ENC 1102 E-Portfolio
By: Bradley Harman Cover Letter: As the semester of ENC 1102 progressed each student learned about the four main course outcomes. Each outcome has its own unique purpose for its relevance to the student in the class. They provide sort of a checklist that must be fulfilled by each student to show that they have mastered the course's learning requirements. In the following paragraphs I will argue my position that I have achieved all four course learning outcomes through various pieces of writing done throughout the semester. Outcome 1: The first course learning outcome states that the students will be able to analyze and synthesize complex texts in ways that demonstrate an understanding of the situation and intertextual nature of writing and research. One pathway that I used to achieve this course outcome was by demonstrating an understanding of key readings by using terms, concepts, and arguments from scholarly texts correctly. Shown in my Annotated Bibliography Cars Model paragraphs I was able to look at different pieces of secondary research and see the intertextual overlap as well as differences. For instance, when I stated that T.C. Rogers in AFROTC (AIR FORCE RESERVE OFFICERS' CORPS) "has had [trouble] communicating with a certain pool of individuals to recruit". Which I then compared that statement to Isaac Kyle's "Rhetorical Reflection on an Air Force IT Ad" and his issues attracting "diverse recruits to join the Air Force as a communication troop". This example shows how I have an understanding of complex texts and I am able to synthesize the intertextual information. Another example, on how I achieved this outcome can be shown when I stated that "Activity theory...allows us to look at particular groups to see how they function...[and] activity systems which allow more of a narrow frame which takes a closer look at the tools used in a particular group to get a certain outcome" (Harman, "Synthesis Grid"). That citation showed my ability to pick up on the authors main arguments in the "Activity Theory: An Introduction for the Writing Classroom" (Kain and Wardle). Outcome 2: This outcome says that students will engage in a recursive inquiry-based writing and research process that is meaningful for a specific community. The pathway I took to fulfill this outcome was developing and framing a research question that is relevant to a particular group. I chose to do research on the UCF Air Force ROTC program which qualified as an "activity system" by Kain and Wardle's definition "a group of people who share a common object...[who] act on that object and realize that motive" (398). Followed by my research question in my Research Paper on "how do members in the ROTC use genres/texts differently based on their military rank, level of expertise...and how does using genres create symbolic power for these individuals?" (Harman, "Research Paper", 3). These two examples show my ability to create a research question for a specific community and also one that is relevant to it. In my Research Proposal, I laid out my primary research plans which were to interview several cadets in my ROTC program "insuring a variety of different levels of expertise and ranks to question in my interviews" to gain a multitude of viewpoints within the chain of command (5). The pathway of researching, developing, and employing discipline-appropriate research methods was achieved when I conducted my three interviews (Cadet X "Email Interview", Cadet Y "Email Interview", Cadet Z "In Person Interview"). Outcome 3: The next outcome says students will be able to interpret their research findings in order to produce arguments that matter to specific communities by addressing real-world exigencies. The pathway that I took to complete this outcome was by writing persuasively and articulating the stakes of at least one argument (why what is being argued matters). Clearly shown in my Research Proposal in the "Justification" section when I spoke on why my research mattered and why it shouldn't be overlooked. Highlighted when I said, "more specifically it will allow for a better diffusion of knowledge related to how social standing within the program affects the types of genres these members use and also how they use them" (4). That citation definitely utilized all aspects of the pathway to answer the outcome. The next pathway I used to achieve the outcome was demonstrating a clear understanding of their audience and why their argument matters to that audience, with various aspects of the writing (mode of inquiry, content, structure, appeals, tone, sentences and word choice) being addressed and strategically oriented to that audience. I fulfilled this pathway with the use of my Coding Data Worksheet by identifying important word choice that would appeal to my audience in my research such as "Leadership", "Organization", "Authority", and "Superiors" (Harman, "Coding Data Worksheet"). Looking for specific codes in my research such as provisional, emergent and in-vivo codes helped to identify not only important words and phrases but also an overall theme. Outcome 4: The last outcome says students will examine their own conceptions of writing and research in response to their inquiry, reading, and writing throughout the course. The pathway I chose to follow to accomplish this outcome was demonstrating a meta-awareness of their growth as a writer and researcher over time by reflecting on their writing and research practices and products and making claims about their learning. The first piece of writing that shows this type of language is in my Annotated Bibliography Revision Memo. Specifically, when I stated that "I have learned that there is always room for improvement and that you are never done with your education with literacy...[and] always growing as a writer, speaker, reader" (Harman, "Annotated Bib Revision Memo"). The second pathway I used was employing acquired vocabulary for discussing the roles that writing and research play in a given community. I exemplified this in by stating that "this research project will allow for a better understanding...of what the affect that literate activities have on us...not to mention my research might spark further interest on the subject by others and could help foster more knowledge to be shared" (Harman, "Research Paper", 10).
Works Cited
Kain, Donna, and Elizabeth Wardle. “Activity Theory: An Introduction for the Writing Classroom.” Writing about Writing, 3rd ed., edited by Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Bedford/St. Martins, 2017, pp. 395-405
Kyle, Isaac.
“Rhetorical Reflection on an Air Force IT Ad.”
Produced in Vanessa Calkins’ Fall 2014 ENC 1101, pp. 1-4.
Rogers, T. C.
“AFROTC (AIR FORCE RESERVE OFFICERS’ TRAINING CORPS).”
The Air Power Historian, Vol. 5, No. 4 (OCTOBER 1958), pp. 234-244
X, Cadet. Email Interview. 4 March 2019.
Y, Cadet. Email Interview. 4 March 2019.
Z, Cadet. Personal Interview. 25 February 2019.
Works Cited
Kain, Donna, and Elizabeth Wardle. “Activity Theory: An Introduction for the Writing Classroom.” Writing about Writing, 3rd ed., edited by Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs. Bedford/St. Martins, 2017, pp. 395-405
Kyle, Isaac.
“Rhetorical Reflection on an Air Force IT Ad.”
Produced in Vanessa Calkins’ Fall 2014 ENC 1101, pp. 1-4.
Rogers, T. C.
“AFROTC (AIR FORCE RESERVE OFFICERS’ TRAINING CORPS).”
The Air Power Historian, Vol. 5, No. 4 (OCTOBER 1958), pp. 234-244
X, Cadet. Email Interview. 4 March 2019.
Y, Cadet. Email Interview. 4 March 2019.
Z, Cadet. Personal Interview. 25 February 2019.