Sharon To

Dr. Lynda Haas

WR 39C
24 August 2015
The Inevitable End: A Reflection Essay
As with most courses I have taken during my short time as a college student, I
have come to realize in Writing 39C how much room I have to grow both as a student
and as a person, and I have developed a better sense of where I stand in terms of skill
and ability. These qualities come with nearly every learning experience, but there are
also many other lessons I have learned that are uniquely a result of having taken this
class. Writing 39C is an intensive writing course that cultivates students abilities of
argument, research, and proper use of rhetoric through writing and reading exercises as
well as three main assignments: the Historical Conversations Project (HCP) essay, the
Advocacy Project (AP) essay, and the Social Media Campaign (SMC) group project.
Every element of this course required concentrated and extensive research and
thorough peer review and personal reflection, all of which I had limited prior experience
with, but was able to learn much from. One of the things I found particularly interesting
and enlightening, was our focus on digital rhetoric which includes social media and
multimodality. Because of the ubiquitous state of technology in which I was raised, social
medias functionality as a tool for spreading awareness had gone practically unnoticed
until taking this course. As I researched for the SMC, I began to realize how often
organizations initiate social media campaigns as well as the effects their efforts have on
the general public and the change they are able to provoke. In addition to promoting
better argumentative, research, and rhetorical proficiency, this class has been a
significant proponent of the eight Habits of Mind (curiosity, openness, engagement,
creativity, persistence, responsibility, flexibility, and metacognition). Every assignment

throughout this course improved multiple attributes, forming us into more intelligent and
mindful students.
As this class was a research-based writing course, our assignments served to
better develop and reinforce our knowledge of the reiterative process of researchedbased texts. Our first major assignment, the HCP, was my first experience with writing
an essay that required such thorough research. Prior to this course, I was under the
impression that the writing process was linear - we research, we write, we revise, and
were done. However, it was through writing the HCP that I was first introduced to the
idea that the writing process is recursive. Rather than moving from one stage to the next,
research, writing, and revision are all equal parts of the writing process that are needed
at all times. This was apparent in every assignment we completed whether it was the
HCP, the AP, or the SMC, but my initial exposure to it with the HCP really helped me
develop my openness towards a new method of writing. I stumbled through it as I wrote
the HCP, but with more practice and persistence, as well as a conscious recognition of
what I was doing in relation to what I felt would be more effective, I improved my ability

to better execute the reiterative process of writing a researched text.

It was also through exposure to other pieces of writing that I was better able to
grasp this novel writing process procedure. The critical reading and skim-reading
practices in particular that we completed on Connect were extremely helpful in walking
through how to get the most out of a text when researching. Figure 1 depicts the reading
tasks that were included in the Power of Process exercise on Connect. By first looking
up the authors, I was better able to get a sense of what they would be talking about in
their writing piece, knowing what positions and ideas to expect from the reading.
Highlighting and annotating important ideas and excerpts were helpful in that I thought
more deliberately about which ideas I felt were important and significant. Also,
summarizing the pieces in the end allowed me to understand my interpretation of the
text and see which ideas appeared the most salient. The annotations and the summaries
were most helpful because they kept me engaged in the text and aided me in
establishing which ideas and evidence I recognized as most important. I took the
practices I felt were most effective and applied it to the research I did for my own writing.
Initially, it took a longer amount of time and was more difficult, but by the time I was
writing my AP essay, the research process felt a lot more natural.
Because the research process was conducted throughout my writing, I
reevaluated the organization my paper based on new information that I chose to utilize.
One of the things I still need to improve on is being consistently aware of how my pieces
of evidence fit together into one cohesive argument. There were a few instances in
which either the logical flow of my paper or my integration of evidence was a bit weak,
but upon revision I was able to improve it. In the HCP, I moved the Bahlig-Pieren &
Turner study to follow the Miklosi & Hare study from its previous location following the
Odendaal & Meintjes study. The new order was more coherent because I decided to
focus the Bahlig-Pieren & Turner study dogs portrayal of emotion rather than internal
feeling of emotion to align with the body language infographic that I provided.

Additionally, I found myself altering the direction in which I was taking my paper
depending on the research I conducted and the information I sought to include. This
practice occurred during the writing process of both the HCP and the AP. I initially wrote
my HCP with the purpose of discussing the growing recognition for canine
consciousness; however, as I did more research, I started to address their level of
intelligence and emotional capacity, using consciousness as more of a detail rather than
the focal point. As for the AP, I started it without having determined exactly what I
wanted to advocate, but the more research I did the more clarity I found. The research
portion of the AP was a bit difficult at first because I had used the method of research I
used for the HCP and was unable to find as many or as useful sources. Because of this
predicament, I altered the way I conducted my research my extending my research to
non-scientific studies, veterinary journals, and national animal welfare organization sites
which helped me accumulate a fair amount of resourceful information. This process of
adapting my paper to accommodate new information and altering my research method
required much flexibility when the process did not go as planned and persistence to
continue research and modification.
Another large focus of Writing 39C lied in the practice of argumentation and
rhetoric. I found that my argument was more persuasive and effective when it was
focused on a topic that I was curious about. In deciding on my topic of the HCP, I had
naturally gravitated toward canines as the subject of interest due to my curiousity about
dogs - the way they think and what they feel. I tried looking into other topics, conducting
some minor research on different animals to see if I would be more interested in
something else. However, as interesting as they were, I felt more captivated by the topic
of canine cognition and emotion, and because I was so intrigued, my research and
paper would be more engaging for both me and my audience.

