Project I: Sword Reviews
Self-Evaluation:
1. Focus
a. I believe that my paper states a clear purpose intended for the reader and for the topic. I strove to make an attempt to relate various anecdotal stories to one general topic and hopefully put my point across about my thesis, which was the fact that I believe that many Victorianesque aspects of my college career have come into play when shaping who I am. I additionally believe that information and details within the paper are extremely relevant and critical to the thesis. The conclusion, in addition, wraps up what I was trying to say throughout the whole paper.
b. On the 1-7 scale, I would rate the focus to be a 6.
2. Organization
a. The paper was clearly organized through the use of both headings and subheadings, at least that was the clear intention. The visual items in the paper accurately correspond with the verbal rhetoric. The pictures are integrated into the text. The captions, in addition, help to function with the paper. The pictures seem to be related to the particular sections in which they are placed and that they address. The only thing I could do differently is better form the website portion so the captions are more compatible with all web browsers. (I’ve noticed, in retrospect, that the captions for the pictures are jumbled when the user is not using FireFox.)
b. On the 1-7 scale, I would rate the organization to be a 6.
3. Flow
a. The only criticism I had of the way I did the paper here was that the use of the subheadings kind of interrupted the flow of the paper. I was a little disappointed with the effect this produced, but found it necessary to the way the paper was written. So, it was a trade-off. At times I use too many commas, but it’s my style of writing and went back and tried to eliminate as many as possible. Overall, I think the organization works well to induce a good flow within the paper and the concept itself produces a good effect in relating certain characteristics of the project to the reader.
b. On the 1-7 scale, I would rate the flow to be a 6.
Reviews of others:
Of mhv89’s Project I...
Focus: 6
The focus of this paper seems to be pretty clear and is well-maintained throughout. It is formally written and the language is consistent. The sexual themes of the various characters are thoroughly explored in their societal context and are well-presented. I would recommend that the author consider putting in her thesis more emphasis on how she will explore these sex and gender issues equally as much as they related to Jude than just a societal context. There seemed to be an imbalance in what was stated in the topic paragraph and how deeply she actually explored the effects on Jude. The quotes are extremely relevant and well-worked into the paper.
Organization: 6
The organization of the paper is very clear throughout. The visual elements, however, seem to be discussed inadequately in the text. Perhaps a stronger emphasis on how those visual elements relate to the body of the work would bring a better togetherness to the whole assignment. Other than that, there are good transitions between the paragraphs and the conclusion ties everything in with the beginning. Altogether good!
Flow: 7
There is a smooth flow. Smooth like silk. Like silky ice. Silky ice oil. The slickest of the smooth flows. Ok, maybe not that smooth. But seriously, good job all around. This was a well-constructed, coherent paper in my opinion, which, of course, doesn''t really matter. I don''t give you the final grade. The only thing I could possibly comment on with the flow is that you might find a better way to transition from the final body paragraph into your conclusion.
Of postalservice’s Project I...
Focus: 7
This was an extremely focused and well-written paper. The thesis was clearly present at the beginning of the paper and evolved throughout the piece until the end, at which point the conclusion wrapped it up nicely. The examples within the piece prove how Hardy effectively provides a social commentary on Victorian life. All the details seem relevant to the topic. The literature cited was obviously directly necessary to the theme of the paper and supported the argument nicely.
Organization: 7
The visual rhetoric and captions do a really nice job of coexisting with each other on the paper. It was relatively easy to follow the order of sequence within the paper. Really, this was a clear read from start to finish for me. Obviously the author put a significant amount of effort into it. The transitions take place relatively seamlessly and the paragraphs are independent but tie together nicely to make a whole piece.
Flow: 6
Really it''s hard to keep typing comments on this paper. It just went well from start to finish. Maybe you should capitalized Bible? Or perhaps putting a comma after "her lover" in that same sentence. The only thing that really created a bother at all were minor punctuation errors, which can be easily fixed with another proofread. I like the word "toxic" to describe his relationship with Sue. I circled that a few times on my hard copy earlier today.
