Running head: FINAL REFLECTION

Final Reflection
Kristen Martin
Nevada State College

FINAL REFLECTION

2
Final Reflection

In English 102 this semester, I was required to write three separate essays. Paper 1 was a
letter to the writing center describing how I believed it could be improved. In Paper 1, I discussed
the gap in writing education for science undergraduates. Science undergraduates are required to take
two English courses, typically English 101 and 102. These courses are helpful, they teach grammar,
formatting, spelling, tone, audience, and voice. However, they do not cover other very important
topics for science undergraduates. Many things such as writing collaboratively to produce a single
research paper are swept under the carpet. Science undergraduates must be comfortable when it
comes to having others review their work. Generally, students are uncomfortable with peer reviews
and receiving critical feedback on their work. Unfortunately, students will need these skills later on
in life. For these reasons, I proposed that Nevada State College should introduce a series of Writing
in the Sciences courses to replace current English requirements. Writing in the Sciences would be centered
around one or two major papers. Students would be divided into small groups of three people and
work together to gather research and write a standard research paper. Students would gather
research and write different sections as the 'specialist' of their section and then collaborate with their
peers in order to create the finished paper. Students would be graded on their individual work which
would be submitted separately in addition to the final paper. In my paper I propose that the first
class could be graded on a letter grade scale for students to gauge their competency levels, but
graded on a pass or fail scale for the final course grade. This would allow students to focus more on
their work and getting a feel for writing collaboratively as opposed to their final grade. However, it
would also give students a good idea of how well they are performing in the course and an idea of
whether or not they are ready for the second class. The second class would be very similar to the
first, but would be graded solely on a letter grade scale. I then go on to discuss how the Writing
Center could help by advocating for the program and finding specialized science writing tutors. The

FINAL REFLECTION

first paper really got me excited about my topic. I wanted to conduct more research and find sources
to support my research. I believe that Paper one was the least difficult of all three papers. However,
the letter format was a bit confusing when it came to academic tone. In Paper one I stated, " If I sit
down and bust out my entire paper, it is usually pretty decent". I used the term 'bust out' casually, as
one would do in an informal letter. I also used contractions which I later learned were not formal
enough for the paper.
Going into Paper 2, I had no idea what a research proposal was. I had never even heard of a
research proposal before. I was having difficulty finding research for my paper because my topic was
so specific. Because I was focusing on Writing in the Sciences it was difficult to find research because it
is a relatively new idea and I could not find any colleges or universities that had already implemented
a similar program. In my methods section I discussed primary research that I was hoping to
conduct. I stated, "I would like to interview several more science professors, specifically Biology
professor Dr. Mantooth and Psychology professor Dr. Dunning". This turned out to be incredibly
difficult because the semester was running out and with Thanksgiving break in the way, I was unable
to conduct more staff interviews. I also found it incredibly difficult to contact either professor. I am
unable to see what classes they teach this semester for their availability and I cannot message any
professors that I am not enrolled in a class with via canvas. There is also no public database of staff
e-mail addresses or phone numbers on NSC's website, which meant that short of spotting them in
the hallway and cornering them for an interview, I was out of luck. Because of this, I relied heavily
on student surveys in the third paper. I was also not sure what to write in my discussion section of
Paper 2. I treated the discussion as more of a traditional conclusion paragraph. I summarized my
ideas and state my objectives for the next paper.

FINAL REFLECTION

Paper 3 was by far the most challenging paper in the class. By the time I reached the third
paper, I was sort of tired of my topic. I began the semester excited about my topic, but by
November it just felt like I was beating a dead horse. I felt like I did not have any new ideas when it
came to Writing in the Sciences. Because of this, I changed my topic to Writing in the Disciplines to make
the paper more convincing not only for science undergraduates, but for all undergraduates. I wanted
to discuss the domino effect that Writing in the Disciplines would have on students. In my conclusion I
summarize my thoughts, stating that, "Writing in the Disciplines is vital to undergraduate success, not
only for academic endeavors, but for personal goals as well. As Writing in the Disciplines students
continue along their degree path, they will have the tools they need to achieve a higher over-all
GPA, making them a stronger applicant for both graduate school and jobs, Writing in the
Disciplines allows students to gain adequate knowledge writing in their discipline and can set them
apart from other job applicants". I did not have any trouble finding research on the issues I wanted
to talk about: high student debt, lack of post-graduate jobs, and high competition for these limited
jobs. However, I did have issues when it came to evidence of the correlations I was making. The
correlations I made were mostly common sense: more experience writing in a designated field will
make students more qualified for post-graduate jobs, which will allow them to make more money,
which will allow them to pay off student debt faster. Unfortunately, I was not able to find any useful
research about the long-term benefits of a Writing in the Disciplines program because I could not find
any studies that follow students who have completed degree-specific writing courses. I think that to
make my research stronger, I would need to conduct a large scale survey of all the students in the
nation. I would also probably need to survey some of the top employers of new graduates to
determine if Writing in the Sciences would give students a competitive edge in the job market.
I have always felt quite comfortable with my skills as a writer. My grammar, spelling, flow,
academic tone, research, formatting (except in Word Online), and organization have always been at

FINAL REFLECTION

or above the level anticipated by instructors. I do not believe that any of these things have
improved, however, I do feel that I am more aware of the writing process. This course helped me to
understand the value of the writing process and the different techniques that can be used to write a
better paper. One of these ideas was the idea if 'shitty first drafts' presented in the article Shitty First
Drafts by Anne Lamott. In her article, Lamott defines 'shitty first drafts' as "The first draft is the
child's draft, where you let it all pour out and then let it romp all over the place, knowing that no
one is going to see it and that you can shape it later... If one of the characters wants to say, "Well, so
what, Mr. Poopy Pants?," you let her. No one is going to see it... Just get it all down on paper,
because there may be something great in those six crazy pages that you would never have gotten to
by more rational, grown-up means" (Lamott, 1). This article really made me reflect on my writing
process. I spent a lot of time editing as I wrote and it made it difficult to get all the thoughts that I
wanted onto the page. Lamott really made me think, "why do I do this to myself" and made me
more aware of my bad habits. For papers 2 and 3 I tried to create 'shitty first drafts' and leave the
editing process as just that, a separate process. I think that I did improve, although it is difficult to
break years of editing as I write. One of the things that really helped me was knowing that we would
have in-class peer review sessions. The peer review sessions were incredibly helpful and I am really
glad I was able to rely on getting some feedback on my papers.
As I continue my academic career, my topic throughout the semester has shown me what I
need to work on as a scientific writer. During my research and interview with Professor Sigel, I
realized that I need a much more experience when it comes to scientific writing. I hope to work
towards developing my skills by becoming even more comfortable with constructive criticism,
developing collaborative writing skills, and working on my ability to effectively produce a research
proposal. I will also continue to work towards 'shitty first drafts' and being more aware of my
personal writing process. I hope to spend more time editing and revising in the future and I hope I

FINAL REFLECTION
will get the chance to conduct more primary research in the form of surveys because that was
something I truly enjoyed.