While
working on the latest project, I felt as though I did well in the observation
aspect. I noticed a bunch of details and
incorporated them into my analysis; however, I failed to emphasize the actual “analysis”
aspect. I need to edit my rough draft
quite a bit in order to meet the expectations for the analysis because I did it
wrong. I did not compare and relate my
observations to the writings of Vanclay or the other authors of the short
stories that we read in class, so I need to do that in my final draft. Also, I failed to ask questions- why? Why is the color scheme in the location I
chose the way it is? Why did they decide
to make the location? Why is it set up
and decorated the way it is? These are
all questions that I needed to ask myself in the rough draft that would make my
paper more of an analysis than an essay.
I’ll just ask these questions in my final draft.
As
you can probably infer from the statements above, I don’t feel as though my
paper reached a depth of analysis that was asked for. I barely even analyzed it. I mostly did just a descriptive essay, noting
every single detail to a point where the reader could imagine the place and
picture it perfectly in his or her head.
I basically am going to have to re-write most of my paper in order to do
it correctly. I also need to include
Vanclay or one of the other authors somewhere in my paper and quote him and
relate to his observations and works.
In
the future, I plan on improving my skill of analysis by asking questions. Instead of just looking at something and
observing, I am actually going to try to think about the reasons why the place
is the way it is. Analysis isn’t just
looking and observing and taking in what you see, and being like “Oh hey, that’s
cool. The walls are maroon and gold.” Instead, it’s taking all of that in, and also
thinking to yourself “Hmm, they painted those walls maroon and gold like the
school colors. I wonder if they did that
intentionally.” Next time I try to
analyze something, I’ll ask more questions instead of just observing things for
what they are.
I know exactly how you feel. I also feel like I could have asked more analytical questions as well for the project. Straying more in preference to write a description essay. We both used Vanclay, who made it really easy to write about how a place is a place via description, not through analytical questions. I like how you recognize that you must quote the authors of the other texts, because quoting is one of my favorite things to do. Using quotes well helps add ethos to your paper. You can always go through the texts and high light parts of them that you really like, and know you can relate it back to what you are writing about.
ReplyDeleteFor future growth, it’s smart of you to ask questions. I just want to warn you, however, that asking too many questions can make the paper lose its purpose, and its credibility. I have read a few papers where a whole two or three paragraphs are all questions, and the person didn’t even attempt to turn them into simple musings. It drove me insane. Especially since they weren’t that deep of questions. I guess what I am getting at is to ask questions, but if you don’t want to ask too many questions, just mention the observation, and give potential reasonings as to why it is so.
I wish I could get a chance to read your paper, seeing as how you probably have used figurative language really well. Figurative language is always important in order to keep the audience interested. Though I don’t think I need to tell you that, your blog post kept me interested, so you should be fine.
Wow, I feel the same way about this project. I cannot stress enough how difficult it was for me to keep asking questions, or ask questions at all, while observing my place. I wish I would have gone to the workshops in order to learn how to correctly observe a place because in high school this was never a requirement, nor was it taught to us. For myself, it was also difficult to write a lot about my place, I’m thinking this is because of my poor observation skills and analytical skills while observing. Also, it was difficult for me to use a lens or observe through a lens, and it was even more difficult to include the lens into the paper. I’m not sure if you went to the workshops or not, but I feel as though they would have benefitted and I am definitely thinking of going next time I am having difficulty, maybe this would be of assistance to you as well. The lack of observational notes and analytical skills definitely held me back in the length and depth of my paper, and hopefully not my grade. Either way, I feel as though we had a lot of the same issues with this project, but hopefully we can learn to become better observers.
ReplyDeleteI can definitely see the challenge in asking question and downright giving analysis to anything that needs analysis. Description is very important to do. It is much easier for readers to relate to because of the fact that is more physical and thusly more easy to imagine within the mind. But, as I learned from accomplishing project 1, deep analysis is even more important in most cases. It gives an area deeper meaning to its traits than just its physical aspects. Furthermore, as you pointed out, a great way to add analysis to any paper is to ask questions. The questions ‘why’ and ‘so what’ causes a state of mind that gets one to write down analysis to answer those question. The real trick however, is to understand or master what question or how many questions to ask. The more questions you ask the more ways you must answer them. Unless you have good evidence to support an answer to those questions, just stick to the few questions that you can give great information. This in turn will inevitably lengthen your paper and fulfill your requirements. Additionally, I had some of the same problems finding where to put down quotes from Vanclay within my paper. I feel like the trick is to find a quote that does speak directly to your argument and when in doubt of it actually supporting your argument, interpret it so that it fits the context of your argument.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your reflection I learned that I too had very similar mistakes. Like you, I feel like I did not add enough analysis questions and I didn’t analyze as much as I should have when writing my paper. Where it was hard for you to relate to the writer Vanclay, I had a hard time actually writing about my location where and making observations and analysis of the place. This might have to do with the fact that my location was absolutely uninteresting. Also where you had a hard time quoting Vanclay I had a hard time over quoting him. I do like how you acknowledge in your reflection, what you did not write and how you are going to change that for the future like when you talked about the maroon and gold and how you in the future analyze it in a more in-depth way and question why more. You are not the only one with these problems so don’t feel too bad. Conveniently, this is our first project so it can only get better from here on out and we learn from our mistakes…Hopefully!
ReplyDelete