INSTRUCTION IN THE FILE

PART ONE:

Post a draft of your Research Essay

So start working on the essay

PART TWO:

Follow the instructions provided in “

Lesson: Research Essay Content Workshop [PART TWO]

” to provide thoughtful feedback to a minimum of two classmates

Lesson: Research Essay Content Workshop [PART TWO]

choose two working drafts to read carefully and provide thoughtful feedback for.

In a reply to each of these two drafts:

· Post answers to all of the workshop questions (below)

· Answer any questions that the writer may have asked within the post.

· Add any other feedback that will help the writer improve the draft in revision.

WORKSHOP QUESTIONS: ( YOU DON’T HAVE TO ANSWER EACH QUESTION BELOW ON THE FEEDBACK, YOU NEED TO FOCUS ONLY IN ONE OF THEM. THE FEEDBACK SHOULD BE MAXIMUM 70 WORDS)

1. Restate the thesis. In your own words, describe the author’s position on Beck’s ideas about tribalism. What is this writer’s response to Beck’s claims?

2. Is the thesis clear? (Were you able to understand easily, or did it take a bit of work? Are you certain you understand the thesis, or are you guessing?) If it is unclear (or only somewhat clear), offer suggestions for improving clarity.

3. Describe the real-world example/s used to illustrate concepts from Beck’s article. Is this example described clearly and in enough detail? If not, what details would you like to see included? What needs clarified?

4. Discuss the purpose of the essay. In what ways might the ideas presented in this essay be meaningful to readers? What ideas/attitudes might readers relate to? What type of reader would this essay appeal to? (Are the questions “So What?” and “Who Cares?” answered?)

5. How clearly is textual evidence presented? Pretend you are a reader who has not Julie Beck’s article. Is enough detail about the source provided for new readers to understand these ideas clearly?

6. Describe the organizational strategy employed in this draft. How are points/ideas ordered? Do ideas follow logically and clearly from one another? Note areas in the draft where transitions can be strengthened.

7. What are the strengths of this draft? What elements most contribute to its effectiveness?

The first working essay

Growing up as an African American male in America I cannot help but notice the patterns that many African Americans face. Many of those patterns deal with nonobservance, distress, injustice, and solitude done by others. Throughout it all, the Black diaspora continues to look for solutions like Frederick Douglass did by encouraging Abraham Lincoln to end slavery to the recent Little Rock Nine attending classes to end segregation in public schools. Instead of being accepted as is, there were always obstacles placed in front of the black community by those who oppose them. In Julie Beck’s article, “This Article Won’t Change Your Mind” Beck covers tribalism and how it occurs. When it comes to African American Issues, sides are always taken between those who want the immorality to change and those who side eye the issues. In my day and age, the Black Lives Matter movement contains tribalism along with those who go against the movement. 

In 2013, then 28-year-old George Zimmerman is found not guilty of 2nd degree murder of a 17-year-old Trayvon martin. Neighbors claimed that Martin was screaming “Help!” Before gunshots were fired along with Martin’s girlfriend claiming that he was being followed, but George Zimmerman claimed that it was self-defense. After the unsettling decision, it motivated Alicia Garza, Patrise Cullors, and Opal Tometi to create a Black Lives Matter hashtag in 2013 to express their emotions and thoughts of infuriation towards George Zimmerman being found unguilty. What I noticed in this world that we live in is that African Americans are constantly broken down against their own will and are only the ones who must bring the issues to the limelight. After a series of situations that went wrong, people decided to compete against the Black Lives Matter movement made to put black lives to the forefront and address issues by following the #AllLivesMatter & #BlueLivesMatter trend. Arguing that everyone’s lives matter and not just those who are constantly living in vain.  

missing some paragraphs and a conclusion I plan on having this finished soon

The second essay

Growing up as a kid, I was curious about how the universe we live in was created but whenever I ask anyone about this I received different answers. At school, I learned that the big bang theory was the answer I was looking for however my church members argued that the answer is creationism. Creationism is the belief that the universe and the various forms of life were created by a divine being out of nothing. Christians and many Abrahamic religions believe in Creationism and through this belief, we can easily spot tribalistic behaviors within those groups. I will focus on the Christian side since I’ve grown up in a Christian household and attended a Christian school.

