10

ONE DOCUMENT (not a folder) made up of all my previous papers written so far threaded together with your improved analysis and claims progression based on your outline followed by an alphabetized MLA or APA bibliography. Keep the rubric in mind as you write and proofread meticulously. SOAR is the acronym.  Note: My final paper should include all the previous orders together and you add more content so that it would sumup to 20-24 pages ( 3 pages bibilography). follow the below instructions for writing. Writing Style Use your "I" voice and develop different styles of writing. In Writing Workshop I, you may have explored different kinds of writing. You may be great at writing stories or memoirs, but freeze when it comes to working on a full-length academic paper. In fact, all kinds of writing can help you develop your topic. A case history in medicine is a narrative; poems are lyrical, but so are the emotional cries of someone in pain, and the experience of pain is crucial to our theme; whenever you read something you should always analyze and criticize it in terms of your thoughts; you've all engaged in some kind of arguments and now you must organize them formally to see the different points of view embedded in your topic; doctors, lawyers, and even tourist agents describe patients, defendants, or resorts, and so you must use descriptive writing to paint the pictures that bring your problem to life; and whenever you explain a procedure or skill to someone, you are engaged in expository writing. By using narrative, lyrical, analytical/critical, argumentative, descriptive, and expository writing to explore your topic, you can be sure you are covering all aspects as you develop and refine your unique voice. What personal stories are connected to your topic? (narrative) How would you explain your topic to someone from another planet? (expository) What kinds of arguments have you heard about this topic? (argumentation) What emotions are connected to your topic? (lyrical) Describe a typical person, text, or situation in detail that epitomizes the victim or site of your problem. (descriptive) How would you analyze or break down the components of your problem in order to criticize the whys and wherefores? (critical/analytical) Sentence structure is incorrect, there are grammatical errors, word choice is limited, or cliche, paragraphs are too short or too long, and the paper lacks a strong, consistent voice, succumbing to the cut-and-paste reporting, or the repetition of simple words that are not developing the thesis. Writing is clear but needs a richer and/or more technical vocabulary. There are some syntactical or style errors when quoting. Some sections resemble cut and paste. The paper lacks a unique writing style. The writer exhibits a very good style, with a few proofreading errors, or inconsistencies in voice; vocabulary could be richer or more technical, sentence structure more complex. The writer uses a strong, elegant, persuasive writing style,with a distinctive voice, varied sentence structure, well-developed, cohesive paragraphs, and complex, abstract, or technical vocabulary when needed, free of grammatical errors and proofreading mistakes, with correct parenthetical APA or MLA documentation. Originality The paper repeats cliche claims, lacks a unique voice or point of view, or a sufficiently provocative critical analysis of previous material. There are no primary sources, interviews, field research to contribute to the field. The writer has a personal investment in the topic, but lacks a truly original point of view, organizing other people's research,without sufficient interpretation, and repeating present knowledge, rather than forging a new path. The writer is beginning an original research journey with good primary sources, but still lacks the confidence, courage, and commitment to fully express and develop a completely original approach. The writer presents a new angle on an old topic, or investigates something for the first time, or does investigative research to contribute to the field, or puts two or more disciplines together in a unique way, or presents the evidence in a novel way so that the findings could be publishable. Argumentation Claims may be omitted or misunderstood. The paper shows a lack of argumentation and logic; the thesis is not clearly articulated, or adequately developed, the thesis does not embrace the topic, or the thesis is non-existent. Thesis and claims are there somewhere but the paper lacks consistent development and application to evidence. There may be some lack of clarity in definitions, or lack of specificity in the claim of fact, lack of analysis, hierarchy, and applications in the claims of value, or lack of imagination and procedural detail in the claim of policy. Thesis and claims are clearly articulated, but more causality and detail are needed, as well as stronger rebuttals of counterclaims. There is a clear, original thesis that is presented, developed, and refined as each piece of new evidence is analyzed. Claims of fact, value, and policy are causally related and organized appropriately. Counterclaims are expressed or considered and refuted with attention to pointing out logical fallacies and coming up with better solutions. Depth and Diversity of Research The bibliography is inadequate or even non-existent. Important elements like books, professional journals, etc could be eliminated, or the sources are all biased in favor of one point of view. There is a complete bibliography but more scholarly books or journals are needed, as well as diverse points of view. There could be a preponderance of secondary, as opposed to primary sources. The bibliography is complete with all necessary elements, but needs a little more depth and diversity in order to really exhaust the subject to establish authority. Research shows both depth, in terms of using the expertise of professional journals, the best books on the subject, as well as the timely articles, interviews, field research and case studies pertinent to the topic. All points of view are considered, especially those that go against the author's thesis.