Thinking Toward A Revision Plan

I had been feeling pretty much done with my paper from a first draft point of view, just considering some tweaking, some playing around with examples, some minor revisions. Ironically I received peer feedback on my paper last week that echoed a life-long criticism of my work "your words are too long and complex, I didn't get it." In the past I have blown those off, and given my inadequacies in my grad level class where EVERYONE speaks and writes in similarly huge and far more esoteric language, I was amused. But I think it is important to communicate effectively to  my audience, and now four students in this class have said the same thing, so I am looking at that again. Who exactly IS my audience? Who do I want to convince? I am also very intrigued by suggestions to write it to a die hard prescriptivist, and two other points of view. So I am planning to rip it up (figuratively) and play with it some more. Also, Hannelore gave me a new resource during class last week that I might want to incorporate into my paper.

And now the questions:

• Am I clear about my argument? Can I state it as a thesis statement? Yep, here it is: Therefore, what is important to teach is not a set of rules that students view as obscure and irrelevant, and thus have no intrinsic desire to assimilate into their linguistic repertoire; instead, students need to gain an increasing appreciation for the power that using the mechanisms of grammar brings to their discourse. 

• Does my writing offer well-supported and accurate evidence for each of my claims? If anything I have too much evidence, and could trim up, perhaps through paraphrasing, some of my quotes.
• Is my writing fair and respectful toward the differing positions one could take on my arguments? I need to explore the prescriptivist argument more, since I have discovered it continues to be employed (ineffectively, I might add).
• Will my readers understand the purpose of each paragraph? I think so, actually.
• Can I say why my paragraphs are ordered as they are? Can I describe the steps of my argument? I have shifted the paragraphs around a few times already, so I am comfortable with them as they are. they progress through my argument in a way I think is effective.
• Will my writing engage readers? The audience piece is still something I am tweaking. I need to figure out, really, why anyone but a grammar geek would care about this, and if I am writing to grammar geeks, what do I have to say.
• Does my introduction engage readers with my argument and initial concerns? I think it does. I also think that the quote I used evokes some of the emotion people attack to what others consider "silly grammar."
• Have I given appropriate stylistic emphasis to the main parts of my arguments? Yes, with examples and "they say, I say".
• Do my transitions help readers move from one paragraph to the next? Yes, they do. My paper has good grammar techniques (I hope!)
• Does my conclusion sum up my argument and end memorably for readers? I think it sums it up well - I'm not sure how memorable it is.