ENGL 1102 Idaho State Effective Advertisements of the Cigarette Companies Discussion

Question Description

You will read each group member’s rough draft and respond to the following questions by 10:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 24. In addition to answering these questions directly in your feedback replies, download your group members’ rough drafts and insert any comments, highlight any sections, etc. Then, rename these and attach them to your replies.

Use the grading rubric for writing workshops to help you develop your forum posts. Make sure your feedback to all group members is posted by 10:00 p.m., March 24 (note that these questions are adapted to illustrate the grading criteria posted in the syllabus block.).

Student Guidelines for Peer Review

Before you even make your first comment, read the rough draft all the way through.
Make sure you leave enough time for you to read through, respond, and for your peer to edit his/her document with your comments before any deadlines.
Point out strengths as well as the weaknesses of the document.
Offer suggestions, not commands.
As a reader, raise questions that cross your mind, points that may have not occurred to your peer author.
Try not to overwhelm your peer with too much commentary. Follow the questions/instructions below and the issues you are supposed to address.
Be careful to not let your own opinions bias your review (e.g. don’t suggest that your peer completely rewrite the paper just because you don’t agree with his or her point of view).
Read your comments before passing them on to your peer. Make sure all your comments make sense and are easy to follow.

Answer these questions, which are adapted from the grading criteria for essays:

Thesis:

Which of the following statements best describes the rough draft’s thesis?

The thesis responds thoughtfully to the assigned topic.
The thesis responds well to the assigned topic, but may be too general or ambitious.
The thesis responds adequately to the assignment, but may be obvious or ill-defined at times.
The thesis fails to maintain logical coherence.
The paper fails to respond to the assigned topic.

Support/ Explain your answer:

Development and Source Use:

What analytical tool/principal does the writer apply to the ad(s)?
Is this tool clearly defined and properly cited?
Is it synthesized with the discussion (In other words, does it use signal phrases? If you do not remember what a signal phrase is, review Chapter 3 and the in-text citations lectures.)?
Refer to the reading(s) the writer has cited. Locate the analytical tool. Compare this with what the writer has presented in his/her rough draft.
If it is quoted, is it quoted accurately?
If it is paraphrased, is it acceptable?
Explain your answer directly in the rough draft.
What ad/ads does the writer analyze?
Are these effectively described and analyzed for the general audience?
Mark directly in the rough draft areas that contain effective/compelling analysis/development; as well, mark directly in the rough draft areas that require additional development.
Has the writer used any sources outside of the assigned readings/sources? Remember that students are permitted to use ads and commercials of their choosing; however, they are not permitted to use any outside research: They are limited to the Fowles and Bovée et al.
Has the writer remembered to include a Reference (APA) or Works Cited page (MLA)? If the writer did not include a Reference or Works Cited page, direct them to the sample reference/Works Cited page in Moodle. They just need to copy and paste (and reformat, if necessary) the entries their instructor has created for them.

Organization

undefined

Organization for the essay is clear throughout, with excellent paragraph-to-paragraph and sentence-to-sentence transitions.
Organization is generally unified, but there is an occasional lapse in coherence.
Organization is appropriate, but more transitions are needed to maintain unity and coherence.
Organization and coherence are problematic at all levels.
The paper lacks organization and coherence at all levels.

Support your answer: Mark these areas directly in the rough draft and provide comments.

Language Skills:

Do you see any problems with language skills (grammar, spelling, syntax, wordiness, redundancies, filler). Mark some of these problems directly in the rough draft, and in the margins, explain how they interfere with the readers’ abilities to follow the discussion?

Grading

Grading Rubric for Writing Workshops

Remember: To earn any grade, all posts (your original post AND two replies) must be made by their deadlines; late workincluding postswill not be graded.

Criteria	Excellent (A: 90%-100%)	Proficient (B: 80%-89%)	Marginal (70%-79%)	Below Expectations (D/F: 0% to 69%)
Original Post (your rough draft)	A substantial rough draft–at least 90% of the required word count–is posted to the forum.	At least 85% of the essay’s required word count is posted to the forum.	At least 75% of the essay’s required word count is posted to the forum.	Less than 75% of the essay’s required word count is posted to the forum.
Feedback/Comments	All workshop questions have been answered in detail; editorial comments are appropriate, constructive, and considerate of writer’s feelings (Be critical, not rude); comments are clear and text-specific so your peer will know what you are referring to (terms such as “unclear” or “vague” are too general to be helpful). Feedback is provided to all group members’ uploaded documents.	Workshop questions have been answered, but responses require additional details for writers to understand (writers understand to what most comments refer and what they mean, but some additional details and specific references are needed); comments are critical, but not rude; comments, marks, etc. are made on all group members’ uploaded documents.	An attempt to answer Workshop questions has been made, but are marginally articulated (group members have a difficult time understanding feedback [it is vague, unclear]); comments are critical, but not rude; some comments, marks, etc. are made on all group members’ uploaded documents.	Answers to Workshop questions are abrupt, undeveloped; few, if any, comments, marks, etc. have been made on group members’ uploaded documents; comments may be considered rude. Note: Failing to post feedback to ALL group members results in an automatic F in the Workshop.
Delivery of Feedback	Feedback posts consistently use correct grammar, with rare misspellings.	Feedback posts contain few grammatical or spelling errors.	Feedback posts contain several grammatical and spelling errors.	Feedback posts contain poor spelling and grammar; posts appear hasty.

^{"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you "A" results."}