S 2012 1010 Moll ENGL 1010 Sections 33 and 36
English 1010: Writing
Dr. Patience Moll
Office: Norman Mayer 202
Office Hours: T/TH 4-5:30pm
email: pmoll@tulane.edu
Required texts: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Longman ed.; MLA Handbook, 7th ed.
Additional readings to be posted on the class Blackboard page.
________________________________________________________________________
Departmental Course Description and Outcomes:
In English 1010 students will learn to write clearly, to develop complex and coherent
arguments, and to engage with expert knowledge through independent, scholarly
research.

To write clearly, students are taught to revise essays through multiple drafts in
order to eliminate grammatical errors and stylistic flaws that undermine the
author-audience compact.
 To develop complexity, students are introduced to multiple invention strategies
including the classical rhetorical appeals, free-writing, dialogue, critical analysis
of written texts, and library research.
 To develop coherent arguments without sacrificing complexity, students will
practice with principles of style, principles of arrangement, and different models
of argument (Graff, Toulmin).
 To engage in a scholarly way with expert knowledge and to demonstrate selfconscious participation in the professional community of the academy, students
will be taught how to conduct independent bibliographic research in the
university library; will be taught how to evaluate scholarly writing critically; will
practice strategies for summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting; and will be
introduced to and expected to master the standard citation and formatting
conventions of the Modern Language Association.
The method of instruction in English 1010 is hybrid and comprises four different modes:




seminar-style discussions with heavy student participation;
hands-on, productive work in writing workshops and guided, “lab”-style
exercises;
brief lectures by both professor and students;
regular one-on-one conferencing with the professor, both inside and outside the
classroom.
Sections 33 and 36 of ENGL 1010 achieve the above goals through sustained, close
reading of Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel Frankenstein and its intertexts with specific focus
on the novel’s thematized dialectic of creation and communication. Shelley’s mythic
work presses us to consider how good writing—among other modes of production and
expression—both demonstrates the creativity, originality, and inspiration of the author
and succeeds as communication by connecting with and eliciting sympathy from an
audience; in this way, good writing both changes the world and builds communities
within it, challenges established systems and repairs broken ones. Shelley’s curious,
impassioned reflection on this dialectic will help us to consider such writerly challenges
as getting started or creating something out of, apparently nothing; shaping various parts
of an essay into a finished, coherent whole; complementing logical rigor with attention to
aesthetic detail in order to present a compelling authorial ethos; sharpening, keeping in
view, and conveying a keen sense of purpose; getting your readers to do what you want
them to do, and more. At the same time, Frankenstein raises difficult questions about the
costs of an imbalanced dialectic between creation and communication, and will open our
reflections on writing onto broader social issues of relevance today: what are the costs of
creating something for which one bears no ethical responsibility? Why do some attempts
at communication fail, and others succeed? How are communities built and sustained
according to specific assumptions, roles, and linguistic conventions? What is the
relationship between authorship and authority, and how does gender inform or complicate
our ideas about authority and authorship? What are the costs, but also the power of
anonymity? How is language used not only to bring people together but also to keep
people apart? To what extent is language, and writing, essential to being human, and
what happens when nonhuman creatures become able to write and speak, or when the
definition of “the human” becomes unclear? To what extent do we as human beings live
in a “Frankenstein” moment, when the products of our technological science threaten to
develop in monstrous directions beyond our control, and when our mastery of the globe
seems to be leading toward much of the latter’s destruction? Our semester-long
engagement with the novel and myth of Frankenstein will help us to develop innovative,
scholarly ways to address such questions, which students will be asked to pursue
selectively in final independent research project.
________________________________________________________________________
Course Policies
Attendance and Class Participation: Students in English 1010 develop skills that will
serve them for their rest of their academic and professional lives. What’s more, no matter
how well a student writes, he or she can and always cultivate these skills further. To do
this, students must come to class, participate in class activities, and sustain positive,
productive membership in the classroom community of student-writers. Attendance,
punctual arrival, and participation are absolutely essential; tardiness, the use of cell
phones in class, text-messaging in class, using laptops for non-class related activities,
and doing other homework in class all are grounds for being marked as absent.
Students will be asked to leave class if they do not bring the assigned text(s) or other
materials we need for that day, and will be marked absent for that day.
