Luis Mendoza

88424135
Professor Haas
Writing 37
December 6, 2014

So Fast
Sometimes how things sound are not really how they seem. When I signed up for writing
37, I got really intimidated by the course description .Writing 37, intense writing and rhetoric,
now that sounds pretty intimidating and that it seem like the course is going to b e very work
intensive. But as the course progressed I realized that even though the course sounded
challenging, it turned out to be manageable. This quarter was focused on the conventions of
the detective genre, as well as focusing on improving scholarly writing. Since the class focused
on conventions of the detective genre, I also learned how to analyze detective stories, in
particular Conan Doyles Sherlock Holmes stories. Throughout the class I learned how to
analyze scholarly texts and incorporate them into my essays, in order to add validity to them.
When I first started the class, I had my doubts on whether or not to drop the course. I was
intimidated when Professor Haas went over the course syllabus and explained all the essays we
would be writing. To someone like myself, who gets overwhelmed with writing lengthy essays, I
started having doubts whether I should stay in the class. However, I decided to stick through it
and as the the quarter progressed the course taught me many valuable skills that I can carry on
throughout my years at UCI.
The course taught me how to how to analyze the detective genre and scholarly tests,
but also how to work as a team, improve my proofreading skills, and my literature review and
rhetorical essay writing. During the first few weeks of the class we focused on the structure of
the detective story. I spent a great deal of time reading articles by scholars on what made the

detective genre unique, and what was necessary for the detective genre to become popular.
The texts we analyzed in the class were scholarly articles, written by scholars such as Leroy
Panek and George Dove. Due to the articles being between 20-30 pages in length I had some
trouble understanding the message from the author. The first time I read the scholarly articles I
was re-reading every sentence, trying to figure out what they were saying. The most
challenging part of the articles was the vocabulary, I read words I has no idea existed. In order
for me to effectively understand the authors message, I would read one page at a time and try
to analyze what the message was in that particular page. But here and there I would still get
puzzled, thankfully Professor Haas had also annotated the majority of the articles, and that
helped me with understanding what the scholars were talking about. But, the articles I focused
on the most and took the time to understand where, Leroy Paneks Beginnings and George
Doves Different Story. And although the vocabulary was challenging, after looking up a lot of
words and looking fro there simpler synonyms I was able to use the articles for the first essay of
the class. I used the two articles for my literature review, because they were the ones I
understood the most and focused on my idea for the review, in which I focused on what qualities
made the detective genre so popular.
The class also helped me develop a skill that I had no ideas was so useful, peer reviews.
Peer editing allows me to get the feedback I need for my essay without always having to go to
my professor. For our draft revising we would do peer reviews, which I found to be extremely
helpful. Its not only less stressful knowing a fellow peer is reviewing your essay, rather than your
professor. Although you do not get advice from the person grading your final paper, peer
reviews can be equally or more beneficial. The peer reviews were beneficial for me because it
gave me a chance to not only see what the person was missing or did well on their essay, but
also how they incorporated the requirements of the rubric within the essay. In a way the peer
reviewed gave me an example of what and what not to include within my own essay. Like
stated in the article we read in class, It is better to give than to to receive reviewing for others

helps you review and give ideas how to modify your own writing. My peer reviewers have also
helped me, such as Angerica whose comment on my RA Essay draft, helped me fortify my
thesis. But, I still have to work on being able to incorporate the rubric with my essay by myself.
But, the most important skill I think I have learned was that in writing there can still be
collaboration. Usually in other writing classes, teachers make you work on your own essay and
look for your own sources. But, what I liked about writing 37 was that for every assignment there
was some level of collaboration. The best form of collaboration for me where the class notes,
and how they were organized so that anyone could use them when needing sources or essay
topics. I also liked the fact that most of the time we were working in groups, for me that was
beneficial in that I didnt have to understand every essay or every article, since the workload
was divided among the class groups. Such as how even for the wiki presentations each group
was responsible for a sections of it, and then we would just present in class. The RIP
presentation, even though it is a good portion of our grade didn't feel as a huge workload
because we had it divided with in various groups in the class. And although we do work together
as a whole there is a lot of miscommunication and people need different group deadlines, since
we all have different schedules. The connect modules for me personally where redundant. I
could have gone without more than half the connect modules. But I the connect website very
faulty, well at least for me. Sometimes when I would be in the process of doing a module the
flash player would crash or I would get three questions right and the progress bar wouldnt
move. And for the most part I found the modules unnecessary, the only module I found really
helpful was the one that focused on developing an effective thesis. I actually paid attention to
that module since I knew thesis writing is a weakness for me. The other upside to the modules
was that they helped me identify my grammar and english weakness. According to the modules
i have a great deal of difficulty with critical reading. I can see why, because, when I read any
article or even story or novel, I tend to get very distracted. Sometimes I could be reading
weather by myself, or I could be reading out loud without processing what the words really

mean. So, thanks to the connect modules, I know to focus more on my reading and analyzing of
texts.
In the end I am glad I did not drop the course. The course has taught me so much, I
have learned responsibility, time management, and various forms of writing. The most
important lesson I learned was that in order to give validity to your writing, you have to use
recognized scholars that support your idea. The course also taught me, how to revise my essay
and seek help from my fellow peers. Another thing the course taught me was how to basically
do a writing class online. The fact that every day we meet in class we had to bring our laptops
and all the work was online. In a way that prepared me for other online based classes Im sure I
will encounter at UCI. Having the class online and having set due dates for every assignment
also helped me with my my time management. Mainly because if the essays I wrote had to be
printed out and due during class class I would probably do them the night before. But, since the
online writing studio had deadlines for our assignments I had to plan ahead and work around my
school and work schedule to make enough time to turn in my assignments on time. Overall, Im
glad I took Writing 37 with Professor Hass, and even though I never looked her up on Rate My
Professor, she turned out to be a great Professor. Professor Haass approachment to the
course and her teaching techniques truly did prepare me for my future writing courses at UCI.