As I am nearing the end of my Writing for Engineering class, I have found this writing course experience to be very distinct to other writing courses I have taken in my college journey. As an upcoming sophomore here at City College of New York, writing has never been one of my strong skills, however this course challenged me to reach my limits by participating in useful peer discussions as well as strengthen soft skills. The papers we were tasked to do each compiled of different components that would benefit us on our engineering path. We tackled skills such as practicing how to write formal introduction letters, analyzation of labs, description of technical objects, product review, collaborative projects, and presentations. Each helped accomplish the course learning outcomes from the class. There have also been additional artifacts that have helped with my writing growth in the class such as peers’ leadership presentation on peer review, insightful discussion posts, and useful documents such as the Norton Analyzing an Argument.

The first assignment task was the Formal Letter of Introduction in which we were asked to introduce ourselves in a formal matter by identifying short and long-term goals as a writer and in my career path. The course learning outcome that this assignment aimed at was negotiating my own writing goals. The letter helped introduce me to formal writing and how certain words/phrases should not be said. For example, key factors that I learned are that there should be no direct address when writing a formal letter such as including words such as “you.” As a writer, this word was very common in my writing. However, I have learned when and where this type of vocabulary is applicable.

The product review assignment was another artifact that played a role in my growth, especially in the analysis perspective. This was the first assignment that challenged my observation and analysis skills. It helped with analyzing a single item and seeing if it was an ordinary object or a complex item. As a writer, I was able to develop a description of the object. It helped with finding fine details when it comes to something small and including expanding the variety of criteria whether it be an object or any other item. I was able to formulate and articulate a stance through my writing using conventions such as rhetorical situations. For example, subtle persuasion played a major role in this essay. As the writer of this product review, we wanted to make it seem as if our product was the best in the market. I was also able to enhance my strategies for drafting, editing, and revising since we participated in peer review. For example, a drafting strategy that I was able to improve was learning how to develop a detailed outline to improve the flow of my essay. Peer review was a combination of revising and editing because I was able to edit and revise based on my peer’s feedback. This product review had to be specific so that any type of audience can understand. The self-reflection memo helped clarify mistakes I had incorporated in the product review assignment.

The leadership presentation was the first presentation that this course consisted of. The presentation helped with expanding my knowledge of different types of audiences and how it’s included in writing. As well as what it takes to prepare and present work to my class. I was able to strengthen my source use practices such as paraphrasing and analyzing readings about the audience and formulating slides to help the audience gain knowledge on the different types of audiences. For example, the document that helped me with creating the slide was the open Oregon press book document on the audience located in the course content. Paraphrasing and choosing how I format my information to give the audience a better presentation was a skill I learned during this process.

The Lab Report Analysis was a rhetorical analysis that analyzes the similarities and differences of the formats. This assignment was the most challenging for me compared to the others because it focused on formats rather than the content in the labs.  This had been one of the first times I had been introduced to formal lab reports. I was able to learn how to analyze a scientific report based on the format such as images, charts, and wording. I practiced using online databases, and the internet to locate sources on finding lab reports for this essay. As well as improving source use practices like analyzing. For example, analyzing the lab reports and identifying the different formats is what helped me lead to a conclusion on which lab report has a greater appeal to the audience. The self-reflection memo helped me acknowledge how to sort my evidence from three different lab reports and arrange them so that the audience is aware of the different formats. I was able to enhance my strategies for self-assessment by writing this memo because I was able to acknowledge areas that needed more evidence when comparing the lab reports. Looking back the self-reflection helped me with gathering my thoughts on my writing process when choosing the right evidence to analyze the different reports.

The technical description was another assignment that required more specification when compared to the product review assignment. In this assignment we were asked to choose an innovation that has been improved, I picked a light bulb. It helped me with practicing the use of specific and knowledge that is known as “subtle persuasion.” I was able to draw on those resources to develop rhetorical sensibility. The rhetorical sensibility in this case being “subtle persuasion.” I have learned that subtle persuasion is a resourceful tool because it can be applied to any type of writing. I have incorporated subtle persuasion and used it to persuade my audience without using persuasive language. Rather I was able to focus on details that would make the audience side with my argument. In this case, I would have used subtle persuasion to persuade my audience in believing that the light bulb was one of world’s best innovations because of all the information I was able to provide. The technical description memo relates to my growth because I was able to reflect on errors such as format and description details. I was able to enhance my strategies self-assessment by writing this memo because I was able to identify errors in my format and reflect on what I will be able to do in the future to solve these format errors. For example, creating a more detailed outline that will. The specific errors that my format included were not being organized enough that led my information and details to be clustered. Outlining will allow me to see where my details best fit.

The final assignment was the Collaborative project which came with a presentation and proposal. I was able to engage in the collaborative aspects of the writing process. We gathered as a group and developed an innovation with a hypothetical process. Sharing ideas with my peers such as brainstorming and writing a paper together are the collaborative aspects that tied into my writing process. As a group we can peer review each other’s work and identify each other’s different writing styles. Participating in a presentation as well was a unique experience because there were six of us which meant we had to divide how the content will be presented.

There were also additional assignments that helped with my growth in class such as peer discussion posts, peer presentations, and documents provided to us by our professor. A particular discussion thread from my peer Edwin titled Self-Reflection. It helped me understand what a self-reflection needs to include and what things should exclude. This helped me consider different audiences in writing and how I should consider my thoughts differently. This post helped me obtain my writing goals and audience expectations regarding conventions of the rhetorical situation. This thread provided a very developed insight as to what a Self-reflection should include and how it should relate to society. Another artifact was the Norton­_Analyzing an Argument, which helped with understanding how to interpret an argument and think deeper when it comes to providing evidence to support a claim for example. This document helped strengthen my source use practices such as analyzing. By reading the questions provided in this document, I can think like a critical reader when looking at my sources. Additionally, my classmate, Christopher’s leadership presentation on Peer Review, helped with ways to peer review essays and what type of feedback to give/receive. For example, being able to identify major and minor concerns. I was also made aware of proper etiquette needed when peer-reviewing, such as the formality needed. When participating in peer review, it is crucial to remind yourself that the goal is to provide feedback and not demand for changes.

Overall, the course has allowed me to grow as a writer and develop major skills such as rhetoric sensibility and analysis of sources. I will continue to grow and practice with these sources because writing is a recursive process, meaning you grow as you continue writing.