Five-Paragraph Writing Exercise
Prompt Option
How is the racial metamorphosis differently handled in “Mars Jeems’s Nightmare” and Blackass? What does this difference in handling suggest about the racial politics that each work engages in?
Overview
The Five-Paragraph Writing Exercise asks you to put into conversation with one another two works, among several options, that present the same topic, theme, or motif. By juxtaposing texts that possess a shared element, we can sharpen our perception of how each work differently handles that topic, theme, or motif. Differences in form necessarily give rise to differences in meaning. Differences in meaning make for differences in ideational content, the commentary a work offers (on society, ethics, concepts, etc.). Please note that, like the Three-Paragraph Writing Exercise, the format of this assignment is quite different than that of the traditional thesis-driven essay, so read the directions below for how to structure it very carefully.
Learning Objectives
In this writing assignment, you will be able to
· Contrast two of our readings that share a similar topic to more effectively develop an interpretation of each work
· Analyze a literary works handling of a particular topic in relation to their supernatural and anti-mimetic elements
· Compose effective literary analyses of two of our readings; to do this, you will be able to
· Select textual or narrative details that help extend your analysis
· Demonstrate that you can effectively situate textual and/or narrative details in your writing
· Develop close readings of textual or narrative details in order to elaborate or further flesh out your analysis
· Provide topic sentences that conceptually frame the subsequent discussion and, if it isn’t self-evident, make explicit the relation between the overarching interpretive question and the content of the paragraph
· Integrate your paragraphs using transitions and stitching between them so that the exercise feels like a single extended discussion
General Instructions
Format: Times New Roman, 12 pt. font, double spaced, default margins
Heading: Use the prompt that you choose to respond to as your heading (see below for your options)
Length: five paragraphs; each paragraph should be at minimum 250-350 words
Citations: Use MLA in-text citations for textual and narrative evidence; you do not have to include bibliographic information if you are using the assigned version posted in or linked through Canvas or, for standalone texts, the edition identified in the syllabus.
Specific Instructions
How to Structure the Exercise
Please Note: You should not include an introductory paragraph.
Paragraphs 1-4
· Dedicate 2 paragraphs to each work (for a total of 4). Save any directly comparative analysis for your fifth paragraph.
· Use a topic sentence for each paragraph that identifies a subtopic that will help you to differentiate the works in relation to your overarching topic. A topic sentence should conceptually frame your discussion and make clear, if it isn’t self-evident, how it relates to your overarching topic.
· Your narrative or textual evidence should be well situated for your reader.
· Each of your four paragraphs should include a close reading of either a single longer passage (i.e. a detailed analysis of the language of that passage) or two-to-three concrete and specific narrative or textual details (i.e. an analysis that braids together these details). In either case, your close reading should explain what this evidence reveals about the subtopic and how that helps us to better understand the overarching topic within the work. Nuanced or counterintuitive yet persuasive interpretive analyses (i.e. ones that aren’t fairly obvious) will be the most highly valued.
· At the end of each of your four paragraphs, you should draw a convincing inference, based on the close reading you’ve performed within that paragraph, as to the broader idea or social commentary the work offers us. In other words, how does the narrative’s specific handling of the subtopic you’ve discussed contribute to its ideational content (i.e. the statement it makes in symbolic form about the world, a concept, humanity, etc.)?
Paragraph 5
This paragraph will involve three steps and will likely be the longest of your five paragraphs (since you’ll discuss both literary works in it).
1. For each text, synthesize your set of paragraphs on that work. Based on what you said about each work’s ideational content in the two paragraphs dedicated to it, what is its overarching take on this topic? That is to say, what broader idea or commentary does it offer on that topic
2. Next, further elaborate the conclusion that you’ve drawn for each work by putting them into conversation with one another. In other words, what’s further revealed by contrasting the two works in relation to the shared topic, theme, or motif?
3. Finally, add a further twist by very briefly considering how the unlikely as it appears in each work impacts the broader idea on the topic that you’ve identified for each. Or, alternatively, you could respond to the question of why, in each work, this ideational content is delivered in a narrative with unlikely or speculative aspects.
Kobe Thomas-Joshua
ENGL 2331
April 19, 2022
How is the racial metamorphosis differently handled in “Mars Jeems’s Nightmare” and Blackass? What does this difference in handling suggest about the racial politics that each work engages in?
To examine the trope of racial commodification in Chesnutt’s “conjure tales,” this essay examines figures who are described as, or transformed into, black objects. However, this essay contends that Chesnutt’s “black objects” cumulatively express his concern regarding about the constraints placed on African American autonomy during Reconstruction. Chesnutt’s complex relationship to “uplift” worldview, which values black authority and enfranchisement, is aided by these figures. As a result, this essay has argued that Chesnutt’s diagnosis of objectification contributes to current discussions of fabrication and perfectibility in black world literature theory.
Scholars frequently examine racism in order to promote equality, but not why it persists. This thesis examines the psychological superiority and inferiority of literary characters of both races. It also looks at “White Privilege” in thirty written texts: Griffin’s Black Like Me, Levy’s Small Archipelago, and Barrett’s Blacks. Thus, each chapter has two primary components. The first part talks with psychological explanations based on Alfred Adler’s “Individual Psychotherapy” personality theory (Motala, et al 2021).
The next section discusses race, referring to Noel Ignatiev’s concept of “Race Treason,” which abhors the presence of white skin privilege. Although the characters’ feelings differ, they all feel superior or inferior depending on their lifestyles and personalities. However, due to historical influences, black skin has been associated with low self – esteem, while white skin has been connected with superiority. The research also reveals how each personality suffers and copes with such thoughts, and how “White Privilege” affects both white and black characters. The studies show how some of the personalities figuratively betray their own race’s dominant beliefs for the greater good, personal gain, or both, due to racism and its repercussions (Motala, et al 2021). Excellent ideas expressed clearly and in the precise order of significance are the hallmarks of effective writing. This chapter will allow you to practice all of these important writing skills. Among the many prewriting techniques, this chapter concentrates on six: personal experiences; freewriting; questions; thinking; mapping; and Internet research. The strategies in this chapter may help you overcome your phobia of blank paper and start the creative process with confidence (Motala, et al 2021).
Prewriting is the practice of writing down abstract thoughts on paper to make them more tangible. Prewriting is the initial step (or in type on a computer screen). Prewriting tactics are useful at all phases of a project, but they are most useful at the start (Motala, et al 2021).
Authors know that choosing a good general topic for an assignment is a key first step. Your teacher may advise where to begin a homework assignment, or you may be required to research a topic on your own. A linked component comprises the assignment’s topic content, goal, and target audience (Motala, et al 2021). In this chapter, you will follow the journey of a writer named Mariah as she writes a piece for publication. You will also be throwing a party. To begin, decide why you’re talking (to educate, explain, or otherwise) and who you’re writing to. This is an important phase (Motala, et al 2021).
Choosing a topic may be based on your personal interests, job, or life experiences. Even the simplest observations might spark amazing thoughts. Authors typically scribble down their ideas on paper after reflecting on their experiences. These notes help writers decide what to say about their selected topic (Motala, et al 2021). Reading is necessary at all stages of the task, but especially while forming ideas and topics. Various papers might help you choose a topic and develop it further. An advertising for the latest research on the consequences of global warming may catch your eye while supermarket shopping. You may be intrigued by the cover and the theme of global warming. Maybe a book’s courtroom drama piques your interest in a real-life dispute or legal issue (Motala, et al 2021). After selecting a topic, careful reading is essential to develop it. When reading a manuscript, you evaluate the author’s point of view based on the main idea and the evidence supporting it. When you examine an author’s argument, you learn about the author’s point of view as well as your own. Even the most skilled authors must employ prewriting techniques to build ideas, so don’t be discouraged (Motala, et al 2021).
Freewriting is a kind of activity where you write for a period of time without revising your work (usually three to five minutes). During the time restriction, you may write down any thoughts that come to mind. Don’t worry about grammar, spelling, or punctuation. Instead, write as quickly as you can without stopping. If you’re stuck, just repeat the same phrase or word until you come up with a new thought or notion (Motala, et al 2021). Writing is often easier when you have a personal connection to the topic matter. Remember to utilize readings that you enjoyed or that pushed your thinking to help you generate ideas for your freewriting. This may lead to amazing ideas (Motala, et al 2021). Writing down your thoughts fast might teach you more about yourself and what you have to say. When writing quickly, don’t second-guess or doubt your ideas. Allow yourself to write freely and without self-censorship. You may find that you have more to say than you imagined once you start writing with less constraints. Your thoughts may lead you to additional intriguing topics. Freewriting may also lead you to a new topic of interest (Motala, et al 2021).
Reference
Motala, S., & Stewart, K. D. (2021). Hauntings across the divide: transdisciplinary activism, dualisms, and the ghosts of racism in engineering and humanities education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 21(2), 1-17.
Overview
The Five-Paragraph Writing Exercise asks you to put into conversation with one another two works, among several options, that present the same topic, theme, or motif. By juxtaposing texts that possess a shared element, we can sharpen our perception of how each work differently handles that topic, theme, or motif. Differences in form necessarily give rise to differences in meaning. Differences in meaning make for differences in ideational content, the commentary a work offers (on society, ethics, concepts, etc.). Please note that, like the Three-Paragraph Writing Exercise, the format of this assignment is quite different than that of the traditional thesis-driven essay, so read the directions below for how to structure it very carefully.
Learning Objectives
In this writing assignment, you will be able to
· Contrast two of our readings that share a similar topic to more effectively develop an interpretation of each work
· Analyze a literary works handling of a particular topic in relation to their supernatural and anti-mimetic elements
· Compose effective literary analyses of two of our readings; to do this, you will be able to
· Select textual or narrative details that help extend your analysis
· Demonstrate that you can effectively situate textual and/or narrative details in your writing
· Develop close readings of textual or narrative details in order to elaborate or further flesh out your analysis
· Provide topic sentences that conceptually frame the subsequent discussion and, if it isn’t self-evident, make explicit the relation between the overarching interpretive question and the content of the paragraph
· Integrate your paragraphs using transitions and stitching between them so that the exercise feels like a single extended discussion
General Instructions
Format: Times New Roman, 12 pt. font, double spaced, default margins
Heading: Use the prompt that you choose to respond to as your heading (see below for your options)
Length: five paragraphs; each paragraph should be at minimum 250-350 words
Citations: Use MLA in-text citations for textual and narrative evidence; you do not have to include bibliographic information if you are using the assigned version posted in or linked through Canvas or, for standalone texts, the edition identified in the syllabus.
Specific Instructions
How to Structure the Exercise
Please Note: You should not include an introductory paragraph.
Paragraphs 1-4
· Dedicate 2 paragraphs to each work (for a total of 4). Save any directly comparative analysis for your fifth paragraph.
· Use a topic sentence for each paragraph that identifies a subtopic that will help you to differentiate the works in relation to your overarching topic. A topic sentence should conceptually frame your discussion and make clear, if it isn’t self-evident, how it relates to your overarching topic.
· Your narrative or textual evidence should be well situated for your reader.
· Each of your four paragraphs should include a close reading of either a single longer passage (i.e. a detailed analysis of the language of that passage) or two-to-three concrete and specific narrative or textual details (i.e. an analysis that braids together these details). In either case, your close reading should explain what this evidence reveals about the subtopic and how that helps us to better understand the overarching topic within the work. Nuanced or counterintuitive yet persuasive interpretive analyses (i.e. ones that aren’t fairly obvious) will be the most highly valued.
· At the end of each of your four paragraphs, you should draw a convincing inference, based on the close reading you’ve performed within that paragraph, as to the broader idea or social commentary the work offers us. In other words, how does the narrative’s specific handling of the subtopic you’ve discussed contribute to its ideational content (i.e. the statement it makes in symbolic form about the world, a concept, humanity, etc.)?
Paragraph 5
This paragraph will involve three steps and will likely be the longest of your five paragraphs (since you’ll discuss both literary works in it).
