As I was writing my draft for paper one, I was worried about, not being able to make all of my ideas in an order that would make sense to the reader. As well as placing the quotes with a detailed introduction and have an in-depth commentary.
What my peers liked most about my paper was that it was clear what my opinion was about joining a new Discourse and using Gee and Cuddy to argue my point. As Heather stated, “It is also easy to follow since you compared and contrasted Gee and Cuddy with the relationship of their own versions of faking it until you make it.” She is saying that I was able to contrast the two authors very clearly. This was the idea I was hoping to achieve while completing my draft.
Where I work best with Gee is when I am quoting his first theorem about how you are either in a Discourse or you are not. However, I need to improve upon introducing his quotes. According to Heather, “Some of your quotes are confusing while reading, maybe works on introducing them more.” In the draft, some of my quotes from Gee do get confusing because I do not introduce them properly.
I work best with Cuddy while comparing and contrasting her with Gee. This is seen by Heather, “this shows your point of the paper and gives clear evidence of how they are not similar” An area to improve on is to add more commentary to my quotes about Cuddy to show why they fit in with my argument.
According to my peers, two things I need to work is, “Some of your quotes are confusing while reading, maybe work on introducing them more. I think it was just the ones that we’re talking about the student and when Cuddy was doubting herself.” (Heather) I can address this issue by going back through the essay and add more detail to my introduction so the reader understands as to why and how it is important to the claim. The second issue with my paper was the amount of evidence I used in a certain paragraph that was overwhelming to read, for example, what Hayden said, “There were times where there was too much evidence in a single paragraph.” I ended up placing too much evidence from the text into the paragraph, without providing enough commentary. To fix this I can make two or three different paragraphs, for the different pieces of evidence. This way different points in my claim will be separated and not confusing.
Overall the point of my essay is to prove that it is possible to join a new Secondary Discourse, by using Amy Cuddy’s rules on faking it until you become it. Furthermore, to argue against James Gee, that joining a secondary Discourse is almost impossible.
