Paper One Feedback and the Number Codes
Fall 2015
O’Brien Hallstein
“Show me how you write, and I can see how you read and think.”
“Students have to do things they are not yet ready to do; this is how they learn. Students
need to read materials that they are not yet ready to read. This is how they get started; this
is where they begin” (Bartholomae and Petrosky 11).
Below is the general feedback and number codes you must read before you can understand the
feedback I have provided on your paper and your grade. I recognize that there is a lot of
information here, so take the time to read the material carefully; read this sheet more than once,
and keep this feedback sheet for the rest of the semester because I will refer to this sheet often!
And, keep in mind, that there is much to learn as you get started learning academic writing
norms and expectations.
Responding to my Feedback on Paper #1: Each of you is required to respond to the comments
you see on paper #1. This means that you must highlight the comments, then, tell me what you
did in paper #2 as a result, i.e., let me know what you learned from my comments on paper #1
and how that new learning was implemented in your drafting of paper #2. Also, write me a note
below the individual note that I wrote to you at the end of paper #1 explaining what you did to
respond to the general suggestions I gave you. You must write your responses on paper #1 and
turn in paper #1 with your portfolio for paper #2. Failure to do this response assignment will
result in a half letter grade deduction on paper #2, no exceptions.
Grammar Issues: Several grammar issues emerged: hyphenating, vague pronoun use,
especially “this” and “it,” split infinitives, comma splices, possessive, and mechanical errors
integrating quotes in sentences. They will be covered in a writing lab, but I expect each of you
to work on these issues and to read the grammar rules for each in your St. Martin’s Handbook
before I cover these rules in the writing labs. Please see the following: #19, “Unnecessary or
missing hyphen,” #4, 10; “Vague pronounce use,” 4 and 32i, 630 (vague use of it, this, that, and
which); “Modifiers splitting an infinitive,” 38b, 670; 316, “Comma splice,” and “Chapter 36,”
654; possessive, #14, “Unnecessary or missing apostrophe,” 8 and “Chapter 47,” 734, and #6,
“Mechanical error with a quotation,” 7.
Code Explanation: What follows is the explanation for the numbers you see throughout your
essay. These numbers indicate important additional comments by me about your essay, so please
make sure to read this material before you create the outline for paper #2 and as you draft Paper
#2!
1. Grammar: If you have a one, then, this means that you need to attend carefully to grammar
as you revise. Specifically, check general grammar issues like spelling, comma usage,
wordiness, the use of page numbers, and formatting requirements for MLA. In many places,
I simply circled words or texts to indicate that there was something there that you should
consider in the revision, i.e., you should figure out what is the grammar issue and correct it in
the revision. Many of you are not using MLA correctly in your Works Cited. Review
the material in the St. Martin’s Handbook for works cited, especially indenting, spacing,
and where to place periods.
1
2. Too much reporting and not enough analysis: If you have a two, then, this means that you
need to move from a summary of Rodriguez and/or Hoggart to your own analysis of the text.
To put it another way: you must move away from reporting what are now “facts” about the
reading and move toward using these facts in the service of your sub-arguments. A
summary, reporting, and/or factual “claim,” for example, would be something like: “Hoggart
introduced the scholarship boy as from the working class.” In this example, if you read it
and think, “yes,” then, you probably have a fact rather than a claim. As a result, you need to
begin using readings—in this case Rodriguez and Hoggart--selectively and strategically IN
THE SERVICE of your analysis/argument claims. To make the point another way: make
sure that your essay reveals how you are strategically using the readings in your subargument rather than just reiterating the readings. I tried to put many probes in your essay to
help you move from reporting to synthesis.