Of peterpan’s Project I...
Focus: 5
The author makes a pretty clear thesis statement at the beginning. He makes an argument concerning what it takes to be a good leader, and how Barrie embodied this. The author additionally calls up certain authors to support his point that are relevant to the topic that he discusses, most specifically Barrie. The one thing I did notice about the author''s paper that interrupts to focus (and simultaneously the flow) is that he tends to go off on tangents (particularly tangent stories about Barrie''s life that seem unrelated to the topic of leadership). This caused the paper to read more as a biography of Barrie and a praise of his work than on the aspects of leadership in Barrie.
Organization: 3
There was no integration of visual items into the paper. With pictures it would have been more helpful to understand some of the visuals the author brings to mind. For instance, the image of Peter Pan as a boy could help strengthen the argument by calling to mind a visual image associated with the verbal description. In addition, an image of Barrie would''ve helped. I had difficulty at times following the content with respect to the thesis. In addition the paper seems to be unfinished. There was a point where "cite" was left in as if it was an instruction by the author to himself to cite a source. Also, without spaces and indentation it seemed like one giant paragraph.
Flow: 3
The flow was interrupted by various seemingly unrelated tangents. Additionally, the author''s use of punctuation was distracting. I would suggest that the author re-read the paper and correct informal uses of punctuation. Additionally, I would suggest that some sentences (primarily towards the end, especially in the last sentence) be chopped into separate sentences because the continuous use of separating clauses with commas can make a sentence hard to get through.
Of Jane Austen’s Project I...
Focus: 4
The opening paragraph of this essay contains some extremely bold statements that make the rest of the essay hard to acknowledge. Although the focus is clear, it''s very hard to follow when what are so clearly opinions are stated so matter-of-factly. It is quite difficult to enjoy a rhetorical argument when its being presented as a lecture of already-established facts. Avoid using words like "greatest" and "fascinating" and instead try convincing us why he''s great and fascinating without actually saying it. The details seem relevant and they include Mill''s body of works. The conclusion continued to praise Mill, but it didn''t quite leave the reader with a sense of why he needs to be praised. The author can continually state that Mill is amazing all day long, but it seems integral that he or she makes an attempt to tie factual evidence in with the conclusion.
Organization: 4
The paper is obviously organized and it is divided into sections quite clearly. However, there really is no transition between the paragraphs and the introduction and the conclusion don''t really address what was referred to in the body. Although the paragraphs clearly deal with one subject, the introduction leaves a significant load of expectations and the conclusion leaves much to be desired. It''s hard to prove someone is the "greatest" in 1400 words. The pictures, however, do a relatively good job of supporting the argument. The only problem is that they are not adequately addressed in the text.
Flow: 4
The writing style is extremely clear and direct, but the flow isn''t smooth. The paragraphs need to be better tied together to allow the piece to be read more smoothly. I would consider the over-use of opinion words to be adding "fluff" to the piece. The language that is used, however, is clear and easily understood and allows the piece to be read without much confusion.
Others reviews of mine with back-reviews:
Focus (Overall quality: 5.4)
Reviewer 1
The author’s purpose is on his life journey and what he has learned from it. He states his thesis specifically in the introduction.
Back Review: Thank you for stating exactly what you felt clearly, and most of all succinctly.
Reviewer 2
I enjoyed this essay. I feel the author has a skill in placing the audience in the background and a gift for writing painfully true stories. I specifically enjoyed the content of the essay and the detailed description applied to each chapter. The author is clearly writing in a format that comes naturally and some of his witty, humorous personality emerges throughout the essay.
The focus, however, is lacking, as the thesis is not concise. Understandably, the thesis is not concise as it is an open-ended question, “Who are you.” However, the author does a great job showing us his progression towards answering this question and he does cite some great quotes to support his conclusion. Ultimately, the paper ends with a student that is in the process of self-discovery. The problem here is that the author is attempting to focus on “who he is” yet his view of self is not in focus. In that sense, he is being asked to focus on something that is out of focus.
