# data[].attributes.body
Link to papelitos: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-gpIyhFsV5dyfxUYoNIUtXGkJBShUPI7AUJbUOBpVC0/edit?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.body
D1 - Richard A. Harvill Building

For the final goal, the location is once again set at the Harvill building (I finished this assignment here while we were granted free time in class). Before coming to U of A, I was not familiar with the University’s ties to the pre-existing Native culture of Tucson. I assumed that there might have been some embracing of Mexican culture, considering it is located in a border town, but nothing more. In all honesty, I was not aware of how much Natives were acknowledged by the city of Tucson along with the U of A until I took this class! In the first discussion board we were ever assigned, we were asked to read the official land acknowledgment that was renewed and upheld by the university, then describe the potential benefits of the enforced land agreement. A pro I listed reads, “One of the many advantages of developing a land acknowledgement is forming a peaceful relationship with those whose land the developer occupies- which allows them to both operate in harmony by themselves and together in the future.” Learning about how a land acknowledgement can strengthen bonds between different communities allowed me to appreciate Tucson as a part of Native culture, as well as separate.

# data[].attributes.body
D8 - 1557 E 6th St Tucson, AZ

The location set for this artifact takes place at my dorm, because that is where I completed the assignment. D8 Part C is a perfect example of reflecting on writing because the prompt asks us to think about what skills we rely on most in our writing- along with other skills we need to practice more. I had written that I think my usage of metaphors is entertaining for readers, especially with the objective nature of my language. Unfortunately, since I like to get so creative with these things it ends up finishing off as too wordy. In my discussion board post, I had written, “When asked what a flaw of my writing is I would instantly respond with a lack of clarity, as my work is all over the place. This is because I like to try and connect either a piece of evidence to a lot of different claims, making my main message unclear.” As much as I dislike not making sense I would not trade it in at the price of my descriptive abilities, which I think is something genuinely unique to my style of writing. It made me realize that I am creative and that I enjoy writing the most when I can make things ambiguous. Ambiguity in my opinion is very essential to a good piece of written work, for it opens up numerous possible interpretations. With such an infinite amount of potential meanings, it makes the work a lot more meaningful. I have learned this tip and I’ve been utilizing it ever since I recognized it because it makes my writing a lot more interesting, or at least I think so!

# data[].attributes.body
U1A4 Peer Review Workshop - Richard A. Harvill Building

Back in Unit 1 there was a big essay due titled the “Borderlands Synthesis Essay”. To help us polish up our work before final submissions, my professor instructed us to review the work of our peers, including having our own drafts reviewed. My work was read and evaluated by two peers and I viewed their work as well, we did this during our class session at the Harvill building. Afterwards we all exchanged opinions on the other’s essay, specifically what seemed to flow, was relevant, or what needed more detail. In my summary of lessons I learned through peer review, I included a struggle of mine that was inspired by the feedback I got. It reads, “Some of the challenges I’ve faced were people telling me my work wasn’t clear enough or that they didn’t know what it meant, which was hard for me to improve because my work was clear to me in a way I knew I understood.” To overcome this challenge, though, I collaborated with my peers and we all broke down what we thought the meanings of each others’ essays were. This in turn ended up being more helpful than our original approach, which was just to read and give feedback. As bad as it may sound, I never really engaged in much peer review prior to this class, or until English in college at all. So doing these peer reviews and coming up with more strategies to improve work is definitely going to stick with me in the future. It will shape into me asking others to read my work so I can get an understanding of it from an outside perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
D10 - Guatemala

An assignment that I feel taught me well identifying and analyzing conventions is discussion board assignment, being D10. In Part B, we are asked to describe how the usage of plural pronouns, specifically “us” and “we” adds to a story. Considering that the material we were told to read was a testimonio, I explained that the plural pronouns make the testimonio more meaningful. My reasoning for this being that testimonios are meant to speak for more than one person, making this small detail very vital to the whole purpose of the story. In my response I had written, “The main purpose of one is to seek justice and/or bring awareness to a marginalized community who may not have the strength in voice to do it on their own. Therefore, the plural pronouns are one of the most important conventions of the book.” Here I explain what an essential component, or convention, of a testimonio is, and how the author’s language reflects it. Conventions are basically the blueprint for a story, and can vary depending on what one wishes to write. For me, I feel like this assignment makes me put more thought into what makes something what I want it to be. As a result, in the future I plan on putting more effort into emphasizing specific conventions that can shape a story the most.

