0% found this document useful (0 votes)
58 views5 pages

Revision Matrix

The document summarizes changes the author made to their initial writing based on feedback from their professor or classmates. It includes the original text, the feedback received, changes made, and how those changes impacted the paper. The feedback focused on making the writing more original, specific, and evidence-based. The author adjusted their thesis, provided more details and analysis, removed assumptions not supported by evidence, and added examples from the text. The revisions aimed to strengthen the writing and arguments based on the feedback.

Uploaded by

api-311229039
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
58 views5 pages

Revision Matrix

The document summarizes changes the author made to their initial writing based on feedback from their professor or classmates. It includes the original text, the feedback received, changes made, and how those changes impacted the paper. The feedback focused on making the writing more original, specific, and evidence-based. The author adjusted their thesis, provided more details and analysis, removed assumptions not supported by evidence, and added examples from the text. The revisions aimed to strengthen the writing and arguments based on the feedback.

Uploaded by

api-311229039
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Text from my

initial WP
submission:
(a phrase,
sentence,
paragraph, idea,
move,
punctuation,
piece of evidence,
etc.)
Heroes can come
in many different
shapes and sizes.
One of the many
forms worthy of
the title are film
critics.

An observation or
question I received
from De Piero or a
classmate:

The change(s) I
made to what I
initially wrote:
(ie, the change[s]
I made to column
1)

How this
change
impacts my
paper:

Medina, I don't love


this opening for a
few reasons. It starts
out with a "trite"
phrase that I've
heard a million times
-- unless you're
going to turn this on
its head, be original!

The enjoyment
derived from
watching films is
subjective.

Although all of
them fit into the
movie review
genre, each have
their own unique
approach to
reviewing the
movie. The
distinctive style
of each periodical
is embedded into
the reviews,
differentiating
them from the
rest to serve their
own targeted
audience, while
producing the
same work.
. All of the three
periodicals have
the same

OK, this is strong


start for a supersolid thesis
statement. What I'd
like you to do now is
to find a way to get
more specific -- what
kinds of styles
differentiate them?
Who is the intended
audience(s)?

The simple and


clean style of The
New York Times,
the adventurous
style of Rolling
Stone, and the
eloquent style of
Variety are each
embedded into
their respective
reviews,
differentiating
them from the
rest to serve their
own targeted
audience, while
producing the
same work.

After
reading
Zacks
comment, I
realized that
I did have a
corny hook. I
changed it
to a more
mature but
still
interesting
hook.
I gave each
of the
articles a
description
in three
words and
under to
provide the
readers with
a short but
insightful
heads up of
the articles
attitudes.

To me,this sentence
is wrapping up
"exigence" and the

All of the three


periodicals have
the same

The
transition in
the two

exigence;
however, their
approach to
responding to it
are different. The
New York Times is a
newspaper, so
naturally, they would
present the review of
The Revenant as news.

next one is moving


on to how they're
different across the
sources.

average daily
newspaper
reader, and like
any other
newspaper, the
language used
must be formal
while also
understandable.
Normal everyday
citizens are the
audience of The
New York Times,
so for them to be
able to read the
newspaper, the
newspaper must
accommodate
them with
everyday
language.

What makes you say


this? Does the
national-vs-localpublication dynamic
have anything to do
with this?
And does the onlinevs-print element do
anything to
complicate this even
further?

exigence;
however, their
approach to
responding to it
are different.

sentences
were asking
for a new
paragraph. I
divided the
paragraphs
The New York Times is so the ideas
a newspaper, so
from the
naturally, they would
first
present the review of
paragraph
The Revenant as news. does not get
lost in the
second.
Throughout the
The original
review, The New
assumes the
York Times uses
intended
understandable
audience of
everyday
The New
language. This use York Times. I
of a specific
changed the
language is a form structure of
of constraint, a
the
limiting factor of a sentences so
work of rhetoric
the audience
to successfully
comes from
satisfy the
the
exigence (Lowe).
information
With this
provided by
information, the
the article,
targeted audience not as an
of The New York
assumption
Times must be the by me. The
average newssentence
reader who is
also implies
looking for a
how the
direct answer
audience
concerning the
found the
quality of the film. article,
It does not
instead of
necessarily mean
the article
the reader does
trying to find
not have a vast
the audience
vocabulary; it just with their
means for the
language.
sake of
information, the