Creationism is a religious motivated worldview that has been very resistant to change. Christians can have Cognitive Dissonance when it comes to remaining faithful to their beliefs they may claim since no one has proof of how the universe was created, God created the universe. According to Julie Beck’s article, This Article Won’t Change Your Mind, “Cognitive Dissonance is the extreme discomfort of simultaneously holding two thoughts that conflict”. I attended a missionary school that offers classes from 1st grade to 12th grade. In middle school, I had to listen to a class about earth science and the textbook I received for the class was biased. The textbook was published by BJU Press. All the books about science published from them stem from creationism. Every book had an emphasis on how God’s infinite wisdom was able to structure the laws of this world. The chemistry teacher who taught these books agrees with everything that the textbook says and made statements that only a perfect being can make a perfect system. The textbooks do mention other theories like evolution or the big bang theory but the book treats these theories as something that’s not reliable to listen to and only makes claims that everything written in the bible is true. I also have witnessed some students who are non-Christians talk to the teachers about this subject and I found it interesting how the teachers wouldn’t back down from their beliefs. 

Motivated reasoning can happen to Christians as they try to convince people to believe an almighty being has created everything we have today especially if their viewpoints are threatened. Motivated reasoning is how people convince themselves or remains convinced of what they want to believe. People with motivated reasoning tend to seek out the information they agree with and avoid or ignore information they disagree with. I have seen this type of behavior on YouTube and in real life. An atheist Korean YouTuber talked with Christians about biblical facts. Whenever he questioned the liability of the information the Christians provided, they would brush off any comments he made and make claims that like God knows the truth about the universe and the bible is the way to the truth. For my real-life experience, a Christian I know keeps sending me videos about the bible and explains why these videos have to be true. But whenever I make comments that disagree with the information he provided, he gets defensive and tries to convince me of his beliefs.

Echo Chambers are found in Christian communities which promotes tribalism among Christians. Echo chambers are situations in media where beliefs are amplified and reinforced by repeated communication inside a closed system. There are examples of echo chambers on Christian YouTube channels or blogging sites run by Christians. One of my Christian family members joined an online Christian community and he reads and posts comments there every day. One day, I got to see what kinds of things are posted there and all I can find are posts about biblical facts about the world. I couldn’t find any comments that disagree with anything about the bible.

There are people who claim that not every Christians show signs of Tribalism. Some are willing to listen to other opinions. I actually saw some Christians have conversations with nonbelievers about their worldviews. In high school, my Christian teacher talked with his atheist student about the reason why the student rejects Christianity. People might believe this claim through personal experience since; they may have encountered open-minded Christians and talked to them before.

Although I agree not every Christians is tribalistic, the Bible promotes fellowship among Christians so tribalistic behaviors are likely to be found in Christians. Here’s a passage in the bible that promotes fellowship. “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. (John 17:20-21). Because of the passages found in the Bible like this, I believe it makes it hard for Christians to not be tribalistic. 

In conclusion, the beliefs in creationism it pushes Christians to have tribalistic behaviors such as Cognitive Dissonance, Motivated reasoning, and the creation of Echo Chambers within their communities. Even though I do agree that not all Christians show signs of tribalism, it is likely to be seen in most Christians since scripture promotes fellowships and gatherings.     

Criteria : GRADE 60/100 D-

OUTSTANDING

COMPETENT

ADEQUATE

DEVELOPING

INADEQUATE

IDEAS: Analytical Response to Beck’s Text

OUTSTANDING: Ideas are clear, insightful, thought-provoking, and focused so that they consistently support the topic, thesis and audience for the paper. This essay tackles the topic of tribalism in an innovative way, either presenting a new way of looking at the topic or Beck’s text or challenging major ideas within.

COMPETENT: A clear thesis is presented that provides an interesting and/or thoughtful response to the text or assignment. The application of Beck’s ideas to real-world contexts has clear relevance for readers (i.e., the questions “So what?” and “Who cares?” are thoughtfully answered).

ADEQUATE: The thesis is clear but conventional. Tribalism is applied to a real-world context purposefully and there is some indication that this application has relevance for you and/or your readers.

DEVELOPING: Ideas are unclear or clichéd and demonstrate a lack of focus in support of the topic or a central idea, which may be vague or missing. It may have a general or implied thesis; but the idea may be too broad, vague, or obvious.

INADEQUATE: It may be an attempt to meet the requirements of the assignment, but it may have no apparent thesis or a self-contradictory one, or the essay’s point is so general or obvious as to suggest little thinking-through of the topic.

