Rodriguez 1

Racquel Rodriguez
Ms. Buckless
Writing 104 H
2 June 2016
Reflection
Throughout the course of this year, I wrote a variety of different essays ranging from an
about me to a critical analysis and to a memoir, amongst others. Throughout the course of this
year, I grew. I became a better student and a better writer. Lastly, throughout the course of this
year, I learned. I completed a variety of different learning outcomes that are necessary to be
completed as a technical college student. Although I would say I completed all nine learning
outcomes, I am going to solely focus on five of them. Under the understanding of rhetorical
situation section, two of these five include: students recognize that different rhetorical situations
(audiences, purposes, contexts) call for different types of writing and students reflect upon and
explain the appropriateness of their choices for the rhetorical situation. Under the compositions
processes and practices, two more of these five include: students recognize differences between
revision and editing and students practice various methods of invention, collaboration, research,
ethical incorporation of sources, peer review, and revision. Under the conventions and craft
section, one more of these five includes: students practice a range of styles, registers, and
conventions. I am going to explain how I completed these learning outcomes by focusing on the
revisions I made to my position argument paper and my profile.
Before going on about how I completed these learning outcomes, I shall provide a brief
summary of what my position argument paper was about and what my profile was about. My
position argument paper was about why Donald Trump is unfit to be president. My thesis read as

Rodriguez 2
follows: Donald Trump should not be president due to his immense vulgarity, arrogance, and
untrustworthiness. I provided a variety of different examples as to how Donald Trump is vulgar,
arrogant, and untrustworthy. On the other hand, my profile was about one of my best friends,
Jessie Donegan. It was titled Inside the Utterly Complicated and Ingenious Mind of Jessie
Donegan. I went on to talk about Jessies unique yet refreshing characteristics. I described how
she is helpful, how she is strong-willed, how she is intuitive, and how she is absolutely and
utterly insane. I used real life examples to describe such things.
Throughout the process of revising these papers, I completed almost all of the learning
outcomes, as I stated prior. The first learning outcome I am going to focus on is under the
understanding of the rhetorical situation. This learning outcome states that, Students recognize
that different rhetorical situations (audiences, purposes, contexts) call for different types of
writing. With my position paper, I recognized the fact that although my audience would be the
same, my purpose and context would not be. For the entirety of my Writing 104 class, my
audience would always be my teacher, Ms. Buckless, and my fellow classmates. However, the
purposes of our papers and the contexts of our papers changed drastically between every
assignment. The purpose of my position paper was to prove why Donald Trump is unfit to be
president and to do so in a manner that provided ample evidence and was not biased. At first, my
paper provided more than enough evidence. Honestly, it provided too much evidence. Therefore,
I slimmed it down some. This was very hard for me to do since there was so much information in
regards to my thesis. I wanted to include as much information as possible in order to strengthen
my argument. At the time, I did not recognize how this could make it difficult for some people to
read. Along with that, at first I did not recognize the fact that I was showing slight bias
throughout my paper. I was making it very obvious that I was not a fan of republican nominee,

Rodriguez 3
Donald Trump. I made some points that were based off of opinion rather than fact. In order to fix
this, I read through my entire nine page position paper once again, and removed anything and
everything that seemed bias or even borderline bias. As for my profile, I recognized that I would
have the same audience as I always had, Ms. Buckless and my classmates. However, the purpose
of my profile was very different than the purpose of my position paper. The purpose of my
profile was to prove to people that my dear friend, Jessie Donegan, was worth reading about. As
I stated prior, I did so by illustrating her unique and well worth-noting characteristics. I also
mentioned a variety of different experiences that Jessie has underwent or that I have underwent
in regards to Jessie as a means of backing up why she is the way she is. As for revising my
profile in regards to the rhetorical situation, I did not have to do much. The only thing that I had
to fix was my colloquial choice of words. My paper was a little bit too casual, especially since
my teacher would be reading it. Therefore, I went back and changed some of the overly
colloquial terms to something a little bit more appropriate. Other than that, my profile always
had a clear purpose and the context was just about right. In that case, I did not have to do any
work to fix that.
The second learning outcome I focused on was also under the understanding the
rhetorical situation section. It stated that, Students reflect upon and explain the appropriateness
of their choices for the rhetorical situation. After reading the previous paragraph, it is rather
clear that I completed this outcome. I also completed this outcome through reflections that we
completed directly after completing our assignments. As a form of reiteration, I shall reflect upon
and explain the appropriateness of my choices for the rhetorical situation once again. Regarding
my position argument paper on Donald Trump, I recognized the fact that my audience would be
my teacher and my fellow classmates. For this matter, I made my writing more formal than

