How I write

         My writing process is rather simple, honestly. First off, I either sit down and search for some information on the topic, just a broad overview if I can find it, to get the idea of the material so I can decide on a thesis statement. After that, I begin looking for information pertaining to my statement, mostly things that support it, but also some issues with it because if it's being supported by everything, it seems to me like it's too unrealistic. All or most of this is done on the computer, firstly because it's a more easily accessible source of information, and secondly because there's more information there. I write down a few of the most important facts and points that happened or are relevant to the topic and my thesis statement, then form those into an outline. After I've got a functional outline, I first make a rough introduction paragraph, mainly to lay out how I think I want things to flow at first. Nothing too concrete, but something that works to start it. Once that's done, I start on the body, usually going with chronological order if that's applicable, but if not, I usually go with the most 'well-known' aspect of what I'm writing about first, since it appeals to people if they read about something they know about.
        Once the body is completed, I read back through what I've written and correct or change things if it seems to work better or was just outright wrong. After that, I read it yet again or give it to someone else to read, and decide if my stance remained the same throughout the paper. If it did, I refine the rough introduction from earlier into one that can serve as a true introduction. If not, I re-write the entire introduction and rethink my thesis for my new stance on the topic. After the introduction is completed either way, I start on the conclusion. I find it notably easier to do than the introduction most of the time, because it's usually simply re-specifying your thesis and stating the most important parts of the paper itself. Usually, I consider a paper finished after reaching that point and after the person I previously had read it agrees that it is completed.
          Now, if you were asking "Well, where are you while doing this? What are you doing?", this will answer it. For nearly all of my time writing, I'm secluded up in my room, not listening to anything. Any music just distracts me, I stop writing and start to watch Youtube or something, so I sit there with headphones on for no reason at all. The majority of the time, I have a glass of tea or something similar to drink while writing, unless there was not any mixed or made, in which case I just drink water. I've got a spare spiral to write these things down in, but it's not for anything or any class in specific, and is just filled with random notes on random pages. Roughly every half-hour to hour, I'll take a break for a few minutes, go get a snack or something if I'm hungry, watch a video for a few, then get back to work. I think that should answer a few questions about that, but I really don't know what would be asked, and am bad at anticipating questions, so I can't actually answer everything.

Literacy Lookback

           I personally think, that I did at least a decent job on my Literacy Narrative, however, I am also aware that there is always room for improvement. First and foremost, I know that I need to learn to use descriptive language more effectively, because while I can use basic descriptions, more specific words escape me, on occasion. As for the paper itself, I do wish I'd done a bit more research as to my early literacy history, since I do not remember much about that time aside from my mother reading to my brother and I. Along with adding more in that area, I believe that I could have gone into more detail when it comes to my middle school years, as I did not elaborate on what exactly I did read, when I read. Those are, honestly, the only things that come to mind when I think about corrections from a writing standpoint. From a writing process standpoint, however, I do have something that very clearly, even to me, needs improvement. That being, I usually dislike writing an outline, if I can avoid it, I will. Obviously, I wrote one for the paper, but that is just from a broad standpoint. If I had to select one specific flaw when it comes to my writing process, that would definitely be it. So, there you have it. My reflections on the paper about my own Literacy History.
   
                                                                                                                 

Murray & Strasser

              According to Murray, all writing is autobiography. The reason for him  to say this is because whenever someone writes anything, they write it in their own individual way. The words they chose, the tone they take, the way they see the world, and the way they think. It's all their own, personal way of writing, neither right nor wrong. If one had to categorize the separate reasons, it would probably end up being a split between things that readers can actively see, such as the words that are chosen and the tone taken, and things that are important and noticeable to the writer, like the way the world is seen and how they think.
              Murray's arguments probably wouldn't change the way I write all too much, if he's correct about them, since changing it would be doing the exact opposite of what he's saying is writing. However, they probably would change the way I think about it because, as of now, I really don't purposefully put too much of myself into most writing assignments, though it obviously does happen.
            As for the last few papers, texts, what-have-you, that I've written, most of them are considered autobiographies in the way that's described, because I always write things in my own way. What I mean by that, is of course that I write everything from my own point of view and state of mind, without trying to back up and act like someone else.


         She says this because, if you're not enjoying what you're writing, then you're not properly using your skills in writing. The reasoning that I think is behind this, is that you can't write anything truly good, something that's worth being acclaimed and praised, unless it's something that you actually enjoy researching and writing about. Personally, I can agree with that. It's incredibly boring to write about something that doesn't interest you, and there's no way you can use your skills to the fullest doing it.
           There is nothing stated directly that Fish's students won't be able to create "meaningful" writing, but I can see why she would believe that. If you constantly pound something into some one's head, like Fish seems to be doing with Grammar, they will end up memorizing it, but at the same time, they'll hate it because they've had to do so much of it, and so much of the same thing at that, over and over. In short, she probably is right to assume that at least some of Fish's students won't be able to get anywhere writing, but others probably will at the same time, if only because of how people work.

Finally, from personal experience, I can say that school does indeed separate your mind, body and spirit. It's so droning, so repetitive, that by the time you're finally finished and ready to move on, you've been taught, even if it was unintentional, that school must always be something that you resent.







  

"Skills to be Learned"

          Of the listed skills, the one that I am probably the least familiar with is the MLA formatting/citations and the like. Now, obviously, I know how to post citations themselves, and I know the reason that they're necessary, but overall, I'm not too experienced with actually using them due to not having to write all too many essays in school. Another issue that arises from that section, is that I don't even own Microsoft Word. For whatever reason, my computer didn't come with it installed, so I've had to just use OpenOffice instead, as it's free.
          I suppose another area where I lack experience is in critiquing others' work, as I was home-schooled from my freshman year of high school onwards. The reasons behind that are various, but it boils down to the school that I live in the district for being less than stellar. Anyway, due to being home-schooled, the opportunities for me to actually look at the work of other students were slim at best, for reasons I believe are somewhat obvious.
          Next on the list, is probably C, "Compose an effectively organized essay that focuses on a clear purpose and develops major points that support it's main idea(s) in reasonable effective ways." I've always had issues with finding a way to properly end off an essay, either that, or I accidentally make it go for too long because I get slightly off topic and can't find a proper transition to use to get back on topic. The reason for this is probably at least partially because I don't like to talk in front of people too much, so I tend to ramble on with writing in place of it, or something along those lines. As for why I want to improve, it's lost me points on papers a couple of times, and for such a stupid and easily resolved reason, I think it'd be odd if I didn't want to.
         I guess for the final one, it'd have to be letter B. When it comes to the whole 'writing process' with planning, drafting, and so on, I've never really been all too enthusiastic about it, because I've always thought it was somewhat annoying. Obviously necessary, but still annoying and bothersome, since, unless it was required, I've always had the bad habit of jumping headfirst into a paper with not too much planning, and editing and revising as I go along. A terrible habit, I know, but it's one I've got because I'm very impatient with things and dislike it taking more than a week or so to actively finish a paper.
         So, there you have it. The areas, in order, that I believe need work more so than others with my writing. Apologies if it's a bit longer than requested since as I've said, I'm not the best at actually limiting my words.