Week 16 · Final study guide

Final Exam — Study Guide

English Composition Free sample edition

Coverage — what the final covers

The final is cumulative: it reaches back across all fifteen teaching weeks and all eight course objectives. It is given in Week 16, the finals week, which has no new module. The exam has 40 questions, and every question counts the same. Most ask you to select exactly one option (31 questions); six ask you to judge a true/false statement, and three ask you to select every applicable option. There is no time limit, and you get one attempt. The questions appear one at a time, and you cannot go back.

All 40 questions were drawn from the question banks of Weeks 9 to 15. Every objective still appears at least once, because the first-half skills come back inside that later material. Here is what this form actually contains:

The eight course objectives, the weeks that teach each one, and how many of the final's 40 questions fall on each
Objective	What you do	Weeks	Questions on this exam
Objective 1 (analyze the rhetorical situation — writer, audience, purpose, genre, and context — and approach writing as a recursive process of invention, drafting, revision, editing, and reflection, distinguishing revision (re-seeing ideas and structure) from editing (sentences and surface))	Read a situation's writer, audience, and purpose; place each process stage, with proofreading inside editing	1, again in 9, 13, 14	4
Objective 2 (read critically: annotate a text, summarize it accurately and neutrally in your own words, respond to it analytically with reasons, and separate a writer's claim from its support and a summary from a response)	Summarize neutrally and keep a summary apart from a response	2, again in 6, 10	1
Objective 3 (develop an arguable, specific thesis and organize an essay around it — unified, coherent, well-developed paragraphs built from a point through evidence to explanation, with an introduction that lands the thesis, transitions that name real relationships, and a conclusion that synthesizes)	Build an arguable, specific thesis and paragraphs that each do one job	3, 4, again in 13	1
Objective 4 (compose in multiple rhetorical modes — narration and exposition, rhetorical analysis, and argument — using the appeals (ethos, pathos, logos, kairos) to explain how a real text persuades and the structure of argument (claim, grounds, warrant, counterargument, rebuttal) to build your own, arguing from evidence and representing opposing views fairly)	Analyze how a text persuades; argue with grounds, a warrant, and a fair rebuttal	5, 6, 7, again in 12	1
Objective 5 (find, evaluate, and integrate credible sources: turn a topic into a research question, classify sources, judge credibility by lateral reading and a checklist, and quote, paraphrase, summarize, and synthesize with signal phrases and attribution — never patchwriting, never plagiarizing, and never trusting an unverified quotation, source, or citation)	Evaluate sources, then quote, paraphrase, summarize, and synthesize them honestly	9, 10, 12, again in 11	15
Objective 6 (document sources in MLA style — in-text citations in the author-page form and a works-cited list built on the ninth edition's template of core elements and containers — and apply MLA formatting conventions accurately, checking any generator's or chatbot's entry against the template and the real source)	Cite in MLA style: the in-text citation, the works-cited entry, the format	11, again in 12	7
Objective 7 (revise globally and edit locally: re-see a draft's thesis, structure, argument, and evidence; then sharpen sentences for concision, variety, emphasis, and voice; and correct the most common surface errors — fragments, comma splices, fused sentences, agreement, pronoun reference, apostrophes, and commas)	Revise globally, then edit locally for concision, variety, and correctness	13, 14, again in 15	9
Objective 8 (reflect on writing as a process: assess your own choices with specific, evidence-based reflection, assemble and introduce a curated portfolio, and articulate which skills transfer beyond this course and where)	Reflect with specific evidence, curate a portfolio, and name a transfer	15	2

That is 31 of the 40 questions on the three objectives taught in Weeks 9 to 14: sources and integration (15), MLA documentation (7), and revision and editing (9). Put most of your review there. The first-half ideas still earn their place, but they show up inside later scenes. A question about a source's bias turns on Week 1's purpose. A question about a reverse outline turns on Week 4's essay structure.

Topic-by-topic review

Each unit gives the idea in plain words first, then the course's exact definitions, then the mistake students make most often and its cure. The "deeper review" line tells you where to look in that week's materials. Units 4 to 9 carry the weight of the exam, so they get the most space.

