My rough drafts from task one and task four are very similar to each other, but for

several

important reasons.

My rough draft writing process has remained very intricate and time-consuming

throughout the semester. This is because of my recursive, self-correcting writing style. This

means that I will write between two and four sentences and then reread, edit, delete, and/or

revise those few sentences before moving on to the next sentence. For instance, in rough draft

one, the section Literate Activities of the community, made up of nine sentences, took

approximately 45 minutes to write. This is about the same amount of time that the section

Audience: Essay from rough draft four took that was also 9 sentences. As a result, my rough

draft writing is very time-consuming, even frustrating at times. These downfalls however are not

why my rough draft styles have not changed throughout the semester.

Even with this information, the most important part of this similarity is how effective the

style is. Very few grammatical or mechanical errors are present in the completed rough draft,

which means that even fewer basic errors are found in the final draft. In addition to this, the flow

of the paper, main idea, and other major essay components are rarely flawed to such an extent to

which they have to be corrected, re-written, or re-conceived entirely thanks to this writing style

as well as other situational variables. This is best seen between task one and four by calculating

the amount of grammatical errors on a random page from each paper. On task one there were 2,

On task four, there was one. I also checked for major mechanical errors on these pages, but there

were none that I could notice. These comparisons not only prove that my papers are very similar,

but also that they are similar for a good reason. Although I do not spend time ensuring that each

rough draft is identical in process to the last, these reasons are why it has not altered greatly

throughout this semester.

 These similarities can also be seen on a more fundamental level. The first way is that

both rough drafts use in-text headers to help allow the reader to skim the essay and

compartmentalize the information presented. Both papers also use paragraphs that are mostly

between six and eight sentences. This is not inherently good, but the way in which I make points

is usually best presented in larger paragraphs like those in these essays (evidenced by the high

grades on both). Another similarity is the overall flow of each paper. Each rough draft begins

with a brief introduction to the topic, followed by explaining major components of the topic, then

discussing the culmination of the major components, and ended with a short conclusion. The last

fundamental similarity is the use of outside references in both rough drafts. These references are

used for multiple reasons like strengthening arguments, increasing ethos, and giving examples of

ideas, all of which used in both rough drafts. All of these reasons presented both show that and

explain why my rough drafts have not changed throughout the semester.