A whole term measured from one student's file: how many sources got cut, when each document appeared, and exactly what changed between two drafts.
The sentences here are not model answers. A paper that arrives on the same topic gets recognized the moment it is read; this page is open to everyone. What you copy is not the sentences, it is the order: when each document appeared, how many sources got cut, exactly what changed between two drafts. The name, number, section and instructor name were removed.
All the numbers were measured off the files themselves: the works cited lines were matched by hand, and the word counts come from pdftotext output.
Document dates come from PDF CreationDate and docx docProps; submission times were read from the archived HTML of the Moodle assignment pages.
This table is a measurement, not advice. But it shows one thing: every link of the chain was squeezed into the last moment, and one thing going wrong would have broken it.
| Submission | Left before the deadline | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Library Skills Task | 17 minutes | The window was open for 24 hours. PART 3 was handwritten first, photographed, and the typed version went up 28 minutes later. |
| Annotated bibliography | 42 minutes | 6 sources, 5 of them with citations. |
| Research outline | 15 seconds | Started before noon the same day. The PDF was exported once more the next morning, so it was corrected after submission too. |
| First draft | 13 hours 26 minutes | The 1855 word version came out the day before, and was corrected in 11 places and uploaded at 1916 words the next day. |
| Final draft | 20 hours | A week after the draft. A Turnitin record was created. |
The question was written three different ways in three documents. The second move is good, the third is an error.
The first version of the question can be rough, it gets fixed in the outline.
to what extent ai leads into happiness
To What Extent Artificial Intelligence Affects Happiness?
The first version was written in the class group in lower case and rough. What mattered was that the axis had been chosen: the umbrella fixed (happiness), one variable set against it (AI). It was cleaned up in the outline and pulled up into the title.
Count the file name as part of the text.
To What Extent Artificial Intelligence Affects Happiness?
TO WHAT EXTEND AI EFFECT HAPPINESS?
Two errors from the file name (extend for extent, effect for affect) carried into the draft's title and into the submitted PDF. In the rubric that costs points on the Language and Formatting items.
The thesis sentence stayed word for word the same from the outline to the first draft. What changed was not the thesis itself but the framing sentences around it and the paragraph openings. That is good news: if the thesis settles early, the rest is repair work.
The thesis that was submitted is this: "Despite the opposing views, the increasing influence of artificial intelligence in our lives has increased the happiness level of our society for the following three reasons: a) artificial intelligence can lead to reforms and regulations that will maximize our happiness, b) artificial intelligence can reduce unhappiness caused by diseases by helping people in the field of health, c) artificial intelligence can affect life satisfaction by making the education more effective."
Its structure is copyable: an opening that grants the opposing view (Despite the opposing views), then the position, then three reasons as a) b) c). The three items become sections III, IV and V of the outline. A warning: the latest version we have is the first draft that was submitted, the final draft is not in the archive. So no claim is being made that "this was the final thesis".
The thesis sentence at the top of the outline says "making the education more effective". Where the same thesis is written again in item I.D of the same document, it has become "making the slope more effective". The introduction paragraph written four days later copied the thesis from the wrong item, and "slope" carried into it too.
The measurement: "slope" appears 1 time in the outline PDF, 1 time in the introduction paragraph file, and 0 times in both drafts. So it got fixed in the draft, but a wrong thesis sat inside the document for four days.
The rule: do not write the thesis sentence in more than one place in the document. Keep it in one place and refer to it from the others.
A classic outline with Roman numerals. Sub items A/B/C, and 1/2 under those.
Two drafts a day apart. Compared with difflib, 11 blocks changed and all but two of them are transition and citation fixes. That is exactly what "revision" means.
The title line
TO WHAT EXTEND AI EFFECT HAPPINESS (no question mark)
TO WHAT EXTEND AI EFFECT HAPPINESS?
If the title is a question it takes a question mark. The spelling error in it still did not get fixed.
Counterargument paragraph, the opening
Artificial intelligence currently has an understanding ability at the level of a senior high school student.
Although people think AI is already smarter than everyone else, artificial intelligence currently has an understanding ability at the level of a senior high school student.
Do not leave data bare. Say the common belief in the reader's head first, then set the data against it.
Counterargument paragraph, the middle
(there was a direct jump between the two sentences)
If artificial intelligence is smarter than humans, more creative solutions can be produced to many solutions that have not been solved so far. However, there may be problems that may be encountered because artificial intelligence is smarter than humans.
A bridge sentence was added between two claims. The Readability/Clarity item in the rubric measures exactly this.
End of the counterargument
(was not there)
For this reason, contrary to popular belief, there is no cause for concern even if artificial intelligence is smarter than human intelligence.
The counterargument paragraph should not end without delivering its own verdict, or the reader will think the other side is right.
Repeated citation
Acemoğlu points out ... (2021, 46) ... Another point emphasized by Acemoglu ... (2021, Chapter 3.2) ... As Professor Acemoglu emphasizes in his article ... (2021)
He points out ... Another point emphasized that ... (Acemoğlu, 2021) ... These potential threats may cause anxiety and unhappiness.
When the same source is named four times in four sentences, the paragraph reads like a summary of that writer. The repeated name was turned into a pronoun, and the Chicago style citations with page and chapter numbers were pulled into APA.
The opening of the third body paragraph
Artificial intelligence can reduce unhappiness caused by diseases by helping people in the field of health.
Besides the above-mentioned reasons, artificial intelligence can reduce unhappiness caused by diseases by helping people in the field of health.
A transition phrase was added to the topic sentence, tying the paragraphs together.
The opening of the fourth body paragraph
Besides the above-mentioned reasons, another thing that has to considered ...
The last reason that has to considered ...
When two paragraphs start with the same transition pattern, the sense of sequence disappears; the last one was made "the last reason".
The education paragraph
By making the level determination more sensitive and more accurate, more important and less understood topics can be addressed without wasting time on the already understood topics.
By improving the precision and sensitivity of level assessments, we can focus more effectively on topics that are significant yet less understood, avoiding spending time on topics that are already well known.
The same claim, shorter and less repetitive. The concision item on the Language criterion.
The conclusion paragraph
The integration of artificial intelligence into our daily lives has increased ...
In conclusion, the integration of artificial intelligence into our daily lives has increased ...
The conclusion paragraph has to be marked, the reader should know where they are.
Works cited
a page number got mixed into the works cited line
the works cited line is clean
The works cited counts on the Formatting item too. Read it with your eyes once more after converting to PDF.
The Academic Essay that comes before the research paper (20% of the course) is under the same umbrella, but the instructor gives you the question. In the file we measured, the question was: "Do richer nations tend to be happier than poorer ones?"
The source rule: three of the four texts your instructor gives you, plus at least one source you found in the library yourself. The task requirements say "at least four written sources". So the source you find yourself is not an extra, it is a requirement.
The essay was handwritten in class time: four class hours, 6 pages of handwriting. It was typed up and uploaded by noon the next day, and the printed copy was handed in at the next class.
The outline is the only help you can take into class. Bringing a pre-written draft is banned, so the more you invest in the outline the easier the class gets.
In two days the structure of the thesis did not change, only the word choices got tightened.
Despite the opposing views, richer nations tend to be happier than poorer ones because of the following reasons: a) countries that are more economically developed have more elements for their citizens to be happy, b) trying to be better economically has a direct positive effect on data that increases life satisfaction.
Despite the opposing views, richer nations tend to be happier than poorer ones because of the following reasons: a) countries that are more economically developed have more elements for their citizens to achieve happiness, b) trying to achieve better economically has a direct positive effect on the data that increases life satisfaction.
In two days the structure of the thesis did not change, only word choices got tightened, like "to achieve happiness" instead of "to be happy". That is the job when you type up a handwritten text: the prompt says "making any necessary minor edits, corrections and changes", not rewriting.
The prompt says "minor edits, corrections and changes", not rewriting. That is exactly what got done in that one day.
Anonymized instructor notes: the note itself and the rule it gives are kept, and who, when and which section were removed.
Upload the library task in the window that opens this evening, by the same hour tomorrow.
The rule it gives. This task's window can be 24 hours and it opens right after the library session. Fill in the form the day you come out of the session, do not leave it to the next day.
You will write the essay by hand in class time, two hours on each of two days. Bring the texts you will use and your essay outline to class.
The rule it gives. The outline is the only help you can take into the exam. Bringing a pre-written draft is banned; the prompt explicitly bans "draft essays pre-prepared in whole or part". So the more you invest in the outline, the easier the class gets.
Upload the typed up version of the essay by noon the next day, and hand in the printout at the next class.
The rule it gives. The handwritten text gets digitized and goes into Turnitin within a day. The job in that one day is not rewriting, it is small corrections: the prompt says "minor edits, corrections and changes".
There is a sample outline attached. Keep in mind that it is not perfect.
The rule it gives. Shared examples are examples of format, not of quality. Copy the structure of the example, do not take its level as your measure.
Bring the first draft and the final draft to class printed, in a folder.
The rule it gives. In this course written feedback on the draft is given on paper, and the final is submitted TOGETHER with the draft that was written on. The rubric turns this into a rule: if the final draft is submitted without the earlier draft(s), the paper is not read at all and the grade is zero.
Hand in the research papers together with their drafts, without delay.
The rule it gives. A reminder of the same rule: if one link of the draft submission chain is missing, the final is not assessed.
The AI percentage in the plagiarism report for the final drafts is coming out above zero, all of you upload again.
The rule it gives. The expected AI percentage is zero. If the report comes out above zero, the submission is asked for again, as Word instead of PDF if necessary. Having a language tool fix your text can leave a trace in that report; do the fixing in your own sentences.
By name and type, not by content. Two format variants of the same text were kept, and the plain one is what was submitted.
We do not write up something unverified as if it were verified. It was looked for and not found.
The individual feedback written on the student's draft is not in the archive, and the documents make the reason clear: the draft is taken to class printed and comes back printed. Annotation counters were scanned in all the relevant PDFs, comment files were looked for in the docx files, and the Moodle feedback fields were read. It turned up in none of them. So on this page you will not see individual feedback in the form of "the instructor said this about that", only announcements made to the whole class.