-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS

Critiques in CANVAS: to find out whom you are to critique, click on the wheel, but do your actual critique in the form of a reply to that student's post in the Project One blog. As critiques build up, make sure you go back to "reply" to the original entry in the blog for each project instead of replying to replies of others, which causes confusion.

LOOKING AHEAD: Critiques are normally no more than two-hundred words or so; you earn more, but you earn more doing more critiques rather than by writing longer critiques. To get credit for your critiques you will need to have them in a Word document that you hand in to me: thus you would be wise to start off doing them in such a document and then copy and paste them into the blog "comment" available at the end of each blog entry.

HERE IS THE BEGINNING OF A SAMPLE CRITIQUE: The critiquer critiques three sentences but only one is required. On the other hand, this is just the beginning of the critique: not shown are the three required final categories: Punctuation, Word Choice, and Coherence, all required categories of critiques.

Something about this phrasing seems off—how do the starfish reveal truth? Maybe the better word choice would be "find hope in healing". I think also this phrase should be rewritten as "We starfish" so as to keep it in first-person.

I love this sentence, but I just wish it was phrased better. If you want to incorporate the list at the end, you should probably separate this sentence into two phrases otherwise it is quite the mouthful for the reader.

After reading several of these lists, I sort of found them off-putting. Using repetition or exhaustive lists can be at times helpful, but I think it gets to be excessive in your essay.

Unity, Coherence, Flow-6 I generally liked the flow of your essay. I think the unity between the parts could be fixed so that the essay is altogether more coherent with better transitions.

Organization and Logical Order of the Prose-5 I wanted to see a better organization of the essay, specifically in the second part. I think if you categorized what you learned from the starfish as your spirit animal, it might make the essay seem more logical.

Specificity and "Concreteness"-7 I think your phrasing and concrete examples really engaged me as a reader. I loved reading the imagery of being underwater and the description of your "limbs." Well done!

Integration of Verbal and Visual Rhetoric-7 I think your incorporation of the images is to be commended. Your captions really connected with what you were talking about in your essay, which helped with unity and clarity.

Proofreading: Typos, Spelling, and Grammar errors-5 I think there are some definite typos and other errors in the essay. Example: "Starfish have taught me that in both effective sea life and effective human life, risk is not to avoided, but instead eagerly welcomed."

=================================================================================================

"The uninhabited paradise that was Yellowstone hosted free-roaming elks and pronghorns but most notably lacked the herds of humans."

This sentence stood out as awkwardly phrased to me and made me pause. I half-expected a comma before the "but", so that the sentence would read "...Yellowstone hosted free-roaming elks and pronghorns, but most notably lacked the herds of humans." The switch from talking about Yellowstone "hosting" and then "most notably lacking" is also confusing, and slightly interrupts the flow.

"My closest friend, Abe, loves to tell stories, many I consider to be tall tales."

I think you're missing an "of which" here, so that "many" directly refers to the stories. The sentence would read "My closest friend, Abe, loves to tell stories, many of which I consider to be tall tales."

The essay flows easily, with the exception of a few transitions in the second half. For example, at the beginning of paragraph 8, the sentence "Beyond unity, buffalo are also known to be intractable and independent" sounds a bit forced. This is primarily because of the lack of parallelism between the noun "unity" and the adjectives "intractable and independent". This can be fixed by changing these three words to be the same part of speech.

The essay makes good use of paragraphs, and all the ideas flow very logically. I like how you break down the bison's specific attributes and explain how you can learn from them before going on to talk about how your interaction with the bison should be "two-way".

I think you integrate facts very well into the second half of your essay, and your portrayal of the animal's POV in the first half is very enjoyable. I would suggest elaborating on your "entrapments and enslavements" (paragraph 8), as that paragraph currently seems a bit vague.

Nice use of pictures! I especially like the last one, with you standing in the field. I think you integrate verbal and visual rhetoric well in your essay. My only suggestion is to insert a picture of "wallowing", because as I was reading, I was curious as to what that looked like.

