Transition sentences help please!

[LinRTX]

Would you please look at a part of my daughter's paper:

 

Mr. Hyde, the evil character in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, is the friend and benefactor of Dr. Jekyll. Whereas Dr. Jekyll is ninety percent good, Mr. Hyde is one hundred percent evil -- when you are in his presence you can sense, almost smell his wickedness. He is described as pale and small. Mr. Utterson dislikes him for this “Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish; he gave an impression of deformity without any namable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyer with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice.” At first Mr. Hyde is tolerable to be around, but, as time wears on, his evilness increases until he murders a gentleman and seemingly disappears. Even though everyone recognizes the complete evil that is Mr. Hyde, they fail to perceive is that he is the utterly evil side of Dr. Jekyll.

“O God!' I screamed, and `O God!' again and again; for there before my eyes - pale and shaken, and half fainting, and groping before him with his hands, like a man restored from death - there stood Henry Jekyll!” Mr. Lanyon, a colleague of Dr. Jekyll, does not realize what Dr. Jekyll is doing. Though everyone loves Dr. Jekyll and scorns Mr. Hyde, they do not realize that these two characters comprise the dual nature of one person. Robert Louis Stevenson wrote a very compelling book about the sinful nature of man, how a good person could become wholly evil and how trickery exists in anyone. Robert Louis Stevenson believes that there were two natures, evil and good, in one body “This, as I [Dr. Jekyll] take it, was because all human beings, as we meet them, are commingled out of good and evil.”The separation of one being into two parts – the good Dr. Jekyll and the evil Mr. Hyde—provides no solution to the problem of sin. Dr. Jekyll never actually finds a way to eradicate the problem. Robert Louis Stevenson also believes that over time sin can, and will, control your life. “And at the very moment of that vainglorious thought, a qualm came over me, a horrid nausea and the most deadly shuddering... I began to be aware of a change in the temper of my thoughts, a greater boldness, a contempt of danger, a solution of the bonds of obligation ….I [Dr. Jekyll] was once more Edward Hyde.”Even though, at first, Dr. Jekyll believes that he can control the sinful, evil nature embodied in Mr. Hyde, he eventually recognizes that the sinful nature starts to control him and slowly eats at his conscience, killing everything that is good. All that is left is the completely evil Mr. Hyde. With no way to rid the evil, death is the only answer and Dr. Jekyll, sadly, dies at the end of the book. Robert Louis Stevenson sees no answer to the problem of sin and evil.

 

 

She was downgraded because she had no transition sentence between the paragraphs and no topic sentence on the second. She tried to ask what the problem was (her e-mail was not worded well and taken as disrespectful) but was only given more points off for questioning the grader.:tongue_smilie: No answers there.

 

She would really like some help here to figure this out. I do fine with math and science and cannot help her here. To me, it looks fine.

 

By the way she is 15 and a 10th grader. At the end of last year I could not get a cohesive paragraph out of her so this is a great improvement.

 

Thanks

Linda

 

Just a note: This is the third and fourth paragrph of a 5 paragraph paper. It is for a Starting Points class. Part of the first paragraph states:

 

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde a twisted and tragic story by Robert Louis Stevenson deals with the essence of man. As we compare Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, we can discover Stevenson’s worldview of man to determine if it is a Biblical worldview. Stevenson looks at the duality of man, a good nature and an evil one.

Edited March 12, 2009 by Linda in TX
more info

[GraceinMD]

Mr. Hyde, the evil character in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, is the friend and benefactor of Dr. Jekyll. Whereas Dr. Jekyll is ninety percent good, Mr. Hyde is one hundred percent evil -- when you are in his presence you can sense, almost smell his wickedness. He is described as pale and small. Mr. Utterson dislikes him for this “Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish; he gave an impression of deformity without any namable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyer with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice.†At first Mr. Hyde is tolerable to be around, but, as time wears on, his evilness increases until he murders a gentleman and seemingly disappears. Even though everyone recognizes the complete evil that is Mr. Hyde, they fail to perceive is that he is the utterly evil side of Dr. Jekyll.

“O God!' I screamed, and `O God!' again and again; for there before my eyes - pale and shaken, and half fainting, and groping before him with his hands, like a man restored from death - there stood Henry Jekyll!†Mr. Lanyon, a colleague of Dr. Jekyll, does not realize what Dr. Jekyll is doing. Though everyone loves Dr. Jekyll and scorns Mr. Hyde, they do not realize that these two characters comprise the dual nature of one person. Robert Louis Stevenson wrote a very compelling book about the sinful nature of man, how a good person could become wholly evil and how trickery exists in anyone. Robert Louis Stevenson believes that there were two natures, evil and good, in one body “This, as I [Dr. Jekyll] take it, was because all human beings, as we meet them, are commingled out of good and evil.â€The separation of one being into two parts – the good Dr. Jekyll and the evil Mr. Hyde—provides no solution to the problem of sin. Dr. Jekyll never actually finds a way to eradicate the problem. Robert Louis Stevenson also believes that over time sin can, and will, control your life. “And at the very moment of that vainglorious thought, a qualm came over me, a horrid nausea and the most deadly shuddering... I began to be aware of a change in the temper of my thoughts, a greater boldness, a contempt of danger, a solution of the bonds of obligation ….I [Dr. Jekyll] was once more Edward Hyde.â€Even though, at first, Dr. Jekyll believes that he can control the sinful, evil nature embodied in Mr. Hyde, he eventually recognizes that the sinful nature starts to control him and slowly eats at his conscience, killing everything that is good. All that is left is the completely evil Mr. Hyde. With no way to rid the evil, death is the only answer and Dr. Jekyll, sadly, dies at the end of the book. Robert Louis Stevenson sees no answer to the problem of sin and evil.

 

 

I'll be interested in responses from others who have walked this road before (my ds is only 12!), but my first thought is that it would be better organized if she had let the paper flow from the sentence that I bolded, above. It's not clear to me how she has organized this paper (maybe transition words *would* help), so that makes it confusing to follow. If she were able to use a formulaic 5-paragraph essay format, it might help. Her 3 body paras could address the three points she lists in the bolded sentence.

[LinRTX]

Thank you for your input. This is actually just a few paragraphs of a five paragraph paper. I wasn't clear in my first post, so I have edited the original post.

[Jean in Wisc]

I am not a professional here—I’ve taught 6 years of high school English so far:). A quick, not-too-much-thought-put-into-it response is written below. HTH, Jean

 

Mr. Hyde, the evil character in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, is the friend and benefactor of Dr. Jekyll. Whereas Dr. Jekyll is ninety percent good, Mr. Hyde is one hundred percent evil -- when you are in his presence you can sense, almost smell his wickedness. He is described as pale and small. Mr. Utterson dislikes him for this “Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish; he gave an impression of deformity without any namable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyer with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice.†At first Mr. Hyde is tolerable to be around, but, as time wears on, his evilness increases until he murders a gentleman and seemingly disappears. Even though everyone recognizes the complete evil that is Mr. Hyde, they fail to perceive is that he is the utterly evil side of Dr. Jekyll.

 

O.K. When I read the 1st paragraph and then jump into the 2nd which starts with a quote, I am completely lost. You go from describing Hyde and Jekyll to screaming, “O God!†My response is, “What??†Tell me more—why are you going to put this quote here? Get me ready to shift from the description of the man to this quote. Perhaps if you were to switch the sentences around so that you say something like:

 

Though everyone loves Dr. Jekyll and scorns Mr. Hyde, they do not realize that these two characters comprise the dual nature of one person. Mr. Lanyon, a colleague of Dr. Jekyll, does not realize what Dr. Jekyll is doing, but when he does he is appalled: “O God!' I screamed, and `O God!' again and again; for there before my eyes - pale and shaken, and half fainting, and groping before him with his hands, like a man restored from death - there stood Henry Jekyll!â€

