What do your peers think you might do here, based on the evidence you’ve provided in the draft? Is there other evidence in the narratives that you’ve left out of the draft so far? Be specific about what your narratives reveal and what you think your might say about literacy acquisition through that data.  NOTE: Work here will inform your “perspective” or thesis AND your conclusion.

 

I believe that I agree with Alexander and Williams in their ideas that victim narratives are about the blame of a sponsor or outside source to account for their own perception of inability. However, I believe that the definition is commonly misinterpreted and requires further distinction to avoid misinterpretation. I have used all the evidence that I plan to use in my first draft, and I might actually have to cut back on the amount of evidence to meet the word limit. My first three chosen are displaying the common misinterpretation of victim narratives, showing one that has the correct characteristics, and two that do not but were labeled anyways. The other two are to explain the observed patterns in literacy narratives that can be developed into their own classifications (authentic and non-authentic, entity and incremental). I think that the rising Cairn and class data suggests that victim narratives are too broadly defined, and that the additional subcategories provide context to more accurately define the term.



Do your peers think you have enough “introduction” of A/B/W in the draft? Do you have too much? And what about your naming of the literacy narratives? What work do you have in this area?

 

The only clarification in my introduction that I believe would help the understanding of my project is perhaps a sentence about where the information on classifications came from. The class data and rising cairn being mentioned would help this clarification. I would also personally like a better first sentence to hook the reader into the topic. My introduction of the main literary sources may also need more context, especially the one by Williams (according to my peer edits).

Evidence. We must have actual passages from both our scholarly sources and our literacy narratives. The scholarly sources help signal the conversation you’re engaging; the narratives are your support for the ways you’re engaging the conversation. It is entirely reasonable to need to find and consider additional narratives, to need to dig more deeply into those one is using, and even to re-read parts of Alexander or Brandt that are relevant to one’s project but were not originally assigned to the entire class! What do you need to do in this area?

I think that I actually need to cut down on evidence, or at least the description of evidence. Instead, I could group together multiple narratives but only describe one. Whereas, in my current draft each narrative is perhaps over-explained. I should also reiterate my main points after each piece of evidence, as according to my peers it is unclear.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *