Flourishing

    In my educational career, I always breezed through my English classes. I never had to think hard about the answers, I could easily remember vocabulary words, and pick up the symbolic meaning of a book written centuries ago. English 110 was different, not in its difficulty but in the way it challenged me and forced me to venture outside of the box my previous classes contained me in. The required texts for the course were unique and opened my mind to new topics such as codemeshing and the oppression of non-English speakers. The course delved deeper into strategies for writing that were only lightly touched on in my time in general education. Learning about synthesizing and rhetorical appeals aided in me strengthening my writing skills. English 110 propelled me to greater understanding and success in my reading and writing abilities and through this, I was able to achieve all of the course learning objectives.

    This course gave me the opportunity to expand my horizons with the topic of linguistic standards. I had never given the politics of language much thought as a monolingual student but through the course texts and assignments, I was able to accomplish the first course learning outcome, “Examine how attitudes towards linguistic standards empower and oppress language users”.

    During phase 1, the societal pressures of standard English was a huge theme in my written narrative. I analyzed a moment in my life where I was asked to write a speech in standard English to appeal to politicians. Prior to English 110, I did not realize the importance of being asked to write it a certain way but after class lessons and analyzing the course texts, I could see this event as a way people diminish writing talents because it does not fit their expectation of standard English. 

    During phase 2, I created a poem and a meme where I examined how public perception about different languages and dialects is still shamed and judged. I used the course text “Should Writers Use They Own English?” by Vershawn Ashanti Young as inspiration to acknowledge the harmful stereotypes and how people should break through them. 

    During phase 3, I dissected the discrimination in the US healthcare system because of language barriers inspired by an anecdote in the course text, “Mother Tongue” by Amy Tan about Tan’s mother’s hospital visit and the discriminatory treatment she received due to her not speaking perfect English. This struck me as no one should ever have their life on the line because of negative judgment especially in a setting such as a hospital. The harmful standards stigmatize patients and further worsen their oppression. This course was an eye opener to linguistics standards because I never gave much thought to the subject and perceived people who pushed Standard English as people who wanted to help advance and correct students.

    Through the variety of assignments and types of course texts I was able to achieve the second course learning outcome, “Explore and analyze, in writing and reading, a variety of genres and rhetorical situations.”

    Using content such as videos, poetry, and personal essays allowed me to go beyond what I had previously learned and used to analyze. With the addition of videos, I learned how to analyze tone, the visual presentation, and techniques used by the speaker to understand the message they wanted to convey. This was shown through my work most prominently in phase 2. Analyzing the rhetorical situations in my own work was a challenge but I grew as a writer and learner and the process has impacted the way I analyze texts in other classes and in my personal life.

    I was able to achieve the third course learning outcome, “Develop strategies for reading, drafting, collaborating, revising, and editing”, through continuous practice and class lessons that expanded the way I went about each process. 

    Reading is a large aspect of this class and is necessary to be able to complete assignments but prior to the class, I did not have strategies for it. Class lessons on the CRAAP test and vocalizing written work surprisingly helped me improve my skills. The CRAAP test allowed me to understand what articles had validity and reading my work aloud granted me to catch mistakes and clunky phrasing. After practicing attentive reading and strategies such as annotation, I was able to apply this approach to my own work. After writing, I would go back with the mindset of a reader, making notes on the intention, rhetorical strategies, and audience. It helped me tailor my work towards my audience as well as strengthen the true purpose so readers could clearly understand. Drafting helped because I could see the major flaws in my beginning drafts and could adjust accordingly as well as gain feedback from the professor and classmates. The ability to make multiple drafts of an assignment allowed me to find what works strongly and what needs revisions. Collaborating with other students to review work was a great aid. Regardless of the terrifying concept of someone looking at my work when it’s not completed, fresh eyes and alternate perspectives pointed out details I never noticed. Viewing my fellow classmates’ work also gave me a guideline to see if I missed making any key points in my writing.

    The fourth, “Recognize and practice key rhetorical terms and strategies when engaged in writing situations”, significantly influenced my writing approach in phase 2 and 3. 

    The class delved heavily into rhetorical terms and how to identify them in readings and apply them to the course texts and our personal works. For phase 2, we had to break down the reasons for our word choice, visuals, and how we tried to reach our target audiences after practicing these skills on other documents. Explaining through vocabulary such as pathos, ethos, logos and embedding those strategies into my writing allowed me to strengthen skills I felt were personally weak prior to the class. 

    For phase 3, my essay was tailored towards the audience of the US healthcare system, hospitals, as well as just US residents who were unaware of the issue in their country. Doctors and healthcare professionals are intelligent individuals so in order to gain their viewership, I used logos by providing multiple proven statistics to showcase the gravity of the problem. I used ethos to explain the relevance of each author and why I chose to use their words to defend my position. I used pathos by citing anecdotes from sources, using genuine stories to portray the importance of my topic.

    In both phase 2 and 3, I was able to accomplish course learning outcome 5, “Understand and use print and digital technologies to address a range of audiences”. 

    Phase 2 was geared towards creating a project directed at a specific audience. I created a poem and a meme to spread the same message to different audiences. I created the meme to reach a younger audience, inserting a prominent image that would be easily recognized and understood by my target audience. I codemeshed and used common abbreviations “bc” to connect using their form of casual language. I directed the poem towards an older generation that would take interest in that form of writing. I used old-fashioned terms like “prima donna” and “copper” and incorporated an end rhyme scheme similar to a song or a rap that they would be familiar with. In my research essay for phase 3, I used academic papers and videos as evidence to further my thesis. Using both digital and print technologies to reach the multiple audiences I wanted to target.

    I was able to “Locate research sources in the library’s databases or archives and on the Internet and evaluate them for credibility, accuracy, timeliness, and bias” during phase 3. Because the essay required 7 sources, this step was vital in achieving. Both the internet and the library provided good search engines to find exactly what I needed to educate myself on my chosen topic and be able to pull credible data and testimonies to cite in my paper. I utilized the CRAAP test, taught in class, to check for the currency of the information, the relevancy to my thesis, the authority of the information, how accurate the information provided was, and the purpose of the source.

    I was able to “Compose texts that integrate a stance with appropriate sources, using strategies such as summary, analysis, synthesis, and argumentation” because of the practice during class hours. Assignments such as synthesizing for homework aided in my ability to use this strategy fairly well to develop the body paragraphs in my phase 3 paper. Working on summarizing during class lessons allowed me to write enough information for the audience to understand the source but not overly complicate it. I personally feel that I could have worked on analysis more in my research essay and broken down each statement made so the audience could clearly grasp the message. I did not delve deeper into each point equally and left some to be confusing. I feel this way with argumentation as well. If I had provided a counter argument in my paper, it might have given more insight and an explanation on why I was pushing my thesis. 

    The eighth course learning outcome, “Practice systematic application of citation conventions” was used heavily in phase 3. I used in-text citations as well as created works cited to give credit everywhere I got information from and explicitly used in my essay. 

    English 110 was a fascinating learning experience where my skills grew exponentially. I didn’t know what to expect coming in but I learned new strategies, topics such as the politics of language, and more. Although I did not complete each course learning outcome to the best of my ability, I walk away this semester with new skills in my belt that I will continue to use in all aspects of my life.