Overall, I thought your paper was really interesting! Before reading it, I probably knew nothing about what goes into different types of academic and non-academic writing for authors but now I defiantly have a better grasp of this topic. The paper was very well organized, which helped me understand when you were talking about academic writing and when you were talking about non-academic writing. Most of the paper flowed really well, but there were a few places (that I will address in the following paragraphs) that I thought you could use some more background information to help give the reader more details about the topic. One area that I thought could use more explanation was the first two paragraphs in the academic section. While I liked how you split up the two different audiences that authors write for, I think it would be helpful to your reader if you analyzed more how these two different types of writing differ. For example, after you talk about writing for those who study creative writing from an academic standpoint, it might be helpful to add an paragraph that discusses the similarities and differences between writing for these two audiences. This will provide an effective transition to the next section about writing about teaching creative writing. Another area that I thought could use more explanation how you integrate the stories you reference. For example, in the last paragraph on page 4, you talk about a work by Hegamin and provide an outline of the structure, but do not go into much detail about about how the structure helped her argument. You need to remember that your audience is college freshman who have not read these works, so a little more explanation and use of quotes would help the reader better understand the points you are trying to make, because I think all the points are really good but could be confusing if you do not know the writer you are talking about. A final suggestion I have is to better introduce your interview. When you bring up Bergren in the first paragraph of the non-academic section, you do not tell the reader that she is the one you interviewed. I really like all the quotes you provide from that interview, but the reader (if they did not know that an interview was required for this assignment) might not know you interviewed this person until you cite a personal communication in the second paragraph of page 6.
Overall, I thought your paper was really interesting! Before reading it, I probably knew nothing about what goes into different types of academic and non-academic writing for authors but now I defiantly have a better grasp of this topic. The paper was very well organized, which helped me understand when you were talking about academic writing and when you were talking about non-academic writing. Most of the paper flowed really well, but there were a few places (that I will address in the following paragraphs) that I thought you could use some more background information to help give the reader more details about the topic.
ReplyDeleteOne area that I thought could use more explanation was the first two paragraphs in the academic section. While I liked how you split up the two different audiences that authors write for, I think it would be helpful to your reader if you analyzed more how these two different types of writing differ. For example, after you talk about writing for those who study creative writing from an academic standpoint, it might be helpful to add an paragraph that discusses the similarities and differences between writing for these two audiences. This will provide an effective transition to the next section about writing about teaching creative writing.
Another area that I thought could use more explanation how you integrate the stories you reference. For example, in the last paragraph on page 4, you talk about a work by Hegamin and provide an outline of the structure, but do not go into much detail about about how the structure helped her argument. You need to remember that your audience is college freshman who have not read these works, so a little more explanation and use of quotes would help the reader better understand the points you are trying to make, because I think all the points are really good but could be confusing if you do not know the writer you are talking about.
A final suggestion I have is to better introduce your interview. When you bring up Bergren in the first paragraph of the non-academic section, you do not tell the reader that she is the one you interviewed. I really like all the quotes you provide from that interview, but the reader (if they did not know that an interview was required for this assignment) might not know you interviewed this person until you cite a personal communication in the second paragraph of page 6.