Full-bodied entries—of at least ten sentences of writing from you (in addition to quotations from the text)—are more likely to receive full credit. Lesser credit will be assigned to work that is missing, brief, or clearly disengaged or sloppily produced such that miscues interfere with readability.
Your responses to other students’ work are also assessed. Students often resist commenting on each others’ work in substantial ways; instead choosing to post simply “good job” or “looks okay to me.” This kind of peer response doesn’t help your own—or your peers’—development as a writer and thinker.
Acceptable peer responses will, among other things:
Explicitly identify what was learned from someone else’s work.
Ask a follow-up question.
Offer an alternative interpretation.
Offer concrete strategies for improvement.
Questions (TV Series/Novel)
Choose one question to answer:
1. You has the ability to change the way we think about talking to strangers and sharing information online. Did you change your passwords when you finished? Describe your own online or social media persona and offer up a realistic perspective of the data that you release when making a post. Offer up a specific example if you choose this posting, and detail the ways this online persona may/may not put you in danger.
2. When you finished reading, did you hope that Joe might get away with murder and find love? Or do you like to think that somehow, someway, he will be held responsible for his actions?
3.This novel is told from the serial killer’s perspective, just as Lindsay’s Darkly Dreaming Dexter. Describe the effect of this first person perspective and of Joe’s use of the word “you” in the text (second person perspective) for Beck. When we are forced to see the world through Joe’s eyes, how does this unreliable view change our own in the real world?