I wouldn’t have described the forum for our first assignment (a critical review) as a “workshop”; in fact, little work actually took place there. What was promised as a valuable practice of sharing and reviewing drafts resulted in a completely disheartening experience for me. Only two students actually participated in our selected group (including myself), and while a third member was later added, her review came too close to the deadline for me to fully utilize. The activity left me questioning what went wrong and what could have made it better.

Then I began reading in preparation for the literature review on research relating to academic writing anxiety.  Article after article endorsed the process of swapping drafts with peers as a key ingredient to acknowledging and eventually tempering writer anxiety.  I was beginning to feel a bit cheated. Why did the process I experienced only elevate feelings of frustration and stress? One particular article by authors Cameron, Nairn and Higgins mentioned the importance of genuine drafts and quality feedback as factors that would put participants on as “equitable (of) terms as possible” (Cameron et al. 2009). This made sense to me; the process didn’t feel fair because the effort, timing and quality of the feedback were inconsistent within our group.

The second time around, in our assignment 2 workshop (a literature review) I had a completely different experience.  This reversal highlighted a key element relating to the success of swapping drafts: how (and when) to select groups. Obviously, who you end up working with plays a major role in the quality of the feedback. Our group seemed to have highly motivated players that put a fair amount of consideration into each participant’s draft.  Now having compared the limited feedback of the first process with the multifaceted review of the second, I was floored to see how different the perspectives and editing focusses were of each participant.  This provided a well-rounded review of my paper. Twice now, our instructor Angie has formed working groups based on a “first come, first serve” basis (participants to post earlier in the week are placed together, while those that post closer to the weekend generally form another). Since weekend participation in the forums doesn’t fit with my schedule, this managerial factor alleviated a lot of anxiety I had about getting my final draft in on time.  I could sense the same urgency and motivation from my group members, and this provided strong feelings of trust and belonging. And although there is still one, incredibly important review to come in (the instructor’s), I am confident that this experience has been a more successful one.

Works Cited

Cameron, Jenny, Karen Nairn, and Jane Higgins. "Demystifying Academic Writing: Reflections On Emotions, Know-How And Academic Identity." Journal Of Geography In Higher Education 33.2 (2009): 269-284. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 July 2016.