Discussion (Weight: 5%) Learning Objectives: 1, 3, 5, 6 Review the rubric for this assignment by clicking on this link. Review the rubric for this assignment by clicking on this link. – Alternative

Discussion (Weight: 5%)

Learning Objectives: 1, 3, 5, 6 Review the rubric for this assignment by clicking on this link.  Review the rubric for this assignment by clicking on this link. – Alternative Formats

MAIN POST

For this discussion, Read the following essay: 

Murray, D. (2014) The maker’s eye: Revising your own writing. In G.H. Muller (Ed.), The McGraw-Hill reader: Issues across the disciplines pp. 109-113. McGraw-Hill. 

First, answer the following question found on p. 113 under “Writing.” 

Question 3: Writing an Argument: Murray suggests that revision is actually “fun” (paragraph 24).

• Do you agree or disagree? Write [a response] defending your position.
• Be sure to quote and cite Murray when writing your response.

Your response to this first prompt should be 100+ words.

Second, Read the article found here. What are “higher order concerns”? What are “lower order concerns”? Why are “higher order concerns” more important? How have you revised for them already or how will you revise for them? 

Your response to this second prompt should be 100+ words.

Third, what was the largest challenge you experienced in completing this research paper? What is one aspect about research that you believe is still challenging for you? What is one area that you have improved in? And what is one area of your work so far that you are proud of? 

Your response to this third prompt should be 100+ words.

TIP: Be sure to respond to all three questions in individual paragraphs.

PEER REPLIES

• In 100-150 words, respond to two peers’ main posts.  Offer your thoughts on ways your peer approaches the revision process. Identify any considerations or strategies that your peer may not have identified initially.
• Take a moment to check replies you receive to your own main post.