Overall, your paper is well written and doesn’t need too many changes. The paper is organized clearly and flows nicely. There is a clear thesis and relevant information to support it. There can be some improvement with analysis and use of quotations. The intro has a good lead in and provides good background, but may need to be more specific. To make the intro more detailed, add a quote from the interview. Instead of putting the first interview quotes in the second paragraph, add it into the intro. Another thing that should be added is a sentence at the end to bring the intro together and lead into the next paragraph. The quotes used in each paragraph are relevant to the point of the paragraph. You did a good job introducing the quotes, but the explanation should be more thorough. Instead of stating what the quote is saying, be specific as to why that's important to the convention youre talking about. Another thing that can be added to improve the paper is transition words. You’re transitions are good, but if you add some more transition words it will help your paper flow better.
Overall I thought this was a very solid paper. I thought that you used your sources well and that it supported your ideas well. I also thought that the transitions between the paragraphs were good and it helped with the overall flow of the paper. The introduction and conclusion was also strong.
One minor detail I noticed were the in-text citations. For some of the sources I noticed there were multiple authors for one source. Instead of putting all of the authors into the the parenthesis, only put the first authors last name and then et al at the end. Also some of the sources could have more explanation behind them. For example on page 6, in the first paragraph last quote and in the first paragraph of the structure section second source. Other than those minor details I thought the paper was very strong.
Overall, your paper is well written and doesn’t need too many changes. The paper is organized clearly and flows nicely. There is a clear thesis and relevant information to support it. There can be some improvement with analysis and use of quotations.
ReplyDeleteThe intro has a good lead in and provides good background, but may need to be more specific. To make the intro more detailed, add a quote from the interview. Instead of putting the first interview quotes in the second paragraph, add it into the intro. Another thing that should be added is a sentence at the end to bring the intro together and lead into the next paragraph.
The quotes used in each paragraph are relevant to the point of the paragraph. You did a good job introducing the quotes, but the explanation should be more thorough. Instead of stating what the quote is saying, be specific as to why that's important to the convention youre talking about.
Another thing that can be added to improve the paper is transition words. You’re transitions are good, but if you add some more transition words it will help your paper flow better.
Overall I thought this was a very solid paper. I thought that you used your sources well and that it supported your ideas well. I also thought that the transitions between the paragraphs were good and it helped with the overall flow of the paper. The introduction and conclusion was also strong.
ReplyDeleteOne minor detail I noticed were the in-text citations. For some of the sources I noticed there were multiple authors for one source. Instead of putting all of the authors into the the parenthesis, only put the first authors last name and then et al at the end. Also some of the sources could have more explanation behind them. For example on page 6, in the first paragraph last quote and in the first paragraph of the structure section second source. Other than those minor details I thought the paper was very strong.