Onwards and Upwards: My Academic Literacy Development and its Impact on my Goal of Becoming an Army Officer

Though I am no doubt still a substantial distance away from possessing a professional level of academic literacy in English writing (I am not yet a doctor of literature), looking back at my career in this field, I believe that I have developed the core skills and knowledge necessary to be successful in my desired profession, which is to become an Army Officer. In this essay, I will be using the results of Erika Peterson’s study of how past experiences shape future attitudes toward literacy (known as a defining moment) (193) and Deborah Brandt’s concept of literacy sponsors (43) to illustrate how I developed as a writer and how this development impacts my goal of becoming an Army Officer.

My journey toward academic literacy in English writing thus far consists of three developmental phases, the first of which began in seventh grade when I was introduced to the academic essay. The teacher, Ms. X, emphasized that good essay writing has two parts: developing persuasive ideas and writing with correct grammar. The second phase began in ninth grade, when my professor, Mr. Y, asserted that a good essay does not only contain good ideas and correct grammar, but also possesses coherent essay structure. The third and final phase began in ERH 101-03, where I developed another core characteristic of good essay writing: the message of the essay must be conveyed in a manner that is appealing to the audience. Through these three phases of academic literacy development, I learned that to be an effective rhetor, my communicative convention must be grammatically correct and contain sound ideas that are inherently persuasive, a coherent structure of those ideas so that they are easily understood, and a tailored version of the ideas themselves so as to appeal to the audience members and transcend their biases. These developmental phases directly correlate to my professional goal of becoming an Army Officer because I must know how to effectively persuade all types of audiences, whether they be my subordinates, my superiors, or my enemies.

Concerning the first phase of my academic literacy development, in seventh grade, I was  introduced to my literacy sponsor’s (Ms. X’s) opinion of what good essay writing entails: logical, persuasive ideas and perfect grammar. I learned how to develop persuasive ideas through reading nationally renowned essays, banned novels, and student examples, and learned correct grammar from her lectures and worksheets. As a result, when writing essays of my own, the teacher’s grading system focused solely on the feasibility of essay ideas and grammatical correctness. This stage of writing development was a defining moment for me, as I developed the misconceived notion that writing was solely about having good ideas and committing as few grammar errors as possible. Furthermore, as a literacy sponsor, Ms. X promoted different points of view and fostered within me a strong grammatical knowledge construct, but failed to mention other key aspects of essay writing such as the thesis statement and essay structure. As a result, I came away with a solid understanding of how to produce great ideas and write with near perfect grammar, but lacked other core aspects of persuasive essay writing such as transferring those ideas into an argument (via the thesis statement) and then asserting that argument in a structured, coherent manner.

Granted that Ms. X’s view of good essay writing was incomplete, my first stage of writing development was nonetheless an important step towards my goal of becoming an Army Officer. By learning how to develop feasible and convincing ideas, I developed the capability to give my audience the motivation to do what I want them to. This applies to my superiors (if I want them to change a plan), subordinates (if I want my men to complete a mission) and enemies (if I want them to surrender), as if I want them to do any of these things, I must provide good ideas that give them reason to do them. Furthermore, writing with correct grammar will also prevent any confusion amongst these audiences. As illustrated by the “grammar saves lives” meme, instead of saying “let’s eat grandma”, when inviting grandma to eat, one should instead write “let’s eat, grandma”, to prevent the undesired implication of wanting to eat grandma. The same concept applies to my professional career, as a strong understanding of grammar will prevent similar confusion when giving orders to my subordinates, responding to orders from my superiors, or when communicating with enemies.

Concerning the next phase of my literacy development, phase two began when I first entered high school. Given Ms. X’s incomplete curriculum in middle school, I lacked a basic understanding of what a thesis was, its role, and how to structure the rest of the essay around that thesis. As such, my very first essay earned a grade of a C. After reviewing my teacher’s comments, I noticed that Mr. Y praised me for the ideas that were present in my writing, but did not mention at all my essay’s flawless grammar. When meeting with him, Mr. Y emphasized that writing is not all about ideas or grammar, but about the way in which ideas are structured so as to accomplish cohesion. This was a defining moment for me, as I realized that in order to be a great writer and have a stellar grade in the class, I had to improve on the concept of structuring and organizing ideas. This was another important step in my development that aids in my goal of becoming an effective Army officer because I must learn to assert good ideas in a way that my subordinates, superiors, and enemies can understand. If I just jumble my ideas together with no coherent structure, they are likely to miss my key points and not understand what I am asserting in the way that I want them to.  

