Grading of Nickel by James

I would give Nickel a 20. She narrated a wonderful story but some of her sentences could have been constructed better and there were many spelling mistakes. In addition her portfolio was laid out in such a way that it was difficult to determine what narrative was her final one.

Do I want to read it again? Yes I would read it again. It was a wonderful and moving story. I just would ask that the grammar be corrected to make it more readable.

Do I understand it's purpose? Yes the purpose is very clear and is laid out well

Would a recognizable community of users understand the writer's purpose? The narrative seems to be targeted towards a very general audience

Can I recognize and follow the lines of narrative, argument, and inquiry it promises and endeavors to develop, can I follow the directives it offers to users? Yes, the lines of narrative and argument are developed clearly and were easy to follow.

Have I come away from the narrative with a fresh perspective on the topic(s)? Yes the narrative gave me a fresh perspective on the problem of homelessness and the homeless in general. In addition it gave me a new perspective on what can be done to help.

How well does the wiki space you are engaging and evaluating draw from and deploy relevant tools of narrative and argument (definition, analogy, cause, evaluation) for its case? The wiki space does a decent job in deploying the tools of narrative and argument.

Can I find places where the narrative could have been strengthened? Yes, the obvious area would be grammar. There were many misspelled words and sentence fragments.

Was the space composed in an accessible manner? Yes but like I said earlier, it would help if the final draft was marked more clearly.

Now trace the remixing activity performed by writer of the narrative project under review. How effective is this rhetorical performance? The remixes were done well. She put a different twist on others narratives.