Every night as a young child my parents would send me up to bed at 8:30 where I would eagerly await the sound of their footsteps approaching my room. Once they were finally upstairs I was allowed to pick out two books for them to read to me that night. For as long as I can remember this was a routine that took place every night. As children we are eager for story time for the sole reason that we are able to hear entertaining stories involving beautiful princesses, scary robots, or silly talking animals. You may be wondering what significance my childhood story holds to our current assignment.  The answer is this. What appeared to me to just be “just story time,” 16 years ago was in fact much, much more. With this realization I have begun to appreciate the work that children’s story author put forth. I have also realized the significance these stories play in the development of young children.  

What I believed was just story time was actually the beginning of an 18-year long process of instilling my parent’s (and society’s) morals and values into me. This was done in the hopes of making me a beneficial member of society. This process begins when we are infants, with things such as Baby Einstein, and leads well into our scholastic years. In this essay I will be analyzing two stories and their moral lessons. Furthermore, I will evaluate how the technique of the stories have been adapted to appeal to the audiences of various generations and whether or not I believe that this change is something that should be considered a “good” thing. I believe that parents should take what many would dub as the “old school” approach and use the older version of stories for reasons I will discuss below.  

One of the two books I consistently chose as a child was The Hare and The Tortoise, an Aesop Fable. This story is believed to have been written by Aesop, a Greek story teller, between the years of 620 and 564 BC. The Hare and the Tortoise is a short story about a race that takes place between a Hare and a Tortoise, two obviously opposite creatures when it comes to their natural abilities. Turtles are notorious for being extremely slow whereas hares are known for their speed and quick agility. The Hare was a cocky creature who constantly boasted about his speed and ability to beat all creatures in speed focused competition. The Hare, having  beaten all of his previous competitors began asking if anyone was brave enough to challenge him. The Tortoise, seeing an opportunity to teach the Hare a lesson, humbly accepted his challenge. “That is a good joke,” said the Hare; “I could dance round you all the way.”
(Aesop) The Hare, being so sure of his victory takes a nap and meanders around until he realizes that the Tortoise near the finish line. Unable to catch up with the Tortoise the Hare learns a lesson in both humility and patience.  (Aesop) 

It was not until I was older that I realized the true meaning of this story. This same story that millions of other children over hundreds of years have also heard and taught them the same life lesson. This is something that connects not only all citizens of our country, but is a shared moral belief across the world. While the message has not changed the method of delivering it to the children has. In Diane Sekers “The Market Child and Branded Fiction: A Synergism of Children’s Literature” she discusses how our Market has changed the way children relate and interpret stories, thus forcing publication houses to adapt the way they market and design their books.  “Publishers and marketers also want children to be consumers as well as readers. ” (Sekers) 

For instance, when The Hare and The Tortoise was originally created it was nothing but some lines of text that children would use to fuel their imaginations. Each Tortoise and each Hare was a different color or size or even shape within the young child’s mind. They did not have dolls, cartoons, or comic book versions of the story that painted the picture for them.(Sekers)  Every story is interpreted however it is “Branded.” (Sekers) This supports my claim that while the moral of stories has stayed the same, our method of rhetoric has evolved, and some would say not necessarily for the best. One small example of the evolution had been seen in the second story I will be analyzing. 

The second story I have chosen is titled, I’ll wait, Mr. Panda. This story is about a panda and a few of his friends including a llama, a alpaca, some rabbits, and finally the penguin.(Antony) The Panda was baking a surprise when each individual animal came up and asked the Panda what he was making. Each time the Panda answered “Wait and see it’s a surprise.” To what the animals would rudely reply that they will not wait and march away.(Antony)  It was not until the end when the Penguin was kind and patient with the Panda that he was rewarded with friendship and a giant doughnut. (Antony) While the moral of these stories is the same, the execution was not. The first story was a mere nine lines with no images. It left much to the imagination and the child’s interpretation. These were the kind of stories that as Seker said “children dressed up as the characters and acted how they imagined the characters would.” I’ll wait, Mr. Panda leaves nothing to the imagination. Each page consists of approximately four to seven words and large pictures that cover both pages.  The image that the market wants to portray in the dominant aspect of the entire book. Not to mention that there are various I’ll wait, Mr. Panda toys and classroom crafts. 

