Grading of Nina by James

I would give Nina a 21. She brought up a good point with this narrative, but I felt it could have been strengthened in a few areas.

Do I want to read it again? I am somewhat indifferent to this question. I was not bored, but I was not amazed. I would have no problem with reading it again, but I do not see a reason for me to want to.

Do I understand it's purpose? Yes I understand that she wants to explain to people that buying a house is a complicated decision.

Would a recognizable community of users understand the writer's purpose? Yes I think anyone who has ever thought about buying a house, along with many others, would understand her purpose.

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, although I feel the argument could have been developed more. I feel the narrative was a little shallow in content and it left me wanting more information

Have I come away from the narrative with a fresh perspective on the topic(s)? No not really. I was not moved by any points in the narrative. With a little more content I might have come away from the narrative with a fresh perspective on something.

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 mediocre job of this. The argument tools were not really there to make me agree with their case whole heartedly.

Can I find places where the narrative could have been strengthened? Yes I think some content and argumentation could have been added to help make the point better.

Was the space composed in an accessible manner? Yes, but some changes would make her portfolio more accessible. Such as, her outside sources should be active links on the page and the remixes of her narrative could have been linked to her page.

Now trace the remixing activity performed by writer of the narrative project under review. How effective is this rhetorical performance? The remixes were not amazing. It seemed that all that was done was editing for the most part. They seemed more like revisions and less like remixes.