This course was very challenging and difficult overall. There were a variety of assignments that I never saw which created difficulties in creating the correct format. The assignments did have a clear requirement and in order to receive a decent grade you had to go above and beyond and put the effort on. The difficulty of assignments was decreased due to the multiple attempts and comments left by other students and the professor which gave opportunities for growth within my writing. The various assignments all had different tasks which helped achieve different course learning objectives and improve different aspects of my writing. 

The Formal letter of introduction was the most useful in improving my writing structure, drafting skills, formulating a stance, negotiating my writing goals and audience expectations. Professor Rodwell gave several comments stating the issue of “run-on sentences” and “sentence and paragraph formation.” This assignment was required to be a formal letter, and to correctly meet the expectation I required both the correct format and organization. This was accomplished through both the comments left by Professor Rodwell and the outline given by the syllabus since it addressed areas within my organization that lacked information. In addition to leaving such comments, she also pointed out where they occurred. These comments allowed me to restructure my writing so that it wouldn’t incorporate such run-on sentences improving my drafting skills. The assignment itself required information pertaining to my major, career, short and long term goals. These goals allowed me to formulate a stance on which career path I believe would benefit me the most. I described the benefits of the stock market in comparison to Electrical Engineering and articulated that they would be both interdependent but the stock market can have a higher yield of benefits. 

The Lab Report Analysis had a different structure from any previous writing assignments. It required a comparison of three individual reports and to determine the strongest. This assisted in developing skills with source practicing such as analyzing, integrating and citing correct sources. Additionally, it assisted with using library resources and online databases, and formulating a stance. Initially, I was unsure of the requirements of a traditional lab report, this led to a lack of analysis amongst the three reports. This led to a weak self reflection memo, which is utilized to dictate the skills developed through writing the assignment. I stated things such as “these, they, better, worse” which led to comments by both professor Rodwell about inconsistency within my writing. This allowed me to strengthen my stance in determining the strongest or best report by removing five dollar vocabulary and replacing them with stronger diction. The assignment also required that we utilize lab reports pertaining to our course work, requiring us to find credible sources. This allowed us to improve on our source use practice by using various Library sources and correctly using APA format. Overall, this assignment was very difficult because it emphasized the weakness of my writing, especially my diction choices which I improved on throughout the course.

The Technical Description was the most research dependent assignment. This allowed for the use of various online sources within the internet to correctly describe an innovation and strengthen my source use practice. Additionally, it enhanced different strategies for reading, drafting, revising,editing my work and using others’ range of linguistic differences as resources and developing rhetorical sensibility.  The paper was written primarily as a persuasive essay to persuade the audience to want the innovation. I chose the Galaxy Buds pro, which required a description of the inner components functionality and physicality. I accomplished the assignment tasks by researching on youtube for numerous parts breakdown which developed the skill of using the internet to locate appropriate sources. Through the peer review of the technical description, it allowed for the peers to look at my work and understand the difference in writing between my writing and their writing expanding the range of our linguistic differences and draw on them to develop a sense of rhetorical sensibility. In addition, the peer review for the Technical description allowed me to develop better skills in both editing, revising, and drafting because they gave comments such as “ great analysis but missing dimensions,” which told me what to look for when revising the entire assignment. They also mentioned “ use proper citation” since my initial paper did not include APA format. This allowed me to strengthen my source use practices of citing sources and integrating them within my writing.

The Proposal Pitch was the last major assignment and the most beneficial to my writing. It also allowed me to develop and engage in the collaborative and social aspect of the writing process, enhance my self assessment strategies while acknowledging my range and others’ range of linguistic differences . The group project was created to describe an innovation that solves a problem. This required the division of work amongst our group members, however it gave numerous opportunities to peer review. We used the peer review to continuously point out flaws within each other’s writing and indirectly peer edited our own work by looking for the same flaws. I believe that this was the most beneficial because we were also drawing on each other’s linguistic differences constantly, which improved our individual writing amongst ourselves. The proposal also required an oral factor, which forced me to read my own writing out loud. I believed that this factor was the most impactful because it allowed me to hear the gaps within my writing and better form of self assessment. 

The Blackboard discussion’s central topic was documenting your sources. This discussion primarily pointed out flaws with sources and determined whether or not the sources were useful. This strengthened my source use practice and the ability to locate proper sources. Other students described their sources and how they were utilized which gave a different perspective of how sources can be integrated building upon my individual skill of locating appropriate sources by looking at how they can be used. 

Overall, the coursework was very challenging for individuals who struggle with both writing and have little knowledge of Engineering. However, it was very beneficial in determining the factors to strengthen individual writing and developing skills to become a better engineer.