Do different sections of the paper transition well between each other?
* Does the beginning of the paper offer a usefully specific and not overlong overview of the writer’s chosen controversy?
* Topic sentences! Does each paragraph begin with a topic sentence that allows the reader to comprehend the paragraph body? (Seriously, do not underestimate how important topic sentences are to your paper’s overall clarity and organization.)
* Do different sections of the paper transition well between each other? Are paragraph breaks used effectively to show where one area of analysis ends and the next begins?
* Are examples of ethos, pathos, and / or logos explained and not simply labeled (even though they absolutely need to be labeled)? Point out any instances of analysis that could use some deeper investigation.
* Does the writer make an effort to compare and contrast the different rhetorical strategies that are being analyzed?
* When analyzing modes of persuasion, does the writer complete the analytic task? More specifically, does the writer:
1. Identify the mode of persuasion being utilized?
2. Provide logic and/or examples to support their claim?
* Is the concluding section of the essay in which the writer explains which source is the most effective not overlong?
* Put a question mark over any phrase / sentence / section of the paper that could use clarification.
* Circle any mistake in punctuation or spelling.
* Is the simple prescribed structure followed?
Image preview for do different sections of the paper transition well between each other?