Overall good proofreading, but I noticed a typo. In paragraph eight, you wrote "I can learn from the ferocious nature of the bison by breaking my owns forms of entrapment and enslavement." Fix that :p

You used Roman numerals instead of Arabic numerals, which is a mistake you realized and brought up in class :)

There are a few noticeable errors in word choice here and there, but your word choice is good overall. In paragraph three, in the sentence that reads "...winter's scarcity evokes more predators", the word "evokes" is misused. "Evoke (Links to an external site.) " (link to definition in Oxford English Dictionary) is a verb used when describing the action of calling something (an idea or an abstract thing) to mind, not into the tangible world. I think the world you're looking for is "provoke", which means "To incite or urge (a person or animal) to an action, state, etc." (Links to an external site.) .

In general, you're very concise and specific when conveying your ideas. I think you tend to restate things unnecessarily sometimes, however. For example, in paragraph 8, your essay reads, "I can learn from the ferocious nature of the bison by breaking my owns [sic] forms of entrapment and enslavement. Early on, our class identified specific objects of our enslavement."

This sounds a little bit repetitive because you refer to your forms of "enslavement" twice, in two separate sentences. This isn't a big issue, but your essay would be more concise if you combined these two sentences, maybe with "my own forms of entrapment and enslavement, some of which we identified early on in class."

Overall: Your essay exhibits good command of language and organizational flow. Just go back and proofread a bit more, and work on conciseness/word choice :)

==============================================================================

BEFORE you review: read your peer's writing carefully with reference to the criteria given in this form. ASSIGN THE NUMBER FROM 1 TO 7 THAT YOU THINK THE INSTRUCTOR WOULD ASSIGN ACCORDING TO THE CRITERIA BELOW FOR EACH OF THE CATEGORIES for each essay you review. AND, if you can, provide suggestions for improvement for each of the categories. Remember, your reviewing will be graded by the instructor. (If you just assign all high numbers to avoid critiquing, your reviewing grade will be 0.) The number you assign will not become part of the grade for that student's project. It will help him or her revise the project for a higher grade.

Your reviewing grade will also depend upon how well you follow the instructions below, especially on how specific you are. Extra points will be given for citations of page numbers or section titles in our anthology or the Penguin handbook that will help the author.

First, You must quote a word, phrase, or sentence of the student's essay that has not been quoted by a previous respondent and specify why it needs change and how it could be improved. Put this word, phrase, or sentence at the top of your critique so the students don't take th same words for revision.

Then, after you have done this, make specific suggestions that have not been given in previous critiques. Point to particular words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs that were problematic; give examples of general problems that you found; be clear about what exactly the problem was; explain why it was a problem, etc. Extra points will be given for citations of page numbers in our anthology, supplements to the criteria such as those on word choice and conciseness, the Oxford English Dictionary, etc.

Because you can not just repeat what others have said in their critiques, time management is important. The more you procrastinate the more difficult it will be to say something not already said in previous critiques and the fewer points you will earn.

Responses that consist solely of generic phrases, such as "Good Job"; that do not reveal detailed knowledge of the project; will not be acceptable. You must respond in sufficient detail to reveal that you have read the project closely. Let the author of the writing know how it affected you as a reader, where you were pleased, where you got confused, where irritated, etc. In general, evaluate the other students' writing as works of art. If each sample of writing were, say, a statue, which little as well as big flaws should be corrected?

Second, make your comments helpful. The goal is not to punish the writer for making mistakes. Instead your goal is to help the writer improve his or her paper. You should point out problems where they occur. But don't stop there. Explain why they are problems and give some clear advice on how to fix the problems. Also keep your tone professional. No personal attacks. Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone can improve their writing.

When you are finally finished reviewing, to get credit for your work, if you have not already done so, print out your responses to others by cutting and pasting them into a Word document, not by printing out each page individually from the screen. Turn in the Word document to me.

1. UNITY, COHERENCE, AND FLOW

worth 12%

How you say something affects what you say because the medium IS the message, form and content are inseparable. (See your course anthology, especially: “COMPOSITION”; "COHERENCE, sign of an ‘A’ paper"; "TRANSITIONAL EXPRESSIONS"; "Writing Well is Thinking Well"; and "Undergrad Writing Center.")

Hence, grades for unity include subtracting for all errors and infelicities in the prose that stop the flow and make the reader pause, however briefly, to try to figure out what you are trying to say. Hence, all projects must have logical transitions between paragraphs and sentences as well as structural unity and progression of thought throughout. Failures of connection between paragraphs and sentences in the hard copy will be indicated by an inverted V (indicating something needs to be inserted) and points subtracted accordingly.

