Assignment Prompt & Instructions
The visualization pdf is for part 2
– 2 years ago
**files (5)**
– ## Visualizationofthewritingprocess.pdf
– ## module2recommendedreadingsassignment.docx
– Solomon-1.pdf
– Keyt-1.pdf
– Kraut-1.pdf
**## Visualizationofthewritingprocess.pdf**
Visualization of the writing process*
*Adapted from “The Design Squiggle” by Damien Newman
[Re]searching Generating Refining
This phase is primarily at the content level. It is the
brainstorm phase where you work to gain a sense of the
“scope” or “proportion” of the argument (and what it
includes).
Writing practices often include:
• Gathering sources & developing an initial bibliography
• Reading and annotating sources
• Reviewing & clustering reading notes to identify
patterns
• Listing & defining possible key concepts or theses
• Drawing maps that show relationships between ideas
and their assumptions
• Dialoguing with partners to test or “think through”
ideas
• Reflective writing to clarify your ideas
• Identifying guiding thesis
This phase works at both the content and structural
levels. It is where you begin to develop and “fill in” the
argument through generating paragraphs sections that
layer onto the initial mapping process. It can feel as
though the argument begins to “gel” or “set,” but still
has some fluidity.
Writing practices often include:
• Identifying sub-theses that frame major sub-
sections
• Details, key quotes, or ideas are “pinned” into
sections
• Expansive freewriting within sub-sections to
expand ideas or generate justification
• Key concepts are defined, possible counter-
arguments noted
This phase is primarily at the craft level, but can include
larger movements back in to retool the structure or craft.
It is where stabilized structures lead to deep polishing.
Writing practices often include:
• Frequent “whole essay” reading to ensure major ideas
connect throughout the overarching argument,
occasionally leading to “high level” reorganization
• Paragraphs and sentences are scrutinized for their
function or purpose in the argument
• Signposts are generated throughout the argument
• Sentences and words are re-written focusing on clarity
and precision of language
• Reading sections or sentences aloud checking for
cadence and voice.
Aaron Stoller, Ph.D. pg. 3
OGL530: Critical Perspectives in Leadership Theory
Spring 2021
Teacher: Aaron Stoller
**## module2recommendedreadingsassignment.docx**
This assignment includes two parts
**Part A**
In addition to completing a collaborative annotation, each student will complete an individual reading response. This response is intended to be “semi-formal” in nature. On one hand, it should be polished, clearly written, and should include in-text citations that demonstrate you have carefully read the assigned reading. On the other hand, the reading response is not intended for you to provide me with a summary of the assigned reading.
The purpose of the reading response is to allow you to wrestle with the course material and ask questions about your understanding, your interpretation, and your disagreements with it. I also want the reflections to be a useful tool you can refer to in constructing your final paper, so each response will ask you to think about the key ideas from the assigned reading that you might later use in your final paper.
I want to be clear that this assignment is not my way of testing whether you walked away with the “correct” understanding of a reading, but it is instead a way of me gauging your process of understanding.
**Reading responses are therefore graded for completion, but not for “accuracy” though I will provide feedback as part of our ongoing dialogue.**
Your response should be no fewer than 750 words (but can be longer), distributed in the following three sections.
**Please make sure to include the following subheadings that clearly define each of the parts of your reflection, so I know which part is which**.
·
**Summary (250+ words).** First, summarize the main themes of the readings. I am not asking you here to spend time reproducing each article individually, but to give an integrated summary of the main ideas. So, for example, if we are engaging different authors’ perspectives on the process of eminent critique you would focus on providing an overall vision of eminent critique informed by everyone we read, rather than arranging your summary by author.
·
**Critical analysis (250+ words).** Second, I want to you provide a critical analysis of the readings. This is where you are going to carefully consider what was beneficial, useful, and helpful in the readings, and what concerns or differences of opinion you might have. Please do NOT speak in vague terms but stay very close to the text. This means, for example, you should provide quotes or paraphrase authors with citations that show you understood what they said. Two things to remember: authors are neither all good nor all bad. A careful reader will find some value and some problems in just about everyone. Second, you don’t have to respond to everything in the text. Just select aspects of the reading that stood out to you.
