Reflection on Project III

In this post, I will reflect on my project as a whole. Project 3 was an achievement to myself and I feel very good about what I had to say and how I said it. With that, I will present my answers as given on Writing Public Lives page 520 with regards to the revision process of my public argument. Enjoy.

849356. "Mirroring Ball Reflection Mirror About Reflex." 04/12/2015 via pixabay. Public Domain Dedication.

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

I changed my mentality as an author towards my goal. In my draft, I was unaware of how direct I could go with my argumentation. After meeting with Sean during conferences, I was assured that including a strong and very persuasive tone throughout my argument would be most effective. Thus, my tone between drafts are much different. My final product is my best, and most intimidating, piece I have written in this class.


2. Point to global changes: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

I chose to organize my article based on different aspects of geoengineering. Before my revisions, my original rough draft was very disjointed and was not smooth when transitioning into different topics due to the fact that aspects of a topic were placed throughout the entire article. This mistake on my part had left my draft audience confused and pondering my intent.


3. What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?

Clarifying with my instructor as well as my peers that a public argumentation is meant to be stern and outright is what led me to change the majority of my writing. Their aid in my writing is what helped produce the end product. My audience remained the same and my purpose was the same as well. The only difference in my writing from my first draft to my final product is my tone of voice and how I conveyed my information.


4. How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?

These changes have labeled me as a more credible source than if I were to have not revised and called my original draft my final product. My reorganization, my edits, my changes are what has made me a credible source of information and have increased my level of trust with my audience as I continue to attempt to persuade audiences.


5. How will these changes better address the audience or venue?

These changes will get my audience to better understand the urgency of the issue. That they must take action before more harm is done. With my previous tone of voice, my readers may have experienced a sense of doubt, but after revising heavily, I feel my argument would withstand in many more debates to come.


6. Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

My sentence structure is still in the third-person, but I have changed my tone of voice. Each sentence now caters to a strong intent of persuading my audience. I do not try to come across something as lightly but very stern as the issue at hand is in fact life or death. Changing my sentences has changed the style of my article into something that forcefully argues against an idea, which in this case is the methods of geoengineering.


7. How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

Now that I have reorganized my article, my audience will be able to better understand my purpose. Before my edits, my writings were complex and very unclear as they were disorderly. Once I recognized these errors, I went back into my writings to change what needed changing to get my readers to clearly and easily understand my views. The hard part then would only be for them to decide whether my argument is legitimate and if they should support my opinions.


8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?

Throughout my writing process,  I did not reconsider the conventions on my genre. I merely elaborated upon them and increased my intention of persuading my readers that the information I gave was meant to refute the solutions and methods being employed by geoengineers.


9. Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?

Through this project, and the previous ones, I would say my writing skills have not changed. But on the contrary, my skills to construct, to organize and to strengthen my writing has definitely bettered my identity as a writer. As I now just realize the question, I would say it does not make me reconsider my identity, but it actually just reenforces my thoughts that I am a terrible writer. The reflection process makes me think about how much I could better my writing if I were to actually reflect upon my pieces before finalizing them and after publishing them.