User: Reflective Introduction Draft #1 - Due Wednesday, 12/4
Due Wednesday by 11:30am Points 0 Submitting a file upload File Types docx and pdf Available Dec 4 at 10am - Dec 4 at 11:59pm 13 hours and 59 minutes
For your first draft of the Reflective Introduction, start by looking over your past Metacognitive Exercises for inspiration and even language you can update. 

Before you upload, write a note for your peer reviewers at the bottom of your draft:

1) Begin by summarizing briefly any useful information that can contextualize your draft.  For example, maybe there are aspects of your reading, writing, etc. that you haven't mentioned yet, but you have a plan to do so--let them know what it is.  Or perhaps you want to say something about how you've approached this first draft, or the intentions behind the way you've tried to develop your arguments and analysis, integrate your examples, or smooth your organization and style.  Whatever you want your peer reviewers to know, this is the place to explain it.

2) Write down specific questions that you want your peer reviewers to answer when they review your draft.  Use the Best Practices for Peer Review guidelines to help you.

There's no limit to how many questions you can ask, but please respect your reviewers' time by focusing on higher-order issues.
Be as specific as possible about what you're asking and what passages you want your reviewers to look at.  For example, "How clear is the paragraph transition at the bottom of p. 3?"
If you find yourself getting vague or unhelpful comments, your questions may not be specific or detailed enough, or you don't have enough questions.  Your goal is to make it as easy as possible for your reviewers to give you the feedback you need.
Submit everything here in a Word document.  

----------------------------------

Peer Review Guidelines

Each group will review each other's drafts individually, then meet to discuss, clarify, and ask follow-up questions.  Instructions are here:  Reflective Introduction Peer Review
Peer reviews should be completed by the end of class on Wednesday, 12/4, to leave enough time to revise before the final deadline.
The quality and thoughtfulness of your peer review responses will be counted toward your Class Community grade.

metacognitives #1-4:

I like to read fantasy and historical fiction books. What I read motivates my writing since I really love the worldbuilding of the books in these genres, and this significantly motivates me to create a world with equal depth and intrigue to the books I've read. I usually take notes. I'm very forgetful, so even if I read something (unless very thoroughly), I will forget it, unless I use some sort of retention method. This doesn't mean I have a terrible memory, but I won't remember it long term. 
I have written stories before. Back in high school, before I decided to dive into computer science, I loved writing, and English was my favorite subject. Hours of essay writing, research analysis, and reviewing isn't fun when you're placed within the pressure of a deadline, but it's exciting when you have all the time in the world, with nothing but you and your thoughts. I think the reason I began creative writing and worldbuilding was because of my introduction to high fantasy books such as ASOIAF. I read it when I was much younger, alongside other classic novels like Lord of the RIngs and the Chronicles of Narnia. I became obsessed with fantasy, especially because of how beautiful it was, even if it wasn't true in reality. This made me want to write because I really wanted to replicate that feeling I had when watching or reading these fantasy works. 
Other than English, I also speak Bengali, but not at the level of English. I do know how to read Bengali, but I'm not an exceptional writer. WR50 will definitely help me even though I'm a computer science major. Computer science is more than just programming and coding, you need creativity and originality. I would say writing is essential for computer science, and can help you significantly. My current weakness is writer's block, since oftentimes when I'm focused on writing on a specific subject, I'll have no idea how to begin. Since I'm not a fan of making outlines and drafts, I'll sit there until I forge the perfect hook, introduction, and transition to other paragraphs. 
I have received feedback in my essays in the past. It was very helpful and focused on the organization of my essay. When I was preparing for the AP exam, we did alot of timed essays, and it wasn't my best work, although I did well. To write well, you have to read, so you technically can learn a lot of new ideas and information, unless you're not trying to actively improve your writing. I learned a lot about rhetoric and genre from my previous English and AP classes. It depends on what type of writing assignment it is, but usually it has the same approach. Assuming I already have an idea of the text, and a good comprehensive overview which can support my writing, I'll have my sources in one document, then write the introduction and all the components of an essay. I usually follow the structure I was taught, and the balance such as having a ratio of 1:2 with your evidence and reasoning; more reasoning than evidence. 
I knew a lot about fairy tales, but I never knew the true definition of a fairy tale. For example, I absolutely adored Miyazaki's work since his movies are really beautiful and meaningful, but only now have I discovered that his work could be considered a fairytale. There is a lot I did not know which I'm only discovering now. Out of all of Miyazaki's movies (if we were to consider his collection a modern day fairy tale), then I would choose Princess Mononoke which is based on a lot of the Indigenous beliefs during the pre-Buddhist era of Japan, with inclusion of Shintoism mythology. 
I wasn't into fairy tales, but some of my siblings used to obsess over it—for example, I remember them watching a show called Ever After High, which wasn’t a fairy tale itself, but used an amalgamation of fairy tale characters to make an entertaining cartoon drama. I do enjoy watching and reading stories involving myths, legends, and fantasy, as I've always been told folklore as a child, and the folklore from my homeland can be really terrifying yet beautiful and appreciative in a strange way. 
Based on my assigned readings, the fairy tale genre is much more than meets the eye. I knew that fairy tales weren't primarily made for children, since I've read many of the dark original writings of fairy tales before this class (which traumatized me when I was younger when I used to watch Disney movies and decided to go researching their origins). I would love to speak about modern forms of fairy tales such as in media and literature with my classmates, since we're all more familiar with them and some of us grew up with them, or even folklores that they have heard growing up, whether from their homelands or here. I really want to know about the development of fairy tales in other countries. So far, all I've heard about is Europe, and the only mention of fairy tales outside of Europe (excluding the mentions of fairy tales from Indonesia, Philippines, China, etc that I read of from the Norton Anthology). 
I want to know how fairy tales outside of Europe impacted European writers (I do remember that many fairytale writers used and introduced stories from West Asia, specifically Arab folktales, and even mentioned distant lands; for example, if I remember correctly, in Donkeyskin, there was a mention of the Moors (where they made a racist comment of them during the mention of them appearing at the first few balls).So, I’m not completely sure if European writers viewed foreign fairy tale writers in a positive light, but I would still like to read of them, and how oral traditions and folktales from other countries developed into fairy tales, whether earlier or later than European fairy tales.

Critical reading is actively engaging with the text to understand it deeply; the meaning of the text, its implications, and the intentions of the author. This requires readers to process, analyze, and question information rather than just absorb it. It is important because it allows us to evaluate evidence, recognize arguments, and make valid interpretations, especially if the topic is complex. 

Passage:
“Another passage from Haase's essay, 'Yours, Mine, or Ours,' clarifies his concerns about collective ownership and the importance of individual interpretation: 'The problem - indeed, the danger - with both the nationalistic/ethnic perspective and the universal view of fairy tales is that they prescribe forms of thought and behavior, and modes and models of humanity, that are meant to be normative. That is, they stereotype us - either as members of a nationalistic or ethnic group, or as human beings defined by a certain concept of what is or is not normal.”