To further strengthen our arguments, we were required to include multi-modal

elements in both the HCP and the AP. In my peers writing as well as my own, I came to
see that the multi-modal component does indeed help support the argument the paper
makes if it is used effectively. The interesting part about using visuals to make an
argument is the need for concise descriptions and compelling images. For the HCP, the
AP, and the SMC, I created an infographic for each to support my claims (Fig. 2). The
process of creating the infographic was helpful in that I was able to exercise my
creativity to create a persuasive and informative image that would appeal to the
audience, and process the information on a more concentrated level in order to properly

articulate it to the audience.

By organizing and running our own social media campaign, I was able to truly
understand both the immense influence new media has on the world and the way we
obtain information, and the need for us as content creators to tailor the way we present
information to fully take advantage of the mediums we choose to utilize. The SMC was
very different from the HCP or AP essays because of the need for active participation
and interaction with a live audience as well as the different demographic of the audience.
My group in particular chose to advocate change for an issue that would most effectively
be received through graphics and images, the use of animals in the fashion industry.
Because this campaign was not necessarily for a scholarly audience, but more directed
towards peers and fashion consumers of varying age groups, our campaign
concentrated on appealing to pathos and ethos rather than logos. This approach differs
from written text arguments geared towards scholarly audiences since those would be
more effective if appealing to logos over pathos.
While planning our social media campaign, my group and I decided on which
social media platforms to use based on their ability to support the type of content we
wished to share. Because our campaign was more graphics-based, we opened an
Instagram account as it was the social media platform that best supported photo sharing,
and because we were aware of the extent of its user base. We also used Twitter as a
means of sharing videos and articles that appealed more to ethos and encouraged the
audience to take a stance against animal fashion by commending popular brands and
people who are joining the movement, and documenting the progress made in the
industry overall. Figure 3 includes some of the posts we made on our Twitter and

Instagram accounts, compiled on our homebase website.

The arguments we made over social media with the SMC were very different
from the traditional scholarly essay. Traditional essays allot pages for one to make an
argument and require an academic tone and many credible sources along with ample
background information and development in order to be effective. With social media, all
posts and arguments are restricted to a character count; messages must be conveyed in
as few words as possible, but must also be intriguing and appealing. However, even
without character count restrictions, text over social media cannot be too verbose
because social media is such a fast-pace medium that effective arguments must be
concise and captivating in order to get any attention. Therefore, the clickbaits we used
for the SMC were sentence-long captions meant to introduce or support the content we
were sharing, allowing the images or videos to speak for themselves.
With the completion of the first drafts of our essays came a revision process that
served to enhance our arguments and make them more effective. Revision plays a large
part in the formation of an argument because it seeks to rectify fallacies and
weaknesses in an argument that can be corrected in the next draft to make the paper
stronger. The feedback I received from both my peers and Dr. Haas were very positive
and also helpful in that they were able to shed light on weaknesses that I had in my
paper. In my HCP, for example, such weaknesses included the lack of transitions and a
few organizational issues. It was also brought to my attention that throughout my paper, I
hadnt been connecting the studies and the evidence I presented back to the main idea.
For instance, in my HCP final draft, I added These results illustrate the attachment that
dogs form between themselves and humans; they are sentient beings who draw
connections and behave according to those connections, even if it is in a way humans
have yet to fully understand to the end of a study the kennel study (HCP Final Draft 67). This sentence serves two purposes: it transitions into the next study, which

addresses human-animal attachment on a hormonal level, and it refers back to my initial

argument that dogs are capable of feeling emotions.
While receiving feedback was beneficial in providing me with revision ideas from
fresh eyes and different perspectives, offering feedback to my peers was also just as
valuable. By reading others students writing and contributing suggestions, I became
more aware of my own writing. For instance, for the peer review process of the HCP, I
noticed that one of my group members hadnt introduced their sources the way we had
practiced, and so by reminding him to include an introduction, I became more conscious
of whether or not I was doing so in my own paper. Also, when revising the AP, the lack
of counter-arguments in my partners paper made me realize that I also hadnt
addressed counter-arguments in my own, which made me revisit my draft to fix what I
was lacking. The peer review process required contemplation and reflection on my own
work even when I was reviewing someone elses, and it allowed me to recognize my
own thought process and compare it to how it differs with my peers, an application of
metacognition that I hadnt before experienced.
I believe that one of the biggest improvements I have made due to this course
has been in the practice of metacognition. The weekly blogs that we wrote allowed me
to evaluate my progress on a regular basis, and by discussing and commenting on the
work I had done, I gained a better sense of my abilities and areas of improvement. The
self-reflection blog posts served as a way for me to consistently evaluate myself
throughout the course and provide personal and internal feedback on my work. In doing
so, I also took responsibility for my creations. Evaluating my essays, projects, and
overall activity throughout this course was a way of taking ownership of my actions and
the results that would follow.
This class has taught me how to better frame an argument as well as how to
more adequately utilize rhetorical techniques. The skills that I have cultivated throughout

these past ten weeks extend well beyond writing and into every field. As made clear by
the social media campaign, argumentation and rhetoric is relevant in every situation and
takes on so many forms aside from the traditional written essay. Aside from the purely
academic perspective, I have also learned so much about animal issues as a whole. The
readings that we did in class, like Klugers TIME articles and each others HCP and AP
essays, were very informative and compelling. Of course, I also learned an immense
amount about canine cognition and emotion due to my own research, and the
knowledge in these fields that I have gained are already manifesting themselves in my
own life. I pay more attention to the way my dog behaves in certain situations, and I am
more conscious of the material of my clothing and the content of my food. On top of
growing as an academic writer, I have also learned how to be a more contemplative and
knowledgeable individual thanks to Writing 39C.