·
**Reflection (250+ words).** In this final section I want to you to think about how what you read might be useful for your final paper. Remember that the final paper for the class will ask you to select a “problem of practice” (something from your personal leadership context), to provide a critical analysis of the problem using insights from our readings, and to develop a potential solution to the problem from a critical lens. In this final reflection, you should start to identify how what you learned might be useful for this final paper. This space should be used, in other words, for you to start to reflect on what ideas in our readings might be of value to your final paper and why those things are important.
**References**
**Make sure to key in on these readings: Required Readings for this assignment.**
·
[**Solomon**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471036/download?wrap=1)
**Reading. Solomon, R. C. (2004). Aristotle, ethics, and business organizations.**
**_Organization Studies, 25_, 1021–1043.**
[**Kraut**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471035/download?wrap=1)
**Reading. Kraut, R. (2007). Nature in Aristotle's ethics and politics.**
**_Social Philosophy and Policy,_ _24_ (2), 199-219.**
·
**Wilson, S. (2016).**
**_Thinking differently about leadership: A critical history of leadership studies_. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Chapters 2 and 3. I have attached these readings into the assignment. Thus, the readings from Soloman, Kraut are essential to this assignment. However, discuss Aristotle as well.** http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ&t=5s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ&t=5s)
**Part B**
**Writing Process Assignment (Writing as a Process)**
The purpose of this assignment is to get you to think intentionally and strategically about your own writing process.
We often think about writing as an artifact or a tool that we use to communicate ideas or emotions. If writing is discussed at all in academic classes, the entire focus is on what composition scholars call “genre conventions,” which are the contextual rules or frameworks generally agreed upon by a discourse community as the standards or common practices for communicating within the community.
In the previous module, we reflected on and practiced some of these conventions common to academic writing and, more specifically to the humanities and the humanistic social sciences. In my mind, however, successful writing not only requires a fluency with the genre conventions of a discourse community (a community of writers), but it also requires a keen understanding of your own writerly identity. If you are to actually
_produce_ successful writing, equally important is understanding and being able to successfully manage a writing project. For that, you need to know something about writing as a process.
In this way, writing is quite similar to a sport. When we talk about genre conventions we are talking about the rules of the game. These rules are obviously important to success. A basketball player must understand the boundary of the court, the point system, or the rules for fouling an opponent, among other things. It should also quite obvious that simply knowing the rules of the game
is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for being able to actually play the game. To be successful, you need a regular practice schedule, a certain level of fitness, and a set of tacit instincts that you can use in the course of the game.
The same is true of writing, of course. All successful writers have developed their own
[unique habits for writingLinks to an external site.](https://sites.usc.edu/graduate-writing-coach/developing-sustainable-writing-habits-from-people-who-write-about-and-for-academic-writers/) – something that they regularly do, that puts them in the “frame” of writing, and that allows them to deconstruct a huge project into manageable elements. With such a set of habits, successful writers also understand how to establish, scale, and manage a writing process (and they are familiar with how the various parts of that process “feels” to them). They have also developed an “ear” for language they apply to the project.
For this assignment, I want to you first to
[**review this handout**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471022?wrap=1) [**Download review this handout**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471022/download?download_frd=1) I have created which offers a visualization of the writing process in its most generalizable form. Then, I want you to watch the following brief video which is a time lapse of a painting process, and think about the video in the context of your writing process.
As you watch the video, think about things like: What happened in the video? What parts of the painting process came before others, and why were they ordered in this way? How did things like accident or revision come into play? What elements of the painting process stood out as being similar to a process of writing an academic paper? Specifically consider thing that might not seem obvious, such as concepts like proportion, layering, balance, and whole/part?
Then, I want you to share with your classmates a brief (~100-150 words) reflection on your own writing process. Specifically, I want you to focus on the ways in which your process is similar to and different from the painting process you watched in the video, and what can you take from the painting process (if anything) that might helpful as a way of improving your own writing process?
