Fox 1

Cole Fox

Julia Crisler

Writing 2

December 18, 2020

The End of a 10-Week Era

Science has always been my favorite subject. Not to say it was the easiest, but I thrived

off knowing there was always a right answer to solve for. In writing, there is no right answer,

and I have always struggled with and disliked that concept. Throughout my entire educational

career, I have tried to fit my writing into the mold of what I thought impressive writing was,

struggling to find and feel comfortable using my own voice. Fast forward to today, only ten

weeks after starting college, and my mindset regarding writing has already dramatically shifted.

Writing 2 has further proven to me that writing has no answer, yet instead of dreading this, I

have learned to celebrate it. I originally thought this class would be like previous English classes:

reading Shakespeare, analyzing Shakespeare, and writing about Shakespeare. Yet instead, this

class focused on writing itself, and steps I can take to reach my full potential as a writer. We read

a multitude of genuinely interesting articles from multiple genres, were pushed to let our minds

flow in free writes, properly planned for our two writing projects through Zero Drafts and Project

Builders, and best of all, got to discuss everything we learned together in creative and helpful

group activities.

The first article we read in this class was, “Teaching Two Kinds of Thinking by Teaching

Writing,” by Peter Elbow. This article, alongside the “First Order Thinking Lecture,” kickstarted

the change in my approach to thinking, reading, and writing, for I was introduced to the wonder
 Fox 2

of first-order thinking. First-order thinking requires no deep analysis but instead allows me to

express my thoughts as they come to mind, which I practiced during multiple free writes.

Writing for ten minutes straight was not always easy for me, and at first, I couldn’t see how

writing “whatever pops into my head” could possibly help my writing, but I quickly learned to

value this exercise in regard to formulating my ideas. Alongside this, I conceptualized how to

use second-order thinking to proofread and sharpen my work. By themselves, each type of

thinking wouldn’t create the best paper, but when used together, a piece of writing that is

creative yet polished can emerge.

Drafting has become my new best friend in this class, and the idea of writing multiple

drafts is perhaps one of my biggest takeaways. The multiple zero drafts and project builders that

were assigned greatly inspired my writing and improved the formation of my final drafts. I have

never previously used these methods, yet now I cannot imagine writing a paper without them. In

high school the drafting process was simple: I was required to submit one rough draft before the

final one. However, I treated my rough drafts as if they were the real thing. The concept that a

first draft can, and actually should be, well, shitty, never clicked in my brain. In fact, when

writing the “Carroll Reading Response” in week 2, which was supposed to be a quick response, I

spent an hour writing and editing it. However, in week 3, when I read “Shitty First Drafts” by

Anne Lamott, my brain finally clicked, and I realized that I needed to let go. The article was

incredibly personable, and I related to her message that “almost all good writing begins with

terrible first efforts” (Lamott 25). This new thinking allowed me to view my Zero Drafts and

Project Builders as tools to build upon, rather than to perfect, which greatly improved my ability

to expand upon my ideas and think deeper.

 Fox 3

Along with drafting through Project Builders and Zero Drafts, Writing 2 heavily

emphasized peer revision. Openly presenting unfinished work to someone you’ve only ever met

over Zoom is intimidating, yet in the end, I received valuable feedback. This exercise would not

have been an efficient use of time if we were simply required to write “good job” on someone’s

paper, which is why the reading “Responding, Really Responding, to other student’s writing,” by

Richard Straub, was such a valuable tool. Through this article I was able to better understand the

importance of responding to someone’s work, as well as “how to get started, what to address in

my comments, how to sound, and how much criticism/praise is considered helpful for my peer”

(Straub 136-145).

The terms “rhetoric” and “genre” are ones I was familiar with, but the components of

what makes up rhetoric and genres are what I learned in this course. A helpful reading, and one

of my favorites from the course, is “Murder! Rhetorically Speaking,” by Janet Boyd. The title

itself intrigued me, yet what kept me interested was how interactive it was, especially

considering how we expanded it in the “Making a Translation together with Boyd” lecture and

the “translating- x-into-y” assignment. My biggest takeaway from this lesson, besides creating

SpongeBob memes, comes directly from the quote, “each time you write you will find yourself

in a rhetorical situation, in other words within a context or genre, that nudges you to choose the

right diction or even jargon and to strike the right tone” (Boyd 100). I had never previously

thought of a genre outside of a book or story, yet now I see that everything around me has a

genre, and the demands of genres shape the rhetoric that is used. We also heavily focused on the

topic of genre conventions, an example being the type of language used, which I now look at as

“stepping stones” in building a genre.

