Now that we are finishing up Unit 1, you will take time to reflect on what you learned. You’ll be asked to reflect a few times throughout the semester. There are a few reasons for this: reflection helps you understand what you learned and make sense of it in context; it helps you understand things that you can improve; and it helps you explain your choices as a writer and learner to the reader of the reflection. In addition, reflection can be a good way to share what you’ve learned with other people, helping them to consider new or different perspectives.

With this in mind, you are being asked to write a letter to your classmates in which you reflect on some of the main things you’ve learned about information literacy and conducting research rhetorically and responsibly in the 21^st century. Although we have all been exploring these concepts throughout our semester, we have been doing so through the lens of our individual research topics. This means that the ideas you have learned so far might be somewhat different than what your peer has learned. This reflection is an opportunity to share these ideas with one another. Your reflective letter should be at least 500 words and incorporate specific references to the texts you discussed and analyzed in Researching Rhetorically 1 and/or 2.

The rhetorical situation of this assignment:

• Audience: Your classmates.
• Purpose: For this assignment, your task is to explain to your classmates what you have learned about information literacy and about researching rhetorically and responsibly in the 21^st. You will bring in specific examples from the analyses you did in Researching Rhetorically 1 and 2 to support the ideas you are sharing in your letter. You may also discuss other assignments in the unit, but make sure you address Researching Rhetorically 1 and Researching Rhetorically 2.
• Genre: Letter to ENC 1102 classmates. Since this genre is a letter to your classmates, you can assume that your audience has read/viewed all of the course information we’ve covered together until this point in the semester. This means that if you reference a text such as the Stanford University study we discussed in Week 1, you can reference it by name and assume your readers are familiar with it. However, when you reference a text that you analyzed for Researching Rhetorically 1 or 2, this is not a text that the rest of your classmates have read/viewed, so you will need to provide more context.

In addition, so that we can share our letters with one another, we are submitting them to a discussion board. This means that you are expected to post your own response and also respond to your peers’ posts. More details about the peer responses provided below.

Part 1: Submit your Reflective Letter

Guidelines and requirements for your reflective letter:

• You should address your peers directly (for example, “Dear ENC 1101 classmates…”)
• You should offer at least four specific observationsrelated to information literacy and/or researching rhetorically and responsibly in the 21^st century. To help you come up with your observations, I’ve provided some guiding questions for you. You should not try to answer all of these questions; rather, select the ones that 1) you can make specific observations about and 2) you can support with details from the research you conducted for Researching Rhetorically 1 and/or Researching Rhetorically 2.Use the Guiding Questions for Researching Rhetorically 3 Page to guide you.
• Support your observations with specific, detailed references to the research and analyses you conducted in Researching Rhetorically 1 and/or Researching Rhetorically 2. In other words, how has what you learned in Researching Rhetorically 1 and/or 2 shaped and impacted your ideas about information literacy and researching rhetorically and responsibly in the 21^stcentury?
  • For example, in your letter you might decide to discuss the importance of fact-checking sources. In this part of your letter, you could explain to your peers one of the sources you fact-checked in Researching Rhetorically 2 and what information or insight you gained about your research topic as a result of this fact-checking process.

Part 2: Comment on Two Peers Posts

After you have posted your letter to this discussion board, you will post two peer comments. Each peer comment should be at least 100 words.

• Comment #1: Find a peer who addressed an idea similar to one you addressed in your letter. Comment on how that idea adds to or complements your idea. Additionally, your comment should also further the discussion by bringing up a new example or a new (related) idea to be considered.
• Comment #2: Find a peer who addressed an idea that you did not address in your letter. Comment by explaining what idea they addressed, your reaction to it, and whether you agree with it: Did you see this idea in the unit? (If so, where?) Did your peer teach you something, but now you have questions? (If so, ask them.) Does your peer explain a concept that is different than your own experience or different from what you understood? (If so, explain.)

Here’s how you’ll be graded:

• Did the writer achieve their rhetorical purpose? Does the final product clearly explain what the writer learned about research from this unit? Does the student address how Researching Rhetorically Post 1 and 2 illustrate these concepts? (17 points)
• Does the writer use specific examples and evidence to support their claims? (10 points)
• Did the writer make effective rhetorical choices to reach their audience? Did the writer produce a document that clearly follows the conventions of the genre of a letter (including salutation, multiple paragraphs, and a signature)? (8 points)
• Does the final product reveal evidence of effective proofreading and editing? (5 points)
• Does the writer/student make two meaningful comments that follow instructions? (10 points)