Jose Diaz

Reflection as Self-Assessment to the e-Portfolio

Over the duration of this ENC 1102 course, each and every assignment and larger project

have served more than just simply receiving a grade or conveying the intended message. At the

beginning of the course (in the syllabus) and outlined in the first five modules, specific learning

outcomes were named that, if the course was done diligently and true attention was paid, would

be fulfilled, with the students proficient or at the very least understanding of each of the

established literary practices, techniques, and goals. The course is molded in a way that useful

information pertaining to each outcome is essentially unavoidable, and as such, I feel that

understanding how far I have come should be simple. In order to assess my own progress within

each of these learning outcomes, and to better understand the progress that I as a writer and a

reader have made, I am going to go through each (sans Module 1 for simplicity) module’s

outcomes separately and touch on the major writing assignments within each (all of this in

addition to the syllabus’ learning outcomes). With this, I can apply how each lesson or peer-

review also included in the modules effected the products, and portray an accurate insight as to

where I feel I stand and where I feel that I should actually stand.

Module 2: Beginning with Rhetoric (Add In Writing Examples from Documents)

The second module, also the inaugural module for actual learning and application of

content, is presented as seven assignments with certain lessons to take from supplied reading

within the assignments. The learning outcomes within the module were met with the completion

of these assignments; that is, the ability “to demonstrate awareness of the dynamic relationship

between rhetorical situation, discourse community, genre, and inquiry”, and “to read, analyze,

and synthesize complex texts and incorporate multiple kinds of evidence purposefully in their

reading responses in order to generate and support writing” as mentioned in Module 2’s
Jose Diaz
“Rationale and Learning Outcomes” section. I feel that I can effectively apply the learning

outcomes in my writing, and I even constantly applied text and evidence skills throughout the

rest of the course (although the first mentioned outcome also applies, albeit in a rather passive

way). Each individual assignment helped me establish my evidence drawing skills and source

comprehension with a different article or piece of a larger work - for the assignment “What is

Rhetoric?”, the article “Making Sense of Human Interaction and Meaning Making” by Doug

Downs was used. Each assignment focused on rhetoric or rhetorical ideas (or a certain question)

and helped me establish utilizing outside sources for evidence with each reading. In general, the

assignments helped build an understanding of the relationships of the main concepts explored in

the class, and laid a foundation for not only the later assignments, but also helped understand

later modules as well. All in all, I feel that I have mastered Module 2’s outcomes.

Module 3: Research Process (Add In Writing Examples from Documents)

Module 3’s outcomes mark the beginning of the major assignments and introduces the

idea of in-depth and multi-staged preparation and pre-planning for a Research Project. The

outcomes (outlined in Module 3’s “Rationale and Leaning Outcomes” section) include the ability

(continued from Module 2) to “demonstrate awareness of the dynamic relationship between

rhetorical situation, discourse community, genre, and inquiry”, “to engage in meaningful,

dynamic, and inquiry-based research process”, to “read and categorize complex texts and

incorporate multiple kinds of evidence purposefully in a research dossier (annotated

bibliography) in order to generate and support their future research-based writing”, and “to

produce complex, analytic, research dossier that illustrates the progress of the research progress”.

Given that the first outcome is essentially the same as the one for Module 2, I’ll cover only the

newly presented ideas (and will continue this pattern for the duration of the assessment). Module
Jose Diaz
3’s outcomes are evidently heavy on learning how to research effectively and how to get more

quality information through certain research methods. The culmination of lessons on types and

methods of research, as well as the introduction of peer-review, lead me to the completion of the

last three outcomes mentioned above. A digital paper trail was established as well as a research

dossier which went through a period of peer review. Through the construction of the digital

paper trail (and, in an expanded sense, the research dossier’s final draft), I displayed a

proficiency in the finding of quality research and the ability to compile several sources in one

place with ample description of each. I feel that I hve mastered Module 3’s outcomes as a result.

Module 4: Rhetorical Analysis (Add In Writing Examples from Documents)

Module 4 puts Module 2’s lessons in rhetorical techniques and concepts to the test, and is

almost entirely focused upon building up a rhetorical analysis of one of the sources from the

previously mentioned research dossier. The outcomes as outlined in this module’s “Rationale

and Learning Outcomes” section are the ability “to demonstrate awareness of the dynamic

relationship between rhetorical situation, discourse community, genre, and inquiry in relation to

one text they select to analyze rhetorically”, “to read and analyze one text within a discourse”,

and “to produce a complex, analytic, persuasive analysis that matters in an academic context”. In

my completion of the rhetorical analysis itself, I satisfied the outcomes expressed, though I do

not think that I completely mastered them. I took Huang et al.’s article “Progress in the Research

and Development of Anti-COVID-19 Drugs” into consideration for this assignment, and decided

that it would be one of the best options to analyze for those purposes. While rhetorical analysis

within the paper did exist, my peer-reviews made me notice that a lot of the information was

presented on a matter-of-fact, superficial level, when I actually needed more analysis. I also

presented nearly every single rhetorical technique learned from Module 2 on, yet mostly gave a
Jose Diaz
surface level short analysis and did not go in depth as was necessary to properly rhetorically

analyze the text. I feel that I did show an understanding of the content of the lessons that

culminated in the final product rhetorical analysis, yet I did not sufficiently express that I

understood to the point of mastery.

Module 5: Argumentative Research Paper and TED Presentation (Add In Writing

Examples from Documents)

Module 5 followed the previous module’s pattern in that less time was spent on learning,

and most of the module was spent assembling the research paper the course is geared to end up

at. The outcomes are expressed in the module’s “Rationale and Learning Outcomes” section as

the ability to “demonstrate awareness of the dynamic relationship between the rhetorical

situation of the research project, the various sources included in the research dossier, the

discourse community they are joining with their research, the genre they are using, and the many

types of inquiry that are required when deciding how to synthesize all that information.

Furthermore, they read, analyze, and synthesize complex texts and incorporate multiple kinds of

evidence purposefully in order to produce a complex, analytic, persuasive argument that will

matter in academic contexts”. The final draft of my research paper is being drafted at the time of

writing this self-assessment, but the previous three drafts as well as the previous three peer-

review sessions have lead my paper to be a solid product that handles all of the concerns

expressed within the module’s outcomes to the point of mastery. (Examples/Proof Follow)

Course Outcomes (?)

Conclusion/Final Thoughts (?)