This paragraph demonstrates my understanding of critical reading as I was able to comprehend one of the passages from Haase's essay. I was able to summarize it concisely, and recognize the terms used within his words, and connect it to the broader context and Fitcher's Bird, later in my essay. I stated the meaning of the text and subtly the intentions of the author, and the implications of his words onto us. I would revise my original analysis to include specific examples of how fairy tales have historically been interpreted to reinforce stereotypes, perhaps through a secondary supporting source, which may strengthen my argument. In my other classes, I apply critical reading skills by using similar strategies to question and truly understand a text. For instance, in my Boolean Algebra and Logic class (basically Discrete Mathematics), I have to write proofs. Initially, proofs were very hard, and it did require a lot of practice. There is a lot of algebraic skill involved but the argument also had to logically make sense. I had to search for the hypothesis and conclusion, and use definitions and strong sentences to create a valid and understandable proof for why something was the way it was. I definitely applied critical reading skills to this, since I had to consider many aspects of proofs as it was an entirely different field of mathematics, but it had many similarities with critical reading. We also had to translate mathematical sentences into English.
The paragraph shows my understanding of critical reading since I was able to comprehend one of the passages from Haase's essay which closely ties to his main argument and thesis. I not only summarized it concisely but also recognized key terms and was able to connect them to the broader context, and Fitcher's Bird later in my essay. I showed how the interpretations of fairy tales can force norms onto us, and this can break a solid understanding. I analyzed the meaning of the text, addressed the author's intentions, and also revealed the implications of his word to his time, and contemporary times. To improve my original analysis, I would include specific historical examples of how fairy tales have been interpreted to reinforce stereotypes. This can be sort of like a secondary supporting source that can be referenced alongside Haase's essay. By implementing this evidence, my argument would be much more specific and gain depth.    
In my other classes, I apply critical reading skills by using similar strategies to question and deeply understand a text. An example is in my Boolean Algebra and Logic class which is basically Discrete Mathematics. There, I have to write proofs that require both algebraic skills but also a logical sense of understanding. Initially, this was really difficult, it required a lot of practice to master the techniques, and I struggled a lot writing proofs. Each proof needed to be carefully examined; the hypotheses and conclusion. I had to use precise definitions and articulate reasoning to present a valid and comprehensible argument. This is exactly like the critical reading skills I employ in literary analyses. Just like I had to analyze Haase's text to understand his main argument, and points, I have to use mathematical statements to understand the logical structure and even translate them into plain English from time to time. The translation process is basically uncovering complex texts, and a lot of the comprehension skills used in critical reading is used in discrete mathematics, as you have to analyze and interpret the material logically and effectively.


Genre refers to categories of text which have shared characteristics like themes or even structures. It serves as a basis for the writer and the reader. It guides the writers in knowing what and how they should go about their content, and helps the readers in having expectations. Genre is really important because it helps organize papers, essays, and reports, and outside of academic life, it can also help us communicate clearly and effectively.
In my analysis of Fitcher's Bird, I wrote "Fitcher's Bird adheres to several fairy tale conventions--such as vulnerable heroine, a powerful antagonist, and the inclusion of magical elements; it also subverts traditional norms by depicting the empowerment of the protagonist, the celebration of her curiosity, and the enabling of her independence." This passage, which is meant to serve as the thesis of the essay, shows my understanding of genre as I'm analyzing what is conventional to fairy tales, and what is unconventional.
While analyzing the antagonist of Fitcher's Bird, the sorcerer, I wrote the following: "He disguises himself as a beggar to capture and kidnap the eldest daughters of a household." I was referring to one of the scenes in Fitcher's Bird, which I intended to use as a way to emphasize the deception of the antagonist and his gruesome nature, alongside the magical elements existent in the story (which is himself). This reflects my understanding as it addresses the sorcerer's disguise and how it manipulates the perception of those around him. This can highlight the true nature of the sorcerer, and how grisly he and his intentions are compared to other fairy tales (excluding the variants of Bluebeard which involve a similar disturbing vibe). It is important to understand rhetorical situations in academic settings and in non-academic life, since they are both relevant wherever we go. It can enhance our ability to adapt, and even communicate, and frankly speaking, communication is something we lack today in certain fields, when speaking specifically to my own field. It can aid us in arguments, analyzing, and even extend out to other aspects of society such as job interviews and writing articles.
In another scene, I wrote about how the protagonist uses her wit by disguising herself in a bird's feathers to deceive the sorcerer and his friends, which is similar to the way the sorcerer deceived her and her sisters in the beginning. This reflected my understanding of the dynamics between the protagonist and the antagonist initially in the introductory passages, but how that dynamic changed over towards the story's end, where the protagonist is finally able to defeat the sorcerer using her wits and intelligence (symbolizing the defeat of patriarchy). 
In another sentence, I cited Jack Zipes and his Spells of Enchantment. Specifically, the quote which states how fairy tales "serve as a didactic instrument to entertain and educate’ by warning women against overstepping societal expectations." This supported my thesis in my argument, significantly, as Fitcher's Bird demonstrated exactly that, to an extent, based on how the story was formatted. This citation reflected my understanding of academic writing conventions because I used an expert viewpoint to strengthen my argument. Zipes, a renowned scholar, helped connect to the broader conversation on fairy tales and definitely was useful to figuring out my interpretation.
I would say that compared to when I first came to this class and subject, my understanding has grown significantly because, initially, I saw fairy tales as straightforward moral lessons, maybe even stories and tales purely intended for entertainment. And, while some were specifically for those reasons, they are much more complex, and each have unique rhetorical choices by the authors who translated or converted them from oral tales, and each has genre conventions they may adhere or subvert to. There are fantasy elements that make us dream, and believe the impossible to be possible; to strive for what is unexpected of us. I have analyzed several fairy tales and I have learned how they reflect societal values by critiquing them. Fairy tales even utilize devices to reveal insights and perspectives on gender roles, power dynamics, and cultural norms at the time they were published. Overall, I've come to see writing/academic writing as a tool to accurately portray and demonstrate the genre and strategies used by the authors in the genre. 
I still find myself struggling to organize my arguments cohesively and concisely. Sometimes, I get carried away with specific details and lose sight of the bigger picture. To improve, I have to focus on outlining my essays more effectively and reviewing each section (especially each of my sources, rather than scanning through them, or even taking notes, as I won't remember everything). I also need to gain more feedback, get more perspectives, and that will strengthen my writing.


