Jilver Mazariegos

Scott Learner
Writing 39C
26 August 2015
Reflective Introduction
Writing is essential, it is a mode of compiling thoughts and articulating them into words
to deliver a specific message to the audience. Writing is a bridge that connects peers and
individuals of society to communicate a prevalent notice, problem, or task. Writing delivers
skills needed for academic excellence in any area whether it be in social sciences or
mathematics. Ever so, writing is a difficult task. It is strenuous and difficult. It is a task that
requires patience and practice. It is a task that always can be improved. And as such, the chasm
that exists within my writing skills is still present, however it is slowly diminishing. Throughout
the time in Writing 39C: Argument and Research, I have improved my writing through rigorous
revision and complicated research.
Throughout 39C, a process of continually pre-writing, drafting, and revising was
prevalent. These seemingly menial tasks demanded time and a lot of it; however, they do serve
an important purpose. An important factor in determining the structure of my essay was framing
the question into a research proposal. The main question I initially began having with my
historical analysis essay was what question do I have about a contemporary issue. Since the class
had an open discussion about important questions regarding Alexander's book I wrote this
excerpt, "one major problem discussed that Alexander and West are connoting is the idea that
racial segregation and discrimination through disenfranchisement, public benefits, and housing
have not vanished, disappeared but have been transformed into a new redesigned to adhere to

contemporary society social change through civil movements and formations." This excerpt
provided a question that I wanted to research, however the question was too broad. Segregation
and discrimination could not be discussed within the same historical analysis essay, in essence, I
had to choose what was the most prevailing question that can acquire an abundance of
contemporary information. I chose to follow the segregation question. This was still too broad, I
had to reframe the question according to the type of segregation that Alexander conveys. Two
main points are argued by Alexander, the first being segregation from prison confinement and
then segregation from society through incarceration. The basis of the historical analysis was from
segregation from society through residential discrimination. Through the process of reforming
the main question, I was able to answer a prevalent question, what were the reasons behind
residential segregation for African Americans after incarceration? This question yielded research
articles that were relevant into my essay such as this except from the final Historical Analysis
essay "Despite African Americans having the highest support in terms of ending racial
segregation than any other ethnic/ minority group, residential exclusion remains very high with
many metropolitan and high congested cities still suffering from racial exclusion. This can be
supported by the National Index of Dissimilarity which found that the "United states declined
from .70 in 1990 to .66 to 2000" (Williams)". Through reframing my initial question, it allowed
the ability for my essay to have a coherent structure and thesis that allowed the essay to function
as a historical analysis. Although the process was difficult, learning to reframe questions allowed
multiple scholarly sources that enriched my essay.
Another struggle I had through the composition process of the historical analysis essay
was the merging of evidence to make a coherent meaning. This was a difficult task simply
because most of the sources provided different statistics and evaluations of issues that were

under the domain of residential segregation but were referring to later time dates. An example
was from my final historical project "Within contemporary society segregation still exist even
after many civil laws creating desegregation. The segregation of African Americans is very
distinctive . Most immigrant group have experienced some degree of discrimination or
segregation but not such as 'under the high levels of high segregation that currently exists for the
African American' (Williams). In fact, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 did make discrimination of
housing units illegal however 'studies reveal that subtle and explicit discrimination in housing
persists '(Williams). Despite African Americans having the highest support in terms of ending
racial segregation than any other ethnic/ minority group, residential exclusion remains very high
with many metropolitan and high congested cities still suffering from racial exclusion. This can
be supported by the National Index of Dissimilarity which found that the 'United states declined
from .70 in 1990 to .66 to 2000' (Williams)." This except conveys an issue I had in the beginning
of this source, source integration. The academic sources were helpful in conveying a pressing
issue, however the sources hardly blended together to make the essay more organized. This issue
had to be fixed and over the course of this class, I was able to find academic works that
coinciding with each other. For example this excerpt of the final Advocacy draft, "Bushway
argues that these domains are particularly important for ex-felons because of the role they play in
the process of desistance. In other words these bans creates a hopeless environment that can trap
an ex-offender and provide little incentive to adopt a pro-social attitude. There exists evidence
that as the prevalence of lifetime bans has increased and so has recidivism rates (Travis) so much
so that 'The 3-year reconviction rate of drug offenders increased by 33% from 1983 to 1994'
(Hughes and Wilson). The preeminent way to abolish these bans and to stop ex-felons from
being re-incarcerated is to create new policy's that limit's lifetime bans into period bans. Such a

