Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Quiz 4 for Introduction: Knowledge, Reality, and the Human Condition | PHIL 111, Quizzes of Philosophy

Material Type: Quiz; Professor: Goffstein; Class: Introduction: Knowledge, Reality, and the Human Condition; Subject: Philosophy; University: Radford University; Term: Fall 2009;

Typology: Quizzes

2009/2010

Uploaded on 10/26/2010

farline
farline 🇺🇸

2

(1)

1 document

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Your name: Alexis NortonAuthor’s name:FrancesArline
Peer Response Worksheet
Directions:This worksheet is to be completed during rough draft workshops. After reading and critiquing your
peer's essay, return your responses to the author. Be sure to keep any response sheets you receive and put
them in your folder to turn in with the final paper. Half of workshop credit depends on these responses.
First, read the draft completely and carefully. Then address the following questions:
1. Look for overall strengths first. What seems interesting or good about the draft? Give two specific
things you think the writer has done well.
1. Very well written. The sentences flowed very well together. Descriptive.
2. It was not boring, I was paying attention to what I was reading rather than zoning out.
2. What is the weakest part of the essay? Name two specific things you think are potentially problems.
(NOTE: Even if you cannot put a name to it, attempt to explain what seems “off” about the draft. For
example, “While I think your topic is great, when I read your sentences, they seem choppy—like they are
too short. Do you think you could combine some of them?”)
1. Maybe you should state your group affiliation early in the paper instead of at the end so the
reader gets an early clue to what the paper will ultimately be about.
2. ^ That is all.
3. Make one suggestion for the introduction and one suggestion for the conclusion.
Introduction: No suggestion, the descriptiveness is intriguing and it works.
Conclusion:Maybe you should make it a little longer and tie in all of the important elements in your
body paragraphs into the conclusion-but I liked the saying at the very end.
4. Is there any place where the author could/should address the opposing arguments more thoroughly?
Explain and make suggestions.
It may be helpful to the paper to state the other groups who view yours negatively and have different
opinions than yours on particular matters. Details.
pf2

Partial preview of the text

Download Quiz 4 for Introduction: Knowledge, Reality, and the Human Condition | PHIL 111 and more Quizzes Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

Your name: Alexis Norton Author’s name: FrancesArline

Peer Response Worksheet

Directions: This worksheet is to be completed during rough draft workshops. After reading and critiquing your

peer's essay, return your responses to the author. Be sure to keep any response sheets you receive and put them in your folder to turn in with the final paper. Half of workshop credit depends on these responses. First, read the draft completely and carefully. Then address the following questions:

  1. Look for overall strengths first. What seems interesting or good about the draft? Give two specific things you think the writer has done well. 1. Very well written. The sentences flowed very well together. Descriptive. 2. It was not boring, I was paying attention to what I was reading rather than zoning out.
  2. What is the weakest part of the essay? Name two specific things you think are potentially problems. (NOTE: Even if you cannot put a name to it, attempt to explain what seems “off” about the draft. For example, “While I think your topic is great, when I read your sentences, they seem choppy—like they are too short. Do you think you could combine some of them?”) 1. Maybe you should state your group affiliation early in the paper instead of at the end so the reader gets an early clue to what the paper will ultimately be about. 2. ^ That is all.
  3. Make one suggestion for the introduction and one suggestion for the conclusion. Introduction: No suggestion, the descriptiveness is intriguing and it works. Conclusion: Maybe you should make it a little longer and tie in all of the important elements in your body paragraphs into the conclusion-but I liked the saying at the very end.
  4. Is there any place where the author could/should address the opposing arguments more thoroughly? Explain and make suggestions. It may be helpful to the paper to state the other groups who view yours negatively and have different opinions than yours on particular matters. Details.
  1. Does the writer have a sufficient thesis statement that is a satisfactory and arguable claim? Restate the thesis statement in your own words. Is the thesis statement vague? If it is vague, explain. What phrases and/or words are unclear? If the thesis statement is clear and specific, explain what makes it so. (NOTE: If the writer is merely making an OBSERVATION rather than a major CLAIM, note this in your response.) Thesis: I did not see a clear thesis statement, though you can tell what it is, it is not clearly stated as a claim.
  2. Does the draft have adequate development or does it contain empty phrases, such as, "Many people think..." or "There are many things that affected his decision..." or "There are too many things to talk about, so I'll just talk about one...."? Circle at least three areas that you would like additional explanation, more details, more proof, etc. The development on this paper is good, the words and sentences flow, it isn’t boring, the paper gets somewhere without talking in circles.
  3. Does the author effectively use the information from any outside sources, including the interview? Why or why not? Yes, and the author gives some background information on the source that was interviewed.