	Metacognitive Exercise 4
	Critical reading is analyzing a text to find the deeper meaning. It applies to viewing since viewing a text critically is important for evaluation. It helps me understand how it works together and how it achieves the author's goals. Both skills are important in academic context when it comes to understanding arguments, analyzing works, or just navigating media.
My understanding of critical reading and viewing has grown significantly. In my IP Draft, I critically portray the setting, scenery, and tension between characters, while showing the visual and thematic elements due to it being an adaptation, as shown in the following text: “Changeling Janet follows a Will-o’-Wisp which leads her to the Fairy Realm. The followers of the Queen mock and warn her,” which in the entire paragraph, is a description suitable for a film adaptation. Critical reading and viewing definitely helped with this. For instance, in my Metacognitive 2, I analyze the subversion and adherence to fairy tale conventions, and this knowledge improved my critical reading and viewing as I was able to read the text, Fitcher's Bird, critically, and apply the same approach when creating and interpreting visual narratives, but in this case, I had to write from what I've read.
	When I first started working on the IP, I had a pretty basic understanding of genre as categories of text. I had no idea of the characteristics shared which makes expectations for writers and readers. However, my understanding definitely evolved compared to before, and this helped me a lot when writing a film adaptation, because while I'm the writer, I also sort of had to see things through the lens of the audience (a contemporary one, at that). Genre now signifies a framework in which we/people can work with. It is powerful and isn't just a category. In my craft essay and my metacognitives before, I speak of the many similarities–conventions, between several fairytales (and in my craft essay, genres), and most, if not all of the genres I spoke of had similarities, so they went beyond mere categorization, and are more of an encompassing which can allow for hybrid forms, and ultimately make for innovative expression (such as social commentary or critical evaluation; critical reading and viewing).
	I decided to go with a passage from my IP draft which was a part of explaining one of the acts: “The Queen grows desperate as both of the Janet become stronger through friendship and determination. She fears that the truth of her actions will destroy everything she’s worked for. She sends Tamiel to capture the real Janet. Tamiel succeeds, and the real Janet is taken back to the Queen to initiate the sacrifice.” In my metacognitive 3, I wrote the following as well: “In another sentence, I cited Jack Zipes and his Spells of Enchantment. Specifically, the quote which states how fairy tales "serve as a didactic instrument to entertain and educate’ by warning women against overstepping societal expectations."
	In my current draft, I developed understanding of how to use genre conventions and subversions to be creative. The passage demonstrates me combining the genre conventions of the dark fantasy genre with the Tam Lin ballad, to create a twisted and more cruel version of the Queen. Through my IP project, I've learned to not only identify but craft genre-specific techniques (generally applied by authors within the genre/s I'm working with), to enhance my storytelling for a contemporary audience. Initially, I perceived rhetoric as the art of persuasion within writing (like what I learned back in high school with the utilization of ethos, pathos, and logos. It is, but my understanding expanded beyond that.
Rhetoric literally influences how stories are told and received. It has devices, tones, cultural references (aka allusions, etc), and stylistic choices to convey messages effectively. We did dive into many of these during our analysis of poems and novels (such as but not limited to Shakespeare and Frankenstein), but fairy tales are entirely new, and the presence of rhetoric in fairy tales, are much more interesting to dive into (and provide a lot of new knowledge into writing techniques I had no clue existed). I would say, rhetoric, from what I've learned so far in this class, is still strategic as I thought before, but it influences the audience, alongside shaping perception/conveying meaning. It's a blend of persuasive techniques which can have us engage and evoke responses; bringing us to an entirely new world. 
In my IP draft, I wrote: “Tamiel begins to question his role as the Queen’s enforcer. His humanity is still buried somewhere deep inside, and he begins to understand the weight of his actions. The two Janets will be able to convince him to his side soon." In my metacognitive 3 assignment, I wrote a sentence analyzing Fitcher’s Bird in the following text: "In another scene, I wrote about how the protagonist uses her wit by disguising herself in a bird's feathers to deceive the sorcerer and his friends, similar to the way the sorcerer deceived her and her sisters in the beginning." 
In the passage for the draft, my approach to rhetoric is nuanced, showing Tamiel's internal conflict which was essential to the adaptation, and his gradual shift in loyalty to the queen through the reflective dialogue and tension (when adapted, it'll be more tense!). In contrast, the earlier passage focuses on a more straightforward rhetorical analysis within a narrative, to highlight the protagonist of Fitcher's Bird as a cunning and wise character. 
My comprehension of fairy tales has deepened a lot. I'm able to recognize the structures (conventions), themes, and societal critiques (commentary). This extends to moral lessons, but also understanding these tales in what they intend to demonstrate as a message, what it meant for the time of its production; cultural values, and the rhetorical values used to entertain or evoke a certain message/response.
In terms of meeting my initial goals, I have significantly improved my analytic and critical reading skills. I've engaged deeply with texts, visual media, and works in meaningful ways, learned strategies that I did not know before, and have applied them to complex genres I had a difficulty dissecting (like Haase or Zipes). I often struggle with organizing my arguments and maintaining clarity, especially when I'm required to make a detailed analysis. To improve, I will outline essays, much, much, more comprehensively. Peer reviews are also great. From the ones we have done in class, it's great to have great minds (who can also literally be your audience if they apply), and diverse perspectives. Summarizing arguments concisely is also good for improving clarity (we have done this in previous assignments and it was a great technique). As I continue to refine my critical reading, viewing, and writing strategies, it will be essential to address these challenges–especially to enhance my academic performance in future writing classes but also within my major.
Assistant: Based on the reflective introduction draft you've provided along with the details from your metacognitive exercises, it looks like you have already started synthesizing insights from your reading and writing experiences. Here’s a suggested structure to help you refine and organize your draft further, along with some suggestions on what to include and specific questions for your peer reviewers.

### Reflective Introduction Structure

1. **Introduction**
   - Briefly introduce the purpose of your reflective introduction.
   - Mention the key themes or areas you plan to explore in the reflection (e.g., growth in writing, understanding of genre, critical reading skills).

2. **Reading and Its Influence on Writing**
   - Discuss your love for fantasy and historical fiction and how it has inspired your worldbuilding endeavors.
   - Mention how you take notes to aid retention and how this impacts your reading and writing processes.

3. **Past Writing Experiences**
   - Reflect on your early writing experiences in high school.
   - Talk about your transition to computer science and how writing has been an integral part of your learning process.

4. **Current Writing Challenges and Strategies**
   - Discuss your experiences with writer's block and your strategies for overcoming it.
   - Mention how feedback from past essays helped improve your organization.

5. **Critical Reading and Its Application**
   - Elaborate on your understanding of critical reading and how you've applied it in various contexts, like in literature and mathematics.
   - Mention specific insights from readings like Haase's essay and Fitcher's Bird analysis.

6. **Rhetoric and Genre Exploration**
   - Discuss your evolving understanding of genre and rhetoric through your coursework.
   - Highlight how your understanding of fairy tales changed over time and how you've analyzed their societal critiques.

7. **Conclusion**
   - Summarize the insights gained and areas for further growth.
   - Reflect on your goals for future writing and learning.

### Note for Peer Reviewers

1. **Contextual Information**
   - I'm still working on integrating more specific examples and secondary sources to support my arguments, especially regarding historical interpretations of fairy tales. I plan to dive deeper into these examples in the next draft.

