A Model of a Reflective Unit Analysis
A reflective-analytical analysis on the experience of creating and completing a unit should be submitted as part of each unit by each student involved in the unit.
A Unit Analysis should have one major focus:
- Describing salient details about writing the unit (what choices were made, how they were made, outcomes of choices, things affected by choices, et cetera), including:
- How your original idea evolved or was shaped by various problems encountered in your writing journey (and those individuals involved in your writing journey)
- What other factors influenced changes to your original idea
- What significant writing conventions you chose, and why
- Graphics: what kinds graphics you used, how you used those graphics, and why
- How you envision a reader in your intended audience making meaning from your text
Each Unit Analysis should be written in a conversational---yet analytical--- style and be at least 650 words in length.
Bruce Erickson
ENG145.13
November 3, 2000
Reflective Analysis for Unit # X
When I first began this unit, I had intended to write about the movie, Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. I really wasn't sure what the movie had to do with my major or my audience. In fact, I didn't even have an audience. I just want to write about this wacky movie.
Well, I soon learned that me just wanting to write about Dr. Strangelove because it was a wacky movie wasn't going to get me very far with my instructor. She pretty much insisted that I write to change some aspect of my world. I didn't get what she was saying at first. In fact, I'm not sure that I really get it now. But the one thing I do know is that it really made me think about how I was going to make this paper mean something in the world (as opposed to just being handed in for a grade).
So, I needed to change some aspect of my world with this paper, and I wanted to write about Dr. Strangelove. This put me in a bit of a dilemma because I really couldn't get my head around this idea of writing a paper to change some aspect of my world. Since I was confused about this, I went back to my instructor and asked for some help. She asked me, "What was Dr. Strangelove about?" I told her it was about the world ending in nuclear war. Then she asked me, "How do you feel about the world ending in a nuclear war?" I told her that I thought it might happen, and that I didn't think it was a good idea.
"So, you're against a nuclear war that ends the world?" she asked.
"Yes," I said.
"It sounds to me like you might write this paper to change that aspect of your world."
Huh. It was odd how what she said made so much sense. Then, when I sat down at my computer to write, all of the sense seemed to go away. I mean, it was such a ridiculous idea that me writing a paper to ban nuclear weapons was going to change the world. Who was she (my instructor) trying to fool?
It was a class period or two later when I started to begin to understand what she was trying to tell me. "Write to change your world." It's kinda like voting. You know, when you vote for a really good candidate who loses the election. Well, writing to change your world doesn't necessary guarantee change---except for in your writing. What I mean to say is this: writing to change my world changed my writing. It actually made my writing sound better and read better. Sure, I still need to work on my grammar and punctuation. But the idea of writing to change my world really gave my writing focus---once I realized what a desired result was all about.
It was Bill who helped with desired result during the peer response activities. He wrote, "You've got lots of great facts and statistics, but who are you writing to? And, how do you want your paper to change their behavior? Be specific." I wasn't sure what Bill was getting at, so I asked him to explain. He didn't.
What Bill did do was this: He asked, "What's the single most important thing someone who reads this paper can do to ban nuclear weapons?" I suggested that they could write their senators and congressman(person). It was what Bill asked me next that helped me see what I had missed before. He asked, "Where in your paper do you make that point, and what motivation have you provided your audience to write their senators and congressmen?" I hadn't. I had just dumped a bunch of facts, figures, and sentiments about how nuclear weapons were bad. In other words, I hadn't really made my point.
After peer response, I started revising my paper to make my points more clear and specific. I thought I was doing pretty well until my teacher sat down beside me and said, "Bruce, who's in your audience for this paper?" I told her that everyone was in my audience because it was going to take everyone working together to ban nuclear weapons. But while my instructor more or less agreed with my rationale for including everyone in my audience for this paper, she said that "writing for everyone is like writing for no one." While I didn't say it to her face, I thought that was the stupidest thing she had ever said. I told her I didn't get it.
She asked, "How well do you know everyone in the world?" Of course, I didn't even know everyone in the world---but nobody does. I think she could tell that she still wasn't making sense because then she asked, "How might your writing be different if your wrote this paper to your uncle, as opposed to writing it to everyone?" That got us started talking about being persuasive by being personal---being in tune with the wants and values of my audience. Oh, my. I had more revisions to do.
So, the first thing I did was choose a new audience---working mothers of preschool children. It was easier to identify with working mothers of preschool children than everyone. Because of this, I could make really cogent (I just learned that word last week) arguments that would really appeal to mothers of preschool children---so much so, that they just might write a letter to their senator in between diaper changes.
When I put myself in the shoes of my audience and read my paper, I'm not as impressed by the graphs of the numbers of nuclear missle warheads as I was when I first included them. They're still useful, but I have to admit that what gives them meaning are the really short stories about victims of radiation poisoning and how radioactive fallout can cause birth defects. The combination of graphs and stories is a 1-2 knockout punch, but I didn't say that to the working mothers of preschoolers because most of them probably don't follow boxing.
I don't really know what to say about significant writing conventions. I tried to keep my paragraphs short and to the point. I worked at being concise---you know, brief and direct---without getting telegraphic in my writing style. Finally, I had someone help me with my copyediting because I've learned that perfect grammar and spelling are what readers expect. In other words, good grammar and spelling are writing conventions.
Oh, yeah. My paper really did change from the idea I began with, but Dr. Strangelove is no longer the main focus of the paper. Still, I'm using two scenes from the movie to illustrate points in the opening and in my conclusion. So, I'm pretty happy. I hope my instructor will be happy with my paper, too.
Word Count: 1171