Weren't you given a template?

Why? Can you elaborate?

Can you go into more detail? Not about family dynamics necessarily, but your reaction to them? What were the behaviors you adopted that slowed/corrupted your progress?

But informational essays don't require analysis. Are you sure you weren't writing an argumentative paper?

Why? Can you give an example of something specific that left you with that impression?

On Zoom, right?

cut

Whoa, and Italy was hit hard. Weren't you terrified?

Almost seems like the start of a new paragraph. You could have begun here.

What makes them memorable? What ties them together thematically? In other words, how is this not the setup for a 5-paragraph essay?

Opening clauses set up contrast but final clause maintains the same point of view

Word choice. Try: a fluke or erroneous

In writing?

Cut

How do you know this? What views populate that context? What figures did you engage with? With whom did you agree? disagree? Align with? Where do you your view fit it?

of what?

My big take away from this piece is that, while I've learned a bit about the circumstances that presented themselves to you while writing in college, I lack an understand why you reacted to them the way you did. Lots of telling; little showing. Generally, your prose is bloated with unnecessary terms and turns of phrase while much of the content is purely descriptive and lacking in substance.

Good. But why?

Can you explain why you reverted to this format despite your experience in 150?

Word choice. Try: involved

Why? You do a lot of telling here, but not much showing. You've made this point repeatedly but failed to follow up on it.

What do you mean? The experience of writing? Or the processes you went through or specifically employed?

Why, and to what?

Very awkward phrasing. Overwrought. Try: "The internship application lacked a writing component, as did the position itself."

... helped me become more confident ...

Maybe explore the reasons why

Such as?

You might want to say more about this.

Awkward phrasing. To what does "it" refer? Discrimination? If so, it seems like you're celebrating its return, which I doubt is your intention.

So, two things leap out right away: 1) wordiness, and 2) curiously elevated tone

Why anomalous? Because it's 5-year program?

Specific

Indeed

What mystery? The metaphors you're using, while not uninteresting, seem somewhat random and incomplete in your usage of them

This is more an instrumental analysis than a contextual one. Who's involved in the discourse? What are they saying? Where? With whom to you agree? Disagree? Where does your policy suggestion fit in?

phrasing

cut

Not sure about your use of this phrase. Maybe just say, "you'll be graded down."

Running with this mystery metaphor isn't a bad idea, but it seems a little half-baked, like you thought if it while writing and didn't make any revisions to earlier paragraphs (or your title) to set it up.

To what does "these" refer?

Why use "as such" here? What are you referring to? Awkward. It's unclear how this sentence relates to what you say earlier in the paragraph.

This is all a bit opaque. What was the idea you had (about being a writer)? To what does "this" refer? To what does "it" refer?

Do you mean that writing for school gave you feeling of accomplishment?

To what? It's unclear what you're comparing and why.

Good, but who's view is this? Who's espousing it?

Such as?

Good, but what does the discursive context look like? Who's in it? What views are being expressed? Where and why? Who/what do you align yourself with? Who do you take issue with? Were do you fit in?

What do you mean by cautious?

it being? the evidence?

Why these three? What's significant about them? Can you thematize your choices so that they don't appear arbitrary?

Although, ironically, I continued eating meat while working on this project, I nevertheless developed deeper appreciation for ...

A good place for a paragraph break

The one missing component here: any explicit mention of an event that set you on your path. Do you share Twain's view, or maybe you a have slightly different one? What's your tale away, having written this piece?

misunderstood?

And? What happened?

Polish scholar Barbara Chojnacka

A bit awkward. Try:

They look upon those outside Mormonism with skepticism.

Where does this idea sit within the critical discourse of mirrors in film?

Say more. What did you explore? Who did you read? What did they argue? Did you cite works in your piece? Which ones? Who did you align with? Who did you dislike?

What is, for you, the take away from this autobiographical reflection?

word choice?

Terrible!

Wow, that's amazing

Lol

Thumbs down

You seem to be writing to someone who knows you -- or at least knows your major. What it you weren't?

Run-on sentence

And your major is ... ?

What we're looking at here, however, is the discursive context of Princess Mononoke. What do people say about it? Where and why do they say it? What points of view are out there, and how do yours compare? Where do you fit in?

What do you mean? What rhetoric did you arrange?

Can you provide examples of this things? What's flow to you? Flowery language?

Cool!

What's long?

Well, social at any rate

We should work on this. I get the issues with peer review, but try to find someone to read your work. I mean, that's the point -- writing is written to be read!

Why do you think that's so? Maybe something to do with the stakes?

Lol, understood

cut

transpose

Akward transition

For me, the big take away here is that wordiness and a strong tendency toward passive voice makes your writing easy to get lost in. Which is to say, your phrasing can be confusing, and therefore your writing can be generally alienating. It gives the reader the impression you're orbiting the point rather than making it.

Be mindful about your uses of passive voice. It tends to undermine clarity in your writing.

Do you mean you were instructed to write as if the paper would be presented, or did you actually present it?

Not sure what you mean

I'm sure you're not alone

Quality and effort don't always align, especially when it comes to writing!

