Stenzel 1

Michael Stenzel

Ms. Crisler

Writing 2: MW from 8:00 to 9:50 a.m.

22 March 2023

My Writing Progression

Before taking Writing 2, my writing experiences were limited. In elementary school, my

teachers taught the five-paragraph essay structure. Throughout middle and high school, the

majority of my papers were in this style. Looking back, these papers were written after reading

fictional books and researching non-scholarly websites. While taking Writing 2, I grew as a

writer. I learned about new genres of writing, their specific conventions, and how to analyze

writing rhetorically. Additionally, my approach to drafting and revising papers became more

structured.

During this quarter, I learned about genres and their conventions. While reading Lisa

Bickmore’s pressbook, Genre in the Wild: Understanding Genre Within Rhetorical

(Eco)systems, I discovered that genres are “kinds of communication.”1 This definition of genre is

broader than what previous writing courses taught me. Genres are not limited to the basic genres

I knew when beginning the course: fiction, science-fiction, fantasy, comedy, and more. In the

textbook, Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Kerry Dirk’s chapter, “Navigating Genres,”

informs readers about the importance of “knowing what particular genre is called for in a

particular situation.”2 Writers choose their written genres and conventions based on their

situation. For example, my first writing project displayed differences between a cruise line's

1 Bickmore, Lisa. 2016. “GENRE in the WILD: Understanding Genre within Rhetorical (Eco)Systems.”
Pressbooks.pub, August. https://pressbooks.pub/openenglishatslcc/chapter/genre-in-the-wild-understanding-genre-
within-rhetorical-ecosystems/.
2 Dirk, Kerry. 2010. “Navigating Genres.” In Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, 259. Parlor Press.
https://writingspaces.org/past-volumes/navigating-genres/.
 Stenzel 2

vacation package and a travel guide. The cruise line writes about their vacation with a positive

tone, hoping to persuade members of the public to purchase the package. The travel guide

displays an honest tone, acknowledging both the positive and negative aspects of the vacation

package. Overall, the first writing project taught me about the ways in which genre conventions

can be manipulated to achieve specific purposes. In addition, conventions are not limited to tone.

The “Analyzing Genres Handout” states, “genres are often identified by their functions and uses,

their textual features, their modes of inquiry, and their use of evidence.”3 The features of a genre

that define it are not limited to tone and purpose. The handout supports that formatting and

evidence are specific conventions that can be modified to match different genres. After learning

about genres and their conventions, I began to perform rhetorical analyses on pieces of writing.

Writing 2 has made me confident in my ability to rhetorically analyze a piece of writing.

In high school, I learned about rhetoric, but my papers lacked detailed and coherent analyses. I

struggled in my AP English Language and Composition class and dropped it. In Writing 2,

readings helped me understand rhetoric and ways to analyze it. The textbook, Writing Spaces:

Readings on Writing, contains “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward Rhetorical Analysis.” In

this chapter, Laura Bolin Carroll writes that rhetoric is “the way we use language and images to

persuade.”4 A rhetorical analysis begins by considering the situation that an author is writing in.

The situation, or context, consists of three factors: “the occasion for writing” (exigence),

audience, and constraints.5 An author’s means of persuasion can be studied by evaluating his or

her rhetorical appeals. Janet Boyd’s “Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking),” a chapter within Writing

Spaces: Readings on Writing, describes logos as “objective facts,” ethos as an author’s

3 Crisler, Julia. 2023a. “Analyzing Genres Handout.” Microsoft Word Document, January 16, 2023.
4 Carroll, Laura Bolin. 2010. “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward Rhetorical Analysis.” In Writing Spaces:
Readings on Writing, 46. Parlor Press. https://writingspaces.org/past-volumes/backpacks-vs-briefcases-steps-
toward-rhetorical-analysis/.
5 Rhetorical Situation Poster. 2010. National Council of Teachers of English.
https://prod-ncte-cdn.azureedge.net/nctefiles/resources/journals/ccc/0613-feb2010/ccc0613poster.pdf.
 Stenzel 3

“credible” level, and pathos as “an appeal to emotion.”6 Therefore, an author can use truth, his or

her experience in an area, and emotion to persuade readers. This reading helped me analyze

Carnival Cruise Line’s site for writing project one. For example, I noticed that their well-

recognized name earned them credibility around the world. Although I learned how to complete

a rhetorical analysis, my ability to draft a paper improved.

The majority of my writing improvements came in terms of drafting. In the “Teaching

Two Kinds of Thinking by Teaching Writing” chapter of Embracing Contraries: Explorations in

Learning and Teaching, Peter Elbow advises readers to use first-order thinking when initially

drafting, stating it is “intuitive and creative and doesn’t strive for conscious direction or

control.”7 Before taking Writing 2, I would try to write my papers in one sitting. I did not

dedicate time to brainstorm ideas and add a specific structure to my paper. Elbow’s description

of first-order thinking provided me with a method of brainstorming. I was able to gather different

topics of discussion and create first drafts with various ideas. I improved my drafting efficiency

after reading “Shitty First Drafts,” a book chapter from Anne Lamott’s Bird by Bird: Some

Instructions on Writing and Life. In the chapter, Lamott describes how “almost all good writing

begins with terrible first efforts.”8 The chapter explained how first drafts are not perfect. I

learned to avoid trying to build a polished paper in one try. When starting a writing project, my

first draft served as a place where I could gather my thoughts without focusing on each error I

was making. Over the course of the quarter, I completed different free writes. These improved

my ability to perform first-order thinking, ignore errors I was making, and efficiently write a