In addition to identifying every place in the prose that makes you pause, however briefly, consider these questions.

7. Perfect flow, with evident or subtle transitions wherever needed.

6. Very good: almost perfect flow with evidence of transitions.

5. Good: fairly good flow, with some evidence of transitions, with perhaps one obvious interruption.

4. Average: average flow with some interruptions, with or without attempts at transitions.

3. Poor: poor flow, with quite a few interruptions, with or without attempts at transitions.

2. Very poor: Minimal control, with few if any attempts at transitions, that is, very poor flow, with many interruptions.

1. Disastrous: No apparent control, no attempt at transitions in the prose, that is, almost no flow.

2. Organization and Logical Order of the Prose,

worth 12%

Is the organization clear from the start and a logical order of sequence maintained?

7. Apparently perfect organization and logical order.

6. Very good: Effective organization and fairly logical order.

5. Good: Functional organization and fairly logical order.

4. Average: Consistent organization and some logical order, with some interruptions.

3. Poor : Confused arrangement and inconsistent logical order, with quite a few interruptions.

2. Very poor: Minimal control and little logical order, with many interruptions.

1. Disastrous: No apparent control, no logical order, no apparent organization.

3. Specificity and "Concreteness": Examples, Verbal Images, Metaphors, Similes, Evidence, Supporting Details

worth 12%

Does the essay move easily between general and specific? Are claims supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples? Does concrete language anchor the essay, engaging the senses, and keeping it from becoming too vague? Are the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay shown or demonstrated in personal, specific, concrete examples, images, metaphors, similes, and/or supporting sensory details that enable us to experience the world through another’s perspective?

See "Freshness" and the section on images and metaphors in the article, "Diction and Conciseness," in your anthology.

7. Excellent: Approaches the quality of a professional, perhaps even a great writer. The essay moves easily between general and specific. All claims are supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples. Concrete language anchors the essay, engages the five senses, and keeps it from becoming too vague. Instead of vague abstractions the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay are shown or demonstrated in personal, specific, concrete examples, images, metaphors, similes, and/or supporting sensory details that enable us to experience the world through another’s perspective.

6. Very Good: Approaches the quality of an excellent amateur writer. The essay moves fairly easily between general and specific. Almost all claims are supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples. Concrete language usually anchors the essay, engages the five senses, and keeps it from becoming too vague. Instead of vague abstractions the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay are often shown or demonstrated in personal, specific, concrete examples, images, metaphors, similes, and/or supporting sensory details that enable us to experience the world through another’s perspective.

5. Good: Approaches the quality of an excellent college writer. Most of the time, the essay moves fairly easily between general and specific. All but two or three claims are supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples. Concrete language anchors most of the essay, engages the five senses, and keeps it from becoming too vague. Instead of vague abstractions the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay are at times shown or demonstrated in personal, specific, concrete examples, images, metaphors, similes, and/or supporting sensory details that enable us to experience the world through another’s perspective.

4. Average: Approaches the quality of an excellent high school writer. Some of the time, the essay moves fairly easily between general and specific. All but two or three claims are supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples. Concrete language anchors some of the essay, engages the five senses, and keeps it from becoming too vague. Once or twice instead of vague abstractions the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay are at times shown or demonstrated in personal, specific, concrete examples, images, metaphors, similes, and/or supporting sensory details that enable us to experience the world through another’s perspective.

3. Poor: Approaches the quality of a high school writer. The essay rarely moves easily between general and specific. Most of the claims are not supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples. Concrete language anchors a little of the essay but does not keep it from becoming too vague at times. Vague abstractions abound, hiding the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay. There is little that enables us to experience the world through another’s perspective.

2. Very Poor: Approaches the quality of a functional illiterate. The essay does not move between general and specific. The claims are not supported by specific, detailed evidence and/or examples. There is no concrete language. Vague abstractions abound, hiding the basic stories and/or emotions behind the essay, if there are any. There is nothing that enables us to experience the world through another’s perspective.

1. Disastrous: The language is so vague that it is apparent that the writer, as well as the reader, doesn’t know what s/he is talking about.

