Reflection on Project 2 Draft

In this blog post, I will reflect on my draft of project 2. Specifically, I will review what the peer editing phase of this project taught me.

Screenshot from my computer, 10/17/15

After reviewing Bri's and Elliot's rough draft of the rhetorical analysis, I learned several things. For the below section, I will answer questions as they appear in order on page 197 of the Student's Guide.

1. I have an identifiable thesis. It points to specific rhetorical strategies and tools used by my speaker. I don't think my thesis needs much revisement, if any.

2. I organized my essay by using each body paragraph to directly address one specific part of the argument. Each paragraph definitely has a central point that is supported with lots of evidence and analysis.

3. I clearly identify and analyze several different elements of the text's rhetorical situation and structure. Each body paragraph is devoted to identifying and analyzing one specific element of the rhetorical piece.

4. I did explain why certain rhetorical stratgies. In fact, I addressed that specfic aspect of each rhetorical element I touched on. I then discuss each effect these strategies have on the audience and for the piece as a whole.

5. The one aspect really lacking in my draft is evidence. I have lots of analysis and assertions, but limited evidence. I plan on going back and adding direct quotes from my public speech act in order to back up what I have to say.

6. I believe I leave my reader with new knowledge that they will want to apply. I don't think I necessarily leave them wanting more. I'm not sure if that's the most relevant goal when writing this type of paper. I absolutley answer the classic "so what" question in my conclusion. I tell my audience why what I'm saying is important and how they will/should use it in the future.