Children’s books have always been and will continue to be a driving force in the education of children. They offer not only the benefit of learning and developing language, but in this case, they offer life lessons on how to interact with other people in order to be successful in life. I find it comforting that the morals of the stories have remained the same despite the modernization and elimination of the use of children’s imaginations. In some ways I believe that the market’s agenda could be perceived as a good thing. All of these various forces help captivate the children to a new degree. What it does not help improve is our children’s desire to go outside side and play, or use their imaginations to make the story whatever they want it to be, typically creating a strong personal connection between them and the story. The focus of the publishers and authors should remain the education of the students as opposed to turning them into consumers. 

Works Cited 

Aesop. “The Hare and the Tortoise – An Aesop’s Fable.” The Hare and the Tortoise an Aesop’s Fable, www.taleswithmorals.com/aesop-fable-the-hare-and-the-tortoise.htm. 

Antony, Steve. I’ll Wait, Mr. Panda. Scholastic Press, 2016.

Sekers, Diana Carver. The Market Child and Branded Fiction: A Synergism of Children’s Literature, Consumer Culture, and New Literacies. Wiley on Behalf of the International Literacy Association, 21 Sept. 2017, 

Every night as a young child my parents would send me up to my room at 8:30 where I would eagerly await the sound of their footsteps coming up the stairs. Once they were upstairs I would get to pick out two books that they were going to read to me that night. This wasn’t a routine that I was forced to do, it was something that was incorporated into my life that I found joy in. You may be wondering what significance this story holds to our current assignment.  The answer is simple. What appeared to be “just story time,” was much more. 

Every night as I got excited to hear a story was actually the beginning of an 18-year process of instilling theirs (and society’s) moral values into me with the hope of making me a beneficial member of society. This process begins with infants and leads well into our scholastic years. In this essay I will be analyzing two stories and their moral lessons. Furthermore, I will evaluate how the *technique* of the stories have been adapted to the audiences of various generations and whether or not this is a good thing for both our generation and those proceeding us.  

One of the two books I consistently chose as a child during story time was “The Hare and The Tortoise,” an Aesop Fable. This story is believed to have been written by Aesop, who was a story teller in Greece between the years of 620 and 564 BC. The Hare and the Tortoise is a short story about a race that takes place between a Hare and a Tortoise, two seemingly opposite creatures when it comes to natural ability. Turtles are notorious for being extremely slow whereas rabbits are known for their quick ability to hop away. The Hare was a cocky creature who constantly boasted about his speed and ability to beat all creatures in every speed competition. The Tortoise humbly accepted his challenge and thus began the race. The Tortoise, being so sure of his victory takes a nap and meanders around until he realizes that the Tortoise near the finish line. Unable to catch up with the Tortoise the Hare learns a lesson in both humility and patience.  

It was not until I was older that I realized the true meaning of this story. The same story that millions of other children have also heard and taught them the same life lesson. This is a connection amongst all citizens of our nation, a shared moral belief and expectation of what behavior is acceptable. While the message has not changed the method of delivering it to the children has. In Diane Sekers “The Market Child and Branded Fiction: A Synergism of Children’s Literature” she discusses how our Market has changed the way children relate and interpret stories. 

For instance, when The Hare and The Tortoise was originally created it was nothing but some lines of text that children would use to fuel their imaginations. Each Tortoise and each Hare was a different color or size or even shape within the young child’s mind. They did not have dolls, cartoons, or comic book versions of the story that painted the picture for them.(Sekers)  Every story is interpreted however it is “Branded.” (Sekers) This supports my claim that while the moral of stories has stayed the same, our method of rhetoric has evolved, and some would say not necessarily for the best. One small example of the evolution had been seen in the second story I will be analyzing. 

