Graduation Portfolio Reflection
As I am in the process of compiling a collection of my most valued written pieces, I can’t
help but sincerely reflect on myself, not just as an obligation, but as a genuine moment of
assessment of my growth as a writer over my entire collegiate career here at Georgia State
University. I acknowledge how integral the education under this concentration has been in
shaping my overall academic interests, leading to my career path as a law student and a future
attorney. I can honestly say that I am grateful for selecting Advanced Composition and Rhetoric
as my concentration for the past 3 years of academic study. In this final reflection piece, I will
include and elaborate on one piece from each of the following courses: Engl 3050: Introduction
to Rhetoric and Composition, Engl 3080: History, Theory, and Practice of Argumentative
Writing, Engl 3105: Practical Grammar, Engl 3130: Business Writing, Engl 3140: Editing, and
Engl 4320: Senior Seminar in Rhetoric and Composition. This reflection will be organized
chronologically from my first rhetoric course to Senior Seminar.
My first rhetoric and composition course, believe it or not, was not the Introduction to
Rhetoric and Composition, but rather, Practical Grammar—a class I thought more suitable for
myself, as I wanted to regain the basics in structuring coherent sentences and rehash the rules of
grammar to refresh myself on the proper mechanics of writing. Because this class focused more
on sentence diagrams and the writing rules of engagement, there was no formal written piece
required for this course. Instead, we were advised to submit an old written piece from another
course that we would peer review and edit to create more lucid sentences. Of course, I took this
opportunity to revise a piece that needed revision from my Comparative Politics class rather than
another English course (unfortunately, we don’t get the pleasure of peer review in courses
outside of English). Under Engl 3105 in my portfolio, you will find a paper entitled, “Regime
Change in Ukraine.” For this essay, we watched a short film in class, The Orange Revolution,
and were required to submit a write up, with the instructor being our audience, addressing the
following topics: the nature of Yanukovych’s regime and the issues against him, the demands of
the protesters and the nature of the protest, and the factors that prevented the revolution from
happening. As I was writing this paper, I gave no extra effort in making sure it was
grammatically correct, because I was prideful in thinking as an English major, I had the upper
hand in this assignment and my graduate teaching assistant wouldn’t know how to spot the
minute grammatical errors I may have had if he had tried. Of course, I was thinking I had no
errors, but oh, how I was wrong! When I submitted it for review in my Practical Grammar
course, Dr. Lopez tore it apart with revision after revision. Title change, misused words,
subject/verb agreement, tense change, clarity, spelling errors (who makes these type of mistakes
with spell check?), and then more clarity, clarity, subject/verb agreement, tense change again,
and a little more clarity. As embarrassing as it was, I knew shifting in tenses, subject/verb
agreement, and clarity were all reoccurring weaknesses in my writing style. These were
weaknesses I was constantly reprimanded of in high school, along with repetition issues that I
resolved before I graduated. I suppose taking Practical Grammar as my first rhetoric course was
a wise decision; ever since the completion of this course, I no longer ran into issues of
subject/verb agreement and tense change. My sentence clarity had improved, but it wasn’t
necessarily abolished by the completion of this course. It took a few more rhetoric courses to
hone that skill.
The next rhetoric course I took was during the summer in an editing class, again with Dr.
Lopez. At the time of choosing this course, I thought it only logical that an editing course would
pair well with the completion of a practical grammar course. First I learn the rules, I thought,
then I learn how to spot them being misused. Under Engl 3140 in my portfolio, you will find an
essay entitled, “The Elements of Legal Writing and Editing.” I chose this specific piece because
like Practical Grammar, there weren’t many papers written in this course. Editing pre-written
documents was the course’s main focus. Furthermore, the object of this assignment was to write
a short paper about our career interest, involving editing as a profession in our chosen field. My
aspiration is law school, so I researched editing in the legal field. The paper includes the different
types of legal writing and editing, the responsibilities of both the writer and the editor, and the
job outlook of the profession. The audience, again, was the instructor. Moreover, as I began to
assess my work, I didn’t necessarily find the same mistakes I struggled with before—
subject/verb agreement, tense change, and clarity—but rather, I found a new issue that I am still
faced with, even as I write this final reflection. I noticed in the “The Elements of Legal Writing
and Editing” piece that I used “to be” verbs so profusely that it made my writing seem weak. Of
course, over my time as a rhetoric and composition student, I have learned how to avoid using
those verbs when I wish; however, in the particular assignment for the editing course, I failed to
realize the effect of the abundance of “to be” words in my writing. Yes, I am still using them
even now. However, I have learned the effects of “to be” verbs and have mastered how to rid my
papers of them when necessary to enhance and strengthen my writing. It is not an easy task, but
it can be done. I only wish I was aware during the editing course of how the abundant use of “to
be” weakened my writing as a whole.
During my junior year, I took on both Engl 3080: History, Theory, and Practice of
Argumentative Writing, and Engl 3050: Introduction to Rhetoric and Composition, both with Dr.
Lopez yet again. I know it may seem out of order that I took the introductory course to my
concentration just last semester; however, for my personal need as a writer, I preferred Practical
Grammar and Editing for the enhancement of my writing in general before I entered into the
concentrated study of specifically rhetoric. First, under Engl 3050, you will find my piece,
“Rhetoric as an Integral Element of Courtroom Practices.” The purposes for this assignment was
to research a person, time period, issue, or debate in rhetoric and composition and create either
an informative or persuasive paper focused on an academic audience. I chose a persuasive piece
on how rhetoric is an integral element of courtroom practices, and I concentrated primarily on
Aristotle’s forensic branch of rhetoric. I appreciated this assignment more so for the research
element rather than the actual end product of the piece. I chose to include this writing in my
portfolio because the research shows how my career interests are directly related to rhetoric, and
in fact, relies on rhetoric as a fundamental tool that must be mastered under a law profession.