Additionally, I also learned in high school that to get a good grade, one must sometimes write from my sponsor of literacy’s perspective, or in other words, convey the same ideas of the teacher on the subject matter. I have had some teachers who have deducted points off of my essay in high school, which contained sound logic and strong organization, all because it did not reflect their perspectives. This was another defining moment for me, as I believed that to appeal to the audience (or otherwise get a good grade), I always had to write from their perspective. Thus, even though my sponsor of literacy in high school provided effective essay writing instruction, Mr. Y and other faculty members restricted conservative viewpoints, and tried to have students transcend conservative values such as religion and fiscally conservative policies. To that end, the literacy sponsors in high school withheld conservative information and knowledge, negatively impacting my goal of becoming an Army Officer because I must learn to appeal to people with all kinds of backgrounds, liberal and conservative ones alike.

Concerning the third phase, in ERH 101, I learned, that writing contains several “truths”, and that a “truth” is relative to the views and biases of the audience and the connection that they assume with the rhetor. Therefore, it is not just the ideas themselves or how they are structured that make for a great paper; rather, it is also the quality by which they are conveyed to convince the audience of the rhetor’s perception of “truth”. This leads to my third and final defining moment, which is learning that in order to construct the “truth” that I want my subordinates, superiors, or enemies to believe in my professional career as an Army officer, I must tailoring my ideas in such a way that, in some sense, appeals to said audience’s motivation to believe in that truth.  This is important to my goal of becoming an Army officer because I will have superiors, subordinates, and enemies of all sorts of backgrounds and points of view; therefore, I must use with each of them a different method of conveying my ideas (authoritative with subordinates, tempered with superiors, and aggressive with enemies). One such example of tailoring my language to appeal to the audience is in my syllabus essay analysis, where I had to assume a certain level of expertise from the audience, which was the teacher and the class. In the essay, my first paragraph defined the terms syllabus, ethos, logos, and pathos, which were not needed, as the audience already has experience and knowledge of what the meaning of those terms are. As a result, my literacy sponsor, MAJ Garriott, commented, “You don’t need this”, and crossed out that whole paragraph (qtd. Sells. Analysis of Dr. Jim Cullen’s Syllabus: “Empire as a Way of Life” 1). If I had defined terms that people my audience already knows (e.g. if I say “ACU’s need not be worn tomorrow”, then defined the term ACU so that my subordinates can understand), it would undermine my audience’s intelligence and probably insult them, making them less likely to accept my message.

Regarding my literacy sponsor, Major Garriott, I learned from her a more complete view of what good essay writing is compared to any of my other instructors. The concepts of grammar, ideas (or content), and structure were all explained in terms of both how they function and their significance in making a great essay, offering a more complete academic literacy development curriculum than those of my previous teachers. Moreover, my literacy sponsor in ERH 101 also introduced two other concepts that are important in writing a good essay, which are incorporating primary and secondary sources to support ideas, and concluding the essay with an answer to the question, “why does what you are writing about matter?” Concerning the concepts of primary and secondary sources, this helps my goal of becoming a successful Army Officer because without evidence to support my ideas, I become less convincing to my audience members because there is nothing to prove their feasibility. Lastly, concerning the question of “why does what you are writing matter?”, it provides a motive for my audience members to act. To illustrate, if I limit my suggestion to one of my superiors to we should change the formation of our attack by doing x,y, and z, he would most likely dismiss my idea and think it pointless. However, if I say we should change the formation of our attack by doing x, y, and z because it will save more lives, he is more likely to receive what I am saying because there is a point to all my argument.   

After analyzing all three developmental phases in my journey towards academic literacy, it seems to me that the overarching purpose of academic writing is to prepare me to be an effective communicator in the real world. By learning how to develop sound ideas, communicate those ideas in a structured manner, and convey them in a way that is appealing to an audience, I believe that I have taken my very first steps in becoming an effective leader and future Army Officer.

Word Count: 1,846

Citations:

Wardle, Elizabeth A., and Doug Downs. “Sponsors of Literacy.” Writing about Writing: A College Reader. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 43-62. Print.

Wardle, Elizabeth A., and Doug Downs. “Past Experiences and Future Attitudes in Literacy.” Writing about Writing: A College Reader. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 191-7. Print.

Sells, Justin. Analysis of Dr. Jim Cullen’s Syllabus: “Empire as a Way of Life”. 1.

Help Received:

Major Garriott (Critical Comments and Organization)

Joshua Austin (Critical Comments)