MWA2 Reflection

Chapter 3 of the book focuses on the process of writing a paper, specifically how to properly begin constructing your paper and how to analyze your paper and writing process. The chapter advises a clear workspace environment that maximizes the focus placed on the paper and minimizes distracting and obstructive elements. The chapter also advocates the use of pre-writing methods such as free-writing and brainstorming to help improve and better one’s general view of their essay. The chapter pushes the importance of the PACT (Purpose, Audience, Context, Text) system during the early stages of constructing your paper to help better one’s general view of their essay and strengthen the basic structure of your essay. To tighten the structure of an essay and ease the writing process, the essay advises to only search for and narrow down vital sources during research. Looking back at the writing process of MWA2, I realize that I skipped over several important steps and tips that would have helped tighten both my essay and my working experience. The majority of time spent on MWA2 was spent in the SLU library and the desk in my room. While both environments were solitary and relatively serene places to be, theoretically perfect environments for some to work in, they might have been detrimental to my writing process due to how solitary they were. I have noticed that I tend to work faster and more efficiently when around a busy crowd or an authoritative figure rather than alone, as I usually procrastinate through browsing the internet or playing distracting music when no one is around to keep me in check. The unhealthy amount of procrastination that has occured during my MWA2 writing process also might have been a product of my lack of proper vision for my paper. I didn’t utilize any of the chapter’s pre-writing techniques other than maybe brainstorming, and as a result it proved difficult to both motivate myself to start writing the paper and to actually think of what to write. Considering the PACT system during my writing process would have likely helped tighten the focus of my paper as well. The opposing argument of my dissoi logoi seems to be lacking in the “audience” department, as it doesn’t have a clear target in sending its message, aiming both at the “for” paper as a direct response and at a general audience interested in the subject. Lastly, my paper holds several relatively useless sources that might have been better left off the drawing board as a result of rapidly grabbing a large amount of sources regardless of how useful they actually are to my paper. I hope to expand my schedule in researching so that I may more carefully observe and choose important sources for a future research paper.