ENG 122 Feedback and Revision Reflection

Think about your experiences with revision in the past. What approaches to revision have

worked well for you?

My approach to revision has always been collaborative. There are times when I think I

understand what the parameters of an assignment are. I can put that work in front of a teacher or

some other expert and tell them what I was trying to say and by being open to criticism, I have

learned to accept new ideas. Its not always easy for me to accept criticism but I have learned to

hear what someone is saying to me and actually integrate the concepts to make my work better.

In the case of “Me Talk Pretty one Day” I had an idea of what the expectation for my work was

and it wasn’t that my expectation was necessarily wrong, it was just off. In addition, it did not

really reflect what I thought of the work that I was analyzing. Once I was honest about the fact

that I really did not understand what was expected and I reached out for help, I had a much better

understanding of the approach I will be using to write the paper.

It was the process of trying it and being confused and asking that I found most helpful. The

confusing part was the most stressful part of the process. I had an understanding in my own

sphere of knowing that was different than the expectation as I understood it. In hindsight, given

what I now understand, I would have approached my process of analysis completely differently

right from the beginning. In fact, the most influential comment to impact my way of thinking

about critical analysis did not even come from the lessons or the text. It came from a person. She

said, “A critical analysis is you presenting your interpretation of an article's message and

meaning, then defending that interpretation using your key points and examples from the article

to support all of it. So, you're defending your opinion…” (Nicholas, 2019) My opinion was what

was wanted, not my research, not the regurgitation of other opinions that I thought were better or
more educated than mine, but my opinions based on my perspective at my age living as I had

lived. I have been so accustomed to fact-based literature and critical analysis that I was not sure

how to write about my opinion. That was a revelation. It also made me very uncomfortable

because I have been working diligently to keep my opinions to myself and just write about the

facts.

This writing would stretch my ability to think about how I feel about his work and how I think

the author felt when he wrote it. If I relate the article to myself and how I would feel in the

situation that he found himself in, then I would be putting a little piece of myself in the paper.

This is me and this is what I think. So, the revision stage taught me to ask, to listen to the

criticism objectively, to ask more and to really consider what I am being told. It also surprised

me because there was a new understanding for me out there that I didn’t know was there and I

got it. Feedback is important, more important than I thought. I am happy to learn that new fractal

and integrate it into me.

What revision strategy from the Module 5 content would you like to try when revising your

critical analysis essay?

The revision strategies in this module were helpful to know about but I found that they were a

little too static for me. I wanted to revisit my concepts and evolve them, but I also wanted the

language and grammar to reflect the new concepts that I was learning. I don’t think that I will

settle on a single way to revise, rather I will likely use both large-scale revisions and small-scale

revisions. The evolution of my writing was impacted by feedback and the lessons that I learned

about writing in this module. Large scale revision will be necessary because my approach to

critical analysis has changed. Instead of writing to my perceived way of presenting a factual

presentation that is backed up by relevant quotations, I will be approaching the essay with more
thought given to my perspective about the author and his state of mind while writing. It may

seem like a small nuance, but it is actually a big one for me. It means that my approach will

likely be an exploration of synergies in my own experience that relate to the experiences of the

author. Perspective will be key and a new reading of the article from this perspective will be

necessary in order to find commonalities in my experience so that I can relate my opinions about

the work.

Review your Writing Plan and the feedback provided by your instructor. How does this

feedback influence your ideas about your selected reading?

What changes will you make to your analysis now that you have received this outside

feedback?

The Writing Plan feedback was extremely important to my perspective. One of the thoughts from

the professor stated, “…something that communicates your ideas about the article and relies on

evidence from the original article to support and illustrate those ideas.” (Nicholas, 2019) That

spoke to my entire evolution in this process. Professor Nicholas also states in the feedback, “Key

points – are these key points distinct enough from one another that readers won't confuse them as

they read through your analysis? Will your key points help support and illustrate your claim?”

(Nicholas, 2019) This part of the essay will be much different than my original writing plan.

Although the quotations that I use may be similar, they will have a different meaning for me as I

write about them. Because I am an original person, the analysis I will write will be from an

original perspective. The word “regurgitation” was used in the feedback twice. Although it is not

a pleasant word, it says something really important. We’ve heard it before, it is not original, what

does it say about you and what you think? These are the questions that I asked myself when I
read the feedback. This must mean that original is important. Original cannot happen if I don’t

think about my perspective. My perspective is unique, not better and not worse, just unique. That

uniqueness did not find a place in my initial analysis. That will require more from me that I was

initially willing to reveal. I have been in the circumstance that the author is writing about, I have

felt the way he feels. I was uncomfortable every time I found myself in that situation. I am a

private person, I have to talk about that, I don’t want to talk about that. My story about those

feelings will help me be a better writer and help me write a better analysis. Initially I was writing

a critical analysis, but I am finding that I am writing a story of experience, the author’s and mine.

Danielle Slay