Revision Strategy:After my peer review experience, I have a general idea of what I need to revise for the final paper. My goals are to narrow my thesis and overall argument so that I can have a more general focus in my paper, incorporate more of John Armstrong in relation to my argument about nature being beautiful, and reorganize my paragraphs so that they make the most sense. The first step would be to figure out exactly what, specifically, I want to argue. I want to argue the beauty of nature and the emotions and realizations received from this. By doing this, I will be able to narrow my thesis and focus my paper more on these exact elements. The second step would be to reread Armstrong’s essay and make a list of relevant quotes from it that connect well to my argument. The last step, with all of this information sorted out, would be to rethink how I will organize it into paragraphs. I think I need to look at my topic sentences and make an outline again, making sure the information flows well. My biggest challenge will be figuring out exactly what I want to argue and relating it to every aspect of this prompt in terms of including all of my sources. If a challenge arises that proves to be too difficult for me, I will consult the Little Seagull & They Say/I Say books, as they have proved to be very helpful. If I am still having trouble, I will consult a peer or Professor Emerson for insight.
Great plan. I’m so glad that you plan on rereading Armstrong. That’s a super smart move. Some possible questions you can consider as you continue to revise your paper: 1) What do you think people get out of nature? 2) How do people tend to “appreciate” nature’s beauty? What does that look like? 3) What is the result of your community’s appreciation for nature’s beauty? 4) How are you defining nature? Gardens? Untamed forests?