The second story I have chosen is titled, I’ll wait, Mr. Panda. This story is about a panda and a few of his friends including a llama, a alpaca, some rabbits, and finally the penguin. The Panda was baking a surprise when each individual animal came up and asked the Panda what he was making. Each time the Panda answered “Wait and see it’s a surprise.” To what the animals would rudely reply that they will not wait and march away. It was not until the end when the Penguin was kind and patient with the Panda that he was rewarded with friendship and a giant doughnut. While the moral of these stories is the same, the execution was not. The first story was a mere nine lines with no images. It left much to the imagination and the child’s interpretation. These were the kind of stories that as Seker said “children dressed up as the characters and acted how they imagined the characters would.” I’ll wait, Mr. Panda leaves nothing to the imagination. Each page consists of approximately four to seven words and large pictures that cover both pages.  The image that the market wants to portray in the dominant aspect of the entire book. Not to mention that there are various I’ll wait, Mr. Panda toys and classroom crafts. 

Children’s books have always been and will continue to be a driving force in the education of children. They offer not only the benefit of learning and developing language, but in this case, they offer life lessons on how to interact with other people in order to be successful in life. I find it comforting that the morals of the stories have remained the same despite the modernization and elimination of the use of children’s imaginations. In some ways I believe that they market’s agenda could be perceived as a good thing. All of these various forces help captivate the children to a new degree. What it does not help improve is our children’s desire to go outside side and play, or use their imaginations to make the story whatever they want it to be, typically creating a strong personal connection between them and the story.  

My topic for this paper consists of two interchanging ideas that develop as children and are essential as adults. The first thing I am addressing is the importance of loyalty regardless of any and all challenging situations. The second topic I will be addressing is treating others how you would like to be treated. The reason I felt it was best to discuss both of these topics at once was that I believe that one plays a significant part in the significance of the other. If we are loyal to someone we expect the same in return, and it is important not to take one person’s kindness for granted. It should be an endless circle of the right and kind behavior.   

My audience will be children between the ages of 5 and 15 (With a potential sub audience but I would like to discuss this with Mrs. Mcdonald.) The overall occasion of this paper is a Research Informed essay where we address behaviors, beliefs, and values that a group of people have using various examples in rhetoric.  The specific occasion is to teach young children about the importance of being a good friend and citizen.  The message I am trying to get across to the audience is that loyalty and “the gold rule” are two of the most important things in the all relationships. The first source I have below is the children’s story “The Bear and the Two Friends” which is used to teach about loyalty. The second is a children’s book on friendship and how to make it successful, while the final (The Golden Rule according to the Berenstain Bears) is a short story on treating others how you want to be treated. 

Three sources  

http://www.moralstories.org/the-bear-and-the-two-friends/ 

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=OxtEBAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&hl=en 

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=pf7BKyjMI40C&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&hl=en 

Regardless of what many people believe, the study of Rhetoric is not a new concept. Because of this nearly every rhetorician will give you a different definitions. While every rhetorician may have the same general concept in mind, they will explain their thoughts using different focal terms. These focuses could be on the vernacular, theories, civic focuses , or even something as simple as writing.  During our class brainstorming exercise the two terms I believe encompass rhetoric are “persuasion” and “discourse”.

The goal of every speaker and writer is to persuade their audience into believing what they are telling them. If this does not successfully take place then all of the effort put forth by the writer becomes irrelevant. The techniques and verbiage used to successfully persuade an audience has to be adapted to the specific group and goal that the rhetor is addressing.

This adaptation relies heavily on the specific discourse that the rhetor is focusing on. For example, political discourse is portrayed in nearly every propaganda ad and speech given by any candidate that we watch. The way in which the politician expresses his ideas and beliefs to us is entirely different than the way a teacher would address a classroom full of students, or a pastor would address the members of their congregation.

There are even smaller discourses within the larger ones. I once analyzed a speech given by a politician where his focuses was a group of students who supported his competitor. Shockingly his goal was not to persuade them to support his cause, but to persuade them of their worth. My point being, even within a larger discourse (political) a rhetor has to adjust their approach. This is what give rhetoric its significance and power.

Prior to “Biology of Gender” I always viewed the world as having two “genders” or what I believed to be gender. In my mind there were men and there were women. I was taught to believe that these roles were defined by the sexual genitalia the individual was born with.  Not only was I not using the term “gender” correctly, but it is a much more complicated concept than I could have ever anticipated.  Beginning with artifact 1 my entire perspective on humans identities began to change.