When a student absence results from serious illness, injury or a critical personal problem,
that student must notify the instructor and arrange to complete any missed work in a
timely fashion. Students are allowed, over the course of the semester, to miss the
equivalent of one week of class without penalty. Thereafter, students will lose onethird of their final grade for every unexcused absence from class. Once a student
has accumulated the equivalent of three weeks of unexcused absences, he or she has
automatically failed the class.
The instructor will document the dates of every student’s unexcused absences and file an
“Absence Report Form” for any of their students who accumulate four, unexcused
absences. These forms are sent to the student and the student’s dean (the instructor retains
the third copy). If the student’s attendance problem results in his or her failing the course,
the instructor should file a second “Absence Report Form” recommending that the
student be withdrawn from the course with an F.
Academic Dishonesty: This link will take you to the Newcomb-Tulane Code of Academic
Conduct: tulane.edu/college/code.cfm. All students must take responsibility for studying
this code and adhering to it. We will devote some time in class to it. Our purpose, in
these discussions, will be not only to teach you how to avoid plagiarism and how to cite
sources, but to initiate you into the contemporary discussion of intellectual property and
the nuanced dynamics between individuality, authorship, and what’s sometimes called
intertextuality, so that you can make informed and thoughtful choices about your writing
for the rest of your university career and later in life.
The Grade of “Incomplete”: If a student has a legitimate excuse for being unable to
complete all of the work for a course, the instructor can give that student an “I”
(Incomplete) on the final grade sheet. If the student does not complete the work and the
instructor does not change the grade, however, that grade will revert to an F. The deadline
for addressing incompletes varies each semester but is usually about one month after the
final exam period. Before a student is given an “I,” the instructor will confirm with the
student – in writing – exactly what the student needs to finish and retain a dated copy of
this correspondence in the event that the student misses the deadline and then expresses
confusion about the new grade of “F.”
Students with Special Needs: Students who need special help with the course, such as
note-taking, free tutoring, additional time and/or a distraction-reduced environment for
tests and final exams, may contact the Goldman Office of Disability Services (ODS),
located in the Center for Educational Resources & Counseling (ERC). It is the
responsibility of the student to register a disability with ODS, to make a specific request
for accommodations, and to submit all required documentation. On a case-by-case basis,
ODS staff determines disability status, accommodation needs supported by the
documentation, and accommodations reasonable for the University to provide.
University faculty and staff, in collaboration with ODS, are then responsible for
providing the approved accommodations. ODS is located in the ERC on the 1st floor of
the Science and Engineering Lab Complex, Building (#14). Please visit the ODS website
for more detailed information, including registration forms and disability documentation
guidelines: http://tulane.edu/studentaffairs/erc/services/disabilityserviceshome.cfm
The Writing Center: Students are encouraged to seek extra help with revising their essays
at the university’s Writing Center. More information is available at the Writing Center’s
Web site: http://tulane.edu/tutoring/writing_center.cfm . You can also call 504-314-5103
to schedule an appointment.
Essays Submissions and Late-Work Policy: All assignments are to be handed in as hardcopies by the author at the beginning of class. I do not accept essays or other
homework submissions by email. Printer failure and other computer malfunctions
do not constitute an acceptable excuse for a missed deadline. Plan ahead! Major
essays handed in late will be deducted 1.5 points per class period; shorter assignments
handed in late will be deducted 1 point per class period. I provide minimal comments on
late work, so please be sure to submit your work on time. Extensions on major papers are
granted only in extreme circumstances and must be requested 48 hours in advance. You
may be asked to provide documentation in support of your extension application. If you
are having trouble completing assignments on time, please see me in office hours for
help.
Office Hours: My regular office hours are Tuesday and Thursday from 4pm to 5:30pm;
during these times you are welcome to come talk to me about a draft you are working on,
or about any other individual issues related to class. No scheduled appointments are
necessary during these times, and if more than one student shows up at the same time we
will have a group workshop, so don’t wait outside if you see another student meeting
with me. If you are unable to see me during those times, send me an email about
scheduling an appointment with you at a more convenient time. If you need to discuss
any one-one-one issues with me that do not concern the entire class, please see me
during my office hours to do so; class time is not appropriate for addressing
individual issues such as handing in late work.
Email: Your email correspondence with me and other professors should demonstrate the
conventions of professional communication: include a salutation and a signature; use
proper grammar, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation; include a “subject” entry; and
so on. You can expect me to respond within 24 hours of receiving your emails, and I will
expect you to do the same. You should not email me with questions about information
covered in this syllabus or in individual assignment descriptions; if you do, I will direct
you to the appropriate document.
