Learning Log

Entry 1:

  • Writing as a Recursive Process (200-300 words):
    • My first draft of a paper usually starts off extremely sketchy and does not have great fluency. Usually I end up just getting all of my ideas out in sporadic sentences and then group them together as paragraphs. In most cases, no one really sees this draft except me. Then, I edit it and try to move around the ideas to help flow the pieces more together. The link found bellow is basically a “final rough draft” that I have edited as much as I can see.
    • On every draft that I submit for peer reviewing I will include questions and/or concerns for the editor to keep an eye out for in my essay. Throughout this draft, you can see on the side margins of the paper that the peer editors took time to carefully read through it and try to pick out what they saw as critical editing pointers.
    • The following link is what my final paper looked like after taking the suggestions into consideration, but before grading. As you can see, I have a new title at the top of the page and my MLA formatting is better as well. I also made sure to carefully go through every comment and fix any conventional errors and fluency problems that they were able to pick out.
    • I also went through the rough draft document and read through it numerous times picking up small details and minor corrections that I was able to pick out.
    • During this process I learned that my fluency of the paper ended up not being where I wanted to it to be at. However, I am unsure how to counteract this issue because it sounded fluent to me both in my head and out-loud. In addition, I also had other people read it and they also said that they thought it sounded fluent. Therefore, I need to find a different system for determining if my paper is fluent enough or not to get a better grade on the next one.
  • Integrating your ideas with those of others (200-300 words):
    • When integrating quotes into my essays, I believe I do a fairly good job. I definitely use both the Quotation Sandwich and TRIAC. However, for this essay, since it was shorter, I found myself using the quotation sandwich method more than the TRIAC.
    • One good example that I used in my essay was the following section,
      • “There are so many different combinations of what to talk about that it is no wonder that Anne Hallward, speaker from the Ted Talk “How Telling Our Silenced “Stories Can Change the World”, who has an MD from Harvard Medical School from 1997, as well as the founder of Safe Space Radio (a place where people can go to talk about the stories and moments in their lives that mean a great deal to them), claims that “One story is like someone opening that door and then other people’s voices can come through that door…” (Hallward, 6:37). Basically what Hallward is trying to say here is that when just one person decides to tell their story, or have a conversation or dialogue with someone, it allows for so many more people to have the courage to do the same thing.”
    • The only issue I had with this quote was determining whether or not to include Hallward in the end of the sentence parenthesis, but after reading the comments on my paper, I learned that as long as the author’s name is mentioned at the beginning of the sentence, or if we are only using one source, then I do not have to include their name in addition to the timestamp, page number, etc.
  • Active, critical Reading (150-250):
    • I think I am on track to being a very successful active, critical reader. I may not be getting to a deep connection to the texts, however, I do annotate and do get a lot from the text. I also am very capable of relating the text to my own personal experiences in a text-to-self connection. An example of this is as follows in a blog post I did on Martha Stewart:
      • “I have known a great deal of people who have suffered from cancers of all types and ages including a dance teacher who went through ovarian cancer a few years ago and she was able to push herself enough to come to teach us even if she was too weak to actually show us what to do. Hall in some ways was like my dance teacher because even though she was in a lot of pain she still managed to write how she was feeling and the struggles she went through while dealing with it.”
    • I also make extensive notes on my annotations of the text on the articles that we use to help support us in our essays. This allows me to reference in the text easier. For example, the quote that I mentioned in the previous section I made a note of in my notes when I listened to the ted talk as well as on the script that was given to us to read along with (“How Telling Our Silenced “Stories Can Change the World”). By making a note of that quote early on in the reading process, I was able to quickly find it and put it into my essay with ease.
  • Critiquing your own and others’ work (200-300 words):
    • Personally, I did not make any notes on my own work. I made them inside of my head and then edited them the way I thought was best as I made the suggestion to myself. Rarely, I think, have I ever legitimately made notes on my own paper and kept them there. I should probably change this tactic because it is fairly hard trying to remember all of the little details that I think of changing throughout the paper. By writing all of my thoughts down it would help make certain that I make the changes I want to make. For other peoples’ papers however, I make sure to write down as much as I thought of both positive and negatively speaking because I know that whenever I ask someone to review my paper, I want them to put in as many suggestions and thoughts on it as they can. The reason for this is because it helps me make sure that one, if there are only a few comments, it could potentially mean that my essay is fine, and two, if there are a lot, it gives me a different way to approach a topic in my paper.
