research essay, first draft

Criteria : GRADE 60/100 D-

OUTSTANDING

COMPETENT

ADEQUATE

DEVELOPING

INADEQUATE

IDEAS: Analytical Response to Beck’s Text

OUTSTANDING: Ideas are clear, insightful, thought-provoking, and focused so that they consistently support the topic, thesis and audience for the paper. This essay tackles the topic of tribalism in an innovative way, either presenting a new way of looking at the topic or Beck’s text or challenging major ideas within.

COMPETENT: A clear thesis is presented that provides an interesting and/or thoughtful response to the text or assignment. The application of Beck’s ideas to real-world contexts has clear relevance for readers (i.e., the questions “So what?” and “Who cares?” are thoughtfully answered).

ADEQUATE: The thesis is clear but conventional. Tribalism is applied to a real-world context purposefully and there is some indication that this application has relevance for you and/or your readers.

DEVELOPING: Ideas are unclear or clichéd and demonstrate a lack of focus in support of the topic or a central idea, which may be vague or missing. It may have a general or implied thesis; but the idea may be too broad, vague, or obvious.

INADEQUATE: It may be an attempt to meet the requirements of the assignment, but it may have no apparent thesis or a self-contradictory one, or the essay's point is so general or obvious as to suggest little thinking-through of the topic.

Criterion Feedback

Only a small portion of the essay addresses the assigned task for this paper. Your experience as a Christian is a real-world context through which Beck's ideas can be tested. (See notes inside of the draft. There is room to expand this example.) Much of the draft is rhetorical analysis, citing heavily from one of your sources that is a rhetorical analysis of Beck's article. Before beginning your portfolio revision, I recommend that you read through the assignment sheet carefully.

AUDIENCE AND STYLE

OUTSTANDING: Both development and organization anticipate the needs and expectations of the reading audience. The writer effectively conveys the significance of the subject matter to the reader, and all reasonable concerns and/or objections are addressed. The paper has an introduction that draws the reader in, and a conclusion that does more than just repeat the introduction or body paragraphs. Creative elements such as particularly vivid descriptions, figurative language, and/or humor (when appropriate) are present and are used in ways that add to the piece.

COMPETENT: Development and organization suggest awareness of the needs and expectations of the reading audience. A reasonable number of concerns/objections are addressed. The author’s tone is appropriate for the topic, assignment, and target audience. The application of Beck’s ideas to real-world contexts has clear relevance for readers (i.e., the questions “So what?” and “Who cares?” are thoughtfully answered).

ADEQUATE: Development and organization may suggest an awareness of audience but may not show awareness of specific concerns to the same degree as the “A” or “B” essay. The introduction could be too general and the conclusion too repetitive. Tribalism is applied to a real-world context purposely and there is some indication that this application has relevance for you and/or your readers.

DEVELOPING: Development and organization may suggest only occasional or superficial awareness of the needs and expectations of the reading audience. Style may be incoherent, inconsistent, or inappropriate in tone.

INADEQUATE: Development and organization suggest little or no awareness of the needs and expectations of the reading audience.

ORGANIZATION

OUTSTANDING: Organization is coherent, unified, and effective in support of the paper’s purpose/plan and consistently demonstrates effective and appropriate rhetorical transitions between ideas and paragraphs. The logical relationships between ideas are abundantly clear and readers are pulled through the essay with a clear sense of progression.

COMPETENT: Organization is coherent, unified and effective in support of the paper’s purpose/plan and usually demonstrates effective and appropriate rhetorical transitions between ideas and paragraphs. Sufficient transitions allow readers to infer logical connections between ideas.

ADEQUATE: Organization is coherent and unified overall in support of the essay’s purpose/ plan but is ineffective at times and may demonstrate abrupt or weak transitions between ideas or paragraphs. Clear, but perhaps generic (next, another reason, etc.) transitions are used.

DEVELOPING: Organization is confused and fragmented in support of the essay’s purpose/ plan and demonstrates a lack of structure or coherence that negatively affects readability.

INADEQUATE: It may display little or no apparent sense of organization (e.g., the paragraphs lack a sense of progression).

SUPPORT: Applying to a Real-World Context

OUTSTANDING: Development is fresh, with abundant details and examples that arouse audience interest and provide relevant, concrete, specific and insightful evidence in support of sound logic. Nuanced comprehension of all cited sources evident. (This is perhaps shown through purposeful inclusion of material beyond thorough definitions of Beck’s key terms, such as the potential causes of or solutions for tribalism, the contributions of media outlets, etc.). Beck’s ideas about tribalism are applied to a real-world context that is clearly described in abundant detail. A sufficient number of key terms is applied to the real-world context to allow readers to fully understand the concept of tribalism and easily connect it to the real-world context.

