Edit English Essay

Draft2 by Junf an Wu

Submission dat e : 01- No v- 2017 10:03PM (UT C- 07 00) Submission ID: 87 304 17 27 File name : 2017 - 10- 09_Junf an_Wu_Draf t1.do cx (20.89K) Word count : 653 Charact e r count : 337 6

The essay is well organized and each point has been clearly made and supported with some evidence. There is room to add more evidence or to dig further to explore and explain the evidence by providing examples or doing more analysis to make the point. Right now each paragraph is missing some depth. There are times when sentences could use clarification and stronger connections. Try editing sentences for clarity and try combining sentences to create longer, fluid ideas.

73/100

FINAL GRADE

20/20 Draft2 GRADEMARK REPORT

GENERAL COMMENTS

Instructor

Essay Rubric

Level o f co mprehensio n & Fo cus:

20- a so phisticated thesis reveals an in- depth analysis o f the argument.

18- a so und thesis demo nstrates a plausible interpretatio n o f the argument.

16 - a cle ar t he sis de monst rat e s some int e rpre t ive compre he nsion of t he argume nt .

14 - a thesis demo nstrates a basic understanding o f the argument.

12- the thesis is so general/simple it do es no t need develo pment: an o bvio us f act.

0- no evidence o f a thesis OR the thesis do es no t demo nstrate a reading o f the arguments.

Organizatio n:

10- exhibits a so phisticated and co herent structure thro ugh skillf ul placement o f ideas and ef f ective transitio ning.

9- exhibits a co herent structure with lo gical placement o f ideas and smo o th transitio ns.

8- e xhibit s a logical st ruct ure and has re lat ive ly smoot h t ransit ions.

7 - exhibits a rudimentary structure that has f airly smo o th transitio ns co mbined with so me cho ppy o nes.

6- much o f the essay seems o ut o f o rder, illo gical and has very f ew transitio ns.

0- essay has little to no sense o f lo gical o rder.

Suppo rt and Fo cus:

20- Ideas are o riginal, clearly develo ped and suppo rted with ef f ective, relevant, and specif ic ref erences in o rder to analyze the text. 3 citatio ns are co rrectly used and placed.

18- ideas are develo ped making use o f relevant and specif ic ref erences in o rder to interpret the text. Less than 3 citatio ns. Citatio n erro r in use.

16- mo st ideas are develo ped, with interpretatio n o f the text, making use o f the relevant and specif ic ref erences f ro m the text. Less than 3 citatio ns. Citatio n erro rs in use.

14 - ide as are brie f ly de ve lope d, using some re le vant and spe cif ic re f e re nce s f rom t he t e xt combine d wit h paraphrasing/summary. Less than 3 citatio ns. Citatio n erro r in use.

12- Ideas are underdevelo ped, unsuppo rted o r suppo rted with

12- Ideas are underdevelo ped, unsuppo rted o r suppo rted with irrelevant text o r summary. Less than 3 citatio ns. Citatio ns erro r in use.

0- mo st ideas are underdevelo ped, repetitive o r suppo rted o nly with summary o f text. Less than 3 citatio ns. Citatio n erro r in use.

Lead/Intro :

10- inno vative, o riginal intro ductio n that indicates writer’s grasp o f to pic, purpo se and audience.

9- pulls the reader into the piece, intro duces the text and thesis.

8- st andard le ad and int roduct ion t o t he t he sis. (it works)

7 - lead is attempted, intro ducing the text and thesis.

6- lead is attempted, but do es little to intro duce essay.

0- to o sho rt, no n- existent, o r unf itting f o r the essay.

Co nclusio n:

10- writer, “co mes to a co nclusio n”, leaving reader satisf ied and thinking.

9- writer, “co mes to a co nclusio n”, abo ut thesis/text, leaving the reader satisf ied.

8- writer, “co mes to a co nclusio n”, ties essay to gether.

7 - re st at e s t he sis, may be supe rf icial.

6- sho rt o r superf icial just tacked o n the end.

0- no n- existent o r do es no t make a po int.

