Once I
picked the topic I wanted to focus my paper on, the writing process
came fairly easily. I knew I wanted my paper to be based on the
problem of civil disengagement, being that we have focused so much on
it in class discussions and done so many readings surrounding the
topic. I also knew I wanted to tie in aspects of my personal essay
(using the Park 51 project as a real world example) because I knew
they could be useful in furthering the point I was trying to make.
Both were things I found highly interesting, and I thought they would
allow me to incorporate the greatest amount of things I've learned
over the course of the semester.
I really
focused on making the paper flow and because I wanted to incorporate
so many different items, this was the most difficult part of the
process. I tried to connect all of my ideas using quotes from
readings we discussed that applied to each theme. S I think I could
have gone about starting a little better, by flushing out all of my
ideas and then refining them and working on making them more
connected. I think it would have been easier to spend more time
cleaning my thoughts up at the end than trying to perfectly organize
everything as I wrote. Since weaving in multiple sources to make a
point of my own has been an aspect of writing I have struggled with
previously, I also think, however, that putting so much work into
this paper was a really good strengthening exercise for me.
I was
also, in writing this paper, able to learn a lot about what civil
engagement means and the importance of citizens going beyond simply
the bare minimum (voting) and taking it upon themselves to initiate
social change. By reviewing all of the sources we covered and drawing
from them what I believed to be the most important quotes, I was able
to take away some very positive and inspirational messages.
Overall
it was a very involved process that allowed me to gain new
perspectives on what it means to participate civilly and also how to
better write a paper synthesizing multiple sources and incorporating
an argument.
