Mastery: Coltrane
1. His beginning sentence which was a quote and was very eye catching and lured me in making me want to read his whole paper. Then he had his thesis after the first quote. And his thesis was very descriptive and truly set up a good backbone for his paper. Being referred back to or having a relation to all of the key interesting facts and information that he adds into his paper.
2. He uses evidence from all of the different things we researched, read, or discussed in his paper. Starting from the book 1984 by george orwell, relating it to the nazis, feed, and the soviets. All leading back to his these statement. So nothing was off topic or just randomly in there, it all made sense.
3. His conclusion was great. He summed off all the information and the point that he wanted to make with this paper. And made great sense of it. Then after he summed all of that off he added another quote at the end of his paper, which I believe fits his ending perfectly.
4. He definitely shows a high level of thinking throughout his whole entire paper. Throughout the paper he is comparing the similarities and difference between certain governments and how it relates to his thesis, the affect of totalitarianism etc..
5. He used absolutely great vocabulary and sentence structure. I felt as though the only one mistake I could find could have possible just been a small accident or a typo. Other wise I thought everything was great.
Target: Marshall
1. He provided a thesis statement that had a good variety of things to talk about for it but it was not to broad of a thesis statement. The thesis statement is referred back to and is the obvious main idea and point that is seen through every piece of information he brings into his paper.
2. He actually uses a lot of evidence from the stories and history facts and research that we have been reading and learning about. But I think that he kind of mixed around his information a little bit and it could have been organized better the next time.
3. He comes to a conclusion of his idea of what the totalitarian governments like and stuff. His conclusion paragraph was all right. It didn’t really leave me feeling fully complete, just kind of. That is the reason why I have chosen her as target because she just meets the standards.
4. His paper and writing does show that he was performing a high level of thinking as well. He was comparing things to each other and showing the similarities and differences of certain things. As well he used cause and effect, mainly to push across his point of what would happen if they did not follow the rules and got punished.
5. I think that his spelling and gramma was all right but could use a little bit of work here and there. But a lot of things look like they are just simply little spelling errors that he didn’t see.
Developing: Blaine
1. His thesis statement needs help. It is confusing and he uses the word government three times in one sentence. It is much much much to repetitive. As well his thesis statement doesn’t set a good tone for the rest of his paper to follow along to it because it is to plain and not easy to understand.
2. He uses evidence throughout his paper but it doesn’t fully relate to his thesis statement because his statement is confusing. Also the order in which he out all his information is somewhat confusing to.
3. He does come to a conclusion answering his thesis statement. And it supports all of the evidence and information that he was giving throughout his essay.
4. There are certain areas where he shows that he is performing a higher level of thinking by comparing certain things to each other. But there are also a few areas where I feel as if he is just listing a bunch of information.
5. His grammar and spelling and sentence structure could all use some help. He has a lot of sentence fragments and spelling errors. As well grammar mistakes and a few more things.
Needs development: The essay I have chosen is Blaine’s. First of all his thesis is a little weak-“A totalarlism government is not a good government for the people under the government.” It somewhat does not make sense a little bit. Such as: “A totalarlism government.” Also his introduction is short he could add more information. He does has evidence for his thesis. But he does not explain his topics and evidence. He does have a conclusion and have his thoughts. But, again he does not explain why. I do think he worked hard on this. He did have a high level of thinking when he talked about the utopian societies. He could’ve compared and contrasted though. Also he has good spelling and grammar, could have better word choice.
Target: The essay I chose is Noah F. First off his thesis is pretty clever on saying the people think wrong is right. In the intro he makes the reader draw in to the essay. Adding a lot of questions. But he does say information that is already know and not necessary. When he says all the documents. He has all the necessary evidence explaining his thesis. His main evidence is knowledge and the type of dictator and explains it well. He has a well written conclusion restating his thesis and his thoughts, he backs everything up as well. He does show a high level of think on his thesis. Like I said before I thought it was clever. He had well written spelling and grammar. But could have better word choice.
Mastery: Nikki. First off her starting sentence is excellent-“The experiences of living in a totalitarian society are detrimental to the mind, body, and personality which forms all people to become victims of the regimes.” She also has a very good thesis. On pain and death is only one component to a totalitarian citizen. That is a very good thesis cause its very specific and gives a lot of questions I wonder. She has lots of evidence. Explaining what each document does to its people. She has a very good conclusion. She restates her thesis. Gives her thoughts and opinion on the societies. She then explains her ideas. She has a very high thinking in this. Giving specific information on all her ideas. Like I said she then gives about two pieces of evidence for each topic explaining her thinking. Lastly she has excellence spelling grammar and very good word choice.
