@Jolenealaska No quick fix here. But there are some patterns that may recur in poli sci, e.g. comparing two groups on some characteristic like voting behavior.
The one most easily fixed may be sloppiness: if you can convince him or her to properly capitalise words, to check the spelling of every sentence, etc., you get rid of the easiest mistakes.
We all make mistakes, typos, etc., which is why we go back and check what we have written.
Second tip: read the question and make sure you answer it fully, instead of freely associating around the topic.
Then I would switch to sentence analysis and parts of speech, which is a lot more difficult to learn in a short period of time. Make sure each sentence you write is actually a complete sentence, with a subject and a finite verb, etc.: no run-ons, no fragments.
Lastly, an example may be helpful, but it isn't a definition. So make sure you include a definition where required.
A definition of x may be introduced like "x is ...".
A cause may be given by writing, "[x happens] because ...".
@Jolenealaska The third question, about interest groups and their use of protests, assumes that interest groups are tools of political parties. I’m surprised that this answer ignores the historical analysis of interest groups (“factions”) in the early years (before the Constitution was ratified), but perhaps this is what the prof wants.
@Cerberus that was my first thought even before the content. If you give me crap, let me at least understand it by using regular, whole sentences.
@Jolenealaska I would ask him to first explain what the question is, ideally what aspects it covers. The answer should then at least address that. Whether opening side topics in an answer (“another aspect that may warrant further investigation is X”) is acceptable, depends on the kind of exercise.
@Stephie Yep. Unfortunately, I'm seeing no improvement there (grasping and then answering what is actually asked), even though it came up in Physics every week.
I am seeing small improvements in some aspects of critical thinking. That's rewarding. (more on that in a bit)
Within hours of presenting the Political Science crap to me, he wrote an almost OK thing for his OSHA class. It doesn't even look like it could possibly have been written by the same author.
It reminds me of "...hails from Finland". :)
I zeroed in on that, and it felt like a bit of an epiphany when he said, "Well, I know safety. I don't know the politics stuff."
You know what? This kind of incoherent text happens when the writer can’t write in more or less one go, but is constantly interrupted, either externally or because they don’t know what they want to write. Reads like an older essay from minor one back when he has serious trouble focusing.
The student has a business trip to Fairbanks this weekend. He had to go last weekend too. The assignments for both classes are due in 20 hours. I feel some ghostwriting and cognitive dissonance coming on.
SO
I will have his very solid attention when he comes back and going on in this class.
He knows I hate crossing academic integrity lines, but shit.
So whaddya think of this? He reads the reading assignments and then watches the videos I've pre-selected (I'll post links). Then we discuss what we have learned. (The "we" here is real, I do read the assignments and am learning from them. I just stay a week ahead.)
@Jolenealaska With minor, time. We had a very similar problem with BiL and his cover letters for the last, nah, every, job search. After many (many, many...) loops, he learned to analyze the job ad’s demands and cluster them. Then find which of his skills match them. And only after all that, he was allowed to actually form sentences, taking his skill clusters into account and thus making sure that he actually “answers the question”.
If anyone who wants to help is interested enough in the subject to want the textbook of the Political Science class or the written lectures, let me know. I can post sharable links. You too can learn about state and local politics in the US.
@JaspervanLooij The A.H.D. is more on the prescriptivist side, so it is a little slow on the uptake of slang, and a little less comprehensive than other unabridged dictionaries. Also, it doesn't seem like Random House has it either.
@VigneswaraPrabhu When people do that it means they have a reason but don't actually want to give it for some reason, so they do not continue on with their sentence to explain it. Parents who would rather not bother explaining every little detail of how the world works to overly inquisitive kids do it quite often. I think you can see Gepetto doing it in Pinnochio once Pinnochio starts asking too many questions. In your context, it's a less rude way of explaining that "it's none of your business".
I've not announced that many things in total over the course of my entire life. Much less specifically on the Internet specifically from this site specifically in the last ten years.
I think I linked to maybe four questions back in the day when Reddit still existed.
But 4 << 29.
Maybe I should start announcing things on MuseScore. Those people can't spell for shit.
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…