Katelyn Watters

Ms. Santiago

UWRT 1102-027

21 March 2017

Mykayla,

Your paper meets and exceeds all informational and organizational standards. It has great

flow, your word choice is elevated, and you provide ample background knowledge so the reader

can fully understand your argument. You appeared to approach the topic from a logical and open-

minded standpoint, allowing for multiple perspectives and facets of the argument to be

demonstrated. I was engaged from the first paragraph to the last.

The structure of your paper makes a lot of sense. You introduce the topic, define it and

provide background information, discuss media influences and major discussions in the field,

give examples and elaborate, then conclude by restating your claims. This format is cogent and

easy to comprehend. On each topic, such as the twin studies, you go into incredible detail, which

really gives readers a lot of information to grasp. Even with all the data, you keep it concise and

engaging. In addition, you analyze the information you provide very well. I admire how you

incorporate your ideas into your argument as well, as this is key to a successful inquiry paper.

When we read through each of our papers in class you explained to me how you still had

more to add to the nature/nurture debate. In the paragraphs in the next section of your paper,

titled psychopaths, you discuss how Richard Kuklinskis childhood was traumatic, how his

father beat him and his mother was abusive. You then contrast James Fallon and Richard

Kuklinski, however, I would suggest that you directly state how those two individuals can be
contrasted to reinforce arguments regarding the nature/nurture debate. Even though it is strongly

alluded to, particularly in the last sentence, I am not sure if every reader would know how

exactly the nature/nurture debate tied in there if it is not directly stated.

The main element that needs some work are your in-text citations. I simply think that

there should be more. Like we discussed in class, it is better to have more than you think you

need then not having enough. Nevertheless, having an excess can be problematic. My

understanding is that any time an idea or information is used that was provided from a given

source, a citation must be used. If one part of a sentence contains information derived from a

source, and another part of the sentence is your own analysis/commentary, an in-text citation can

be broken up and used mid-sentence, usually with the assistance of a comma.

Given your topic, your papers structure and format has been very well executed. As

stated previously, I think that your organization and placement of ideas connect well. As I

reading, I have had no gaps in understanding, been confused about the purpose of a paragraph or

why information is being used. Aside from the addition of in-text citations, more information in

certain areas, and a few tweaks here and there, I think that your paper is phenomenal. You cover

the topic thoroughly, utilize information that furthers your argument, and address that

information so that it coincides with your thesis from start to finish.