Workshop for Xia Baker's "Research Paper (Second Draft)"

Overall
1. What do you like best about the paper?
-I really liked the paper, it was very good. It presented a lot of interesting statistical information, as well as a viewpoint from the author speaking their own words.

2. Authors particular area of concern.
- The author seemed to be concerned about whether the citations were used correctly when citing sources, as well as if all of the sources cited were used in the paper. I do believe that all sources cited are used in the paper, however at the end of paragraph six there is a citation that reads, “(Berg, E., (2005).” It is in the author of this workshop’s opinion that the author of the paper may want to look at that particular citation again, and perhaps revise it to follow the guidelines provided.

Thesis
3. Does the author clearly express his/her opinion of the topic in the thesis? What argument does the thesis make?- Yes the author definitely makes her opinion known within the thesis of the essay; she is arguing that polar bears will soon be extinct due to global warming, glacial recession, beach erosion, and environmental changes to the ecosystem.

4. What group of people agrees with the author? What group disagrees with the author?
- The author seems to be speaking to the public, however once againI did not notice anywhere that the author specifically addressed the oppositions viewpoint.

5. Does the paper have an argumentative thesis statement using ALTHOUGH and BECAUSE?
- The thesis statement of the paper does follow the format of the “although” and “because.” However, the thesis statement does not govern the content of the paper, as an example, in the conclusion paragraph the author is concluding a paper written about global climate change and global warming, however the thesis statement provided is dealing with polar bears directly.

Content.
6. On a scale of 1 to 10, how interesting did you find this paper to read? Be brutally honest!
- To be brutally honest, I would give this paper a 6.5 out of 10, with 10 being the best paper ever written. I think that’s really pretty good. The paper is overall really good, however the author of the workshop did notice several grammar and mechanical errors, as well as the fact that the paper’s thesis does not seem to coincide directly with the content of the paper itself.

7. Where can the author more fully develop ideas, either by providing examples or explaining/clarifying concepts for the reader? Be specific (e.g. “the 3rd is dullsville”; “the conclusion is really vague”).
- It is in my opinion that although there is a ton of really good information in the paper, the topic of polar bears is not brought about until the last point in the paper. However, given the fact that the thesis makes it appear as though polar bears and the effects that all the points listed are having on the polar bears is the main topic, perhaps they should be mentioned a bit more throughout the paper.

8. What kinds of objections might someone who disagrees with the author’s point of view raise?
- Opposition would probably argue that many of the effects being discussed are caused by natural cycles and phenomena rather than human impact. One topic in particular that is strongly refuted is the idea of global warming itself; some would say that global warming is just a natural cycle as the Earth is moving closer to the sun, etc. There are many opposing viewpoints that could be addressed. Again, since polar bears are supposed to be the central issue of the paper, perhaps they should be mentioned more throughout.

9. Has the author dealt with these objections?
- No the author needs to dedicate some more energy on addressing the opposition’s viewpoints. This was addressed in the first workshop for this paper, however the author of the workshop still finds nothing really mentioned for opposition, or in dealing with the fact that the paper seems to be steering away from the talk of polar bears.

10. Is the relationship between each paragraph and the thesis clear? If not, what suggestions do you have for the author to improve the connection?
- Perhaps try to put in a lead sentence in each paragraph that introduces a new point that contains the exact terminology describing the main point within the thesis statement. Style

11. Are there easy transitions from one paragraph to the next, or does the author jump from topic to topic?
- As stated earlier, I don’t believe that the paper jumps around too much, and the transitions are pretty good. However I would spend some time trying to make it more apparent while reading within each different main point, which main point that it is exactly is being discussed. Such as using the lead sentence method described above. As well as the fact that the topic of Polar Bears should be addressed more within the paper.

12. Does the opening of the essay capture the reader’s attention? How so? If not, what suggestions can you make that might strengthen the opening?
- The author needs to use a stronger voice in the opening of the paper in order to draw the reader’s attention, such as when the author writes, “Polar bears face possible extinction due to global warming” (Baker, 2008), one could write, “Polar bears are on the verge of extinction and the killer is global warming,” or at least something to that effect.

13. Does the concluding paragraph serve to bring the discussion to an end that logically follows from the thesis and its direction?
- The problem that I see within the conclusion of the essay relates back directly to the content as well, and was briefly addressed earlier in this workshop. That is that in the thesis statement polar bears and the effects that these various climate changes are having on them was the main topic of the paper; however, in the body of the paper polar bears aren’t really even mentioned again until the last main point is discussed. Perhaps the other points need to be related a little better to polar bears and why they are going extinct. In the conclusion the author writes, “…polar bears could live longer without having to go extinct, glaciers will not retreat as fast and beaches will not be eroded, blocking access to shorelines” (Baker, 2008), however this makes it sounds as if polar bear extinction was just a
point in the paper, not the main topic of the essay.

Research
14. How many different sources are cited in the paper?
- There are fifteen sources cited within the paper.

15. Does the author rely heavily on just 1 or 2 sources, or does the author equally use all of the sources to support the paper’s thesis?
- The author does rely on a couple of the sources more than others, however I don’t believe it is so much as to constitute a problem. Some sources are just more useful than others.

16. Does the author have more quotes in his/her paper than personal opinion?
- There is probably more research and quotes then personal opinion, however it is done in a very nice way so that the reader is not distracted by the information, and it is presented in an informative way. There is a lot of paraphrasing that can be attributed to the success of the authors style.

17. Are there any sources listed on the Works Cited or References that are not cited within the body of the essay? (This is a no-no)
- It does not appear that any sources are listed that were not used in the paper.

18. Is all the information retrieved from research, including opinion, ideas, paraphrases, quotes, and statistics, cited with in-text (parenthetical) citations? If not, list specifics of what needs to be cited (friends don’t let friends turn in plagiarized papers).
- Yes, it appears that everything is cited well within the paragraphs, including paraphrasing, except the one paraphrase citation pointed out earlier in the workshop, from paragraph six.

19. All quotes in research papers should be commented upon. Does the author comment after every quote? If not, help the author decide what the underlying reason behind putting the quote in the paper was.
- It appears that the author commented on pretty much every quote.Overall I would say the paper was well written, with a great blend of informative research and personal opinion. The biggest change that I would recommend is to relate the body of the paper more to the thesis; more to polar bears. Other than that there are a few more little suggestions up there that may or may not be helpful for you. Anyway though, I enjoyed reading your paper and wish you luck on your rewriting.

Baker, X. (2008). Global Warming Threatens Alaska’s Ecosystem. Xia’s English 213 Blog. Retrieved March 30, 2008, from http://xia-xia08.blogspot.com/2008/04/research-paper-second-draft-english-213.html