Vo ice:

10- utilizes termino lo gy appro priate to genre, cho o ses distinct wo rds, and varies sentence length and grammatical structure to create an o riginal and co nf ident vo ice bo th f itting to the purpo se o f the essay and intended audience.

9- utilizes termino lo gy appro priate to genre, makes co nscio us wo rd cho ice, and varies so me sentence length and grammatical structure to create a co nvincing vo ice

8- utilizes termino lo gy appro priate to genre, and varies so me sentence length and grammatical structure; vo ice is stro nger in so me parts o f essay.

7 - utilizes termino lo gy appro priate to genre, experiments with varied sentence length and grammatical

structure; a hint o f vo ice is present in essay.

6- writ ing shows lit t le aware ne ss of varying grammat ical st ruct ure s or word choice t o f it purpose of e ssay voice may only be pre se nt in le ad and conclusion.

0- no vo ice and no awareness o f audience demo nstrated; sentences are awkward, rambling f ragmented and/o r co nf using.

Co nventio ns:

20- mastery o f co nventio ns: no spelling, punctuatio n o r f o rmat erro rs (including MLA format & citing text).

18- stro ng co nventio ns: co rrect f o rmat; o ne o r two reaso nable erro rs in punctuatio n, verb tense, spelling, and/o r MLA f o rmat.

16- a f ew erro rs in f o rmat, spelling, punctuatio n, verb tense o r MLA f o rmat.

14 - Some e rrors combine d wit h care le ss e rrors in spe lling, conve nt ions, e dit ing, t e nse or MLA f ormat .

12- f requent spelling/editing typing and MLA f o rmat erro rs.

0- to o many erro rs in spelling, co nventio ns, tense o r MLA f o rmat to be co nsidered a f inal draf t.

PAGE 1

Text Comment. T he essay is well o rganized and each po int has been clearly made and suppo rted with so me evidence. T here is ro o m to add mo re evidence o r to dig f urther to explo re and explain the evidence by pro viding examples o r do ing mo re analysis to make the po int. Right no w each paragraph is missing so me depth. T here are times when sentences co uld use clarif icatio n and stro nger co nnectio ns. T ry editing sentences f o r clarity and try co mbining sentences to create lo nger, f luid ideas.

Text Comment. 7 3/100

PAGE 2

PAGE 3

PAGE 4

RUBRIC: CCSS 11TH- 12TH GRADE ARGUMENT

CLAIM (20%)

EXCEPT IONAL (5)

SKILLED (4)

PROFICIENT (3)

DEVELOPING (2)

INADEQUAT E (1)

DEVELOPMENT (20%)

EXCEPT IONAL (5)

SKILLED (4)

PROFICIENT (3)

DEVELOPING (2)

INADEQUAT E (1)

AUDIENCE (20%)

EXCEPT IONAL (5)

0 / 5

0 / 5

T he text intro duces a clear, arguable claim that can be suppo rted by reaso ns and evidence.

T he text intro duces a co mpelling claim that is clearly arguable and takes a purpo sef ul po sitio n o n an issue. T he text has a structure and o rganizatio n that is caref ully craf ted to suppo rt the claim.

T he text intro duces a precise claim that is clearly arguable and takes an identif iable po sitio n o n an issue. T he text has an ef f ective structure and o rganizatio n that is aligned with the claim.

T he text intro duces a claim that is arguable and takes a po sitio n. T he text has a structure and o rganizatio n that is aligned with the claim.

T he text co ntains an unclear o r emerging claim that suggests a vague po sitio n. T he text attempts a structure and o rganizatio n to suppo rt the po sitio n.

T he text co ntains an unidentif iable claim o r vague po sitio n. T he text has limited structure and o rganizatio n.

0 / 5

T he text pro vides suf f icient data and evidence to back up the claim while po inting o ut the strengths and limitatio ns o f bo th the claim and co unterclaim. T he text pro vides a co nclusio n that suppo rts the argument.

T he text pro vides co nvincing and relevant data and evidence to back up the claim and skillf ully addresses co unterclaims. T he co nclusio n ef f ectively strengthens the claim and evidence.

