Synthesis_Bailly.

docx
by 134661 User

FILE

SYNT HESIS_BAILLY.DOCX (16.83K)

T IME SUBMIT T ED

25-FEB-2016 10:19PM

WORD COUNT

1064

SUBMISSION ID

637221263

CHARACT ER COUNT

5061

Nice
metaphor

Even

Citation? Where does Thompson express similar

points?
including me.

So you're partially
disagreeing with Carr.
That could be clearer too.

Good, the
links are
stronger here.

What does Thompson mean

by "cognitive past?"
Remember your audience-they probably wouldn't know.

Oooh! Do you really think Carr would say this?

And what does

this
comparison
suggest? That
technology is
harmless and a
helpful tool?

Nice citations! Again, your

page numbers don't match
mine, so it would be useful
to put the edition of the
book in after the editors.

Synthesis_Bailly.docx
GRADEMARK REPORT
FINAL GRADE

GENERAL COMMENTS

/100

Instructor
Kayla,
I've enjoyed reading your dialogue! It was welldeveloped, and these are great companion pieces.
T he links between certain lines of dialogue could be
a little stronger, but this is a f airly minor problem.
In general, there are about f ive skills I'm looking at to
gauge whether you're ready to move on to the next
part of the semester: 1) ability to identif y an issue,
2) ability to report what "they say," 3) ability to
synthesis two views, 4) ability to respond with your
own argument, and 5) citation. So I'll address those
three issues in my comment.
1) Right now, your paper has a topic, not an issue.
See the comment at the very beginning of the paper
f or more details.
2 and 3) You're doing well with both of these. At
times, taking a little more care with a quote or idea
f rom an author is needed (see the comment about
Carr's points about accessing more inf ormation or
the comment about a point you seem to miss f rom
T hompson), but overall, you possess these skills!
4) Your argument is clear--you agree with
T hompson--but the explanation of why he is more
convincing could be more developed. See the
comment at the end of the paper.
5) You're also doing well here. I didn't take of f points
f or not citing paraphrased inf ormation here, but I will
in the next paper, so be aware that you always skip
this type of citation. Also, your page numbers are
completely dif f erent than mine, which isn't a problem.
It's just a little conf using! Which version of the book
are you using?
Overall, you're def initely ready f or the second half
of the semester because you've mostly gained or
ref ined the skills needed! Make sure to work on
developing arguments, citing paraphrased inf o, and
identif ying an "issue" f or f uture papers.

PAGE 1

Text Comment.

Nice metaphor

Comment 1
Like you say, this is a topic, not an issue or "f ocus," as I called it in the assignment explanation.
In the synchronous session, I explained "f ocus" f urther. You need to name a question or issue
that both authors are weighing in on or trying to answer. So, f or example, both Carr and
T hompson seem interested in whether technology is ef f ecting our mental abilities. T hat would
be an issue, not a topic.

Strikethrough.
Comment 3
Just FYI: as of 2009, MLA no longer allows underlining OR italicizing f or book titles. Underlining
is f or URLs only.

Text Comment.

Even

Comment 4
A little stronger connection here and between the exchanges would be usef ul. For example,
T hompson could say "I disagree" or something, just to clarif y.

QM

Text Comment.

Citation? Where does T hompson express similar points?

Text Comment.

including me.

Paraphrase
Don't f orget to cite paraphrased inf ormation!

Text Comment.

So you're partially disagreeing with Carr. T hat could be clearer too.

Comment 5
Here, it's just a little hard to understand why you're having T hompson start mid-sentence. T here
needs to be a stronger indication that you're playing an announcer and you're commenting on
the "action" while it's happening. T his is also not clear in the multi-media project. How could you
make it clearer?
QM

Paraphrase
Don't f orget to cite paraphrased inf ormation!

Comment 6
Is that what Carr's example showed? It would help to have T hompson explain how his point is
an explanation of what Carr is doing when he makes the statements he does,

Text Comment.

Good, the

links are
stronger here.
QM

Transpose
T ranspose

Comment 7
Remember, this is "in Google's view," but here, you make this sound like Carr's point (324). Be a
little more caref ul here so you don't make it seem like Carr has a view he doesn't.

Comment 8
Your page numbers don't seem to be correct. Which version of the book are you using? Also,
since these two quotes aren't on the same page, they need two separate citations.

Text Comment.

What does T hompson mean by "cognitive past?" Remember your

audience--they probably wouldn't know.
QM

Cite
Citation Needed

PAGE 2

Text Comment.

And what does this comparison suggest? T hat technology is harmless

and a helpf ul tool?

Text Comment.
QM

Oooh! Do you really think Carr would say this?

Paraphrase
Don't f orget to cite paraphrased inf ormation!

QM

Awk.
Awkward:
T he expression or construction is cumbersome or dif f icult to read. Consider rewriting.

Comment 9
It seems like you're missing the idea that T hompson admits that technology might change our
brains, but that he thinks this change will be well worth it because we'll gain more than we lose.
For example, check out his point on the "trade-of f " on 357.

Comment 10
Your f inal word needs to be a bit more developed. Why, f or example, do you f ind T hompson's
argument more convincing? Because of his analysis of the lack of research Carr has? Because
your own experiences supports it?
PAGE 3

Text Comment.

Nice citations! Again, your page numbers don't match mine, so it would be
usef ul to put the edition of the book in af ter the editors.