mind, I was able to construct an effective analysis. The intended audience is incoming engineering students; therefore, through my structure, tone and analysis, I was able to demonstrate how a person in our discipline presents an argument. Furthermore, the audience will be able to understand my purpose of explaining. 

8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?

No, I did not have to reconsider the conventions of a rhetorical analysis. In high school, we wrote many rhetoric essays so I already knew the conventions. I did, however, reconsider the purpose of the assignment a lot during the creative process.

9. Finally, how does the purpose of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?

Reflection helps me consider myself a pretty solid writer. In addition, reflecting on the project makes me realize the flaws in my creative process and how I should be more aware of the rhetorical context I'm writing in. Keeping the topic and purpose in mind helps construct an effective essay. 

Reflection:

Morgan has a very similar reflection to mine. In terms of conventions, we both already knew the conventions of a rhetorical analysis and did not have to reconsider them for this project. However, we both found it was helpful to keep the audience and overall purpose of project two when drafting. Just like Morgan, Isabel and I had similar reflections. We both feel as though it helps keeping the purpose in mind as well as the audience. In addition, I agree that a final reflection helps catch mistakes that would be otherwise overlooked.