# data[].attributes.body
The artifacts from my subject's analysis, along with insights from Yancey and Murray's works, shed light on their literacy background, behavior, and practices. Yancey's exploration of evolving teaching approaches and the impact of technology on writing resonates with my subject's observations. The recurring theme of confidence in specific writing skills aligns with Yancey's emphasis on adapting writing models to the changing landscape. My subject's confidence in brainstorming and incorporating feedback reflects their familiarity with engaging writing practices.Murray's perspective on writing procrastination also relates to my subject's artifacts. The self-awareness demonstrated in their analysis aligns with Murray's acknowledgment of the writer's internal dialogue before the writing process. Their reflections on AI, highlighted in Anson's annotations, indicate an awareness of technology's influence on writing practices, aligning with Murray's recognition of external factors shaping the writing process.In sum, my subject's artifacts showcase a familiarity with writing practices that align with Yancey's call for adapting teaching approaches and Murray's insights into the internal and external factors affecting the writing process. The artifacts reflect a literacy background that encompasses both traditional and modern writing approaches, echoing Yancey's and Murray's discussions. The recognition of technology's role in writing aligns with both scholars' discussions and highlights my subject's awareness of the evolving literacy landscape.

# data[].attributes.body
I noticed that my peer seems to be more confident in reading than writing. This may be due to the fact that he was heavily encouraged to read while growing up. He seemed to dislike writing when growing up because it was associated with school, which he did not enjoy. It seemed like he didn’t always enjoy writing because of the amount of energy and time that goes into it. Yancey touches on this topic discussing how writing is complex and it requires labor through processing ideas and going through the writing/revising portion. My peer also discussed how they didn’t have experience with certain types of texts/writing. I think the fact that they were able to discuss that they understand they have strengths/weaknesses and they were truthful on what they were unsure about, this is helpful towards understanding what they need help on in the future. Not knowing how to go about some of these sources isn’t a bad thing, we as students are not expected to know everything. Brockman touches on this topic by stating that college writing isn’t meant to fully be understood as soon as we get there. Professors don’t expect us to know everything within each topic.

# data[].attributes.body
While looking through my subjects' artifacts, I noticed that he did not  necessarily have a bad relationship with literacy; but when he was given restrictions in school it became more of a bother. I can link the details I learned from him to people like Yancey, Parrott, Warner, and Brockman. I can tie what I've learned to these four articles because they all discuss what is expected of students and how much is required of them after they enter college as well as with literacy skills in general. They cover a wide range of topics in their writings, covering teachers' excessively high standards, the image of writers as geniuses, the differences between high school and college writing, and so many other topics as well. Yancey promotes the idea that students should be free to switch up their writing styles and that the process should be more open when it comes to teachers placing limitations on what students can include in their writing. I believe this prevents students from thinking creatively. Since writing is taught to be done in a specific way, and this is something Warner disagrees with, they are also putting emphasis on changing the writing process to better fit students' needs. This takes me back to my subject's artifacts because he has expressed his dislike for when teachers have given him a specific set of rules and guidelines that restrict his writing process.

# data[].attributes.body
As I reviewed my subjects' responses to the questionnaires and pallets I discovered that they have a love/hate relationship with reading and writing depending on the occasion. At a young age, they fell in love with the world of reading but developed a negative attitude towards it as school lacked assignments that didn't seem like busy work. On the other hand, my subject has had a negative association with writing from the start. Writing always seemed uncorrelated to reading as well as tedious to them. This pattern was very similar to what Carrillo discusses in “Reading and Writing are Not Connected” because she discusses how often students favor one skill over the other typically reading over writing. She goes on to describe the importance of learning reading and writing simultaneously due to the chances the subject may become more efficient in both. Considering Yancey’s “Writing in the 21st Century” article, I can make a connection between my subject and the text because this is almost like a call of urgency to educators to adapt to ever-changing  21st-century literacies. My subject has benefitted from previous teachers adapting to these changes and allowing them to learn in a more creative outlet.

# data[].attributes.body
I connected my subject to Carrillo and Parrott as well as Yancey. I noticed through the analysis of my subjects artifacts that they lack a bit of confidence when it comes to the academic and systematic side of reading and writing. Yancey's argument of needing to produce well rounded students in classrooms and outside of them as well as the steps in which she states needed to be worked on connects to my subjects artifacts. My subject would resonate with Murray's Write Before Writing by understanding that writing is a process whether it is academic or personal. Understanding that there is a process behind writing no matter what it is for would be beneficial to him. If reading and writing had an equal emphasis in classrooms then it would be beneficial to my subject being an incoming college student. However even with these difficulties the artifacts I analyzed connect to Carrillo, Parrott, Yancey, and Murray because of their claim on the difficulties of reading and writing in college and how that will affect you in the future. The Google doc artifacts show that the confidence level in this incoming college students literacy level is low when it comes to deeper analysis work. But high in surface level literary work. The pallet assignments connect to reading because the academic ones are a bit jumbled however the personal ones are pretty concise and easily read.

