Paola Flores - English 1301.

pdf
by Paola Flores

Submission date: 03-Dec-2023 11:44AM (UTC-0600)

Submission ID: 2233834237
File name: Paola_Flores_-_English_1301.pdf (81.45K)
Word count: 1084
Character count: 6082
 3

Sp. 2

1
 2

1 1

Possessive
 1

Proofread

Possessive

Possessive

Sp.

Sp.
6

4
Paola Flores - English 1301.pdf
ORIGINALITY REPORT

8 %
SIMILARITY INDEX
7%
INTERNET SOURCES
6%
PUBLICATIONS
4%
STUDENT PAPERS

PRIMARY SOURCES

1
www.novareligio.com
Internet Source 4%
2
Submitted to Western Illinois University
Student Paper 1%
3
www.empapelar.es
Internet Source 1%
4
Submitted to Irvine Valley College
Student Paper 1%
5
Winston Davis. "Heaven's Gate: A Study of
Religious Obedience", Nova Religio, 2000
1%
Publication

6
Submitted to Transylvania University
Student Paper <1 %
7
scarab.bates.edu
Internet Source <1 %

Exclude quotes On Exclude matches Off

Exclude bibliography On
Paola Flores - English 1301.pdf
GRADEMARK REPORT

FINAL GRADE GENERAL COMMENTS

99
Rubric Breakdown

Controlling idea: 19.5

/100 Evidence: 20

Audience Awareness: 20

Genre Competence: 20

Style, Grammar, MLA: 19.9

Total: 99.4 round to 99

PAGE 1

Sp. This word is misspelled. Use a dictionary or spellchecker when you proofread your
work.

Comment 1
It's a good thesis! Note that you should not include quotes/citations in your thesis. I also
think it could have been a bit more smooth in its flow

PAGE 2

Comment 2
no period here since it comes after the citation
 Comment 3
Great paragraph

Possessive

PAGE 3

Proofread This part of the sentence contains an error or misspelling that makes your
meaning unclear.

Possessive

Possessive

Sp. This word is misspelled. Use a dictionary or spellchecker when you proofread your
work.

Sp. This word is misspelled. Use a dictionary or spellchecker when you proofread your
work.

PAGE 4

Comment 4
Good solid conclusion

PAGE 5
RUBRIC: ENGL 1301 ESSAY 3 RUBRIC FL23

CRITERION 1
Controlling Idea/Purpose

EXCELLENT (20-18) Text presents a clear, direct thesis statement that reveals an analysis of the
rhetorical strategies used. The thesis is supported by relevant subpoints and
explanation of textual evidence. Thesis statement presents a clear, explicit claim
about the effectiveness of the rhetorical strategies used in the article.

ABOVE AVERAGE Text mainly presents a thesis statement that reveals an analysis of the rhetorical
(17.9-16) strategies used, though it may be somewhat vague. The thesis is supported by
relevant subpoints but may be missing some explanation of textual evidence.
Thesis statement mostly presents a claim about the effectiveness of the rhetorical
strategies used in the article.

AVERAGE (15.9-14) Text somewhat presents a thesis statement that reveals an analysis of the
rhetorical strategies used, though it may be somewhat vague. The thesis is
somewhat supported with subpoints, though some may seem tangential, and the
explanation seems to be superficial. Thesis statement somewhat presents a claim
about the effectiveness of the rhetorical strategies used in the article.

POOR (13.9-12) Text either lacks a thesis statement or identifies subpoints that are unconnected to
rhetorical analysis. Author focuses on reporting information rather than
explaining textual evidence and may argue the topic of the article rather than its
rhetorical moves. Thesis statement fails to present a claim about the effectiveness
of the rhetorical strategies used in the article.

VERY POOR (11.9-0) Text either lacks a thesis statement or identifies subpoints that are unconnected to
rhetorical analysis. Explanation is absent or unrelated, and the text argues the
topic of the article rather than its rhetorical moves. Thesis statement fails to
present a claim about the effectiveness of the rhetorical strategies used in the
article.

CRITERION 2
Evidence

EXCELLENT (20-18) Text clearly and logically presents evidence that supports the statement. Evidence
is clearly chosen for its ability to support the thesis statement and the subpoints
in each of the body paragraphs.

ABOVE AVERAGE Text somewhat clearly and logically presents evidence that mostly supports the
(17.9-16) thesis statement. Some evidence may be disconnected or tangential but is mostly
connected to the subpoints and mainly supports the thesis statement.

AVERAGE (15.9-14) Text presents evidence for the thesis statement, though it may not fully support
the thesis statement, or the connections between the evidence and controlling
idea are unclear. Several tangents present, or the evidence may not connect to the
analysis.

