Rafael Martinez Salguero

College Writing R1A, Section 002

Oct. 06, 2017

The Real Paper 2

Generation Like Essay Evaluation

Considering the fact that this essay was unedited and written with a time constraint, I

would say that this is a solid paper. This analysis will go from top to bottom, analyzing the

weaknesses and strengths of each paragraph. After the analysis of the paragraph is complete, a

grade will be given if inside that paragraph theres an important part of the rubric.

We will start with the introduction and thesis. Here is where the question, did this essay

address the prompt? Comes in handy. For your introduction, one prompt was addressed and the

other prompt was overlooked. The one that was addressed Rushkoffs chief concerns about

marketing and teens was in my opinion a good introduction and thesis. The reasoning behind

this is that, you do answer the first prompt. You first begin stating the inherent issue that

Rushkoff sees in digital spaces; this being the behavior that companies have towards teens. One

detail that you missed for the first prompt was addressing the impact that companies have on

teens. You indeed addressed the main concern that Rushkoff sees with likes and social media

but, you failed to address the repercussions that teens suffer because of businesses. The issue

here is not what you addressed, but it is what you did not addressed. You completely missed to

argue the second prompt, this being the I say part of the essay. The prompt was: What do you

think of his views?

 You did not address the second prompt in the introduction or thesis, but you did address

it, shortly, at the end of the essay. This still qualifies this introduction and thesis as incomplete,

even if you addressed the second prompt later in the essay. Your essay should draw from your

thesis, not the opposite. It is because of this reasoning that the grade for your thesis will be a C;

although you addressed the first prompt, the thesis in general is lacking essential details. The

essential details being the second prompt, the I say part of the essay.

The second paragraph is simply a short paragraph where you explain how you will

provide enough evidence to prove the validity of your argument. I think this is a paragraph that

could be eliminated from the essay, because this is already known by the reader. The reader

knows that you will provide a certain degree of evidence in order to prove your point. This

paragraph is unnecessary. The organization and development for this paragraph falls in the C

range because it is a repetitive line of reasoning.

The third paragraph, is a good introduction to the case of Ceili Lynch. Perhaps for this

paragraph words such as quantifiable and object could be changed to something more succinct

and to the point. You are falling in the trap of trying to use elaborate words in order to embellish

your writing. I would recommend you do that in an essay where you have time to edit, and not in

a timed essay. It is better to use a regular word properly, than a fancy word inadequately. The

word choice in this paragraph is overall adequate so this paragraph falls in the C range.

The fourth paragraph is really good. The transition from the previous paragraph is

smooth, both paragraphs third and fourth complement each other. This paragraph not only

has a good transition, but it advances your rhetoric. This means it helps to make your claim more

persuasive. The grade earned for this paragraph has to do with development and organization.

For this paragraph alone, your grade would fall in the B range.
 For paragraph five, the reasoning is similar to paragraph four. A good sense of transition

is present coming from paragraph four to paragraph five. The issue with this paragraph is mostly

organization. Some of the sentences in this paragraph like, The second type is how through her

own posting, she is increasing the discourse, the reach of this marketing campaign. Ceili is an

unpaid worker to these marketing campaigns, because she is doing their job for free lack a sense

of transition. So, the transition from one paragraph to another is good, but it is the transition from

your inner sentences in the paragraph that lack a proper flow. This paragraph would fall in the C

range.

For paragraph six, again theres problems with organization. Coming from paragraph five

to six, theres a bit of a bump. You are trying to bring a new piece of evidence to advance your

claim which is good, but the flow coming from paragraph five to six could be better. The points

being brought in this paragraph are good points. They advance your main claim, and they

provide evidence to back up your claim. For example, The issue with this company and every

other marketing agency is the lack of transparency here you are letting the reader know that

most marketing campaigns benefit from ignorance, which ties up with the exploitation of teens in

social media. This paragraph for organization would fall in the C range because it uses strategies

to detract from coherence and for development it would fall in the B range. The development

grade would be a B because this paragraph advances a solid line of reasoning, supported by

relevant evidence.

Paragraph seven is very short, maybe you could add this paragraph to either paragraph

six or eight.

Paragraph eight contains a lot of information that for the most part helps to drive your

claim. You used the example of Steven Fernandez in order to show how businesses are affecting
creators. You argued that it is because of businesses that some creators have to deter from being

themselves because this will harm their fame. The evidence and argument are quite solid but, the

issue here is that you are not very thorough with your explanation. For example, perhaps you

could argue a bit more about why Steven Fernandez, wants to change his socio-economic

status or why is This is not Stevens true personality nor behavior? You argue points that

overall are driving your claim, but you are not being as thorough as needed in order for this to be

persuasive. This paragraph would fall in the B category for development and organization,

because overall you are advancing your claim.

In paragraphs nine and ten you finally address the I say part of the prompt. These

paragraphs are quite good in the sense that they provide a reasoning of why you agree with

Rushkoff. The issue is that this should be in your thesis and also these paragraphs should be

much more thorough. This is your other prompt, which means that just as much effort should be

put in this one as the other prompt. For development in this paragraph the grade would be a B

because in the end it is providing evidence to why you agree with Rushkoff. In organization this

paragraph would earn an NP, because it undermines coherence.

For the conclusion I believe this is good. You restate your claim, you drive your claim to

an ending point and you also do mention the I say part of the essay in the beginning of the

paragraph. This perhaps should have been a bit more thorough, but because of the time constraint

this a good conclusion. This conclusion would earn a grade in development of a B because it

advances a line of reasoning, supported by real evidence.

Critical engagement would probably be a B because you do seem to understand the

material, and you do advance your claims with proper evidence.

 Thesis would earn a NP because it is lacking one of the prompts, you are not answering

the full question.

Development would earn a grade of a B if again there was only one prompt but because

theres two that you need to address your grade would be a C.

Word choice would earn a C because at times it can be imprecise.

Sentences would earn a C because some sentences break rules which overall compromise clarity.

Grammar and Usage would earn a B because overall you seem to be generally accurate with your

grammar.

Overall, your essay is good if the prompt was only the first prompt. It is because of this

big issue that your overall grade will be C- / C.