Feedback 2017 Part B

Row 1: What the Rubric Says The response identifies a theme or issue connecting the provided sources AND does one of the following: Presents a perspective that is not represented in one of the sources; Brings a particularly insightful approach to one of the perspectives; Makes a strong thematic connection among perspectives.

Row 1: Most Common Areas of Concern Your paper MUST include unique arguments. Some papers were just a summary of the sources. Even some of the papers that were technically arguments, were NOT unique. For your main argument, you cannot just take a source’s claim as your own (or just make a very obvious connection among sources). YOUR perspective must be new, insightful, intriguing, and/or an extension of the sources (not just a rehash of the sources). Your argument must DRIVE the paper. Your unique perspective should be the focus of the paper from beginning to end. The sources are there to help you develop your argument, not the other way around.

Row 2: What the Rubric Says The response’s line of reasoning is logically organized and well-developed. The commentary explains evidence and connects it to claims to clearly and convincingly establish an argument.

Row 2: Most Common Areas of Concern Your argument must be logically developed Many of your papers had an organized structure, but your claims weren’t always logical. Most often when this occurred it was because you provided very little (or irrelevant) support for your claims (through discussion of evidence, limitations, implications, opposing views, etc.) Your argument must be organized Sometimes your ideas were very logical, but the paper lacked a clear and purposeful organizational structure (with transitions) to help lead your reader through your ideas. You must explain how the evidence supports your claims (or discussion of counterclaims). This just comes down to commentary, a difficult skill you’ve been working on all year. You must explain/show how your evidence and examples supports the points you are trying to make.

Row 3: What the Rubric Says The response appropriately synthesizes relevant information drawn from at least two of the provided sources… ...to develop and support a compelling argument.

Row 3: Most Common Areas of Concern You must use the sources to develop YOUR argument. Many of you very thoroughly and accurately summarized and/or analyzed the sources but neglected to use them to support an actual argument. Sometimes even when there was an argument present, it was just tagged on; you did not use the sources to directly support it. Your discussion of the sources must be ACCURATE. Occasionally a student would inaccurately discuss a source’s claims. Whether this is done on accident from a misunderstanding of the source or done on purpose to better fit your needs as an arguer, it is not permitted. This will negatively affect this row of the rubric.

A Note about Rows 2 and 3 Sometimes, when a response has no unique argument present and/or the argument is not developed throughout the paper, the student will automatically receive LOW for Rows 2 and 3. Row 2: You must explain links between evidence and claims. Row 3: You must use sources to support an argument.

Row 4: What the Rubric Says The response communicates clearly to the reader AND … the response effectively integrates material from the sources into the argument (e.g., it is clearly introduced, integrated, or embedded into the text) and accurately attributes knowledge and ideas.

Row 4: Most Common Areas of Concern Syntax should be clear and direct. Use active voice; avoid passive voice. Avoid run-on or fragmented sentences. Be concise and avoid redundancies. Be precise in your word choice; avoid generalities and vague words. Try to use a scholarly tone of voice and avoid informal language.

Examples of Problematic Language Use “In this paper, I will be talking about the 4 sources…” “I believe that…” or “My argument is…” “Americans spend more money on fast food than on other important things…” “It is straight up wrong for society to…” “This quote shows…” “A piece of evidence to back up my claim is…” “My first reason is…” / “My second reason why is…” / “My third reason is…”