Schedule of Readings and Assignments
NB: Reading and writing assignments are to be completed by the date given. (“In-class”
writing assignments are completed in class). The following schedule is subject to
revision, and you should anticipate additional reading assignments from the MLA
Handbook and in the form of other secondary material on Blackboard as we proceed
throughout the semester.
Unit 1 – Analysis: Reading One Text Through the Lens of Another
Week I
Jan. 15 In-class discussion: Introduction to ENGL 1010, Course objectives, Shelley’s
Frankenstein, Writing as creation and communication.
In-class writing: Diagnostic essay (20 min)
Jan. 17 Reading assignment: Review and print course syllabus; bring to class. Read the
Preface to the 1818 edition of Frankenstein.
In-class discussion: Analyzing Frankenstein’s preface: What is the stated thesis of
this novel? How is the thesis stated clearly, and what part of it remains unclear or
undeveloped? What was the author’s purpose in writing this novel? How does he
use negation to define his purpose more clearly? How does the author’s
identification of specific source materials indicate the direction in which he is
going to develop his thesis?
In-class writing: Writing up class discussion on thesis, purpose, source materials
invention strategies.
Prose strategy: amplification
Week II
Jan. 22 In-class discussion: Reading Frankenstein’s 1818 title, subtitle, epigraph, and
dedication.
 How are titles especially effective modes of communicating with an audience?
Considering the epigraph, subtitle, and dedication or acknowledgment in
academic writing.
 Connecting the title page to the preface to develop complexity: how does
Frankenstein begin by identifying authorship and authority as complex
problems? How is authorship “amplified” from title, to epigraph, to
dedication, to preface?
 Using editorial footnotes to develop coherence, complexity, and relevance
(kairos).
 Analyzing and using images rhetorically: the 1831 doublet. How can images
be used effectively in writing? What happens when you analyze one image
through another?
 Developing complexity: What do the 1831 images add to the 1818 preface and
title page?
 Review of 1/16 and 1/21: establishing kairos
 Prose strategy: hypophora
In-class writing: Establish the relevance of Shelley’s Frankenstein using notes
from discussion of 1/16 and 1/21
Jan. 24 Reading assignment: Introduction to the 1831 edition of Frankenstein (Longman
184-191)
In-class discussion: Reading the 1818 Preface through the lens of the 1831
Introduction:
 How does Shelley use hypophora to identify herself as author? How does
she metaphorically and literally introduce gender into the topic of
authorship in 1831, and how is gender used to reflect on the problem of
anonymity? What is the difference between ideas (or imagination and
fantasy) and writing? What purpose(s) does each practice serve? How
does the author present herself here? How does she compare to the society
around her? How does she use writing to change her position in that
society?
 How does Shelley develop the 1818 preface’s identification of source
material? How does she define her purpose in writing Frankenstein, and
how does this 1831 statement of purpose compare to the 1818 Preface?
 How does Shelley define invention, and what invention strategies does she
identify? How does she understand the author-reader relation? How does
she identify her audience differently than the author of the Preface does?
 Invention strategies: appealing to ethos, pathos
In-class writing: Distinguishing between the kairos of 1818 and that of
1831.
Week III
Jan. 29 Writing assignment: 3-4 page draft of Essay 1: Reading the 1818 Preface
through the lens of the 1831 Introduction.
In-class workshop: Identifying a topic, thesis construction, the purpose of the
paragraph, coherence and complexity, focus and flow. Using the MLA Handbook.
(NB: Bring MLA Handbook to class).
Jan. 31: Writing assignment: 3-4page advanced draft of Essay 1.
In-class workshop: Revising for focus and flow. Topic sentences. Considering the
purpose of introduction and conclusion.
Week IV
Feb. 5 Writing assignment: Final draft of Essay 1 due.
Reading assignment: Frankenstein 5-11
The Rime of the Ancient Mariner Parts I-III (available on
Blackboard)
In-class discussion: Writing community, Introduction to Romanticism, the Gothic,
the Sublime. Review: Amplification
Unit 2: Analysis and Revision
Feb. 7 Reading assignment: Finish The Rime of the Ancient Mariner
“Monsters, Visionaries, and Mary Shelley” in Longman pp.
211-216 (Burke and Wollstonecraft)
Frankenstein 11-25, plus the 1831 revision on pp. 194-197
In-class discussion: The Romantic sublime, gendered aesthetics. Purposes in
writing: revolution versus communion. Evaluating revision.