policy will include as Bush way discuses; sunset clauses for individuals who meet standards on
conduct otherwise going 'straight for more than 7 to 10 years' (Bushway). By allowing ex-felons
to eliminate bans through proper conduct and proper protocols on a free crime life, allows
multiple opportunities for employment and housing". This excerpt illustrates the change from an
argument from one single author to many authors in order to create a strong main argument from
multiple sources. I learned the ability to find multiple articles and use them effectively to
illustrate a strong argument rather than a single source that diminishes the overall strength of the
argument. Through rigorous research, it allowed me to convey ideas coherently and meaningful.
In the 10 weeks of 39C, I was assigned to write two multi-model compositions, two
academic works that incorporated both words and visuals to articulate a succinct, coherent
message. However doing such compositions was a daunting task especially for my second
composition as advocating for a task which required many academic solutions which was not
always a straightforward task. Essentially the historical analysis paper initial question did not
yield any strong solutions. The advocacy essay was initially suppose to cover residential
segregation to greater detail and to advocate solutions towards ending this segregation. However
the policies I initially found were to broad such as a potential solution based on Swedish
residencies that mixed different ethnicities together which resulted in a decline of poverty.
Despite talking about African Americans as an example, It did not provide enough details on the
group I was advocating , therefore I had to reframe the question again and find new solutions. I
noticed that Alexander mostly referred African Americans segregation to the consequences of exfelons and its importance on maintain segregation visible. This changed is how I approached the
essay and I had to find what where the consequences of being a felon. I found that a lot of
restrictions are applied towards ex-felons such as house leasing, child adoption, and employment

limitations. These served as foundations for finding scholarly articles that were employed into
making my thesis for my final advocacy essay "it is imperative to deal with regulations to those
who are confided within the criminal system and to advocate policies to restrict lifetime bans,
housing discrimination against felons, and allow pre-release prison programs to provide a just
establishment into today's society". This thesis, although was slightly different from the historical
analysis, served as a proper introduction into my essay as I examined not just any solutions but
practicable ones that were not possible when determining solutions to residential segregation.
Changing the advocacy essay also helped determine counter arguments, to these
solutions. Since most of these works were from professors, some contained article links that
talked about counter arguments towards the authors solutions. This helped my essay
tremendously as I had the ability to counter any arguments that the audience might have such as
this example from the final advocacy essay, " However, some oppose this view of the policy and
question it such as a professor of Public Policy at University of California Berkley, Raphael. He
argues since short term ban collateral damage increase recidivism 'why not abolish all bans to exfelons' (Bushway)". This quote serves as the ethos of my essay, it provides a counter example
towards the solutions that I am advocating and presents thoughts from another professor of a
similar field. This established my essays credibility, the essay becomes more trustworthy as I am
not opposed to just present one side of an argument but two. This measures I underwent was
designed to both establish my credibility and to bring the audience to an understanding of the
situation, all in the prospects of being able to maintain an ethos as a strong advocate. This
became an important factor to make a persuasive essay, it was difficult to advocate for solutions
of an issue that was slightly different from the first essay but it served well in establishing an

ethos and establishing a strong main argument for the audience. And lastly, a final lesson to be
learned as the quarter closes is the process of revision.
A single most important factor of revision that a student can behold is the ability to
receive and give criticism. When I received criticism from a peer review, I had a few issues with
the historical rough draft essay. The peer's comment stated this "I think you're heading in the
right direction with your essay and I can see it has much potential. Your diction is excellent and
your essay is progressing at a good speed. However, be careful for grammar mistakes and
awkward wording in your sentences which may confuse readers. Spend some time rereading
your essay to find these details and you will be fine". This criticism was essential, as a writer I
had to take this criticism and apply it to my essay to ensure a concise and persuasive argument. I
used this type of criticism to help a peer on his essay. These are some of the comments left on the
peer's essay, "I would take out 'there is no doubt' because that may not be universally accepted
and your paper should however answer this later on' and "Well done intro, I believe your
audience would be news studio corporations". These critics helped mostly with grammar but they
served as fundamentals for a persuasive essay. I also commented on situating the intended
audience more openly as sometimes the essay seemed to sway from who they were writing
towards. Overall, these critics served as essential tools to understanding an essay, to make a well
rounded essay means to focus of simple mistakes that can deteriorate the main argument.
However, there is still one more insightful criticism that helped me greatly, that criticism is from
the final draft of the historical analysis. This quote was from the professor Lerner, " the thesis is
unfocused, and I had trouble tracking the progression of your argument" and " I also highly
recommend contacting the UCI writing center before the next essay is due, and working with
them to help with some grammatical and syntactical issues". These comments pointed flaws that

my first major composition had, the thesis. The thesis was lacking from the central argument and
did not present the authors as reliable sources which weakened the essay. These comments
helped my advocacy essay because I was able to use the writing center as a tool for finding
proper sources and to develop my thesis. This criticism helped me as a writer to be more diligent
and careful when writing in order to convey a meaningful persuasive essay.
The reflection represents my final academic work as a student of Writing 39C: Argument
and Research. This class has taught me many lessons. Most notable are the lessons included in
composing and revising academic work such as synthesizing your research, incorporating
sources coherently, and applying criticism. However, these lessons are not just applicable to
academic work but also to many other areas. It's applicable to communication as a whole. As this
course ends I plan to continuously improve my writing and communication skills because like all
things in life, these take time and practice to master.