Damaris Ulloa Marquez

Professor Bocchino

Writing 2

3 June 2024

Metacognitive Reflection

Starting the quarter, I had no idea the roller coaster I was gonna embark on with my

writing skills. I came into this class with mediocre writing skills. I always felt that writing wasn't

my strong suit, and I felt that this feeling would characterize my entire experience with writing.

However, in just ten weeks my whole perspective on writing has changed. Instead of dreading

writing assignments, I have grown to enjoy the creativity and structure that writing has given me.

Along with the readings, I felt that they have helped me grow as a writer and improved my skills

as a student by exploring in detail what writing conventions as well as understanding an

academic paper. I am certain my comprehension skills as well as my collaboration skills have

expanded all thanks to this writing course and its requirements.

Project builders were essential in the pathway to making my writing skills of a higher

quality. Through the incorporation of them, I learned how to adequately prepare and tackle my

writing assignments. One of the most important lessons that project builders have unknowingly

taught me is that preparation is key when writing papers. Through every lesson and reading, I

learned more and more what it meant to become a better writer. In our reading, “Understanding

Discourse Communities” by Dan Melzer, I felt it was the pivotal reading that changed how I

understood genres and their purposes. I learned new terms such as discourse communities and

the correlation between genre and writing. It was essential to develop the understanding that

“each of these academic fields had their own goals, their own genres, their own writing
 Ulloa 2

convention” to help guide me during my writing process.1 I have always had a difficult time

composing my writing, learning about the “rules” in writing, gave me the structure I needed to

take on my writing. Having to write academic papers is something I’ve never done before, which

had extremely discouraged me from starting. Being given the genre conventions of an academic

paper such as proper citations and diction worked well with how I learn because I need structure.

Feeling prepared and empowered in my ability to write, I took on WP 1. Analyzing

academic papers, specifically STEM-focused ones, proved extremely difficult. I got lost and it

took me multiple times to understand the research and main purpose of the papers. I felt like in

my submission draft there were many aspects in my writing that were lacking. I didn't deliver my

points as well as I could and a plethora of my evidence was unnecessary or in an improper

context. I worked intensively on the sentence structures and flow of my overall paper. I got many

suggestions to fix opening sentences which is something I worked on in my WP 1. I felt that

Professor Bocchino’s comments in my submission draft were the most helpful because she

identified parts of my paper that no one else had acknowledged. In my original draft, I only

reached the surface when speaking about different writing conventions such as evidence (data),

citations (APA), and audience. Yet in my revision, I elaborated and included more evidence to

further push my points. Out of the entirety of my portfolio, I felt the most proud of my writing

project 1 revision. I dedicated the majority of my time and effort to my first writing project but I

felt that my other revision fell short.

The freedom presented to us in writing project 2 was quite exciting. Starting my WP 2

was and will continue to be my favorite part of the entire course. I felt thrilled to take on this

writing project because I wanted to let my creativity be free. Whereas in WP 1 I felt very

1
Dan Melzer,“Understanding Discourse Communities”, Writing Spaces:Readings on Writing, Volume 3,
106.
 Ulloa 3

confined, with a set of rules which I felt was necessary in the beginning but didn't allow me to

take on as much as I did in WP 2. While revising this writing project I dedicated the most time

on my metacognitive reflection and honestly neglected my translation. The main change I made

in my children's book was fixing the spacing and pages. I improved the flow and overall

structure of my book, making it more pleasing to the eyes and easier to read. However, my

metacognitive reflection did not prove to be as easy to revise. I felt like I did not convey my

translation process and there was a lot more writing I needed to include. I added an entire

paragraph explaining how I created my translation focusing on the tools and apps I utilized.

Again, like my previous writing project revision, I felt like the most helpful comments were from

my professor. Her comments and advice really helped fill the missing gaps my reflection needed

to adequately convey the importance and effort of my translation. Many of my mistakes were

tied into explaining my new genre, I had to go back and add definitions and include how I

discovered what children’s book conventions were. Overall, I believe there could have been

more improvements to my metacognitive reflection if I allocated my time properly but I’m

incredibly proud of the improvements I made in such a short amount of time.

Struggle is the word I would use to describe my entire experience throughout this course.

It was the right kind of struggle that challenged me and pushed me to become better. From the

beginning, I felt overwhelmed by the reading and material of the course. It felt too much to

absorb in such little time. For me, the most difficult aspect was remembering as well as

incorporating the readings and teachings into my papers. For example, as I mentioned in WP 2

having to remember “every discipline has its own range of acceptable jargon, diction, and tone to

be learned and applied.”2 As told in Janet Boyd’s “Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking)” there is so

2
Janet Boyd, “ Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking)”, Writing Spaces:Readings on Writing, Volume 2, edited
by Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky, 92.
 Ulloa 4

much consideration that goes into every aspect of writing that I felt overwhelmed. However,

through trial and error along with many drafts, I felt like I was able to incorporate all that I

needed into my revisions.

To me, this portfolio reflects my growth and dedication to my development as a writer.

Like I mentioned in as little as ten weeks I have learned more about myself as a writer and

writing conventions than I have in any other class in my life. I have learned to read and analyze

academic papers and how this understanding helped grow my writing skills. Before I didn't know

how to properly revise my writing I would make minimal grammatical changes and call it a day.

Now, I understand the importance of changing and improving the overall structure and

composition of my writing. Realizing what is lacking in a paper is something I’m so thankful for

learning how to identify because it will only help my writing in the future. As a political science

major, I know that improving my writing is essential in my progression through the major.

Having performed poorly in my fall quarter political science course due to my writing I believe

that now I will take my skills and apply them into my writing projects for my future courses. I

wish I had taken this course sooner because its pivotal lessons have shaped me into a person

who's more confident about their writing but is also able to ask for help when needed. My

comprehension skills have also improved greatly and I’m able to understand and absorb

information from much more difficult material such as academic papers. All of these positive

changes and developments I know will guide and help prepare me for much more difficult

courses coming as I continue my education and take upper-division courses. I am grateful for this

course and all of the knowledge and growth it has presented me with. This entire course has been

a stepping stone toward helping my education and overall development and performance as a

student at UCSB.
 Ulloa 5

Bibliography

Boyd, Janet. “ Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking)”, Writing Spaces:Readings on Writing,

Volume 2, edited by Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky, 87-101. Parlor Press, 2011.

Melzer, Dan. “Understanding Discourse Communities”, Writing Spaces:Readings on Writing,

Volume 3, 100-115. Parlor Press, 2020.