Overall Reflection 2

Throughout the semester I noticed the general progression of each and every one of my tasks. After writing a specific task, I felt confident that by using what I learned from writing the previous task I could write even better for the next one. A lot of this stems from fact that after completing each task, I started to understand my community more and more. For example, when I began task 1 I really had no idea about how to research lexis within my community. However after rewriting my task 1 I was able to generate valid research questions regarding the use of lexis in my own community, which would be the foundation for all of my later research that followed. Another sign of my progression between tasks, was how I came to better understand how secondary sources should be used to validate my research. For instance, when I finished my task 2 I did not really know how to synthesize and connect the sources I had collected to one another and to my research. Yet, after receiving feedback that it was lacking from my paper, I met with my professor and addressed the issue.
After fixing the issue with my sources I then felt fully and completely confident in my ability to perform well on task 3. So as I began writing task 3 I incorporated all of these lessons about sources, my threshold concept, and research questions in my paper in order to develop an effective analysis of my discourse community. I used what I knew about lexis to develop strong claims regarding the online bass fishing community and their use of lexis within community communication. I used the research questions to guide my research and as relatable talking points that aided my mini claims that I made about my own research. The research questions also helped me formulate a more concise and accurate methods of research, which I later explained in my task 3. Finally, when revising my final draft of task 3 I included sources in order to validate and relate the claims I made to real existing research regarding lexis and writing studies.
With my task 3 complete I then had to begin on the final paper. For my research and analysis section and introduction I pulled heavily from prior tasks that we had completed earlier in the semester. In the introduction I implemented the same CARS model design from task 2 and expanded upon it. I elaborated more in each required section and gave a better more in depth explanation of the literate activities of the community. I also used the newly revised research questions from my task 3 in my introduction as well. As for my analysis, I pretty much copied the analysis from my task 3 and expanded upon it, like my introduction. In the newer analysis I included more secondary source information as well as more evidence for my claims. I also incorporated pictures of the texts from my community as examples. Another thing that progressed from task 3 to 4 was how in depth my analysis was. In the newer version I included information on how my claims connected directly to my thesis of the paper.
Overall, over the course of the semester I definetly saw a large progression in my work. My ability to understand the basic characteristics of a discourse community changed through the writing of each task, which is reflected in the grades I received for each task. It should be noted that although I learned a lot about these basic characteristics, the main reason my performance on each task improved was because it took me awhile to adjust my writing style to the needs of class. I had to go from a creative argumentative style to a more strict rule binding analytical style, which was hard for me to do. Nevertheless I believe that my a large part of the success of my tasks has to do with the in class material that was taught by professor Pierson, her knowledge of writing and guidance allowed for skills as a research and analytical writer to really blossom.