2. **Questions for Reviewers**
   - How effective is the balance between personal reflection and analytical insights in the draft?
   - Are there any sections where the transition between ideas feels abrupt or unclear?
   - Is the explanation of how my past experiences connect to my current understanding of rhetoric and genre clear?
   - Do you think I'm effectively conveying the evolution of my writing and critical reading skills throughout the course?
   - Are there any areas where you feel more specific examples or evidence could strengthen the reflection?

Please focus specifically on the sections where I discuss my current writing challenges and critical reading application, as I'm particularly interested in feedback on the clarity and depth of these reflections.

### Additional Tips for Enhancing Your Draft

- Remember to include specific examples and make your narrative more concise, focusing on key insights rather than trying to cover everything.
- Use connective phrases to ensure smooth transitions between paragraphs and sections, helping your reader follow your thought process more easily.
- Incorporate feedback from peer reviewers to address any areas of confusion or suggestions for improvement.

Revise your draft with these points in mind, and don't hesitate to reach out to your peer group for further feedback. Good luck with your reflective introduction!
User: write the reflective introduction draft for me.

we were also told to read these which might help improve the draft you write (also consider all the metacogs given previously, to have a sense of my understanding, etc):

Kimberly Emmons on Portfolio Cover Letters and the Narrative of Progress
Rethinking Genres of Reflection: Student Portfolio Cover Letters and the Narrative of Progress [ABRIDGED]

Kimberly Emmons, Composition Studies, Volume 31, Number 1, Spring 2003.

 

The portfolio cover letter, whether it takes the form of a letter, essay, or self-assessment questionnaire, has proven to be at least as important to composition instructors as the rest of the materials collected in their students' writing portfolios (Conway 83). Like many other scholars, such as Kerry Weinbaum, I appreciate these reflective documents for the insights that they provide into students' writing practices, and for the syntheses of teaching and learning that they offer (Camp and Levine 197)        

However, our reflective assignments can be revised so that students begin to look outward toward the social environments in which they are writing and to envision the relationships their writing responds to and enacts…. Beyond articulation of rules and conventions, students should be encouraged to engage with and critique the practices they identify. Such active participation—not just reciting but also questioning, challenging, and rewriting rules—has the potential to make students aware of writing and literacy as plural practices. That is, students may begin to view writing as always already contextually influenced and to recognize and develop their own strategies for meeting the varied demands of multiple writing situations.

In this article… I argue that a reversal of the reflective gaze—from an internal contemplation of a writer's growth to an external analysis of community practices—encourages students to become not only more effective writers but also more active members of their various communities. Ultimately, the following analysis suggests that asking students to reflect on their own progress is at best unproductive and at worst additionally marginalizing unless it also asks students to consider the contexts within which that progress is made and against which that progress will ultimately be tested.

 

THE LEGACY OF PROCESS: SELF-REFLECTION

In its idealized form, the portfolio classroom offers students and teachers a chance to collaborate in the learning process by opening a conversation about writing. Thus, the successful student will begin to internalize a sense of personal satisfaction about writing he has nurtured through various stages of maturation; the astute pupil will own her writing not only because she has produced it, but because she has also learned to evaluate and improve it. In the end, the portfolio system has been both popular and successful at least in part because it involves students more actively in their own learning. As Sandra Murphy and Mary Ann Smith suggest in their summary of recent scholarship on portfolio pedagogy, "what composition scholars are telling us is that we, as teachers, need to allow students to own their work, not just rent it" (339). Borrowing Robert Tierney's renters-versus-owners metaphor, Murphy and Smith suggest that student portfolios offer a space for student agency and ownership. Thus, the portfolio invites students into the assessment process by allowing them to select which pieces to include, by asking them to revise those pieces in response to peer and instructor feedback, and by requiring some form of reflection on their own processes of textual production. Using portfolios in the writing classroom has the potential to make students more responsible for and more in control of their own development as writers….

[However,] while our intentions may have been to democratize the writing classroom by giving students access to the tools of self-assessment, the result has been less emancipatory. Still looking to us for final evaluations, our students have used our calls for reflection as moments to assert their personal growth instead of their relationships to a community's discursive practices.

*****

In this reflective assignment, students perform their writing-selves according to the implicit requirements of the rhetorical situation: they must demonstrate growth as writers. The scripted response to this exigency is what I have labeled the narrative of progress—it begins with a reluctant, frightened student and ends with an articulate, confident writer. Our responses to this genre are complicated by what Kathleen Blake Yancey calls the "schmooze factor," "the temptation to reward students who tell us what we naturally enough want to hear: that they are learning, that they are taking risks, in the most dramatic case, that they have never experienced such pleasure in learning before, that it is in this class where it has taken place" (100). Together, the narrative of progress and the schmooze factor have shaped a genre that affirms our pedagogy without interrogating it—because the reflective responses seem to provide evidence of growth and progress, we are reluctant to investigate whether or not these responses are founded on an understanding of our expectations….

Thus, we must reconsider what we accomplish when we assign a self-reflective essay: are we really empowering students if we allow them to ignore the pre-existing rules and conventions against by which their writing will be judged when it leaves our classrooms? Perhaps we need to consider the rhetorical slippage between reflective practices and self-reflective practices…. As a start, students who can reflect on the rhetorical and social practices of the composition classroom (rather than those who simply reflect on their own internal practices) are more likely to be able to transfer these skills to new writing situations.

 

REFLECTION AND/AS INTROSPECTION

In the traditional portfolio assignment, students are asked to collect, revise, and explicate their best work from the term. submissions and to argue for why these pieces represent their best work. The primary directive of this assignment includes the statement:

Your portfolio cover letter is itself an argument. Your claim, the basis of the argument, is that I should consider the papers you submitted for evaluation as your best work for the quarter. You'll need to make that argument by drawing upon your current assessment of the work, your original self-assessments, your peer responses, and my responses.

While this assignment clearly asks students to revisit the comments made on earlier drafts—an attempt to help them become aware of their audience and the discourse practices of their writing situation—the primary focus is on the ambiguous notion of the students' "best" writing. Despite encouragement to cite course evaluation criteria and the standards of academic discourse discussed in class, students consistently produce variations on the narrative of progress for this assignment. This narrative replaces specific evidence of criteria fulfilled with general comments about emotional satisfaction and personal growth. One student, Min, writes:

At the beginning of the quarter, I was really apprehensive about writing an essay, even though I had some writing experiences in English 103. . . . However, through this ten weeks, I gained some confidence and have improved immensely on many [f]actors of my writings. One that I have improved on the most is my organization of my thoughts.

As Min's letter suggests, the growth of confidence is a significant step toward becoming an active member of the academic community. Yet while she begins to gesture toward improvement in a specific feature of her writing, her organization, Min characterizes this feature as personal and internal. She does not explain how her thoughts have become more organized and her self-reflection moves away from considering the academic conventions of organization, which are quite different from her own initial reliance on poetic imagery as an organizational tool in her early writing assignments. Instead, Min simply states that she has learned to organize her thoughts, presumably viewing this as an internal process of clarification rather than as an accommodation to rhetorical pressures.

