My writing experience within English in the Sciences is one with much growth and struggles. For starters, I thoroughly enjoyed the topics and the prompts for the assignments. This was my first time learning what an IMRAD is, and it helps me decipher experimental text so much easier as now I know how to spot one. Being able to explore and choose my own topic was exciting and allowed me to be truly passionate about what I was researching and intending to write about. It gave me a creative outlet, although daunting, it did not feel as dreadful as a typical paper. IMRADs are typically formulated in the same consistent order and show the same passive tone throughout, this is done intentionally to elicit facts and trustworthiness. This made the IMRAD a straightforward writing assignment, with an introduction, methodology, results, analysis, and discussion. I never really had to think twice about what I was writing, just about how I was writing. As much as I enjoyed learning and familiarizing myself with the logistics of an IMRAD, writing it was a bit more complex. Throughout my literary education, I was always instructed to write in a tone that is not boring or passive, rather active. Typically, the audience of my papers are a general audience so active writing is a nonnegotiable to keep them intrigued throughout. To exile active writing out of my IMRAD was a struggle, I felt as though I was not putting enough emphasis on my claim, which is understandable as an IMRAD is based on pure fact, not diction. In the lecture, I remember Miss Geoghan was explaining the issues with making words more complex than they had to be, for example using the word “utilize” instead of “use”. A lot of the time I spent revising my IMRAD including changing up words because I could not tell if I was over-complicating words or not. I would spend about five minutes trying to reread a sentence and deciding if I should write the word “represent” or “show” within the sentence. These struggles were in fact not present during the first assignment, which was the researched op-ed. The research op-ed was an interesting scientific topic, and was written to be received by a general audience. This allowed me to write the way I intended, almost as if I was writing the way I spoke. I also enjoyed the visual formatting a lot more, op-eds are meant to be appealing. This allowed me to experiment with a big title font, and some corresponding images to my topic, which was about how facial expressions make individuals more likable. The op-ed felt comfortable and familiar in comparison to the IMRAD. I believe this has to do with the audience I meant to write for. While op-eds are more inclusive and target a general audience, the IMRAD was geared toward other scientists and researchers who want to learn about and perhaps recreate the experiment their reading about. All in all, I feel the writing assignments within this class were well balanced for me, I felt confident right away being able to write an assignment so similar to how I typically enjoy writing while also being brought out my comfort zone and intellectually stimulated with the IMRAD and writing in a way I was not familiar with.