Throughout this semester, we looked at 3 separate ways to author papers. The styles of writing were a rhetorical analysis, a delayed thesis paper, and a proposal argument. Each of these topics was new to me, creating a challenge I have not faced before. Devising a structured paper that flowed well and had a clear argument was tough but not the primary challenge I faced when writing this semester. The main challenge I faced when revising my papers was figuring out the opposing arguments to my main argument and proving a clear thesis.  

The first writing assignment for the semester was the rhetorical analysis of an article by Rebecca Mead, titled “Learning by Degrees.” This assignment exemplifies my struggles this semester. I faced my problems and resolved them by using my peer revisions, consultation meetings, and the writing center. After reading this article for the first time, I found it hard to find the author’s clear argument and her thesis. The delayed thesis Mead used confused me at first, but I found my rough drafts weaknesses. I was struggling to make a clear thesis in my paper. In each of my peer revisions, they said I had a great hook, but they struggled understanding my thesis. (Peer revisions, Sisco, Gutierrez, 2021) I found this problem hard to address, but after my consultation meeting and my meeting with the writing center, the article became much clearer.  

Originally, I found Mead to be contradicting and could not decide if she thought college was a waste of time or not. During my consultation meeting, Professor Dupal helped me analyze the article and asked me questions such as, “why do you think she said that” and “how does this help her argument.” I reread the article and focused on when Mead was using irony in her article when she is telling the opposing beliefs about the argument. For example, when Mead cites the two college professors in an ironic manner. “Both professors were quoted saying college is a waste of time, yet they both attended college.” (Mead, 2010) After I decided that Mead’s beliefs were clear, I developed a new thesis. My final thesis in my final essay is clear, concise, and gets to the point. Mead believes that college is not a waste of time and “regardless of each graduate’s ultimate path, all might be qualified to be carriers of arts and letter, of which the nation can never have to many.” (Mead, 2010) 

The other key roadblock I came across while writing this semester was figuring out opposing arguments. Not only does this credit an author more, but it makes the author more believable and unbiased. I found myself specifically in the following essays to simply just argue about my beliefs without crediting opposing beliefs. For the delayed thesis essay, I chose the topic “Social media and domestic terrorism.” My argument was clear, social media affected the world in many ways including domestic terrorism. In the delayed thesis essay, it took me a while to even discover the alternative views on the topic. Once again, my consultation meeting helped me a lot as Professor Dupal even pointed out some scenarios I did not even acknowledge in my rough draft. Views such as the FBI using social media to find terrorist organizations and the accessibility of the internet. I resolved this issue by diving into more research on the topic and crediting them within my final drafts. This became a similar trend as in the proposal argument, I struggled telling solutions to my problem. Instead of contrasting and considering the alternative views, I focused on my argument at hand. The comments Professor Dupal made on my rough draft and my peer revisions made it clear to me that I did not do it in the paper. I resolved this issue in an equivalent manner to essay two, by researching more and weighing out all the options.  

One of the key tactics I used when attacking my problems with writing was rereading my drafts and the articles, if supplied. This was a technique my professor and the writing center introduced to me, and I found it extremely helpful. Reading the paper aloud helped me not only to hear my flaws but also correct the structure and flow of the paper. Adding this to my writing process allowed me to become a better writer throughout the semester. Authoring a clear thesis and considering both sides of an argument became the main issue this semester for my writing. Learning how to properly structure a paper whether that be a delayed thesis argument or simply just a proposal argument was crucial to my progress as a writer. Using my resources such as my peers, my consultation meetings, and the writing center helped me develop a higher quality of writing this semester. The techniques I learned this semester will stick with me as I continue my writing career as a college student.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited 

Mead, Rebecca. “Learning by Degrees.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 31 May 2010, https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/06/07/learning-by-degrees.   

 

 

Help Received  

Cooper Sisco (Peer Revision) 

Elena Gutierrez (Peer Revision)  

Annick Dupal (Consultation Meetings) 

Writing Center