Rodriguez 4
casual. I chose to incorporate my voice as well as a means of making my paper a little bit easier
to read. As for the purpose, my purpose was pretty clear. My purpose was to persuade people to
believe that Donald Trump is unfit to be president. I did so by providing a thesis and supporting
the thesis with a medley of facts. However, at times, I showed some bias. Therefore, when
revising, I went back and made sure that my paper did not show as much bias as it did before. I
made sure that it was more concentrated on facts rather than my opinion. By doing so, I was also
changing my context. I was making my context more factually concentrated. I also had written
way too much to start with. Therefore I had to slim down my work some. This affected the length
of my context. As for my profile, at first, I did not do the best job of recognizing my audience. I
used terms and phrases that were far too colloquial and inappropriate. Since my audience
included my teacher, I recognized that I needed to change these things. I replaced the
inappropriate terms with more appropriate terms that also held more substance. As for my
purpose, my purpose was always very clear. My purpose was always to show people why my
friend, Jessie Donegan, is worth knowing. I think I did a very good job of doing this. I described
her characteristics to the perfect extent. I also described some of her life experiences in a way
that was so interesting that it would be implausible for the reader to say that they would not want
to know Jessie Donegan. However, there is always room for improvement. As a means of
improving this, I went back and replaced some words with words that I felt were more fitting. I
also rearranged some sentences to make it flow better. As for my context, some of my sentence
structure was a little off. Therefore, I went back and rephrased some sentences in order to make
the paper flow better. Other than that, my context was nearly perfect. The overall length of my
paper was perfect. Overall, I understood the rhetorical situation very well and I was able to fix
the problems that did not follow my specific audience, purpose, and context.

Rodriguez 5
The third learning outcome that I focused on was under the composition processes and
practices section. It stated that, Students recognize differences between revision and editing.
The difference between revising and editing is a very fine line. When revising a paper, the reader
must focus on readability, logic, and clarity. With revising, you may have to rewrite entire
paragraphs just so the paper flows better. Also with revising, you must make sure that the
organization of the paper is logical. It must follow your thesis statement. You must also make
sure the paper fits the prompt and that the paper never veered off topic. On the other hand,
editing is a lot simpler. When editing, youre looking at the smaller mistakes. You are looking for
spelling errors, punctuation mistakes, common word mix-ups, and things of that nature. For my
portfolio, I did both. For my position argument paper I did the most revising. As I stated before, I
tried to make my paper less bias and I also slimmed it down a lot. However, I also edited this
paper. Since the paper was so long, there were a lot of grammatical mistakes. There were no
spelling errors, thanks to spell check, but there was fault in a lot of the sentence structure. Along
with that, there were many punctuation mistakes and a good number of common word mix-ups. I
fixed all of these things. I rearranged the sentence structure, I fixed my punctuation mistakes, and
I replaced mixed-up words with words that made more sense. As for my profile, I did more
editing than I did revising. For revising, I did try and make sure that my paper flowed better. I
did so by adding transitions and by adding sentences that I felt as though were necessary. By
doing so I made my paper more organized and I made it flow better. As for editing, I had a lot of
common word mix-ups. I made sure to go back and replace these words with better fitting words.
Along with that, at times my sentence structure was messed up. I fixed this by, again, rearranging
my sentences. There were also some simple grammatical mistakes such as spelling and

