Writer’s Reflection
When I heard the assignment for Inquiry Two, I was quite excited. I had heard of “Waiting For Superman,” but had never really had the chance to watch it. The topic of it is something that I am extremely passionate about and was eager to learn more about. So I happily watched the documentary and quickly whipped out a first draft (rough rough draft) without even really having to think about it- the words just poured out. However, when writing my real rough draft, I tried to focus a bit more on the rhetorical appeals.
My revision process on Inquiry Two was much more rigorous than my typical revision process. At my meeting with Bridget for my conference on my rough draft of Inquiry 2, she had me read my paper aloud. Reading it out loud made me realize how focused the paper really was on my thoughts and my opinions on the topic of the documentary. There was way too much emphasis on my thoughts on the public school systems of America, and not nearly enough rhetorical analysis of the documentary. I wrote what felt like millions of drafts and printed them all out and scribbled all over them. I also used Bridget as resource and took her ideas and comments into considering my final draft. Overall, I tried to focus the paper much more on a rhetorical analysis of the film instead of my own opinions on the issue (those can come in Inquiry Three!). Waiting for “Superman”
Waiting for “Superman” examines one of the most heated debates in today’s political society: the question of what to do about public school systems in America. Most of the public schools in the country are funded based on local property taxes. This system leaves make schools in low- income areas deprived of the funding necessary to provide an adequate education for the children in these areas. The documentary proposes a solution to this problem: charter schools. Although a good idea in