In another student reflection, the euphoria of ownership is evident in an extended narrative of progress.   James writes:

As a child I would stair at the wall during English class dreaming of other places. I had given up on the battle against verbs and prepositions. Comas and semicolons annoyed me. I didn't understand our language. That is not to say that I couldn't speak it fluently. It was the written side of the language, which gave me the trouble.... However, I must say that this class has been great for me. I won't say I've become a great writer, but I must admit I take a lot of pride in the papers I have written for this class. My portfolio is genuinely my best work up to date. I invested a lot of time and energy into what you see before you. If you personally don't like [it] I'm sorry but it won't change my opinion of my work. No matter the grade you give I will retain my belief that I am turning [in] a solid example of my writing.

James' letter responds to the demands of a reflection that is both inwardly focused and relatively autonomous. His declaration of progress is heartwarming and reassuring, and his assertion that he will remain proud of his portfolio regardless of its final numerical assessment suggests that he has begun to develop into a writer who is in control of his own work. Nevertheless, James' reflection sidesteps the requirement to engage with academic criteria in favor of his own "time and energy." This rhetorical move, while it does signal an attempt to exert control over the writing situation, ultimately allows students like James to ignore the pre-existing rhetorical and social demands of the community for/in which they write.

Students respond to the traditional reflective assignment by producing a narrative of progress that

1) celebrates their achievements without acknowledging the contexts of those achievements, and

2) develops its own internal criteria for success.

Despite the class and conference time spent describing and working with the "standard" academic criteria for evaluation (e.g., purpose/thesis, organization, development of evidence, etc.), students tend to focus on subjective qualities like "effort" and "improvement." In many cases, these criteria are stated as self-evident (as in James' letter), but at other times students like Ravika explain their criteria more fully. She writes:

College life can be a very stressful time as well as challenging. With so much to accomplish, I always would wonder if I had enough time to finish my assignments, study for tests, and have time to relax to clear my mind. What I did know was that with hard work, and determination I was able to accomplish my intentions for this quarter. My hard wor[k] consisted of staying up late, receiving tutor help, and lots of time trying to think and figure out answers. With all this in mind, I am hoping my grades will reflect my achievement.

Here, Ravika explains that her criterion—hard work—includes the qualities of staying up late, receiving help, and spending time. While the process of asserting, defining, and adhering to an internal criterion for success is an indication of growth and confidence, it also reifies the sense of an autonomous writer who responds to the external pressures of community through personal effort. Nevertheless, Ravika's final statement—that she hopes her grade will reflect her self-defined achievement—is an indication that she at least intuits that her own assessment may not fulfill the discourse expectations of the academy.  This intuition turns out to be quite correct—the academy will not necessarily reward her for losing sleep and seeking the help of friends—and it becomes ever more important to initiate a process of reflection that will bring Ravika closer to an awareness of what will be rewarded and therefore to an awareness of her own strategies for fulfilling and possibly challenging those expectations.

I am convinced… that the current genres of reflection—with their ambiguous emphasis on students' "best" writing and "improvement"—discourage students from actively engaging with the communities and discourses that they are attempting to enter.

Isaac, a more advanced writer, produced consistently readable and entertaining prose throughout the quarter. He took revision suggestions to heart and worked intensely on his papers. And, while his final reflection does engage with the specific details of his revisions (including more complete quotation analysis, narrower claims, and definitions of terms—all qualities of "academic discourse"), he, too, falls victim both to introspective criteria and to the "schmooze factor." He writes:

You should consider these two papers as my submission to the testimony of what I believe to be my best work for the quarter. Based on how I personally felt about the original drafts of these papers, peer reviews, and your responses, I felt that with a little fine tuning, these were the two that would best exemplify the highest quality work which I could produce.

Framing his argument on his beliefs and "how [he] personally felt" about the papers, Isaac still avoids direct engagement with the discourse community. While he does refer to his peers' and my own commentary in detail, Isaac does not connect these reviews with a larger set of conventions or requirements. He again plays on the notion of hard work and accomplishment more heavily than on the evaluative criteria that were well explained throughout the quarter. He writes that "after many hours of work and revision, I must say that I am pleased and impressed with the final results, and it is my hope that you share in my sentiments." As with each of the students I have discussed here, Isaac's sense of personal accomplishment is something that I do not want to discourage, but it is a form of teacher-flattery that deflects attention from a more careful analysis of the rhetorical demands of the academy.

Process and expressivist theories of writing, which privilege introspective knowledge over community practices, are clearly implicated in the traditional reflective assignment described above. Personal testimonies of growth and emotional success are key features of the narrative of progress that students (re)produce in response to our calls for reflection. Yet as affirming as these narratives are—both for our students and for us as teachers—they reinforce the ideology of an autonomous author who is not bound by social contexts….The construction of meaning is more complicated than simply looking within oneself for the appropriate language to express one's thoughts, and our practices of reflection are disingenuous if they allow students to ignore their own social locations as they write.

I would add to this that not only must we follow the genres, we must encourage our students to do so as well. We can, I am suggesting, usefully apply the methodologies of genre analysis to the classroom and foster generic inquiry in our students.        

          

REFLECTION AND/AS SOCIAL PRACTICE

As we search for a way of allowing students both access to and a critical vision of discursive communities, our reflective assignment might usefully be revised to ask students to engage explicitly with the specific discourse conventions that their writing is subject to. Since investigating the prevalence of the narrative of progress, I have begun the process of revising my own reflective assignments. And while much of the course has remained the same—e.g., the emphasis on academic discourse and argumentation—my focus has shifted slightly to encourage students to explore the conventions of their social location in the academy….

The immediate result of this assignment change has been a marked increase in students' uses of the terminology of assessment, but even as these terms are used more frequently, students are providing their own explanations of them. Through classroom practice and an emphasis on the conventions of academic discourse, my students have become better able to define in their own words the criteria for evaluation. In addition, the students more readily apply the terminology of assessment to their own work….For example, Jae-Hee provides her own version of an unacceptable academic claim:

Writings in the academic discourse are not the opinion papers. For example, this sentence cannot be a thesis that the Vietnam War must be ended because I want to do. A writer cannot write their opinion without supporting evidence like previous sentence, because a writer do not suggest objective, supportable, and provable reasons.

Here, Jae-Hee demonstrates her control over the convention that academic claims cannot be mere opinions by providing an example and analyzing why it is inappropriate. Jae-Hee goes on to show how she revised one of her own essays from a "description that explain[s] three Korean women's lives" to an argument "against [Virginia] Woolf's claim" that women need a room of their own to foster creativity. Here, Jae-Hee engages with the notion of an arguable claim, and she shows how her own work is in conversation with Woolf's. This recognition of the social interplay of writing is particularly relevant to an outward directed reflective practice.

