The paper lacks in throughly explaining the good part of welfare, there seems to be more negatives then positives. The writer does not argue for his/her position well, an academic audience would score the essay as a poorly written essay.Many parts of paper seems to be coppied from another article on welfare that I read. Overall this entire paper needs to be re-written, to form a clear arguement.
- 26/11/2003
- 00:27:54
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
The intro is weak, claim is confusing. The writer just jumps into the paper without explaining the controversy. Needs a forecasting passage. Passive voice is used throught, making the paper seem like a conversation. Try using transtions to bridge the gap between your sentences.
- 26/11/2003
- 00:22:14
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
I like how it was subdivided into different parts, which makes it more focused on the point discussed. Really liked the section on "Will I make a differnce" great way to sum up your paper. Overall great paper and well written.
- 04/11/2003
- 22:25:12
- Score: 4 out of 4 people found this comment useful.