# data[].attributes.body
Considering my subject's artifacts and all I learned about my subject in the process of completing my analysis of their artifacts, I can connect them to the text Yancey , Bunn , and Parrott. I can connect their artifacts to these three different sources because what they both are saying is how students are given unreal expectations they are expected to meet fresh out of high school , how the writing process grows and evolves over time , writing is thinking , good literacy doesn't only come from smart people , and how writing can help develop your own writing. Thinking about a topic while writing and actually focusing on staying on that topic can be different but with the writing process you can jot down all your ideas so it can be organized and a jumbled mess. Unhealthy stereotypes cause students to get discouraged and not even attempt to better their own writing they simply shut down. Using AI while writing can be very helpful because it can give you insight and lots of different word structures that can set you up for success but it isn’t helpful for it to be originated so the smarter choice would be to look over your work and begin the writing process. Looking back at my subject’s work and artifacts I was provided with showed me that even with the same text we can have different thoughts which distinguish writers from each other because it shows different techniques you can make and apply to your own writing.

# data[].attributes.body
As I looked through my subjects artifacts, they do not have a really strong connection to reading, even if they started to learn at such a young age, they do not enjoy it. Writing is more of a mixed bag for them, they enjoy the idea of more of free writing and journaling instead of having to do assignments as it seems too difficult or stressful for them. I connect this back to Murray, as he expresses the idea that writers should be able to struggle and face road blocks in their writing for it show that they are invested and actually want to try and build more on their ideas of writing. Every writer should struggle and not have an easy time when it comes to writing as it is able to unleash many sorts of potential. I also connected this back to Yancey,  and how Yancey encourages for students and writers to change the way they write for a way that is best suited for them, may it be with a change in technology or in writing habits. They both connect to the idea of struggle and learning to learn with the struggle and find ways for those things to be implemented into their writing.

# data[].attributes.body
My subject artifacts demonstrate that they struggle with writing and reading. They feel very 50/50 with it but they want to improve. When they try to do structural reading and writing they struggle a lot to focus. They said that tests they’ve taken to test their speed and understanding in reading and writing has brought their confidence down. They also didn’t have too many literacy sponsorships that really motivated them to do educational reading and writing. Yancey explained in her text how reading was used to “control” and dish information out, while writing has more creative freedom. This relates a lot to my subject because they also expressed how they didn’t like to read large texts but they loved to write poetry or journal. In addition Yancey wants to call to action educators to implement better reading and writing techniques to help students improve. I think this also relates to my subject because they want to improve themselves, they feel the way high school taught them reading and writing didn’t prepare them at all for college so therefore they don’t feel very confident. This also relates to Murray’s text because he also explains the reality of how writing is and how a lot of educators don’t know what to do with students who are unprepared for college writing. My subject demonstrates that they don’t think they are an ideal writer or reader and Murray also says that many people think that too, but Murray also explains that not being the ideal writer doesn’t mean you’re a bad writer.

# data[].attributes.body
I notice that, like most others, he has difficulties writing at the expected level or even explaining himself. But he seems to have a great support system to get through college stress and has techniques to help him overcome obstacles that come his way like annotating and highlighting. Along with finding a certain topic that interests him in the assignments that are given in order for him to be more attentive to the readings. My subject seems to be following with Donald M. Murray’s, Write Before Writing, exemplifying techniques to the writing process with increasing information, often my subject tends to go deeper into the text when not understanding and trying to get more information on the concept. Accompanied by increasing concern, he also try’s to find connections to the text in order to become more intrigued with the meaning. My subject sees writing as something that comes from the soul and it is a form of art which a lines in addition to Murray’s key strategies in Writing in the 21st Century by Kathleen Blake Yancey, where she explains that writing is not something that one can control what someone else write and with reading any material is. My subject seems not to want to be controlled and wants to be able to write what is on his mind and soul using Yancey’s idea of literacy.

# data[].attributes.body
My subjects' reports on her experiences in writing and reading highlight a major disconnect with reading and writing throughout one's scholastic lifetime. A disconnect which Yancey and Warner both highlight in their pieces as things which must change, only Warner proposes a singular general direction in which the issue can be solved from meanwhile Yancey believes the writing can be solved through a shift in mindset in all areas. These two ideas in the end could be the solving factor in why my subject's weaknesses turned out to be a lack of confidence or familiarity in her own writing. Now this may be a misinterpretation of her weaknesses however assuming this is correct, writing is something which can be seen in a positive light when it moves away from the “Window Pane Composition” Yancey makes note of in her report. The window pane to my understanding is a work of imitation without context, simply looking into the action being conducted but not understanding why or how this action is being done. In this way Yancey and Warner actually disagree in their conclusions. Warner believes a greater clarity of the Windowpane from colleges will bridge the gap between the secondary and college literacies. Essentially opening the door to creative writing as that is how academic writing operates. I personally conclude that my subject’s improvement in confidence and writing experience will be better solved through Yancey’s methodology. Understanding and Comprehension will always elevate to a further degree and writing is a social act as Yancey highlights. This makes the understanding even more vital as following a plan will never foster such creativity.

# data[].attributes.body
Consider your Subject’s Artifacts and all you learned about your subject in the process of completing your analysis of their artifacts. In about 200 words or so, connect Yancey and a minimum of one other source text from class to the literacy background, behavior, or practices of your subject. Try to be as specific as possible!