Video is attached
**Solomon-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/solomon-1-pdf-10243113)
**Keyt-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/keyt-1-pdf)
**Kraut-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/kraut-1-pdf-10243111)
**Kraut-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/kraut-1-pdf-10243111)
**## Visualizationofthewritingprocess.pdf**
Visualization of the writing process*
*Adapted from “The Design Squiggle” by Damien Newman
[Re]searching Generating Refining
This phase is primarily at the content level. It is the
brainstorm phase where you work to gain a sense of the
“scope” or “proportion” of the argument (and what it
includes).
Writing practices often include:
• Gathering sources & developing an initial bibliography
• Reading and annotating sources
• Reviewing & clustering reading notes to identify
patterns
• Listing & defining possible key concepts or theses
• Drawing maps that show relationships between ideas
and their assumptions
• Dialoguing with partners to test or “think through”
ideas
• Reflective writing to clarify your ideas
• Identifying guiding thesis
This phase works at both the content and structural
levels. It is where you begin to develop and “fill in” the
argument through generating paragraphs sections that
layer onto the initial mapping process. It can feel as
though the argument begins to “gel” or “set,” but still
has some fluidity.
Writing practices often include:
• Identifying sub-theses that frame major sub-
sections
• Details, key quotes, or ideas are “pinned” into
sections
• Expansive freewriting within sub-sections to
expand ideas or generate justification
• Key concepts are defined, possible counter-
arguments noted
This phase is primarily at the craft level, but can include
larger movements back in to retool the structure or craft.
It is where stabilized structures lead to deep polishing.
Writing practices often include:
• Frequent “whole essay” reading to ensure major ideas
connect throughout the overarching argument,
occasionally leading to “high level” reorganization
• Paragraphs and sentences are scrutinized for their
function or purpose in the argument
• Signposts are generated throughout the argument
• Sentences and words are re-written focusing on clarity
and precision of language
• Reading sections or sentences aloud checking for
cadence and voice.
Aaron Stoller, Ph.D. pg. 3
OGL530: Critical Perspectives in Leadership Theory
Spring 2021
Teacher: Aaron Stoller
**## module2recommendedreadingsassignment.docx**
This assignment includes two parts
**Part A**
In addition to completing a collaborative annotation, each student will complete an individual reading response. This response is intended to be “semi-formal” in nature. On one hand, it should be polished, clearly written, and should include in-text citations that demonstrate you have carefully read the assigned reading. On the other hand, the reading response is not intended for you to provide me with a summary of the assigned reading.
The purpose of the reading response is to allow you to wrestle with the course material and ask questions about your understanding, your interpretation, and your disagreements with it. I also want the reflections to be a useful tool you can refer to in constructing your final paper, so each response will ask you to think about the key ideas from the assigned reading that you might later use in your final paper.
I want to be clear that this assignment is not my way of testing whether you walked away with the “correct” understanding of a reading, but it is instead a way of me gauging your process of understanding.
**Reading responses are therefore graded for completion, but not for “accuracy” though I will provide feedback as part of our ongoing dialogue.**
Your response should be no fewer than 750 words (but can be longer), distributed in the following three sections.
**Please make sure to include the following subheadings that clearly define each of the parts of your reflection, so I know which part is which**.
·
**Summary (250+ words).** First, summarize the main themes of the readings. I am not asking you here to spend time reproducing each article individually, but to give an integrated summary of the main ideas. So, for example, if we are engaging different authors’ perspectives on the process of eminent critique you would focus on providing an overall vision of eminent critique informed by everyone we read, rather than arranging your summary by author.
·
**Critical analysis (250+ words).** Second, I want to you provide a critical analysis of the readings. This is where you are going to carefully consider what was beneficial, useful, and helpful in the readings, and what concerns or differences of opinion you might have. Please do NOT speak in vague terms but stay very close to the text. This means, for example, you should provide quotes or paraphrase authors with citations that show you understood what they said. Two things to remember: authors are neither all good nor all bad. A careful reader will find some value and some problems in just about everyone. Second, you don’t have to respond to everything in the text. Just select aspects of the reading that stood out to you.
