Portfolio Introductory Essay

              When examining the different WR150 courses available, I was immediately drawn to WR152: Representing Disaster in America. I had recently experienced Hurricane Harvey first-hand, and I had also witnessed an extremely inaccurate portrayal of this disaster. This representation, Vice’s labelling of my high school’s solution to displacement following Harvey as “modern-day segregation,” made me want to further explore and examine the different portrayals of disaster narratives that modern media companies employ in order to carry out their own agendas. I wrote about this first-hand experience in my first research essay during this course, and by reflecting on this work, my eyes were opened to multiple realizations about my writing style, process, and how I think. To clarify, before taking this course, I had never delved deep in the method of true research. In high school, we mainly wrote literary analysis and rhetorical arguments, and I never had to come up with an entire argument with no specific prompt, then find sources to back and refute my claim. This was very challenging, and some of the realizations this course brought to me, through various techniques of exploring potential arguments, is that I struggle when it comes to planning essays and organizing my thoughts into one coherent whole.

              I will begin this reflection essay by recognizing my strengths in the writing process. I believe that through my writing class last semester, WR120 Mental Health Portrayal in the Media, I have learned how to make my essays flow by incorporating transitions to connect my concluding and topic sentences fluidly. For example, in my first research essay, when transitioning between two of my body paragraphs detailing racial bias, I end the first paragraph by stating that Vice “neglected to include how the students actually benefited from the situation in regards to racial awareness”, followed by “Vice’s negatively-connotated ‘one-dimensional racial binary’” (Research Essay). I state the same information twice but making sure the second statement gravitates towards a new perspective or understanding. Through this, I am able to convey to the reader that the previous information will be used in accordance to what follows in order to build on my central argument using different evidence. In addition, in my first blog post, as my paragraphs continue, I incorporate short nominalizations to restate my previous sentences while still adding new information in order to keep my words in motion so that the reader is able to clearly follow along with what I am trying to prove (Artifact 4). However, this strength leads me to a comparable weakness.

              One of the realizations I made through this course is that my organization of writing was sometimes incohesive in flow and that caused me to steer off topic in a way that my claim did not benefit. For example, in my research essay, one of my professor’s main criticisms was that “at times ‘Vice’ [the main subject of my argument] drops out entirely from the essay” (Artifact 2). This rambling stemmed from my lack of organizing a clear and complete outline due to insufficient planning. I realized after reflecting my work and my writing process that I struggled with picking potential arguments, especially when assigned with a general prompt, since I waited too long to begin brainstorming. This caused me to completely change my essay topic in the middle of my writing process since I realized I was not confident in my argument; then I would fall behind and stress to finish before the deadline. This was exemplified in my first research essay as shown in my Prospectus where I shifted an incomplete argument from examining the differences in old and new media representations of disaster to specifically focusing on digital media disaster narratives (Artifact 5). However, in my final remediation essay, I compensated for this by planning earlier and writing multiple different outlines and subjects I wanted to address in sticky notes on my computer to edit and refer to while creating my multimedia revision (Artifact 1). Because of my insufficient planning in the writing process, my writing style resulted as directly reflecting my thoughts in a disorganized manner; however, towards the end of the semester, I ratified this weakness by planning for a more coherent and fully thought-out argument.

              Along with organizing and planning my essays, I particularly struggled with providing a consistent argument through inadequate conclusions of essays and exercises this semester. For instance, in my first blog post, I argued that the news source Quartz failed to address their audience’s perspective followed by conceding that their article was more useful than most disaster representations. However, I concluded the essay by stating there must be balance, and I recognize that this conclusion does not correctly reflect my argument or give significance to disaster narratives as a whole (Artifact 4). This exact same phenomenon was also reflected in my multimedia essay when I argued a certain perspective, introduced a counterargument, then was unsure of how to conclude. This caused me to lack “a conceptual argument [that was] communicated through that balance from start to finish” (Artifact 3). In order to compensate for these weaknesses, throughout the rest of my writing career in university, I will take some measures to ensure that my arguments are communicated fully. I will go to office hours to ask for help in concluding, and I will revise my essays to ensure that my argument is summarized in full and that I address the bigger picture or “So what?” principle that the book They Say, I Say discusses.

            After reflecting on my work throughout this semester, I made some realizations about my writing style and process. I have made sufficient progress in improving my planning process and organization of specific parts of my essays, however there is still improvement to be made in regards to organizing my essays from start to finish as my conclusions were often lacking. As I continue my writing career in university, I will address these inadequacies and make sure to fully synthesize and summarize my essays in the conclusion with the help of future professors and through several revisions. While in the future I hope to write papers for medical journals instead of research essays such as those from this course, the two are very similar as they require a central claim, evidence to prove it, and a summarized conclusion. This course has helped me prepare for these scientific papers in the future by exposing me to a variety of different types of sources, teaching me how to use different modes and genres to communicate to a desired audience, and by revealing my strengths and weaknesses in order to make me into a better writer.