Week V
Feb. 12 Mardi Gras: Class does not meet.
Feb. 14 Reading assignment: Frankenstein 25-64, Shelley’s “Mutability” (on
Blackboard)
In-class discussion: Inventing through dialogue--the themes of science, education,
the university, politics. What makes the creature monstrous? Who is the monster
in this novel? Considering the novel’s success and its various adaptations. The
monster on screen versus in writing. Inventing through source material:
Frankenstein as response to “Mutability.”
Week VI
Feb. 19 Reading assignment: Frankenstein 64-103
In-class discussion: analyzing the creature’s rhetoric – commonplaces, rhetorical
question, chiasmus, pathos, logos, ethos. The creature’s reading list: how
Frankenstein engages with a broader, European and culture.
In-class writing: close reading a specific passage.
Feb. 21 Reading assignment: Frankenstein 103-129, Gilpin on the Picturesque (Longman
216-218)
In-class discussion: analyzing the creature’s rhetoric. Invention strategies: using
aesthetic categories to develop ideas. Revising for style.
In-class writing: Free-writing – analyzing Frankenstein through the lens of
another text.
Week VII
Feb. 26 Reading assignment: Frankenstein 129-145
Writing assignment: 4-5 page draft of second analysis-paper
In –class workshop: Titles, focus and flow, revising to be concise and active,
considering principles of organization.
Feb. 28 Reading assignment: Frankenstein 145-158
Writing assignment: advanced 4-5 page draft of second analysis-paper
In-class workshop: transitions, establishing kairos, identifying your audience
Week VIII
March 5 Writing assignment: Final Draft, 4-5 page analysis-paper
In-class discussion: What makes a good argument - the Toulmin model.
Analyzing Moers, “Female Gothic: The Monster’s Mother” (10 pp., on
Blackboard)
Unit 3 - Argument
March 7 Reading assignment: Frankenstein 158-170; finish Moers, “Female Gothic”
Writing assignment: Annotation of Moers.
In-class discussion: Shelley’s two endings – the power of the first-person in
writing. Analyzing Moers
Week IX
March 12 Reading assignment: Young, “Frankenstein as Historical Metaphor” (6 pp., on
Blackboard); Mellor, “The Female in Frankenstein” (13 pp., on Blackboard)
Writing assignment: Annotating Young
In-class discussion: Analyzing Young and Mellor. Graff’s “They say/I say”
model. Using scholarly dialogue to develop a thesis. Situating yourself within a
debate.
March 14 Reading Assignment: Lipking, “Frankenstein, the True Story; or Rousseau
Judges Jean-Jacques.” (17 pp., on Blackboard).
In-class discussion: Analyzing argument in Lipking. Review - Looking at
Frankenstein through various lenses.
In-class writing: Using They say/I say to develop an argument. Thesis
construction, outlining.
March 14 Writing Assignment: 4-5 page draft of Argument Paper
In-Class Workshop: Using texts effectively- establishing creative agreement and
creative disagreement. Paraphrasing, Quoting, and Summarizing. Using The MLA
Handbook (NB: Bring MLA Handbook to Class). Revising for focus and flow.
Week X
March 19 Writing Assignment: advanced 3-4 page draft of Argument Paper
In-class workshop: Revising for focus and flow, topic sentences, principles of
organization, introduction and conclusion, establishing kairos.
March 21 In-class discussion: Developing a research project. Film adaptations of
Frankenstein. The Library Course Guide. Scholarly, popular, and professional
sources. Writing to the code
Week XI
Spring Break – Classes do not meet
Week XII
April 2 Writing Assignment: Final draft of Argument Paper due
In-class Discussion: Fish’s “Plagiarism is not a Big Moral Deal.” Plagiarism as
creation, as communication, as a Frankenstein monster? Discuss Tulane’s “Code
of Academic Conduct. Identifying Research Areas of Interest
Unit 4 - Research
April 4 Writing Assignment: Area of interest statement(s), Complete “Writing to the
Code” quiz and email me your results.
NB: Class meets in the library
Week XIII
April 9 Writing Assignment: Relevant resources statement
In-class: Identifying scholarly versus non-scholarly sources. Using journal titles to
identify audience. Where to look for thesis, author’s purpose. Strategies for
developing a compelling research project
April 11 Writing Assignment: Detailed project statement.