4. Integration of Verbal and Visual Rhetoric,

worth 8%

7. Excellent: Sophisticated arrangement of VERBAL AND MULTIMEDIA. MULTIMEDIA includes not only still images but also movies, animated images, sound, Flash, or other special effects, but all are essential to the essay. All are placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them. The words clearly connect the multimedia to the argument and keep the flow of the prose as well as the multimedia flowing well.

6. Very good: Effective arrangement of VERBAL AND VISUAL/MULTIMEDIA. MULTIMEDIA includes not only still images but at least one other media, but all are essential to the essay. All are placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them. The words connect the multimedia to the argument fairly well and sustain the flow of the prose.

5. Good: Functional arrangement of WORDS AND PICTURES. All images are placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them. The words connect the images to the argument fairly well.

4. Average: Consistent arrangement of WORDS AND PICTURES. Allor all but one of images are placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them. The words connect the images to the argument somewhat.

3. Poor : Confused or inconsistent arrangement of WORDS AND PICTURES. Images are not usually placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them.

2. Very poor: Minimal control of PICTURES in relation to the rest of the essay. Images are not usually discussed in the text.

1. Disastrous: No apparent logic to the arrangement of VERBAL AND VISUAL/MULTIMEDIA or no VISUAL/MULTIMEDIA.

5.Proofreading: Typos, Spelling, and Grammar errors,

[including the need to spell out any number than can be written in one or two words]

worth 8%

Has the author re-read the essay carefully enough to catch basic proofreading errors, such as typos and missing words?

Are there any grammatical or spelling errors?

7 There are no apparent grammar, spelling, or proofreading errors.

6 There are one or two minor errors, but the prose flows fairly well.

5 There are two or three minor errors, but the prose moves along well enough.

4 There are a number of errors that force the reader to hesitate, however briefly, to figure out what the writer intended. There is some doubt as to how much of the assigned reading on spellchecks, and proofreading has been read or understood. In as much as half of the essay the flow would benefit from better proofreading.

3 Apparently not much of the assigned reading on spellchecks and proofreading has been read or understood, forcing the reader often to hesitate, however briefly, to figure out what the writer intended. In as much as two-thirds of the essay the flow would benefit from better proofreading.

2. The author appears often unaware of the appropriate use of grammar, spellchecks,and proofreading, and most of the flow of the essay suffers as a result.

1. The proofreading, and/or spelling, and/or grammar is atrocious and the essay does not flow at all.

6. Documentation,

worth 6%

Has the author revealed the sources of his images and quotations? Has the author provided complete information about these sources? Has the author followed the University of Chicago footnote system* in each and every detail? (In the website version these will be endnotes, but in the hard copy they must be footnotes.)

7. All the images and quotations are fully documented perfectly according to the University of Chicago documentation system.

6 All the images and quotations are documented according to the University of Chicago documentation system, but there are one or two minor errors.

5 All the images and quotations are documented according to the University of Chicago documentation system, but there are two or three minor errors.

4 Not all the images and quotations are documented according to the University of Chicago documentation system. There is some doubt as to how much of the reading in the handbook on the University of Chicago documentation system has been read or understood. A third or so of the images and/or quotations need better documentation.

3 Apparently not much of reading in the handbook on the University of Chicago documentation system has been read or understood, forcing the reader often to hesitate, however briefly, to figure out what the writer's sources are. Most of the images and/or quotations need better documentation.

2. The author appears unaware of the University of Chicago documentation system.

1. The author appears unaware of the need for documentation.

------------------------

================================================================

7. Punctuation,

worth 12%

Has the author used punctuation as the traffic signals of the language: telling us to when to slow down, what to notice, when to detour, when to stop? Has the author used punctuation to guide you through the essay without hesitating or stumbling (and thus making you retrace your steps and read a sentence again)? Has the author used punctuation the way a composer uses musical notation to show you how to perform the prose in your mind?