In artifact 1 we were asked to distinguish the difference between sex and gender. As stated above, my prior belief of gender was incorrect, gender does not refer to the biology of the individual. Gender refers to how a person psychologically identifies themselves.Our idea of gender is believed to be a social construct. This was explained to us at the very beginning of       BI-218 using a “gender bread man.” This chart gave students the oppurtunity to distinguish how they felt sexually, emotionally, and companionship wise. The significant part is, that not all the answers on the “gender break man” had to align to either specific “gender” that society has created.

What I believed to be “gender” was in fact the sex of the individual. “Sex” is the scientific term used in reference to the physically parts someone is born with. This is where the terms man and woman fits most properly, not coinciding the word gender. The focus of this artifact was to teach us and our readers that someone’s identity goes much deeper than their physical makeup. A fact that I found this extremely insightful. I furthered my research into this gender phenomena in my second artifact on the Fa’afaine of the Samoan culture.

Gender equality and rights has been a hot topic in recent United States news . Recent acts such as passing equal marriage laws has brought some peace to those who are treated like they do not fit into culture “norms.” Members of the LGBTQ community in the United states still have a ways to go in society but thankfully large strides have been made. We can see these positive strides in other areas of the world as well. In my second artifact I spoke of the Fa’afaine culture in Samoa. This concept initially confused me but in the end I found it to be fascinating and was glad that I had the opportunity to research it.

In the both the Fa’afaine culture and the Igbo culture in Nigeria (referenced from artifact #3) social roles and jobs are determined entirely by sex. In some ways this is similar to culture in the United States. This difference is , the United states has drastically evolved and has begun to allow woman to create their own paths in life. Because of the world I have been raised in these issues is not something that has crossed my mind. That is,  until I did further research on the topic itself. This  evolution of society is not something that can be seen in the two cultures mentioned above.

In Samoan culture having a daughter in the family is essential.  When there is not a daughter in the family the mother can often become overwhelmed with the “womanly ” duties. In this case the mother will typically chose a son, usually the youngest, who is designated as the daughter and given the womanly jobs. This is something that I disagreed with. Not only because the separation of roles is entirely sexist, but because it forces a young man to live the life of a woman regardless of how he associates.

This practice is no different than society forcing children to solely associate with the sex they are born as. In one of the Fa’afaine films a man recalls being tormented as a child because he was chosen by his mother to fill the role of Fa’afaine. Other young boys pulled down his pants and called him a little girl when he actually identified as a young man despite being forced to fulfill the role as a woman. It was this forced behavior that shaped the rest of his life. On the other end of this cultural practice there are young men who chose to live this life because  of the way they identify. In this sense it is a positive because the culture is already accustomed to seeing men in this position. The key conclusion that was reached during this artifact was that regardless of the role men and women decided to fulfill it has to be a personal CHOICE.

Earlier in this essay  I mentioned the Igbo tribe of Nigeria and their gender roles from Artifact 3. This culture both fascinated and impressed me. This is one of very few cultures in that area of the world which allows women to have some level of independence. When we typically think of gender defined roles we imagine women stuck in the household cooking and cleaning while men play the role of “bread winners” and take care of the majority of social interaction and finances. This is not the case in the Igbo tribe. The woman of the tribe are solely responsible for all financial  decisions and transactions. Not only does this allow woman to have some money of their own, but they learn different dialects and languages necessary to interact with people. This is a huge step in the right direction for the woman of this culture and hopefully will influence those around it. It gave me a sliver of hope for those other woman.

Lastly there is the way woman are treated in regards to menstruation. There were no positives outside of the United States that I studied or came across in class. In artifact 5 I addressed the terrible social stigmas that many third world countries associate with menstruation. In multiple villages we saw film of women being forced to live together in miniature huts while they menstruate because they men find them to be “disgusting,” or “unclean.” They even went as far as to claim that if a woman goes near the livestock during this time of the month they will all die and the village will starve. This is due to a lack of education and willingness to learn. This research made me feel exceptionally thankful for living in the society that I do.

Overall I think taking this course was a well spent month of summer school . Not just because it fulfilled a credit requirement, but because it opened by eyes up to the big picture. We live in a society where woman are slowly becoming more “equal.” We have rights that other women around the world could only dream of having. It is because of this that woman in positions similar to ours have a responsibility to try to help improve the lifestyles of other woman around the world. This is the major benefit I received from taking Biology of Gender.