 Fox 4

The final portfolio was my favorite assignment, not due to the hours I spent working at

my tiny desk, but to my great feeling of growth when rewriting and analyzing previous work.

When I first submitted my writing projects, I thought they were the best they could be, but when

I relooked at them for the purposes of this portfolio, I recognized clear mistakes. For example,

some of my sentences were too long and lacked clarity, so I applied knowledge from “Style

Reading: Cohesion and Coherence” and “Style Reading: Concision” to improve the flow of my

sentences. I removed distractions from the beginning of sentences, unnecessary or repetitive

words, and separated complex thoughts into short and concise sentences. I also heavily referred

to “Style Reading: Shape,” which taught me how to better structure my sentences. I learned the

importance of starting a sentence with your point, followed by the explanation, for “we can best

manage complexity when we begin with something short and direct that frames the more

complex information that follows” (Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace). Through these

revisions, I created much better versions of my projects, and am now more confident in my work

than ever.

Although I have befriended many new techniques in Writing 2, citation styles remain on

my frenemies list. In Writing 2 we used both MLA and Chicago Style citations, one of which

was foreign to me. Not only are there multiple citation styles, but each style is updated every

year, which makes keeping track of the correct form extremely difficult. There are wonderful

sources we were encouraged to use, such as Owl Purdue, yet I still have a long way to go before

I feel confident in the citations I put forward. Another aspect of this course that I struggled with

was writing essays with one topic per paragraph, or in other words, in more than five paragraphs.

I don’t struggle because I dislike this concept, but because the five-paragraph format has been

engraved in my mind since before I can remember. However, I have learned to push past my
 Fox 5

previously learned boundaries regarding writing, and format essays in the style that best suits my

purpose. Although I still struggle with correctly formatting my citations and writing more than

five paragraphs, Writing 2 has provided me with a variety of resources to help me improve,

which I will be sure to use in my future writing.

These past 10 weeks have opened my eyes to a much greater way of writing, and as I

move into the next quarter, so will my newfound knowledge. When brainstorming topics for a

piece of writing I will use first-order thinking to bring my ideas out of hiding, as well as second-

order thinking to make my writing clean and clear. I will also take advantage of writing as a

process, utilizing the drafting process. Additionally, I now recognize different genres and the

conventions that define them, as well as the always-changing citation styles. This knowledge will

help me understand the purposes behind different genres of writing, as well as how to properly

cite my resources. Although writing and I are still working on our relationship, my new

knowledge on thinking, drafting, genres, rhetorical strategies, and the many other lessons of this

course have mended a great deal of division we once had. In fact, science may now have a run

for its money when it comes to the subject of the quarter.

 Fox 6

Bibliography

Boyd, Janet. “Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking).” Writing Spaces 2: Readings on Writing,

Volume 2, by Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky, Parlor Press, 2010, pp. 87–101.

Crisler, Julia, and Patricia Morland. “Making a Translation Together with Boyd.”

Lamott, Anne. Bird By Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. New York: Pantheon, 1994.

Print.

Elbow, Peter. Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Learning and Teaching. New York:

Oxford U Press. 1986.

“Lesson 4 Cohesion and Coherence.” Style: the Basics of Clarity and Grace, by Joseph M.

Williams and Joseph Bizup, Pearson, 2015, pp. 34–44.

“Lesson 4 Concision.” Style: the Basics of Clarity and Grace, by Joseph M. Williams and

Joseph Bizup, Pearson, 2015, pp. 56–68.

“Lesson 7 Shape.” Style: the Basics of Clarity and Grace, by Joseph M. Williams and

Joseph Bizup, Pearson, 2015, pp. 68–88.

Straub, Richard. “Responding—Really Responding—to Other Students; Writing.” The Subject Is

Writing. 2nd ed. Ed. Wendy Bishop. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, 1999.