In this class, other students also engage with the notion of academic argument—most note the need for specific, narrow claims as one of the major features of academic discourse. Beyond simply describing "good" arguments, however, students find that their own work benefits from a closer adherence to the style of academic argumentation. Mary explicitly describes her revision process as the result of conforming to the discourse conventions of the academy. She begins defining the "rules" of academic discourse by making references to the community to which her writing will be addressed: "[T]here is a set of rules of academic discourse that must be followed. The following or not following of those rules will determine how its readers receive the paper. If those rules are not followed, the paper will not be effective."

Mary acknowledges the importance of readers who have specific expectations of her writing. Mary continues her cover essay by describing how her revision processes respond to the practices of this community: "Because it is necessary to have a focused, arguable claim in an academic essay, the second essay needed a stronger, clearer claim. I changed it to: [new claim statement]. Making my claim clearer made my argument and evidence stronger and the paper more focused." Here, Mary discovers that the new claim, revised to better address the expectations of her audience, helps her focus her paper and develop stronger evidence. Her engagement with the criteria suggests that she is not only making use of the conventions, but also judging her own work against them.

Similarly, revising his argument enables Joe to make a better connection to his audience: "From these small improvements, I discovered how much more clear-cut my argument became compared to before. It seemed to focus the reader on one question and provide many answers to convince the reader of the argument instead of giving him more questions and fewer answers." In his analysis of his own revising process, Joe not only invokes the convention of a specific argument, he also explicitly recognizes that his work will be read by an audience and that he can manipulate the reading experience of that audience.

This recognition of writing as a social activity, as a practice that assumes an audience, becomes much more relevant for the students who complete the [revised] assignment. Stacy moves beyond stating that her "purpose" is clearer to suggest that her work must be "important" to her readers: "I really liked the way that my paper ends—to tell the reader why this paper is important and how they find my paper is useful in daily life. This matches one of the goals of academic discourse—to tell the reader why the topic is important and why they should care about my essay." By asserting that she has told her audience "why they should care" about her argument, Stacy moves from a passive observer of her audience to a more active participant with them. Similarly, Tom points out that anticipating his audience's questions is useful as he revises his work:

In order to write a good article, including academic discourse, writers must try to stand in the position of readers. Essays are written to let people read, and convince them with the idea in the essays. The essay should be clear enough to answer all the questions that readers might have while reading it. If writers can image them[selves] as readers while revising their essays, they will know what their essays are lacks of.

Here, Tom shows himself to be aware of the whole rhetorical triangle—he seeks to put himself in the place of his audience and to imagine the questions that they will have about his argument. In the rest of his reflective essay, Tom continues to refine his notion of audience by describing the expectations of his academic readers.

In addition to employing the external criteria and engaging with revision as a process of social negotiation (between writer and audience), these students explore more fully the implications of the discourse conventions of the academy. In…the cover essay, students demonstrate a deeper understanding of the criteria—both as a means of conforming to the standards ("getting in" to the academic discourse community) and, to some extent, as a means of critiquing them ("getting at" the community). These instances are steps toward the kind of rhetorical reflection that the portfolio cover letter can encourage. For example, Alex uses the metaphor of a conversation to discuss why academic discourse must be "critical." He acknowledges the primary focus of academic discourse as trying to "convince" others, and he suggests that without critical analysis the "conversation" will become one-sided. This metaphoric formulation shows a sophisticated understanding of the ways that texts interact in the academy. Alex writes:

The primary reason that writers try to make their evidence related and their claims provable is to convince readers with analytic information. Because of this, academic discourse requires readers to be critical. Without critically analyzing the claim and its supporting evidence, our conversation in the academic community is meaningless, since the discourse becomes a one-way conversation. When we take a critical viewpoint and develop detailed analysis while reading the academic essay, we are able to acquire 'membership' in the academic community.

Alex demonstrates a strong grasp of the social nature of academic reading and writing; he figures his texts as part of a larger conversation among community members. In addition, his awareness of the centrality of analysis in academic discourse is a move toward a critical stance that he can inhabit in relation to this discourse. In other words, Alex is now able to see the work he has done as one specific kind of textual production instead of viewing it as simply "good" writing.

Beyond the idea of responding to a community, students begin to explore the character of academic conversations. Juanita focuses on the ways that academics must be "cautious and specific debater[s]." She focuses on how language is manipulated and qualified in order to make a more convincing case:

Through discovering and exploring the aspects of writing that academics appreciate, I have made a list of characteristics that a person needs in order to gain membership into this cerebral community. It takes a very cautious and specific debater to gain admission to this group. The authors must be particular in their wording of statements, as well as, able to assert their position in a way that invites discussion, but not dismissal. In order to prevent other scholars from automatically rejecting a claim, an investigator must be specific in their phrasing, adding just enough qualifiers, to ensure that their readers take them seriously and do not dismiss their work as bogus too soon. And, finally, a person needs to be critical of their own work, anticipating the types of questions others may ask of them, and then addressing those concerns in their papers instead of waiting to be questioned.

Here again, Juanita shows her understanding of the interactional nature of academic discourse. Further, she recognizes both the need for "discussion" and the role of careful language choices in avoiding "dismissal." Her willingness to anticipate her audience's questions indicates that she has a well-developed picture of that audience in her mind as she writes. From a critical perspective, Juanita's awareness that her work could be "dismiss[ed] . . . as bogus" because of particular language choices is an important factor in her development as a rhetorician. By describing these processes of admission/exclusion, Juanita is moving toward the ability to manipulate both her own rhetorical choices and the discourse conventions themselves. She is learning to construct her arguments so that they will be acceptable to an academic community, but she is also learning that she can assert her own power instead of "waiting to be questioned."

For Frank, a science major enrolled in introductory composition in his last quarter of study, the differences within/among academic discourses were additional challenging. Frank’s writing throughout the quarter displayed a heavy bias toward meticulous description, and he resisted making critical arguments in his essays. In his reflection, Frank alludes to these difficulties by characterizing complexity as a variable commodity:

The level of academic interpretation that is sought for by the author will dictate what level of language is used, and the difference between the levels is mostly contained in the depth of descriptions of terms used and the complexity of sentence structure. This basic level of complexity is often inherent in the field of study that a paper or essay falls under.

In this portion of the essay, Frank acknowledges that different fields of study require different levels of complexity. Thus, he begins to form his own critique of the discourse conventions that I had been advocating in my class. In addition to this analysis, Frank explores how academic “credibility” is established. He writes:

One final important aspect of academic discourse is the fact that it builds on itself. In any given essay, there must be some other works that had inspired the author to have an opinion about the topic in the first place. These other works are simply other authors’ attempts at directing the audience toward seeing the topic from their angle, and it is critical for the establishment of credibility of the paper being written that previous authors be cited.

In this excerpt, Frank exhibits his understanding of the social motivations driving academic texts. He acknowledges that others’ ideas form the “inspiration” of his own arguments, and he discusses the ethical requirements (and benefits) of giving credit to previous authors.