Needs Development: Bobby Ellis
There is very little present argument within this essay. Although, it has a vast amount of examples and details, they aren’t connected very well, and actually end up making the essay lose strengths. Another thing that I could immediately notice was the grammar and some of the spelling errors. However, many of these errors may have been caused if this was written on the IPad. But, they could’ve also been prevented if the essay was proof read. Also, the conclusion that this essay reaches could be considered a bit “iffy”. It states a conclusion, but doesn’t follow up any of the evidence with an explanation that would normally allow them to come to such a conclusion. None of the thought process is showed, and thus much of the point of the essay is lost. The concluding statement is reasonable, however there is absolutely no evidence on why it is so. Perhaps there is evidence, but none of it is being linked in the essay. For the thinking process, I must say that is lacking. There is some thought process behind the sentences, however most of it just seems to be random lists of events in the book. There is too much within the essay itself that is lacking that makes the meaning disappear. There is too much excess, and not enough of the writers on thoughts. There are too many examples within the essay that could be tossed aside, and there is so much more that could be added in.
Target: Coltrane Kubo
Despite the fancy sentences and near grammatical perfection, this paper lacks a lot of structure. The paragraphs are well divided for the style that the essay was written in, however they in turn lacked many details. Despite this lack of details, it made up for it by supporting these details with powerful imagery, and deeper thought into these short pieces of details. The paragraph comes to a nice closing with a quote that many people can draw meaning from. They also opened up the paragraph in an interesting way, deciding to use a quote that would lead the essay rather than use a quote to support evidence. The strength of this essay was not in the details nor evidence, but rather in the thoughts that went behind these things and delved into the possible deeper meanings of these phrases. A more difficult thing to do, yet they managed to do it quite well, and with efficiency.
Mastery: Kai Wilding
The argument presented in here, is strong. It provides clear evidence, with strong backing details, as well as it delves into the deeper thoughts of things. The evidence is clearly linked to and back to supporting documents, strengthening the points rather than just throwing them into the essay because they were required to be there. The conclusion that this paper comes to was reasonably stated in the beginning, restated at the end, and all the evidence points and suggest that conclusion. By using the quote from the main point that he was arguing, he made his essay more powerful. He drew a full circle by opening and closing with quotes from the same person. The thinking that had to be done here was more advanced than a lot of peoples and allowed for the writing to improve in the quality. The comparisons between the two societies was powerful. It was odd that 1984 and Feed was left out, however by avoiding these topics, more room was left for Stalin and Hitler, and more details would be used. Despite this odd decision, the writing was greatly enhanced by it, and left for a more powerful conclusion.
1. His beginning sentence which was a quote and was very eye catching and lured me in making me want to read his whole paper. Then he had his thesis after the first quote. And his thesis was very descriptive and truly set up a good backbone for his paper. Being referred back to or having a relation to all of the key interesting facts and information that he adds into his paper.
2. He uses evidence from all of the different things we researched, read, or discussed in his paper. Starting from the book 1984 by george orwell, relating it to the nazis, feed, and the soviets. All leading back to his these statement. So nothing was off topic or just randomly in there, it all made sense.
3. His conclusion was great. He summed off all the information and the point that he wanted to make with this paper. And made great sense of it. Then after he summed all of that off he added another quote at the end of his paper, which I believe fits his ending perfectly.
4. He definitely shows a high level of thinking throughout his whole entire paper. Throughout the paper he is comparing the similarities and difference between certain governments and how it relates to his thesis, the affect of totalitarianism etc..
5. He used absolutely great vocabulary and sentence structure. I felt as though the only one mistake I could find could have possible just been a small accident or a typo. Other wise I thought everything was great.
Target: Marshall
1. He provided a thesis statement that had a good variety of things to talk about for it but it was not to broad of a thesis statement. The thesis statement is referred back to and is the obvious main idea and point that is seen through every piece of information he brings into his paper.
2. He actually uses a lot of evidence from the stories and history facts and research that we have been reading and learning about. But I think that he kind of mixed around his information a little bit and it could have been organized better the next time.
3. He comes to a conclusion of his idea of what the totalitarian governments like and stuff. His conclusion paragraph was all right. It didn’t really leave me feeling fully complete, just kind of. That is the reason why I have chosen her as target because she just meets the standards.
4. His paper and writing does show that he was performing a high level of thinking as well. He was comparing things to each other and showing the similarities and differences of certain things. As well he used cause and effect, mainly to push across his point of what would happen if they did not follow the rules and got punished.
5. I think that his spelling and gramma was all right but could use a little bit of work here and there. But a lot of things look like they are just simply little spelling errors that he didn’t see.
Developing: Blaine
1. His thesis statement needs help. It is confusing and he uses the word government three times in one sentence. It is much much much to repetitive. As well his thesis statement doesn’t set a good tone for the rest of his paper to follow along to it because it is to plain and not easy to understand.
2. He uses evidence throughout his paper but it doesn’t fully relate to his thesis statement because his statement is confusing. Also the order in which he out all his information is somewhat confusing to.
