This article fully explores the use of critical incidents as
a problem solving strategy used in a variety of fields to help improve
communications and group dynamics. The article deals with (1) Background and
Early Developments, (2) Developmental Studies at the American Institute for
Research, and (3) Studies at the University of Pittburgh. The text also analyses procedure as consisting of:
General Aims, Plans and Specifications, Collection of Data, Data Analysis, and
Data Interpretation and Report.[C4]
|
Annotated
Bibliographies
|
||||||
|
Name
and Surname:
|
Topic:
|
|||||
|
Draft
#
Date:
|
Title:
|
|||||
|
Dimension
|
Criteria
|
Points
|
||||
|
LAYOUT
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
(5 to 20)
|
|
|
Format
|
No
headers, no page numbers, no clear margins. Spacing problems. Inappropriate
font.
|
Header
included. Page numbers absence. Spacing problems.
|
Header
and page numbers included. Spacing problems. Inappropriate font.
|
Clear
paper’s presentation. There are page numbers. Respected margins. Correct
spacing and type & size of font. 1.5 or double interlining.
|
5
|
|
|
Header
|
Not
included.
|
Included.
Too much information.
|
Included.
Not well balanced.
|
Included.
Precise info is given. Well balanced.
|
5
|
|
|
Main
Title
|
Not
included.
|
Included.
Not appealing. Underlined, highlighted or italicized.
|
Included.
Appealing. Underlined, highlighted or italicized.
|
Included.
Appealing. Centered.
|
5
|
|
|
References
|
Not
mentioned.
Plagiarism.
|
Mentioned
vaguely. Not on a new sheet of paper.
Not
clear use of references or erroneous sources acknowledgement
|
Not
clear use of references or erroneous sources acknowledgement.
|
Sources
cited clearly in a reference list at the end of the paper. APA style.
|
15
|
|
|
In-text citations
|
Not
included.
Plagiarism.
|
Little
use of in-text citations. Incorrect use of required style.
|
Included.
Not well balanced. Repeated pattern. (e.g. too many quotes, only
paraphrasing, etc).
|
Included.
Well balanced. Different techniques applied. It is read smoothly.
|
10
|
|
|
CONTENT
|
|
|
|
|
(7 to 40)
|
|
|
Data analysis
|
Not
clear analysis. Relationships & comparisons cannot be followed.
|
Brief.
Not substantial. Some connections can be followed.
|
Clear.
Good analysis. No evidence presented. Inversion. Hedging.
Conditionals.
|
Very
good. Clear analysis. Comparisons can be established. Evidence is
provided. Inversion. Hedging & conditionals.
|
7
|
|
|
Terminology/ Word choice
|
Difficult
to follow. Not understandable. Imprecise language.
No
acronyms clarification.
|
Inappropriate
terminology.
Little
clarification.
Some
terms are not academic.
|
Legible
terminology.
Clarification.
More
academic style. Effective.
|
Legible
terminology. New terms clarification. Effective vocabulary. Good use of
connectors. Academic style.
|
14
|
|
|
Spelling
|
Full of
errors. Unreadable.
|
Many
errors. Some parts unreadable.
|
Few
errors. Readable.
|
All
words are spelled correctly.
|
40
|
|
|
Sentence variety
|
Many
sentence fragments. Same pattern and length.
|
Some
sentence fragments. Same pattern & length.
|
Most
sentences are complete and varied in pattern & length.
|
Complete
sentences in a variety of patterns and lengths.
|
14
|
|
|
Organization
Punctuation
Paragraph length
Grammar
Details
Tone
& audience
Annotated
Bibliography
|
Vague
ideas. Long & confusing intro. Unrelated development. Blurred conclusion.
Frequent
and major errors that obscure meaning.
Few or
no paragraphs relate to the topic. Not balanced: too long & too
short paragraphs are presented.
Grammar
choices are confusing. Mixture of tenses.
No or
little details (such as explanations, examples, etc) to support & explain
the topic.
Unclear
& inappropriate tone. Audience not considered.
Incorrect
citation of reference. Unclear ideas. Too short / too long paragraphs. No
citations included.
|
Some
ideas connected to each other. Purpose established. No transitions.
Main
point presented. Two of the three parts are not clear or too long.
Some
frequent or major errors: Readers’ confusion.
Some
paragraphs relate to the topic. Not balanced: too long or too short
paragraphs are presented.
Grammar
choices sometimes confuse the readers.
Some
accurate details. Do not always support topic.
Inconsistent
tone. Incomplete idea of audience.
Correct
citation of reference.
Too
short paragraph. Few details.
|
Connected
ideas. Clear purpose. Marked transitions. One of the three parts is not
clear or too long.
A few
errors.
Most
paragraphs are related to the topic. Well balanced.
Appropriate
grammar choice. No meaning interference.
Accurate
info that supports the topic.
Appropriate
tone. Audience is considered.
Correct
citation of reference.
Too
long paragraph. Too many details.
|
Connected
ideas: supporting the main topic. Clear and concise introduction. Clear
development: good clarification of major points.
Clear
conclusion.
No
punctuation errors. 40
Paragraph
length has been respected & achieved.
Smooth.
Clear
and precise. 20
Completely
appropriate grammar choice: Help
readers understand
meaning. 14
Accurate
and relevant info that fully support
the topic. 7
Appropriate
& consistent tone. Audience correctly identified. 14
Correct
citation of reference. Clear paragraph. 7
If
indicative/descriptive: Clear paragraph presenting structure and chapters’ titles.
40
If
informative: Quotes summarized source and stated conclusion.
If
evaluative: Content evaluated. Assessing negative/positive points.
Or a
mixture of the three types.
Total 231
|
14
|
|
Comments:
·
Citations: in the annotated bibliography, there is
no use of in-text citations. The writer only refers to the text and never to
its author.
·
Referencing: the source which appears at the
beginning does not follow the APA style.
·
Language: the language employed is neutral (not
very formal or academic)
1.
English for No Obvious Reason or EGP (English for
General Purposes)
II.
English for Specific Purposes
1.
English for Occupational, Vocational/ Professional
Purposes (EOP, EVP, EPP)
2.
English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
2. What
needs does EAP serve?
2. English for Specific Academic
Purposes (ESAP)
1. Formal
teaching programs
2. Self-access
situations
3. Distance-learning
materials
4. CALL (Computer-assisted
language learning)
5. When can
EAP be taught?
1. pre-sessional
EAP
2. in-sessional
EAP
|
Outlines
|
||||||
|
Name
and Surname:
|
Topic:
|
|||||
|
Draft
#
Date:
|
Title:
|
|||||
|
Dimension
|
Criteria
|
Points
|
||||
|
LAYOUT
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
(5 to 20)
|
|
|
Format
|
No
title. Omission of one or more parts: Purpose, Audience & thesis
statement. Not clear title. Inconsistency.
|
Omission
of one of the parts: Purpose, Thesis Statement and Audience. Title.
|
Purpose,
Thesis Statement and Audience stated. Title. Not clear body.
|
Purpose,
Thesis statement and Audience clearly stated + Appealing title + Consistent
skeleton.
|
5
|
|
|
Header
|
Not
included.
|
Included.
Too much information.
|
Included.
Not well balanced.
|
Included.
Precise info is given. Well balanced.
|
5
|
|
|
Main
Title
|
Not
included.
|
Included.
Not appealing. Underlined, highlighted or italicized.
|
Included.
Appealing. Underlined, highlighted or italicized.
|
Included.
Appealing. Centered.
|
10
|
|
|
References
|
Not
mentioned.
Plagiarism.
|
Mentioned
vaguely. Not on a new sheet of paper.
Not
clear use of references or erroneous sources acknowledgement
|
Not
clear use of references or erroneous sources acknowledgement.
|
Sources
cited clearly in a reference list at the end of the paper. APA style.
|
10
|
|
|
Skeleton
|
Neither
system is respected.
|
Inconsistent:
mixture of Roman numerals and decimals
|
Inconsistent:
mixing Roman numerals and letters.
|
Consistent.
Respecting Roman numerals/letters or decimal form
|
10
|
|
|
CONTENT
|
|
|
|
|
(7 to 28)
|
|
|
Purpose
|
Omitted.
|
Unclear
statement of reasons. No reference of main concepts.
|
Clear
statement of reasons. No reference of main concepts.
|
Clear
summary of reasons/aims. Showing logical structure. Explaining main concepts.
|
7
|
|
|
Thesis Statement
|
Omitted.
|
Unclear
ideas. Leading concept: Not clear.
|
Main
idea presented. Leading concept: Unclear.
|
Well
developed. Main idea of text posted. The leading concept is clearly stated.
Clear hypothesis.
|
7
|
|
|
Audience
|
Omitted.
|
Not
complete. Unclear.
|
Clearly
stated. Incomplete.
|
Clearly
stated. All possible audience considered.
|
7
|
|
|
Parallelism
|
Not
considered.
|
Grammatical
patterns: Not respected.
|
Respect
of grammatical patterns. Some instances sound unnatural.
|
Every
line is started respecting same grammatical pattern. Not forced. Natural.
|
7
|
|
|
Terminology/ Word choice
Subordination
Coordination
|
Difficult
to follow. Not understandable. Imprecise language.
No
acronyms clarification.
Not
respected. Too many details provided.
Not
coordinated at all. Unclear and confusing.
|
Inappropriate
terminology.
Little
clarification.
Some
terms are not academic.
Ideas
are mixed: From specific data to general facts.
Items
do not follow a hierarchical order. Unclear categories.
|
Legible
terminology.
Clarification.
More
academic style. Effective.
Subordinated
ideas: Sometimes from general to specific.
Items
follow a hierarchical order. Categories are unclear.
|
Legible
terminology. New terms clarification. Effective vocabulary. Good use of
connectors. Academic style.
Clear
subordinated ideas: General to specific details. 14
14
Items
follow same hierarchical order: They have the same value. Categories are
clearly defined.
|
14
|
|
Total:
110
Comments:
There are several parts missing.
Work on
language and acronyms. Full of mistakes regarding outline structure.
Citations?
You have
done an excellent job, Clarisa! No need to upload this paper to your blog, but
if you want, go ahead.
[C1]The year of publication must appear before the name of the text,
according to APA style.
[C2]It must be written in italics
[C3]This line must be five spaces within the line
[C4]It must be double spaced with indentation.
[C5]No use of header
[C7]Incorrect citation of this source. Not clear if it is the title. If
it is so, it must be centralized and capitalized.
Furthermore, the writer does not make
any reference to purpose, thesis and audience of the outline.
[C8]These questions do not have a consistent form or coordination. Numbers
can be replaced by decimals, for example.
[C9]Roman numerals must be used for main ideas. Confusing
[C10]This should be after “English for Academic Purposes” with, for
example, capitalized letter for the question and , after number 5, letters must
have been used
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario