Writing2 Final Coverletter

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 4

June 8, 2022

Dear Dr. Warwic

When I was in primary school, I was taught that it is important to develop the habit of

questioning things constantly. But in China, kids were brought up knowing that we were not

supposed to question things for it was impolite. Therefore, I listened to my cultural convention,

and I play by all the “rules” like most people. After I came to UCSB in the US, course writing 2

started to once again tell me the importance of keeping questioning things. This time, I took the

one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference. 

I learned many things from this course that opened my eyes to things I never knew could

be comprehended this way in the practice of writing. First and foremost, like what Madelaine

Donnell, the author of Teardrops, said that there are conventions and not rules. Many students

know the “rules” of formal writing since high school, such as using only the third person,

including a thesis statement, having both an introduction and conclusion, and so on. But they are

only conventions followed by most people. According to Sara P, “standard written English is not

an objective set of criteria. It is an ideal system of writing built by white, upper-middle-class, and

male, lacking any form of variation”. Following these conventions could generate many

downsides that have negative impacts on ourselves. The purposes of writing are to persuade and

express. If we only do what others do and we write like how others write, what is the difference

between our writing and everyone else’s writing? Thus it is extremely essential to have our own

voices in each one of our work. Surrendering to the conventions is only limiting our choices in

writing, eliminating our ability to generate new ideas. 

In order to show my experience comprehensively in my final portfolio, I will put both

teacher’s draft and the final revised in comparison under the project page. Another huge element
I plan to include in my portfolio is Eli Review because I think peer feedback was one of the

biggest surprises I encountered in this course. I will then talk about my revisions in the

translation project and conversation project separately. 

In the translation project, I turned an academic article into a series of Instagram posts,

telling people the benefits of adopting pets during the social lockdown. I got to play around with

the “hashtag” function on Instagram, learning how to target the appropriate groups of audience.

My main problem was I concentrated on advertising that adopting puppies not only benefit

human physically but also give puppies a home in the teacher’s draft. I was neglecting the future

advantages brought by living with a puppy. Living with a puppy actually encourages people to

become a better version of themselves for puppies give them a sense of responsibility, and teach

people to take care of others, so I added a post highlighting this point. One of the most

interesting thing I encountered during project 1 was the mistake I made on the lab report. I didn’t

know that lab report should be about my translation project, not the original academic article. I

did not realize this issue until my peer pointed out to me in the Eli Review. The moment I saw

that comment from my peer was the same moment I realized why peer feedback plays a such

important role in writing classroom.

In the conversation project, I collected the central ideas of each author’s article and I

rephrased them into a form of conversation, a quarterly discussion over “How the peer-reviewing

feedback impact L2 learners and L1 speakers with their writing experience” through Zoom. I let

the authors give their own speeches one after the other. But in this way, not only do the

paragraphs get too long and readers could easily feel bored reading them, but also there are fewer

chances for the authors to interact with each other.  So I separated the sentences into smaller

paragraphs and I added more interaction between the authors. Before the Eli review, I put L1 and
L2 in the conversation project without explaining the meaning of these two terms. I did not put

the definitions because I already understood the meanings of these two words, but I did not think

about my audience. Until I saw the peer feedback from my peers, I then realized readers and

writers don't always see eye to eye on the same text, just like what Madelaine Donnell said. So I

also added the definitions of L1 and L2 for my conversation to be more reader-friendly.

One big takeaway from these two projects is that we, as writers, should consider readers’

experiences while composing our pieces, and that is where reflection comes in. Kara Taczak

claimed that writers develop and improve with practice, time, and reflection throughout the

process. This is why we should reflect on our writing even if it comes from ourselves. We should

also value peer review for they ALWAYS provide us with new perspective and places we could

improve. Keep reflecting and improving could greatly promote the quality of our writing. 

To conclude, Writing 2 plays an irreplaceable role in my relationship with writing, it

opened my eyes to many new possibilities about writing and many unknown areas under the

study of writing I could further explore in the future. All the skills such as adding my personal

voice, considering readers’ experience,s or revising my writing based on reflection are building

up a concrete foundation for my future writing, learning, or communication. I believe it is only a

matter of time before I could live up to my own expectations and write as no one else could.

Lastly, I have to thank you for all your assistance and patience. Writing 2 is so far the most

inspiring course I have taken. Thank you again for everything!

Sincerely,

Jiahe Sun
Citation:

Taczak, Kara. “Reflection is Critical for Writers’ Development.” Naming What We Know, edited by

Linda Adler-Kassner and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2015, pp. 78-81.

Donnell, Madelaine. “Teardrops.” Starting Lines: An Anthology of Student Writing, edited by

Christopher Dean and Kathy Patterson, Hayden McNeil, UCSB Writing Program, 2021, pp. 90-

94.

Alvarez, Sara P., Wan, Amy J., and Lee, Eunjeong. “Workin’ Languages: Who We Are Matters in Our

Writing.” Writing Spaces, Edited by Dana Driscoll, Megan Heise, Mary Stewart, and Matthew

Vetter, vol. 4, Parlor Press and WAC Clearinghouse, 2022, pp. 1-17.

You might also like