3. Introduction issues: A three suggests that you need to rethink or rework your how you are
crafting your introduction to cover the “triangle” I detailed for you in class. As a reminder, I
am looking for you to construct an introduction that frames your reason for writing, while
also being concept focused. At the most basic level, this means that you should not include
any authors and essay titles in your introductions. A concept-based introduction
introduces the conceptual issues your essay explores, then, moves to reveal the problem,
controversy, or dilemma within which your essay is intervening in relation to the concept you
address (use the word problem, dilemma or controversy in the essay as a way to guarantee
that you actually state one)—the problem/dilemma/controversy is the intellectual issue of
concern that you “care” about under the probe: your reason for writing the essay. And,
finally, the introduction ends with a concept-based thesis that is your answer to the
problem/dilemma/controversy. Look at the “Example Sentences Sheet” from Paper #1 for an
example introduction.
4. Define terms: Here, I am asking you to define the key terms that you are using and/or if I am
asking you to clarify what you mean by your key terms. As a writer, you should never
assume that the reader knows what you mean by a term and/or that the reader has the same
definition for a word. An excellent student example of a writer defining her key term—
interdependent--follows: “Just as a writer’s words hold no meaning if left unread, the readerwriter relationship is void if not interdependent; each person needs the other to work.” I also
gave this code if you are using vague phrases or ideas. Finally, if you used course terms like
making a mark, reading with the grain, and/or reading against the grain without citing the
original source for these terms (Bartholomae and Petrosky), and/or if you did not say in your
own words what these terms meant after you used the terms, I asked you to define your
terms. Keep in mind that, as a student writer, one of your rhetorical demands in your writing
is to demonstrate that you understand key terms from readings; do not just throw them
around! In other words, do not write a claim like the following: “Rodriguez is no longer a
scholarship boy because he reads with the grain.” This is an undefined concept/term (reads
with the grain) and demonstrates a lack of understanding of what the term/concept actually
means, while also engaging in a form of plagiarism!
5. Synthesis: A five indicates that you are not synthesizing the readings. The primary
intellectual task of this semester and each paper assignment is to begin to work on and learn
to engage in synthesis. Synthesis—the act of integrating, interweaving, fusing, and/or
combining—texts and ideas is key to success in Rhetoric 101. As a result, you must work on
synthesizing your ideas around the analysis of texts and your sub-arguments. Equally
2
important, while I acknowledge that learning to synthesize is difficult and takes time to learn
properly, I expect you to get better at synthesis with each paper you write. Many of you who
are not synthesizing are instead engaging in “compare and contrast,” where you are
comparing and contrasting Rodriguez and Hoggart. Make sure, again, that you are only
comparing and contrasting in the service of your larger arguments about the paper probes. If
you are having trouble with synthesis, you should also see #2 above. A student who is still
reporting rather than analyzing, often, then has difficulty synthesizing and/or tends to engage
in compare and contrast between or among authors.
6. Missing or unclear claims: A six indicates that you have no claims (facts instead), vague
claims, and/or you are not making R-W rel. or S-T rel. claims. As I noted in class, we are
following a conventional academic form for paragraphing: we are thinking of body
paragraphs as sub-arguments to your overall thesis, which will also help you to develop your
analytic and argumentative writing skills. Thus, at this stage in the semester, I want to be
able find clear claims in each body paragraph; I want to see the claim you are proving for
each sub-argument, for each paragraph. Moreover, to help you make sure that you are
crafting concept-based claims, I am “banning” you from using either authors’ names or
quotes in your claims. This will help you make sure that each body paragraph has a clear
claim that you are then proving with your own reasoning and textual evidence.
7.
Paragraphing Norms: A seven is related to our use of academic paragraphing norms (see
“Paragraphs” in Key Words). As discussed in class, each body paragraph is to have a claim,
evidence, and significance (i.e., what the sub-argument gives you in relation to your thesis).
Most of you who have a seven are missing significance (S). Make sure that you end each
sub-argument stating what the sub-arguments “gives you” in relation to the overall thesis.
Look at the “Cheat Sheet” from paper #1 for a good example of an academic paragraph.