Unit 1 — The situation, the process, and critical reading (Weeks 1 and 2)

Key idea. Every piece of writing answers to a situation, and good writers loop back instead of trying to nail it once. Rhetoric is the art of choosing what to say and how to say it for a particular reader and purpose.
The five questions. The rhetorical situation is taught as five questions: writer, audience, purpose, genre, and context. The exigence is the need or occasion that sets a piece of writing in motion; the term comes from Bitzer's essay "The Rhetorical Situation" (1968).
The process. The writing process is invention, drafting, revision, editing, and reflection, and it is recursive: you return to an earlier stage whenever the work needs it. Revision re-sees a draft's ideas, focus, and structure. Editing improves sentences and surface. Proofreading is the last surface pass inside editing.
Critical reading. A summary is a short restatement of what a text says: neutral, covering the whole text, and in your own words. A response is your reasoned evaluation, kept separate: you agree, disagree, or complicate, with reasons about the text. An opinion-leak is a judging word inside a summary. The they say / I say order states the other view fairly first (Graff and Birkenstein, 2006).
The bridge to research. Week 8's three-sentence habit keeps what a text says, how it persuades, and whether you agree in three separate sentences. A source paragraph needs all three, in that order.
Predictable mistakes → cures. Calling a comma fix "revision": revision re-sees ideas and structure; a comma is editing. Letting "sensibly" or "rightly" into a summary: swap in a neutral verb such as "argues" or "warns". Treating the process as a straight line: drafting can send you back to invention.
Deeper review: the Week 1 and Week 2 chapters, and the Week 8 review slides.

Unit 2 — The paragraph and the thesis (Weeks 3 and 4)

Key idea. A paragraph makes one idea fully, and an essay makes one claim fully. A topic sentence states the paragraph's controlling idea, a claim the paragraph can prove. Unity means every sentence serves it. Coherence means logical order, transitions that name real relationships, and old-to-new flow.
Development. Development is evidence plus explanation, built with PIE (Point, Illustration, Explanation, Link) or its twin MEAL (Main idea, Evidence, Analysis, Link).
The thesis. A thesis states the essay's main claim. It must pass the two-part test: arguable, so a reasonable person could disagree, and specific, so it names what is claimed and often why. The impostors are a topic, a statement of fact, a question, and an announcement.
Structure. An introduction gives a hook, context, and the thesis. Body paragraphs make one point each. A conclusion synthesizes and answers "so what?" The reverse outline notes what each paragraph says and what job it does, then reads only the notes.
Predictable mistakes → cures. Listing facts and stopping: add the explanation sentence. Handing in a topic as a thesis: ask what a reasonable reader could dispute. Restating the thesis as a conclusion: say what the points add up to.
Deeper review: the Week 3 and Week 4 chapters; the running draft's weak and revised body paragraphs.

Unit 3 — The modes, analysis, and argument (Weeks 5, 6, and 7)

Key idea. A rhetorical mode is a way of developing a piece of writing. Narration tells a true story to make a point; exposition explains or informs without taking a side. Showing gives concrete sensory detail; telling names the feeling.
Rhetorical analysis. It is an account of how a text persuades its audience, never of whether you agree. The four appeals, in order, are ethos (credibility), pathos (emotion), logos (reasoning and evidence), and kairos (the opportune moment). A label names an appeal; an analysis adds the move and its effect.
Argument. The Toulmin model (Toulmin, 1958, The Uses of Argument) names six parts: claim, grounds, warrant, backing, qualifier, and rebuttal. The course keys claim, grounds, warrant, and rebuttal. The warrant is the usually unstated assumption that links the grounds to the claim. Steel-manning states the other side at its strongest before the rebuttal answers it.
Predictable mistakes → cures. "The author uses pathos" offered as analysis: add how the move works and what it does to the audience. Calling the warrant "the evidence": the grounds are what you point to; the warrant is why they count. Answering a straw man: state the objection so its holders would recognize it.
Deeper review: the Week 6 analysis of King's "I Have a Dream" (1963) and the Week 7 argument map.

