WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT TO SEE ON THIS PAGE
This page houses the writing and speaking materials I submitted to the Writing and Speaking Studio when I first applied for the Peer Consultant position. These pieces reflect my writing/speaking style and, as I reflect on them through my curatorial notes, I will be able to identify how my communication style has changed since I first wrote them. This space will allow me to express the original intent of my work while also providing different perspectives as I continue to grow as a writer and speaker.
|
WRITING SAMPLE 1
|
Curatorial Notes:
I wrote this final analytical research paper for a History of Film course I took in the Spring 2021 semester, almost a year before I applied to the Writing and Speaking Studio. I decided to write my paper on two films by François Truffaut, one of the most significant filmmakers who pioneered the French New Wave movement in the late 1950s. During my training, I had a session with Mike, a professional consultant at the Writing and Speaking Studio, and we looked over this paper together. Having not read the essay since I wrote it, it had been almost a year since I looked it over and I was surprised to see how my writing style had changed. Mike helped me recognize areas for improvement like the fact that my thesis was a little too vague and didn’t provide the reader with enough information to truly understand my argument. Specificity in a thesis is not something I had previously considered because I assumed that the rest of the paper would support my thesis enough so I don’t need to clarify it in the opening paragraph. However, my session with Mike made me realize that I need to be less ambiguous in my thesis to allow the reader to discern my argument from the start of the paper. Furthermore, he called attention to the first paragraph of my essay, which was particularly long and not completely necessary. Through our discussion, I noticed that, due to how passionate I am about the topic, I provided a lot more context/information than the reader actually needed. Though I found the information interesting, it was not pertinent to my argument and so took up a lot of unnecessary space. I also found that this made the essay less specific because the paragraph went on a tangent that didn’t add to my argument. What I found interesting was that I found that paragraph to be a little long and redundant before Mike even pointed it out but I remember thinking that same paragraph was very effective for providing context when I first wrote the paper. If I were to revise this paper, the first thing I would do is cut down all the superfluous information in the first body paragraph. Having a more succinct first paragraph with only the necessary information will greatly improve the paper as it would be a lot easier for the reader to understand and digest. Another thing I would change is the thesis, which needed more clarity and specificity. From a reader’s perspective, unless they have prior knowledge of the topic, the thesis doesn’t provide enough information regarding the argument of the paper. Overall, though I am still really proud of this paper, my session with Mike made me realize how much my writing style has changed and how much more I can continue to grow as a writer. |