As I came into this class, I was truly uncertain of my abilities to write. In the past I got by in writing classes by with the minimum doing just enough to satisfy my teachers. This is how I approached Writing 39B and I was able to get by, but I quickly found out that this is would not possible for Writing 39C. This class presented a challenge to me, in order to overcome this challenge I had to engage myself in the class and develop the necessary writing and researching skills. Primarily I focused more on the research and rhetoric sides of writing, as is the nature of this class. I had adequate writing ability from previous classes, so my goal with this class is train my researching abilities. 

            Something our professor, Lisa, told us at the start of the class was that the research should guide the writing, not the other way around. In writing 39B, I often found myself struggling to find evidence to support my claim, however little did I know that the reason for this struggle is that I made a claim without having sufficient evidence. This flaw carried over to some of my earlier works, one being my HCP prospectus.

Here I make a claim that the mental health care system in America is lacking. Though this claim isn’t incorrect, it limited my range the range of research I was exposed to. I found myself looking for specific evidence that supported the claim. This caused me to disregard possible counters and led to disjointed evidence throughout my writing. In this case, I provide evidence that the mentally are not predisposed to violence, and evidence that suggest that the mentally ill are a leading cause for gun violence. Though both these statements support the claim individually, in conjunction they are disjointed and contract each other.

            As I moved on from the prospectus, I began doing more and more research. Through the use of tools such as problem maps and outlines, I was able focus my research bringing a new found depth to my writing. As I did more research it felt as if I was slowly putting together a puzzle, each new evidence filled in a hole in the puzzle. I now had new views of my topic from different angles, allowing me to formulate my own claims with the research I had done. The results become particularly evident in my final HCP. Though my claim regarding mental health remains the same, I am able to defend this claim much more effectively. Each piece of evidence works coherently to convey my claim. I first start off by establishing the background of mental health in America, showing how it has deteriorated over time. Then I am able to relate this back to gun violence by providing a study showing a correlation between gun violence and deinstitutionalization. In the end I learned a valuable lesson, to not write before having sufficient research done. 

            Something else I learned was the use of critical analysis. Personally, I have always thought of myself as an analytical person. However, in this the past I have not been able to translate this over to writing. Something I have learned is that the critical analysis done with writing a research is the same as analyzing algorithms in a computer science class. It is in this class that I able to make this connection and utilize my analytical nature.

            During the earlier weeks, my writing was heavily lacking in critical analysis, even as I moved onto to the AP drafts. I was still doing a lot of research, but I was not able to analyze this research and come up with my arguments. With the HCP I struggled with not having enough research, however with the AP I overcompensated for this struggle and let the research take over my writing. I relied too much on the input of others, and did not create my own arguments.

In this example from my AP draft 2, I am trying to justify Obama’s budget for gun control. So I do this by providing what I found in my research. The problem here is that I’m relying too much on what Obama or becket said. Though this evidence does convey my point, it does not require any critical analysis from me. This is something I fix in my AP final draft. I decided to scrap all the evidence I so far, and find a more analytical way to justify Obama’s budget.

Here I am using a study done by Ludwig to gain an estimate on how much America’s value gun control in terms of money. With this figure I am able to justify Obama’s budget. The difference between this and my previous draft is Ludwig is not telling directly that Obama’s budget is viable. I analyzed the information provided by Ludwig to come to my own conclusion.

            Overall, my composing process throughout this quarter was a struggle of gathering the correct evidence and utilizing it effectively. At first I didn’t have enough research, and in an attempt to fix this I overcompensated. I did too much research and let it cloud my analysis. I feel like I have found a good balance between incorporating research and providing my own analysis. In addition to keeping this balance of research and analysis, I also had to utilize this research to develop my rhetoric.

Rhetoric, Argumentation & Multi-modal Composition

            Rhetoric is a term that I have been exposed from time to time, it is defined as the art of persuasion through speaking and writing. This is the simple definition that I have come to accept, however it was not until this class that I was able to learn some of its nuances. For example, I was able to grasp the use of signposts in writing. The idea of signposts refers to the arrangement of ideas in a logical, persuasive manner.

            In my HCP Draft 2, I found myself with plenty of information, but the lack of organization took away from my argument.

What I am trying to say in this example is that there is a lack of information provided to the NICS because of the lack of the participation from the states. However, this becomes a lot harder to understand because of the way the information is phrased. I addressed this problem in my HCP final draft finding a new away to organize this information. I completely remove the part about the NICS lacking information and make a whole new paragraph for this section. This allows me increase the detail and hone the focus of each paragraph.

            Another tool that enhanced my use of rhetoric is the use of multimodal artifacts. These artifacts provide the readers credible and easily understand information. This is a powerful tool, but it is import to use it correctly. At times I found it difficult to correctly use multimodality. I often used graphs and charts the problem with this is that I had trouble differentiating causation and correlation. I found that the statistics I used did do not necessarily prove what I intended them to. The prime example of this would be in my HCP Draft 1.

This graph shows the homicides rates in America throughout the past century. I used this data to state that with the release of the Brady Act is 1993, there was also a drop in homicide rates. The problem here is that this graph does not prove the Brady Act caused the drop in homicide rates, there could have been extern factors. For my HCP final I fixed this problem by specifically providing statistics regarding firearms related deaths. This was an adequate solution but there is still room for improvement. This solution removed the external factors such as non-firearm related deaths, but there is also a possibility for factors such as advancements in healthcare.

Revision

            To me revisions is essential part of any writer’s journey. It is through revision in which we gain the most experience. Personally, the points where I felt the most improvement is when I get feedback from others and when I learn from reading other’s papers. All progress that I mentioned previously was made possible through revision. Whether it be a conference with Lisa or a peer review session it is invaluable have someone else’s input on your writing.

            During the peer reviews we did in class, one thing I found especially helpful is that I gain the perspective of a different person on my writing. When writing a research paper it is vital to be thorough, by having the perspective of another person I was exposed to facets of my topic that I have not thought about. One particular peer review where this occurred is with the AP prospectus. My topic was gun violence and my solution was Obama’s executive order. My partner exposed me to possible concerns with Obama’s executive orders, and with this I was able to form a counter argument.

            When I receive critique for my papers from Lisa, I was always overwhelmed by the amount of advice and guidance on the paper. This feedback exposed me to a deeper level of thinking; seeing the meticulous comments on my paper gave me insight as to how I should be thinking of my own work as I am writing. When we first received feedback for our HCP prospectus, I was stunned but the plethora of comments. With each comment I read I learned more and more about not just how to write, but how I should be evaluating my own writing. Whether it be for small things such as grammar, or larger issues such as argumentation, overall I feel more aware of my writing. I have been enabled to grow as a writer and am capable of evaluating my own writing at a more honestly and more extensively.

Looking to the Future

            Though I have had significant improvement in writing, I also acknowledge that there is still much I have left to work on. Throughout my times as a writer I have always struggled with sentence structure and tonality. This was blatantly obvious in my earlier works in the HCP, and even occurs at a lesser extent in my AP final draft. In this class I tended to focus more on the research and argumentation side of writing, but In future classes I aim to fix my sentence level issues.

            Writing 39C marks a milestone for my writing journey, the improvement that I have experience throughout this class is unrivaled by previous writing classes. I have gained invaluable writing, researching, and even presenting skills that are sure to serve me well in my future career. In my Self-assessment for week 1 I stated that I wasn’t comfortable with writing, and that it is not one of my best topics. However this is no longer the case, I have been able to get past this stigma and no longer see writing as a daunting task.