ENG 122 Feedbacks and Revision Reflection
Think about your experience with revision in the past. What approaches to revision have worked well for you?
My technique for reviewing my writing has always been integrative. I would in this case present my work to a tutor or an external expert to whom I would try to speak out my intended message. As a result, they would complement, recommend, and criticize my piece from a rationale perspective. The criticism part is the hardest due to the tag of war between integrating their ideas to my work as a measure to make it better (Huck, 2015). I have however learned to adopt criticism positive and as a result, gained newer ideas. During my analysis of “Mother tongue” by Amy Tam for instance I expressed a literal understanding of the bear argument the author meant to put across. I was not necessarily wrong to indicate that she meant to send a message on the perception of non-bilingual speakers towards the non-native English speakers, rather my articulation of the message was literal. After an acknowledgment that I really didn’t visualize what was required of the writing, I sourced out for holding. As a result, I gained both the necessary expertise and approach needed for the write up on the paper.
Whenever I would write a paper, my opinion revolved around facts and research. I had thus no guidelines in writing a critical analysis. It is evident in my paper that I based on the notion basically expressed the facts identified by the author. I preferred to write other people’s opinions which sounded much more appealing. The lesson however that I was to factor in my opinions brought about confusion since it was contrary to my expectations. A contrary opinion from an expert stating that “You will then use the key points and examples from the article to help the entire understanding of the argument and context of the article. A thorough review will, therefore, support your view” that entirely changes my perspective. At that point, it dawned to me that I needed to place myself in the position of the author and think of how I would have reacted. The feedbacks are also essential since they help in questioning, listening then criticizing positively.
What revision strategy from the module 3 content would you like to try when revising your critical analysis essay?
The overhaul techniques in this module were helpful, but I found them to be a little too rigid for me. I wanted to study and refine my concepts but also to represent the new concepts I was learning in syntax and grammar (Pawlak, 2020). Because I think I would probably use both broad and small-scale revisions, I don’t want to settle on a single method of revising. Feedback and lessons I learned about writing in this module affected the development of my writing.
There would be a need for a major overhaul, as my critical research methodology has shifted. Instead of writing my own interpretation of a truthful document, accompanied by appropriate quotations, I will approach the essay more carefully with my viewpoint on the author and his mind as I write. It might look like a little subtlety, but it’s a big vagueness for me. This means my solution is possible to explore the synergies that apply to the perspectives of the author of my own life. The viewpoint will be important and it will be useful to read the article from this viewpoint in a new way in which I can express my views about the job, to similar deals in my context.
Review your writing plan and the feedback provided by your instructor. How does the feedback influence your ideas about your selected reading? What changes will you make to your analysis now that you have received this outside feedback?
The writing plan feedback is an essential framework in revising my writing. It is particularly effective to merge the ensuing thoughts that will help identify the major drawbacks to the piece work. The professor for instance refrains on the author’s claim and its connection to the audience. I thus realized that, despite my struggle to come up with the argument being put across by the author, I seemed to beat around the bush. The most conspicuous comment for instance is”….While the article does give readers a good understanding of Tan’s life, this represents a surface level, literal reading of the text. For the sake of the analysis essay, you will need to dig more deeply to understand the message or argument that the author is making that he is intending to convey to his audience.” The feedback sensitized my concentration on the facts and thoughts of the author. I also realized that I did very little to uncover the message that the author intended to convey to her audience.
The essay will be based on the feedback be different despite seldom use of similar phrases. I will also ensure that I dig out the message from the author’s argument from a personal perspective. The professor also identified a huge gap as cautioned against by Huck, (2015) between the identified audience and a connection to the message. The new write up will at this point entail a wider inclusion of both details and arguments. It will eventually be necessary to justify my argument from a personal view.
Identify an external audience that might benefit from reading your essay and some of their characteristics
The college grown-ups are probably the ideal outside audience that would benefit from reading my essay. Adults from college will talk to their family a higher degree of English, friends an English of another kind and school English of another kind. Students reading my analysis will learn how to apply my analysis to themselves and how to benefit from speaking English in various forms.
The college adults are characterized by sway in balancing time for their activities. Most of the time they are taking higher-level educations as an extension of the expertise. They thus have to take some time off to study while they are out of work. Besides they need time to bond with their families. The colleague students in such cases belong to similar academic echelons as well as racial and ethnic diversities. Such an aspect thus calls for diversity in terms of grammatical presentation as well as academic knowhow. Due to diversity in their family members, the college adults also need to be flexible in their communications (BAŞTUĞ & KARA, 2018). The workplaces will also need them to refine their English which is mostly the language of communication amongst staff. They need to remain formal while embracing diversity, especially while interacting with expatriates.
What potential challenges would you encounter in connecting the audience to your writing? Identify some choices you can make within your writing to connect with this audience.
The main challenge in articulating my thoughts in the essay will be the conflict of opinions. The verdict is based on the fact that the audience is an academic giant thus prone to a diversity of opinions. Similarly, most of such an audience might have encountered similar cases calling for the first-hand maneuver through such challenges as expressed by Amy Tam. As a result, they would be holding different opinions on the most appropriate as well as situation fit mechanisms. My writing would however express an open perspective based on the authors’ argument. It would also factor in diversity as an acknowledgment that rather than Tam’s audience, there are other different audiences along with the college adult interactions (Cottrell, 2017). The expression in the authors’ dimension is based on a personal presentation of a transition from crooked English in the struggle to perfect the writing skills. My essay would thus fail to serve the entire college adult audience who might have a different background. As a result, my argument would revolve around the measures to cope with such situations both from a primary and a secondary perspective.