Details/F.Y.I.:
A. In academic writing, you need only state the first name of the author the first time you use
the author’s name. Then, only use last names in the rest of the paper, i.e., “Rodriguez” and
“Hoggart.” Also, there is no need to put the title of their essays in your paper; we have that
information in your works cited. Many of you “filled up” much space in your draft writing
by including the titles of the essays again and again. When you revise, take out all references
to the titles of the essays.
B. Many of you came up with great paper titles—well done—while many of you did not even
title your paper. A good writer always titles her paper, and that title should capture the
essence of the argument found in the thesis. You must always title your papers. Moreover, a
sophisticated writer actually references, often in subtle ways, his title. Thus, for each paper,
please craft a title that captures the “essence” or core position you are arguing in every paper
from this point on, while also referencing that title at some point in your essay.
C. Too many of you still used the pronoun “he” without clarity. In other words, you say he
when you are talking about both Rodriguez and Hoggart. It was often difficult for me to
know which “he” you meant. Because they are both male writers and to enhance your clarity,
as often as possible, use last names rather than just “he.”
3
D. Abbreviations: I used many abbreviations in your paper. The following is what each of the
abbreviations means. “IE” means “missing comma after an introductory element.” VP means
“vague pronoun reference.” Please look in your St. Martin’s Handbook for a review of both!
Finally, “arg.” means argument; “S” means significance; S-T rel. or R-W rel. means
“Student-Teacher or Reader-Writer Relationship”’; SB means “scholarship boy or
scholarship boys”; “N.C.” means no claim; “V.C.” means vague claim; “IC” means
incomplete claim; “C.C.” means compare and contrast, “Splice” means comma splice, and no
“R-W/S-T rel. claim” means no reader-writer or student-teacher relationship claim.
E. Many of you are “dumping quotes” in your essay. What I mean by this is that you are
simply putting quotes in from authors without introducing and interpreting the quotes into
your essay/thinking. Never just “dump” a quote and, instead, always set them up or integrate
them into your own ideas/claims, while also letting the reader know how you are interpreting
the quote, i.e., use a quote sandwich, which I cover on Monday, Sept. 28. For a review of
these issues, look at “Integrating Quotes in Your Own Writing” in your St. Martin’s
Handbook and “Quotation” in Key Words.
F. Many of you describe both the Rodriquez and Hoggart essays as “stories.” The word
“story” is only relevant to fiction work. Because we are only reading academic essays this
year, it is not appropriate to describe the essays as “stories.” Please refer to what Rodriquez
and Hoggart wrote and all future readings as “essays.”
G. Many of you need to work on hyphenating the student-teacher or reader-writer
relationship. When you are describing the relations specifically, then, you need to
hyphenate because “student-teacher”/”reader-writer” modifies what kind of relationship. If,
however, you are only describing the student and the teacher, then, you do not need a
hyphen. Please see “Unnecessary or missing hyphen,” #4, 10.
H. Works Cited Page: Not only did many of you not attach your Works Cited page to your
essay, you also had a page that was in a different font and color. This is unacceptable and
reveals a lack of attention to detail. Your Works Cited is always a part of your essay and
must be integrated into that essay regardless of whether or not you use an electronic system
to create your page for you!
I. Non-Academic Language: In formal, academic writing it is important to use intellectual
and conceptual language in your writing. In other words, the rhetorical situation demands a
certain level of language, i.e., more sophisticated than “every-day talk.” Some of you use
“non-academic words” or too much “every-day language” in your essays/writing. Make sure
to intellectualize the terms you use in your writing this semester by using as many of our
course concepts as possible your writing this year.
J. “Ways” Reading Titles Not Necessary: As noted in A, there is no need to include the titles
of the readings in your essays because: 1. everyone in the class is working with the same
texts and 2. the full title for each readings is in your works cited. If you do decide you must
include the title of an essay, only do so once when you introduce the reading the first time in
your essay. But, in general, the convention in academic writing is not to state the title of an
author’s essay, unless doing so is somehow germane to your argument.
4