Reflection 2.1

Writing this paper was much harder than the last. I not only had to analyze the editorial, but I had to then make my own arguments against its claims while incorporating research as support. I found it difficult to decide whether or not a source was useful and if it would add validity to my rebuttal or just confusion. For my second draft, I plan on making my paper more organized with clearer points and references to the author of the editorial. Also, I think I should look for more credible evidence including statistics and factual data rather. I mostly incorporated valid points of views eloquently spoken that added to my overall claim, however I doubt that really added any sense of authority to my credibility. I think this first draft is more rough than the other essay's first draft, but hopefully that will give me more room to add a lot more evidence to back up my argument. I tried to follow the format of the author of the editorial in addressing his points with my own refutation and/or counterargument, however once I got into the actual process of writing the paper, I found a lot of my rebutting to his points were intertwined, so I found it difficult to keep certain points separate. I'm glad I know what I need to do next, but these things are only the beginning of my process of revision.