Critique #3 Postmortem

Critique #3 was allot easier than the previous critiques. The subject that was being discussed was allot shorter to go over and did not require too much work to investigate and analyze. The two previous critiques analyzed two articles, while this critique analyzed faulty instructions. I did make some changes to the draft that I prepared to turn in on Tuesday. I reread it and added more in-depth discussion in the response section, and I rewrote the response part of the executive summary section. I made the changes because I thought that less discussion on my response needed to be in the executive overview, and more discussion of my response needed to be in the actual response section. I also thought that the detailed overview needed to be the same length as the response, like in the previous critiques, and I simplified my response in the first draft to accommodate that requirement. I started this assignment on sunday and finished it on sunday. The time frame for this paper was allot shorter than on other papers due to the complexity of the assignment. The topic that the critique discussed was not more complex than the previous topics and therefore required less time to organize my thoughts and write the paper. The main thing that surprised me about this writing assignment was how short the detailed summary was. The detailed summary was small due to the lack of instructions provided, and therefore that was the easiest part about the writing assignment. Usually the detailed summary is one of the harder parts of the critique because it requires the condensing of what the paper assignment discusses, but in this case it was different. The hardest part was organizing my response and condensing it to fit on one page. I would tell someone attempting this assignment to be open-minded about it and be organized when writing it.


Critique #2 Postmortem

This writing assignment was allot less time consuming than the first major critique. I also gained interest as I was reading the essay I critiqued, which did not happen in the first major critique. With this writing assignment I felt like my thoughts were organized a little bit better than with the first assignment. I started reading the essay last night and I actually wrote the essay this morning. I completed the essay this morning and it took me about an hour to do so. This time frame was allot smaller than the time frame for previous papers. With previous papers I take my time because I felt as if I had nothing to say, but with this paper I felt like I had more to say about the subject of the paper. What surprised me about doing this writing assignment was how I felt when I finished the assignment. I was dissatisfied with the amount of writing I had done. I actually wished I was able to write more, but due to the length constraint, I was not able to do so. The hardest part about the assignment was condensing my paper into specific points and summaries that could all fit on one page. The easiest part about the assignment was actually writing the paper. I knew what I had to say during and after reading the essay. The process by which I proofread and copyedited my paper involved writing different versions of what I had to say, and making sure the right point of view was used. On the final critique assignment I would try to start earlier. Although the whole process was done in a short time frame, I could have had more time to rest and work on other assignments if I had not waited until the last minute to work on this assignment. Regarding staying the same, I would keep an optimistic attitude towards the assignment. I was more optimistic about reading the essay than I usually am about essays, which resulted in me enjoying the essay. I would tell someone attempting to do this essay to go into the process with a positive attitude and start on it earlier.

Major Writing Assignment #1 Postmortem

The Major Writing Assignment #1, or MWA #1, was similar when compared to my writing assignments in previous english classes due to the length and quality of the assignment. The length of the paper was similar to previous papers in the way that previous papers required around 4-6 pages, and the MWA #1 required 5-7 pages. In the subject of quality, previous papers required an in-depth discussion of a certain topic, and similarly, the MWA #1 required an analytical discussion of the different genres of writing in the engineering discipline. When compared to writings done in engineering courses, the MWA #1 was not so similar. In engineering courses, the writing is typically 1-2 pages and it includes a discussion based solely on data and calculations. The MWA #1 was started on Monday February 18, 2013, and was completed on Thursday February 21, 2013. The time frame was a lot shorter than presious papers, but that was due to procrastination and poor time-management. One thing that surprised me about the paper was how easy it was to write after I deeply thought about what I wanted to say. Usually I put off writing assignments until the last minute because I feel as if I have nothing to talk about. In the MWA #1, I thought about what I wanted to say and just wrote as if I was having a conversation with someone. The hardest part of the assignment was actually sitting down to write the essay, and the easiest part of the assignment was writing about each sample genre. The process by which I proofread my paper was by rereading what I wrote and determining the tense of the paper, and subject that I wanted to get across. If the subject that I was trying to get across was made, then there was no revision needed, but if not, revisions were made. On the next assignment I will need to start earlier and be optimistic about what I am writing about. I would keep my enthusisam while writing the paper the same. For someone that is attempting to do this assignment for the first time, I would advise them to start on the assignment early and outline what they want to write about.