    • I have two examples of comments made on two different papers. The first following example shows a comment that a peer reviewer posted on my essay that I found helpful:
      • “If people are nervous, will they go to these events, and if they do, will the event be enough to make them feel comfortable enough to talk to each other?”
        • This comment gave me more things to think about when I was writing, thus making a more established thought in my essay.
    • The second following example is a quote that I made on a paper that I thought was particularly helpful for the person and the paper that they wrote:
      • “Your main argument is solid, I can see your thesis coming through in the paper. I would watch your sentences to make sure that you complete your thoughts in all of them, and the critical thinking is good, maybe connect to self to bring yourself into the paper more? The transitions between paragraphs are good, and the structure is good, it is a decent paper good job.”
        • This comment allowed the writer to both see the negatives and positives of the paper in order to give the writer motivation with the positives, and things to work on with the negatives.
  • Using MLA citation (150-250):
    • I believe that when I use MLA my citations are usually fairly accurate. My main problem this essay was just not including the last name along with the timestamp at the end of a quote. An example of this was on page two of my essay at the top of my page when I had my quotation and at the end of the sentence I included (Hallward, 6:37), when instead it should have just been (6:37). My works cited page I believe was organized well. My only issue was the spacing at the beginning. For some reason I could not get the paper to print with the correct margins on the paper. Next time I will probably not do the “print from my laptop” option to print my essay and will most likely just print in the printing area off of one of the library’s computers. I did not necessarily improve from draft to draft. The only thing that I forgot to include in my first draft was the last name with the page number in the upper right hand corner of the essay along with the page number. Thus, on my second draft, I included it and did not get marked down for not having that piece. I also struggled with giving the author’s the correct version of credibility.
  • Managing individual error patterns (150-250):
    • Throughout my paper I noticed that I had a problem with using the correct term when describing social cohesion versus social change. I often intertwined the words where they did not intertwine. An example of this was on the second page of my essay when I said,
      • “These connections are what make social cohesion possible.”
        • In this instance using social change would have fit better instead of social cohesion due to the legitimate definition of both terms.
    • I also do this at the beginning of my paper within my thesis when I say,
      • “Thus, the generational gaps in the society of the United States have caused social unification to seem unattainable at a first glance; however, if we all make the decision to take the leap and begin conversing with the other age groups, we may find ourselves surprised at how much we have in common and can bond over in order to come together as a country.”
        • At the end of this statement I say “come together as a country” when instead it should have said “in order to create social change.”
    • Overall, throughout my paper I also consistently did not express all of my ideas the way that I had thought in my brain. There is not a good way to really put that here so the easiest way is to just look at my essay using the final draft link at the beginning of this Learning Log in section ‘Writing as a recursive process.’

Entry 2:

  • Writing as a Recursive Process (200-300 words):
    • My first draft of a paper usually starts off extremely sketchy and does not have great fluency. Usually I end up just getting all of my ideas out in sporadic sentences and then group them together as paragraphs. In most cases, no one really sees this draft except me. Then, I edit it and try to move around the ideas to help flow the pieces more together. The link found bellow is basically a “final rough draft” that I have edited as much as I can see.
    • On every draft that I submit for peer reviewing I will include questions and/or concerns for the editor to keep an eye out for in my essay. Throughout this draft, you can see on the side margins of the paper that the peer editors took time to carefully read through it and try to pick out what they saw as critical editing pointers.
    • The following link is what my final paper looked like after taking the suggestions into consideration, but before grading. As you can see, I have reworded the sentences to help with my fluency concerns as well as made sure to address any author confusions. I also made sure to carefully go through every comment and fix any conventional errors and fluency problems that they were able to pick out.
    • I also went through the rough draft document and read through it numerous times picking up small details and minor corrections that I was able to pick out.
    • During this process I learned that my fluency of the paper ended up not being where I wanted to it to be at. However, I am unsure how to counteract this issue because it sounded fluent to me both in my head and out-loud. In addition, I also had other people read it and they also said that they thought it sounded fluent. Therefore, I need to find a different system for determining if my paper is fluent enough or not to get a better grade on the next one.
  • Integrating your ideas with those of others (200-300 words):
    • Usually I feel as if I do a fairly decent job of integrating my sources. However, this go around, one of the primary requirements was to create a naysayer and I was unable to make my naysayer paragraph show through. The paragraph began with:
      • ” When people spend all their time on screens, it does not only affect the future of how a child’s working career will be, it will also affect the child’s mental health as they grow older. Twenge also mentions in her article that ‘[t]eens who spend more time than average on screen activities are more likely to be unhappy…’ (9). In this statement Twenge is outlining one of the negative consequences of spending too much time on technology. Even though Twenge is talking about teenagers, it is still prevalent to children. This is because most of the teenagers that Twenge is speaking about have only been doing this since they were in 6th grade. While this is still extremely young compared to my generation, it is nowhere near the ages of four, five, or six.”