In-class Discussion: Invention through dialogue: class presentations and
evaluations of projects.
Week XIV
April 16 Writing Assignment: Annotated Bibliography, 2 sources
April 18: Writing Assignment: Annotated Bibliography, 2 sources
Week XV
April 23 Annotation Bibliography, 1 source
In-class discussion: Principles of organization, creative agreement and
disagreement
April 25 Writing Assignment: 7-8 page draft of research paper
In-class workshop: Revising for focus and flow. Working with sources –
introduction, presentation, explanation. Revising for style – overwriting,
overstating, passive voice.
Week XVI
April 30: Writing Assignment: advanced 7-8 page draft of research paper
In-class workshop: Principles of organization, amplification, coherence and
complexity, establishing kairos and connecting with an audience. Revising the
introduction and the conclusion.
Discussion: Summarizing skills you have learned in E1010. How do we
understand writing as communication and creation differently now? How to take
the skills learned in this course with you into the future.
** For Section 1010-33, Final Draft of the Research Paper is due by Weds., May 8th
an 1pm.
** For Section 1010-36, Final Draft of the Research Paper is due by Sunday, May
5th at 1pm.
** Final papers should be submitted by email to pmoll@tulane.edu. Do not submit
the final paper to Blackboard.
Grading
Unit 1
Write-up of class discussion 1
Kairos of Frankenstein today 1
Kairos of 1818 v. 1831
1
Workshop Participation
2
Analysis Essay
16
Total
21
Unit 2
Passage analysis
1
Fr.through the lens of another 1
Workshop Participation
2
Analysis Essay
17
Total
21
Unit 3
Annotation
Annotation
They say/I say
Workshop participation
Argument essay
Total
1
1
1
2
19
24
Unit 4
Writing to the code
Area of Interest
Relevant Resources
Project Statement
Annotations (5)
Workshop participation
Final Draft
Total
1
1
1
1
5
2
23
34
________________________________________________________________________
Grading Rubric
I. Overview
The A Paper is characterized by freshness, ambition, maturity, coherence, and complexity. Its
claims are stated clearly and supported well because it incorporates relevant nuances that go
beyond the obvious. It manifests a distinctive voice that explicitly engages a meaningful
rhetorical context and, in turn, an actual audience. It situates itself thoroughly among assigned
readings, or other key, related texts in public discourse. It effectively balances the specific and the
general, the compelling detail and the larger point. It grows out of large-scale revisions (both in
terms of content and structure). It not only fulfills the assignment, but inventively uses the
assignment’s parameters as an occasion to excel. Its only errors, if any, are purely typographical
and thus quite rare. For readers, it’s memorable because it’s fully realized in terms of content,
context, and overall purpose.
The B Paper is characterized by content that is less daring and therefore less integrated into a
larger critical framework. Its claims need more support and exploration because its purpose is not
stated overtly enough. Its voice needs to be more distinct or differentiated. In terms of revision, it
needs to do more with the assigned readings. Hence, there is a weak or unclear balance between
the specific and the general, the detail and the idea, the personal anecdote and the larger point. It
fulfills the assignment, but in a perfunctory way. It makes very few errors and shows no
systematic misunderstanding of the fundamentals of grammar, but its overall structure is uneven
in places because it’s not fully realized in terms of purpose or effect.
The C Paper is characterized by an overdependence on the self-evident and the cliché, which
renders it completely uninformative. It has no particular voice or main argument, nor any
significant sense of context or audience. It envisions no dynamic interplay between detail and
idea. It fulfills the assignment but does so in a wholly perfunctory manner. It often has serious
grammatical errors that significantly disrupt the reading experience. It’s rather obvious that a C
paper hasn’t been revised in any purposeful way.
The D Paper is characterized by minimal thought and effort, which appears primarily as the
absence of a meaningful central idea. It fails to fulfill some or most of the key aspects of the
assignment. It makes no meaningful use of other texts and thus fails to envision a larger cultural
purpose. It ignores its audience. Its sentences and paragraphs are built around rigidly repeated
formulae that soon become predictable. It is riddled with errors and is therefore not realized
enough to warrant revision. Instead, it needs to be completely rewritten.
The F Paper is characterized by plagiarism, lateness, or a total misunderstanding of the
assignment. It’s incomprehensible due to a plethora of errors or even a nonexistent organizational
plan. It hasn’t been revised because it hasn’t even begun to resemble a scholarly mode of writing.