1. For each text, synthesize your set of paragraphs on that work. Based on what you said about each work’s ideational content in the two paragraphs dedicated to it, what is its overarching take on this topic? That is to say, what broader idea or commentary does it offer on that topic
2. Next, further elaborate the conclusion that you’ve drawn for each work by putting them into conversation with one another. In other words, what’s further revealed by contrasting the two works in relation to the shared topic, theme, or motif?
3. Finally, add a further twist by very briefly considering how the unlikely as it appears in each work impacts the broader idea on the topic that you’ve identified for each. Or, alternatively, you could respond to the question of why, in each work, this ideational content is delivered in a narrative with unlikely or speculative aspects.
Prompt Options
· How is the racial metamorphosis differently handled in “Mars Jeems’s Nightmare” and Blackass? What does this difference in handling suggest about the racial politics that each work engages in?
Rubric
Five-Paragraph Writing Exercise (1)
Five-Paragraph Writing Exercise (1)
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraphs 1-4: Topic Sentences
Each of your paragraphs should open by conceptually framing the subsequent discussion and, if it isn’t self-evident, by making explicit the relation between the overarching interpretive question and the content of the paragraph.
8 pts
Proficient
6 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
3 out of 4
4 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
2 out of 4
2 pts
Beginner (Partial Credit)
1 out of 4
0 pts
No Marks
0 out of 4
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraphs 1-4: Selection of Textual and/or Narrative Details
The textual and/or narrative details that you identify in each paragraph should be relevant to the topic at hand. For textual details, you quote only what is relevant to your discussion. For narrative details, you are concrete and specific in conveying them. You do not leave out any critical textual or narrative details that contradict or otherwise undercut your account of the text.
16 pts
Proficient
14 pts
Competent (Pass)
Most textual or narrative details are relevant to the topic at hand and are concrete and specific enough. (But a few are not.)
12 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
Many textual or narrative details are not relevant to the topic at hand, or you aren’t concrete and specific enough.
8 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
Quotations aren’t relevant and/or you discuss the narrative only in very general, schematic way.
0 pts
No Marks
You don’t discuss any textual or narrative details.
16 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraphs 1-4: Situate Textual or Narrative Details
You set up any textual or narrative details that you plan to use as evidence with a brief description of where they occur in the literary work. You make clear who the speaker is if you quote a character and to whom they are speaking.
12 pts
Proficient
9 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You attempt to situate textual or narrative details, but something critical to understanding some those details has been left out.
0 pts
No Marks
You make no effort to situate textual or narrative details.
12 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 1: Close Reading of Textual or Narrative Details
You develop a sophisticated and convincing account of a literary work’s internal logic. In discussing events in a narrative’s plot, its characters, or its symbols and motifs, you flesh out or complicate our understanding of the literary work’s form or its fictional world, revealing aspects of the text that are not, one hopes, immediately obvious and are, ideally, surprising or counterintuitive. For quotations (beyond a sentence or two), you break down the language of the passage not merely to confirm an interpretive claim but to further elaborate that claim.
18 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Competent (Pass)
Your discussion of textual or narrative details is persuasive and to some degree insightful, but not surprising or counterintuitive, Quoted language is merely used to confirm your interpretive claims.
14 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You’ve attempted to analyze textual or narrative details, but the analysis is unconvincing or merely obvious.
9 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
You’ve attempted an analysis, but you’ve badly misconstrued the events of the plot or the meaning of the language that you’ve quoted.
0 pts
No Marks
You provide no close reading.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 1: Ideational Inference
You close your paragraph by drawing convincing inference, based on the close reading you’ve performed within that paragraph, as to the broader idea or social commentary the work offers us. In other words, how does the narrative’s specific handling of the subtopic you’ve discussed contribute to its ideational content (i.e. the statement it makes in symbolic form about the world, a concept, humanity, etc.)?
8 pts
Proficient
7 pts
Competent (Pass)
The link isn’t entirely persuasive or self-evident (i.e. leaves unanswered questions or raises questions about your conclusions).
6 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
‘Your close reading has done some of this work, but you don’t step back to draw a direct inference.
4 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
The link isn’t persuasive or self-evident. It seems as though you draw the wrong inference.
0 pts
No Marks
You’ve merely pointed out how the topic shows up in the work; you don’t seem to draw even an implicit inference.