Has the author read and understood the relevant readings in the course anthology (Eats, Shoots, and Leaves) and handbook on punctuation, such as the following? Are the paired bracketing devices - - parentheses, dashes, quotation marks, appositives (paired commas) - -complete? Has the author avoided comma splices? Does the author make good use of colons and semicolons? Does the author know how to use hyphens with compound adjectives and numbers? Does the author know when to use quotation marks and how they work with other forms of punctuation? Does the author know when to use ellipses and when to use brackets instead of parentheses? Has the author read and understand the sections on punctuation in the anthology and in the Penguin handbook covering not only the issues above but also periods, apostrophes, exclamation points, slashes, etc. ?

7 The author has used punctuation like a great composer uses musical notation and as a result the prose flows beautifully. The punctuation appears to be perfect.

6 The punctuation guides the reader effectively, and there are no obvious moments of hesitation or stumbling as a result, but the punctuation could probably work even better if revised.

5 The punctuation is generally effective, but there are one or two places where it could be changed, added, or removed to improve the flow of the essay.

4 There is some doubt as to how much of the assigned reading on punctuation has been read or understood. In as much as half of the essay the flow would benefit from changing, adding, or removing punctuation.

3 .Not much of the assigned reading on punctuation has been read or understood. In as much as two-thirds of the essay the flow would benefit from changing, adding, or removing punctuation.

2. The author appears unaware of the appropriate use of many modes of punctuation, and most of the flow of the essay suffers as a result.

1. The punctuation is atrocious and the essay does not flow at all.

Where can I find out more? See your course anthology:" Eats, Shoots, and Leaves: commas, semicolons "

8. Word choice,

worth 15%

Paris Review: How much rewriting do you do?

Hemingway: It depends. I rewrote the ending to A Farewell To Arms, the last page of it, thirty-nine times before I was satisfied.

Paris Review: Was there some technical problem there? What was it that stumped you?

Hemingway: Getting the words right

------------------------------------

ADVICE FOR ACHIEVING BETTER CONCISENESS

Adapted from John Trimble’s Writing with

by Adam Vramescu

“Most of us write as if we’re paid a dime a word” (53).

HE RESULT IS vague writing (lots of passive voice, needlessly protracted sentences, empty intensifiers, expletives and impersonal constructions like “there is” and “it is”)

Conciseness is saying only as much as you mean to say, avoiding wordiness or repetition.

-----------------------------------

Tests for conciseness:

1. Have you repeated a word a number of times? Could you find synonyms? Cut the word in some instances? Combine sentences so you don’t have to use the word?

2. Have you repeated an idea? Occasionally we write two sentences in a row that say essentially the same thing. Make sure each sentence answers a question posed by the preceding one rather than simply restating it.

-----------------------------------

Tip: Verbs are your best tool to say exactly what you mean, so have you used the clearest (not the fanciest) verb possible?

Sometimes clear verbs already lurk in disguise as nouns.

Ex: “Hamlet’s feeling for his father’s death is grievance.”

Find the lurking verb… How about grievance? Grievance = grieve.

So… “Hamlet grieves his father’s death.” Much simpler!

Eliminating Unnecessary Modifiers (or, the road to Hell is paved with adverbs)

Are you using specific words? What do the following words mean?: very, definitely, extremely, truly, ultimately, honestly, etc. The answer: not a whole lot.

Instead of “the desert is very hot,” why not “the desert is scorching”?

Instead of “I ate the pie quickly,” why not “I devoured the pie”?

Empty intensifiers actually dull the effect of the word! To a reader, “very hot” doesn’t really mean “more than regular-hot.” It reads more like “very zzzzzzzzz…” So remember to use descriptive language! It’s more precise and more fun to use.

Myth: Longer sentences are more intelligent than shorter ones. The truth is that sentences don’t have brains and, as such, can’t be intelligent. But in seriousness, let’s think about this: Are long sentences more refined than shorter sentences? We actually think in longer phrases—Trimble calls them “ready-made.” He goes on to say that since these phrases have “the added attraction of sounding elegant,” they don’t seem intuitively bad. But!—“This habit of thinking in prefab phrases slowly dulls our sensitivity to words as words” (53). So what’s the harm? Try these bad boys of diction: Wordiness, repetition, cliché.

Usually, you can use the fewest and simplest words possible.

Fact #1: There’s a shorter way to say it. Keep an eye on your connecting words, especially. Prepositions, conjunctions, and the like. They’re usually hiding something.

Sometimes they’re symptomatic, as in this case: “He fought with great honor.” Nothing bad about the word with, itself. But it’s burying an adjective, “honorably.” So why not “He fought honorably”? Incidentally, the word “great” wasn’t a loss to be mourned, if you remember the section on empty intensifiers from the “Saying What You Mean” handout.
Sometimes they’re just longer than they need to be. Look at these pairs: to/in order to, if/in the event that. Any loss in meaning by trimming the fat? (If this seems petty to you, remember that we’re developing a bag of tricks to deal with wordiness; occasionally you’ll prefer “in order to” for the flow of the sentence, but make sure you’re not just doing this because you want to sound more elegant. An ostrich in a tutu might also think she’s elegant.)

Here’s some typical sentence protraction, from WWS: “His bold and brash temper has been replaced by a careful and prudent manner.” Where’s the repetition there? Check the whopping four adjectives. The sentence was “His impetuosity has been replaced by prudence,” still not a gem but not a clunker.

"Only connect! That was the whole of her sermon. Only connect the prose and the passion, and both will be exalted, and human love will be seen at its height. Live in fragments no longer.”

E. M. Forster, Howards End (1910), ch. 22

EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS

Do NOT just paste your critique in the "Add a comment" box after clicking on the Assignments tab, or after the project author's name in your list of assigned critiques.

Do NOT try to circumvent the whole process by using Google Doc because you need to know which sentences your predecessors have already critiqued in each project.

"Starfish reveal an incredible truth about healing: we must cling to hope in seemingly hopeless circumstances."

Something about this phrasing seems off—how do the starfish reveal truth? Maybe the better word choice would be "find hope in healing". I think also this phrase should be rewritten as "We starfish" so as to keep it in first-person.

"In the end, I must, as exemplified by sea stars' exposure to predators, wholly run towards these risks if confronting them offers any chance of making me a stronger leader, more confident changemaker, more informed thinker, and a more compassionate human being.

I love this sentence, but I just wish it was phrased better. If you want to incorporate the list at the end, you should probably separate this sentence into two phrases otherwise it is quite the mouthful for the reader.

"To spend the next four years consumed by my grades, my organizations, my relationships, my goals and my future is foolish and dull."

After reading several of these lists, I sort of found them off-putting. Using repetition or exhaustive lists can be at times helpful, but I think it gets to be excessive in your essay.

Unity, Coherence, Flow-6 I generally liked the flow of your essay. I think the unity between the parts could be fixed so that the essay is altogether more coherent with better transitions.

Organization and Logical Order of the Prose-5 I wanted to see a better organization of the essay, specifically in the second part. I think if you categorized what you learned from the starfish as your spirit animal, it might make the essay seem more logical.

Specificity and "Concreteness"-7 I think your phrasing and concrete examples really engaged me as a reader. I loved reading the imagery of being underwater and the description of your "limbs." Well done!

Integration of Verbal and Visual Rhetoric-7 I think your incorporation of the images is to be commended. Your captions really connected with what you were talking about in your essay, which helped with unity and clarity.

Proofreading: Typos, Spelling, and Grammar errors-5 I think there are some definite typos and other errors in the essay. Example: "Starfish have taught me that in both effective sea life and effective human life, risk is not to avoided, but instead eagerly welcomed."

==============================================================================

Your reviewing grade will also depend upon how well you follow the instructions below, especially on how specific you are. Extra points will be given for citations of page numbers or section titles in our anthology or the Penguin handbook that will help the author.

Because you can not just repeat what others have said in their critiques, time management is important. The more you procrastinate the more difficult it will be to say something not already said in previous critiques and the fewer points you will earn.

When you are finally finished reviewing, to get credit for your work, if you have not already done so, print out your responses to others by cutting and pasting them into a Word document, not by printing out each page individually from the screen. Turn in the Word document to me.

[1] at least four-hundred words from the point of view of the animal

[2] at least seven-hundred words devoted to what you learned from the animal

[3] must include multimedia (at least two images); to include video supply an image and the link to YouTube or whatever

[4] must end with two accurate word counts: one with and one without quotations. The one without quotations must be at least 1400 words

[5] must include at least two of the required citations (for this version the citations will be endnotes; for the hard copy they must be footnotes.) the required quotations:

[5b] AND ONE from a library book not available in any way on the internet. You may choose one of the books on reserve listed below. (Needless to say, the quote from the reserve book can not be from pages reproduced in our course anthology. )

1. UNITY, COHERENCE, AND FLOW

worth 12%

In addition to identifying every place in the prose that makes you pause, however briefly, consider these questions.

