This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: But forcing myself to do research and find my own sources helped me figure out which arguments would work and which wouldn’t. I was hopeful for my next draft. Professor Prentice gave us more flexibility in terms of what we wanted to write and it broaden my options a lot. Unfortunately, the comments I received on my draft were not as uplifting as I had hoped. I found the same trend of comments appearing again and again. This time my professor commented, “First, a problem condition is missing. What is wrong or incomplete with the existing discussion or ideas about the structure of IOT ? Second, your thesis doesn’t directly respond to your argument sources” (qtd. in Paper 2 Draft 1 Comments 35). I was back to square one. I hoped my ability to articulate an argument improved, but it hadn’t. I tried out different approaches from before and yet the results were the same. This was when I started to get frustrated. It seemed as if my understanding of the basics was worse than I thought. But I pushed through to produce another paper, crossing my fingers as I submitted it. Needless to say, my grade showed an improvement and my hopes were restored! I was confident my argument for my final paper would be solid on the first attempt. But my drafting process proved that to be difficult. I wrote three different drafts and one outline before I was satisfied with my final paper. My first draft was not close to being a well-argued paper. As Jason put it, “to make this paper clearly motived, and to make it more of an argument than a set of summaries, I think you need to approach it from a fresh angle and do some major restructuring” (qtd. in Paper 3 Draft 1 Comments 63). To me, this was even worse than my draft of Paper 2. I didn’t even have a real argument, per se, for this draft. Again, it was back to square one. Professor Prentice suggested writing out a 6 claim-evidence outline to help formulate our points more clearly. As I was working through my outline, I saw where my problems were. I had difficultly coming up with claims that connected to my original thesis and my evidence for those claims were very weak and underdeveloped. Constructing that outline gave me a little more guidance in the direction I should be going in for my paper and the second draft was a lot closer to the final version. I also had an advantage for this paper because of Exercise 25. Exercise 25 was a reflection of the other two papers in terms of what worked for the paper and what didn’t. This was a good reminder of what I needed to improve on for this paper and gave me more insight on how I should write my final paper. I said, “I definitely want to focus on having a clear argument right from the beginning… I also want to try and summarize less and analyze more” (qtd. in Exercise 25 69-70). Isolating exactly what I should work on personally made it easier for me to fix the problems I had before. By the end of all these exercises and drafts, I finally wrote a self-satisfying paper....
View Full Document
- Spring '08
- Winesburg, Ohio, SON-9