Quoting Greek Philosopher Heraclitus Revise Essay

By /

Quoting Greek Philosopher Heraclitus Revise Essay

Revise the essay

  • Use instructor feedback(Red font in file”Essay one draft”) and peer workshop material(Below) to revise and submit a final, polished, revised draft of Essay 1
  • Revisit the Essay 1 Assignment Sheet for specifics about formatting and guidelines
  • Include the Annotated Bibliography as part of the essay, paginated accordingly. It should appear after the References page.
  • Submit the final draft to the E1 Assignment by the due date/time listed in the assignment.

Peer workshop material:

After reading your partner’s essay, type responses to the following questions. Be thoughtful and detailed. Save this document to return to your partner when you’re finished.

In your own words and in a sentence or two, explain the writer’s argument:

  • The writer’s argument is that the acquisition of the Louisiana changed the development of America. The purchase of Louisiana led to the unlimited expansion of America.

Does the introduction set up the reader for understanding the topic and subject of the essay? (An introduction to the essay’s broader topic? To a specific event? Does it include a clear and argumentative thesis?)

  • The introduction sets up the reader for comprehending the topic and subject of the essay. The introduction introduces the reader to the wider topic. However, the writer can improve the thesis to make it clearer.

How could the writer begin the essay with more intensity or clarity? (How could the writer improve his or her “hook”?)

  • The writer could begin the essay with more clarify by making the thesis clearer than it is.

Which writing tools and strategies does the author use that are effective? Which need attention or are not as effective as they could be?

  • The writer effectively arranges his paper properly with an introduction, body, and a conclusion. The writer uses proper grammar, and a good flow of ideas. However, the writer could improve on the grammar.

Which specific areas or ideas within the body of the paper are confusing or do not clearly relate to the thesis? And, what ideas could be added or elaborated upon to better support the thesis? (Be specific. Give examples.)

  • I find all the ideas in the body of the paper very related to the thesis. The writer can improve the body of the essay by using more conjunctions to link the ideas and make them flawless.

Comment on the organization of the essay. Are the essay’s body paragraphs arranged logically? Are there paragraphs that shift focus and interrupt the flow of the essay? Where do you sense gaps in the logic of the argument or support?

  • The organization of the essay is very good and the flow of ideas is logical. The only thing the writer can work on is the linking of ideas from one paragraph to the other. I feel that the writer has not used conjunctions effectively.

How does the author’s conclusion tie into the thesis, or, if it doesn’t, how does it has strayed from its purpose? Compare the introduction to the conclusion—Does the conclusion state more strongly the intention of the paper?

  • The author’s conclusion ties directly to the conclusion since the writers states the thesis at the conclusion. The conclusion and the introduction are very directly related and they both state the intention of the paper.

Does the writer use the outside source(s) effectively to support his/her argument, including specific references to the sources? Are the sources used only to provide information or to enhance his or her argument? How could the writer make better use of the sources?

  • The writer effectively uses outside sources effectively to support his argument. The sources used to provide information to enhance the writers’ argument. In my view, the writer has used the sources the best way possible.

What are the most interesting and/or convincing parts of the essay? (Be specific. Give examples.)

  • One of the most convincing part if the introduction. The writer uses a very good hook by quoting Greek philosopher Heraclitus “the only thing that is constant is change.” Another convincing part is the conclusion which clearly restates the thesis.

What could be eliminated from the paper, if anything, while maintaining the paper’s central focus? (In other words, what portions of the paper are distracting or stray away from its main point?)

  • In my view, there is nothing that should be eliminated from the paper given that no part of the paper that strays away from the main idea.

Is the paper properly cited and formatted using APA style? References page? Annotated Bibliography? Note areas that appear to be incorrect.

  • The paper did not have Annotated Bibliography.

Essay Rubric

Argument

Organization and paragraphs

Style and sentences

Conventions

5

•The paper presents a logical, persuasive, scholarly
argument about a particular topic.
•The paper addresses relevant authorities on the
topic and clearly explains its relationship to their
ideas.

•The paper weighs a wide range of viewpoints, and
persuasively articulates the reasons for its position
on the topic.
•The paper creates genuine interest in the topic.

•The structure of the paper’s overall argument is
remarkably clear and logical.
•Individual paragraphs are always unified and
coherent.

•Transitions between paragraphs underscore the
links in the paper’s argument.
•The paper possesses a skillful and interesting
introduction and conclusion.