Unit 4 — Finding and evaluating sources (Week 9)

Key idea. Before you use a source, ask whether it answers your question and whether you can trust it.
The research question. A research question is focused, answerable with evidence, more than a trivial yes or no, and arguable enough to lead to a thesis. A topic names a subject and asks nothing.
Kinds of source. A primary source is the thing itself: an original study, a speech, a law, or official guidance. A secondary source is writing about it. The same item can be either, depending on how you use it. A scholarly source is written by specialists for specialists and passes peer review; a popular source is edited for general readers; a trade source is written for people who work in one field.
Where you search. A library database screens what it indexes. The open web is unfiltered, and a search engine ranks pages by many signals, not by truth.
The checklist. The five questions are currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose, in that order. The version taught here is the CRAAP test (Blakeslee, 2004), one common checklist among several.
Lateral reading. Vertical reading stays on a site and judges it by its own pages. Lateral reading leaves the site and opens new tabs to see what independent sources say about it. Wineburg and McGrew (2017; 2019) found that professional fact checkers read laterally. Bias is a source's point of view and the purpose behind it; naming it tells you how to read the source.
Predictable mistakes → cures. "A .org address means trustworthy": only .edu and .gov restrict who may register. "Lateral reading means reading the About page": that is vertical; lateral reading leaves the site. "A biased source is useless": name its purpose and cross-check its claims. A chatbot's claims about a source: unverified until you check them laterally.
Deeper review: the Week 9 chapter's four-source sort and its illustrative website.

Unit 5 — Quoting, paraphrasing, and avoiding plagiarism (Week 10)

Key idea. The three honest moves bring a source in while showing whose idea it is. A quotation is a source's exact words, copied from the real text and set in quotation marks. A paraphrase restates one specific passage in your own words and your own sentence structure, at about the original's length. A summary boils a longer passage, or a whole source, down to its gist.
Choosing the move. Quote when the exact wording matters. Paraphrase when the idea matters but the wording does not. Summarize when you need the gist of something long.
Signal phrases. A signal phrase names the source before you use it, such as "As Strunk argues". Its signal verb matches what the source is doing: a study finds or reports; a writer argues, warns, or concedes.
Credit. Attribution is owed for quoted words and for paraphrased or summarized ideas alike. Common knowledge is the one exception: a fact found in many sources, known to many readers, and not in dispute. When unsure, cite.
The trap. Patchwriting keeps a source's sentence and swaps in synonyms. It is plagiarism even with a citation attached, because the sentence shape is still borrowed; the term is Howard's (1992; 1995). The cover-the-source test catches it: cover the passage, write from memory, then compare skeletons.
Predictable mistakes → cures. "Changing a few words makes a paraphrase": change the structure too. "I only cite direct quotes": paraphrases and summaries need credit. "The chatbot's quotation is real because it is formatted": search the real text for the words.
Deeper review: the Week 10 chapter's Rule 13 set (Strunk, 1918, The Elements of Style).

Unit 6 — MLA documentation (Week 11)

Key idea. Documentation answers two questions a reader always asks: says who, and where can I find it? This course teaches the MLA Handbook, 9th ed. (2021).
The in-text citation. MLA uses the author-page form: the author's last name and the page, separated by one space, with no comma and no "p.", as in (Beland and Murphy 61). In the signal-phrase form you name the author in the sentence, so the parentheses hold only the page, as in (61). A web source with no pages takes the author's name alone, such as (Amy), or no parenthetical at all when the author is named in the sentence. Never count paragraphs or use a browser's page number.
The entry. Every works-cited entry is built on the template of core elements, nine in this order: Author. Title of Source. Title of Container, Contributor, Version, Number, Publisher, Publication Date, Location. A period follows the author, the title of source, and the end of the container string; commas separate the elements inside it. Include only the elements your source has.
The container. A container is the larger whole that holds your source: the journal that holds an article, the website that holds a page. A book that stands alone has no container.
The format. The paper gets one-inch margins, double spacing throughout, a legible font, a running head of your last name and the page number, and a half-inch first-line indent. The list is headed "Works Cited", runs in alphabetical order by each entry's first element, and uses a half-inch hanging indent and title case.
The matched pair. Whatever word begins the in-text citation begins the entry it points to.
Predictable mistakes → cures. "(Beland and Murphy, 61)": no comma. "(Beland and Murphy p. 61)": no "p."; "pp." belongs only in the entry's page range. Ordering the list by citation order or by date: alphabetize by first element. Trusting a generator: audit its entry twice, format against the template and facts against the real source.
Deeper review: the Week 11 chapter's four entries, built element by element.

