Formatting- MLA/APA headers, titles, indentation, etc: I gave this article a 3. He used a title, but no indentation or headers, plus while he makes references to sources cited, there is no bibliography.
Introduction-sufficiently forecasted the remainder of the essay: i gave the article a 5. i found nothing wrong with how the introduction was set up. he used a chart which was good. it leads up to the remainder of this essay well.
Conclusion-sufficiently wrapped up the author’s thoughts; connected the into:i gave him a 4 this time because it was an ok conclusion, it wraps it up but i think it could have connected to the intro better
In-text citations-at least 2 and properly formatted: a 1. he only uses the new york times as a source and there is no bibliography at the end. there is no second source used. im assuming he is using mla.
Works cited/references-only work actually cited in the paper is included:1. he uses it in the paper but no bibliography
Grammar/mechanics-language choice; punctuation;spelling, etc.: 5. no spelling errors as far as i can tell. language wasnt hard, easy to understand, gets the point across.
Pre & post writing paragraphs-did the author sufficiently describe goals and how to meet them? did author sufficiently explain how goals were met: 2. there are brief introduction and conclusion but it is just that, doesnt outling goals or how he will meet them. very brief.
Flow-transitions between paragraphs; all sentences in a paragraph related; no run-on or fragmented sentences: 5. saw nothing wrong with content flow, easy to follow along
Hooked and maintained reader interest: 4. while it wasnt hard to keep reading, i felt like he could have improved this area.
genre-met the needs of the intended genre: im guessing this is an analytical paper in which he is analyzing why rampages have increased, if this is correct i would give him a 4. could have been better with more sources.
total 34/50
