When I planned to take WRT 102 this semester, I looked at as a class that would require a lot of time, but conceptually wouldn’t be too hard. In hindsight, I think my prediction was right.

In high school English classes, I would always score higher than the average on most essays. I was never really sure why, as I always felt that my writing was very weak. I guess that my teachers didn’t think so.

This didn’t really change in WRT 102, as my final copies wouldn’t be that different from my drafts, with the exception of the Research Paper, in which I had to take more time to revise. But of course, there was always room for improvement on every essay. And I think that’s where Karli’s constructive criticism and fun lessons came into play.

Any other teacher could’ve lectured for an hour and twenty minutes on comma placement or introducing citations, but Karli always made it interesting. You felt like you learned something that you could apply to your essays in every group activity. She also even had us write a sample cover letter which I thought was a good idea for a lesson, because after college, all writing that we do is going to become writing for “real world” scenarios, not for a letter grade. I also think her constructive criticism on our papers really prepared us for the portfolio.

The “rhetorical analysis” activity was interesting too. We analyzed our social media posts to learn why exactly we post certain pictures or videos. Are we intending for a certain audience to view them, or for everyone? Do we want people to laugh?

All in all this class could’ve been a drag with any other teacher, but section 72 definitely wasn’t. I feel like I learned a lot more about writing than I did in high school, especially on the matter of making my writing more cohesive. With the many engaging lessons, the class itself was not what I expected it to be, and I was happy to be in this particular section.