·
**Reflection (250+ words).** In this final section I want to you to think about how what you read might be useful for your final paper. Remember that the final paper for the class will ask you to select a “problem of practice” (something from your personal leadership context), to provide a critical analysis of the problem using insights from our readings, and to develop a potential solution to the problem from a critical lens. In this final reflection, you should start to identify how what you learned might be useful for this final paper. This space should be used, in other words, for you to start to reflect on what ideas in our readings might be of value to your final paper and why those things are important.
**References**
**Make sure to key in on these readings: Required Readings for this assignment.**
·
[**Solomon**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471036/download?wrap=1)
**Reading. Solomon, R. C. (2004). Aristotle, ethics, and business organizations.**
**_Organization Studies, 25_, 1021–1043.**
[**Kraut**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471035/download?wrap=1)
**Reading. Kraut, R. (2007). Nature in Aristotle's ethics and politics.**
**_Social Philosophy and Policy,_ _24_ (2), 199-219.**
·
**Wilson, S. (2016).**
**_Thinking differently about leadership: A critical history of leadership studies_. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Chapters 2 and 3. I have attached these readings into the assignment. Thus, the readings from Soloman, Kraut are essential to this assignment. However, discuss Aristotle as well.** http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ&t=5s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ&t=5s)
**Part B**
**Writing Process Assignment (Writing as a Process)**
The purpose of this assignment is to get you to think intentionally and strategically about your own writing process.
We often think about writing as an artifact or a tool that we use to communicate ideas or emotions. If writing is discussed at all in academic classes, the entire focus is on what composition scholars call “genre conventions,” which are the contextual rules or frameworks generally agreed upon by a discourse community as the standards or common practices for communicating within the community.
In the previous module, we reflected on and practiced some of these conventions common to academic writing and, more specifically to the humanities and the humanistic social sciences. In my mind, however, successful writing not only requires a fluency with the genre conventions of a discourse community (a community of writers), but it also requires a keen understanding of your own writerly identity. If you are to actually
_produce_ successful writing, equally important is understanding and being able to successfully manage a writing project. For that, you need to know something about writing as a process.
In this way, writing is quite similar to a sport. When we talk about genre conventions we are talking about the rules of the game. These rules are obviously important to success. A basketball player must understand the boundary of the court, the point system, or the rules for fouling an opponent, among other things. It should also quite obvious that simply knowing the rules of the game
is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for being able to actually play the game. To be successful, you need a regular practice schedule, a certain level of fitness, and a set of tacit instincts that you can use in the course of the game.
The same is true of writing, of course. All successful writers have developed their own
[unique habits for writingLinks to an external site.](https://sites.usc.edu/graduate-writing-coach/developing-sustainable-writing-habits-from-people-who-write-about-and-for-academic-writers/) – something that they regularly do, that puts them in the “frame” of writing, and that allows them to deconstruct a huge project into manageable elements. With such a set of habits, successful writers also understand how to establish, scale, and manage a writing process (and they are familiar with how the various parts of that process “feels” to them). They have also developed an “ear” for language they apply to the project.
For this assignment, I want to you first to
[**review this handout**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471022?wrap=1) [**Download review this handout**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471022/download?download_frd=1) I have created which offers a visualization of the writing process in its most generalizable form. Then, I want you to watch the following brief video which is a time lapse of a painting process, and think about the video in the context of your writing process.
As you watch the video, think about things like: What happened in the video? What parts of the painting process came before others, and why were they ordered in this way? How did things like accident or revision come into play? What elements of the painting process stood out as being similar to a process of writing an academic paper? Specifically consider thing that might not seem obvious, such as concepts like proportion, layering, balance, and whole/part?
Then, I want you to share with your classmates a brief (~100-150 words) reflection on your own writing process. Specifically, I want you to focus on the ways in which your process is similar to and different from the painting process you watched in the video, and what can you take from the painting process (if anything) that might helpful as a way of improving your own writing process?