Furthermore, under Engl 3080, you will find two pieces: an analysis entitled, “The Benefits of an
English Degree,” and an argument entitled, “The Necessity of Plea Bargaining.” I chose to
include both papers because they are my greatest pieces of writing from this class and they
highlight the two types of writing assignments this class required from us. The analysis was
simply us gathering an article and analyzing the effectiveness of the writer. I specifically chose
Michael Bérubé’s article, “My view: What will you do with an English degree? Plenty.” because
of the content and how it directly related to me as an English major. The issues he discusses, as
you will read in my portfolio, are all issues I have faced because I chose English as my major
over business or political science. On the contrary, I chose to write about a topic that has little to
do with my major in my piece, “The Necessity of Plea Bargaining.” Instead, I argued on one of
the major controversial topics in the legal sphere about the constitutionality of plea bargains and
whether or not they are necessary in the criminal justice system. My argument was that although
the bargaining system may be controversial for its many reasons, it still proves constitutional and
most necessary and proper for the balance it provides to the criminal justice system. Overall, I
appreciated this assignment for the liberty of choosing our own topics and audience to argue to. I
had a difficult time in completing this assignment because it took more critical thinking to
construct this argument than I had anticipated. However, I am proud of the outcome.
Finally, I am currently enrolled in both Engl 3130: Business Writing with Professor
Paxton-Wilson and Engl 4130: Senior Seminar with Dr. Hocks. Unfortunately, because we are
only midway through the semester, I have no final or major paper projects to submit for review
from either class, but rather smaller writing assignments that I still deem appropriate for
submission. For Engl 3130, I chose an analysis and a rewrite of a poorly written insurance letter.
The requirements of the assignment was to review the insurance letter from Allied Mutual Auto
Insurance, analyze it, and re-write it as if we were the insurance company writing a letter to Eric
& Nancy Soderholm, the recipients of the original letter. Evaluating this piece was effortless.
The assignment itself was like second nature for me. Out of the numerous English courses I have
taken as a student at GSU, writing an effective analysis is definitely a skill I have honed over the
past couple of years. I remember my first analysis as a freshman, with no understanding of what
an effective analysis even was. Now, as a senior, rhetoric student, an analysis may just be the
easiest piece of writing I can create. Furthermore, under Engl 4130 of my portfolio, you will find
three short writing responses. Writing response one will be an emotional, physical, and
intellectual response to the song “Johnny & Donna” by Mali Music. Writing response two will
be an emotional reaction to an environmental soundscape, and writing response three will be a
reflection of a short voice recording of a public event. I specifically included all three of these
critical thinking and writing assignments because of the task of expanding on the critical thinking
questions versus the content of the responses that I made. These three critical thinking and
writing pieces contributed some of the most vivid, intellectual responses that I have ever created
as a writer. Again, I stress that it’s not the content of my response; because if I could, I would go
back through these assignments and provide a more eloquent response for you to read. However,
the assignments themselves were the most thought provoking assignments I have had as a
rhetoric student. They have allowed me to think in such a critical way that I actually found these
assignments as a bit of a challenge, but a healthy challenge as it relates to molding me into an
effective writer. Thus, I included all three pieces because they are the most influential writing
projects I have had in all my three years as a student of this concentration. Give me any topic,
and I can write whatever is asked of me, but tell me to physically, emotionally, and intellectually
analyze a thirty second sound snippet—now that requires me to think.
All and all, I am grateful that I chose such a rewarding concentration such as advanced
composition and rhetoric. Before I began taking courses under this concentration, I had only the
slightest idea of what rhetoric even was. At the beginning of English 3050, Dr. Lopez asked us,
“What is rhetoric?” And as I sat there absent minded, silent, avoiding eye contact with Dr.
Lopez, and waiting for the more intellectual students to answer the question, I realized how little
I honestly knew of the educational subject that will one day shape my entire perspective of the
art and skill of writing and how it directly correlates with my present career goals. Even now, I
realize it’s not about what I didn’t know, but rather, what I was oblivious to. Once the definition
of rhetoric was shouted out, “The art of persuasion,” we began to learn how rhetoric is all around
us, incorporated in almost everything. Through each of these rhetoric courses, I have gained, not
just an understanding of rhetoric, but of what constitutes “good writing.” As a first year student, I
had in my mind that there was only one formula in writing a good paper: five paragraphs, each a
page long, filled with big, lofty words to sound intellectually advanced, and absolutely no
inclusion of the word “you.” From this wrong thinking stemmed all of my writing issues: clarity,
subject/verb agreement, repetition, and tense changes. After taking courses like Practical
Grammar, Editing, Introduction to Rhetoric—they all contributed in my new found
understanding of what it means to be a “good writer”, and the liberty that is bestowed upon a
writer once he or she has mastered the basics of grammar and mechanics, identifying an
audience, and differentiating between the different types of writing to suit an intended purpose.
As I prepare for law school, I will take every skill I have adopted from being a rhetoric and
composition student, and use it toward my success as a future lawyer. There couldn’t have been a
better major and concentration to prepare me for such an academic career. As I have done my
research on the impact of English as a major entering law school, I have found that those who
have learned to think and write critically and analytically are those who prosper beyond all else.
The District Attorney of Fulton County, an alumnus of Emory, my dream law school, has fully
agreed that with English as my major, I am exactly where I need to be to succeed.