3. He does come to a conclusion answering his thesis statement. And it supports all of the evidence and information that he was giving throughout his essay.
4. There are certain areas where he shows that he is performing a higher level of thinking by comparing certain things to each other. But there are also a few areas where I feel as if he is just listing a bunch of information.
5. His grammar and spelling and sentence structure could all use some help. He has a lot of sentence fragments and spelling errors. As well grammar mistakes and a few more things.
Needs development: The essay I have chosen is Blaine’s. First of all his thesis is a little weak-“A totalarlism government is not a good government for the people under the government.” It somewhat does not make sense a little bit. Such as: “A totalarlism government.” Also his introduction is short he could add more information. He does has evidence for his thesis. But he does not explain his topics and evidence. He does have a conclusion and have his thoughts. But, again he does not explain why. I do think he worked hard on this. He did have a high level of thinking when he talked about the utopian societies. He could’ve compared and contrasted though. Also he has good spelling and grammar, could have better word choice.
Target: The essay I chose is Noah F. First off his thesis is pretty clever on saying the people think wrong is right. In the intro he makes the reader draw in to the essay. Adding a lot of questions. But he does say information that is already know and not necessary. When he says all the documents. He has all the necessary evidence explaining his thesis. His main evidence is knowledge and the type of dictator and explains it well. He has a well written conclusion restating his thesis and his thoughts, he backs everything up as well. He does show a high level of think on his thesis. Like I said before I thought it was clever. He had well written spelling and grammar. But could have better word choice.
Mastery: Nikki. First off her starting sentence is excellent-“The experiences of living in a totalitarian society are detrimental to the mind, body, and personality which forms all people to become victims of the regimes.” She also has a very good thesis. On pain and death is only one component to a totalitarian citizen. That is a very good thesis cause its very specific and gives a lot of questions I wonder. She has lots of evidence. Explaining what each document does to its people. She has a very good conclusion. She restates her thesis. Gives her thoughts and opinion on the societies. She then explains her ideas. She has a very high thinking in this. Giving specific information on all her ideas. Like I said she then gives about two pieces of evidence for each topic explaining her thinking. Lastly she has excellence spelling grammar and very good word choice.
Needs Development: Bobby Ellis
There is very little present argument within this essay. Although, it has a vast amount of examples and details, they aren’t connected very well, and actually end up making the essay lose strengths. Another thing that I could immediately notice was the grammar and some of the spelling errors. However, many of these errors may have been caused if this was written on the IPad. But, they could’ve also been prevented if the essay was proof read. Also, the conclusion that this essay reaches could be considered a bit “iffy”. It states a conclusion, but doesn’t follow up any of the evidence with an explanation that would normally allow them to come to such a conclusion. None of the thought process is showed, and thus much of the point of the essay is lost. The concluding statement is reasonable, however there is absolutely no evidence on why it is so. Perhaps there is evidence, but none of it is being linked in the essay. For the thinking process, I must say that is lacking. There is some thought process behind the sentences, however most of it just seems to be random lists of events in the book. There is too much within the essay itself that is lacking that makes the meaning disappear. There is too much excess, and not enough of the writers on thoughts. There are too many examples within the essay that could be tossed aside, and there is so much more that could be added in.
Target: Coltrane Kubo
Despite the fancy sentences and near grammatical perfection, this paper lacks a lot of structure. The paragraphs are well divided for the style that the essay was written in, however they in turn lacked many details. Despite this lack of details, it made up for it by supporting these details with powerful imagery, and deeper thought into these short pieces of details. The paragraph comes to a nice closing with a quote that many people can draw meaning from. They also opened up the paragraph in an interesting way, deciding to use a quote that would lead the essay rather than use a quote to support evidence. The strength of this essay was not in the details nor evidence, but rather in the thoughts that went behind these things and delved into the possible deeper meanings of these phrases. A more difficult thing to do, yet they managed to do it quite well, and with efficiency.
Mastery: Kai Wilding
The argument presented in here, is strong. It provides clear evidence, with strong backing details, as well as it delves into the deeper thoughts of things. The evidence is clearly linked to and back to supporting documents, strengthening the points rather than just throwing them into the essay because they were required to be there. The conclusion that this paper comes to was reasonably stated in the beginning, restated at the end, and all the evidence points and suggest that conclusion. By using the quote from the main point that he was arguing, he made his essay more powerful. He drew a full circle by opening and closing with quotes from the same person. The thinking that had to be done here was more advanced than a lot of peoples and allowed for the writing to improve in the quality. The comparisons between the two societies was powerful. It was odd that 1984 and Feed was left out, however by avoiding these topics, more room was left for Stalin and Hitler, and more details would be used. Despite this odd decision, the writing was greatly enhanced by it, and left for a more powerful conclusion.