I would recommend easing up on your use of semicolons.

Maybe more carefully consider your phrasing choices:

--the effort I expended failed to result in a satisfactory grade OR --the grades I received failed to correlate with the effort I expended

Discuss coherence: fear of getting things wrong; obsession with getting As; linked to self-esteem

Sentence ideas don't neatly line up

Maybe drop the semicolon.

The results tend to hit more personally than they do in other classes, as I consider my writing a representation of my intelligence, personality, and likeability.

So far, this section seems more focused on circumstance than context. Expand on the sources you used, how you used them, and where your intervention fits in to the overall conversation about sleep strategies.

However, I took ...

cut

I would advise you to stop thinking in these terms. Instead, think about audience more broadly. Rarely in life will you write long-form pieces for an audience of one whom you seek to impress.

I would advise using the USC Library search engine set to "everything" -- take advantage of this powerful resource while you can.

This is different from the assignment you mentioned above?

Understood. But on the other hand, legal writing strongly adheres to set structures, so this is something you'll have to deal with in the future. I advise thinking more in terms of genre conventions than structure. Certain kinds of documents require writers adhere to set conventions precisely so that authors can meet readers' expectations.

This paragraph could be cut down by editing out repetition and wordiness

Transition -- new paragraph

cut

No comma needed. So far, I'm noticing a strong tendency toward wordiness

Try: "In"

Part 2 seems more like a tonal analysis or a kind of instrumental analysis more than a contextual one. I'm not left with a sense of those involved in the conversation, what the points of view are, what propositions for change have been made. Where do you situate yourself relative to these views?

There's data, which you're using here, and then there's the broader conversation. What points of view about police brutality in India did you consider?

Okay, but to what extent did you engage with the broader discourse re: social media? What points of view did you take into consideration?

Was it a transcript or the text you followed when giving your remarks? A transcript would be if you were talking without prepared remarks and someone write down what you were saying.

If there were 21 speakers with equal stature, you weren't really a keynote speaker (those who established the fundamental ideas explored throughout the conference or meeting)

Problem here is, the assignment expressly ask you NOT to do this

Are you referring to a grading contract? If so, I would encourage you to look at their use slightly differently. The work does very much count, just not in a way you're used to

So interesting because this prompt seems designed to be a crowd pleaser, to increase likelihood of enjoyment

Maybe use a different term (unless you mean to criticize yourself)

Why this term? Transcription means to make some kind of writing legible in a new context. For instance, one would transcribe audio of a recorded interview when writing about it. Is that what you're doing here?

Not needed

redundant

That's okay. Writing often (perhaps most often!) works this way in the real world.

This is what I mean my involuntary, by the way. Creative or not, enjoyable or not, you're obliged to do it to pass a class.

excerpts

Can you explain what you mean by critically engage? Readers might appreciate more detail, like, for instance, an example of "close-ended prompt." What does that look like?

Just say first, second, third. These words are already adverbs; no need to add "ly"

Where did you land, argumentatively? Where does your piece fit in the discourse?

Why address him using his first name? Suggests familiarity.

Essays and op-eds aren't the same thing

Not really an op-ed, then, don't you think. Aren't op-eds geared toward wide audiences?

Honestly, I'm not picking up on this as much as I might like. Part 1 is heavy on description, which isn't necessarily bad. But if you're trying to make an overarching point, I'm struggling to see it. Your emotional state affects your writing?

What was English 174? What was the assignment? You're assuming readers have more information than they do.

Which texts? And what do you mean by "anthology"?

That ... and a deadline, of course

I see it, too. Not a bad thing in the right context.

LOL

Readers might wonder how you square this circle. Ideas find you, but rarely in academic writing. Why is that? You practice writing, presumably without ideas, aiming at pleasing profs.

Uses dashes instead of hyphens (and maybe use fewer of them!)

Repetition

What are those ideals?

Eek. Been granted? Or fought for?

This has been my experience exactly re: ChatGPT. Great for boilerplate, not so great for anything else.

one word

Cool

Yeah, that process theory - doesn't work for everyone!

Awkward phrasing. Try: Although I gave myself more time than usual to write my final paper for "Slavery and Salvation," I completed my other writing tasks that semester using a process I perfected in high school.

Yeah, the reality is, most professional writing happens incredibly close to the wire. It's not a bad thing to know how to do. But it would be good to ad sounding boards other than (or in additional to) your mom.

Odd word choice. Seems needlessly elevated relative your writing here generally.

What do you mean by "hold up"?

Really? That's surprising given how many Writing 150 essay prompts involve problem solving and/or providing practical rather than conceptual solutions.

This sounds like an argumentative essay more than a research paper.

Are you referring to the title of the class? Because it seems like you're suggesting this was the title of your paper.

Such as?

An elective?

What is a filtered fact?

What sources did you use? How did they influence you? Who in the discourse did you agree with? Disagree with? Where do you comments fit in to the larger conversation?

Wordy. Try:

Although I wrote this piece for a specific assignment, the significance of the writing exceeds the essay's initial purpose.

New paragraph. Also, what class?

