I think throughout my paper I have the right amount of evidence to prove my points and persuade the reader to agree with my perspective. What I have learned from the feedback I have received from my peers is that I need to do more explaining of the quotes I use to show why I agree with what is being stated or disagree. I could also do the same with a few places in which I placed literacy narratives. It’s not that they don’t necessarily make sense it’s more of trying to paint a clearer picture for the reader to understand. Besides that I think my perspective is there I just need to state it clearer than I have so there is no confusion on the points I am trying to get across.
In my introduction my peers believe that I could speak a little more on literacy narratives and what they are all about. They also believe I can start naming some examples of literacy narratives the further prove my thesis and what I believe about victim narratives. One of my peers specifically believes that I could work on including a little more of Brandt or Alexander a little more in my introduction before moving on from it so I can say how I feel about their beliefs in relation to mine. I think the current narratives I’ve used have worked well and done a good job of showing examples of my perspective on victim narratives.
In my evidence I just need to make it clearer as to why I used certain quotes to the audience. My peers can clearly see why I chose certain quotes because they read these scholarly journals as well. But they challenge me to create a clearer picture for the reader so that my message is convey more smoothly and it is easier to understand. The evidence is there for the most part it is just time to take the evidence I have been given and use it to my advantage so that way I can convince readers to agree with my point of view.