II. Breakdown of how papers will be graded. We will use this rubric in peer-editing
sessions and you will receive a copy of this sheet with each graded paper, with the
appropriate numbers circled in order to indicate what specifically you need to work on
and what you already have excelled at.
I. Conceptual
3 Has cogent analysis, shows command of interpretive and conceptual tasks required by the assignment and course
materials: ideas original, complex, and insightful, going beyond ideas discussed in lecture and class.
2 Shows a good understanding of the texts, ideas and methods of the assignment; goes beyond the obvious; may have
one minor factual or conceptual inconsistency
1 Shows and understanding of the basic ideas and information involved in the assignment; may have some factual,
interpretive, or conceptual errors.
.5 Shows inadequate command of course materials or has significant factual and conceptual errors; confuses some
significant ideas.
0 Writer lacks critical understanding of readings, discussions, or assignment.
II. Rhetorical
3 Commands attention with a convincing argument a compelling purpose; highly responsive to the demands of a
specific writing situation; sophisticated use of conventions of academic discipline and genre; anticipates the reader’s
needs for information, explanation, and context.
2 Addresses audience with a thoughtful argument with a clear purpose; responds directly to the demands of a specific
writing situation; competent use of the conventions of academic discipline and genre; addresses the reader’s needs for
information, explanation, and context.
1 Presents an adequate response to the essay prompt pays attention to the basic elements of the writing situation; shows
sufficient competence in the conventions of academic discipline and genre; signals the importance of the reader’s needs
for information, explanation, and context.
.5 Shows serious weakness in addressing an audience; unresponsive to the specific writing situation; poor articulation
of purpose in academic writing; often states the obvious or the inappropriate
0 Shows sever difficulties communicating through academic writing.
III. Thesis
3 Essay controlled by clear, precise well-defined thesis; is sophisticated and complex in both statement and insight.
2 Clear, specific, arguable thesis central to the essay; may have left minor terms undefined.
1 General thesis or controlling idea; may not define several central terms.
.5 Thesis is vague or not central to the argument; central terms are not defined.
0 No discernible thesis.
IV. Development and support
3 Well-chosen examples; uses persuasive reasoning to develop and support thesis consistently; uses specific quotations
effectively; logical connections between ideas are evident.
2 Pursues explanation and proof of thesis consistently; develops a main argument with explicit major points,
appropriate textual evidence, and supporting detail.
1 Only partially develops the argument; shallow analysis; some ideas and generalizations undeveloped or unsupported;
makes limited use of textual evidence; fails to integrate the quotations appropriately; warrants missing.
.5 Frequently only narrates; digresses from one topic to another without developing ideas or terms; makes insufficient
or awkward use of textual evidence.
0 Little or no development; may list disjointed facts or misinformation; uses no quotations or fails to cite sources or
plagiarizes.
V. Structuring / Coherency
3 Well-constructed paragraphs; appropriate, clear and smooth transitions; arrangement of organizational elements
seems particularly apt.
2 Distinct units of thought in paragraphs controlled by specific, detailed, and arguable topic sentences; clear transitions
between develop, cohering, and logically arranged paragraphs.
1 Some awkward transitions; some brief, weakly unified or undeveloped paragraphs; arrangement may not appear
entirely natural; contains extraneous information.
.5 Simplistic, tends to narrate or merely summarize; wanders from one topic to another; illogical arrangement of ideas.
0 No transitions; incoherent paragraphs; suggest poor planning or no serious revision.
VI. Language
3 Uses sophisticated sentences effectively. Usually chooses words aptly; observes professional conventions of written
English and manuscript format; makes few minor or technical errors.
2 A few mechanical difficulties or stylistic problems (which/that use, split infinities, dangling modifiers, etc.); may
make occasional problematic word choices or syntax errors; a few spelling or punctuation errors or a cliché; usually
presents quotations effectively, using appropriate format.
1 More frequent wordiness; unclear; awkward sentences; imprecise use of words or over-reliance on passive voice;
some distracting grammatical errors (verb tense pronoun agreement, apostrophe errors, singular/plural errors, article
use, preposition use, comma splice); makes effort to present quotations accurately.
.5 Some major grammatical or proofreading errors (subject-verb agreement, sentence fragments, ford form errors);
language frequently weakened by colloquialisms, clichés, repeated inexact word choices; incorrect quotation or citation
format.
0 Numerous grammatical errors and stylistic problems seriously detract from the argument; does not meet the
requirements for Standard Written English.