REFLECTIVE WRITING is different from other types of academic (university-based) writing because it uses personal experiences to illustrate or demonstrate course content (lectures, readings, etc.) and/or theory. Reflective writing isn't “journaling” - it requires more than a description of our experiences. Reflective writing involves writing about personal experiences but also includes reflection and analysis. In this way, reflective writing can involve: о о a consideration of the broader context in which experience and action take place; moving beyond our personal stories to illustrate the nature of a social issue and to engage in theory using personal experience to support our position on a particular issue WHY write reflectively? We write reflectively for a number of reasons. We use reflection: ○ to learn about ourselves and to situate our experiences о to understand our biases and reactions O to understand how we learn to better understand our experiences and the things we do Reflection can be integrated into academic writing: ○ to illustrate theory or course content O to document our learning and changes in our values (understanding, reactions) as a case study or example о HOW to write reflectively. Like other kinds of academic writing, reflective writing needs to be: Intelligible. In other words, it needs to conform to standards of academic writing. ―even though we can use the personal pronoun “I” (as in "I thought that..."), it is important that we apply the principles of academic writing to our reflective writing. This means, that we use language accurately; that we write in a linear fashion (with ideas and topics flowing one to the next in a logical and explicit manner); that we pay attention to sentence structure, grammar, and spelling (that we proof-read our work); and that we avoid unsubstantiated claims and generalizations. Comprehensive. Experience and/or reaction is explicitly linked to course material and/or themes; it meets the requirements of the assignment. Productive. Through the process of writing, we learn something about ourselves and the course material. It can be difficult to know where to begin. A good starting place is to consider the parameters of the assignment (what are you being asked to do?). Once you understand the assignment, you may want to ask yourself some questions to help with brainstorming and writing. All assignment instructions can be found in the syllabus. Page 1 of 2 Additional guidance: This is an ACADEMIC writing assignment and should adhere to the following guidelines: • Precision: Address the specific topic with careful word choice • • • Analysis of the lectures: Present and weigh the evidence from the lectures in relation to your views on sustainability Justification: If you state an opinion it must be justified with evidence. Your evidence may be from your own experience or from statements made by the lecturer or from an outside source. If your evidence is from an outside source (not your own experience and not the lecture itself) you must reference it according to APA Style (See "Student Resources" on Brightspace). Analyse your own opinions: If you have a strong positive or negative response, for example, consider why this is the case – what in your experience/socialization leads you to have this reaction? Prior to writing, you may want to ask yourself all or some of these questions— О ○ What (in a few words) was each lecture about? ○ Were the ideas and themes presented during the lectures new to you? Had you encountered them before? What were your initial reactions to the lectures? (Did you feel inspired, angry, perplexed, etc?) о Did these feelings/thoughts change over the course of the lecture(s)? Why or why not? What did you “like” (agree with)? What didn't you “like” (didn't agree with)? Why or why not? Did you find the lecturers convincing? Why or why not? ○ What kind of evidence did the speaker provide to support their arguments/positions? In this reflective writing assignment, you are encouraged to write about things that you not only agree with, but also disagree with. Thinking about your opinions and values through statements like “I liked when the speaker said...” or “I didn't like the example that...” is a good place to start – but you must substantiate your claims and analyze why you think the way you do. - Bad example (just opinion): “I didn't like when the speaker said that Canadians are not involved in the democratic system." Good example (opinion + reasoning): “I didn't like when the speaker said that Canadians are not involved in the democratic system, because while voter turnout has decreased over the past 100 years in Canada, voter turnout actually increased by 4 per cent from the 2008 to 2011 elections (Elections Canada, 2013)." Or, something from your personal experience, “I disagree with the speaker's statement that Canadians are not involved in the democratic system, because my parents have always encouraged me and my siblings to exercise our right to vote and I am a member of an organization that encourages youth to engage with politics." For this assignment, in addition to thinking about what each lecture was about, you will want to identify broad, overarching theme(s). Here, you may want to ask yourself: ○ What were the differences and similarities between the lectures? How might they be related or not? Imaginative exercise: If you invited these two or three speakers to a dinner party, how would they interact? Would they get along, or spend the evening in heated debate? Would one person dominate the conversation? Where would you situate yourself in this hypothetical conversation? Prepared by Catherine Bryan for SUST 1000 2013, adapted for SUST 1001 by Kaarin Tae 2014, 2015. Page 2 of 2