 

In response to the revised portfolio cover essay assignment, students display more comfort with the actual assessment measures, a greater awareness of the social locations of their writing, and a sense of empowerment about their own rhetorical choices. These results confirm the validity of refocusing our students' reflective attentions toward the contexts in which they are writing. Instead of indulging the narrative of progress, even though it offers a comfortable and often flattering vision of our and our students’ accomplishments, we will prepare our students more effectively for their futures as writers if we use our privileged positions within the activity systems of the academy to continually critique and reshape the genres in which we ask students to compose themselves.
Assistant: **Reflective Introduction**

As I reflect on my journey through this course, I am reminded of the multifaceted nature of writing and the influence of genre, narrative, and critical reading on my development as a writer. Initially drawn to fantasy and historical fiction, my love for these genres has not only fueled my creativity but also shaped my approach to writing. This reflection aims to articulate the progression of my writing skills and understanding of rhetorical practices, guided by insights from metacognitive exercises and readings throughout the term.

My early exposure to fantasy literature has been a significant catalyst in my writing journey. Engaging with complex world-building in works like "A Song of Ice and Fire" and "The Lord of the Rings" inspired me to replicate such depth in my own writing. This passion also instilled a habit of note-taking, a crucial strategy for overcoming my forgetfulness and retaining essential details from both reading and writing exercises.

Transitioning from high school, where English was my favorite subject, to a computer science major, writing remained imperative. Before diving into coding, I cherished hours of essay writing and creative endeavors, often struggling with writer's block. The analytical and logical rigor required in computer science parallels the meticulous nature of writing; both demand critical thinking and detailed articulation, which this course has helped me refine.

A recurring theme in my reflective practice has been identifying the roadblocks in my writing process, such as organizing ideas cohesively and starting essays with a compelling hook. Past feedback on my essays, particularly regarding organization, has been invaluable. It's evident that writing is not merely a solitary endeavor but involves engaging with diverse perspectives to enhance clarity and depth—a notion reinforced through class peer reviews.

Critical reading has emerged as a pivotal skill in my development. As suggested by Kimberly Emmons' insights on the importance of external analysis over purely introspective growth, I've learned to apply critical reading beyond literary analysis. In my metacognitive exercises, I explored Haase's essay "Yours, Mine, or Ours," examining collective ownership and the normative power of fairy tales alongside their societal implications. This exploration extended to my mathematics classes, where writing proofs mirrored the logical, structured thinking required in literary critique.

The interplay between genre conventions and rhetorical strategies has reshaped my understanding of writing. Initially, I perceived fairy tales as mere moral stories for entertainment. However, through analyzing works like "Fitcher's Bird," I've grasped the nuanced societal critiques and gender dynamics embedded within these tales. The readings by Emmons encouraged an outward reflection on community practices, pushing me to consider how writing responds to and enacts social realities.

In crafting my adaptation of the "Tam Lin" ballad, I navigated genre conventions, blending dark fantasy elements with a traditional tale to resonate with contemporary audiences. This project underscored the importance of genre as more than categorization—a framework for innovative expression. The rhetorical decisions made in this adaptation were informed by a deeper understanding of audience engagement and narrative construction learned over the course.

Looking ahead, my journey is far from over. The insights gained from this class, bolstered by peer feedback and self-assessment, continue to shape my writing. As Emmons suggests, reflection must encompass an awareness of the broader contexts influencing writing. In this spirit, I aim to hone my skills in outlining and organizing arguments, enhancing my ability to engage critically with new writing situations within and beyond my academic pursuits.

**Note for Peer Reviewers**

1. **Contextual Information**: This draft aims to balance personal reflection with analytical insights, drawing from metacognitive exercises and classroom readings. I am still working on integrating more explicit examples and secondary sources into my arguments.

2. **Questions for Reviewers**:
   - How coherent and effective is the structure of the reflection in conveying my narrative of progress?
   - Are there areas where transitions between ideas can be improved for clarity?
   - Does the draft adequately address the shift from internal to external analysis as suggested by Emmons?
   - Are there specific sections where additional evidence or detail could strengthen the argument?
   - How well does this reflection synthesize insights from the coursework and readings into a cohesive narrative?

Your feedback will help refine my focus and improve the clarity and depth of my reflective introduction. Thank you for your time and insights!
User: add evidence to the paragraph, for reference this is how the essay should be (ignore the instructions about peer review and stuff):

Before you meet as a group:

1. Reread Best Practices for Peer Review, especially the section "Strategies for Giving Productive Feedback."

2. Share a copy of your Reflective Introduction Draft #1 with your review partner.

3. Before you read, remember to scroll to the bottom first to the writer's note and questions.

4.  Scroll back up and read the essay carefully.  Write comments addressing the questions posed by the writer.  If you want additional guidance about what to focus on, see the sample questions below.  Please be as specific as possible--give the kind of detailed feedback you'd like to receive.

5. After the review session, go to your own paper and review the comments your partner has left for you.  Write down any follow-up questions you have, and note places where plan to make edits or modifications.

 

Critical Reflection:  The Main Arguments

Describe how well the writer makes clear arguments evaluating their progress in WR50.  

1)  Does the writer demonstrate a strong understanding of genre, rhetorical situation, and academic writing through clear definitions and explanations of how they work, why they're significant, etc.? 

2) Does the writer explore the specific ways in which their writing illustrates their understanding of genre, rhetorical situation, and the conventions of academic writing through systematic discussion of their:

Responses to our class theme and/or specific texts we read?
Writing process (experiences and strategies for note-taking, invention and drafting)?
Revision process (experiences and strategies for understanding, generating and implementing feedback, higher vs. lower order issues, making independent choices about what/how to revise)?
Understanding of genre and rhetorical situation; ownership over rhetorical choices?
Successes and struggles with specific writing skills?
Application outside WR50 (to other forms of writing, to classes in their major, etc.)?
3) Can you easily paraphrase these arguments in your own words?  If not, this is a red flag that the ideas may not be clear.

4) Are any of these areas missing or underdeveloped?  If so, what do you suggest the writer add?  How can the writer clarify and strengthen their overall arguments about the advancement of their writing?

Analysis and Evidence

Describe how effectively the writer presents and analyzes evidence from their writing.

1) Does the writer bring in enough appropriate evidence for each of their claims?  

The essay should integrate images, quotes, and/or hyperlinks to excerpts from their drafts, prewriting, in-class and conference notes, Critical Reading and Metacognitive exercises, etc. to support its claims about the writer’s progress.
2) Overall, how well are these elements integrated and explained in the essay? Do you see any places where you think the writer should add a specific illustration to substantiate their claims?  Do you see any passages where analytical connections should be more explicit?  

Pick at least one of these elements that is working particularly well as an illustration of the writer’s progress, and explain why it is working so well.
Pick at least one of these elements that you think could use more explanation/contextualization and explain why you think so.
Organization, Coherence, and Style

Describe how well the essay flows and showcases the writer's individual voice.

