On-line Research Writing:  English 102 
Professor Gary Parks (gparks@shoreline.edu)
Shoreline Community College 
Shoreline, WA, USA 

The following are examples of successful (#1 and #3) and unsuccessful (#2) self-evaluation exercises. These are students commenting about their own papers. Italicized material below is written by instructor for guidance on this web page.

Example #1

This assignment was successful because the student used established ways (from the rubric and other course material) of evaluating the writing and also used support from his paper.

In re-reading my research paper, I found that I was pleased with the development and style of the paper in general. Both these areas are essential to a research paper success in my mind, so I will explain and describe why I feel that I excelled in these parts.

The development of a paper is key to giving the reader a sense that something important is being said, therefore I tried to hone in on this aspect, and tried to make the paper flow best I could. This starts with the thesis, and continues with the rest of the paper. For example, my thesis was "If we are to coexist with our environment, then the world community must stop rain forest depletion", so obviously it is the point of the paper to defend the thesis, in which I feel I did correctly. One thing I did was talk about the people who are destroying our forests, with no care for the rest of humanity. Therefore, I answered the question of "coexisting with our environment". Next I went into what part of the world is being affected the most, and described their individual situations from country to country. Addressing the situation of countries fighting destruction in their own way, I brought up this point: It makes you wonder if these Latin America countries really want to stop rain forest destruction, or if their anti-depletion view is just a political smoke screen for their economic outlook. It looks to me that I didn't stray from my thesis, and kept it as close to home as possible.

Style was also used well in the paper, and I feel that I didn't let the facts take over. It is true that I used a number of statistics and facts in it, but I think that whatever was used was essential to the point that I was trying to drive home. I didn't just paraphrase the entire paper, and throw facts in that were unnecessary, but I tried to pose questions that made the reader think, while also understanding the material. An example of this might be: In 1978, the government created an 800,000-acre reserve called the Montes Azules Biosphere in eastern Chiapas. In 1992, they created two smaller reserves to try to help the prevention efforts (Morris, 17). With a remarkably high number of people inhabiting the area of the Lacandon, it will only be tougher to try to stop the destruction. The government will have to offer the campesinos something better than what they have, to try and keep the Lacandon from disappearing for good. These few sentences do not only include important facts, but also a point that gets the reader involved in the paper, not just learning numbers and dates.

Example #2

This student, on the other hand, did not receive credit and had to re-submit the assignment because he did not use details from his paper. He simply dashed off unsupported opinions, which is not the same as evaluating:

I'll just keep this pretty short I guess. Below is a list of strengths I believe my paper possesses:

*I think my paper is decently organized

*I believe the paper is written purely in my voice

*I believe my paper is written as not to be boring; its enjoyable

*I feel I used a variety of methods to get my point across

*I feel I used an extensive amount of quality sources

*I feel my personal experiences on the BBS, and how I used it in my paper is what makes my paper good

Example #3

This student received full credit because she viewed her work using the specific considerations of a research writer, and she used detail to back up assertions about her performance.

The Difficulties with Anencephalic Infants And Organ Donation: The Moral, Ethical, and Legal Stances

The title of this research paper is relevant to the paper and interesting- it makes the reader curious enough to read the paper. The introduction slowly pulls you in, revealing the relevance of the topic to our lives. It accomplishes this with the fact; "One of the conflicts is the fact that if a person has signed a donor card and consented, their immediate family still must approve before the donation can take place." My paper has a clear focus. It shows all the aspects of the conflict concerning anencephalic newborns and donating organs. The focus of the paper was to educate the reader, and was open enough to allow them to make their own conclusions and opinions about it.

I used a lot of facts in this paper. Such as, "As of May 13, 1998 there were 59,121 patients on the UNOS national waiting list for organs needed for transplants." I used definitions- for anencephaly, and brain death to show exactly what the medical aspect of it all is. I found many quotes from doctors and medical professors, such as Alan Shewmon, Jim Walters, Arthur Caplan, and David Orenlicher. To round out he paper and show the emotional side- the human side (otherwise it loses it's importance and meaning) I found stories of real people who had lived through this unimaginable ordeal. Rosalyn Berne and Brenda Winner, mothers of anencephalic infants, made the paper come to life with meaning.

The paper did what it was supposed to do. It showed the reader what the issues were, showed all the sides, and educated the reader. I learned a lot from doing this assignment.