Unit 7 — The research-based argument (Week 12)

Key idea. A report collects what sources say. A research-based argument makes a case; its claim belongs to you, and its sources are the evidence.
Synthesis. You put sources in conversation around your point, and you name each relationship: one source agrees with another, extends it by explaining why or for whom, or disagrees with it or complicates it.
The four-part integration move. Every borrowed idea arrives with a signal phrase, the quotation or paraphrase, the MLA in-text citation, and your own analysis of what it means for your claim. A dropped quotation arrives with none of the lead-in or analysis.
Balance and the match. Your voice is the majority of the page, quoted words a small fraction, and each paragraph ends with your sentence. The two-way match checks that every in-text citation points to an entry and every entry is cited.
Counterargument with sources. State the objection with the other side's best evidence, then rebut it with yours. The strongest counter-evidence often sits inside your own sources.
Predictable mistakes → cures. A paragraph that opens and closes on a source: open with your claim and close with your reasoning. An uncited paraphrase: the idea still needs a signal phrase or a citation. An AI-supplied quotation: unverified until you open the source and find the words.
Deeper review: the Week 12 chapter's synthesis and counterargument paragraphs.

Unit 8 — Revision and style (Week 13)

Key idea. Two passes, the big one first. Global revision re-sees the thesis, structure, argument, and evidence; it can move paragraphs, cut sections, or rewrite the thesis. Local editing works on sentences and surface.
The study behind it. Sommers (1980), "Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers", found that the student writers she studied tended to treat revision as word-level rewording, while experienced writers re-saw the whole.
Concision. Concision means every word earns its place; it cuts words that do no work, not ideas. Deadwood comes in four kinds: inflated phrases ("due to the fact that"), redundancy ("each and every"), empty intensifiers ("very", "really"), and buried verbs ("made a decision" for "decided"). The 25 percent challenge is a practice target that is never scored.
Variety, emphasis, voice. Mix sentence lengths and combine choppy sentences by coordination or subordination. Emphasis falls on the end of a sentence and on the main clause. The passive voice is correct grammar and the right choice when the doer is unknown, beside the point, or deliberately kept in the background.
Predictable mistakes → cures. Revising structure and editing commas in one pass: run the global pass first. "Cutting words loses meaning": cut deadwood, not claims. "Passive is wrong": choose it on purpose. A chatbot's "tightened" paragraph: compare the claim and the voice before and after.
Deeper review: the Week 13 chapter's two-pass revision of the running draft.

Unit 9 — Editing (Week 14)

Key idea. One tool diagnoses every sentence-boundary error: count the independent clauses, then look at what joins them. An independent clause has a subject and a verb and can stand alone. A dependent clause opens with a word such as "because", "although", "when", or "which", so it cannot.
The three boundary errors. A fragment is a word group punctuated as a sentence with no independent clause; its length is not the test. A comma splice joins two independent clauses with a comma alone. A fused sentence (a run-on) joins them with nothing.
The five valid fixes. A period, a semicolon, a comma plus a coordinating conjunction (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so), subordinating one clause, or a dash or colon where it fits. Adding another comma is not a fix.
Agreement, reference, apostrophes, commas. A verb agrees with its real subject, not the nearest noun. A pronoun needs one clear antecedent; singular "they" is accepted by the MLA Handbook, 9th ed. Possessive pronouns such as "its" never take an apostrophe; read "it's" as "it is". A comma follows an introductory element, comes before a coordinating conjunction joining two independent clauses, and sets off a nonessential aside.
Proofreading on purpose. The three moves are reading aloud, making the draft unfamiliar, and hunting one error type at a time. Spell-check cannot hear a comma splice.
Predictable mistakes → cures. Calling a long sentence a run-on: count its independent clauses. "Fixing" a splice with another comma: use one of the five fixes. Matching the verb to the nearest noun: cover the phrase in between.
Deeper review: the Week 14 chapter's sentence-error set and its newsletter notice.