Even though the


author is able to
write an
academic and
insightful review,

Moving on to the
experiment, the
authors provide
research
questions the
experiment hopes
to answer.

(And how would you


know that author is
an academic and/or
can write
academically? Stick
to your evidence.)

Well, what are they?


What's the
experiment? What
was being isolated?
And what RQs were
posed?
What kind of
insights do these
give us into how
they "see" K-Pop?

newsreaders
prefer a
straightforward
review without
any frills.
The purpose of
this use of
language is meant
to make their
targeted audience
more comfortable.
As they see how
similar the
language is with
their own, they
will relate to the
review more
easily. This also
builds a bond
between reader
and writer.
Readers will see
the writer as one
of their own and
are more willing
to trust the
writers claims.
For readers to
accept a writers
claim, they will
first need to trust
them.
Moving on to the
experiment, the
authors provide
research
questions the
experiment hopes
to answer
including who is
the biggest group
of tweeters and
what tweeting
patterns they
have. Their goal is
to analyze the

I completely
took out my
assumption
and added
an analysis
of why the
writer
picked their
language.
The
information
before
wasnt
supported
by any
evidence.

I provided
the goals of
the authors
experiment
to provide
background
info on the
articles
purpose.

To properly
execute their
purpose, the
authors use
distinct moves to
successfully
express their
message to their
audience.

Globalization of
cultural products:
a webometric
analysis of Kpop
in Spanishspeaking
countries

This move brings


life to K-pop

spread of K-pop
through Twitter,
specifically with
Spanish-speaking
users.
Great! Nice insight
To properly
here. However, I'm
execute their
wondering -- why are purpose for
you telling me this?
teaching K-pop in
Is this a part of your different ways, the
main argument?
authors use
distinct moves to
(It certainly could
build credibility,
be, but I don't think
clarity and
you mentioned
importance to
ethos/credibility in
their paper, in
your thesis
order to
statement.)
successfully
express their
message to their
audience.
No need to spell out The scholarly
the super-long title
article
multiple times. If
Globalization of
you're going to
cultural products:
reference something a webometric
like this more than
analysis of Kpop
once, I'd give it an
in Spanishabbreviation in
speaking
parentheses right
countries
after the first time
(Globalization
you use it -- that
for short)
signals to your
reader, "Yo, I'm not
spelling out this
whole title each
time, so be ready for
this
abbreviated/truncate
d version."
Woo! Great! Tell me
She provides a
more about this.
description of a
Hook me up with
tradition unique to
some textual
K-pop saying, As
evidence about her
a way to show
first-person
their devotion,

In my thesis,
I added
goals writers
have in
using their
move. My
information
is then able
to connect to
my thesis.

I provided a
nickname
for the
article when
I introduced
it in my body
paragraph.
Readers
would get to
the point
easily when
they can
avoid the
ridiculously
long length
of the
article.
I gave a
direct
example of
the writers
personal
experience

experience.

Academic articles
just have more
credibility
because of the
thorough
proofreading.

That's it? Nothing


else lends a degree
of credibility to the
audience's
perception?

fans of Korean
pop music or Kpop buy bags of
rice and donate it
to their favorite
bands, who, in
turn, donate the
rice to a
charitable cause
(Mahr).

to bring
even more
life to K-pop.
I then
analyzed it
to connect it
to how it
brings life to
K-pop.
I realized
how
immature
and insulting
this sounded
so I just
simply
removed this
from my
paper thus
improving it.

You might also like