Before embarking on creatibg this draft, I didn’t know where to start. I was under the impression that I needed to start from the ground up again. However, after some freewriting, revision planning, and thought gathering, revising this draft became a lot easier than I expected it to be.

 

I had a lot of trouble getting rid of my broad generalizations and speaking specifically. This struggle interesting because while I was pointing out some assumptions made about the sciences and humanities, I ended making assumptions myself, the exact act that I was condemning. Putting in stories of my own experience and talking more about the intersections of the sciences and the humanities more than the distinctions helped improve this.

 

As for the transition between this draft and the final draft, most of what I needed to do was elaborate on some of the points in the article. In addition, I added a video, which contributed to the multimodality of The Atlantic article genre format.

 

Overall, I found the revision of these drafts easier than I thought. This is due to the amount of reflection that I’ve done beforehand and the careful note taking in my annotated bibliographies. I imagine that I would have a more difficult time writing without them.

 

I’ve tried to grasp the messiness of this debate, and I want to know if I’ve done it fully. Had I had more time, I would have dove into more aspects of this debate. However, for the audience's sake, I think these are the most important things that my readers need to know for now.