Unit 10 — Reflection and the portfolio (Week 15)

Key idea. Metacognition is thinking about your own thinking; for a writer, it means noticing how you write and why you make the choices you make. Reflection is metacognition written down.
The two-part test for reflection. A reflection sentence is specific, naming a skill or a move, and evidence-based, pointing to where that move shows in a named piece. Effort is not evidence: ask "learned what, shown where?"
The portfolio. A writing portfolio is a curated selection, each piece chosen because it proves a named skill, with a rationale for each. A folder of everything is an archive. The reflective cover letter says what was chosen, why, what was learned, and how the work was revised.
Transfer. Transfer is carrying a named skill into a new place. A skill you can name and explain is the kind most likely to travel.
Predictable mistakes → cures. "I worked really hard" as a finding: name the move and the place. Calling an apostrophe fix your biggest revision: that is editing; revision changes thinking. A chatbot's reflection on "my growth": it names no piece, so write your own.
Deeper review: the Week 15 chapter's three reflection sentences and the Week 1 diagnostic write.

Representative practice

These are fresh variants, not the exam's questions. The scenarios are illustrative, written for this course, and attributed to no one. The only real words quoted are pinned course texts, copied exactly. Work each one, then check it.

Worked example 1 — from topic to sorted sources (Unit 4)

A writer's topic is the bike-share stations a city is adding. The scenario is illustrative.

Too broad: "How does transportation affect cities?" No essay could answer it.
Trivial: "Does the city have bike-share stations?" A glance at a street corner answers it, so it leads to no thesis.
Research question: "When a city adds bike-share stations near bus and train stops, who uses them, and do short car trips decline?" It is focused, answerable with evidence, more than a yes or no, and arguable enough to lead to a thesis.
The sort. The city's own ridership report is the thing itself: primary, and a government document. A newspaper story about that report is popular and secondary. A peer-reviewed study of bike-share riders is scholarly and primary, because it reports original research. A magazine written for transportation planners is a trade source, and secondary.
The tally: 2 primary + 2 secondary = 4 sources, and 1 scholarly + 1 popular + 1 trade + 1 government document = 4 sources.
One item, two roles: the newspaper story would become primary if the question were how local news covered the program.

Why it matters: the label tells you what kind of evidence you hold, and the question tells you which kinds you need.

Worked example 2 — lateral reading that raises trust (Unit 4)

An illustrative website posts weekly water readings for a local river. It has no logo, and its About page is two lines long.

Vertical reading: judged by its own plain pages, the site looks amateur, and a hasty reader drops it.
Lateral reading: you open new tabs and search the site's name. Independent sources describe it as a volunteer monitoring project whose readings a county environmental office cites.
The five questions: currency, the readings are dated weekly; relevance, they fit a question about this river; authority, trained volunteers, as other sources confirm; accuracy, the readings can be cross-checked against the county's own reports; purpose, to inform.
The machine: a chatbot calls the site "an official government source." That claim is unverified, and your lateral search shows that volunteers run it.

Why it matters: design proves nothing in either direction. A plain site can be credible and a slick one can be a sales page, so you check the source's context before you trust its content.

Worked example 3 — a patch, a paraphrase, and the move to choose (Unit 5)

The source is the 11-word fragment the running draft quotes from Beland and Murphy's abstract: "the unstructured presence of phones has detrimental effects on certain students".

A patchwritten version (illustrative): "the unorganized existence of phones has harmful effects on some students". It swaps 4 words: "unstructured" → "unorganized", "presence" → "existence", "detrimental" → "harmful", and "certain" → "some". That leaves 11 − 4 = 7 words unchanged in their original places.
The cover-the-source test: cover the original and read the patch alone. Every slot still lines up, so the skeleton is the authors'. It is plagiarism even with (Beland and Murphy 61) attached.
An acceptable paraphrase (illustrative): "Beland and Murphy suggest that phones left without rules work against some students (61)." It is one sentence in the writer's own order and words, 13 words against 11, and it credits the authors with a signal phrase and the page.
Choosing the move: quote the fragment when you plan to analyze its wording; paraphrase it when only the idea matters; summarize the whole study when the essay needs its finding, not its methods.

Why it matters: a citation credits the idea, not a borrowed sentence shape.

Worked example 4 — auditing a generator's book entry (Unit 6)

Suppose a free citation tool builds this illustrative entry for the book the running draft cites:

Carr, Nicholas. The shallows: what the internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton, 2010.

