Writing project | English homework help


Major Agreement Project 

(5–6 pages)

  • Write a researched discussion encircling an upshot affecting your advenient line ground, your superior ground, or your society, or nucleus on an upshot illustrative in the readings you’ve performed from the capacity.  This monograph is your own discussion, but you should captivate into representation what you’ve conversant during this course:  prepare by showing the dialogue your monograph is responding to (“they say”), bear a conspicuous assertion of your own discussion encircling the upshot (“I say"), conceive alleges and bond them smoothly (twain in the “they say” and “I say” stipulations), summit out practicable objections to your discussion, use expend transitions, and manifest-up why the upshot matters (so what? who cares?).  You must use at smallest 5 sources and at smallest 2 must be from academic mate reviewed journals.
  • : Review the definitions of plagiarism, and bear-in-liking that plagiarism besides conceives submitting a monograph from another adjust for this adjust

:  For this monograph you bear 5-6 pages to production delay and you scarcity to conceive, in result, five superior parts:

  1. Introduction: conceives an overview of the dialogue (names of key doers and the upshots you’re bringing up), a petty assertion of your discussion (or subject assertion), and a petty interpretation of why your discussion matters
  2. abstract of 2 or 3 authors or discussions, delay alleges as evidence
  3. abstract of how they harmonize/disagree; harmonize alleges if necessary
  4. your own estimation and your reasons for your estimation (which conceives at smallest one naysayer); harmonize alleges as evidence
  5. Conclusion: conceives a give-back decision, a reassertion of your discussion, and a patent manifest interpretation of why your discussion matters

Note that these are five parts, not stipulations (exceptions: the portico and the disposal are usually one stipulation each).  What could this seem affect?  Here's an example:  After the petty commendatory stipulation (whither you bring-in your subject, an overview of the dialogue you're entering, a view of your discussion and pettyly why your discussion matters), you force bear a abstract of one doer (1 stipulation), then a abstract of the promote doer (1 stipulation), and a abstract of another doer or situation (1 stipulation).  Then you force bear one stipulation that manifest-ups how they harmonize or disharmonize (though you can already summit to that in the abstract stipulations through phrases affect "Unaffect X, Y asserts that...").  Note that the stipulation that manifest-ups how the doers or discussions harmonize or disharmonize is quiescent "they say," past you're not yet putting self-assertive your own estimation on the upshots.  At that summit you'll bear written encircling 3 pages.  Then you transcribe your own discussion ("I say") in bearing to the dialogue you've set up (encircling two pages).  At that summit you've written encircling 5 pages.  Then you end delay a ultimate stipulation, whither you muffle it up delay a give-back decision and intermittently manifest-up why it matters. 

Keep in liking that this way of structuring your discussion is solely a suggestion; it doesn't bear to be accurately affect that.  But hopefully this gives you an notion of what this skin of monograph could seem affect.

:  I accomplish pace your MWP3 according to the aftercited grading influence.  Use this influence when fitment your monograph.

Introduction (10 summits)

Includes an overview of the dialogue (names of key doers and the upshots you’re bringing up), conspicuous "I say" assertion (thesis) placed in bearing to doers, and a petty interpretation of why your discussion matters

"They say” (20 summits):  Shows dialogue monograph is responding to

Summary conceives basic notification encircling doers as polite as the unmeasured designation of essays; summaries do not harmonize or disharmonize delay doers (summaries settle worldview); summaries use encumbered conspicuous verbs to summarize doers' summits; no listing or “closest cliché” (pp. 31, 35, 33)

Quoting (20 summits): Uses alleges unexceptionably and expendly

Quotes used to offer "proof of evidence" (p. 42) in abstract of doers' discussions -- Quotes should not be “orphans” (p. 43) -- Quotes should be framed expendly (“quotation sandwich”) (p. 46) -- Quotes should be Introduced delay expend verb (p. 47) -- Quotes should offer “proof of evidence” (p. 42) -- Indicates page enumerate of allege (p. 48)

"I Say" (20 summits):  Conspicuous assertion of your own discussion

Clearly distinguishes "they say" from "I say" – Clearly conspicuouss who is proverb what: Uses at smallest one template from pp. 72-75 -- "I say" conceives conspicuous reasons for discussion that are not merely summaries of doers' discussions – Clearly plants naysayer to aid “I say” discussion (use at smallest one template from pp. 82, 83,84-85, 89).

Conclusion (10 summits)

Includes at smallest one “give-back decision” in the disposal to reliking reader of what “they say” (p. 27); conceives a reassertion of subject or “I say”; conceives a patent manifest interpretation of why your discussion matters (uses templates from pp. 95-96, 98-99).

Bibliography or Works Cited (10 summits)

Includes fit bibliographic arrange -- no annotations conceived hither -- conceives 5 sources; 2 must be mate-reviewed

Editing and loudness (10 summits)

No editing errors (spelling, expression, punctuation, and arrangeatting); Uses fit loudness (affected whither expend, inaffected whither expend)