Dear Mr.

Neil

I am writing to showcase to you the process of building my portfolio and what the

valuable lessons I have learned throughout the journey of Writing 2. This portfolio highlights the

main two writing projects that demonstrate my ability to rhetorically analyze and translate

academic articles into different genres, WP1 is where I was tasked to translate an academic

article “High School Concussions in the 2008-2009 Academic Year Mechanism, Symptoms, and

Management”. In the translation I chose to translate into an ESPN investigative report. I chose

this genre because I am a film and media studies major with interest in the sports media career

path, so translating an academic article on sports into a segment may be something I have to do

in my future or something similar. My second paper, Writing Project 2 was a translation of 5

academic articles that shared the same topic of how technology is impacting students' writing,

this was translated into a narrative conversation at a concert. .Through multiple drafts the

projects have improved and evolved into its final draft form through the assistance of peer

reviews and your feedback, further building and enriching my writing skills.

In my final revision of Writing Project 1, my primary goal was to scale back the

academic jargon and statistics which was one of the main challenges faced when initially

translating into an investigative report. This was solved by adding an interview and adjusting the

language to be more conversational and accessible to the targeted audience. The decision to

include an interview to the script was an idea I initially had from the early drafts but I didn’t

include it into my first drafts because I didn’t know where it would fit and if it would make the

segment too long. Typically script segments range from three to four minutes or even less, the

shorter the segment the lower the likelihood of the audience to lose interest. However I felt that

since the script was very statistics heavy. Adding an interview to the script would prove effective
because it adds credibility by giving a players real life experience aside from the data and

emotional appeal to the story while also balancing out the statistics heavy information in the

piece. This part ws difficult so I had to use Irvins way of thinking in “Changing your mindset

about revision”, he says “Allowing yourself the space and freedom to let your early drafts be

rough and provisional without the high bar of being a final draft enables you to see and be open

to the changes to content that represent the true growth of your thinking (Irvin 328)”. With this

mindset it allowed me to worry less about hurting the project by adding more but also be

comfortable with using additions to make my project more complete. This taught me the need to

be more flexible in my writing approach to create more developed work and communicate my

ideas more effectively.

Furthermore I made a conscious effort to tone down the language used in the script

ensuring that it flowed in a more conversational tone and less academic. Taking out words like

etiology and a ridiculous amount of statistics made the content in the script accessible for the

ESPN audience who may be unfamiliar with scientific jargon and technical terminology.

Simplifying the language and making the information more relatable through an interview made

the final draft of my script balanced and complete.

Writing Project 2’s revisions were more centered around establishing connecting the

divisions amongst the authors in this discourse community. Dividing the authors from who is for

and against technology for literacy in the classroom was the easy part but the hard part

connecting them at the end. You pointed out how some of the authors focus on small scale issues

and others focus on large scale issues, so in my conclusion I made sure to emphasize. From my

initial drafts I knew that the weakness in my project was the conclusion, I had trouble tying

together the connection between the authors. Something that helped was reading the
conversation out loud, doing this helped me realize that the conversation sounded more like each

of the authors are just saying their points and not interacting with each other. Reading out loud

enhanced my second order thinking elbow says in the article “Second order thinking is a way to

check, to be more aware, to steer instead of being steered.” In this method of second order

thinking I found many grammar errors to be fixed, structure of sentences to be fixed and most

importantly the lack of connection. This allowed me to emphasize by acknowledging how

characters like Antero and Victor disagree on their main points but also have similarities in their

goals. This project helped me develop my understanding of contributing to an academic

discourse community while also interpreting the connections, disputes, and large picture goals

within the community.

The main lesson I've learned from being in writing 2 is that I can be effective when I

dispel the norms and myths of writing specifically in terms of revision and structure. In all of my

college courses prior to this one , writing a singular draft is what I have done for each of my

papers, not because I’m too lazy but because my process is to revise my paragraphs after I finish

them. This class has challenged my habits and forced me to read through my essays during the

revision process with more thoughts than just analyzing grammar and punctuation but also for

structure and content, focusing on how I can build upon what I already have done. Taking from

Lamont’s article on “Shitty First Drafts” “The right words and sentences do not come pouring

out like ticker tape most of the time (Lamont 22)”. This quote stuck with me throughout my

revision processes because it shows that only through revising and re-reading the project can I

improve my writing. This has helped me grow as a writer and acknowledge that my writing has

flaws and isnt perfect on the first attempt and this will carry over into my future courses that

require writing.
 Another aspect that displays my writing improvement is my ability to break free from the

confines of the ingrained academic structure. Since before I could remember, my grade school

teachers have constantly emphasized the importance of using the same structure for each of my

academic essays. However through my writing 2 experiences I have come to realize that this

approach can hinder the effectiveness of my writing. This letter displays me, writing an academic

essay that works against these norms and still is effective in structuring my ideas into a flowing

essay.

Overall, my portfolio reflects my growth as a writer and my willingness to embrace new

approaches to writing. The skills I have developed from Writing 2 will undoubtedly serve me

well in my future courses and beyond as I continue to grow and develop as a writer. I appreciate

your dedication to providing great feedback to help my revision process, without it I would not

have been able to revise my projects.

Sincerely, Jimmy