1. Is the paper’s title informative? If not, suggest ways to improve it.
a. The title is very informative. It is short and simple, but it has an interesting tone to it.
2. Is the introduction interesting to read? Does it provide general context for the paper?
a. The Introduction was not clear. After reading it, I was still wondering what your paper was going to be about. I would suggest reading the entire paper and then create an introduction. It is important to introduce Ishi sooner and more in depth. I would also expand more on the concept of “Vanishing Indians.” Where is this term from?
3. Is the thesis clearly articulated at the end of the introduction?
a. The thesis is not clear. On page 4, I underlined a question that was posed. …show more content…
They were not clear. I would read each paragraph and ask yourself why it is significant to your thesis.
5. Does the supporting material in each paragraph relate to the topic sentence?
a. After you create topic sentences, make sure the information relates to it. If not, start a new paragraph.
6. Are there effective transitional sentences between paragraphs?
a. No, I would suggest using actual transitional words such as moreover, furthermore, additionally, etc.
7. Is the conclusion general enough, and does it recount the most important points of the paper?
a. The paper did not have a conclusion. After creating your introduction, I would use the same steps to create a conclusion. Remember, do not add new information to the conclusion. It should be a summary of what the reader learned.
8. Does the conclusion rearticulate the thesis and suggest a motive for the paper? In other words, does it explain fully enough why the topic matters?
a. No, follow directions for #7.
9. Is the paper properly documented? Do the footnotes and bibliography conform to the Turabian/University of Chicago style?
a. It was not. I would use Purdue Owl to help you cite correctly. Make sure the font and color match the rest of the paper.
10. Are there misspellings or
a. The title is very informative. It is short and simple, but it has an interesting tone to it.
2. Is the introduction interesting to read? Does it provide general context for the paper?
a. The Introduction was not clear. After reading it, I was still wondering what your paper was going to be about. I would suggest reading the entire paper and then create an introduction. It is important to introduce Ishi sooner and more in depth. I would also expand more on the concept of “Vanishing Indians.” Where is this term from?
3. Is the thesis clearly articulated at the end of the introduction?
a. The thesis is not clear. On page 4, I underlined a question that was posed. …show more content…
They were not clear. I would read each paragraph and ask yourself why it is significant to your thesis.
5. Does the supporting material in each paragraph relate to the topic sentence?
a. After you create topic sentences, make sure the information relates to it. If not, start a new paragraph.
6. Are there effective transitional sentences between paragraphs?
a. No, I would suggest using actual transitional words such as moreover, furthermore, additionally, etc.
7. Is the conclusion general enough, and does it recount the most important points of the paper?
a. The paper did not have a conclusion. After creating your introduction, I would use the same steps to create a conclusion. Remember, do not add new information to the conclusion. It should be a summary of what the reader learned.
8. Does the conclusion rearticulate the thesis and suggest a motive for the paper? In other words, does it explain fully enough why the topic matters?
a. No, follow directions for #7.
9. Is the paper properly documented? Do the footnotes and bibliography conform to the Turabian/University of Chicago style?
a. It was not. I would use Purdue Owl to help you cite correctly. Make sure the font and color match the rest of the paper.
10. Are there misspellings or