George Lewis Hughes
English 103: Accelerated Composition – Visual Rhetoric Assignment; Reflection
Daniel Richards
September 10, 2008
Personal Assessment of Effective Argumentative Strategies with Respect to the Completed Task of the Peer-review Exercise
Primarily what I encountered during the peer review process of revising and finalizing our visual-rhetoric research papers as a group whole is the reminder that I myself need to include more references to the fundamental canons of rhetoric when analyzing my artifact. I had forgotten to cite my Envision in Depth textbook, such that arguably my preliminary draft had run more askew and awry in its argumentative focal point regarding my originally prescribed thesis statement than my peer-review partner had evidently processed. I also learned from the standard inventory of evaluative checkpoints on the peer-review chit that I had not refined my rough draft to the satisfactory degree implied in the narrow specifics of the various questions I had encountered, nonetheless, concerning my own partner’s exchanged rough draft on the topic of gas prices inherent in current political cartooning media.
Specifically, I should have diverted more effort and attention toward the intrinsic argumentative traits of my artifact rather than upon the authoritative reinforcement of rather effusive scholarly quotations that were directly cited rather than to the more impressive effect that derives itself from the commitment to paraphrasing. Most importantly, however, how I best identified my own strengths and weaknesses in my own documentation arrived from the easily accessible and reliable source of my very own partner’s hard copy. Her broad range of well-established approaches to her more polished thesis reminded me of my own vulnerabilities to the credibility of my own thesis draft. For instance, I acknowledged in my reading of the draft of a fellow classmate that I was specifically lacking in a soundly founded base for my main argument with respect to the appeals to my own prospective audience school.
I sincerely regard this peer-review tactical approach to personal compositional revision as a crucial step toward denoting one’s own rhetorical flaws, fallacies, and holes. I am thereby currently more confident and informed on the specific details upon which I must expound my most particularly fundamental input of assessment within the now more well-defined constraints of my own research thesis of visual rhetoric.
No comments:
Post a Comment