COMPETENT: Development is adequate, but may lack depth, with details and examples that arouse audience interest and provide relevant, concrete, specific evidence in support of sound logic. This essay has a more complex narrative, displaying a thoughtful analysis of the ways aspects of tribalism can be seen in real-world situations.

ADEQUATE: Development is sufficient but general, providing adequate but perhaps not interesting details, examples, and evidence that include no logical fallacies or unsupported claims. Enough key terms are clearly defined to reasonably allow a new reader to understand the concept of tribalism (as used in Beck’s article).

DEVELOPING: Development is insufficient, providing scarce or inappropriate details, evidence, and examples that may include logical fallacies or unsupported claims. The paper may contain a list of examples placed in context with key terms but with little or no explanation of how these connections relate to the thesis. The examples may be underdeveloped or may not accurately illustrate key terms.

INADEQUATE: Evidence may be inappropriate and/or off-topic or may consist of generalizations, faulty assumptions, or errors of fact. The paper makes little or no mention of how tribalism is present in real-world contexts and/or key aspects of tribalism are inaccurately applied.

Criterion Feedback

I was not sure what to select here, so I split the difference. You had plenty of supporting detail, but these details do not yet work toward forwarding a thesis that is important to this assignment.

TEXTUAL EVIDENCE: Comprehension and Presentation of Beck’s Text

OUTSTANDING: Nuanced comprehension of all cited sources evident. (This is perhaps shown through purposeful inclusion of material beyond thorough definitions of Beck’s key terms, such as the potential causes of or solutions for tribalism, the contributions of media outlets, etc.).

COMPETENT: All cited texts are introduced clearly, accurately, and thoroughly. Definitions of the concepts associated with tribalism taken from Beck are supplemented with further examples/illustrations, as much needed to be thoroughly understood by readers who are unfamiliar with Beck’s text.

ADEQUATE: The concepts associated with tribalism are defined clearly and accurately, and in a way that is easily accessible to readers who are not familiar with Beck’s text. Concepts are introduced/defined before they are referenced or discussed. Errors in punctuation and mechanics of source citation at times create clarity errors (e.g., the combination of a signal phrase and direct quote create a run-on), but do not create confusion about ownership of ideas.

DEVELOPING: Concepts from outside sources are presented with some contextualization, but perhaps not enough for clarity. Readers familiar with these texts may be able to grasp meaning, but it will be inaccessible to new readers. The connection between a point and its supporting textual example may not always be clear, but the essay demonstrates that the writer understands the purposes and mechanics of source citation. The argument will be unconvincing, inconsistent, or superficial, e.g., because the author concentrates on one specific passage rather than a text as a whole.

INADEQUATE: Concepts from one or more texts are presented inaccurately, or with sparse context, making concepts incomprehensible to new readers. The essay demonstrates little understanding of the purpose of textual evidence and/or the mechanics of source integration. The paper indicates that further instruction and/or practice is needed. This essay may fail to handle borrowed material responsibly and/or to document appropriately.

SENTENCE SKILLS

OUTSTANDING: The sentence structure is varied, and the words are carefully chosen. There is evidence of careful editing since the essay contains few grammatical and/or mechanical errors. How the writer says things is as excellent as what the writer says. The style is energetic, confident, and precise.

COMPETENT: The essay shows strong evidence of editing since there are relatively few grammatical and/or mechanical errors. Style is readable and rhetorically effective in tone, incorporating varied sentence structure and effective word choice.

ADEQUATE: Even in the "C" essay, there should be relatively few grammatical or mechanical errors--not enough to interfere with readability; the writer has done some editing, even though it may be superficial. Style is readable, but unremarkable in tone, sometimes including a lack of sentence variety and/or effective word choice.

DEVELOPING: The style may be compromised by repetitive or flawed sentence patterns and/or inappropriate diction and confusing syntax. Grammatical and mechanical errors may interfere with readability and indicate a less-than-adequate attempt at editing or unfamiliarity with some aspects of Standard Written English.

INADEQUATE: The style suggests serious difficulties with fluency which may be revealed in short, simple sentences and ineffective diction. Grammatical/mechanical errors may interfere with reader comprehension or indicate problems with basic literacy or a lack of understanding of Standard English usage.