T he text pro vides suf f icient and relevant data and evidence to back up the claim and f airly addresses co unterclaims. T he co nclusio n ef f ectively reinf o rces the claim and evidence.

T he text pro vides data and evidence to back up the claim and addresses co unterclaims. T he co nclusio n ties to the claim and evidence.

T he text pro vides data and evidence that attempt to back up the claim and unclearly addresses co unterclaims o r lacks co unterclaims. T he co nclusio n merely restates the po sitio n.

T he text co ntains limited data and evidence related to the claim and co unterclaims o r lacks co unterclaims. T he text may f ail to co nclude the argument o r po sitio n.

0 / 5

T he text anticipates the audience's kno wledge level, co ncerns, values, and po ssible biases abo ut the claim. T he text addresses the specif ic needs o f the audience.

T he text co nsistently addresses the audience's kno wledge level, co ncerns, values, and po ssible biases abo ut the claim. T he text addresses the specif ic needs o f the

SKILLED (4)

PROFICIENT (3)

DEVELOPING (2)

INADEQUAT E (1)

COHESION (20%)

EXCEPT IONAL (5)

SKILLED (4)

PROFICIENT (3)

DEVELOPING (2)

INADEQUAT E (1)

CONVENT IONS (20%)

EXCEPT IONAL (5)

SKILLED (4)

audience.

T he text anticipates the audience's kno wledge level, co ncerns, values, and po ssible biases abo ut the claim. T he text addresses the specif ic needs o f the audience.

T he text co nsiders the audience's kno wledge level, co ncerns, values, and po ssible biases abo ut the claim. T he text addresses the needs o f the audience.

T he text illustrates an inco nsistent awareness o f the audience's kno wledge level and needs.

T he text lacks an awareness o f the audience's kno wledge level and needs.

0 / 5

T he text uses wo rds, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the majo r sectio ns o f the text, creates co hesio n and clarif ies the relatio nship between the claim and reaso ns, between reaso ns and evidence, and between claims and co unterclaims.

T he text strategically uses wo rds, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the majo r sectio ns o f the text. T he text explains the relatio nships between the claim and reaso ns as well as the evidence. T he text strategically links the co unterclaims to the claim.

T he text skillf ully uses wo rds, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the majo r sectio ns o f the text. T he text identif ies the relatio nship between the claim and reaso ns as well as the evidence. T he text ef f ectively links the co unterclaims to the claim.

T he text uses wo rds, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the majo r sectio ns o f the text. T he text co nnects the claim and reaso ns. T he text links the co unterclaims to the claim.

T he text co ntains limited wo rds, phrases, and clauses to link the majo r sectio ns o f the text. T he text attempts to co nnect the claim and reaso ns.

T he text co ntains f ew, if any, wo rds, phrases, and clauses to link the majo r sectio ns o f the text. T he text do es no t co nnect the claims and reaso ns.

0 / 5

T he text presents a f o rmal, o bjective to ne that demo nstrates standard English co nventio ns o f usage and mechanics while attending to the no rms o f the discipline (i.e. MLA, APA, etc.).

T he text presents an engaging, f o rmal and o bjective to ne. T he text intentio nally uses standard English co nventio ns o f usage and mechanics while attending to the no rms o f the discipline (i.e. MLA, APA, etc.).

T he text presents a f o rmal, o bjective to ne. T he text demo nstrates standard English co nventio ns o f usage and mechanics while attending to the no rms o f the discipline (i.e. MLA, APA, etc.).

PROFICIENT (3)

DEVELOPING (2)

INADEQUAT E (1)

T he text presents a f o rmal to ne. T he text demo nstrates standard English co nventio ns o f usage and mechanics while attending to the no rms o f the discipline (i.e. MLA, APA, etc.).

T he text illustrates a limited awareness o f f o rmal to ne. T he text demo nstrates so me accuracy in standard English co nventio ns o f usage and mechanics.

T he text illustrates a limited awareness o f o r inco nsistent to ne. T he text demo nstrates inaccuracy in standard English co nventio ns o f usage and mechanics.