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 2: Close Reading of Textual or Narrative Details
You develop a sophisticated and convincing account of a literary work’s internal logic. In discussing events in a narrative’s plot, its characters, or its symbols and motifs, you flesh out or complicate our understanding of the literary work’s form or its fictional world, revealing aspects of the text that are not, one hopes, immediately obvious and are, ideally, surprising or counterintuitive. For quotations (beyond a sentence or two), you break down the language of the passage not merely to confirm an interpretive claim but to further elaborate that claim.
18 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Competent (Pass)
Your discussion of textual or narrative details is persuasive and to some degree insightful, but not surprising or counterintuitive, Quoted language is merely used to confirm your interpretive claims.
14 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You’ve attempted to analyze textual or narrative details, but the analysis is unconvincing or merely obvious.
9 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
You’ve attempted an analysis, but you’ve badly misconstrued the events of the plot or the meaning of the language that you’ve quoted.
0 pts
No Marks
You provide no close reading.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 2: Ideational Inference
You close your paragraph by drawing convincing inference, based on the close reading you’ve performed within that paragraph, as to the broader idea or social commentary the work offers us. In other words, how does the narrative’s specific handling of the subtopic you’ve discussed contribute to its ideational content (i.e. the statement it makes in symbolic form about the world, a concept, humanity, etc.)?
8 pts
Proficient
7 pts
Competent (Pass)
The link isn’t entirely persuasive or self-evident (i.e. leaves unanswered questions or raises questions about your conclusions).
6 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
Your close reading has done some of this work, but you don’t step back to draw a direct inference.
4 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
The link isn’t persuasive or self-evident. It seems as though you draw the wrong inference.
0 pts
No Marks
You’ve merely pointed out how the topic shows up in the work; you don’t seem to draw even an implicit inference.
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 3: Close Reading of Textual or Narrative Details
You develop a sophisticated and convincing account of a literary work’s internal logic. In discussing events in a narrative’s plot, its characters, or its symbols and motifs, you flesh out or complicate our understanding of the literary work’s form or its fictional world, revealing aspects of the text that are not, one hopes, immediately obvious and are, ideally, surprising or counterintuitive. For quotations (beyond a sentence or two), you break down the language of the passage not merely to confirm an interpretive claim but to further elaborate that claim.
18 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Competent (Pass)
Your discussion of textual or narrative details is persuasive and to some degree insightful, but not surprising or counterintuitive, Quoted language is merely used to confirm your interpretive claims.
14 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You’ve attempted to analyze textual or narrative details, but the analysis is unconvincing or merely obvious.
9 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
You’ve attempted an analysis, but you’ve badly misconstrued the events of the plot or the meaning of the language that you’ve quoted.
0 pts
No Marks
You provide no close reading.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 3: Ideational Inference
You close your paragraph by drawing convincing inference, based on the close reading you’ve performed within that paragraph, as to the broader idea or social commentary the work offers us. In other words, how does the narrative’s specific handling of the subtopic you’ve discussed contribute to its ideational content (i.e. the statement it makes in symbolic form about the world, a concept, humanity, etc.)?
8 pts
Proficient
7 pts
Competent (Pass)
The link isn’t entirely persuasive or self-evident (i.e. leaves unanswered questions or raises questions about your conclusions).
6 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
Your close reading has done some of this work, but you don’t step back to draw a direct inference.
4 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
The link isn’t persuasive or self-evident. It seems as though you draw the wrong inference.
0 pts
No Marks
You’ve merely pointed out how the topic shows up in the work; you don’t seem to draw even an implicit inference.
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 4: Close Reading of Textual or Narrative Details
You develop a sophisticated and convincing account of a literary work’s internal logic. In discussing events in a narrative’s plot, its characters, or its symbols and motifs, you flesh out or complicate our understanding of the literary work’s form or its fictional world, revealing aspects of the text that are not, one hopes, immediately obvious and are, ideally, surprising or counterintuitive. For quotations (beyond a sentence or two), you break down the language of the passage not merely to confirm an interpretive claim but to further elaborate that claim.
