In reviewing my paragraphs individually, I was surprised by some of the weaknesses I found. In this post, I will link to my paragraph analysis copy of my QRG and discuss some of the traits I found in my writing, both good and bad.
 |
Edwards, Scott. "Revise." 9/20/15 via eartraininghq. Public Domain. |
Strengths: All my paragraphs were really fluid. I could read through them easily and they all sounded very natural. Chloe did recommend that I change my wording to sound more natural. She recommended that I change my sentences to sound more approachable than verbose. I also centered each paragraph around the main idea very well. I think it will be easy for readers to identify the purpose of each paragraph. I develop each paragraph well by sandwiching my quotes and providing adequate analysis.
Weaknesses: The one thing that some of my paragraphs need is more about the centrality of the information to the controversy. I think it would be helpful for readers to have more of a detailed description of the source's relevance. In some of my paragraphs, I think I assume that readers know more than they actually do. To address this issue, I will contextualize my sources more in my revisions.
You can access the copy of my draft with comments here.
No comments:
Post a Comment