Reflection on Project 2 Draft

ClkerFreeVectorImages, "Cloud, Thinking" 2014 via Pixabay, CC0 Public Domain License

My draft is definitely a work in progress. Overall, I found this draft harder, but less stressful and more familiar to write than the draft for project one. This post is my reflection on my project 2 draft. I reviewed both Thomas and Chingiz' drafts.

• I believe my thesis is clear and identifiable in my piece, It points to specific parts of my rhetorical situation, but in all honesty I need to work on making this part more specific, by alluding to the appeals in ways other than their definitions "appeals to emotions". It is also unanimously agreed that my thesis and my intro don't tie in together seamlessly, so I need to work on tying them together. 

• My essay is structured in a typical essay format. There is an introduction, three body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Each paragraph does have a central point that relates to my thesis, but I was not very careful in organizing my evidence and analysis, so there is not necessarily much of each in each paragraph, nor is it structured in a way that might help the reader understand it and how it relates back to the main point.

• I analyzed the author's purpose/context, and vaguely the audience by mentioning what type of audience the author might pitch his argument to, but I did not go in depth in analyzing the audience or author of the situation, so that I could improve upon in my writing.

• I did not really thoroughly explain why each strategy was employed, which I need to fix. I briefly described how each strategy affects the audience, but not in a way that answers the question of why these strategies are used in a more specific sense, or how/why these affect the audience. By going more in depth about the audience and rhetorical situation, this will be easier to fix, I assume.
  
• I used evidence in each of my paragraphs, but not much of it. After looking over other drafts and reading the comments on mine, I realized I need more evidence and more specificity in the evidence I provide than what I have now. Evidence helps the audience grasp the situation better, and establishes my own credibility. The evidence I do provide does explain how it is relevant though, I think.
  
• I possibly leave the reader wanting more just because my draft is short and does not give much information/evidence to the reader, or analysis that goes in depth about why the author employs the strategies they do. My conclusion answers the question of "what did I just talk about" but not "so what" as it doesn't really bring any new insight or explanation for the reader, which most good conclusions do, so I will fix that as I edit.