Response # 2

Response # 2 I gave serious consideration to the requirements of the grading rubic as I analyzed that sample paper that was given for this particular class discussion. As the grading rubic was quite specific about what to look for in terms of content and format when reviewing an MLA style paper, I was able to grade the paper almost at first glance. However, I decided to give the paper a chance and wait until I had read the whole paper before passing final judgment, Unfortunately, this sample paper from Jane Doe only went from bad to worse and, as far as I am concerned, deserves to get the student an F.
The title was wrong for the paper as it never connoted the content of the paper at all. It was also combative in stance due to the use of an exclamation point in the title. The title is the most important part of an essay or article because it helps the writer target an audience for the papers discussion content. None of those factors exist in the title.
It presented the problem from the point of view of the writer but did not include any factual data in support of her claims. Although the writer made reference to a source for what I assume to be paraphrased information, she improperly cited her source in MLA format within the paragraph. The paper was made even weaker because of her presentation of numerous theses which lacked supporting evidence and a more extensive discussion in order to cover the issues she presents. This presentation told me that she did not bother to previously outline her discussion so that she could coherently talk about her topics in the final paper. Rather, the paper had no sense of direction and left the paper chaotic in content.
The paper also lacked grammar and proof reading on the part of the writer. It was almost as if the paper had been written a few minutes before it was due for submission. Most importantly, even though she had presented a source in one of her earlier paragraphs, she failed to present a works cited page for her reference at the end of the essay thus making the content of the paper questionable. Without the reference page her paper could be deemed to have been plagiarized.