"Glass Shatters" is good because of its strong narrative, and its use of a lot of good key text evidence and good explanations. In both body paragraph's she used a quote. What really stood out though was that for both quotes she elaborated very well. She did this so well, that I understood the quote even though I had not read the book. For example, following a long quote that confused me at first she wrote, "What Kristina is making clear is that her real self is the smallest part and she is worried about getting caught and she thinks that going back to the “monster” which is meth is stupid, but Bree doesn’t really care about anything, but when she’s high Bree is the dominant voice that Kristina has so she doesn’t really care about getting caught all she wants to do is enjoy what’s going to end up ruining Kristinas life." This shows that Gabby helped the reader understand the importance of the quote because she told the backstory and summarized the quote, while telling the meaning of the quote in the book. Gabby did a good job of incorporating text evidence and had a distinct voice in her writing.
George's post made Romeo and Juliet, a very difficult text to get through quite interesting. His post about the irony was very easy to read because of its good structure. It is 5 paragraphs, with an intro, 3 body paragraphs and a conclusion. I also like that George's conclusion and introduction are to the point and short. George's entry was good mostly because of the way he structured it.
These blogs inspire me to improve my posts in various ways. Most importantly though, I will use a lot of quotes like Gabby and thoroughly explain them and structure my responses like George's response.
No comments:
Post a Comment