My culture for this artifact are the Igbo people of Nigeria. This is a bilinear l(or bilateral) culture but not in the traditional manner.The two main areas of focus in Igbo culture are the trade/finances, and home life/home owning. This may sound fairly typical and you are most likely already assigning genders to each of those roles. However, in this culture, the women run the trade and finances while the men are the primary land owners and grounds keepers.

I found this shocking. This financial responsibility gives women a type of independence that is not seen in most other parts of the world. Not only are the women the face of organizing transactions, but they are responsible for the cultivation of the agriculture. The only part men participate in is the planting of the rice, their staple food. This female responsibility allows them to interact with people from other cultures, but most importantly it allows them to have their own personal money instead of relying on the men. This being said, the men are the primary owners of all land and homes. This does not seem to be a system that upsets the women of the Igbo tribe.

The independence demonstrated in the Igbo tribe is similar to the Mosuo Culture of China. Chinese culture is typically known for being Patrilneal (male dominant) but the Mosuo culture is considered to be a “Woman’s paradise.” Unlike main land Chinese culture, the women are in complete control of their finances and personal life. Because this culture does not believe in marriage each individual is responsible for making their own money. This is similar to the Igbo where women handle the money in the family. Unlike the Igbo however, women in Mosuo practice walking marriages. This is where a different man can come to the woman’s bed at night and it is her choice if she wants him to stay. They say this is based off of love they are just avoiding the forced dependence on one another. These are some differences and similarities between the two cultures.

Something else that I found interesting between the two genders in the Igbo culture was their separation in government. Unlike the male dominated political world in the USA, the Igbo have two entirely separate “house”. There is one “house” specifically for the men, and one for the women. Each of these two “houses” only deals with law in regards to their own sex. Within the two “houses” the members are separated into three groups. The highest of which is are the elders of the community. It is the elders who hand down punishments and decide who is guilty.  This purpose of this system is to allow both genders to be heard equally. While I believe that it would be ideal for both sexes to work together this is a step in the right direction compared to the biased male persecution of women in third world countries.

How does Terkel characterize and or/question the “nature” or the “reality” of work? Keep in mind how he talks about worker’s roles, experiences, values and purposes. Include at least one human example from your selected interview.  

From my understanding Terkel views the work force as challenging in a way that can get the best of those participating in it. By this I mean that people do not always see the worth and importance of their positions, thus causing them to perform at a lower level. They say things such as “A monkey can do what I do,” and “I’m an object.” (Terkel Introduction) The nature of the work place can be seen as “humiliating” and in some ways depressing. If a worker is able to change their mindset in regard to their job there with be a plethora of positive effects. In his introduction Terkel mentions a young woman named Dolores Dante who was a waitress. Not many people would necessary categorize that as their dream job, but Dolores was not ashamed and made the best of her situation. “Yet pride in her skills helps her make it through the night.” (Terkel Introduction) This is the exact same mindset that Kitty Scanlan developed in her job as an occupational therapist.

Initially Scanlan did not see her worth as an Occupational therapist. She was constantly comparing herself to the doctors and their life saving operations. Yet despite her jealousy she still viewed the hospital as an extremely rigid and unhappy environment. She decided she was not going to conform to this mindset. While the surgeon receives immediate gratification, Scanlan receives long-term gratification. It began with her realizing how much she enjoyed helping all of her patients, as well as how much she enjoyed learning from them. After she re discovered her joy in helping struggling people she came to a realization. Scanlan stated, “I finally learned it didn’t matter what he (the doctor) though. If I believed in what I was doing I didn’t give a damn what the doctor thought.” (496 Scanlan) This was her realization of her value and the importance of her role. From that moment forward she decided she would not stand by idly and allow everyone to go about their jobs miserably. She stepped forward and made differences that otherwise would not have taken place. With her new found self-confidence and appreciation of her job she was able to help teach more students how to be the best occupational therapists that they could possibly be.

