In the NY Times Summary/ Response Assignment we were assigned to find a New York Times article that mentioned a scientific scholarly journal article. We were supposed to identify certain parts of both the New York Times article and the scientific article that were important such as tone, syntax, purpose, objectivity in writing, and more. In my summary, I thought that my summary was well written in that it focused on the main points of the article and did not have the same language as the New York Times article. However, I felt that my evaluation of the author’s writing was lackluster and did not have enough detail. Also, some of my sentences were run-on sentences. As for the analysis of the scholarly article, I was strong in my “source use practice” with my references in CSE Name-Year System. I also thought that my analysis of IMRAD format, writing style, and tenses was strength in my paper. However, I need to work on developing my paragraphs with far more details. I gave some sections more attention than others. In terms of the learning outcomes, I did enhance and engage in the collaborative and social aspects of the writing processes. In our peer review of the summary, I gave and received fair and constructive criticism.