• My biggest concern that I have after reviewing my first draft is that I don’t have enough evidence to support my claim. I know now that I am lacking quotes from Gee and Cuddy’s work that if I have I can better support my claim. I think I was assuming the reader knew what Gee and Cuddy were saying and have said without saying it. I think if I add more evidence, I will help the reader better understand the evidence given. I think in my final draft if I add more evidence, and expand on that evidence and why it applies to my central claim, I will have a strong essay.

 

• My peers liked how my paper was organized. They thought my paper had a clear claim and evidence, but it needed more evidence to make my claim stronger. Abigail commented that I had a, “skeleton” paper and I needed to beef it up more. I realize that more after peer review.

 

• I worked better with Cuddy than Gee. I more discounted Gee’s ideas and pushed more of Cuddy’s ideas in my essay. My peers suggested that the evidence that I have so far is good, but I need more quotes from each of them to better support my claim. Most of my evidence were Cuddy, and I was discounting Gee’s ideas without stating his ideas. I think if I add more of Gee’s ideas, I can better argue his ideas, and the evidence will be perceived better. Also they felt my quotes were more “hit and run” where I should have longer quotes with better explanations. If I build paragraphs around quotes and evidence, instead of my own personal, separate ideas, my claim will be stronger and be easier to understand to the reader. I plan on doing this and I plan to have this in my final draft.

 

• According to my peers my two biggest challenges was quoting the articles effectively and enough, and using those quotes to better support my claim. My plan for the next paper is to quote the articles more, explain why I am quoting the articles, and build on this quotes to better support my claim. I plan to quote Gee more because I glossed over his ideas and instead of quoting what he said, I said what I think he said. This is a lack of stating the other side to my claim and if I state the other side, I can point out why I think Gee is incorrect. Also I need to better state what Discourse is by quoting from Gee’s article what Discourse is and better explain what it is so the reader can have a strong foundation to the information given.

 

• After talking with my peers, I plan to give the reader more evidence with better explanations of the evidence. I believe if I do that, my claim will be clearer and stronger.