Paper Writing

Ethan Weed

Title

  1. Is there a title?
  2. Does the title adequately describe the contents of the paper?

Topic

  1. Is the topic appropriate to the course?
  2. Is the topic of appropriate size, given the page limit?
  3. Is the topic clear?

Focus

  1. Does every sentence in the paper contribute to a better understanding of the topic?
  2. Does the paper maintain focus on the topic?
  3. Do we get what we are promised in the introduction and only what we are promised in the introduction?

Writing (1/2)

  1. Are there any spelling errors? Grammatical errors? Things like verb agreement that should have been caught by spellcheck or by having a friend read the paper?
  2. Does the author take on an unnaturally authoritative style?
  3. Are the sentences clear and properly constructed?
  4. Are there any unclear referents?
  5. Are there any words or sentences that feel like filler?

Writing (2/2)

  1. Does the paper adopt an academic style?
  2. Is the language exaggerated? (e.g. “utrolig” or “incredibly”)
  3. Does it feel as if the author has taken the time to read their own paper aloud?
  4. Is there a good flow to the paper at both the sentence and document levels?
  5. Is the paper easy to read?

Comprehension

  1. Does the author seem like they have read and understood the relevant literature?
  2. Has the author misunderstood a key element of the literature they are citing?
  3. Does the author explain the literature sufficiently?
  4. Does the author make use of technical language without any layman’s explanation?
  5. Does the author use examples to illustrate their understanding of the topic / technical terminology?
  6. Do we feel like the author could have written much more on the topic, if more pages were available, but boiled the paper down to its most essential components?

Discussion

  1. Does the author draw together the strands of the paper into a cohesive whole?
  2. Do we arrive at where we expected to arrive?
  3. Does the author make explicit how the evidence presented in the paper informs the questions posed at the outset?
  4. Does the author synthesize information from the primary literature cited in the paper?
  5. Does the author make any critical observations, comments, questions, etc. on the basis of the literature presented?

References

  1. Does the author make any claims that are unsubstantiated?
  2. Are the references mostly primary literature?
  3. Are the references varied?
  4. Are the references sufficient (see first point)
  5. Do the references follow a consistent style guide (MLA, Chicago, APA, whatever..)

Mood

  1. Does the author seem interested in the topic?
  2. Was it enjoyable to read the paper?