Dr. Bruce, Leslie.

Professor of English

California State University, Fullerton

Dear Dr. Bruce, Leslie,

My extended definition assignment exemplified my understanding of SLO 3 and 4 (i.e.,

Persuasion and Organization and Focus). Originally, my extended definition lacked any kind of

simplified graph that would help the reader understand the scientific process. To improve upon

my persuasiveness and my Organization, I created two flow charts: the first was a timeline of the

main contributors. This was included because if the reader just wanted to know the main

contributors without having to read through the entire paper, they could simply scroll down to

the bottom and find the flow chart. Second, were the steps of the scientific process. I included

this not because I do not think the reader wants to read the steps of the scientific method, but

rather, I included it to supplement the elaborated steps. After reading about the steps in detail, the

reader could then look at the graph I made and simply rehearse what they had just read in

simplified fashion to ascertain better all of the steps. Thus, upon revision, I was able to

communicate more effectively through the use of charts thereby showcasing my understanding

and effective implementation of SLO 3 and 4.

Synthesizing the three medical algorithm articles, I feel, exemplifies my understanding of SLO 6.

Specifically, when we had initially turned in the assignment, there seemed to be a missing piece

in the middle where we talked about describing two aspects of the New York Times article.

However, upon re-reading the synthesis I realize we had said we would mention two aspects of

how they are fixing racial bias and bettering treatment, but we only mentioned one. I, therefore,

upon revision, added a second treatment improvement option to make the sentence more
accurate. My team and I also fixed a few things we thought would improve the reader-

friendliness of the synthesis. Thus, I feel confident that our synthesis provides evidence that we

as a team have understood and implemented SLO 6 effectively.

The paraphrasing assignment showcases my understanding of SLO 5 and 6. This assignment

required an understanding of the content so that my team and I could accurately paraphrase it. As

a team, we worked together by fixing each other’s grammar and killing off unnecessary verbiage

that would hinder any meaning from being derived from it. Though my team and I are not in the

field of science that the coral paraphrasing exercise was drawn from, we worked together to both

understand and implement our collective understanding in the paraphrase thus showcasing our

grasp of SLO 6. Furthermore, our edits allowed meaning to be conveyed effectively thus

demonstrating our grasp of SLO 5.

Both annotations 1 and 2 on my Weebly annotated bibliography represent my understanding of

SLO 2. A challenge I had when I had initially turned in the assignment was figuring out how,

given the word limit, I was going to convey domain-specific information to the reader so that

they may ascertain it. Another challenge I had was, given the world limit, adding the appropriate

in-text citations. Upon revision, I was able to elaborate enough on the domain-specific

knowledge and the in-text citations to allow for better flow and more ethical research. For

example, I explained in one extra sentence what it meant to have a significant finding for

annotation 1. For annotation 2, I explained what a predictor was thus allowing my reader to

better understand the dynamics of my two papers and how they were related. Furthermore, these

two annotations together really showcase my ability to ethically cite research yet remain
cognizant of the flow of the paper thus exemplifying my understanding and implementation of

SLO2.

I feel that the synthesis I included at the top of my Weebly page really showcased my

understanding and implementation of SLO 1. This synthesis served as both a synthesis and an

introduction to my paper. Thus, there is a formal aspect insofar as I needed to utilize all four

articles in a coherent and cohesive manner. And an informal one insofar as it was an introduction

of which do not require the same rigor as a results page yet must remain in the scope of the topic

enough to not be too informal. Therefore, this showcases my understanding of SLO 1.

Sincerely,

Chase Haney