Outcome 1 (Recursive Process) – Demonstrate the ability to approach writing as a recursive process that requires substantial revision of drafts for content, organization, and clarity (global revision), as well as editing and proofreading (local revision). (Word Count: 334)

At the beginning of the semester, I never really thought about the recursive process that much. Once we started to look in depth at revision in the class however, I actively focused on it. For example, our thesis workshops in class helped me a lot, as I would usually be the first one to volunteer my thesis for it to be picked apart. I found this extremely helpful as I could get other opinions on my work.

Getting other opinions helped me think outside the box and the fresh eyes were able to see mistakes that I might have missed as I had been working with the material for so long. Having these workshops made it easier for me to go back and revise my essay, as I had other suggestions of what to write. My final thesis for this essay was sharper than I had anticipated due to the help from my peers.

My final thesis statement had better attention catching abilities as it was concise and in your face. For example, I remember Professor Brod telling me the words “empathetic” and “combative” placed next to each other sparked an interest in wanting to read more. This made me feel as though my final revisions were making my essay stronger. The workshops were also helpful when it came to the Naysayer paragraphs.

Even though the Naysayer paragraph from Essay 2 is longer, my paragraph in Essay 3 holds more detail. It adds more to my argument as stated in the thesis. As we started doing workshops on Naysayers my paragraphs got shorter but held more meaning. I think this was very helpful as there was no fluff in my paragraph, it was straight to the point. For example, in the Naysayer from Essay 2 I spend less time addressing the skeptic’s concerns. I focus more on that in the Naysayer from Essay 3, so it adds to my argument by taking the time to address the skeptic and then identifying why they’re wrong.