Option #1
How were you taught to revise? When you revise for school, do you tend to focus on micro issues, as the students in Sommers’ study did? Or do you focus on global issues of argument and audience, as the experienced writers in Sommers’ study did? How did you learn your revision techniques? Describe your writing process using Sommers' terms, and then analyze why you write the way you do. Use specific examples from both Sommers' research and your own experiences.
Truthfully if I ever had the choice to take an English class or another subject, I would definitely take the other. Through out my English experiences I have learned that every teacher, professor, or instructor has there own way and usually says “ We write my way.” So I have always found it extremely difficult to learn to properly write. From grammar nazis to elaborate sentence melters, I have had my fair share of english lessons and I hate it.
In Nancy Sommers article “Revison Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” she has pointed out many of the mistakes I have committed as a writer and at the same time also writing some of the techniques I have attempted to use. When it comes to writing I tend to focus on the micro issues and the technicalities of the paper, after that I attempt to fit in the ties of the global issues and try to reach an audience as the experienced writers would do.
At the beginning I was taught to write in a very strict way and follow the guidelines, Opening sentence, thesis, body paragraph, body paragraph, conclusion. Boom that was a paper fit for an A, with of course that you had precise spelling and some proper grammar thrown in. Then I was taught to revise, as Sommers points out for student writers under reviewing, “...Usually when I read what I have written...then I go and get my thesaurus.” Checking for repetition of words and how boring they sound, that was one of the many chores I go through while revision.
After a few years of English I came to learn a new way to write and revise once I had started my college courses. My instructor said, “Forget everything you were taught in grammar school and high school.” Funny as it seemed it appeared that I was the only one who was surprised and confused. All of our essays began with a rough drafts that consisted of a finished essay that she said to write the way you were taught. After that next draft would consist of clever ways of connecting sentences, “melting together,” confused because I always thought run-on sentences were bad. The following draft was to use different punctuation, for example when to use the hyphen or when to use the semi-colon. By the third and final draft you had a bunch of alliteration, quotations, and sources. Trying to accomplish a word count and succeed in proving your argument proved quite difficult.
I am very much part of Sommers’s student writers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
(¶ 1)Introduction engages the audience- relatable. Also Good imagery/description here "grammar nazis to elaborate sentence melters" paints a picture well.
ReplyDelete(¶ 2)In your essay the argument seems to be this "When it comes to writing I tend to focus on the micro issues and the technicalities of the paper, after that I attempt to fit in the ties of the global issues and try to reach an audience as the experienced writers would do."
You provide much evidence as to how you are like a student writer so I think you could drop the "then add in the global issues" because if you keep the argument specific to the point, to me, makes it stronger.
->write like that of the student writers because all your english courses have been so different from one another you get lost. Play it safe and revise the technical stuff.
(¶3)"At the beginning I was taught to write in a very strict way and follow the guidelines, Opening sentence, thesis, body paragraph, body paragraph, conclusion." This piece of text is strong. This is still the outline for a good essay. The thesis of course is your argument and body is the support in favor of your argument.
Other commentary:
I think you analyzed the why you write the way you do.
A few questions you can ask yourself to really work on and breakdown your essay can be:
What is your process of writing? How do you start? How do you figure out your argument and build the body of support for it? etc.
Using humor in your opening paragraph brought me in as a reader and a student, totally able to relate to what you're saying.
ReplyDeleteIt flows into your second paragraph where you clearly make your argument for the essay: "When it comes to writing I tend to focus on the micro issues and the technicalities of the paper, after that I attempt to fit in the ties of the global issues and try to reach an audience as the experienced writers would do."
--I too think that if your argument is that you identify with the student writer description in Sommer's article, then dropping the latter half of that sentence will yield a stronger essay.
Your 3rd paragraph starts with a background of how you were taught to write. I think that this way of organization is still a good way to produce an essay.
Your last paragraph also contains background information as to why you are confused now but I think you need to include more support for your main argument here, perhaps with more specific examples of why you focus on micro issues versus global issues. Providing an example for the last sentence would strengthen your argument as well: "Trying to accomplish a word count and succeed in proving your argument proved quite difficult."
I think this is a good, strong start. You have a grasp on what troubles you regarding writing. Expanding the argument a bit more with more specific examples will strengthen (and lengthen!) your essay.