If you had asked me before taking the ERH 101 and 102 courses what aspect of my writing that I thought needed the most work was I probably would have given you a stereotypical answer. Something along the lines of “my grammar” or “organizing my paragraphs.” While both of those aspects could always be improved upon, neither is the main issue within my writing.

Before now, I never truly put any thought into what the issue has been. Because of this I was unable to provide an accurate and thought out answer. Whenever I was asked this question, whether it is in conferences or peer reviews I always gave the same response of edit grammar or focus on my five-paragraph structure. I didn’t think deeper. This coincidentally is my exact issue. I fail to elaborate and go further with my thoughts.

Before my freshman year of college I had always thought that I had been clear and elaborated thoroughly. I never had any reason to believe differently. Based off of the feedback I have received from teachers in the past I was under the impression that the way in which I was writing was clear and acceptable, with only minor details to correct. Imagine if you were sitting in a theatre watching a movie, and right as the climax begins to form and you are at the edge of your seat the director abruptly cuts the scene and the movie ended. This is how you can imagine reading one of my earlier papers would be like. Sitting there and typing wasn’t nearly enough to get my thought process flowing in the direction that I needed it to go. It was clear that I needed a new strategy, but had no idea as to what that new strategy would be.

“If the United States implemented a system similar to this I believe it would help raise not only the generally education of the population, but change the lives of many in ways that could benefit us all.” (The price you pay) In that statement I mention changing our American School system to one that is similar to the Europeans, but I make no mention as to how specifically or how this change would affect people’s lives. Looking back as I re read this now even I question myself. What ways should the system be similar and how would this benefit people of the population in the long run? I continued reading and waiting for answers to my questions, answers that never came. Instead I continued my writing onto the next paragraph leaving all of those questions un answered. The paper was then concluded.

Something that has always been beneficial to me are the one on one conferences that are held before each paper is due. The purpose is to review my progress and answer any questions that I had about the assignment. I usually understood the assignment but still struggled to identify what exactly the paper was asking or expecting. To help jump start the process my professor would ask me a few basic questions; what audience was I trying to reach, what was my goal, and how did I plan on achieving this goal. This spurred instant conversation as thoughts began to flow out. During all of this he pointed out that I was physically able to tell him what I intended to write and it made sense. The issue was being able to translate my thoughts onto paper as smoothly as I spoke about them. By just talking about it I was able to get my thoughts across fully

Another break through in my writing process occurred at an appointment at VMI’S s writing center. I showed up with a printed copy of my second paper of the Spring 2015 semester, Annotated Bibliography and synthesis, ready to be altered and edited. When I showed up to my appointment the first thing Ms. Affronti had me do was begin reading what I had written thus far out loud. She sat there quietly as I critiqued myself paragraph by paragraph. We only stopped for short moments during the reading to edit sentence structure and wording. It was not until the completion of my paper that she asked me to clarify what she found unclear. Ms. Affronti would ask what exactly I meant and for further elaboration on points that I thought were already solid. Once again leading me to explaining out loud, and bettering my writing information. This is when I knew that in order to better my writing I was going to need to start reading everything I write out loud.

In a perfect world this correction would have showed itself right away. The improvement has gone through a variety of stages. In my second essay of the spring 2015 semester we wrote an Annotated Bibliography and synthesis. After re reading this essay multiple times I realized some progress in my current issue of elaboration. “The National Research Council held a workshop for students with different stations that covered various skills to prepare you for life, such as adaptability and basic communication skills. This workshop proved that while there are still some issues to be worked out, for the most part the scientific proficiency in students has increased. These types of social and business skills are essential in any work place. They are life skills” (European traditional education system) That elaboration on the workshop held by the NRC shows the progress beginning to come along. In my writing before I would have stated that they held stations demonstrating various skills to prepare you for life and it was successful. That would have left many unanswered questions.

In my last essays submitted, The Research essay, it seemed like I was beginning to overcompensate for lacking explanations in the first essay. This can be just as dangerous as under explaining. Multiple times through out this paper I use the same term “ As I stated before” on multiple occasions. (The epitome) That statement alone tells me that I repeated the same information more often than I should have. It was like I was caught in a vicious repetitive circle. This did not prove to be an issue throughout the entire essay. It was only in certain areas throughout.

