Ex 4: Article Analysis
Read Consalvo (in Williams and Smith 203-222). What are the benefits and drawbacks of treating this article as an exploration of gender? Write a 500-word response that demonstrates your ability to engage with an academic text. (Upload to Turnitin.com.)
Rather than listing the benefits and drawbacks in different paragraphs, then tacking on an intro and conclusion, take and support a non-obvious, debatable claim that explores gender and Consalvo's article.
Other disciplines may have a very specific, formal way to critique an academic article. I'm asking for the kind of persuasive paper you wrote towards the end of Basic Comp or STW, in which you take a clear stand (not "There are many interesting things to say about this paper," or "Some may say this paper is X, and some may say that it is Y, but I'm going to argue that it is Z.") and back it up with specific evidence (in this case, quotations from the essay we're reading). You've already been doing this, on a small scale, when you quote from the assigned chapters on your blog. Now I'm asking you to do so on a larger scale, so that you can get my feedback on your academic writing, before we launch into the term paper.Paper Criteria Brief.docx
|
Criterion |
A |
C |
|
Depth/Ideas Response Stance Thesis Knowledge Opinion |
Ambitious and engaging. Clear and defensible. Insightful, worthwhile and nuanced. Deep, broad, & integral to
thesis. |
Acceptable and productive. Mostly clear; generally defensible. Productive and useful. Usefully connected to the thesis. Parts may seem simplistic or
one-sided. |
|
Support/ Evidence Examples Substance Sources (if needed) Int. Engagement |
Apt, critically and effectively
applied. Insightful, with effective
explanations Brief, weighty, intellectually satisfying. Well-chosen; cited accurately &
briefly. Adept; fully & deeply engaged. |
Acceptable; generally applied
usefully. Generally clear and helpful; possibly
sparse. Good content; perhaps some filler. Cited reasonably well; sources may
be iffy. Some solid engagement evident. |
|
Coherence/ Blueprint Paragraphs Transitions Unified Path Title/Thes./Concl. |
Defining, logical & complex. Well-crafted steps along "the path." Logical, smooth, engaging flow. Clear, inviting, insightful,
ambitious. Harmonious and cumulative. |
Usefully identifies supporting
points. Generally focused on the main topic. Helpful, but possibly weak or
mechanical. The reader must work to identify it. May not fully agree. |
|
Style/ Diction Syntax Focus Tone |
Careful selection of powerful words. Polished, elegant sentences &
phrases. Sophisticated handling of reader's
needs, Extremely well-suited to the occasion. |
Minor word-level errors, but
generally sound. Minor phrase- and sentence-level
issues. Generally acknowledges reader's
needs. Some evidence of the proper tone. |
|
Mechanics/ Punctuation Words & Phrases Sentences General Format |
Few if any errors in punctuation,
words, phrases, sentences, and general format. |
May contain moderate errors in
punctuation, words, phrases, sentences or general format, that affect the presentation. |
If you're looking for more guidelines on how to write this kind of paper, here are some handouts I've written on the nature of academic research, on the logical argument in college writing,and a walkthrough of a typical student approaching a writing assignment without a good plan, along with an explanation of a professor's response to a weak paper.
Dr. Jerz, there is no slot for this paper on turnitin.com
Beth Ann, try logging off and back on again -- I think you should be able to see it.