I had a bunch of concerns about my first draft after I completed it. I made my claim defending the liberal arts and using Scheuer and Ungar to show how UNE uses the liberal arts. I have been confused about the question in this essay and what I am supposed to argue. I am concerned if my paper flows and connects back to the thesis. I am even more confused after Cripps said I can agree and disagree with some parts, so what am I arguing? My peers seemed to really like my paper, they had mostly all positive comments, and nothing really negative. My friend SeaBass said “Very good evidence supporting your claim. I like how much in depth it goes and it is very clear on what you are defending.” I support my quotes correctly according to the fish man. I think I am working best with Scheuer when I talk about his conceptions of the liberal arts through economic, civic, and cultural citizenship. My peers made no negative comments about this. I work the best with Ungar when I talk about how people with liberal arts degrees are more successful in career work. My peers also made no negative comments about this. I work best with the student handbook when I talk about the core values from the handbook and compare them to the ideas of Scheuer. My peers actually made no negative comments on the essay, but in the end comments they said to make my conclusion better and to wrap up my ideas more clearly. I need to tie all the loose ends up at the end. I am going to help my reader get my perspective by putting my I say in the essay more.