    • When I integrate my sources I usually just use a topic sentence then a quote and then an analysis. It is fairly straightforward and to the point, but it does not create any variety of structure in my paper which can be detrimental to the overall grade.
  • Active, critical Reading (150-250):
    • I think I am on track to being a very successful active, critical reader. I may not be getting to a deep connection to the texts, however, I do annotate and do get a lot from the text. I also am very capable of relating the text to my own personal experiences in a text-to-world connection. An example of this is as follows in a blog post I did on the video “Do the Math”:
      • “It is sad, however, that the only ways that seems to get through to people is if they are able to blaim someone else for the problems and that if it will eventually effect themselves. Rarely will people join a movement for the benefits of other people. We live in a selfish world and I hope that the tactics that were used in this movie will strike a chord in enough people’s hearts to want to make a difference before it is too late.”
    • I also make extensive notes on my annotations of the text on the articles that we use to help support us in our essays. This allows me to reference in the text easier. For example, the quote that I mentioned in the previous section I made a note of in my notes when I listened to the video as well as on the script that was given to us to read along with (“Do the Math”). By making a note of that quote early on in the reading process, I was able to quickly find it and put it into my essay with ease.
  • Critiquing your own and others’ work (200-300 words):
    • Personally, I did not make any notes on my own work. I made them inside of my head and then edited them the way I thought was best as I made the suggestion to myself. Rarely, I think, have I ever legitimately made notes on my own paper and kept them there. I should probably change this tactic because it is fairly hard trying to remember all of the little details that I think of changing throughout the paper. By writing all of my thoughts down it would help make certain that I make the changes I want to make. For other peoples’ papers however, I make sure to write down as much as I thought of both positive and negatively speaking because I know that whenever I ask someone to review my paper, I want them to put in as many suggestions and thoughts on it as they can. The reason for this is because it helps me make sure that one, if there are only a few comments, it could potentially mean that my essay is fine, and two, if there are a lot, it gives me a different way to approach a topic in my paper.
    • I have two examples of comments made on two different papers. The first following example shows a comment that a peer reviewer posted on my essay that I found helpful:
      • “Will more jobs be based on technology in the future, and if so, will kids who have grown up using computers have an advantage to those who haven’t?”
        • This comment gave me more things to think about when I was writing, thus making a more established thought in my essay.
    • The second following example is a quote that I made on a paper that I thought was particularly helpful for the person and the paper that they wrote:
      • “So the intro is a good attention grabber but I am worried that the excessive amounts of personal emotion will bring down the essay. Maybe tone it down a tiny bit?”
        • This comment allowed the writer to both see the negatives and positives of the paper in order to give the writer motivation with the positives, and things to work on with the negatives.
  • Using MLA citation (150-250):
    • I believe that when I use MLA my citations are usually fairly accurate. My main problem this essay was just not including the URL’s with the citations. My works cited page I believe was organized well. My only issue was the spacing at the beginning. This time I printed from the library but I did not try to download it, I just printed from there instead of trying to make the document reformatted. I did not necessarily improve from draft to draft. The only thing that I forgot to include in my first draft was the last name with the page number in the upper right hand corner of the essay along with the page number. Thus, on my second draft, I included it and did not get marked down for not having that piece. I also struggled with giving the author’s the correct version of credibility.
  • Managing individual error patterns (150-250):
    • Throughout my paper I noticed that I had a problem with italicizing versus quoting the sources article titles. An example of this is:
      • “Sam Anderson, author of the article In Defense of Distraction, in the New York Magazine, claims ‘Making the responsible attention choice, however, is not always easy’ (7).”
        • The italicized article title should have instead had quotation marks around it instead like this:
          • “Sam Anderson, author of the article “In Defense of Distraction”, in the New York Magazine, claims ‘Making the responsible attention choice, however, is not always easy’ (7).”
    • Overall, throughout my paper I also consistently did not express all of my ideas the way that I had thought in my brain. My naysayer paragraph did not come out like I wanted it to and I was missing a topic sentence for a paragraph. There is not a good way to really put that here so the easiest way is to just look at my essay using the final draft link at the beginning of this Learning Log in section ‘Writing as a recursive process.’