# data[].attributes.body
Digital StoryMap - Mt. Lemmon, Arizona

Critical thinking was required the most for my digital StoryMap assignment from unit 2, which required me to shine light about a specific place in Tucson and how it's affected by/contributes to the city. I decided to write about Mt. Lemmon since it was a place I chose to visit, and vandalism and littering are unfortunately very big problems there now. For the StoryMap I created a series of informational slides describing these problems, the effects they had on the environment, and discouraged such specific actions. To do this I had to perform a LOT of research on Mt. Lemmon’s ecosystem and read about how those components can be harmed by careless human activities. I did not only want to inform, but provide solutions as well. So the last part of the StoryMap lists potential reasons as to why these problems are so prominent, one of them being lack of federal attention to environmental issues. The last line reads, “Yet in Arizona, most people do not value natural sights most likely because not even the government values the environment”, With this claim I hint at the idea that the problem can be relieved with more federal recognition. This is a definite solution that I have learned through research just by learning the sensitivity of the ecosystem, which has already geared me in a direction far away from the one I addressed in the StoryMap. While I have obviously done research before, this time was different from most because I was more conscious of clarity than normal. I’ve had to give information on a topic but this was one of the few times I had to make a claim about it, and now I am better at shaping the foundation of the claims I make (evidence/research) to hold my statements better. From now on I expect my own work to maintain relevance throughout and keep the points in line with the evidence I use, due to me being so focused on that for this specific environment.

# data[].attributes.body
Digital StoryMap

Critical thinking was required the most for my digital StoryMap assignment from unit 2, which required me to shine light about a specific place in Tucson and how it's affected by/contributes to the city. I decided to write about Mt. Lemmon since it was a place I chose to visit, and vandalism and littering are unfortunately very big problems there now. For the StoryMap I created a series of informational slides describing these problems, the effects they had on the environment, and discouraged such specific actions. To do this I had to perform a LOT of research on Mt. Lemmon’s ecosystem and read about how those components can be harmed by careless human activities. I did not only want to inform, but provide solutions as well. So the last part of the StoryMap lists potential reasons as to why these problems are so prominent, one of them being lack of federal attention to environmental issues. The last line reads, “Yet in Arizona, most people do not value natural sights most likely because not even the government values the environment”, With this claim I hint at the idea that the problem can be relieved with more federal recognition. This is a definite solution that I have learned through research just by learning the sensitivity of the ecosystem, which has already geared me in a direction far away from the one I addressed in the StoryMap. While I have obviously done research before, this time was different from most because I was more conscious of clarity than normal. I’ve had to give information on a topic but this was one of the few times I had to make a claim about it, and now I am better at shaping the foundation of the claims I make (evidence/research) to hold my statements better. From now on I expect my own work to maintain relevance throughout and keep the points in line with the evidence I use, due to me being so focused on that for this specific environment.

# data[].attributes.body
D4 Part C - Rhetorical Awareness

The included screenshot is from discussion #4 dating back to unit 1. Part C of the prompt called for an analysis of cinematic techniques/rhetorical moves used in the film Border South. In order to understand what the director may have wanted to convey, I turned my attention to small individual details of a specific scene that touched me. The scene itself was a man standing alone on a train with a blue sky behind him and a narration of the time he watched a border patrol officer shoot an immigrant he was traveling with. I wrote, “The death of his friend was described with a soft voice, one that wrapped the tragedy up in a blanket to be coddled and viewed”.  I then thought about the effect that the narrator’s tone had on me. It made me even more sad to hear such an ugly thing spoken of so sweetly, and I think that the director wanted this to make the film even more touching. Seeing people go through tragedies with grace is striking and proves strength, which is what the director wanted to associate traveling immigrants with. While there were more visuals to be noted, it was this small detail that really wrapped up the director’s intent for me. As a result of seeing how powerful something so minor can be, it made me realize that the biggest most crucial feelings or characteristics of someone/something can be the most telling. This knowledge pushes me to think against the bigger picture, and write indirectly about topics so that their mes