Criterion Feedback

Only a small portion of the essay addresses the assigned task for this paper. Your experience as a Christian is a real-world context through which Beck’s ideas can be tested. (See notes inside of the draft. There is room to expand this example.) Much of the draft is rhetorical analysis, citing heavily from one of your sources that is a rhetorical analysis of Beck’s article. Before beginning your portfolio revision, I recommend that you read through the assignment sheet carefully.

AUDIENCE AND STYLE

OUTSTANDING: Both development and organization anticipate the needs and expectations of the reading audience. The writer effectively conveys the significance of the subject matter to the reader, and all reasonable concerns and/or objections are addressed. The paper has an introduction that draws the reader in, and a conclusion that does more than just repeat the introduction or body paragraphs. Creative elements such as particularly vivid descriptions, figurative language, and/or humor (when appropriate) are present and are used in ways that add to the piece.

COMPETENT: Development and organization suggest awareness of the needs and expectations of the reading audience. A reasonable number of concerns/objections are addressed. The author’s tone is appropriate for the topic, assignment, and target audience. The application of Beck’s ideas to real-world contexts has clear relevance for readers (i.e., the questions “So what?” and “Who cares?” are thoughtfully answered).

ADEQUATE: Development and organization may suggest an awareness of audience but may not show awareness of specific concerns to the same degree as the “A” or “B” essay. The introduction could be too general and the conclusion too repetitive. Tribalism is applied to a real-world context purposely and there is some indication that this application has relevance for you and/or your readers.

DEVELOPING: Development and organization may suggest only occasional or superficial awareness of the needs and expectations of the reading audience. Style may be incoherent, inconsistent, or inappropriate in tone.

INADEQUATE: Development and organization suggest little or no awareness of the needs and expectations of the reading audience.

ORGANIZATION

OUTSTANDING: Organization is coherent, unified, and effective in support of the paper’s purpose/plan and consistently demonstrates effective and appropriate rhetorical transitions between ideas and paragraphs. The logical relationships between ideas are abundantly clear and readers are pulled through the essay with a clear sense of progression.

COMPETENT: Organization is coherent, unified and effective in support of the paper’s purpose/plan and usually demonstrates effective and appropriate rhetorical transitions between ideas and paragraphs. Sufficient transitions allow readers to infer logical connections between ideas.

ADEQUATE: Organization is coherent and unified overall in support of the essay’s purpose/ plan but is ineffective at times and may demonstrate abrupt or weak transitions between ideas or paragraphs. Clear, but perhaps generic (next, another reason, etc.) transitions are used.

DEVELOPING: Organization is confused and fragmented in support of the essay’s purpose/ plan and demonstrates a lack of structure or coherence that negatively affects readability.

INADEQUATE: It may display little or no apparent sense of organization (e.g., the paragraphs lack a sense of progression).

SUPPORT: Applying to a Real-World Context

OUTSTANDING: Development is fresh, with abundant details and examples that arouse audience interest and provide relevant, concrete, specific and insightful evidence in support of sound logic. Nuanced comprehension of all cited sources evident. (This is perhaps shown through purposeful inclusion of material beyond thorough definitions of Beck’s key terms, such as the potential causes of or solutions for tribalism, the contributions of media outlets, etc.). Beck’s ideas about tribalism are applied to a real-world context that is clearly described in abundant detail. A sufficient number of key terms is applied to the real-world context to allow readers to fully understand the concept of tribalism and easily connect it to the real-world context.

COMPETENT: Development is adequate, but may lack depth, with details and examples that arouse audience interest and provide relevant, concrete, specific evidence in support of sound logic. This essay has a more complex narrative, displaying a thoughtful analysis of the ways aspects of tribalism can be seen in real-world situations.

ADEQUATE: Development is sufficient but general, providing adequate but perhaps not interesting details, examples, and evidence that include no logical fallacies or unsupported claims. Enough key terms are clearly defined to reasonably allow a new reader to understand the concept of tribalism (as used in Beck’s article).

DEVELOPING: Development is insufficient, providing scarce or inappropriate details, evidence, and examples that may include logical fallacies or unsupported claims. The paper may contain a list of examples placed in context with key terms but with little or no explanation of how these connections relate to the thesis. The examples may be underdeveloped or may not accurately illustrate key terms.

INADEQUATE: Evidence may be inappropriate and/or off-topic or may consist of generalizations, faulty assumptions, or errors of fact. The paper makes little or no mention of how tribalism is present in real-world contexts and/or key aspects of tribalism are inaccurately applied.