6 Boyd, Janet. 2011. “Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking).” In Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, 98. Parlor Press.
https://writingspaces.org/past-volumes/murder-rhetorically-speaking/.
7 Elbow, Peter. 1986. “Teaching Two Kinds of Thinking by Teaching Writing.” In Embracing Contraries:
Explorations in Learning and Teaching, 55. New York: Oxford University Press.
8 Lamott, Anne. 1994. “Shitty First Drafts.” In Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life, 25. New York:
Pantheon.
 Stenzel 4

large number of ideas. Although first-order thinking allowed me to create first drafts, discussions

and readings about revising taught me how to polish papers.

While taking Writing 2, I improved my ability to revise writing. In his chapter, Elbow

explains, “second-order thinking is conscious, directed, controlled thinking.”9 I used second-

order thinking to guide my revision processes. This thinking process is used to organize a first

draft, fix errors, and find direct ways to improve a piece of writing. This quarter, the revision

process for writing projects included peer-revisions. In the essay, “Responding-Really

Responding-to Other Students’ Writing,” Richard Straub states that peer-revisions allow readers

to “learn something more . . . about writing.”10 For each of my writing projects, the revision

processes began with peer-revisions. By reading the work of other students, I was able to identify

specific aspects of the prompt that I needed to answer more completely. Other students also

revised my own writing, providing me with suggestions and feedback. However, the majority of

my revisions occurred when I identified issues with my own writing. “Using Transitions,” a

handout by Santa Barbara City College, informed me how to incorporate transitions in my

writing. The handout says I could use “furthermore” to “provide additional support or evidence”

in my paper.11 This transition, along with others in the handout, improved my flow between ideas

and the coherence of my papers. In Joseph Glaser’s book, Understanding Style: Practical Ways

to Improve Your Writing, I found multiple ways to fix errors that applied to my writing. Chapter

6, “Concision,” includes Glaser telling readers to “replace a phrase with a word.”12 This advice

was applicable to multiple areas of my writing projects. I noticed that I surround verbs and nouns

with words that do not contribute to the meaning of my sentences. Following Glaser’s advice, I
9 Elbow, 55
10 Straub, Richard. 1999. “Responding-Really Responding-to Other Students’ Writing.” In The Subject Is Writing,
136–37. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
11 Crisler, Julia. 2023b. “Using Transitions.” Santa Barbara City College: CLRC Writing Center, 2. 2023.
12 Glaser, Joseph. 1999. “Concision.” In Understanding Style: Practical Ways to Improve Your Writing, 60.
Oxford University Press.
 Stenzel 5

was able to make my writing projects more concise. While in Writing 2, I learned the benefits of

revision and how to complete it successfully.

Writing 2 transformed and improved my writing techniques. My definition of genre

changed, and I observed the unique conventions that genres use to achieve their specific

purposes. Additionally, I learned how to perform a rhetorical analysis, exploring how authors

manipulate language to persuade their audiences. My approach to writing became structured. I

now know how to utilize first-order thinking to collect ideas and create rough drafts. Because I

learned about second-order thinking and revision techniques, I can take these rough drafts and

polish them into complete papers. The techniques that I learned in Writing 2 can be applied to

future classes, and I know that utilizing these techniques will make me successful.

Works Cited

Bickmore, Lisa. 2016. “GENRE in the WILD: Understanding Genre within Rhetorical

(Eco)Systems.” Pressbooks.pub, August.

https://pressbooks.pub/openenglishatslcc/chapter/genre-in-the-wild-understanding-genre-

within-rhetorical-ecosystems/.
 Stenzel 6

Boyd, Janet. 2011. “Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking).” In Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing,

98. Parlor Press. https://writingspaces.org/past-volumes/murder-rhetorically-speaking/.

Carroll, Laura Bolin. 2010. “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward Rhetorical Analysis.” In

Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, 46. Parlor Press. https://writingspaces.org/past-

volumes/backpacks-vs-briefcases-steps-toward-rhetorical-analysis/.

Crisler, Julia. 2023a. “Analyzing Genres Handout.” Microsoft Word Document, 2023.

Crisler, Julia. 2023b. “Using Transitions.” Santa Barbara City College: CLRC Writing Center, 2.

2023.

Dirk, Kerry. 2010. “Navigating Genres.” In Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, 249–62.

Parlor Press. https://writingspaces.org/past-volumes/navigating-genres/.

Elbow, Peter. 1986. “Teaching Two Kinds of Thinking by Teaching Writing.” In Embracing

Contraries: Explorations in Learning and Teaching, 55. New York: Oxford University

Press.

Glaser, Joseph. 1999. “Concision.” In Understanding Style: Practical Ways to Improve Your

Writing, 60. Oxford University Press.

Lamott, Anne. 1994. “Shitty First Drafts.” In Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and

Life, 25. New York: Pantheon.

Rhetorical Situation Poster. 2010. National Council of Teachers of English. https://prod-ncte-

cdn.azureedge.net/nctefiles/resources/journals/ccc/0613-feb2010/ccc0613poster.pdf.

Straub, Richard. 1999. “Responding-Really Responding-to Other Students’ Writing.” In The

Subject Is Writing, 136–37. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.