Shannyn Miller review of Rania Hanna Project Two
1. Does the paper have a clear thesis that follows the "skeletal structure" we've discussed? I.e., does it both identify the central argument(s) of the work it is analyzing and identify the trope and techniques the author/director uses to make their point(s)?
There is a clear thesis:
“In the movie an Inconvient truth, Al Gore, in an agile extravagant way seeks to prove to people that global warming must be stopped.”
But while it uses adjectives to describe his methods it does not state the actual techniques used in the film.
2. Does the paper have a clear exigence and purpose (by explaining the exigence and importance of the work it is analyzing and/or the exigence and importance of analyzing this piece of work)? Do you have a solid idea of why this argument is an important one and/or why it is or should be interesting to an audience made up of people such as yourself? What is the exigence?
She states how Al Gore is trying to make the topic of global warming relevant to us, but she isn’t giving HER audience a reason to think her paper is relevant to us.
3. Does the project contain ample support statements/support paragraphs that refer to and back up the thesis?
Yes
4. What is the strongest part of the paper (most interesting, most powerfully argued, etc.)?
Describing his methods of captivating his audience
5. What is the weakest part of the paper (or the part that needs to be improved, further developed or extended)?
Grammar is terrible. Words are very repetitive and unnecessary (“highest peak”) and some words are not used in the proper manner. I think she should find a better word then sarcasm to explain how he tried to make himself interesting to a younger audience. She also switches between saying “One can captivate an audience…” and “Al Gore captivates his audiences…”
6. Does the author make appropriate references to particular moments in the text (quotations, paraphrases, etc.)? Are there enough references to both back up the thesis and allow a reader to follow the argument being made?
Yes, she makes sure to do this. Especially in the references to his childhood memories
7. On the sentence-level, did you find the paper to be well written? Does it contain poor grammmar or sentence-fragments? Is it unnecessarily wordy at times?
The paper is not well written. I think I may only be this way as a rough draft, but she should have someone help her to edit it.
8. Does the project read like an analysis rather than a review? I.e., does show a clear attention to the structure and technique of the piece rather than simply summarizing it and explaining its strenghts and weaknesses?
No. It reads like a review you would expect a critic to give. I think she is trying to agree with him rather then take a neutral position.
9. What grade would you give the paper if it was a final draft?
C