POOR (13.9-12) Text lacks solid evidence, logical presentation of the evidence, and/or clear
connections between the evidence and thesis statement. Most evidence is
 disconnected, tangential, and/or simply supports the author’s stance on the topic
of the article.

VERY POOR (11.9-0) Text does not present evidence for thesis statement. The evidence is completely
disconnected, tangential and/or simply supports the author’s stance on the topic
of the article.

CRITERION 3
Audience Awareness

EXCELLENT (20-18) Text presents language appropriate to the assigned audience and offers
appropriate balance of summary and details given the audience and purpose.
Author completely omits the use of “I” and “you.”

ABOVE AVERAGE Text mostly presents language appropriate to the audience and mostly offers
(17.9-16) appropriate balance of summary and details given the audience and purpose.
Author mostly omits the use of “I” and “you.”

AVERAGE (15.9-14) Text presents language somewhat inappropriate to the audience and a somewhat
inappropriate balance of summary and details given the audience and purpose.
Author overuses “I” and “you.”

POOR (13.9-12) Text presents language inappropriate to the audience and an inappropriate
balance of summary and details given the audience and purpose. Author uses “I”
and “you” throughout the essay.

VERY POOR (11.9-0) Text presents language completely inappropriate to the audience and far too
much or too little summary given the audience and purpose. Author uses “I” and
“you” throughout the essay.

CRITERION 4
Genre Competence (Rhetorical Analysis)

EXCELLENT (20-18) Text presents a clear understanding of rhetorical analysis by presenting details
that support his/her analysis of the article. Text clearly demonstrates that the
author understands his/her purpose and focuses on the rhetorical effectiveness of
the article.

ABOVE AVERAGE Text presents an understanding of rhetorical analysis by presenting details that
(17.9-16) support his/her analysis of the article. Text clearly demonstrates that the author
understands his/her purpose and mostly focuses the text on the rhetorical
effectiveness of the article.

AVERAGE (15.9-14) Text seems confused about the purpose of the rhetorical analysis by somewhat
revealing an analysis, although the essay relies too heavily on summary of the
article. Focus of the text is somewhat on its rhetorical effectiveness, but the author
may argue their own stance on the topic of the article.

POOR (13.9-12) Text lacks an understanding of rhetorical analysis and focuses instead on
summarizing the article or presenting their own stance on the topic of the article.
Text does offer a stance on the rhetorical effectiveness of the article.
VERY POOR (11.9-0) Text does not present an understanding of rhetorical analysis or the conventions
required of its audience and purpose. Text does not summarize the peer-reviewed
article or offer a stance on the rhetorical effectiveness of the article.

CRITERION 5
Style, Grammar, and MLA

EXCELLENT (20-18) Style is appropriate for the assigned genre and audience. Each body paragraph is
well structured and includes a topic sentence, textual evidence, and connections
between ideas. Author presents an appropriate ratio of textual evidence to
analysis in each body paragraph. Few to no grammar mistakes are present. Text
appears to have benefitted from proofreading and editing. MLA format is
completely correct in terms of document formatting, citations, and references,
and the title of the text clearly relates to the article / argument.

ABOVE AVERAGE Style is mostly appropriate for the assigned genre and audience. Each body
(17.9-16) paragraph is mostly well structured and includes a topic sentence and textual
evidence from the source, though some connections between ideas could be
stronger. Author presents a somewhat appropriate ratio of textual evidence to
analysis in each body paragraph. Few grammar mistakes are present. Text
appears to have benefitted from proofreading and editing. MLA format is mostly
correct, and the title of the text relates to the article / argument but is not as clear
as it could be.

AVERAGE (15.9-14) Style is somewhat appropriate for the assigned genre and audience. Body
paragraphs are not well structured; topic sentences, evidence, and connections
between ideas are weak. Author presents more textual evidence than analysis in
each body paragraph. Several grammar errors are present. Text appears to have
not been proofread and edited. MLA format is incorrect in many places, and the
title of the text does not clearly relate to the article / argument.

POOR (13.9-12) Style is inappropriate for the assigned genre and audience. Body paragraphs are
not well structured; topic sentences, evidence, and connections between ideas are
mostly absent. Author presents evidence almost exclusively, with few instances of
analysis in the essay. Excessive grammar errors are present. Text appears to have
not been proofread and edited. MLA format is incorrect in most places, and the
title of the text does not relate to the article / argument.

VERY POOR (11.9-0) Style is completely inappropriate for the assigned genre and audience. Body
paragraphs are not structured; topic sentences, evidence, and connections
between ideas are absent. Text includes irrelevant or block-quoted evidence that
remains unanalyzed. Grammar errors pervade the text. Text has not been
proofread or edited. MLA format is incorrect throughout, and the title of the text
does not relate to the article / argument or is missing entirely.