•The sentences are consistently clear,
coherent, and syntactically varied.
•Precise word choice and an appropriate
tone support the paper’s purpose and
display a command of the conventions of
academic writing.

•The grammar, spelling, punctuation, and
usage conform to conventions of academic
writing.
•References to sources are accurately cited
and documented according to the
appropriate style manual.

•Format is consistently correct and
appropriate.

4

•The paper presents a logical argument about a
particular topic in a scholarly manner.
•The paper often engages relevant authorities on the
topic and employs their ideas.

•The paper considers a range of viewpoints and
presents them fairly in the course of explaining its
position on the topic.
•The paper is able to express the interest that the
topic might possess.

•The structure of the paper’s overall argument is
clear and logical.
•Individual paragraphs are almost always
unified and coherent.

•Transitions link the paragraphs.
•The paper possesses an introduction and
conclusion that accurately reflect the paper’s
content.

•Sentences are usually clear, coherent, and
syntactically varied.
•Word choice and tone support the paper’s
purpose and usually display a command
of the conventions of academic writing.

•The paper is free of serious errors in
grammar, spelling, punctuation, or usage.
•References to outside sources are usually
cited accurately and documented according
to the appropriate style manual.

•Format is correct and appropriate.

3

•The paper presents a reasonably successful
argument about a topic, although its force may at
times be compromised by faulty logic or superficial
thinking.
•The paper sometimes engages relevant authorities
on the topic; its stance regarding their ideas could
be clearer.
•The paper’s presentation of alternative viewpoints
on the topic is occasionally lacking.
•It does not consistently engage its audience.

•The clarity and logic of the paper’s
organizational structure could be somewhat
clearer.
•Individual paragraphs occasionally lack unity
or coherence.
•Transitions between paragraphs seem wooden
and arbitrary.
•The introduction and conclusion are
perfunctory, but do present the content of the
paper, albeit not in an interesting way.

•Sentences are generally clear and correct;
however, some may be basic, choppy, or
lack syntactic variety.
•Word choice and tone generally support
the paper’s purpose but may less
consistently display a command of the
conventions of academic writing.

•Errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation,
or usage occasionally interfere with
communication and damage the writer’s
credibility.

•References to outside sources are
generally cited and documented, but not
always in the appropriate style.
•Format is generally correct and
appropriate.

2

•The paper’s argument about a topic is only
marginally successful.
•The paper’s attention to what others have said on
the topic is minimal.
•The paper’s presentation of alternative viewpoints
is often lacking.
•The paper does not attempt to engage the audience
in the topic or explain its interest.

•The paper’s organizational structure is unclear;
the reader may be confused by the direction of
the argument.
•Paragraphs often lack unity or coherence.
•Transitions are occasionally missing or
illogical.

•The introduction and conclusion are awkward;
they may not relate clearly to the content of the
paper.

•Sentences are frequently basic, choppy,
or repetitive in structure and may display
lapses in clarity or coherency.
•Inappropriate word choice or tone detract
from the paper’s purpose and frequently
display a lack of command of the
conventions of academic writing.

•Many errors in spelling, grammar,
punctuation, and usage impede
communication and undercut the writer’s
credibility.

•References to outside sources are not
clearly cited; documentation style is
inappropriate.
•Format is not consistently correct or
appropriate.

1

•The paper’s argument about a topic is
unsuccessful; it might be confusingly unclear,
obviously biased, or insufficiently developed.
•The paper neglects to consider what others have
said or written on the topic.
•The paper’s presentation of the material seems to
use sources solely to support its own point, without
considering opposing viewpoints.
•The paper does not attempt to engage the reader in
the topic or explain its interest.

•The paper’s organizational structure is
underdeveloped.
•Most paragraphs seem to have no unifying
idea, and may include gaps in logic; often they
simply summarize a series of events.

•No effort is made to link paragraphs with
transitions.
•The introduction or conclusion may be missing
or underdeveloped.

•Sentences are mostly basic, choppy, or
repetitive in structure and display lapses
in clarity or coherency.
•Inappropriate word choice or tone detract
from the paper’s purpose and display a
general lack of command of the
conventions of academic writing.

•Numerous errors in spelling, grammar,
punctuation, and usage impede
communication.
•References to outside sources are not
cited.

•Format is not consistently correct or
appropriate.