This class, particularly with the focus on genre, has reframed the way I look at and think about writing. Namely, I am more aware of the dynamic that exists between different written items, not that I didn’t know that different genres were connected or related or in response to one another before, but it is more clearly evident now. Rather than a subconscious acknowledgement type of awareness, this relationship is now at the forefront of my understanding of writing. Overall, this class has helped elucidate the less-apparent aspects of writing, both in terms of the rhetorical RACE constituents, as well as the process of uptake and genre interaction. I now see myself explicitly breaking down the rhetorical situation of what I am planning to write before I write it with this new conscious awareness.
While writing in XML was certainly a different writing process/experience, and it served to make rhetorical or content elements very explicit, it’s use was a bit of a double-edged sword in that it inherently pigeon-holed writing into predefined boxes for text to be deposited in and made the writing process a little more tedious. The use of schemas themselves were at times very helpful when following a predefined template, especially when writing something as established as a cover letter, ensuring that no important elements were forgotten or missed, and the proper structure was maintained. The process of creating a schema itself was a great way to understand and break down a genre into its basic constituents and structure, though the entire process itself wasn’t entirely efficient if it were to be replicated with every writing situation in the future (spending a week researching and breaking down a genre to write one piece for). While this process would be very helpful for breaking down a genre that is expected to be used often in the future (such as an actual blogger who creates new content every week seeking to standardize their unique style/structure/flow), it’s a bit cumbersome to use on a single instance. Ultimately, if people were to create a “schema” of sorts to define the conventions of a genre and make the results of their work open-source or publicly shared, it could serve as a useful tool for others to use and construct their own instances, though the mileage will vary depending on how static and established the specific genre is (it would be useful to publish this for a cover letter, less so a science blog). Though templates/examples/breakdowns do exist in the wider world, this specific approach contends to be equally or perhaps more useful for genre newcomers. On a side note, I had no trouble using any of the software we used in class, though I admittedly had experience with WordPress, XML, and GitHub coming into the course, so I was familiar.
In the course, what I found to be the most helpful were the class and group discussions about constructing schema. I found it most interesting how different people could have different conceptions and ideas for the same genre, for example. The ensuing discussion about either how to construct the schema, feedback about a schema constructed by others, or peer comparison between how different people used a flexible schema in some very different ways (science blogs), proved to be the highlights of the course for me. To be completely honest, and perhaps my technical-focused education over the past few years is showing itself, but I found most of the class readings to be a bit dry, abstract, and heady, and was more interested in the summary/conclusions and following discussion of relevance to what we were doing in our writing processes than the actual writings themselves. I therefore really appreciated that the conclusions of the readings and the application of those conclusions to the writing were more critical to the discussions and grading of the course, rather than the literal content of the readings themselves (no reading quizzes, etc.).
Moving forward, I feel that the mindset created by this course is the most important take-away, and I hope to hold onto it for the rest of my academic and professional career. Explicitly thinking about RACE and uptake before beginning a written item is a highly useful way to frame the writing and make it that much more effective. If possible, I also look forward to taking this awareness to discussions with peers, whether they be reviews of already completed work, or when breaking down something that is yet to be written (such as a collaborative paper, etc.). This way of thinking seems to be a fundamental underpinning of a solid writing process, and should be applicable to some extent in all situations, even if it’s as little as a cognizant awareness of audience and uptake.
