Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

Ashley Roach

Dr. Bruce

English 363-21188

12 December 2019

Dear Dr. Bruce,

Throughout the semester, various assignments were presented to the class and offered
each one of us the opportunity to extend our knowledge as scientific writers. Though this is very
true, we also had to consider “The Student Learning Outcomes” presented within the course
syllabus. I believe that even though there were many lows and highs within my work, I improved
upon my errors and succeeded in my achievement of fully fulfilling the objectives. An example
that displays this growth resides in my portfolio collection. Continuing the focus upon the
outcomes, I have complied some of my highlighting work within this compilation that not only
houses documents of my fulfillment of all six aims, but also my timeline of scientific writing
progression.

My “Extended Definition” satisfies SLO#4—Organization and Focus through my various


headings and sectioned information. In my original submission, you left comments encouraging
to make each smaller heading, such as “Exposition” and “Rising Action,” under a larger
umbrella heading that pertained to the Freytag Pyramid elements. In order to make this change, I
changed the colors of the smaller headings to a lighter orange color, included a larger heading
above with a darker orange color, and even added numbers to easily identify the parts of the
pyramid. In addition to SLO#4, my portfolio also completes SLO#3—Persuasive Arguments
with the use of familiar language and objectively including opposing arguments. In your
corrections, you also included the suggestion of adding a recognizable story to the analysis of
Freytag’s Pyramid. With the intention of following this, I integrated the popular tale The Lion
King to not only enhance the familiarity factor, but also to showcase how the Pyramid can be
applied to more current narratives outside of just the standard novel.

Alongside this work, my “Scholar’s Notebook” also constitutes SLO# 5—Academic


Language and Design. This is done through the summarizing of the Deborah Netburn’s Los
Angeles Times article covering Rebecca Shansky’s “Science” report. With great attention to the
audience, my summary includes broad audience terminology; I attempted to recount the facts
presented within the article into my own words, but still tried to maintain the scientific feel. The
“Scholar’s Notebook” also meets the SLO#2—Ethical Research with proper citation styles of
every title, source type, and author coinciding with several links, such as Los Angeles Times, and
proper usage of quotations.
Following the other two, my “Conference Prep Sheet” meets the standards of SLO#1—
Rhetorical Focus and SLO#6—Collaboration. This is shown through the input of both in-class
and out-of-class participation of each group member as well as the combination of writing in
both an informal and formal manner. Each member displayed their process of writing and even
included our writing goals we wish to attain in the future. Once we completed our “Conference
Prep Sheet,” we met with you to make sure our entire document reflected our motives for the
“Review Article” and applied critiques to our methods as necessary.

After putting together all of these works and looking back upon “The Student Learning
Outcomes,” I have been made aware of what I must improve upon and look out for within my
future in academics as well as my later teaching career. I look forward to the next time I write
more scientific based works and reflect upon my growth.

Sincerely,

Ashley Roach

Potrebbero piacerti anche