Reflection on Project 2 Draft

In this post, I will overview the feedback I gave on two of my classmate's Project 2 Drafts.

Maurizio Montanaro "Renault Alpine" June 11, 2011 via Flickr
non-commercial reuse with attribution, no derivs

For peer editing, I commented on Michael and Swati's drafts.
For the rest of my post, I will reflect on my draft considering the questions on page 197 of the Student's Guide.

• I do have an identifiable thesis. I think it reads very well but it falls short in illuminating the most important rhetorical strategies the original article uses. I do not simply fall back on logos, ethos, and pathos; rhetorical strategies are just not part of the thesis at this point.
• I decided to organize my essay in a multi-faceted manner. My paragraphs reflect rhetorical changes that occur sequentially throughout the original article. I think this is a fundamentally strong idea but I need to be more concrete in my analysis.
• I do identify the rhetorical elements that are of consequence to my article. as always, the analysis could use work.
• I do discuss the rhetorical strategies that were used and how they were implemented and how they impact the very specific audience of my piece. I think this is one of the strongest parts of my essay.
• I am using specific examples from the original text. I'm not sure if I could call my uses particularly thoughtful but I am certainly implementing them.
• I think my conclusion provides a solid summary of how the original text fulfills its rhetorical purpose however I think my more in depth analysis is probably wanting.