Content vs. Format

One Student's Story

I made a C on my research paper. I don't make C's on research papers.

I analyzed 4 poems by the poet, showing how the poems were a process of the poet becoming a leader for his people. I used 10 sources; 7-8 were required. My prof made my works cited page bleed with graphite as he corrected the listings of my resources (use "P" for "Press"). My word choice was ridiculed and corrected more than once. Besides these markings, I cannot read the supposed-to-be useful comments written in the margins of my paper. These comments are supposed to be where I figure out how I earned the grade I was given.


I know a lot about the poet I chose to write about. I know his work, his style, his background. I planned this paper- researching, writing- way in advance.

It did not deserve a C. But at least it was a C+...right? Did I earn this grade because I'm a bad writer? No- Because I didn't take my time? No- Because it was shit? No. I didn't fulfill the page requirement to avoid that. Only made it to 6 1/2.

Then why? Because my works cited page needed some revisions; because I chose to word things differently than the professor preferred? Is good analysis being overlooked because the priority is given to the format?

Thanks to guest contributor Gwendolyn Brooks for this post.