600 words 8 hrs

ENG 350 – “Portfolio” Revision of a Formal Essay: Overview and Instructions

Overview

For this assignment, you will select one of your earlier graded essays to revisit and revise. You

will submit the newly revised essay and an attached Reflection (do not turn in the old FD). You

cannot turn in an essay that you somehow skipped or failed to submit; this assignment calls for

you to revisit a final draft (FD) previously posted on Blackboard.

You may choose one (1) of the following:

• Essay One – Summarizing (“Rites of Passage” or “Stirring Up Trouble”)

• Essay Two – Classifying (“Little Communities” or “Culture Shock”)

• Essay Three – Comparing/Contrasting (Anthropology, Education, History, Literature)

• Essay Four – Analyzing (Psychology, Sociology)

• Essay Five – Evaluating (a great feature film)

• Essay Six – Interpreting (a series of visual images)

Instructions

As stated above, this assignment consists of two parts:

• Part I – Revise the entire essay from beginning to end. PAY ATTENTION TO THE

NUMBERS GIVEN TO YOUR ESSAY FOR EACH ITEM ON THE SCORING

GUIDE, and improve each area identified. Proofread carefully and focus on correct MLA

format, especially for in-text citations and for the Works Cited section of your essay

(consult Purdue OWL). As you revise sentence-by-sentence and paragraph-by-paragraph,

and page-by-page, focus especially on Focus/Scope – Organization,

Content/Development and Language/Style – Conventions. In other words, add what needs

to be added, delete anything extraneous, clarify what needs to be clarified, and tightly

organize what needs to be ordered more coherently. This also means to focus on word

choice, grammar, punctuation, capitalization. Embed quotes more effectively, be mindful

of verb tense consistency, and use a variety of appropriate verbs when summarizing or

analyzing text. Revision requires that you eliminate contractions, use of the second

person “you” (e.g., “… when reading the passage you get the sense that Freud rejects the

premise…”) and the use of the personal pronoun “I” (when the essay prompt does not

invite personalized opinions or reflections). Even an A- essay can undergo an overhaul in

certain aspects, so be meticulous and methodical, and make even a good essay greater.

• Part II – Reflection: This should be a separate page (or more), where you specifically

discuss improvements you made to the essay. You will point out 3-5 places where you

improved the essay in terms of Focus/Scope – Organization, Content/Development. Here

is a description of proficiency in this category: “The essay addresses the prompt in an

outstanding manner, responds to all aspects of the task; is organized clearly and

consistently based on a strong central purpose; provides substantial and specific evidence

to support major positions.” Next, you will point out 3-5 specific examples where you

improved the essay in terms of its Language/Style – Conventions. Here is a description of

proficiency in this category: “ The essay demonstrates exceptional control of sentence

structure and precise word choice; is almost entirely free of errors in grammar, usage, and

mechanics (this includes proper MLA format with heading, title, in-text citations and

Works Cited).”

• The Reflection should include specific examples of what you revised to improve the

essay. Look carefully at the example below.

Reflection

The essay “Robert Rose’s Pathological Behavior Analyzed through the Lens of

Seligman” received a “B” for the final draft, and after reviewing the scoring guide there were

clear areas identified for improvement. Revisiting this essay proved to be a rewarding experience

for me, since I am interested in improving as a writer before graduating with a B.A. in sociology

and entering graduate school next fall.

The first areas to revise involved Focus/Scope – Organization – Content/Development.

The scoring guide indicated that the thesis in my introduction needed improvement; it did not

clearly convey that Seligman’s theories would enlighten those who are baffled by Robert Rose’s

bizarre behaviors, as described in the news article “Gunman Kills Himself After Hostage

Drama.” I revised the thesis to assert the following: “An examination of the gunman’s

pathological behaviors through the lens of Seligman’s theories clarifies for lay observers what

was previously incomprehensible.” Next, the scoring guide revealed that an essential body

paragraph was missing from the final draft; I failed to include a summary of the “key ideas from

the expert serving as an authoritative source who explains behaviors to” casual observers. This

omission resulted in the essay having no strong foundation upon which to build my analysis. The

revised version now includes a solid paragraph explaining Seligman’s concepts of trauma, fear,

control, depression, and competence. Now, the reader has a better chance of understanding when

the essay applies these concepts to Rose’s actions. Later in my essay, the scoring guide states

that I did not pinpoint enough distinct behaviors of Rose and apply Seligman’s theories to these

actions. The final draft did examine Rose taking an underage girl as a hostage and ordering her to

undress, but the prompt required “approximately five distinct behaviors” to be analyzed. In my

revision, I added explanations for the gunman ordering pizza and summoning a Catholic priest,

and why he took his own life as the drama escalated. In this way, the revised essay has far more

substance than the final draft contained. Finally, the scoring guide pointed out that the final draft

did not have enough quotes from Seligman in the body paragraphs. The revised version now

includes several quotes from the psychology expert. For example, when the essay examines

Rose’s suicide, I inserted a quote from Seligman to explain the gunman’s act as an attempt to

regain control.

Although the essay received a “4” in the area of Writing Quality, I corrected several

errors discovered in the final draft. I capitalized proper nouns such as “Catholic” and “Special

Weapons and Tactics Team.” I also deleted references to the gunman as “Robert” because in

formal writing the suspect’s last name should be used: Rose. Several sentences used the second

person “you” (“As you can see..” and “You never know what is going on inside the head of a

deranged person…”); I revised these. My final draft also contained many contractions (“they’re”,

“doesn’t”, “wouldn’t”, etc.) and they were eliminated in the revised essay in order to meet the

standards of formal academic writing. The last area of focus involved in-text citations and my

Works Cited entries at the end of the essay. Admittedly, I was too lazy to research the proper

MLA format when I wrote the final draft. For my revision, I consulted Purdue Online Writing

Lab and meticulously revised the way in which I had documented my sources.

The process of revision helped reinforce the importance of proofreading and the value of

revisiting an essay with a critical eye. I will use this process in the future whenever I am asked to

submit a piece of analytical writing.