Being that my desired field to go into is nonprofit management I chose to analyze and article written by Mark Sidel on recent regulations pushed onto organizations within the nonprofit sector. I had only one past experience writing a rhetorical analysis in which I analyzed an advertisement, not an article. Because of my lack of experience I referred to the book during much of my writing process but during my conference I was told that my paper was basically a summary. The revision between my second draft and my final draft was night and day as I practically rewrote the entire paper. Despite the fact I received a decent grade on my final draft I knew I had not quite hit the mark and my weaknesses were more prevalent than my strengths throughout much of the essay. The revised portfolio version of this assignment displays my pursuits in trying to refine my writing so that it fit into the category of a rhetorical analysis. Despite having read the book’s chapter on rhetorical analysis thoroughly and referring to essay models during the writing process, I realized that my major fault was that I focused on telling my audience what I was reading instead of telling the audience what rhetorical concepts made the article work. For much of my revision I scratched the parts that felt like a summary and attempted to replace them with a deeper analysis of the author 's writing choices and why I felt they created a powerful article. For example, in my final draft I went into detail on a point Sidel had made by saying, “His first example encompasses the events of 9/11 and how the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) wrote a provision that primarily served to prevent nonprofit organizations from being conduits for terrorist groups. While such a provision seems logical in combatting terrorism within the United States, it resulted
Being that my desired field to go into is nonprofit management I chose to analyze and article written by Mark Sidel on recent regulations pushed onto organizations within the nonprofit sector. I had only one past experience writing a rhetorical analysis in which I analyzed an advertisement, not an article. Because of my lack of experience I referred to the book during much of my writing process but during my conference I was told that my paper was basically a summary. The revision between my second draft and my final draft was night and day as I practically rewrote the entire paper. Despite the fact I received a decent grade on my final draft I knew I had not quite hit the mark and my weaknesses were more prevalent than my strengths throughout much of the essay. The revised portfolio version of this assignment displays my pursuits in trying to refine my writing so that it fit into the category of a rhetorical analysis. Despite having read the book’s chapter on rhetorical analysis thoroughly and referring to essay models during the writing process, I realized that my major fault was that I focused on telling my audience what I was reading instead of telling the audience what rhetorical concepts made the article work. For much of my revision I scratched the parts that felt like a summary and attempted to replace them with a deeper analysis of the author 's writing choices and why I felt they created a powerful article. For example, in my final draft I went into detail on a point Sidel had made by saying, “His first example encompasses the events of 9/11 and how the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) wrote a provision that primarily served to prevent nonprofit organizations from being conduits for terrorist groups. While such a provision seems logical in combatting terrorism within the United States, it resulted