Argumentative Essay Rough Draft | Homework Helper
Im working on a English exercise and need support.
- Interpret information through close and critical reading.
- Demonstrate effective use of the writing process.
- Employ effective academic tone, style, mechanics, and citation method.
- Integrate relevant source material effectively and ethically.
- Support a position appropriate to the rhetorical situation.
You will submit a 4- to 5-page (1,000 to 1,250 words) rough-draft essay that is formatted in proper APA style. This rough draft assignment must integrate prior feedback and show improvement from your prior coursework. The rough draft will be evaluated differently than a final draft essay, so pay close attention to the grading rubrics and requirements.
Your argument should be sound, valid, and based upon evidence from at least 5 credible sources. At least 3 of your sources must be scholarly. You may integrate additional information, since your final draft requires additional research. Information and evidence must be integrated appropriately, cited in APA-style, and used with integrity. Remember to draft your essay for an academic audience.
This is the feedback I received:
( 1.76 / 2.00) Argument Development
Proficient – Most claims are developed through logical reasoning and/or based on credible evidence from the minimum number of sources required. Argument is fairly cohesive, complete, and relevant to the research question.
Comments:
You did well in developing most of your claims. Your argument demonstrates that you are building an understanding of the research question. There are a few places where the connection between your claims and the supporting evidence is not fully explained. Review your marked-up paper for specific suggestions that you can apply to your rough draft.
This is the grading rubric:
Argument Development
Total: 3.40
Distinguished – Claims are supported by logical reasoning and credible evidence from at least the minimum number of sources required. Argument has a well-developed foundation.
Proficient – Most claims are supported by logical reasoning and/or credible evidence from the minimum number of sources required. Argument has a well-developed foundation.
Basic – Many claims are supported by logical reasoning and/or credible evidence from an adequate number of sources. Argument is identifiable but may not be well-developed.
Below Expectations – Few or no claims are supported by logical reasoning and/or credible evidence from an adequate number of sources. Argument is difficult to identify and underdeveloped.
Non-Performance – The argument development is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Rhetorical Development
Total: 2.30
Distinguished – Voice is appropriate for the situation. Argument is tailored to an academic audience.
Proficient – Academic voice is developing. Argument is appropriate for an academic audience.
Basic – Academic voice is emerging. Argument may be more appropriate for a non-academic audience.
Below Expectations – Academic voice is not apparent. Argument is not suited to an academic audience.
Non-Performance – The rhetorical development is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Written Communication
Total: 2.30
Distinguished – Document is organized, well-structured, and meets length requirements. Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, and other elements are consistent with the required style guide. Writing is clear, correct, and easy to read.
Proficient – Document shows some organization, is properly structured, and meets length requirements. Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, and other elements are mostly consistent with the required style guide. Writing has the potential to be clear, correct, and easy to read after revision and editing.
Basic – Document may have some organizational and structure issues and/or nearly meets the length requirement. Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, and other elements may not be consistent with the required style guide. Writing may be somewhat unclear, incorrect, and/or difficult to read and requires focused revision and editing.
Below Expectations – Document is not well organized, lacks proper structure, and/or does not meet the length requirement. Font, margins, spacing, title block, headers, and other elements may not be consistent with the required style guide. Writing may be unclear, incorrect, and/or difficult to read and requires extensive revision and editing. Use of the style guide is a requirement in all future assignments.
Non-Performance – The rough draft is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Academic Honesty & Source Integration
Total: 2.00
Distinguished – Written work appears to be original. Sources are expertly integrated and cited accurately.
Proficient – Written work appears to be original. Sources are properly integrated and cited appropriately. Minor errors in citations exist.
Basic – Written work appears to be original. Sources are integrated with an attempt at accurate citation. Relevant errors in citations exist.
Below Expectations – Written work appears to contain some unoriginal writing. Sources may be used without proper integration and/or citation.
Non-Performance – The ethical integration of sources is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.
Essay Topic:
Increase Internet usage and its effect in communities since 1980
