FORMAL WRITING PROJECT #2

The Profile
Conference drafts due: Friday, October 9th @ 5 p.m. (uploaded to
Moodle) CONFERENCE DRAFTS MUST BE COMPLETE (WITH A
BEGINNING, MIDDLE, AND AN END) TO EARN FULL PARTICIPATION
CREDIT.
Peer reviews due: Time of conference (Schedule on Moodle)
Revised draft, peer reviews, and self assessment due: Sunday, Oct.
18th by 5 p.m.

The above sketch is of one of the greatest journalistsand perhaps the greatest interviewerin
American history, Studs Terkel. Terkel had the unique ability to make the stories of even the
plainest people fascinating. Nowhere does he do the normal folks greater justice than in
Working, a collection of oral histories from civil servants, blue-collar workers, and even prostitutes.
YOUR ROLE: For your second essay, youre to interview someone and write a profile, specifically
in regards to their relationship with food. In this profile, youre to have central claim about your
subjects authority and expertise, a claim you arrive at after youve interviewed your subject and
collected quotations and data from her.
THIS IS NOT A BIOGRAPHY! In other words, dont list our subjects chronology and resume. We
want what a person stands for, what sets her apart, what makes her story valuable to an
audience, specifically in regards to one of our larger conversations about what and how we
should eat in the 21st century.
As Terkel taught us, anybody can be made fascinating if put in the hands of the right writer. That
said, I want you to go out of your comfort zone. No interviews of roommates, best friends,
parents, or grandparents.
EXAMPLES: Well be looking at two profiles. One is of two people, Michael Pollan and Michael
Moss, both of whom study how what we eat affects the world, as well as our own health. The
second profile is of Timothy Ferris, a new-age self-help guru who uses his own body as a testing
ground for wild, alternative health experiments.
BACKGROUND READINGS: You must verse yourself in the contemporary debates about how
what we eat shapes who we are. The articles you must read and figure out how to incorporate
into your profile follow:
Michael Pollan, Escape from the Western Diet
Jonathan Safran Foer, Against Meat
Radley Balko, What You Eat is Your Business
Submission guidelines. Double-spaced, one-inch margins, footers and headers. No font larger
than 12-point Times New Roman or smaller than 10-point Times New Roman. Put your name, the
class, and the due date in the top left-hand corner of your paper. ALWAYS GIVE YOUR PAPERS
TITLES. UNDERLINE YOUR CENTRAL CLAIM. Any miscellaneous paper-lengthening formatting
Tomfoolery will be deducted from your presentation points on this assignment (see rubric on
page 3 of this handout). When submitting your essay on Moodle, you agree to the Honor Code.

Assignment skills from Formal Essay #1

Invention/topic selection

Assessable Skills for Profile Essay

Arriving at an argument after research

Organization

Proper MLA citation format for a Works

Cited page

Conventions of SAEE (Standard

American Edited English)

Consistent third-person narration

Incorporating quotations (including

proper punctuation and framing)

Proper Manuscript format

Thesis/claim construction

NOTE: The following rubric assumes youre following the assignments directions.

POINT/PURPOSE

EVIDENCE

ORGANIZATION

PRESENTATION

4
(Exemplary)

3
(Competent)

2
(Needs Improvement)

1
(Unsatisfactory)

Central claim is specific,

explainable, confident,
and suggests a nuanced
imagination. Writer is not
delivering a stock or
canned response. Writer
puts something larger at
stake for her readers and
the writing matters.
Piece answers the So
What? question.

Central claim is perhaps

too broad or too narrow.
Response may be stock
or canned. Writing is too
self-directed or selfindulgent and, therefore,
nothing is at stake for a
wider audience. Writer
tries to make subject
matter but is
unsuccessful.

Central claim is too

broad or narrow, is a
statement of fact,
assumes a position
with which nobody
would contend, or is
completely stock or
canned. Writing does
not matter to writer and
therefore does not
matter to audience.

No central claim and,

therefore, pointless.
Paper is mostly a report
or a summary. Critical
thinking about the
writings larger purpose is
minimal and/or
disorganized

Evidence is detailed,
clear, various, framed
appropriately, and
culled from reliable
sources where
applicable.

Evidence needs
additional detail and
clarity. Sources are
reliable but
documented erratically
and framed
inconsistently. Some
repetition of ideas. Some
passages are needlessly
long and exist just to
occupy page space.

Evidence lacks detail

and clarity. Secondary
sources are introduced
or elaborated upon
inappropriately. Sources
are unreliable and either
documented erratically
or undocumented.
Content exists mostly to
take up space and be
submitted for a grade.

Little or no evidence (or

a single point repeated
over and over again).
Sources are unreliable,
nonexistent, and
undocumented. No
evidence the writer is
thinking or reading with
any curiosity or great
effort.

Evidence is logically and

pleasingly ordered.
Sentences and
paragraphs make clever
use of transitions. The
arguments introduction
and conclusion engage
and give a sense of
closure, respectively,
without repeating one
another.

Evidence is ordered,
but a more logical
strategy is available.
Sentences and
paragraphs could use
additional attention in
terms of transitions.
Introduction and
conclusion more or
less mirror one another
and/or make no effort to
appeal to a wide
readership.

Evidence adheres to
juvenile (i.e. five
paragraph
essay) or nonexistent
organizational strategy.
Sentences and
paragraphs suggest little
understanding of
transitions. Introduction
and/or conclusion are
banal, nonexistent,
and/or simply exist to
take up space.

No organizational
strategy. Paragraphs
are not focused;
sentence structures are
repetitive. Argument is
not introduced or
concluded with an
outside audience in
mind.

Document is mostly
error-free (averages less
than two grammatical,
mechanical, spelling, or
usage oversights per
page). Tone is
appropriate for a
learned audience.
Documents format is
not distracting.

Document averages
between two and three
errors per page.
Tone is too relaxed, too
rigid, or otherwise
unappealing to a
learned audience.
Documents format has
one or two distracting
elements.

Document averages
between three and four
errors per page.
Argument shows a lack
of regard for audience.
Documents format has
three or four distracting
elements.

Document averages
more than four errors
per page. No regard for
audience expectations.
Documents format has
more than four
distracting elements.

All 4s =16/16 = 100%

All 3s = 12/16 = 75% (Average)
All 2s = 8/16 = 50%
All 1s = 4/16 = 25%