18 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Competent (Pass)
Your discussion of textual or narrative details is persuasive and to some degree insightful, but not surprising or counterintuitive, Quoted language is merely used to confirm your interpretive claims.
14 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You’ve attempted to analyze textual or narrative details, but the analysis is unconvincing or merely obvious.
9 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
You’ve attempted an analysis, but you’ve badly misconstrued the events of the plot or the meaning of the language that you’ve quoted.
0 pts
No Marks
You provide no close reading.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 4: Ideational Inference
You close your paragraph by drawing convincing inference, based on the close reading you’ve performed within that paragraph, as to the broader idea or social commentary the work offers us. In other words, how does the narrative’s specific handling of the subtopic you’ve discussed contribute to its ideational content (i.e. the statement it makes in symbolic form about the world, a concept, humanity, etc.)?
8 pts
Proficient
7 pts
Competent (Pass)
The link isn’t entirely persuasive or self-evident (i.e. leaves unanswered questions or raises questions about your conclusions).
6 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
Your close reading has done some of this work, but you don’t step back to draw a direct inference.
4 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
The link isn’t persuasive or self-evident. It seems as though you draw the wrong inference.
0 pts
No Marks
You’ve merely pointed out how the topic shows up in the work; you don’t seem to draw even an implicit inference.
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 5: Synthesis
For each literary work, you effectively and persuasively synthesize the ideational content (i.e. the inference that you made) that you identified in your two paragraphs on that text. That is, you explain how these two paragraphs contribute to a single idea–preferably a complex or sophisticated one–about your topic. To be clear, you are NOT to synthesize all four paragraphs into a single claim.
18 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Competent (Pass)
In the case of one of the works, the relation that you draw between your previous two paragraphs is only partially effective and not wholly persuasive. The idea that you identify for one of your texts isn’t genuinely complex or sophisticated.
14 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
In the case of one of the works, the link that you draw between your previous two paragraphs is not effective or persuasive. At least one of the ideas does not seem to follow from your preceding discussion.
9 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
In neither case is the link that you draw persuasive. The ideas do not seem to follow from your preceding discussion (i.e. there has been no synthesis). But you have attempted the procedure.
0 pts
No Marks
You do not attempt to synthesize anything.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 5: Juxtaposition
In directly contrasting them, you identify at least one thing that is further revealed about the difference between ideational content (i.e. their commentary on the topic) expressed by the works.
8 pts
Proficient
6 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You attempt the maneuver, but it doesn’t add anything to your discussion.
0 pts
No Marks
You didn’t attempt this maneuver.
8 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeParagraph 5: Add a Twist
You add a further twist to your discussion of each literary work by responding to either the question of how the unlikely aspect of each narrative contributes to its ideational content or the question of why its an effective vehicle for its commentary on your paper’s topic.
18 pts
Proficient
16 pts
Competent (Pass)
Your analysis of the unlikely aspect adds a further twist (i.e. additional nuance) to your discussion, but isn’t entirely convincing.
14 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
Your analysis of the unlikely aspect doesn’t add a further twist (i.e. additional nuance) to your discussion.
9 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
You mention the unlikely aspects but don’t provide any analysis of them in relation to your preceding discussion.
0 pts
No Marks
You leave this part of paragraph five out.
18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntegrated Paragraphs
You effectively use transitions and stitching between your paragraphs so that the exercise feels like a single extended discussion.
6 pts
Proficient
5 pts
Competent (Pass)
You are missing a transition or stitching in one paragraph.
4 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
You are missing a transition or stitching in two paragraphs.
3 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
You are missing a transition or stitching in three paragraphs.
0 pts
No Marks
You don’t use any transitions or stitching.
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity, Grammar, Usage
Your sentences clearly express your ideas, and you avoid errors of grammar and usage.
10 pts
Full Marks
7 pts
Acceptable (Low Pass)
Some of the sentences are confusing, and/or there are some errors in grammar and/or usage that interfere with meaning
5 pts
Novice (Not Passing)
Many of the sentences are confusing, and/or there are many errors in grammar and/or usage that interfere with meaning
0 pts
No Marks
10 pts
Total Points: 200
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
