Go to your writer's Ansel Adams project. Read through the project QUICKLY for an overview, then carefully read the introduction ONLY a second time. Jot notes in your journal so you can answer these questions in a longer comment to the author:
1) Does the project have a clear "point of departure" (See Hjortshoj 115-6)
2) What sentence or sentences best express the thesis? [Note--while most of you had claims in the drafts I reviewed, a few of you may have a major question, not a claim, depending on which option you chose. That can function like a thesis, by orienting the reader to the project's topic and answering the question "so what?"]
3) What part of that thesis expresses (or implies—important) a “why” or a “how”?
4) Does the thesis fall into any of the traps you see in Writing Analytically, pp. 193-198?
5) Are there spots where the writer uses weak verbs or suitcase terms? Does anything in the thesis confuse you? To see how you might help your writer, check how my Eng. 383 class reworked a thesis for Emily's project
6) Submit this comment.
1) Jot more notes down for a new comment
2) Does the writer contradict the thesis or digress from that governing claim in the body of the project?
3) Does the writer have an ending that is not merely summary for the reader? (See Hjortshoj 115-6)
4) Does the writer, when you consider the guidelines from Chapters 12 and 17, have difficulties with support? With word choice? Pay particular attention to the thesis "traps" on pp. 193-98 and advice about choosing the right tone on pp. 278-279
5) Do you see any “suitcase” words or spots that need clarification? Any Essid Pet-Peeves?
6) If time permits, repeat these steps for a second project in your group!
Sorry that this ended up as a twelve-step program! Say...I feel a new Writer's Web handout coming on...