Criterion Feedback

I was not sure what to select here, so I split the difference. You had plenty of supporting detail, but these details do not yet work toward forwarding a thesis that is important to this assignment.

TEXTUAL EVIDENCE: Comprehension and Presentation of Beck’s Text

OUTSTANDING: Nuanced comprehension of all cited sources evident. (This is perhaps shown through purposeful inclusion of material beyond thorough definitions of Beck’s key terms, such as the potential causes of or solutions for tribalism, the contributions of media outlets, etc.).

COMPETENT: All cited texts are introduced clearly, accurately, and thoroughly. Definitions of the concepts associated with tribalism taken from Beck are supplemented with further examples/illustrations, as much needed to be thoroughly understood by readers who are unfamiliar with Beck’s text.

ADEQUATE: The concepts associated with tribalism are defined clearly and accurately, and in a way that is easily accessible to readers who are not familiar with Beck’s text. Concepts are introduced/defined before they are referenced or discussed. Errors in punctuation and mechanics of source citation at times create clarity errors (e.g., the combination of a signal phrase and direct quote create a run-on), but do not create confusion about ownership of ideas.

DEVELOPING: Concepts from outside sources are presented with some contextualization, but perhaps not enough for clarity. Readers familiar with these texts may be able to grasp meaning, but it will be inaccessible to new readers. The connection between a point and its supporting textual example may not always be clear, but the essay demonstrates that the writer understands the purposes and mechanics of source citation. The argument will be unconvincing, inconsistent, or superficial, e.g., because the author concentrates on one specific passage rather than a text as a whole.

INADEQUATE: Concepts from one or more texts are presented inaccurately, or with sparse context, making concepts incomprehensible to new readers. The essay demonstrates little understanding of the purpose of textual evidence and/or the mechanics of source integration. The paper indicates that further instruction and/or practice is needed. This essay may fail to handle borrowed material responsibly and/or to document appropriately.

SENTENCE SKILLS

OUTSTANDING: The sentence structure is varied, and the words are carefully chosen. There is evidence of careful editing since the essay contains few grammatical and/or mechanical errors. How the writer says things is as excellent as what the writer says. The style is energetic, confident, and precise.

COMPETENT: The essay shows strong evidence of editing since there are relatively few grammatical and/or mechanical errors. Style is readable and rhetorically effective in tone, incorporating varied sentence structure and effective word choice.

ADEQUATE: Even in the “C” essay, there should be relatively few grammatical or mechanical errors–not enough to interfere with readability; the writer has done some editing, even though it may be superficial. Style is readable, but unremarkable in tone, sometimes including a lack of sentence variety and/or effective word choice.

DEVELOPING: The style may be compromised by repetitive or flawed sentence patterns and/or inappropriate diction and confusing syntax. Grammatical and mechanical errors may interfere with readability and indicate a less-than-adequate attempt at editing or unfamiliarity with some aspects of Standard Written English.

INADEQUATE: The style suggests serious difficulties with fluency which may be revealed in short, simple sentences and ineffective diction. Grammatical/mechanical errors may interfere with reader comprehension or indicate problems with basic literacy or a lack of understanding of Standard English usage.

COMMENT KEY
Below is a list of abbreviations I will use to mark your papers. Once an area has been covered in class,

make a check mark next to it in the left-hand column. Space has also been provided for your own notes and

examples. Generally, I will only mark grammatical issues on the first page of your writing. After reviewing

your notes, review the remainder of your work for the same issue, and make corrections where needed.

AD incorrect use of adjectives/adverbs
AP apostrophe mistake
AR missing or misused article
AW awkward
CAP capitalization error
CCW commonly confused words
CF confusing
CL cliché
CO comma error
CS comma splice
DF doesn’t follow
DM dangling modifier
FPS faulty parallel structure
GR grammar
IF informal
IN inconsistent
IR irrelevent
IS incomplete sentence
IT interesting

MM misplaced modifier
MW missing word
NE not exactly
NQ not quite
OK OK
OR organization

PAG faulty pronoun agreement
POV point of view
PRF vague pronoun reference
PU punctuation
PV passive voice
RD redundant
RE repetitive
RO run-on
SF sentence fragment
SP spelling

SVA error in subject-verb agreement
TN tense
TO tone
TR transition
TY typo
UC unclear
UN unnecessary
VC voice
VG vague
WC word choice
WD wordy
WF word form
WO word order