Rodriguez 6
punctuation errors. These were very easy fixes. All in all, I was very capable of deciphering the
difference between both revising and editing.
The fourth learning outcome that I completed was also under the composition processes
and practices section. It stated that, Students practice various methods of invention,
collaboration, research, ethical incorporation of sources, peer review, and revision. Throughout
the course of the year, we wrote a variety of different essays. We wrote About Me papers,
annotated bibliographies, critical analyses, Mad 40s, memoirs, position papers, profiles,
rhetorical analyses, and many, many reflections. Therefore I was exposed to various methods of
all of these things mentioned within this learning outcome. Focusing on my position paper and
my profile, I was able to practice extremely different methods of invention between these two
essays. They are two very different essays. A position paper is far more formal while a profile is
far more casual and creative. However, in both of the papers, I was able to incorporate my voice.
I did incorporate my voice a lot more in my profile, which is to be expected. In regards to
collaboration, neither of these two essays were group essays, however, they did require some
collaboration. With the position paper, I had to collaborate with my teacher in order to find an
appropriate topic. I also had other people edit and revise my paper. I took their edits and
revisions to heart in order to better my paper. Lastly, my teacher also graded my paper. I took the
grade she gave me and the comments she left me and used them to, again, better my paper. As for
my profile, there was a little more collaboration. I, again, collaborated with my teacher to pick an
appropriate interviewee. After doing that, I interviewed this person in order to obtain the
information that I needed for my profile. This essay was also edited and revised by my fellow
classmates. Therefore, I used their edits and revisions to better my paper. Along with that, this
essay was also edited, revised, and graded by my teacher. I took her grade and comments to heart

Rodriguez 7
and edited and revised my paper once more. As for research, both of these two essays required
research. My position paper required a lot more research. I had to search the web for a variety of
credible sources that would support my standpoint. I had to decipher between sources that were
biased and sources that were unbiased. Before completing our position papers, we were required
to complete an annotated bibliography. This helped me out a lot while writing my paper.
Regarding my profile paper, I had to do some research on who my profile was to be about. This
is where the interviewing process came in. I asked my subject about twenty questions that would
help me write my profile and make it fit its purpose of making the reader think my subject is
worth knowing. As for ethical incorporation of sources, with my position paper, I used MLA
format to cite my sources. I also made sure to cite all of my information. I never claimed the
information as my own. I had about twelve or so sources. I also made sure that all of my sources
were credible. For my profile, I made sure to quote my subject, Jessie. Never did I claim her
words as my own. As for peer review, for both of these papers, we were required to have our
classmates edit and revise them. When editing and revising another persons paper, I always
make sure to be very precise. I try and not miss a single thing. I correct grammatical mistakes
and I also make sure that the paper is logical and readable. As for revision, why I am revising my
own papers, I make sure to take every persons comments to heart. I also read over my own
papers and make sure that they are organized and that they flow well. If they dont, I always find
a way to fix them. I want my papers to be very readable and, therefore, I spend a lot of time
revising. I think that throughout the course of this year, I spent most of my time revising. I have
peer reviewed a variety of different papers and I have also revised a variety of my own papers.
The fifth and final learning outcome I completed was under the conventions and craft
section. It stated that, Students practice a range of styles, registers, and conventions. Since the

Rodriguez 8
two essays I chose to incorporate within my portfolio were so different, it is clearly evident that I
practiced a range of different styles, registers, and conventions. As I have stated countless times,
my position paper was more formal of a paper while my profile was more casual of a paper.
These two papers had very different styles. My position paper was a lot more factual while my
profile was a lot more creative. As for registers, again, my voice differed a lot between the two
papers. My voice was incorporated a lot more in my profile. However, I did try to incorporate
my voice within my position paper as much as possible. I find papers rather boring if they do not
have the authors voice. Lastly, when it came to conventions, I did have some minor issues. I
think that the number of issues I had between these two papers were pretty even. There were
some issues with my mechanics, my usage, and my sentence formation. However, I was able to
recognize these issues and fix them. In total, I was able to practice a large range of styles,
registers, and conventions.
All in all, I find that I completed all of the learning outcomes to the utmost of my ability.
The five that I chose to elaborate on were the learning outcomes that I think I completed in the
most successful manner. I think throughout this year I learned a lot, especially about reflecting. I
now understand the importance of reflecting. It is important to reflect because otherwise, you
will never learn from your mistakes. As a writer, it is very important to learn from your mistakes.
In conclusion, I think that this portfolio does a very good job of summing up my experiences
throughout this course. It not only shows how much I learned, but it shows all of the hard work I
put it in. It is a very accurate representation of my experience during this semester in my Honors
Writing 104 class.