Effective Writing

NameCourseUniversityTutorDatePeer Review Feedback FormThe author uses rhetorical questions to introduce different bond into the . I find this interesting as it ensures that the reader s thoughts argon provoked along the writer s line of thinkingThe writer lacks a captivating introduction . He fails to schema briefly the expectations and argument of the making the to be incoherent . The conclusion similarly fails to lead out the name shows raised in the and does non capture the kiosk clear , or the tangible reasons behind his firm cubicleThere ar a number of confusing sentences in this text chance variable , cause by well-formed , punctuation and spelling mistakes . In the last divide of first page , the writer notes Nicolas kernel takes about a boy from California there is confusedness of whether effect is a persons name as it is not capitalized . Takes is also used alternatively of talks . There is a grammatical mistake withal in the last paragraph of the fourth part page . It is indite , most religious see given up an organ is sacrifice the tense in this sentence does not agree with the verbs used , given is used in turn up of givingThesis StatementIntroductionArgument forPoint 1SupportPoint 2SupportPoint 3SupportArguments againstPoint 1Point 2Arguments to counter the arguments againstPoint 1Point 2Re education of the dissertationConclusionThe lacks in a strong thesis statement and a puritanical introduction The writer does not map the s stand but starts with an incoherent introduction so goes on to outline the chronological history of organ reassigns . The mise en scene of the is not presented and it is preferably difficult for the reader to show what question the writer was tackling . The locate about the writer donating his /her variety meat upon death is re peated twice in the . This repeating is by! script after word and is unnecessary .

A repetition in a text should only appear when a writer wants to emphasize a point and should not be in the same address as in the to a higher place caseThe writer fails to introduce the scope of the and hence doesn t outline the point to the tackled . No promises on some(prenominal) point be then do that are not discussed . For the logical flow of the writer s ideas , they should be presented in a coherent sequence where the arguments for donor transplants are presented first followed by the refutations and the counter refutations . The should be re-organized to make it more presentable and telling . The writer should include a thesis statement that clearly captures the stand on donor transplant . The conclusion should as well contain a restatement of the thesis and brief summary of the study points . At the introduction , the key points and arguments should be stated followed by the arguments againstThe of the was interesting but the write skills are below the expectations . The writer should make an effort of modify on the spelling...If you want to array a full essay, rescript it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay