Gradatorium: This is a C

This is a C

If you came to this page directly, be sure you read the “Before you begin” page. Otherwise, download the entire sample paper in PDF or Word format.

Here is the introduction and the third body paragraph from a C paper. The student was asked to write his fourth paper on Lauren Slater’s essay, “Dr. Daedalus,” and Susan Blackmore’s chapters, “Strange Creatures” and “The Ultimate Memeplex.” Here is the assignment question:

For this paper, your project is to discuss Slater’s question of whether we have a “protean self” or a “fundamental core,” Susan Blackmore’s theory of the self and its relationship to “memes,” and your own response to the question asked by Slater: “‘So, do you believe we are just in essence protean, that there is nothing fundamental, or core, to being human?’”

Believe in the Inner Self

The “inner self” is something that people have been searching for all of their life{lives}*. It is the part of the self that makes you react to and do certain things without even thinking about it{them}. Some people believe that they find this “inner self” within their lifetime and some do not find it at all. But does anyone ask themselves if this “inner self” even exists? Maybe it does not {;} maybe we are just a bunch of cells and neurons that act the way they do because it is their job. It could be that we are a collection of “memes.” Memes have{A meme has} been defined by Susan Blackmore in her book, The Meme Machine, “as an idea, an instruction, a behaviour, a piece of information” (4) that is passed on from one to another. It is their job to make decisions for us based on what the surrounding and atmosphere is at that time. In Lauren Slater’s essay, “Dr. Daedalus,” she tries to find how the brain works when the body undergoes a surgery that alters its form. From these two readings, one can find out what each thinks on the topic of having an “inner self.” I believe that there is something “fundamental or core, to being human” (Slater 17). Others may think different{ly} and other{s} may not know how they feel about the subject. Take Susan Blackmore and Lauren Slater for instance. I have noticed that each{both} of them has{have} proof in their writings that can prove both sides of the question.

These writings also contradict what one may think about this topic. Slater believes that “ideological shifts” can now happen at anytime in one’s life: “but today it is not unusual for several such shifts to take place within a year or even a month, whether in the realm of politics, religion, aesthetic values, personal relationships . . .” (Lifton in Slater 17). Due to such a large societal influence in this day and age, people are rethinking thoughts and ideas that have been with them for long periods of time. This in turn shows that the “inner self” really is not present. One may relate this to Slater and her idea of our mind being “essentially indiscriminate and able to morph” (18). The brain just changes with the times and with society. Blackmore’s book shows this as well while speaking about Crick: “Crick not only assumes that you are utterly dependent upon the actions of nerve cells – most neuroscientists assume that – but that you are nothing but the pack of neurons” (221). This relates back to Lipton in Slater, saying that the brain and mind just goes {go} with the flow of things and is{are} ever changing with the times.

Download the Entire Paper: [ Word ] [ PDF ]

Please note: strikethrough or {italicized and bracketed} type denotes corrections made to this student paper by the basic composition coordinator. These edits have been made in the Gradatorium to demonstrate our commitment to grammatical correctness while acknowledging reasonable expectations in our grading standards. The corrections as indicated would not have altered the final grade of this paper.

Here’s how we read these two passages:

• The introduction: This is a successful introduction for a number of reasons. The student lays out the main topic of this paper immediately: the “inner self” and how each author defines it. He introduces a few key terms from each essay and states the main project of each author: Slater’s interest in plastic surgery’s effect on the brain, and Blackmore’s theory of memes in relation to the self. At the end of the introduction, the student directly answers the assignment question by stating, “I believe that there is something ‘fundamental or core, to being human’ (Slater 17).” All these elements of a successful introduction point to the beginnings of a passing paper.

The weakness here lies in how the student has set up his own position in relation to the texts: in other words, the weakness lies in his project itself. He identifies that each author does have an opinion on the topic of the “inner self,” but he does not propose what those opinions are or how they are connected to each other or to his stated position. As a result, he is less successful at connecting his own response to the assignment question with what he’s found in the essays by Slater and Blackmore. Rather, he’s clearly stated his own position, but then chosen a compare-and-contrast project (both essays could support either answer to the question) which suggests that this paper will be in the C range.

• The body: In this paragraph, the student uses quotations from both authors to enable interesting “connective thinking” and to complicate and deepen his own position. The first important connective move happens in the following sentences: “This in turn shows that the “inner self” really is not present. One may relate this to Slater and her idea of our mind being ‘essentially indiscriminate and able to morph’ (18).” Here he’s setting up a connection—in this case, actually a complication, which is very fine—between Blackmore’s description of an “inner self” and Slater’s concept of “proteanism” as a kind of morphing of self. He continues with this connective thinking to the end of the paragraph by citing Blackmore, and then returning once again to Slater. These moves demonstrate the kind of critical engagement required in a passing paper in 100 or 100R.

• Other observations: The student handles contradictions to his own position in both paragraphs by observing directly which views complicate his own. This helps the reader differentiate his views from those of the authors he’s addressing. He uses correct citation to deal with quotes within quotes (for example, quoting Lifton in Slater’s essay). In addition, he shows that he can select relevant quotations to think connectively across texts, but often the connections are loose or simple making it more difficult for him to pursue a focused project. As a result, the student introduces the issues, but he hasn’t used the essays to make a very strong case for his response to the assignment question.

Grammar: These paragraphs show a “pattern of error.” This means that the student has made one kind of error (agreement) multiple times. If he can identify and learn to correct this one kind of error, he will be able to eliminate all of his pronoun agreement and subject-verb agreement problems simultaneously. Finally, when you read the full paper, you’ll notice that it is rather short: only three and a half pages. As the 3 rd essay of the semester, this paper should have been more developed, to at least 4 full pages. More length would have allowed—required—him to address the more complicated issues that Slater and Blackmore raise, work that could potentially move this paper to C+ range.

Applying the grading criteria:

In order to better understand the following final assessment of this paper, please refer to the section of the grading criteria that discusses C papers.

This paper clearly qualifies as passing work because the student:

• addresses the assignment question, though the project is relatively simple;

• demonstrates considerable reading comprehension, though may occasionally misread local passages without damaging the integrity of the overall project;

• is able to “define key terms and has a rudimentary sense of how to take terms from one reading and apply them to another reading;”

• shows he knows how to “choose quotations that are relevant to the point he is trying to make” and uses those quotations with integrity;

• “understands the difference between summary and analysis and is beginning to move beyond summary in a number of significant places;”

• “has the ability to make meaningful connections between at least two ideas or two texts;”

• has general control of grammar; the pattern of error indicates that with one correction, many of the errors can be eliminated; the grammar errors do not impede meaning.

The paper does not rise to the C+ level because:

• the student’s project has potential, but is not fully coherent; it is essentially a compare-contrast paper on Slater and Blackmore juxtaposed with his answer to the assignment question;

• the connections in the paper between the texts, the student’s project, and the assignment question are loose, or merely suggested, rather than clearly connected for the reader. This means that the implied connections are reasonable and could be shown, but are not actively shown by the writer himself, nor do they actively engage with his own position;

• grammar issues: agreement, both subject verb and pronoun. Correcting grammar alone in this paper would not raise the grade to B level; but without correcting his pattern of error, this student’s grades will likely remain at C or C+;

• the page length (only three and a half pages) prevents the student from developing a more complex response to the assignment question.

So this paper is a C: it directly addresses the assignment question, it moves beyond summary, proposes several interesting connections between the readings, addresses key terms and uses properly cited quotations to engage directly with author’s main points – all with the potential to support a coherent project. What about a B?

next: This is a B >>