Format audit, against the template: the title is not in italics and is in sentence case, not title case. The Version element is missing, although the writer read a special edition.
Facts audit, against the real source: 2010 is the year the book first appeared. The writer read the tenth-anniversary edition, which came out in 2020.
The corrected entry: Carr, Nicholas. The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains. 10th anniversary ed., W. W. Norton, 2020.
Element count: Author, Title of Source, Version, Publisher, and Publication Date make 5 of the 9 core elements, so 9 − 5 = 4 are skipped. The book stands alone, so it has no container.
The matched pair: a draft that cites the study as (Murphy and Beland 61) breaks the trail, because the entry begins with "Beland". The fix is (Beland and Murphy 61).

Why it matters: format errors show up against the template, but a wrong year shows up only against the real source.

Worked example 5 — the four-part move and the balance of voices (Unit 7)

An illustrative paragraph from a different draft argues for a phone-free homework hour in a community tutoring program:

"A phone-free homework hour would cost the program almost nothing and would help the students who need it most. As Beland and Murphy argue, 'the unstructured presence of phones has detrimental effects on certain students' (61). That finding matters here, because the program exists for students who are already behind. A rule that asks everyone to set a phone aside for one hour is a small price for the students the program was built to reach."

The four parts: the signal phrase "As Beland and Murphy argue,"; the 11-word quotation; the citation (61), the page alone because the authors are named; and the writer's analysis, the third and fourth sentences.
Without the signal phrase, the same citation would read (Beland and Murphy 61).
Balance: the paragraph runs 75 words, not counting the citation, and 11 of them are quoted. That leaves 75 − 11 = 64 words in the writer's own voice. Since 75 ÷ 6 = 12.5, fewer than 1 word in 6 is quoted.
The last word: the paragraph opens with the writer's claim and closes with the writer's reasoning, not with the source.

Why it matters: the source supports the claim; it does not replace it.

Worked example 6 — a global pass, then a local pass (Unit 8)

An illustrative proposal argues that an apartment building should turn its empty storage room into a shared tool library. Its thesis promises two reasons, money saved and a room already free, and it says a sign-out sheet answers the worry about missing tools.

The reverse outline (illustrative notes): paragraph 1 introduces the problem and states the thesis; 2 argues that sharing saves money; 3 argues that the room already sits empty; 4 argues again that residents would spend less; 5 closes.
What the notes show: paragraphs 2 and 4 do the same job, and no paragraph answers the missing-tools worry.
The global move: merge paragraphs 2 and 4, and add a paragraph that states the worry fairly and answers it with the sign-out sheet. The draft goes from 5 paragraphs to 5 − 1 + 1 = 5, but now each paragraph has its own job.
The local pass, on an illustrative farmers-market notice: "In the event that it rains, the farmers market will conduct a relocation of the vendor stalls to the covered parking garage. Each and every shopper should bring a totally waterproof bag." That is 32 words.
The deadwood: the inflated phrase "In the event that" becomes "If" (3 words saved), and the buried verb "conduct a relocation of" becomes "relocate" (3 saved). The redundancy "Each and every" becomes "Every" (2 saved), and the empty intensifier "totally" goes (1 saved). That is 3 + 3 + 2 + 1 = 9 words cut, and 32 − 9 = 23 remain.
After: "If it rains, the farmers market will relocate the vendor stalls to the covered parking garage. Every shopper should bring a waterproof bag." A quarter of 32 is 32 ÷ 4 = 8, so cutting 9 meets the 25 percent challenge, and every claim survives.
Passive on purpose (illustrative): "The water main was repaired overnight." Residents need to know the water is back, not which crew fixed it, so the passive is the right choice.

Why it matters: no amount of sentence work would have found the repeated paragraph.

Worked example 7 — one memo, one error type at a time (Unit 9)

An illustrative warehouse memo has 6 word groups punctuated as sentences:

"The warehouse runs its safety check at seven. The loading dock is wet, the forklifts will stay parked until it dries. The schedule for both shifts are posted by the time clock. When the supervisor spoke with the driver, she asked for a new route. Because the inspector arrives at noon. Drivers should finish their checks by eleven."

Pass 1, boundaries: "The loading dock is wet, the forklifts will stay parked until it dries." has 2 independent clauses joined by a comma alone, a comma splice. "Because the inspector arrives at noon." has 0 independent clauses, a fragment.
Pass 2, agreement and reference: cover "for both shifts" and the subject is "schedule", so the verb is "is posted". In the supervisor sentence, "she" could point to 2 people, so name the one you mean.
The count: 2 boundary errors + 1 agreement error + 1 reference error = 4 errors, so 6 − 4 = 2 word groups were correct as written. "its safety check" is a correct possessive.
The five fixes for the splice: (1) "The loading dock is wet. The forklifts will stay parked until it dries." (2) "...is wet; the forklifts..." (3) "...is wet, so the forklifts..." (4) "Because the loading dock is wet, the forklifts..." (5) "...is wet — the forklifts..." Fixes 3 and 4 claim a cause, which is true here.
The fragment, joined: "Because the inspector arrives at noon, drivers should finish their checks by eleven." Joining it leaves 6 − 1 = 5 sentences.

Why it matters: the clause count diagnoses every boundary error, and one pass per error type keeps you from missing any.

Worked example 8 — testing reflection and transfer (Unit 10)

Three illustrative reflection sentences, written as if by the same student:

"This course made me a much stronger and more confident writer." It names no skill and no place, so it passes 0 of 2 parts.
"I learned to read a website laterally." It names a skill, so it is specific, but it points nowhere. It passes 1 of 2 parts, and 2 − 1 = 1 part is missing.
"In my research-based argument's third paragraph, I replaced a dropped quotation with a signal phrase, the citation, and two sentences of my own analysis." It names the move and the place, so it passes 2 of 2.
Transfer, vague: "I will use these skills in my career." It names 0 skills and 0 places.
Transfer, named: "I will run the two-way citation match on the references in my nursing care plan before I submit it." It names 1 skill and 1 place.

Why it matters: a reader can check sentence 3, and that is what makes it evidence.

Worked example 9 — the first half, inside later work (Units 1 to 3)

Revision or editing? A writer moves a community theater's grant request from the last paragraph to the first and rewrites it as one clear ask. That re-sees structure, so it is revision. Adding a comma after an introductory element is editing.
Opinion-leak: a summary reads, "Eisenhower wisely warns his television audience against the military-industrial complex." The word "wisely" judges the text. A neutral summary uses "warns" alone, and it keeps the half a hasty reader drops: Eisenhower first grants the need for the military establishment.
A thesis impostor: "In this essay I will discuss the city's bike-share program." It is an announcement that takes no side. An arguable, specific version (illustrative): "The city should place bike-share stations at both hospital entrances, because night-shift workers lose their late bus service."
An appeal, analyzed: in "I Have a Dream", "Now is the time" opens 4 consecutive sentences. Naming it "anaphora" is a label. The analysis adds the effect: the repetition presses the demand into the present moment, so urgency becomes the speech's kairos.
A warrant (illustrative): the claim is that a food-truck lot should add picnic tables, and the grounds are that the lunch crowd eats standing in the lot. The warrant is that a lot that serves meals should give people a place to eat them.

Why it matters: each first-half skill returns on the final inside a source, a revision, or a reflection.

Self-check questions

A research question reads, "Are food trucks popular?" What is wrong with it? Self-check: it is a trivial yes-or-no question that leads to no thesis. Why: a research question asks something evidence can answer in more than one word.
A magazine is written for restaurant managers. Scholarly, popular, or trade? Self-check: trade. Why: it is written for people who work in one field.
You judge a site by its About page and its staff photos. Lateral or vertical? Self-check: vertical. Why: lateral reading leaves the site to see what others say about it.
Which signal verb fits a study's result: argues, finds, or proves? Self-check: finds. Why: "proves" overstates a careful finding, and "argues" fits a writer making a case.
What is the container for Beland and Murphy's article? Self-check: the journal Labour Economics. Why: the container is the larger whole that holds the source.
A web page has no page numbers, and you name its author in your sentence. What goes in the parentheses? Self-check: nothing; no parenthetical follows. Why: the author is already named, and there is no page to give.
How far are the second and later lines of a works-cited entry indented? Self-check: half an inch. Why: that is the hanging indent.
A body paragraph ends on a quotation. What does the balance rule ask? Self-check: add your own closing sentence. Why: the writer gets the last word in every paragraph.
Name the three synthesis relationships. Self-check: agree, extend, and disagree. Why: naming the relationship tells the reader how two sources connect.
Free the verb in "The board conducted an investigation of the leak." Self-check: "The board investigated the leak." Why: the phrase was a buried verb, with the action hiding inside a noun behind a weak verb.
Is "The rain stopped." a fragment because it is short? Self-check: no; it has 1 independent clause. Why: length is not the test.
Correct "The ferry changed it's schedule." Self-check: "The ferry changed its schedule." Why: read "it's" as "it is", and the sentence breaks, so you need the possessive "its".
A reflection says, "I put a lot of effort into every draft." Does it pass the two-part test? Self-check: no; it passes 0 of 2 parts. Why: effort is not evidence, and it names no move and no place.

Check yourself — choose one. (a) Which unit in this guide felt least familiar, and which worked example will you redo first? (b) Pick two units that connect, such as lateral reading and the four-part move, and explain the link in two sentences. Either choice is a good use of ten minutes.

Watch before the exam

These eight videos come from the course's own weekly readings. Use them for review and for connecting weeks, not for new material.

Check Yourself with Lateral Reading: Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #3 — CrashCourse reviews Objective 5 from Week 9: leaving a site to learn its context.
Paraphrasing vs. Patchwriting — Stacey Hoffer reviews Objective 5 from Week 10: why swapped synonyms still borrow a sentence's shape.
Spotting Errors in Online Citation Machines MLA — Chris Hoelscher reviews Objective 6 from Week 11: auditing a generator's entry against the template.
Synthesize Your Sources: How to Write the Research Essay — David Taylor reviews Objective 5 from Week 12 and connects it to Week 7's argument: sources in conversation around your claim.
Writing Revisions: Global vs. Local — Lauren Pisanelli reviews Objective 7 from Week 13 and ties it back to Week 1's revision vs. editing.
Run-on Sentences and Comma Splices and How to Fix Them — Writing Better reviews Objective 7 from Week 14: the boundary errors and their fixes.
Writing Practice: The Reflective Essay — Study Hall reviews Objective 8 from Week 15: reflection built on specific evidence.
Rhetorical Analysis and Transfer — Study Hall synthesizes the term by linking Week 6's analysis to Week 15's transfer.

Study plan

A short countdown sized to a course that meets two or three times a week. Count backward from the day the final opens in Week 16.

Two weeks out: review Units 1 to 3 in one sitting and redo Worked example 9 from scratch. These ideas return inside later questions.
Ten days out: review Units 4 and 5. Redo Worked examples 1, 2, and 3 until each label comes with its reason.
One week out: review Units 6 and 7. Redo Worked examples 4 and 5 without looking, and say each citation rule out loud.
Five days out: take the paired practice exam once, closed-book and under exam-like conditions, then sort every miss by unit. Remember that it leans on Weeks 1 to 7 far more than the final does.
Four days out: review Units 8 and 9 and redo Worked examples 6 and 7. Count the clauses in every sentence you check.
Three days out: run the paired exam-prep tutorial (the copy/paste chatbot tutor, or its no-AI route) on the two units that felt weakest, with at least one from Units 4 to 9.
Two days out: review Unit 10, redo Worked example 8, answer the thirteen self-check questions cold, then retake the practice exam.
The day before: skim the "Predictable mistakes → cures" lines in every unit and watch one video from the list above. Sleep.

Use the exam-prep tutorial and the practice exam for active recall; this guide is for review, and those two are where you rehearse. Rereading alone moves scores less than retrieval practice does.

Exam format and scoring

The final is scored automatically, and all 40 questions count the same. The questions appear one at a time, and you cannot go back to an earlier question once you move on. You have one attempt and no time limit. AI tools are not permitted on the final.

Test-taking strategies for this material:

For any source, ask what it is (primary or secondary) and who it is for (scholarly, popular, or trade) before you judge it.
For any borrowed sentence, find the four parts: signal phrase, the words or the idea, the citation, and the writer's analysis.
For any citation, say the rule first: author and page, one space, no comma, no "p."; the page alone when the author is named.
For any entry, walk the nine core elements in order and skip only the ones the source does not have.
For any sentence, count the independent clauses, then look at the joint.
For any change to a draft, ask whether it re-sees the thinking (revision) or works on the surface (editing).
For any reflection, ask "learned what, shown where?"
Since you cannot go back, settle each question before you move on.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com