Self-Assessment Essay

            Throughout this English course, I discovered different types of writing used in engineering, such as writing in creating products, conducting experiments, or even formally communicating with others. I’ve come to realize that writing, like art, can come in many forms and mediums to communicate ideas. Writers use many strategies to effectively convey their ideas to evoke certain emotions or to fulfill different purposes. The writing process is also extensive as it requires proper writing structure, understanding of the audience, use of language skills, and many revisions and planning.

Through many peer reviews and group work for the Engineering Proposal, I have met the fourth learning objective of working with others and providing and receiving feedback, and the second learning objective of improving my reading, writing drafts, revising, editing, and evaluating my own work. Collaborative work has made me value the benefits of peer review as I gained a better idea of how to incorporate the aspects that were lacking in my writing by reading others’ writing. I also had much practice critiquing my peer’s writing as they had to clarify vague subjects and/or descriptions for some of their writing. I also received feedback on these same exact topics which I didn’t realize when revising my writing on my own. For instance, in my draft of the lab report, my peers pointed out that I should include an introduction that provides context for both lab reports discussed, clarify which lab report I am writing about, cite my information, and incorporate a new way to structure my writing so it is easier to follow each lab report on their own. The way that I structured my writing was by separating each paragraph by each of the 8 structural elements. Thus, I was discussing 2 lab reports in the same paragraph which overloaded information and made it harder to follow each lab report separately. Based on this feedback, I reordered some sentences for my writing to flow better and transition into new ideas seamlessly and wrote a descriptive introduction about both lab reports I was discussing. I also referenced both lab reports as “lab report 1” and “lab report 2” which is easier to follow than “the first” and “the second” or “the other” lab report. I also noticed some of my peers’ writing had better flow, which opened my eyes to how I can further improve my own writing. Peer reviews like this changed my writing process as I learned to be much more meticulous in the way I write and ensure that it is concise for readers and meets source and structural guidelines. This is also why I excelled in the technical description in terms of being attentive to detail and succinct.

For the technical description, I was able to meet the first learning objective of considering others’ linguistic differences to effectively express my ideas. I describe the parts of the PlayStation 5 controller in much detail while also keeping the language simple. I also define more complex terms that most people wouldn’t know paired with labeled visuals and examples. For instance, to explain the adaptive triggers system of the PS5 controller, I describe how the triggers “are part of the pressable R2 and L2 buttons that vary in resistance throughout gameplay,” such as feeling “the tension of drawing a bow”. I then explain how the actual system and pieces work themselves, as the triggers “gain resistance when the motor allows the plastic spiral to turn a gear,” allowing “the angle of the piece beside the gear and behind the buttons to decrease, leaving less room to push the buttons back completely”. The visual of the parts for this system as well as explaining how every labeled part work together to create this effect allows for simplified understanding for readers.

I was also able to meet the eighth learning outcome of strengthening my source-use practices by reading peer work, referring to Purdue Owl, and reading the Technical Communications textbook. I have never formally written a lab report where I had to cite my images so I constantly revised my own citations. For instance, my technical description draft didn’t have annotated images because I was still unsure about how to format and cite them. After asking the professor and my own peers, I gained some tips on how to cite them properly and referred to Purdue Owl too.

For the Engineering Proposal, I was able to meet the sixth learning outcome of creating and conveying a stance within my writing with my group mates. My groupmates and I were able to do this in both our written report and oral presentation. In our writing, we created the argument that the existing sporks used for consuming ramen and broth at the same time can be engineered in their design to function more effectively. We supported our stance by considering multiple factors, such as examining why existing products don’t work, including their cost and material, providing context on the history of ramen, and how Westerners are not accustomed to chopsticks, which is the need for this product.

I have achieved the fifth learning outcome of analyzing different types of writing and using various forms of media to learn how to write effectively. I was able to do this through classwork and homework assignments using the Technical Communication textbook. For instance, one of the topics we learned that benefitted me was how to properly create topic sentences, transition to new ideas, and clarify repeated keywords. Although I already understand thegeneral conventions of this, it was still beneficial to further establish how to make writing concise and I incorporated these ideas into my writing.

Overall, this writing class has taught me many things that I will be able to use in my future career in engineering. I have the skills to write up papers for developing products and businesses, or for research.