Did the writing flow smoothly so you could follow the main argument?

Can you find the main points?

Are the transitions from one point to the next harsh, or do they transition naturally?

Is the order developed and sustained within and across paragraphs using transitional devices?

Is the introduction inviting?

Is the conclusion satisfying?

Do paragraphs deal with one subject?

RATINGS

7. Perfect flow, with evident or subtle transitions wherever needed.

6. Very good: almost perfect flow with evidence of transitions.

5. Good: fairly good flow, with some evidence of transitions, with perhaps one obvious interruption.

4. Average: average flow with some interruptions, with or without attempts at transitions.

3. Poor: poor flow, with quite a few interruptions, with or without attempts at transitions.

2. Very poor: Minimal control, with few if any attempts at transitions, that is, very poor flow, with many interruptions.

1. Disastrous: No apparent control, no attempt at transitions in the prose, that is, almost no flow.

2. Organization and Logical Order of the Prose,

worth 12%

Is the organization clear from the start and a logical order of sequence maintained?

7. Apparently perfect organization and logical order.

6. Very good: Effective organization and fairly logical order.

5. Good: Functional organization and fairly logical order.

4. Average: Consistent organization and some logical order, with some interruptions.

3. Poor : Confused arrangement and inconsistent logical order, with quite a few interruptions.

2. Very poor: Minimal control and little logical order, with many interruptions.

1. Disastrous: No apparent control, no logical order, no apparent organization.

3. Specificity and "Concreteness": Examples, Verbal Images, Metaphors, Similes, Evidence, Supporting Details

worth 12%

See "Freshness" and the section on images and metaphors in the article, "Diction and Conciseness," in your anthology.

1. Disastrous: The language is so vague that it is apparent that the writer, as well as the reader, doesn’t know what s/he is talking about.

4. Integration of Verbal and Visual Rhetoric,

worth 8%

IS THE ORGANIZATION OF THE VISUAL AND VERBAL RHETORIC CLEAR?

ARE THE IMAGES/MULTIMEDIA ESSENTIAL TO THE ESSAY OR NOT?

ARE THE IMAGES/MULTIMEDIA DISCUSSED, OR AT LEAST REFERRED TO, IN THE TEXT?

ARE THE IMAGES/MULTIMEDIA PLACED NEXT TO THE WORDS THAT CONNECT TO THEM?

5. Good: Functional arrangement of WORDS AND PICTURES. All images are placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them. The words connect the images to the argument fairly well.

4. Average: Consistent arrangement of WORDS AND PICTURES. Allor all but one of images are placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them. The words connect the images to the argument somewhat.

3. Poor : Confused or inconsistent arrangement of WORDS AND PICTURES. Images are not usually placed in the text right next to the words that discuss or refer to them.

2. Very poor: Minimal control of PICTURES in relation to the rest of the essay. Images are not usually discussed in the text.

1. Disastrous: No apparent logic to the arrangement of VERBAL AND VISUAL/MULTIMEDIA or no VISUAL/MULTIMEDIA.

5.Proofreading: Typos, Spelling, and Grammar errors,

[including the need to spell out any number than can be written in one or two words]

worth 8%

Has the author re-read the essay carefully enough to catch basic proofreading errors, such as typos and missing words?

Are there any grammatical or spelling errors?

7 There are no apparent grammar, spelling, or proofreading errors.

6 There are one or two minor errors, but the prose flows fairly well.

5 There are two or three minor errors, but the prose moves along well enough.

3 Apparently not much of the assigned reading on spellchecks and proofreading has been read or understood, forcing the reader often to hesitate, however briefly, to figure out what the writer intended. In as much as two-thirds of the essay the flow would benefit from better proofreading.

2. The author appears often unaware of the appropriate use of grammar, spellchecks,and proofreading, and most of the flow of the essay suffers as a result.

1. The proofreading, and/or spelling, and/or grammar is atrocious and the essay does not flow at all.