Perhaps the author could assuage this confusion by expanding the introductory thesis to prepare the reader for what is to follow. The idea of breaking up the essay into three titled chapters compartmentalizes the short essay into even smaller parts. The Author mentions three scenes from the past in the title, but does not set them up in the thesis.
Back Review: Thank you.
Reviewer 3
Thesis: “I may have known who I was before I came to the University of Texas, but as Alice was then, I am still now in the process of finding out who I am. What follows are three chapters describing snapshots of my college experience that have shaped who I am now.”
I enjoyed reading your paper. You took a common thesis and made it interesting and unique.
Back Review: Thank you for succinctly telling me how you felt.
Reviewer 4
The thesis is clear and defined, and appears to be "This accurately summarizes how I feel at present: I may have known who I was before I came to the University of Texas, but as Alice was then, I am still now in the process of finding out who I am."
The information and details are relevant to the topic and focus, and create a good picture of your college experience. However, I feel as though the conclusion just leaves the reader in limbo, wondering if there really is a conclusion or just confusion. (Clever, eh?)
Also, mention more of the strange characters that parallel Victorian literature are; I''m sure the reader would be curious to hear about your parallels.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 5
It''s focused, for sure, but it seems like it''s lacking the "connection" Bump''s looking for. Perhaps at the end you could tie it all together a little more tightly, bringing the three stories together to show that you are a direct result of these three experiences (among others, as you state.)
Back Review: I'm kind of lost as to what you're saying.
Organization (Overall quality: 5.8 )
Reviewer 1 Good use of headings and subheadings in his writing AND his pictures. Although his picture captions were sometimes off and were placed over his actual writing (so that I could not see the words behind the caption), his paper looked pleasing to the eye. The footnotes all work well.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 2 The author wrote a solid, well-organized essay around a weak thesis statement. Overall, the author does a good job maintaining the sequence of the essay. However, as previously mentioned, the paragraphs suffer transitionally in the middle of the paper due to the three chapter titles. The three chapters themselves are well written and a quintessential part of the essay. By expanding the thesis, the author will fix this problem. The order is good and the introduction is inviting.
The author begins by questioning attempting to answer a question (who am I). Then the author sets up three college examples that have shaped the person he has become. Finally, the author ends with the conclusion (the search for the truth continues). In the conclusion, I struggled with the three following sentences:
“Perhaps the truth in searching is not having found what I was looking for originally. Perhaps the truth that I seek is something entirely new and unknown to me. Perhaps the truth I’ve been searching for has already been found.”
I can almost see what the author wants to do here. However, the ambiguity of these three lines does not nail down the conclusion. The organization does not contribute to the thesis statement
I felt the visual aides were well distributed throughout the essay and explicitly discussed in the text.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 3 I like how you’ve split your paper into different chapters of your life. You wrote your paper in a personal tone, but kept it academically credible.
You’ve made excellent connections. You’ve connected Newman, Alice, and Kipling. You’ve accomplished what this class is all about: connecting. And you did it in a well done, organized paper.
I would have liked to see more in “A Well-Rounded Two-Minded Individual.” The idea is interesting. I think you could have expanded more in that area.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly. Thank you.
Reviewer 4 I know you mentioned in class to read your paper in Firefox, which I am doing, but your captions cover up some of your paper''s text. As much as it sucks, you should probably try to fix this if you can. The pictures were relevant, but honestly, the Disney photos weren''t very original. You may wish to find some other "Alice" pictures that are relevant, or try to use other images to support your ideas.
I really enjoyed the "chapters" that you added; it is different than the typical paper format we are used to writing. There is definitely logical order, though it is unique in that there are different topics throughout. Therefore, I can''t say as I would remark on your lack of transitions, considering the organization of the paper. Like I mentioned before, the conclusion isn''t very satisfying, and you may be better off summarizing what you think rather than saying "perhaps".
Back Review: I suck at internets.
