My Own Writing Process

When I start writing a paper, I usually like to start by "brainstorming" or writing down any ideas that come to my head and making a brief outline. I generally like to do this part on paper with a pen or pencil. At this step I'm really just letting my mind go and not thinking twice about what I'm writing. I can always correct mistakes or take stuff out later. 

I usually write at my desk in the dorm room, if it is quiet. If its to distracting then I go to the library and sit in the study cubicles. For me to be fully focused I need silence, especially when I'm just getting started. I think if it is noisy, you are more likely to make a mistake. 

When I begin drafting I use my brainstorm and outline to guide me. I pretty much write whatever comes to mind as I follow my outline. I don't really worry about following the outline exactly because its more of a guide and I often add things as they come to me anyways. Since I write down whatever comes to mind, revision plays a major role in my writing process. I often revise it 5 or 6 times before I even begin to solely focus on grammatical errors. 

In the past my workshop and peer review experiences have been pretty lame. We often just looked for grammatical errors and gave what we learned as "golden praise". My ideal writing circumstances would include intense workshopping. I think it would really help me grow as a writer and be a lot more productive then they were in high school

A workshop draft does not have to look 100% done by any means. It can be full of errors and misspelled words. The main point is to just get all your words down on paper. It doesn't have to be perfect, you just need to get your thoughts down! Write whatever you are thinking. The audience is really for whoever you are writing the paper for, such as your teacher, and who ever is workshopping it for you. Your final draft should look different. It should be error free with sentence variation and sophistication. The audience should be geared towards whoever you are writing the paper for and not your workshopping group!

For EssayR I would advise him to use more sophisticated language and more sentence variation. The other major problem I saw was that he needs to use more sources to prove his points. More sources would help the paper so much. It would make it more professional and reliable. 

After reading EssayR I would give the author a B. I think he could have done a better job comparing the two time periods, and made the distinctions between the two a little more clear. I also feel like the author could have used more elevated language than he did, but then again I do not know how formal this paper was supposed to be. Overall the paper was pretty good and flowed, however I wish he used more sources and concrete facts to back up his points. The single source was only mentioned in the very beginning of the paper. 

I think the rhetorical situation the editorial is responding to is the 2008 primaries. He obviously is not a fan of the Clintons so he was was trying to persuade people against voting for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primary. He is trying to appeal to potential voters especially democratic ones who may have considered voting for her. 

The genre conventions that stood out to me for editorials are the author's extremely strong opinion and harsh words. I have never written in this genre before because I have not had an intense opinion i feel the need to express. 

An editorial is a good genre for him to express his opinion considering he is a college student. Another genre he could use is a commercial or handing out fliers. The disadvantage of a commercial is that being a college student, he does not have the resources to make a commercial and get it out there. The advantage of it, if it was possible, would be that a whole lot more people would see it because unfortunately more people watch tv then read the newspaper. 

The editorial itself is very strongly opinionated. The other hints at the fact that he is a republican, however all his views directly point to the right side. What he is  saying is a bit contradictory because he is saying don't vote for Hillary, however, she might be easier to beat. Being a republican, wouldn't he want an opponent who is easier to beat? Also, his whole argument is based on the principle that since Bill Clinton was not a good president, Hillary would not make a good president. Just because they are married does not mean that they are the same person. She cannot be blamed for his mistakes, and if anything, I bet she learned from his mistakes and is wiser for it. This whole argument is weak, and I think he sounded a little bit ignorant.