You are on page 1of 6

Chapter 4 Twist Analysis Essay

by Joonhwa Kim

Submission date: 23-Jan-2018 08:41PM (UT C-0600)


Submission ID: 906042992
File name: T he_T hings_T hey_Carried_Chapter_4_T wist_Analysis_Essay.pdf (47.6K)
Word count: 574
Character count: 2825
1

3
Chapter 4 Twist Analysis Essay
GRADEMARK REPORT

FINAL GRADE GENERAL COMMENTS

Instructor

80
PAGE 1
/100

Sp. T his word is misspelled. Use a dictionary or spellchecker when you proof read your work.

Prep. You may be using the wrong preposition.

Article Error You may need to remove this article.

Article Error You may need to remove this article.

Hyph. You may need to add a hyphen between these two words.

Comment 1
No. He's lambasting the people back home with these words.

Be specif ic in your analysis.

Article Error You may need to use an article bef ore this word.

Article Error You may need to use an article bef ore this word. Consider using the article a.

Missing "," You may need to place a comma af ter this word.

Comment 2
throw quotation marks around these words, because they are directly taken f rom the test.

Pronoun T his pronoun may be incorrect.

Article Error You may need to remove this article.

Comment 3
instead of "text f low f aster", combine with the idea in your next sentence (which I think is
accurate.)

Sp. T his word is misspelled. Use a dictionary or spellchecker when you proof read your work.

Article Error You may need to remove this article.

Wrong Article You may have used the wrong article or pronoun. Proof read the sentence to
make sure that the article or pronoun agrees with the word it describes.
RUBRIC: 10 TH ANALYSIS ESSAYTHINGSCARRI 4/5

T HESIS (20%) 4/5

EXCEPTIONAL <br />-T hesis presents a logical and compelling argument regarding an interpretation
(5) of "T he T hings T hey Carried". T his interpretation relies on outside evidence to
corroborate your analysis. Main points of discussion are previewed in your
introduction.

STRONG T hesis presents a logical argument regarding an interpretation of "T he T hings T hey
(4) Carried". T his interpretation relies on outside evidence to corroborate your analysis.
Main points of discussion are previewed in your introduction.

PROFICIENT T hesis presents an statement related to "T he T hings T hey Carried". T his statement
(3) may lack a compelling argument or not require outside sources to verif y, but is a
good start.

DEVELOPING T here is a statement about "T he T hings T hey Carried" that demonstrates an
(2) understanding of the novel itself as well as the task of a research paper.

INADEQUATE Provided thesis is not about T he T hings T hey Carried or an idea related to the novel.
(1) T hesis does not demonstrate an awareness of the research purpose.

PURPOSE (20%) 4/5

EXCEPTIONAL <br /><br />T he overall purpose of each paragraph and how it relates to your thesis
(5) is clear; each idea is compelling. <br /><br /><br /><br />

STRONG T he overall purpose of each paragraph and how it relates to your thesis is clear.
(4)

PROFICIENT Most body paragraphs have a clear relation to the thesis, but some may be of f -topic
(3) or f ail to support the thesis. Fixing this may require a retooling of the thesis
statement.

DEVELOPING Most body paragraphs do not have a clear relation to the thesis, but some may be
(2) of f -topic or f ail to support the thesis. Fixing this may require a retooling of the thesis
statement.

INADEQUATE Few, if any, body paragraphs support the thesis. T his may be due to inadequate
(1) research, f ailing to read the novel itself , or both.

EVIDENCE (20%) 4/5

EXCEPTIONAL Evidence is varied and caref ully chosen. T he provided evidence clearly supports the
(5) purpose of each body paragraph. Furthermore, the provided evidence identif ies
literary and rhetorical devices in an accurate and insightf ul way.

STRONG Evidence is caref ully chosen. T he provided evidence mostly supports the purpose of
(4) each body paragraph. T he provided evidence identif ies literary and rhetorical devices
in an accurate way.

PROFICIENT Evidence has been chosen, but it may not be more general than precise. T he provided
(3) evidence may support the purpose of each body paragraph, but it is not immediately
obvious how. It may also f ail to correctly identif y specif ic literary or rhetorical devices.

DEVELOPING Evidence has been chosen, but they are very broad details. T he provided evidence
(2) may support the purpose of each body paragraph, but it is not immediately obvious
how.

INADEQUATE Details are randomly picked and only tangentally relate to the topic.
(1)

ANALYSIS/COMM (20%) 3/5

EXCEPTIONAL Analysis/commentary on your topic is ref lective, accurate, logical, and detailed. Ideas
(5) are f ully explained and unique observations have been made.

STRONG Analysis/commentary on your topic is logical and detailed. Ideas are f ully explained
(4) and unique observations have been made.

PROFICIENT Analysis/commentary on your topic is mostly logical, although there are some lapses
(3) in reasoning. Ideas are explained, but there may be moments where you merely
restate what your sources have already said rather than develop your unique thesis.

DEVELOPING Your overall analysis merely restates your sources, without provideing additional
(2) commentary, but there are moments where you show an understanding of the
research paper purpose.

INADEQUATE Few, if any, moments where you make an original claim f rom the provided sources.
(1)

ORGANIZ AT ION (20%) 5/5

EXCEPTIONAL T he hierarchy of ideas within your paragraphs and the paper as a whole is clear and
(5) reinf orced with syntax that shows the relationship between your ideas.

STRONG T he hierarchy of ideas within your paragraphs and the paper as a whole is clear,
(4) varied, and reinf orced with transitions.

PROFICIENT T he hierarchy of your ideas is mostly clear, but lacks transitions which subordinate
(3) your ideas and make your purpose clear.

DEVELOPING T here are separate paragraphs, but as a whole your paper does not have a strong
(2) hierarchy.

INADEQUATE You may lack a strong thesis statement or lack an understanding of the purpose of a
(1) research paper.