Source 4:
Strengths- They make an effort to explain the quotes. The inclusion of voice was interesting. Academic and non-academic descriptions are organized clearly and are compared.
Weaknesses- Many times they only used one source per paragraph. Introductory paragraphs all have the same idea, just repeated. Frequent use of "I" was distracting, especially in the introduction.
Source 5:
Strengths- This paper has various sources to help with credibility and reliability of the conclusions. Transitions from paragraphs and topics were done well. They gave many details for examples.
Weaknesses- Language is very repetitive. Their use of 2nd person, especially in the conclusion sounds demanding rather than like an analysis. Certain quotes were long and lost the attention of the audience.
Source 6:
Strengths- The organization is clear and pleasant. The author relates to the audience. Their sources are strong and useful to their purpose.
Weaknesses- Some of the headings did not fit the formality of the paper. The conclusion is quite short compared to all the analysis done in the rest of the paper. Even though their resources were helpful, they did not have many.
This essay was extremely well worded, which was the first thing that struck me. Every sentence had a deliberate structure, and there were several instances of complicated punctuation that were executed without error. The introduction was interesting, and the conclusion did not simply repeat the introduction. Overall, this paper was really good. It was concise and informative, which can sometimes be hard to achieve. There are only a couple of small things, one being the use of "I," which I marked on the paper, and the other one was that at some points, not quite enough sources were cited. Also, there were no page numbers after page one.
ReplyDeleteThere was only one use of I in the whole paper. It occurred during the references section of academic writing. That is an easily solvable problem.
With the source citation issue, there was just one entire body paragraph that only had a reference to the interview. I think that if you added another example from a source or two, it would strengthen the analysis and make the paper more well-rounded. This was mostly a problem in the structure section of the non-academic portion.
Finally, there was a small formatting error. There were no page numbers after page one, and that would be a silly reason to get points off of such a solid paper.
1. You provieded comprehensive background knowledge.
ReplyDelete2. In the intro paragraph, you could introduce more about different types of academic & non-academic writing.
3. For structure, I would like to see more discussion on the organization of the writing. How do sentences and paragraphs relate to each other? You only talked about some elements that should be included in the writing.
4. I like your introduction under each genre of writing.
5. When you talked about structure under non-academic sources, the example about bright atrractive color schemes that you used was not based on rehtoric. You could use a better source.
6. There are a lot of types of non-academic writing. Some of them may not have references. You could include that under the subtitle references.
7. In the conclusion paragraph. "Academic writings tend to foucus on presenting facts..." might be better if it was used in the introduction paragraph.