At first, I knew that this English 102 course would be hard knowing that English 101 class was difficult for me. My academic writing was rocky in 101 so I knew I had to step up my game in writing not only grammatically speaking but analytically too. To be honest I knew nothing about the depth of research and source. As discussed in class, we went over using the databases in the Albertsons Library. For the bibliographies I used the databases in the library which was my time using it. After finding my articles I realized those sources were reliable and true to believe. I learned that “if you find that you have nothing to say, this is a surefire way to know either that you haven’t found a good source or that you need to reconsider what they’re saying.” You must be able to talk about a source and rely on it. If you have nothing to comment about finding a better source is the answer. Some articles such as wikipedia is not dependable because people can go and edit anything on that website making it skeptical to me. I also got a lot of feedback which helped me with the Unit One project. These comments changed my understanding of research and sources being used. For the first peer review, my peers read and added their comments about my bibliography. She graded it as if she was a tough teacher and told me I need sources to back up my argument. She also told me to research a different topic such as “why so many families don’t have insurance in the first place.” I felt that that topic didn’t have any relevance to Baby Steps so I just stuck to my initial research topic of low-income pregnancy families. For my second and third sources I researched topics in the databases which was quite easier than looking for a topic on google.
My understanding of the values and rhetorical features underlying academic writing and inquiry have developed by researching articles and analyzing them using the six strategies for analyzing sources. For my first bibliography, I took your comments into account. You said “I had a bit of a hard time getting a feel for what your source was all about because you dive straight in. Also, I think you could dig a little deeper on some of your sections: I would be interested in what specifically showed their bias.” I dived straight in and it was hard to get a feel for it. I added and showed how the article was bias towards. I made it more clear to understand. I added question about the piece and information they did not include which may have been helpful. “I believe this source is bias because they aimed towards single low-come women. Women who are pregnant in general need help getting money to raise a baby. Baby Steps and this article are similar due to the fact that the organization do help women out by distributing diapers, clothes and cribs.” For my second bibliography, I took Alex’s comments into account. I changed my summary around. She said,” the summary was worded very well and was a great start but felt more like an intro rather than a summary. Adding a little more information about what goes in the article after jesseca is interviewed.” I added how my source is credible by adding this, “The credibility of this article is legitimate due to the fact that I did get it from the library website. The University only post valid information which makes this source reliable.” I added into my reflection how the article connected to my thoughts and arguments. “This article connected with my argument that teen moms can go back to school and live above the poverty line because if Jesseca can do it, anyone can. The benefits of joining a low-income pregnancy organization is that they help moms abundantly.” For my third bibliography I revised the summary because it felt like it was all over the place. “This article takes you inside the lives of two black single male parents and what they go through on the daily basis-with dating, day care and financial needs. Alfonso Morrell and Dr. Forrest King Jr play the role of being a father and mother. They cook, clean, wash clothes and discipline while providing a masculine role model for their son.” This sounded more better because before I felt like I was rambling on. I also added to my questions. I figured that men and women should be equal. Everyone should get the same treatment with these agencies that are trying to help low-income pregnancy families.
That was some of my revision made. The experience I had with this Unit One was that it was confusing at first but then I got the hang of it. The reading is long and confusing. Sometimes I don’t know what they are talking about so I feel like why should I read more if I don’t comprehend it. I like the fact that we do peer editing because I will know what I need to fix and work on in my paper. Being able to receive feedback is better because you can learn and grow from your mistakes. My experience with blogging for the first time was frustrating at first. I need to get used to working with technology because that’s what I’ll be doing in the next units. My overall experience was good. I walked out learning more than what I expected. I learned how to research a topic and know weather it’s a reliable source. I learned how to analyze and reflect on a source. Also asking questions and becoming a better writer by intaking other’s comments. I also learned a lot from reading chapters 13 and 14 from Writing Analytically, from reading about the six strategies about analyzing sources, applying a reading as a lens and begin about to identify the pitch-what the piece wishes you to believe, the compliant-what the piece is reacting to or worried about and the moment-the historical and cultural context within which the piece is operating. Overall, I got a lot out of this unit!
No comments:
Post a Comment