Reviewer 5 I personally find the subsections a bit distracting, although I see your intentions. Each of these sections don''t seem long enough to warrant being separated. I would consider condensing them without the subtitles, just for unity''s sake.
Oh, and also, you have a type after your picture of a homeless guy. It says "fist" when you meant "first." Just thought you should know.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Flow (Overall quality: 5.4 )
Reviewer 1 Each paragraph moved smoothly to the next. I did not detect any passive voicing in his paper.
There should be a comma after “the past few years.”
Plangdale: Much like the shy and off-put Alice I could only answer as she did, “I—I hardly know, Sir, just at present—at least I know who I was when I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then.”
There should be a comma after “Alice,” I believe.
Plangdale: As I walked out of the Trinity garage every morning the fist thing I saw was a giant metallic image of the seal of the University of Texas.
I think “fist” should be “first”
Plangdale: During my first winter at college I had a rather unique encounter with a homeless man that changed the way I thought about who I am.
Comma after “college”
Plangdale: One winter night I was walking down 21st Street with a group of my friends and a homeless man approached us.
Comma after “winter night”
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 2 The flow of the paper slows due some minor grammatical errors. First, the author misplaces or omits commas in a few places. Here are a few examples with suggested corrections in parentheses.
“Through the past few years I have realized more about myself” (Use a comma to set off introductory elements)
“But it all leads to an answer” (Use a comma to avoid confusion)
“I felt like vomiting, but at this point in my life I had never vomited after drinking.” (Use a comma to set off parenthetical elements)
“My first winter at college I had a rather unique encounter with a homeless man” (Use a comma to set off introductory elements)
Commas are one of the most confusing items in grammar. Oscar Wilde once said, “I have spent most of the day putting in a comma and the rest of the day taking it out.” So, even the great ones get messed up here.
Secondly, the author uses the passive voice a few times and adds some vagueness to the paper. I struggle with this rule too so I will try to explain things that I have recently heard about my own writing. The active voice is more direct than the passive. The habitual use of the active voice will give you forcible writing.
Here is an example with suggested correction in parentheses.
“My roommate, who has since been expelled from the university numerous times, had taken his cocaine-induced violent rage out on me for the last time.”
(My expelled, cocaine-driven, batshit-crazy roommate attacked me for the last time!)
Notice how much more forcible the rewrite sounds. That is the power of the active voice. Hammer your thoughts into unity indeed.
Overall, minor passive mistakes aside, I feel that the direct writing style is clearly one of the author’s natural talents. Adjusting the few aforementioned grammatical errors will greatly improve the flow of the paper.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 3 “I had taken four years of Latin in middle school, so I should’ve known what it had said on it.” The last had does not need to be there.
“He was seemingly in his forties and was rather large and had the mannerisms of a slightly insane eccentric.” This is a run-on.
Read over the paper again and make sure you’re using commas correctly, or if there are places that need commas.
Your pictures turned out fine. Some of the words ran out of the text box, but it didn’t distract from your paper.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 4 I would say that the writing style is clear and direct, and punctuation doesn''t appear to hinder the writing itself. The language is clear to the audience and is not overly flowery, though I do feel that at times it lacks a bit of passion. Try to convince me of your confusion of identity through your diction.
I''m also a bit confused as to how you were homeless when you said you had a roommate and a dorm room...maybe clarify this.
Also, don''t feel like I''m trying to completely bite your head off; I''m realizing things I am doing in my paper that are similar to yours.
This helped with the revisions very clearly.
Reviewer 5 It all flows quite well, with the only exception being the quotes. The Dickens quote at the beginning is quoted a bit longer than necessary, in my opinion, and the Cheshire Cat/Alice quote could be split off into a block quote (with your interjected commentary moved elsewhere.)
And in the paragraph immediately preceding The Cheshire Cat section, you say "had nowhere to go or no one to turn to," you should consider changing it to "had nowhere to go nor anyone to turn to." It, um, flows a lot better that way, in my opinion.
Back Review: This helped with the revisions very clearly.