Video is attached
**Solomon-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/solomon-1-pdf-10243113)
**Keyt-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/keyt-1-pdf)
**Kraut-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/kraut-1-pdf-10243111)
**## Visualizationofthewritingprocess.pdf**
Visualization of the writing process*
*Adapted from “The Design Squiggle” by Damien Newman
[Re]searching Generating Refining
This phase is primarily at the content level. It is the
brainstorm phase where you work to gain a sense of the
“scope” or “proportion” of the argument (and what it
includes).
Writing practices often include:
• Gathering sources & developing an initial bibliography
• Reading and annotating sources
• Reviewing & clustering reading notes to identify
patterns
• Listing & defining possible key concepts or theses
• Drawing maps that show relationships between ideas
and their assumptions
• Dialoguing with partners to test or “think through”
ideas
• Reflective writing to clarify your ideas
• Identifying guiding thesis
This phase works at both the content and structural
levels. It is where you begin to develop and “fill in” the
argument through generating paragraphs sections that
layer onto the initial mapping process. It can feel as
though the argument begins to “gel” or “set,” but still
has some fluidity.
Writing practices often include:
• Identifying sub-theses that frame major sub-
sections
• Details, key quotes, or ideas are “pinned” into
sections
• Expansive freewriting within sub-sections to
expand ideas or generate justification
• Key concepts are defined, possible counter-
arguments noted
This phase is primarily at the craft level, but can include
larger movements back in to retool the structure or craft.
It is where stabilized structures lead to deep polishing.
Writing practices often include:
• Frequent “whole essay” reading to ensure major ideas
connect throughout the overarching argument,
occasionally leading to “high level” reorganization
• Paragraphs and sentences are scrutinized for their
function or purpose in the argument
• Signposts are generated throughout the argument
• Sentences and words are re-written focusing on clarity
and precision of language
• Reading sections or sentences aloud checking for
cadence and voice.
Aaron Stoller, Ph.D. pg. 3
OGL530: Critical Perspectives in Leadership Theory
Spring 2021
Teacher: Aaron Stoller
**## module2recommendedreadingsassignment.docx**
This assignment includes two parts
**Part A**
In addition to completing a collaborative annotation, each student will complete an individual reading response. This response is intended to be “semi-formal” in nature. On one hand, it should be polished, clearly written, and should include in-text citations that demonstrate you have carefully read the assigned reading. On the other hand, the reading response is not intended for you to provide me with a summary of the assigned reading.
The purpose of the reading response is to allow you to wrestle with the course material and ask questions about your understanding, your interpretation, and your disagreements with it. I also want the reflections to be a useful tool you can refer to in constructing your final paper, so each response will ask you to think about the key ideas from the assigned reading that you might later use in your final paper.
I want to be clear that this assignment is not my way of testing whether you walked away with the “correct” understanding of a reading, but it is instead a way of me gauging your process of understanding.
**Reading responses are therefore graded for completion, but not for “accuracy” though I will provide feedback as part of our ongoing dialogue.**
Your response should be no fewer than 750 words (but can be longer), distributed in the following three sections.
**Please make sure to include the following subheadings that clearly define each of the parts of your reflection, so I know which part is which**.
·
**Summary (250+ words).** First, summarize the main themes of the readings. I am not asking you here to spend time reproducing each article individually, but to give an integrated summary of the main ideas. So, for example, if we are engaging different authors’ perspectives on the process of eminent critique you would focus on providing an overall vision of eminent critique informed by everyone we read, rather than arranging your summary by author.
·
**Critical analysis (250+ words).** Second, I want to you provide a critical analysis of the readings. This is where you are going to carefully consider what was beneficial, useful, and helpful in the readings, and what concerns or differences of opinion you might have. Please do NOT speak in vague terms but stay very close to the text. This means, for example, you should provide quotes or paraphrase authors with citations that show you understood what they said. Two things to remember: authors are neither all good nor all bad. A careful reader will find some value and some problems in just about everyone. Second, you don’t have to respond to everything in the text. Just select aspects of the reading that stood out to you.
