WRT 205 Reflection
My Unit 2 Research Portfolio, Net Neutrality was my worst text in the course. My format stifled my ability to discuss key words and passages. Additionally, I didn’t fully understand the concept of uses and limits. For uses, I did not understand that I was supposed to try to identify specific aspects of the text that serve as insights that I could build off of in my own writing. Similarly, for limits, I should be identifying limits of the source's argument, not limits of the topic/subject the source is discussing. The range of texts I included in my portfolio really shows me how writing is a situational activity. The situation dictates my tone and has an impact on my voice. My revision process is not for content, that gets adjusted during the writing phase. after walking away for a bit, i come back with fresh eyes and revise for flow and how it sounds.
In the first week of this class I said that civic discourse is dead. Through this class, I have realized that we are killing civil discourse on our own. As citizens, what we can do to better facilitate civic discourses is to be able to embrace discomfort and to be open to all opinions. By making my own argument I learned that if we actually listen to the opposing view, rather than just wait for them to stop talking so that we can “prove them wrong,” then we can again engage in civic discourse. I will use this lesson in my other classes and all future writing - in and out of school.
I believe that civil discourse is not still alive. If civil discourse is defined as citizens having intelligent and open minded discussions, then it is dead. People think they want free speech, but they only want free speech if it is the same ideas that they have. Everyone thinks that they are open-minded. However, various people are only open-minded to those with the same view as their own. At various colleges “such divergent actions as writing letters in opposition to campus speakers, or shouting at them when they get to campus” (NBC), have become so routine that the administration is considering canceling speakers all together. Also, as stated by the Washington Examiner, “Americans say political correctness has silenced discussions that society needs to have.” We are killing civil discourse on our own. As citizens, what we can do to better facilitate civic discourses is to be able to embrace discomfort and to be open to all opinions. If we actually listen to the opposing view, rather than just wait for them to stop talking so that we can “prove them wrong,” then we can again engage in civic discourse.
In the first week of this class I said that civic discourse is dead. Through this class, I have realized that we are killing civil discourse on our own. As citizens, what we can do to better facilitate civic discourses is to be able to embrace discomfort and to be open to all opinions. By making my own argument I learned that if we actually listen to the opposing view, rather than just wait for them to stop talking so that we can “prove them wrong,” then we can again engage in civic discourse. I will use this lesson in my other classes and all future writing - in and out of school.
I believe that civil discourse is not still alive. If civil discourse is defined as citizens having intelligent and open minded discussions, then it is dead. People think they want free speech, but they only want free speech if it is the same ideas that they have. Everyone thinks that they are open-minded. However, various people are only open-minded to those with the same view as their own. At various colleges “such divergent actions as writing letters in opposition to campus speakers, or shouting at them when they get to campus” (NBC), have become so routine that the administration is considering canceling speakers all together. Also, as stated by the Washington Examiner, “Americans say political correctness has silenced discussions that society needs to have.” We are killing civil discourse on our own. As citizens, what we can do to better facilitate civic discourses is to be able to embrace discomfort and to be open to all opinions. If we actually listen to the opposing view, rather than just wait for them to stop talking so that we can “prove them wrong,” then we can again engage in civic discourse.