My overall impression of this essay is that you have a good understanding of your topic, and that you understand the conventions of writing in teaching thoroughly. However, I think where you struggle is in the structuring of the essay, explaining broad blanket statements, and giving more or better examples for some pieces of evidence. This paper has a lot of potential once it flows properly. With the structure of your essay, the problem I had was with subheadings. Under the broad heading of academic writing, I had to figure out for myself whether or not the paragraph was about structure, language, or references, which I think should have been the subheadings for the paragraphs. When someone is reading this essay, the flow would be a lot smoother overall if these specific subheadings were provided. even though your transitions aren't bad, I feel as though they are not enough to clearly separate the points. In the non- academic section, try making the same divisions as the academic writing section. For example, the non- academic section only had a small portion on language, whereas the academic section had an entire paragraph dedicated to it. Another problem I saw was when you would make large blanket statements about a topic, for example, you said that the structure of academic writing in teaching differs greatly from non- academic writing in teaching. The statement is true, but your breakdown of it was a bit weak.Since you were talking about how teachers write for a research journal, I would suggest mentioning the abstract, keywords section, and entire references page, all of which the non-academic writings in teaching do not have. You talk about the purpose and topic of the article, but the structural aspect of that would be in the abstract. The final piece of advice I would have would be about your paragraph on language in academic writing. I think that you need to have an excerpt that demonstrates language that truly separates a professional journal audience from an amateur reading an article. The excerpt you provided did not have technical enough terms, in my opinion, to fulfill the purpose of showing the technical language of academic writings in teaching.
1. I like your intro. I like the way that the question "How much writing do people think the average teacher does?" works as a hook to draw the audience's attention. 2. At the end of the intro paragraph, the problem I saw was that you didn't mention all of the aspects that you talked about in the report. You talked about references, but you didn't include it in the intro. 3. The aspects that you talked about are all general aspects that apply to writings in most other fields of study. The article would be better if you talked about something that was special for teachers. 4. Some of the quotes are not very effective, and you used too much quote. My advice is that you may explain more. 5. You talked about structure, language, and references under academic writing. However, you didn't talk about the same aspects in the same order under non-academic writing, which made the article a little hard to read. 6. Under academic writing, you said that teachers used a different tone than they used in non-academic writing. However, your point of view changed when it comes to non-academic writing. 7. Your conclusion was not very effective, since you introduced new idea. 8. Other than distinctions, you also talked about some similarities of academic v.s. non-academic writing in the intro paragraph. If you talked more about the similarities, the article would flow better.
My overall impression of this essay is that you have a good understanding of your topic, and that you understand the conventions of writing in teaching thoroughly. However, I think where you struggle is in the structuring of the essay, explaining broad blanket statements, and giving more or better examples for some pieces of evidence. This paper has a lot of potential once it flows properly.
ReplyDeleteWith the structure of your essay, the problem I had was with subheadings. Under the broad heading of academic writing, I had to figure out for myself whether or not the paragraph was about structure, language, or references, which I think should have been the subheadings for the paragraphs. When someone is reading this essay, the flow would be a lot smoother overall if these specific subheadings were provided. even though your transitions aren't bad, I feel as though they are not enough to clearly separate the points. In the non- academic section, try making the same divisions as the academic writing section. For example, the non- academic section only had a small portion on language, whereas the academic section had an entire paragraph dedicated to it.
Another problem I saw was when you would make large blanket statements about a topic, for example, you said that the structure of academic writing in teaching differs greatly from non- academic writing in teaching. The statement is true, but your breakdown of it was a bit weak.Since you were talking about how teachers write for a research journal, I would suggest mentioning the abstract, keywords section, and entire references page, all of which the non-academic writings in teaching do not have. You talk about the purpose and topic of the article, but the structural aspect of that would be in the abstract.
The final piece of advice I would have would be about your paragraph on language in academic writing. I think that you need to have an excerpt that demonstrates language that truly separates a professional journal audience from an amateur reading an article. The excerpt you provided did not have technical enough terms, in my opinion, to fulfill the purpose of showing the technical language of academic writings in teaching.
1. I like your intro. I like the way that the question "How much writing do people think the average teacher does?" works as a hook to draw the audience's attention.
ReplyDelete2. At the end of the intro paragraph, the problem I saw was that you didn't mention all of the aspects that you talked about in the report. You talked about references, but you didn't include it in the intro.
3. The aspects that you talked about are all general aspects that apply to writings in most other fields of study. The article would be better if you talked about something that was special for teachers.
4. Some of the quotes are not very effective, and you used too much quote. My advice is that you may explain more.
5. You talked about structure, language, and references under academic writing. However, you didn't talk about the same aspects in the same order under non-academic writing, which made the article a little hard to read.
6. Under academic writing, you said that teachers used a different tone than they used in non-academic writing. However, your point of view changed when it comes to non-academic writing.
7. Your conclusion was not very effective, since you introduced new idea.
8. Other than distinctions, you also talked about some similarities of academic v.s. non-academic writing in the intro paragraph. If you talked more about the similarities, the article would flow better.