Writing English Essays: Blog Post 1

Writing English Essays – Blog Post 1

For your first paper draft, please write about 200 words about the peer edit we did last week, or your writing process at present. As a reflection, think about how your writing is going so far, or what you like and don’t like. Was the peer edit helpful? What did you specifically learn from it? Or how would you change it in future? Feel free as well to respond to someone else’s post.

4 thoughts on “Writing English Essays: Blog Post 1

  1. Thamara Tofeti Lima

    Concerning my first paper draft, the peer edit was pretty useful since while reading the paper out loud I could perceive some details that did not pop up on my mind while writing. For example, I realized that my ideas are good and clear, however, I have some problems to express myself in a concise and direct way, tending to write too long sentences that can make the audience confused. Having another person’s opinion over the paper helped me to find out that sometimes one argument is really clear and obvious to me but it can be ambiguous to others, therefore, it was important to make some changes to attend a more general audience. In addition, I could even learn some points related to grammar while analyzing my friend’s paper, such as the usage of coma in certain cases that I was confused about, which being a tiny detail can still make a big difference on the persuasion of the argument. Summing up, the peer edit main contribution in my case was realizing that I need to express myself in a more objective way, because writing a paper is not like presenting a paper, I need to convince the audience through my words.

  2. Nelly Wonjung Cho

    Peer edit on last week, my editor was Lisa who study about English language and it was really beneficial. I can see my papers in detached way and get some advice how to fix an error.
    Although my major paper is kind of different compared to my classmate, therefore I can cover up to other majors audience. The problem which I pointed out from Lisa is that: 1) Historical evidence about my experiments is insufficient. Papers should persuade and bring reader into line so I have to replenish historical background which can assistant about my investigations and logics. 2) Location of figures and tables are not correct. The tables and figures, which express results of experiments have to located in below explain sentences. So readers can recognize what I want to suggest from these tests easily. These can lead pathos, which improve my argue meaningfully and make them agree with me. 3) Some parts in papers are not involved in abstract. Abstract means explain about whole papers in shortly but my paper abstract involve except some parts so I have to add the parts and improve about explain. Thanks for this advices I realize my bad logics and what is the modes of persuasion.

  3. Lisa Kim

    Peer edit for my first draft from Nelly, It was great time for me to think about the layout of writing and organized it again. She recommended me to put conjunction on between paragraphs and also pointed out spelling mistakes on my writing essey which gave me to look over carefully. Out loud reading also gave me a chance to figure whole context closely. Going through some steps with classmate to complete my writing, I could grasp the meaning which I want to tell. Even though it is very good approach to edit on writing essay from peers, I could not give my classmate sufficient advice because of my lacks of background knowledge of her major study as concrete material engineering and also encountering unfamiliar words. If I had understood her context fully, I could have suggested better specific ideas and proposals. Likewise, She has no knowledge of my major. so I also think she might not have given me enough advice. Nevertheless it was really interesting time to explore the study of others.

  4. Hansol Kim

    The peer edit with Thamara was very helpful time for me to revise my first draft. It was conference paper so that I chose the topic under professor’s direction which doesn’t belong to my field. Throughout the peer edit, Thamara helped with not only structure of the paper, but also details about the experimental set-up and term selection. The good thing about peer edit with someone who knows the field worked much more efficiently since the person can understand well and give comments based on the idea of expert. And good thing about reading out loud was that I can already conceive meaning of the sentences and can figure out the mistakes easily. From the peer edit, I found out the paper was structurally well organized and abstract sufficiently explains what I want to express in the body section. However, some mistakes with unclear word expression was found which can lead misunderstanding of the result of the measured data so that Thamara and I discussed how to explain more informatively. Some part of graph also needed to be developed to support the argument stronger.

Comments are closed.