You were given a research paper assignment in Writing 150? Usually those assignments are thesis-driven essays with a research component.

Could it be, though, that the home stress was motivating whereas the assignment wasn't?

What topic?

New paragraph. Also, for what class did you write this assignment?

I wonder if the stress you were experiencing made writing easier somehow. Given that the persuasive rhetoric you used in the letter yielded success whereas that wasn't the case in the letter assignment. Another factor make involve stakes: the statement you wrote had real world consequences; the assignment less so.

Can you say more about how this environment affected your writing?

Good place for a paragraph break

at USC

Do you mean to say it was tedious because it didn't pertain?

Maybe just say "often"

Aim to write more directly. There's a lot of throat clearing in your writing.

Maybe just say: "I'm currently a senior at USC"

I wonder, is it possible to talk about MJ, even in the specific context of race and stardom, without at least mentioning the dreadful things he's been accused of? I get that your piece wasn't about that, but that accusations are part of the broader discourse, which is what the assignment asks you to consider relative to your piece.

The preposition "as" doesn't work grammatically here. Try: ... half the time it takes Black people and people of color.

No comma needed between subject (even long ones) and verb

No comma needed

A bit repetitious. Try: The style was new to me, as was interviewing members of the public.

Replace "ever created"

The first assignment I wrote using journalistic style was for JOUR 207 ...

Maybe say "during my time at USC" or "since coming to USC" so that readers don't get the impression you've left.

What would you say is the main point of this paragraph? What's the take away?

Whether you wish to identify a single event, several events, or like Twain, apply concepts like circumstance and temperament to a series of events, you'll inevitably reflect on beliefs, opinions, and ambitions.

Honing in on a handful of moments, episodes, etc., would be fine. I would avoiding chronicling your life story.

See my first note above.

We're looking at the question of relevance in a slightly different way given our broader objective to write for a popular publication read by a general audience. Replace "a particular course or academic subject" with "the publication in which you imagine your piece appearing." For instance, if you image your piece appearing in a publication like Vox, which declares its commitment to "never ... [losing] sight of the fact that major events impact real people’s lives," you want to emphasis the parts of your narrative that "real people" can relate to. That would likely mean more real-world, experience-oriented examples and much less jardon or theory.

More summary of Reese's argument. Here, Reiderer shows that while Reese makes arguments re: attitudes about meat consumption, ultimately he's more interested in the maintainability of current methods of meat production--the meat industry, and animals generally, are "inefficient producers of flesh."

Here, not only does Scutts show readers how Longworth begins her book, she shows how Longworth initiates a conversation about the role women's views about other women play in our perceptions of men's actions.

Reiderer concedes that she didn't find what she was looking for in Reese's book.

It's never a good sign when a reviewer recommends another, better book!

Here Reiderer describes how Reese distances himself from nutrition advocates like Michael Pollan. He may single out Polan because of his stance on lab-grown or created foods generally (he objects to them in favor of real foods.)

Reiderer suggests that Reese's dispassionate, highly clinical approach to his topic is unlikely to inspire readers.

Here we see Reiderer begin to lean in to her critique of Reese's book.

Here Reiderer paraphrases Reese's claim that eating lab-grown meat isn't any more "unnatural" than eating animal-based meat.

Praise of Reese's treatment of this counterargument (that eating meat is "necessary" for good health).

Sums up power dynamics of 30s and 40s Hollywood.

Underscores one of the book's main arguments.

Scutts provides an example of a high-profile relationship portrayed in Longworth's book.

Discussion of Ida Lupino helps contextualize the era the book covers. To assume power, women had to downplay it.

Scutts situates Longworth's book very much in relation to Scorsese's film, which she probably assumes informs most people's view of Hughes. She also subtly begins to tie the book to the #MeToo movement.

Here, Scutts's introduces an outside source, Scorsese's film about Hughes's, as an example of the contemporary public's exposure to him.

Third paragraph concludes Scutts's brief overview of Hughes's life.

2nd paragraph jumps directly to summary of early Hughes's biography (presumably extracted from Scutts's book); depicts him as ruthless from an early age.

This sentence gives us a good sense of where this review is going. With words like clear-eyed and incisive, it seems likely to be a positive review.

We also learn Scutts's understanding of the book's objective: to cast in bold relief the way history burnishes the reputations of men at the expense of women.

This paragraph summarizes one of Reese's major points.

The first hint we get of the political lens through which Reese views his advocacy (center right).

After a criticism, this paragraph concedes that the issue Reese raises is important.

Center-right, business-friendly animal rights advocacy. It's becoming clear that the reviewer is highly skeptical of Reese's high opinion of entrepreneurs as solvers of ethical problems.

This paragraph gives a brief overview of Reese's background, and describes how he has gone about establishing his animal rights bona fides. There's just a hint of sarcasm that comes through primarily in the sentence about Reese's pet chickens.

These details, as well as Scutter's tone, constitute the first hint we get that this may not be an all together favorable review.

Stressing Wu's thesis, anti-trust seeks to address the danger consolidated economic power poses to democracy.

The review's one criticism: that Wu omits the role of the courts from his analysis.