 

Then make sure I know that RLS is the author (unless you have introduced him to us earlier in the paper). I’d love to have a transition here, too, letting me know where we are going next. Let me know that we are now moving into a discussion of the meaning of the two characters. You have told me about the two characters Dr. J. and Mr. H, and now you are going to talk about the meaning of the book and the struggle the author has over good and evil. It is helpful if you have a sentence at the end of the last paragraph or the beginning of the next para telling me how the two connect-- be sure that you have a bridge sentence that tells me these are related. Don’t make me read several sentences into the new para to figure it out. State it up front so that I know where you are going:

 

It is through these two characters, Dr J. and Mr. H, that the author, Robert Louis Stevenson, describes the sinful nature of man, how a good person could become wholly evil and how trickery exists in anyone. Robert Louis Stevenson believes that there were two natures, evil and good, in one body “This, as I [Dr. Jekyll] take it, was because all human beings, as we meet them, are commingled out of good and evil.â€The separation of one being into two parts – the good Dr. Jekyll and the evil Mr. Hyde—provides no solution to the problem of sin. Dr. Jekyll never actually finds a way to eradicate the problem. Robert Louis Stevenson also believes that over time sin can, and will, control your life. “And at the very moment of that vainglorious thought, a qualm came over me, a horrid nausea and the most deadly shuddering... I began to be aware of a change in the temper of my thoughts, a greater boldness, a contempt of danger, a solution of the bonds of obligation ….I [Dr. Jekyll] was once more Edward Hyde.â€Even though, at first, Dr. Jekyll believes that he can control the sinful, evil nature embodied in Mr. Hyde, he eventually recognizes that the sinful nature starts to control him and slowly eats at his conscience, killing everything that is good. All that is left is the completely evil Mr. Hyde. With no way to rid the evil, death is the only answer and Dr. Jekyll, sadly, dies at the end of the book. Robert Louis Stevenson sees no answer to the problem of sin and evil.

[Jean in Wisc]

I came back to see this post, and I noticed that you wanted info on topic sentences, too. Do you still want that? I only addressed transitions. The transitions and the topic sentences can sometimes merge into the same sentence in paragraphs like these. Did you want more on the TS? Hope some of this was helpful--

 

Jean

[LinRTX]

Jean

 

Your answer was very helpful. I showed it to my daughter and she understood that starting the paragraph with a quote was not a good idea.

 

I've been trying to wrap my head around all this. Her assignment rubic said that there had to be a transition sentence at the end of the one paragraph and a topic sentence at the start of the next. the paragraphs I showed was the description of Mr. Hyde and the one which compared the dual nature of the character to the dual nature of man. I see wher the quote was a problem, but at the end of the first paragraph I think she hinted at the two natures being one, which lead into the second, or would that not transition?

 

My two older children are natural writers, so I have a hard time teaching this one. As I said, I can teach the math and science all day, but writing I have no idea what to do. I am trying not to stifle her natural style while at the same time trying to get the writing to be acceptable. Does that make sense? If you would like I can try to PM you the entire paper so you can see what she did with the entire thing.

 

But I don't want to take a lot of your time. I'm sure you are busy.

 

Thank you for all your help.

 

Linda

[Ellie]

Jean

 

Your answer was very helpful. I showed it to my daughter and she understood that starting the paragraph with a quote was not a good idea.

 

I've been trying to wrap my head around all this. Her assignment rubic said that there had to be a transition sentence at the end of the one paragraph and a topic sentence at the start of the next. the paragraphs I showed was the description of Mr. Hyde and the one which compared the dual nature of the character to the dual nature of man. I see wher the quote was a problem, but at the end of the first paragraph I think she hinted at the two natures being one, which lead into the second, or would that not transition?

There wasn't really a transition. It might have been so if she had not started with the quote, but as written, it's just confusing.

 

My two older children are natural writers, so I have a hard time teaching this one. As I said, I can teach the math and science all day, but writing I have no idea what to do. I am trying not to stifle her natural style while at the same time trying to get the writing to be acceptable. Does that make sense? If you would like I can try to PM you the entire paper so you can see what she did with the entire thing.

Her writing style still has to be coherent. :-)

[Jean in Wisc]

Ah! A rubric. O.K.

 

I’m going to work from my document instead of your daughter's. Please remember that I am not a composition teacher! Others could do this better! My degree was in English, but I studied how the brain learns language and the linguistics of the language. LOL!

What is the topic of this para? What idea does each statement refer pack to? Let's look at each sentence.

 

Mr. Hyde, the evil character in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, is the friend and benefactor of Dr. Jekyll. H=evil friend of J

 

Whereas Dr. Jekyll is ninety percent good, Mr. Hyde is one hundred percent evil -- when you are in his presence you can sense, almost smell his wickedness. He is described as pale and small. H.=evil.. J=good.

 

Mr. Utterson dislikes him for this “Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish; he gave an impression of deformity without any namable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyer with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice.” U dislikes H. Quote: describes H

 

At first Mr. Hyde is tolerable to be around, but, as time wears on, his evilness increases until he murders a gentleman and seemingly disappears. H gets worse with time.

 

Even though everyone recognizes the complete evil that is Mr. Hyde, they fail to perceive is that he is the utterly evil side of Dr. Jekyll. No one realizes that H=J’s evil side.

 

So let’s make a topic sentence using each of those condensed versions of each sentence:

 

H is an evil man who only continues to degenerate with time; he is disliked by others who cannot see that he is the opposite of J.

Now let’s do the 2nd para:

 

Though everyone loves Dr. Jekyll and scorns Mr. Hyde, they do not realize that these two characters comprise the dual nature of one person. No one knows hated H and loved J are one.

 

Mr. Lanyon, a colleague of Dr. Jekyll, does not realize what Dr. Jekyll is doing, but when he does he is appalled: “O God!' I screamed, and `O God!' again and again; for there before my eyes - pale and shaken, and half fainting, and groping before him with his hands, like a man restored from death - there stood Henry Jekyll!” L is appalled when he discovers them to be the same man (+quote).

 

So a topic S:

 

No one knows the hated H and the loved J are the same man, and when it is discovered, it is horrifying.

 

Now let's make a sentence to add to the first paragraph that tells us what it just said and how it leads us into the next para:

 

TS 1: H is an evil man who only continues to degenerate with time; he is disliked by others, who cannot see that he is the opposite of J.

 

TS 2: No one knows the hated H and the loved J are the same man, and when it is discovered, it is horrifying.

Bridge: Because H is so detested by men, it is difficult for J’s friends to deal with J’s and H’s true nature.

I used the synonym finder (hated=detested) to help me make this sentence.

 

I slip this into the end of the 1st para, and you get this:

 

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

H is an evil man who only continues to degenerate with time; he is disliked by others, who cannot see that he is the opposite of J. Mr. Hyde, the evil character in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, is the friend and benefactor of Dr. Jekyll. Whereas Dr. Jekyll is ninety percent good, Mr. Hyde is one hundred percent evil -- when you are in his presence you can sense, almost smell his wickedness. He is described as pale and small. Mr. Utterson dislikes him for this “Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish; he gave an impression of deformity without any namable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyer with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice.” At first Mr. Hyde is tolerable to be around, but, as time wears on, his evilness increases until he murders a gentleman and seemingly disappears. Even though everyone recognizes the complete evil that is Mr. Hyde, they fail to perceive is that he is the utterly evil side of Dr. Jekyll. Because H is so detested by men, it is difficult for J’s friends to deal with J’s and H’s true nature.

 

No one knows the hated H and the loved J are the same man, and when it is discovered, it is horrifying. Though everyone loves Dr. Jekyll and scorns Mr. Hyde, they do not realize that these two characters comprise the dual nature of one person. Mr. Lanyon, a colleague of Dr. Jekyll, does not realize what Dr. Jekyll is doing, but when he does he is appalled: “O God!' I screamed, and `O God!' again and again; for there before my eyes - pale and shaken, and half fainting, and groping before him with his hands, like a man restored from death - there stood Henry Jekyll!”

 

HTH,

Jean

Edited March 14, 2009 by Jean in Wisc

[LinRTX]

Jean

 

Thank you! All I can say is wow. I've never seen it broken down like this. It all makes sense when you do it this way. So write the basic paragraphs, make a skeleton of them, and use that to tie the paragraphs together. It seems so simple now. Even I (a math major) think I can do this now.

 

Thanks again

Linda

[Halftime Hope]

Jean

 

Thank you! All I can say is wow. I've never seen it broken down like this. It all makes sense when you do it this way. So write the basic paragraphs, make a skeleton of them, and use that to tie the paragraphs together. It seems so simple now. Even I (a math major) think I can do this now.

 

Thanks again

Linda

 

This might be my hopping in and muddying the waters; if so, please disregard!

 

Jean did an excellent job improving what was already written and clarifying it for the reader. For other writing pieces, your dd really ought to 1) start first with a skeleton (outline), 2) write in a disciplined way to a) create topic sentences and b) flesh the outline, then 3) work on transition sentences between her paragraphs.

 

I'm working really hard on this with ds#2--in general, he can't just start writing a "stream of consciousness" as thoughts flow out of him, he starts with his outline. If he can't generate an outline, and letting thoughts flow is all he can do (it happens), we call it "prework" before he writes his composition. Skeletonizing those thoughts, like Jean did, would be a good way to make use of the prework and organize/reaarange it into paragraphs. I've taught him to be entirely comfortable cutting and pasting, moving sentences and thoughts around in a document to serve his needs. There's nothing sacred about the way they are arranged when they first hit the paper! :D

 

For my two ds's, writing has been very much like building with blocks. Dd, not so much--her thoughts seem to flow out connected to one another nicely. Go figure!

 

hth

[Jean in Wisc]

This might be my hopping in and muddying the waters; if so, please disregard!

 

Jean did an excellent job improving what was already written and clarifying it for the reader. For other writing pieces, your dd really ought to 1) start first with a skeleton (outline), 2) write in a disciplined way to a) create topic sentences and b) flesh the outline, then 3) work on transition sentences between her paragraphs.

 

I'm working really hard on this with ds#2--in general, he can't just start writing a "stream of consciousness" as thoughts flow out of him, he starts with his outline. If he can't generate an outline, and letting thoughts flow is all he can do (it happens), we call it "prework" before he writes his composition. Skeletonizing those thoughts, like Jean did, would be a good way to make use of the prework and organize/reaarange it into paragraphs. I've taught him to be entirely comfortable cutting and pasting, moving sentences and thoughts around in a document to serve his needs. There's nothing sacred about the way they are arranged when they first hit the paper! :D

 

For my two ds's, writing has been very much like building with blocks. Dd, not so much--her thoughts seem to flow out connected to one another nicely. Go figure!

 

hth

 

Yes, I agree. Ideally, the paper should start with a stated theme and the topic sentences and the rest gets filled in after this original outline is made. But my kids don't write that way--someday they might have the brain power/comprehension/whatever necessary to do it, I don't know. If they understand this rubric or this mathematical equation of how the paragraphs need to be laid out, they can write it and "fix" it as they go along. Eventually, they will be able to do it without all the pain and agony. My dd, who was an absolute writing disaster, was given a essay topic, a computer, and an hour to write her scholarship essay. They called it "smokin' hot", and I think the biggest reason for that was that she knew how to write using a rubric. The pattern laid out in her head dozens and dozens of times throughout high school paid off--in literal dollars.

 

:)

Edited March 14, 2009 by Jean in Wisc

[Halftime Hope]

what you described is exactly how I envision SAT essay writing. (And congrats to you both, BTW!!) Are you describing something different than that, which I'm not quite grasping the subtlety of? I'm still "half-baked" on thinking through some of the writing instruction theory, because, darn it, all my kids are different. What I described before was what I learned with ds#1 and to a small degree with dd. Dd has been so easy that I've hardly had to think when it comes to teaching her; she just "gets" it. I'm on a whole new track with the one coming up. (Sigh!)

 

Thanks for any input!!

 

Yes, I agree. Ideally, the paper should start with a stated theme and the topic sentences and the rest gets filled in after this original outline is made. But my kids don't write that way--someday they might have the brain power/comprehension/whatever necessary to do it, I don't know. If they understand this rubric or this mathematical equation of how the paragraphs need to be laid out, they can write it and "fix" it as they go along. Eventually, they will be able to do it without all the pain and agony. My dd, who was an absolute writing disaster, was given a essay topic, a computer, and an hour to write her scholarship essay. They called it "smokin' hot", and I think the biggest reason for that was that she knew how to write using a rubric. The pattern laid out in her head dozens and dozens of times throughout high school paid off--in literal dollars.

 

:)

[Jean in Wisc]

what you described is exactly how I envision SAT essay writing. (And congrats to you both, BTW!!) Are you describing something different than that, which I'm not quite grasping the subtlety of? I'm still "half-baked" on thinking through some of the writing instruction theory, because, darn it, all my kids are different. What I described before was what I learned with ds#1 and to a small degree with dd. Dd has been so easy that I've hardly had to think when it comes to teaching her; she just "gets" it. I'm on a whole new track with the one coming up. (Sigh!)

 

Thanks for any input!!

 

The SAT, the ACT writing portion, the 5-paragraph essay, all of the non-creative type of works that are expository or persuasive or...whatever--all of these can be written with this rubric. Even the long papers have some of the same elements--just extended into several pages.

 

intro

theme

 

ts

support

bridge

 

ts

support

bridge

 

ts

support

bridge

 

etc. etc.

 

conclusion

 

If you study many sources of writing how-tos, you will find that each author has another way to introduce the 1st paragraph or bridge or support, but they all say much of the same thing. Some clump similar paras together. Some have twin supporting sentences in each paragraph. Each has a rubric and is a variation on this theme. It seems to be "the way" our children are expected to write for college as best as I can tell. The progymnasmata teaches so much more than these simple rubrics, but when it comes to writing for the SAT or the college essay, I find that the people grading their work are hoping our youth will be able to put their thoughts down in this simple, straightforward fashion with order and cohesion.

 

If the child can take a essay question, quick jot an outline with a theme, topic sentences, and supports, and then write the work up into a short paper, college life will move along SO MUCH MORE EASILY for him. I look at all the little papers my dd writes in college and it is easy for her because she can simply repeat this format over and over and over and over...and so far, the profs are happy with it.

 

I KNOW that there is SO MUCH MORE to learn about writing, but this is a basic skill that our children should work hard to learn before leaving high school imo. Some will struggle with it more than others. Some will come at it backwards; others will catch part of it and not the rest...but we trudge forward! LOL!

 

I'm off to bed. Hope this addresses your thoughts. :leaving:

 

Jean

[Halftime Hope]

Hope this addresses your thoughts. :leaving:

 

Jean

 

Ds had some surprisingly difficult papers for freshman comp, but the other classes that require papers do seem to follow that outline, or in a few cases, simply require that the student answer a series of questions on a topic. The profs don't seem to be interested in grading difficult papers.

 

Thanks for sharing your wisdom!