After receiving the reviewed second draft of the auto-ethnography, I realized that I did not address the concept of social adaptation I was talking about through separate studies and did not propose my own thoughts on the idea as a whole. Instead, I mostly elaborated on my past and reflected on my thought process that I had when I was experiencing the multiple movements I had from country to country in my childhood, and how I needed to adapt to the social culture of the new environments every time. I presented a lot of ideas, yet did not go into the psychoanalytic review of my thoughts and actions. As a result, I will need to do more analysis and use outside studies that show how changing cultural and language environments affect children.

I will focus on going through the timeline of my autoethnography and put in some parts of psychoanalytic analysis and breakdown of my perception of the events, rather than just stating them as if I am just writing an autobiography.

Something that I am proud of doing during my high school years was completing the distance education program in hopes of being prepared for any situation that could arise in my unpredictable academic future. My peer’s review on this posed a question whether I would want to do more research on this “preparing for any situation” as an adaptation strategy, which I found interesting and will most likely do. Another question that was raised by the professor in her critique of the second draft was to do some research on the general concepts of forced adaptation versus adaptation that is welcomed, and to figure out whether there is a difference between these proposed concepts in my story, and overall.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.