This year of ERH has shown me not only what I needed to improve, but helped me develop methods to do this. This class was very significant in my process as a writer but was by no means a miracle worker. It has guided me on the path to success and it is my responsibility to continue developing and using the tools I learned. As demonstrated with my examples, the progress is there, I just need to continue working and bettering it.

Works Cited

“The European traditional education system versus the Modernized 21st century United States system.” VMI. March 12,2015

“The Epitome of a first world problem.” VMI. April 23, 2015.

“The price you pay for a college degree.” VMI. January 22,2015

If you had asked me before taking the ERH 101 and 102 courses what I thought I needed to work on most with my writing, I probably would have given you the usual answer. Something along the lines of “my grammar” or “organizing my paragraphs.”

Both of which are valid responses, but they would not been a truthful or accurate response in my case. My original response would not be meant to deceive. The honest the fact is that I never truly put any thought into it. This would limit me from providing an answer. For me it was always the same response, edit grammar or focus on my five-paragraph structure. I didn’t think deeper. This coincidentally is my exact issue. I fail to elaborate and go further.

Before ERH 101 and 102 I thought I was being clear and elaborating. I had never had any reason to believe differently. Imagine if you were sitting in a theatre watching a movie, and right as the climax begins to form and you are at the edge of your seat the director abruptly cuts the scene and the movie ended. This is how you can imagine reading one of my earlier papers would be like. I began to realize that sitting there and typing wasn’t nearly enough to get my thought process flowing in the direction that I needed it to go. I needed a new strategy.

“If the United States implemented a system similar to this I believe it would help raise not only the generally education of the population, but change the lives of many in ways that could benefit us all.” (The price you pay) In that statement I mention changing the system to that of the Europeans, but I make no mention as to how specifically. In the next paragraph I continue onto my conclusion completely leaving my previous statement open ended and lacking elaboration.

Like every paper before, a meeting was held with my professor to review my progress and answer any question that I had. I understood the assignment but was still uncertain about what exactly the paper was asking. Mr Hamilton asked me a few basic questions’ what audience was I trying to reach, and what was my goal. This spurred instant conversation as thoughts began to flow out.. During all of this he pointed out thatI was physically able to tell him what I intended to write. I just needed to put down on the paper what I was saying. I was able to start getting my thoughts across fully without actually realizing it.

Another break through that helped me co me to tis realization with my writing was a meeting that I scheduled with the writing center. I showed up with a printed out copy of my second paper of this Fall semester ready to be altered and edited. When I showed up to my meeting the first thing she had me do was begin reading what I had thus far out loud. She would mostly sit there quietly while I critiqued myself as I read on. We only stopped for short moments during the reading to edit sentence structure and wording. It was not until the very end that she asked me to clarify a few things. Like my professor had stated earlier in the year. She would ask what exactly I meant and for further elaboration on points that I thought were already solid. Once again leading me to explaining out loud, and bettering my writing information.

If you had asked me before taking the ERH 101 and 102 courses what I thought I needed to work on most with my writing, I probably would have given you the usual answer. Something along the lines of “my grammar” or “organizing my paragraphs.” Both of which are valid responses, but they would not been a truthful or accurate response in my case. My original response would not be meant to deceive, but the fact that I never truly put any thought into it would limit me from providing an answer. For me I t was always the same response, edit grammar or focus on my five-paragraph structure. I didn’t think deeper. This coincidentally is my exact issue. I fail to elaborate and go further.

Before ERH 101 and 102 I thought I was being clear and elaborating. I had never had any reason to believe differently. Imagine if you were sitting in a theatre watching a movie, and right as the climax begins to form and you are at the edge of your seat the director abruptly cuts the scene and the movie ended. This is how you can imagine reading one of my earlier papers would be like. I began to realize that sitting there and typing wasn’t nearly enough to get my thought process flowing in the direction that I needed it to go. I needed a new strategy.

During a meeting with my professor I informed him that I had a general idea of what I wanted to write but no idea how to get it across. He began a conversation with me and pointed out that what I was physically telling him was what I needed to put down on the paper. I was able to start getting my thoughts across fully without actually realizing it. It was my meeting along with attending a session at the writing center is what presented me with the technic that I needed to be a successful writer.