·
**Reflection (250+ words).** In this final section I want to you to think about how what you read might be useful for your final paper. Remember that the final paper for the class will ask you to select a “problem of practice” (something from your personal leadership context), to provide a critical analysis of the problem using insights from our readings, and to develop a potential solution to the problem from a critical lens. In this final reflection, you should start to identify how what you learned might be useful for this final paper. This space should be used, in other words, for you to start to reflect on what ideas in our readings might be of value to your final paper and why those things are important.
**References**
**Make sure to key in on these readings: Required Readings for this assignment.**
·
[**Solomon**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471036/download?wrap=1)
**Reading. Solomon, R. C. (2004). Aristotle, ethics, and business organizations.**
**_Organization Studies, 25_, 1021–1043.**
[**Kraut**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471035/download?wrap=1)
**Reading. Kraut, R. (2007). Nature in Aristotle's ethics and politics.**
**_Social Philosophy and Policy,_ _24_ (2), 199-219.**
·
**Wilson, S. (2016).**
**_Thinking differently about leadership: A critical history of leadership studies_. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Chapters 2 and 3. I have attached these readings into the assignment. Thus, the readings from Soloman, Kraut are essential to this assignment. However, discuss Aristotle as well.** http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ&t=5s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ&t=5s)
**Part B**
**Writing Process Assignment (Writing as a Process)**
The purpose of this assignment is to get you to think intentionally and strategically about your own writing process.
We often think about writing as an artifact or a tool that we use to communicate ideas or emotions. If writing is discussed at all in academic classes, the entire focus is on what composition scholars call “genre conventions,” which are the contextual rules or frameworks generally agreed upon by a discourse community as the standards or common practices for communicating within the community.
In the previous module, we reflected on and practiced some of these conventions common to academic writing and, more specifically to the humanities and the humanistic social sciences. In my mind, however, successful writing not only requires a fluency with the genre conventions of a discourse community (a community of writers), but it also requires a keen understanding of your own writerly identity. If you are to actually
_produce_ successful writing, equally important is understanding and being able to successfully manage a writing project. For that, you need to know something about writing as a process.
In this way, writing is quite similar to a sport. When we talk about genre conventions we are talking about the rules of the game. These rules are obviously important to success. A basketball player must understand the boundary of the court, the point system, or the rules for fouling an opponent, among other things. It should also quite obvious that simply knowing the rules of the game
is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for being able to actually play the game. To be successful, you need a regular practice schedule, a certain level of fitness, and a set of tacit instincts that you can use in the course of the game.
The same is true of writing, of course. All successful writers have developed their own
[unique habits for writingLinks to an external site.](https://sites.usc.edu/graduate-writing-coach/developing-sustainable-writing-habits-from-people-who-write-about-and-for-academic-writers/) – something that they regularly do, that puts them in the “frame” of writing, and that allows them to deconstruct a huge project into manageable elements. With such a set of habits, successful writers also understand how to establish, scale, and manage a writing process (and they are familiar with how the various parts of that process “feels” to them). They have also developed an “ear” for language they apply to the project.
For this assignment, I want to you first to
[**review this handout**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471022?wrap=1) [**Download review this handout**](https://asu.instructure.com/courses/217388/files/102471022/download?download_frd=1) I have created which offers a visualization of the writing process in its most generalizable form. Then, I want you to watch the following brief video which is a time lapse of a painting process, and think about the video in the context of your writing process.
As you watch the video, think about things like: What happened in the video? What parts of the painting process came before others, and why were they ordered in this way? How did things like accident or revision come into play? What elements of the painting process stood out as being similar to a process of writing an academic paper? Specifically consider thing that might not seem obvious, such as concepts like proportion, layering, balance, and whole/part?
Then, I want you to share with your classmates a brief (~100-150 words) reflection on your own writing process. Specifically, I want you to focus on the ways in which your process is similar to and different from the painting process you watched in the video, and what can you take from the painting process (if anything) that might helpful as a way of improving your own writing process?
Video is attached
**Solomon-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/solomon-1-pdf-10243113)
**Keyt-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/keyt-1-pdf)
**Kraut-1.pdf**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/kraut-1-pdf-10243111)