Dear Valentina,

In this Writing 2 class, I learned a lot about writing. Primarily through three writing

projects, l have a deeper understanding of writing. In the first writing project, I learned how to

identify and analyze genres. In the reading Rhetorical Practice, I learned how to interpret the

effectiveness of an article by explaining the appealing to ethos, pathos, and logos (Lunsford,

2013). Also, through Dirk’s article, I learned the origin, the creation of a genre. That’s due to the

emergence of other target readers (Dirk, 2010). In the second writing project, I learned how to

determine the persuasive of an argument by analyzing the author’s logic, the presentation of

evidence, and the words used by the writer. By reading the article Literacy Practice, I learned

that different discipline has a different convention; thus, they have a different use of words and

syntax (Barton & Hamilton, 2012). One of the most important things I learned is that every

source should be introduced before using them (Stedman, 2012). I learned this by reading

Stedman’s text: Annoying Way People use Sources. For the writing project, it teaches me how to

translate an academic paper to none academic genre. This writing project is the most fun one for

me, but it’s the hardest one too. That’s because it’s funny to draw something, but since I’m not an

artist, I can’t bring everything I want precisely, which may cause some misunderstanding.

Through the revision process, I learned that writing is a continuous process, and it’s impossible

to be perfect in the first draft. Also, I learned the process of revision. That’s to start revising with

the organization of between paragraphs and within paragraphs; then, I should focus on the

language and style of my essay; finally, I should focus on the syntax and punctuation. For me, I

still want to learn how to develop my essay conceptually, to make my argument more concrete.

And I want to learn how to do this fast and precise.

 For the final portfolio, I revised WP 1 and WP 2.

To improve my WP 1, I focused on how to improve my introduction and conclusion of

my essay. For my original WP 1, the introduction part is ineffective. So, in my revision, I added

rhetorical questions as a hook for my portfolio. Also, I used a specific statement to show my

thesis instead of using general statements. For the ending of my essay, I answered the question I

stated at the beginning of the article without repeating those arguments in my essay. More, I

deleted the repeated words in my conclusion to make it more clearly.

Then, I changed the second article I analyzed in my original essay to another article

because the original one can’t adequately represent the characteristic of the genre that I want to

explain in my essay. I made my thesis stronger with my definition of the genre. To make my

revision effectively, I used Stedman’s text to support my ideas. More, I focused on the

relationship between the audience and the genre’s purpose.

To make my WP 1’s flow better, I changed the way I introduce the source. Instead of

putting quotes from others directly in my essay, I explained why the source is relevant and

connect to my argument. More, I reconstructed my sentence. In my original article, some

sentences contain different information, which will confuse readers and make each paragraph of

my essay loosely connected. To solve this, I shortened my sentence’s length because of the

longer sentence, the more information included, which will cause diversion of argument. Also, I

reconstructed the paragraph in my essay. I placed the same points in the same paragraph or

paragraph that have a similar point together.

To improve my WP 2, I also changed my introduction and my conclusion. In my original

text, the hook in my introduction is not engaging enough, which makes my essay less attractive
to readers. So, I wrote a hook that closely related to readers, which will create resonance with

readers. The hook I wrote should be relevant to the article. More, I moved the thesis sentence to

the end of my introduction since this will make readers more comfortable to follow my ideas. I

also narrow down my thesis to not confusing readers. For the new conclusion, I made it

correspond to the introduction and form a loop with it in my essay, which will make my paper’s

flow better. Also, I started my thesis and argument again without using the same languages.

To improve my body paragraph, I reorganized my arguments and found a logical

relationship between my arguments. So, I reconstructed the information in each paragraph. For

example, I stated the importance of the literature review; and I showed how the writer uses this

in his or her article to explain the thesis of the essay; finally, I analyzed the effectiveness of the

use of evidence for the writer to convey his or her idea to readers and persuade readers.

Overall, I feel okay with my revision. Feedbacks from you and my classmates are

constructive for me to revisit these two articles. Additional things I need to work with are that I

need to choose more close-related sources to the topic. Some of my sources are still not perfect

enough to support my arguments. For my revision of WP1, I used Lunsford’s Rhetorical Analysis

to improve my analysis of logos and pathos appealing. Also, I used Dirk’s article to help me

identify the convention of the genre. For my revision of WP2, I used Barton’s article to help me

identify the literacy convention of disciplines. Throughout the whole revision process, I used

Stedman’s source to help me introduce sources and arrange my argument.

I’ve learned a lot from this writing class. In my future writing, I will incorporate two

essential things I learned in this class. The first thing is to cite everything I used in my essay

correctly. This is very important since it’s related to academic honesty. The second thing that I
will use is the perspective to analyze the effectiveness of an argument through the analyzation of

pathos, logos, and ethos.

Sincerely,

Honghao (Oliver) Li
 Reference

Barton, D., & Hamilton , M. (2012). Local literacies : Reading and writing in one community.

London ; New York: Routledge.

Dirk, K. (2010). Navigating Genres. In C. Lowe, & P. Zemliansky, Writing Spaces: Readings on

Writing (pp. 249-262). Anderson: Parlor Press.

Lunsford, A. A. (2013). Rhetorical Analysis. In A. A. Lunsford, Everythins's An Argument (pp.

91-120). Boston: Bedford St. Martin’s.

Stedman, K. D. (2012). Annoying Ways People Use Source. 244-245. Anderson, South Carolina,

United States of America.