1) Does the essay contain:

an engaging introduction? 
a thesis laying out the writer’s main arguments about his/her progress?
effective topic sentences and paragraph transitions?
an appopriate conclusion?
Are any of these elements missing, ineffective, or underdeveloped? How can the writer strengthen the essay’s sense of unity and purpose?

2) Does the writer express their ideas with clear, polished, and lively prose?  How can the writer improve their style, tone, and the clarity of their voice?

3) What is the reflective essay’s single greatest strength? End your comments with this.

essay (revised, dont change it, just tell me where to add evidence):

Reflective Introduction Draft
Reflecting on WR50, I am reminded of the influence: genre, narrative, and rhetoric had on my development as a writer. Initially, I was drawn to fantasy and historical fiction, my love for these genres has shaped my approach to writing. This reflection aims to demonstrate the progression of my writing, reading, and critical analysis skills.
My early exposure to fantasy literature has been a significant contribution in my writing path. I remember first engaging with complex worldbuilding in fantasy works and literature when I was around 13. Many of them inspired me to replicate such depth in my own writing. This passion also instilled a habit of organization; to retain essential details from both reading and writing, to eventually remember and incorporate them in the future.
Transitioning from high school, where English and history were my favorite subjects, to a computer science major, writing remained imperative. I have not been engaging in writing as excessively as I once was, but before diving into computer science, I loved essay writing and creative writing when I had the time. I often struggled with writer’s block, but it only drove me forward. The analytical and logical ability required in computer science parallels the diligent nature of writing. But, both liberal arts and STEM do demand critical thinking and expression, and this course has helped me refine that.
A recurring theme in my reflection has been identifying the roadblocks in my writing process. Some of the common obstructs were brainstorming and organizing ideas, or simply making a compelling start to an essay. Feedback on my essays have been invaluable. It's evident that writing is not merely meant to be done solo, but involves engaging with diverse perspectives. Different perspectives can help to consider through the lens of the audience.
Critical reading was vital to my development as well. I've learned to apply critical reading beyond just literary analysis. In my metacognitive exercises, I explored fairy tales and essays analyzing the societal, historical, and political context and implications of fairy tales. This has been surprisingly helpful in my mathematics classes, specifically when proofs are involved, as it was similar to the logical, structured thinking required in literary critique.
My first day, I perceived fairy tales as solely for the purpose of entertainment and possibly moral lessons. However, through analyzing works like "Fitcher's Bird,” I've grasped the social commentary embedded within these tales, and this aided me in forming my own social commentary when writing a film adaptation for my IP proposal.
In crafting my adaptation of the "Tam Lin" ballad, I used genre conventions, blending dark fantasy elements with a traditional tale to resonate with contemporary audiences. This project highlighted how important genre is more than just a categorization—it is more of a framework for expression (which can intersect). The rhetorical decisions made in this adaptation were informed by a deeper understanding of how to engage an audience and construct a narrative from the knowledge of fairy tale conventions.
My path ahead is still not over and the insights I gained from this class continue to shape my writing. I aim to continue to hone my skills in writing, to improve my ability to engage with new writing material (for requisites I’ll be taking after Writing 50), and equip myself with necessary tools for the coding industry.

Peer Reviewers Note
TLDR: This draft aims to balance a personal reflection with insights, while also pulling from everything we’ve done in class. I am still working on integrating some more explicit examples and sources from my work since it isn’t fully finished.
Questions:
How effective is the structure of the reflection in conveying my narrative of progress?
Are there areas where transitions between ideas can be improved for clarity and readability (whether the essay has a smooth flow or not)?
Are there specific sections where additional evidence or detail could strengthen the argument (still planning on adding evidence, but which paragraphs would do well with some)?

 
(I have access to my metacog from 1-4, my film adaptation ip proposal and the craft essay for the adaptation)
Assistant: To strengthen your reflective introduction and provide evidence for your claims, you can integrate specific examples and details drawn from your metacognitive exercises, IP proposal, and craft essay. Here’s how you might incorporate evidence into each paragraph to support your narrative of progress:

1. **Introduction Paragraph:**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Mention specific fantasy or historical fiction books that inspired you or describe moments where particular elements of these genres influenced your writing style. For example, "Engaging with the intricate worldbuilding of 'A Song of Ice and Fire' at age 13 inspired me to cultivate detailed settings in my writing."

2. **Second Paragraph (Significant Contribution of Fantasy Literature):**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Quote or describe a specific writing project or narrative you created that showcased how fantasy literature shaped your approach. You could say, "In my early writing projects, I attempted to emulate the elaborate magic systems found in 'The Lord of the Rings,' which taught me the importance of internal consistency and thematic depth."

3. **Third Paragraph (Transitioning to Computer Science):**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Reference a particular essay or class activity that helped you see the parallels between the analytical skills required in computer science and those used in writing. For instance, "Writing structured essays on historical topics informed my approach to developing algorithms, where clarity and logical progression are paramount."

4. **Fourth Paragraph (Identifying Roadblocks):**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Discuss a piece of feedback you received that directly influenced how you approached outlining or organizing ideas. For example, "Feedback from my instructor emphasized the need for stronger transitions, prompting me to seek peer review to diversify perspectives."

5. **Fifth Paragraph (Critical Reading):**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Include an example from a metacognitive exercise where analyzing a fairy tale or essay led to an epiphany about societal implications. You could write, "Analyzing the societal implications in Haase's essay illuminated the underlying historical narratives in 'Fitcher's Bird,' a realization that enhanced my critical reading skills."

6. **Sixth Paragraph (Personal Growth with Fairy Tales):**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Describe a specific moment or realization from your analysis of "Fitcher's Bird" that changed your perception of fairy tales. "By examining the subversion of traditional gender roles in 'Fitcher's Bird,' I began to appreciate fairy tales as vehicles for social critique."

7. **Seventh Paragraph (Adapting "Tam Lin"):**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Use a passage from your craft essay or IP proposal to illustrate how you blended genre conventions. "In my adaptation, I drew from the eerie atmosphere of dark fantasy to emphasize the moral ambiguity inherent in the 'Tam Lin' ballad, a decision supported by my newfound understanding of genre frameworks."

8. **Conclusion Paragraph:**
   - **Suggested Evidence**: Highlight how you plan to apply the critical thinking and rhetorical strategies learned in WR50 to your future coursework and career. "The skills honed in WR50, such as constructing narratives and engaging audiences, are tools I now intend to apply both in upcoming writing courses and in the tech industry."

By integrating these specific examples from your coursework and activities, your reflective essay will convincingly demonstrate your growth and understanding, substantiating each claim with concrete evidence. This will not only enrich your reflection but also provide your reader with a clear view of your writing and critical reading journey.
User: can u add {add here/specify} in the parts where i should add the evidence within each paragraph?
Assistant: