I thought Kim’s Case Study was really well done. After creating the rubric based on the recommendations Google Doc and reading her case study, I wish I could redo mine. But I think I have a clearer idea of what to write for future case studies. While I think a lot of the recommendations and even this rubric are useful tools for critique, I think trying to fit all of this into 1,000 words really difficult.

Exceeds Criteria
Meets Criteria
Doesn’t Meet
Theorist & Theory
Case study identifies theorist(s) who developed the theory and describes the main premise(s) of the theory and key attributes.
 Kim had a detailed opening paragraph that described Foucault’s theory that should would be using.
Relationship to the Field
Case study discusses the relationship of the particular theory to other theories in the field and importance to the field. Identifies existing canonical or well-respected applications of the theory
 Kim did a good job connecting this conceptualization of the writing center with Writing Center scholars like Stephen North and Kenneth Bruffee.
OoS Description
Case study contextualizes and explains the OoS. Theory attributes mapped to OoS attributes (visual).
 Great visual. I like the layering, especially using the different colors for coding.
Theory + OoS
Case study describes portion(s) of the theory used and discarded, and why. Limitations (blind spots) of this theory as applied to this OoS explained.
 This was hard for me to decide on. Kim does discuss the portions of the theory she is working from. There isn’t discussion on the blind spots of the theory though.
Case study discusses contribution to understanding or re-seeing the OoS. Explains the practical benefits of applying the theory.
 The final paragraphs begins to get at this section.