Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Eng 125 Instructor Conference Rhetorical Analysis Summary
Eng 125 Instructor Conference Rhetorical Analysis Summary
Eng 125 Instructor Conference Rhetorical Analysis Summary
Peter Husted
6 March 2024
I came prepared with 4-5 questions to ask about technicalities of how to write my paper,
like whether “we” was self-mention or reader pronoun, or how to technically
parenthetically cite given my circumstances of a short, anonymous paper. I also
vocalized I felt like I was out of control of this path of this paper and you gave me
suggestions on how to combat that and to make either an outline, a reverse outline, or
just write it out and finish the paper. Thank you! This was a helpful meeting.
Reflecting on the drafting process and the feedback received from peers:
The drafting process was brief, as I was set on not working on this over break. I started
the Sunday night I came back and finished it the Monday night it was due. I was content
with not finishing the draft fully because a number of people in the last draft cycle had
hardly anything. I HAD to at least provide structure for each paragraph/section I planned
to include, and I listed all the evidence I planned to use that I didn’t incorporate just yet. I
finished my intro, and second body paragraph. I started and included one or two pieces
of evidence for the first and third sections, and listed all the unused evidence I planned
to use. Then I started the conclusion but didn’t get very far. This draft gave my peers
plenty to work with and allows me to know what questions I had to ask in this
conference.
I plan on leaving the context of my paper in the intro even though my peer said to take it
out. I am also editing my parenthetical citations to be (MiCUSP Student, para. #). Most of
my other feedback will be taken into consideration but most of it was positive. Moving
forward, I have to actually fully finish this draft so I have a completed paper to turn in for
instructor feedback.