1

Dear Neil,

I am excited to share with you my final writing portfolio. This portfolio contains two of

the major pieces of writing I have produced in the Writing 2 course and is also a representation

of my growth as a writer throughout the quarter. My Writing Project 1 is a news article about

prison reform, translated from the academic article titled “Prison Reform and Torture Prevention

Under ‘Compromised Circumstances’ ”. For my Writing Project 2, I created a conversation

between four writers on a talk show discussing reading comprehension. Both of these projects

were revised many times to take the form they have taken today, and in that process, I changed in

many ways as a writer.

Translating an academic article was a completely foreign concept to me before starting

Writing Project 1. This implies that every draft of it was different, as I tried to change it and

advance it with each try. The first major difference between the first and the final draft of my

translated article was the exigence. Initially, the news article seemed as though it was written

without any clear motive or audience in mind. It was simply an excerpt from the original article

that had the formatting of a news article. After the feedback I received, I aimed to clarify why

this article was written and who it was written for. In its final version, the article starts with a

clear exigence, revealing the reason behind the article being written. Another major difference I

made was the timeline of the article. In its first draft, the article was shown to be written in 2024,

years after the research mentioned in the article was even conducted. This was not consistent

with the timing of the article, and in the bigger picture, did not make sense. I changed the date of

the article written to a more recent past, to ensure that the investigation mentioned in the article

was also closer in date to the publishing date, making it seem like breaking news. At the end of

the article, there is a paragraph briefly explaining what a ‘compromised circumstance’ is, a term
 2

I introduced in the article. In that explanation, initially, there were many instances of political

jargon which made it hard for the reader to understand. After trying to include the explanation

for each term, the paragraph lost its “news article” formatting, making it too long to catch the

readers’ interest. I decided to change it by removing those terms, making it easier to understand.

As for the reflection essay, I took into consideration the feedback I received. I included the

argument of the original article in the first paragraph, to ensure that the translation contained the

same argument.

For Writing Project 2, final revisions were more difficult. For the conversation to flow

more smoothly and ensure that the writers could comfortably interact with each other, I needed

to change the formatting quite a bit. Similarly to my first writing project, I needed a clear

exigence for the conversation to make sense. I decided to create a reason why published authors

gathered at a talk show to discuss reading comprehension. Originally, the talk show host

introduced the authors one by one and talked to them individually. This did not allow for

conversation between the authors. In my final draft, I introduced the authors simultaneously,

creating an atmosphere for debate among the authors as well as the talk show host. The

conversation flowed more smoothly with these changes which made it a more interesting read.

Considering the feedback from my peers, I simplified the explanations of the authors’ research

findings by eliminating unnecessary terminology.

I feel I have achieved substantial growth as a writer throughout this quarter. A major

contributor to my growth was the assigned readings. Specifically, “Shitty First Drafts” by Anne

Lamott taught me that even the best writers have bad first drafts. First drafts are meant to be

revised and changed. I learned that I should not be afraid to produce something that is not in its

perfect form. What I truly enjoyed about this class and what separated it from the rest of the
 3

writing-intensive courses at UCSB, is the fact that I got to add my personality into the writing I

produced. I was not forced to stick to the standard five-paragraph academic essay format that I

am used to. Although the freedom of creativity seemed scary at first, I’ve grown to deeply enjoy

being able to express myself freely.

As a person who has never particularly liked writing, I went into this course dreading the

amount of writing I was going to be assigned. I believed I was not creative enough to produce

any piece of writing other than the five-paragraph academic essay I was used to. My

understanding of writing changed substantially after realizing that there is more to writing than

creativity, but also clarity, organization, and well-structured arguments. Many components to

writing create what is considered “good writing.” I have also come to realize that nobody is born

a bad writer. Writing is like playing a sport: the more you practice, the better you get. That is

exactly what I have done throughout this course. With constant revision, practice, and feedback,

I created two pieces of writing that I am truly proud of. I believe second-order thinking was what

truly transformed my first drafts into their final forms. According to Elbow (1994), second-order

thinking is slow, thoughtful rewriting or revising where one constantly subjects everything to

critical scrutiny. This type of thinking is the reason I am no longer afraid to write out of my

comfort zone, acknowledging the fact that the first draft will always get better with revision.

Through this course, I’ve realized my strength in effectively communicating my thoughts

through writing. In my reflection essay for Writing Project 1, I believe I was effectively able to

convey my ideas and thought processes I had during my translation. A major weakness, that has

improved but still needs more improvement, is the organization of my writing. Being

accustomed to writing in a single format, I struggled with presenting my ideas coherently and
 4

logically. The organization of my writing is still something I am working on but believe I have

substantially improved in this area since beginning Writing Project 1.

If I had more time, I would like to continue to work on writing in different genres. I feel

that because of my lack of previous experience in genre translation, I still have lots of room to

improve. Taking this into consideration, I hope to explore different genres of writing when I have

the opportunity to do so. Additionally, I would like to continue to work on concision in my

writing. After reading “Understanding Style” by Joe Glaser, I realized writing concisely and

“eliminating deadwood” gives the reader the opportunity to focus on the important ideas in what

they’re reading, rather than complicated jargon and run-on sentences. Glaser (1999) believes that

deadwood is needless words and constructions that weigh writing down, clogging its arteries.

Following this advice, my writing has become much clearer.

Overall, I am grateful for all I have learned in this course. I am leaving this class, as a

stronger writer who is confident in my abilities to write well. I appreciate all the guidance I have

received from you as well as my peers. Thank you for everything.

Best,

Ela Soyoglu
 5

Works Cited

Elbow, Peter. Everyone Can Write : Essays Toward a Hopeful Theory of Writing and Teaching

Writing. 1st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 2000.

Jefferson, Andrew M. “Prison Reform and Torture Prevention under ‘Compromised

Circumstances.’” Criminology & criminal justice (2022): 174889582211054-.

Lamott, Anne. Bird by Bird : Some Instructions on Writing and Life. 1st ed. New York: Pantheon

Books, 1994.

“UNDERSTANDING STYLE: PRACTICAL WAYS TO IMPROVE YOUR WRITING.” The

Writer. Madavor Media, 1999.